Skip to main content

After several years of not being able to get some problems fixed on the USATF we have now fixed most! A special thanks goes to Blake Facey for helping make all this possible.

Here they are with the fixes!

a. Any course with a 3 letter identifier would not show on the site by entering it that way , but would show when entering their Race Name. However, after entering the Race Name and you click on the map you used to get the following message:” invalid course Certification number”. This applied to the following foreign courses: Canada, Puerto Rico, Bermuda, Bahama and Jamiaca. Where Afghanistan and Somoa couldn't even be entered in our Database.

problem fixed!

b. Along the same idea. Some of our Certifiers use course Identifiers with dashes or small letters(like NC-12001-PH) which when entered as such would not show on the USATF site.

All will show now, hence problem are fixed!

c. There was a problem with the new USATF rule about separation and sanctioning being record eligible. Before when a course was separated by more than 30% it would state "wind dependent" for record eligible. Now any course 50% or less as the separation and has a USATF sanction is record eligible. It now states for record eligible "if the course is sanctioned". However,no courses that are more than 50% are wind dependent and will not be record eligible.

Problem fixed!

d. There was a problem with all courses that have expired as it's clear they are no longer record eligible, but the site used to state "record eligible" for any expired courses. Now it states not record eligible!

problem fixed!
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest


I like the changes that Blake made to the database. I particularly like the change to the Record-Eligible from yes as we had in the past, to if race sanctioned. That should go a long way to remind race directors and the public that a USATF sanctioned event is a requirement for american records.

I was curious about the foreign courses on the list. I noticed we had 17 active road courses from foreign countries including AFG10002RT in Kandahar, ASA12024MW, ASA12025MW, in Somoa, BAH12002DL, BAH12003DL, BER07001RT, BER08001RT, BER08002RT, BER08003RT, BER08004RT, BER08005RT, BER10001RT, BER10002RT, in Bermuda, CAN11001MW in Canada, and JAM11002TY, JAM11003TY, JAM11004TY in Jamaica. I assume those courses were USATF certified because of the high standard of excellence with our Road Running Technical Council.

Thank you. -- Justin

The foreign courses were certified by our standards, but I couldn't list them as the database wouldn't accept their ID's. Blake has worked out this problem, hence they are viewable to all.

On another note, Blake made another adjustment for me to the record eligible area when a course is validate(verified). Check out TX11001GAN!

Do you recall at our meeting about using verified instead of validated? This will be a topic at our meeting.
In order to have a race sanctioned the Race people must contact their local Association.

This can be found by going to the USATF site and going to the Association page under "about". The USATF site is

The sanction has nothing to do with Certification. The sanction allows the race to have any records set(age group and so forth) to be recognized if the race is certified. It also has some insurance provisions for the athlete's and race. Cost vary and can be found on each association web page.
Since Blake has been busy making changes I'm wondering if he also changed the fact that the expiration is tied to the year of certification.
It would be nice not to have to number adjusted courses with the year of their original certification, and rather, number them based on the year the adjustment is certified.
One thing I've noticed is the "Record Eligible" status "if race is sanctioned and meets records standards" takes up a lot of space, creating a very wide field (I think even wider than than course name field).
This has the effect of pushing the Course Name off the screen,particularly if you are using a smartphone or tablet.
Would it be possible to make the "Record Eligible" field the last/far right field? I think 99% of the runners couldn't care less about that, but certainly want to find out if the 5 km they're registered for next weekend is certified.
The way the fields are displayed now, that's more difficult than it needs to be, IMO.
Gene, no problem on my computers, but on my iPhone, even in landscape mode, I have to swipe back and forth to see the entire line at a readable magnification.
Maybe the width could be reduced by changing the positive status answer to "if sanctioned and record standard."
For that matter, what does "meets record standards" mean? I assume it refers to proper timing protocols being met.
The new if race is sanctioned and meets records standards was a simple and quick solution to help avoid confusion with courses and records. Previously, the Record Eligible field displayed either a yes or no. Later, it was changed to a yes, if sanctioned and no. From that information a race director might, incorrectly assume the mile was a record event. (The mile american record was dropped several years ago.)

A similar situation could occur with race walk loops. Not too long ago, a certified 833.33 meter, closed loop would display yes, if sanctioned in the record eligible field. A rule changes introduced a few years ago required race walk loops be a minimum of 1000 meters for championship and record eligible events. (Race walks records also have limit to the length of the loop. Race walk events longer than 10 km may have a maximum course length of 2500 meters. Events less than 10km may have a maximum distance of 1250 meters.)

The point is, simply finding a certified course that has a separation of no more than 50% and drop that does not exceed 1 part per thousand does not mean the course may be used for setting American records. Additionally, the rules for records change from year to year. The complete list of requirements for setting American records is listed in the USATF Competition Rules book, starting with Article V. The rule books are available online at the link below.

Thank you. -- Justin
Gene, I don't have a problem with the notation, although I do think it could be worded more succinctly.
I do think the placement leaves much to be desired. I think the course name and location should be as close to the certification number as possible. Under the current setup, it's as far away as possible, and I just don't see the "record eligible" field as being of much interest or importance to the average runner (if they even understand what it means). My personal preference would be to list the most meaningful information first, then the addenda in the last columns to be read.
This is, of course, assuming that to do so would not require a huge amount of programming effort.

Add Reply

Link copied to your clipboard.