distance measuring in road races (Closed for comments)
Comments about this discussion:
Started
During our work in the world records committee we discussed that distance measurement is a really complex topic to deal with. Often it is hard for organizers of "smaller" events than Unicon to fulfill the criteria of measuring the track correctly and we were wondering if we can provide a document to fill in so that paper work gets a bit easier?
Also we added 100km as a road racing record which means that if it 100km is held at an event the distance measurement for other distances which is stated in section 4D.15.2 is not relevant anymore because +/- 3% is not accurate enough for a world record.
Comment
The 100km issue seems like it will be a separate proposal. Could you create a discussion with a suggestion of the updated text?
Comment
On the topic of measuring a course, I don't know that there's an "easy" way for smaller competitions to do this accurately. I haven't researched it, but I imagine you can create a map of your route in mapping software, like Google Maps, and then add a percentage to account for taking the shortest line around all corners. But this is a rough estimate at best, and the percentage used should be a factor of how many turns/corners/intersections are found on the course. This could work for rough distance estimates, but I don't know that there's any substitute for actually measuring a course by a vehicle taking the shortest route along the course. Which might not even be possible during normal traffic, if the route will go against traffic on a closed road, for instance. Then you would have to piece the bits together.
Comment
4D.15.1 ? Doesn't this already cover the method?
It would be good to have a document to fill in for 10k, 42k.
Comment
it does cover the method.
but it is not written how to document it exactly. For the French Championships last year the French guys did a lot of measuring and I helped Martin to fill in some documents that we found online (for the Jones Counter method). And it was reeeally complicated. So it would probably be helpful if the rulebook would provide a document where all the data could be filled in (so it would alwayse be done with the same document)
Comment
It seems like we are in agreement that a form would be good.
Mirjam, Do you have a document already? Does it make sense to include the text in the rulebook, or just a link to an external document. I prefer the first if it is not too long.
Comment
Unfortunately I don't. Anybody else?
I prefer to include it in the rulebook and try not to make it longer than one page so that it stays overviewable.
Comment
I think it would be the most helpful to have the form as a fillable pdf, but a copy could also be included in the rulebook and also a link provided to the fillable version.
Mirjam, if you send me some of the documents you filled out with Martin, I can create a draft form.
Comment
4D.15.1 was written by me, in one of the previous Rulebook rounds. It is based on a copy that I have downloaded in 2012 of the Course Measurement and Certifications Prcedures Manual of the USATF / Road Running Technical Council. Possibly the same document as Mirjam found online. The Jones Counter method is part of this manual. 4D.15.1 summarises the Jones Counter method, but without actually prescribing a Jones Counter apparatus.
In 2012, I broke the Dutch 24 hour record. I used this method to measure the cycle track that I did the record on. I followed al the steps but did not officially document this.
I can see that a form to document the measurement results would be useful if a course is measured for an IUF-recognised race. As far as I'm concerned, this doesn't need to be a "fillable" pdf. It could also be a "non-fillable" pdf, which then is printed, completed on paper, scanned and e-mailed. This makes completing more versatile than a "fillable" pdf. Either way, the form could follow the steps as described in 4D.15.1.
In addition to its use for IUF-recognised races, the same form could be prescribed for IUF World Records. With that in mind, it might be useful to NOT include the form in the Rulebook, but have it available for download on the IUF website and refer to it from both the Rulebook and the World Record Guidelines (both of which are currently being updated). This would prevent the risk that different versions are prescribed for races and World Records.
Comment
https://aims-worldrunning.org/measurement/MeasurementOfRoadRaceCourses.pdf
Scott: It's in the document (pdf link) from p.51 on...
Comment
The pages 51 to 57 are indeed not very digest but I thought it was a pretty logical and well made procedure. It would be good to keep it.
I see 2 options to make the procedure more accessible to unicycle-events organizers: either making a clearer fillable document explaining the whole procedure as Scott suggested, or keeping the IAAF documents but attaching a small help-document explaining better how to proceed and fill everything.
In any case I would eventually propose removing some question in page 52 SUMMARY OF MEASUREMENTS, and replacing page 53 OVERVIEW OF THE MEASUREMENT PROCEDURE by a list of things to check, instead of writing, because this part was long. But better discussing it appart maybe :)
Another hard point of the procedure was getting a Jones counter. According to Samuel Coupey from Rennes and several clubs of running in France, it looks like the only tool accepted by the IAAF to validate a track length. Sam had problems ordering one counter in the US so we had to borrow one to a running club (and argue so that they would let us use it!).
Steel tape, special nails to plant into the road, and the "spring" to stretch steel rubber looked easier to get.
I suggested Sam to register in this Committee because he knows more than me and recently measured other tracks like the new unicycle marathon of Rennes.
Comment
I do not think that the Jones counter will be in the updated IAAF standard for much longer as there are now auto celebrating GPS (eg. Garmin speed sensor). These should give higher accuracy than a traditional counter. So using their standard as a basis with amendments to make it accessible and bring it up to date would be sensible.
Using their accuracy figures I think is essential though.
Comment
Hello everybody,
I am Sam from Rennes (FR), member of the french unicycle federation, member of the french road commitee and organizer of the 4th Rennes marathon (05/19, please register ;-)).
Mesure a course precisely in not so complicated and it is imperative to certify word (or national) records.
We need a Jones Counter http://www.jonescounter.com/
Before the counter is used, the bicycle must first be calibrated by being ridden on a straight section of road between marks whose separation has been accurately measured by steel tape. A calibration can then be calculated in terms of counts per kilometer. Next, the bicycle is ridden over the race course to determine its length. Finally, the bicycle is recalibrated by riding again over the calibration distance. This is done to check for changes in bicycle-wheel diameter due to temperature changes, air leakage, and other causes.
As Mirjam said, the method is explain in détail in this document : https://aims-worldrunning.org/measurement/MeasurementOfRoadRaceCourses.pdf
This book (easy to understand) has many pages because they are many illustrations and examples. We can find all the answers to our questions.
I don't know any other method so precise.
In France, the first time we borrowed a Jones Counter (members of running federation have one) to measure one 10K and a marathon (french championship 2018) and after then we buyed one and we measured the Rennes marathon. We can explain the measure in a document and we planted special nails in the road, so if anyone wants to check he can, after a word (or national) record for instance.
Comment
Sam, could you maybe send me the document you use to document this via email?
thanks:)
Comment
Very interesting Roger that auto calibrating GPS may replace Jones Counter. I hope it will be available soon, and affordable.
Comment
Martin, I have made some enquiries this week and the claims of their accuracy is.. a claim. Apparently they are either exceptionally good or very bad! they are inconstant and have no failsafe. lets hope they can sort this out though.
Comment
Anybody working on a draft for documentation or do we leave this until next time?
Comment
I am not currently working on anything for this.
Comment
For the time being, we have something workeable in 4D.15.
In view of time pressure, I think we should leave it until the next rulebook round to make changes.
Which begs the question: is anyone taking note of such "postponed" issues?
Comment
I have a file with these notes for after Unicon 20.
Closing this discussion now.