In this follow-up letter to Liza Recto (the race director of the Lower Potomac River Marathon), I try again to appeal to her good senses and her good side. I do not think I could possibly be more polite and respectful, despite the negative attitude of her previous email.
Ms. Recto,
I am sorry that you misconstrued the intent of my email. All I asked for was your assistance in raising questions to USATF, to reach an outcome that would serve us both - more accuracy and better results for runners. I never once used the GPS calculations to challenge you. Because I actually did research the USATF measuring guidelines before I emailed you, I came to the conclusion that both your measurements and the GPS watches were correct. It is too bad you think that is such a worrisome notion, because it appears to be true.
The GPS watch was merely the indicator that something was amiss. I never questioned the accuracy of the course you measured; I questioned the accuracy of the course we actually ran. The discrepancy lies not in the measurement, but in how the instructions for the runners contradicted the measurement guidelines. In fact, if everything you said is true, then you have proven my point perfectly.
You measured the course to follow the shortest possible routes, but then instructed the runners not to take them. Your email says that only Route 249 was restricted, but that was not the message received before the race. This is a direct quote from the "Course Information" page on the website (though the emphasis is mine): "Runners will run on the left side of the roads, facing traffic, throughout the marathon course."
Being denied the opportunity to take tangents and run the middles of curves cost me precious seconds in every mile. Therefore, I was penalized by a minute and a half for following the rules.
That is why I asked for assistance
to bring this to the attention to the USATF. I was not threatening or
challenging you, but that seems to be your impression. I thought this
would be helpful to both of us.I am sorry that you misconstrued the intent of my email. All I asked for was your assistance in raising questions to USATF, to reach an outcome that would serve us both - more accuracy and better results for runners. I never once used the GPS calculations to challenge you. Because I actually did research the USATF measuring guidelines before I emailed you, I came to the conclusion that both your measurements and the GPS watches were correct. It is too bad you think that is such a worrisome notion, because it appears to be true.
The GPS watch was merely the indicator that something was amiss. I never questioned the accuracy of the course you measured; I questioned the accuracy of the course we actually ran. The discrepancy lies not in the measurement, but in how the instructions for the runners contradicted the measurement guidelines. In fact, if everything you said is true, then you have proven my point perfectly.
You measured the course to follow the shortest possible routes, but then instructed the runners not to take them. Your email says that only Route 249 was restricted, but that was not the message received before the race. This is a direct quote from the "Course Information" page on the website (though the emphasis is mine): "Runners will run on the left side of the roads, facing traffic, throughout the marathon course."
Being denied the opportunity to take tangents and run the middles of curves cost me precious seconds in every mile. Therefore, I was penalized by a minute and a half for following the rules.
I disagree with you that an appeal would not be beneficial, so I will continue to pursue the matter.
Sincerely,
Daniel Galioto
No comments:
Post a Comment