I saw that (towards front).  However, this paragraph from page 66 of 72 (Adobe 
count)
" The measurer will complete a single ride of the course and based upon his/her 
calculations will certify that the course is not less than the advertised 
distance "from start to finish". If you wish to have exact splits (kilometres, 
miles) or any other points marked which may require a second ride over the 
course then the costs for this extra ride must be agreed upon beforehand. "

implies to me that splits are completely optional, at the discretion of the 
organizer, and are not in the base price for course measurement.
Neither seems entirely specific and there may be other race rules that need to 
be read.  I think the two at least are in sufficient conflict to denote a lack 
of clarity.

I would also note in additional references, this document references the USATF 
document without adverse remarks.  However, the USATF document many only apply 
to nationally-sanctioned events.




________________________________
From: Martin Vlietstra <[email protected]>
To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]>
Sent: Fri, November 26, 2010 2:38:38 PM
Subject: [USMA:48946] RE: Detroit Turkey Trot


My reading of the regulations says that kilometre markers must be in place – 
mile markers are optional.
 

________________________________

From:[email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
John M. Steele
Sent: 26 November 2010 11:52
To: U.S. Metric Association
Subject: [USMA:48941] RE: Detroit Turkey Trot
 
I don't know.  But I don't think the splits have any official status, so it 
doesn't matter if they are metric or Customary distances.  The course is still 
metric overall, even if laid out by clumsy conversions.
 
Reading the procedures with the bike and Jones counter, it is really laid out 
in 
Jones units anyway, where Jones units are variable with the air pressure in 
tires and weight of rider.  The Jones units are calibrated to a steel tape, so 
it is all based on conversions anyway.  Looking in detail at the procedure, I 
have a minor concern that there is always a fraction of Jones count "stored up" 
in the counter at the end of the calibration ride.  I would lay out the 
calibration course as they do and mark with nails.  However I would override 
the 
course to the next integer count and measure the override with the steel tape.  
That would reduce the integerization error.  However, that error contributes to 
making the course long, which appears to be perfectly acceptable.
 
I understand that the course length must be treated as a minimum and 
measurement 
uncertainty added to the required length.  What I don't understand is "freezing 
the technology" and assuming the proper add is 0.1% of length.  If measurement 
error can be reduced, the bias should be reduced as well.  However, they 
mandate 
that constant.
 
To me, both issues are more important than whether the steel tape is a real 
metric tape or a Customary tape and calculator constant.
 

________________________________

From:Martin Vlietstra <[email protected]>
To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]>
Sent: Fri, November 26, 2010 1:40:29 AM
Subject: [USMA:48940] RE: Detroit Turkey Trot
No doubt the USATF has equivalent rules, but can a world record be set on a 
course that does not display kilometeres?
 

________________________________

From:[email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
John M. Steele
Sent: 25 November 2010 21:08
To: U.S. Metric Association
Subject: [USMA:48938] RE: Detroit Turkey Trot
 
USATF has a very similar course measurer guide which is "remarkably dual."  You 
can search for USATF's guide on the web.  The course is laid out in the same 
bicycle manner using a Jones counter and nominally 1.001X long (short course 
prevention factor).
  
However, the bicycle calibration course may be laid out in feet or meters, and 
machinations and conversions used to get between Customary and metric.  The 
course maps specifically allow the start, finish, turn-around points, etc to be 
referenced in feet or meters from permanent landmarks.
 
Most of the courses recorded on their website have splits in miles with perhaps 
a simple midpoint split in kilometers.  The overall distance is metric.  A 10K 
race must be 10000 m minimum, 10010 m target, and presumably 10020 m max (I'm 
not sure there is a hard max, but it is implied.  I assert a course of length 
32809 ft min, 32841 ft target, 32874 ft max complies, and would seem to be 
allowed by USATF, and sacrifices very little tolerance from rounding 
"specward." 
(not that I think that's a good thing, just a true thing.)

 
 

________________________________

From:Martin Vlietstra <[email protected]>
To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]>
Sent: Thu, November 25, 2010 3:41:02 PM
Subject: [USMA:48937] RE: Detroit Turkey Trot
A quick read of the rules of the IAAF for road races suggests to me the use of 
kilometres is mandatory, miles optional.  (See 
http://www.iaaf.org/mm/Document/Competitions/Competition/04/54/93/20090723080234_httppostedfile_200806_2_MeasurementManual_12345.pdf)

 
This raises the question “Could a new world record be set on a track that does 
not display kilometres?”  

 
 

________________________________

From:[email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
John M. Steele
Sent: 25 November 2010 18:04
To: U.S. Metric Association
Subject: [USMA:48934] Detroit Turkey Trot
 
Well, this seemed more metric than that other Turkey Trot:
*The Detroit Free Press described it as 10 K and 5 K races (with a 
parenthetical 
3.1 miles for the 5K)
http://www.freep.com/article/20101125/NEWS01/101125006/1001/rss01
 
*The organizers describe it as 10K and 5K races (there is also a 1 mile)
http://www.theparade.org/turkeytrot/index.php
 
I was feeling pretty smug that Detroit knew how to be more metric than 
Sacramento .
 
Imagine my surprise when I look at the USATF Course Certification Map.  Only 
mile markers are placed, and all the instructions for starts, finishes, 
turnarounds, etc are laid out in feet from landmark infrastructure.
http://www.theparade.org/docs/turkeytrot/SanctionMap10km.pdf
Does USATF normally lay out metric courses in Customary?  That just seems to 
add 
another layer of complexity.

Reply via email to