Is elevation taken into account?

connie_c

This might be a stupid question.

When a course is measured for a marathon or whatever does the distance measured refer to an "as the crow fly's" distance or does the distance take into account the hills with some sort of formula?

Like if I run 4k and the road starts at 0m elevation rises to 200m and then back to 0m the length of road is actually about 4020 metres instead of the flat 4000m. Over 26miles a hilly course would be a good bit longer than a flat marathon.

sean_84

I think courses are usually measured with a trundle wheel or Jones Counter which counts the rotations of a bicycle wheel. This means that elevation will be taken into account, and you will run 4000m and not 4020m.

I'm not sure if elevation is taken into account on GPS devices (I've heard they don't give very accurate elevation data?), or sites like mapmyrun.com.

connie_c

that makes sense. Cheers.

Condo131

connie_c wrote: »

When a course is measured for a marathon or whatever does the distance measured refer to an "as the crow fly's" distance or does the distance take into account the hills with some sort of formula?

The distance is the actual distance PLUS a short course protection factor of 0.001, measured along the shortest possible route. On your 4k race course, the course is actually 4004m, assuming you run along the measured line. If you run, say, in the middle of the road on a winding road, you might run 4050m or longer. For a marathon, the course is going to be 42.2m longer and as marathons go, if you don't run the SPR (Shortest Possible Route), you're going to be doing a lot longer than 26.22 miles (or even 26.246. inc SCPF)

connie_c wrote: »

Like if I run 4k and the road starts at 0m elevation rises to 200m and then back to 0m the length of road is actually about 4020 metres instead of the flat 4000m. Over 26miles a hilly course would be a good bit longer than a flat marathon.

Course is measured on the road, with contact at all times, so altitude is irrelevant from the measurement point of view. However a course cannot have an altitude difference between start and finish of more than 30m, for record purposes.

sean_84 wrote: »

I think courses are usually measured with a trundle wheel or Jones Counter which counts the rotations of a bicycle wheel.

I'm not sure if elevation is taken into account on GPS devices (I've heard they don't give very accurate elevation data?), or sites like mapmyrun.com.

Jones Counter is the ONLY approved method of measurement. I use two different Garmins when measuring, purely to assist me. Forerunner 305 to give an approx distance for turns/landmarks etc, for my course maps and an Etrex Vista for elevation plots (using the Barometric Pressure option - 'normal' GPS, e.g. on Forerunner and MapMyRun will give you ghost hills in woody/bridge/high building areas etc.

Condo(r)131
AAI National Grade Measurer

Krusty_Clown

Hi condo, thanks as always for the valuable input. I assume that in a roadrace, the shortest possible route is still along the road, without going over kerbs etc?

I think I annoyed quite a few people at DCM this year, by taking a line around kerbs etc, even when the pack around me was going straight over it.

Domer

Isn't there also a rule in a point to point race regarding it being recognised as a record. The drop in elevation between start and finish cannot be more then a certain amount, otherwise the times can only count as course records, and not as world or other records. This is less of a factor where races start and end at the same point, but is a factor on courses like London or New York were they start and end at completely different places.

Condo131

Domer wrote: »

Isn't there also a rule in a point to point race regarding it being recognised as a record. The drop in elevation between start and finish cannot be more then a certain amount....

.....eh, yes...

Condo131 wrote: »

However a course cannot have an altitude difference between start and finish of more than 30m, for record purposes.

Condo(r)131
AAI National Grade Measurer

Condo131

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

Hi condo, thanks as always for the valuable input. I assume that in a roadrace, the shortest possible route is still along the road, without going over kerbs etc?

I think I annoyed quite a few people at DCM this year, by taking a line around kerbs etc, even when the pack around me was going straight over it.

Well...now we're into a right can of worms!

Bear in mind that measurement is basically about records. It is to ensure, as far as is reasonably possible, that someone cannot run shorter than the stated distance. A record for, say 10,000m is not a record if the person only runs 9,999.9m, however if its over, e.g. 10,008m, that's ok.

Most runners think that measurement is about ensuring accuracy, e.g. that a race is exactly 5 miles, its not - see previous para - but it will be accurate, subject to the IAAF measurement criteria.

So when measuring, one has to know where barriers are going to be placed and also think 'Where is the smart runner going to go?'. If someone is going to cut corners on a massive paved bend, cutting out several meters, then that area is either going to need barriers of some sort, or measure across it. Bear in mind also that the record breaker isn't necessarily going to be the long time leader (person who is focus of attention) - s/he can be further back, cutting all the corners and only come to the front at the finish line.

I've measured races where the organisers have stipulated that certain areas are going to be taped off, only to find, on the day, that no tapes have been erected - So no Course Cert!

So ...long answer...If I reckon that someone is going to have an advantage by crossing somewhere, e.g. a particular corner, I'll stipulate that that will have to be taped or else I'll measure across the short-cuts.

I've had 'hammer and tongs' arguements with co-measurers 'Nobody's going to run across there!', only to see, from the race video, the leaders all go straight across that spot.

My approach is to be both pragmatic and sceptic in every measurement (if that makes sense to you)