Forums >General Running>5K distance variation
I've got a fever...
Also, as far as a 2% error for uncertified courses, this is bullocks.
On your deathbed, you won't wish that you'd spent more time at the office. But you will wish that you'd spent more time running. Because if you had, you wouldn't be on your deathbed.
A Saucy Wench
Also, as far as a 2% error for uncertified courses, this is bullocks. Basic statistics, folks. Here is the deal: All courses are either the correct distance or they are not. Courses that are not the correct distance have an error. There is no reason to believe that a course with an error has a higher degree of error just because it was or was not certified. A statement that is more likely correct is this: There is a 1% chance that a certified course is the incorrect distance while there is a 5% chance that an uncertified course is the incorrect distance. (these are, of course, funny numbers to provide an example) Also, please remember that there are several steps to getting the correct distance - - measurement, in which the course is measured by a standard method* - layout, in which the race director and team sets up the course correctly along the measured course - race, in which the runners actually follow the measured route along the measurement line. *this is where certification comes in
I have become Death, the destroyer of electronic gadgets
"When I got too tired to run anymore I just pretended I wasnt tired and kept running anyway" - dd, age 7
Good Bad & The Monkey
I'm running somewhere tomorrow. It's going to be beautiful. I can't wait.
Poor baby
One day at a time
This is one of the best GPS accuracy references I've seen yet. Excellent information.
A fine hypothesis. How do you plan to test the hypothesis?
Globbie and Ennay are essentially saying the same thing, that uncertified courses' measurement technique is less likely to be accurate than one that has been measured as part of a certification process. A fine hypothesis. How do you plan to test the hypothesis?
You guys do suck - you knew an engineer would fall for that!
Yes and no. ... Not all that many "community" races even use a wheel to measure. I've seen them use a car odometer (horrendous accuracy), a bike odometer (still shockingly piss poor), GPS ('nuff said) and even gmaps. In those cases not only is the likelihood of error higher, the magnitude of error will also be higher. I also think there are good organizations who simply are not going to pay USTAF for certification but follow all of the practices themselves. Personally I dont see much reason to worry about it either way. I will sometimes compare top finisher times as Jim does, but not to see if a course is "long" or "short" but to see if my relative performance vs. another race was a factor of overall course difficulty
Feeling the growl again
"If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does. There's your pep talk for today. Go Run." -- Slo_Hand
I am spaniel - Crusher of Treadmills
I fly.
Bring it on.
I ran a certified 5k last month only I know that the course was not the length certified. 2 miles of the course were on bridges and the bridges that were used for the certification are being torn down and replaced. So the course was actually a bit shorter than a 5k. Not much, but enough so that the certification (IMO) should no longer count.
The certification would lapse if it were a USATF-sanctioned event. The RD for your event didn't want to go through the trouble or expense of having the course re-certified. Even re-paving the roads would require a re-cert, as the tangent lines will often change (i.e. if curbs are in slightly different positions, etc.)
My personal favorite was one run in a city park where the organizer just added up the numbers on the park map for the different trails the course followed, and juggled it around until it hit 5K.
Options,Account, Forums
All courses are either the correct distance or they are not.
It's a 5k. It hurt like hell...then I tried to pick it up. The end.