It’s a new year and time for more racing! I usually don’t run many races in January, but this year I decided that it would be a good idea to get out of northern Utah for a few days to get some warm temperatures and clean air. Several of my friends ran the Painters Half Marathon in St. George, UT last year, and it looked like a race worth trying. What primarily drew my eyes to it are that it is a rolling loop course, it is USATF certified, and it has decent competition.

The fact that it is a loop course is important to me. In my humble opinion, there are way too races out here in Utah that are point-to-point downhill screamers. They all start up some mountain canyon and funnel you out to the city in the valley below, usually dropping 1000′ or more. Is it beautiful? Yes! Will it give you a meaningful time? No! And the relatively high elevation of these races (~5000′ above sea level) just complicates things even more. We Utah runners inevitably end up standing around after the race discussing what our time is really “worth“.

It was much simpler back in the flat, low lands in Indiana and Michigan, where I began racing as a high school and collegiate runner.  A 15:30 5K was “worth”…15:30. My time was simply taken at face value (you are what you run), and I always had a good assessment of where I was really at in my training and racing. In Utah, a 15:30 5K could be “worth” anywhere from 15:10 (if you normalize to sea level level) to 16:30 (if the time came from a downhill course). It’s very confusing, and at times very unsatisfying. While it’s nice to witness the beauty of our surrounding mountain canyons during races, beat the high elevation, and get a fast time, ultimately I can never count my Utah PR’s as “real” PR’s. Perhaps if I had done 100% of my running out here I would feel differently, but all of the racing I did in the midwest while growing up has set my perspective.

So to summarize: Loop courses are good. They yield times that I can take a face value. Furthermore, getting down to a lower elevation is good for the same reason. And it’s all worthless without USATF certification and the security of a correct distance. The Painters Half provided all of these incentives with its certified, loop route that averages around 2600′ above sea level.

My wife and I were glad to leave the smog of Logan on Thursday morning. These red air days get really depressing after a while. We were rewarded to clean air and temperatures hovering near 60 in St. George. The trip was already worth it!

Race day morning was chilly, but perfect: sunny, upper 30’s, and no wind. Temperatures during the race climbed into the low 50s, and was quite suitable for shorts, singlet, and gloves. The half marathon had just over 1000 finishers, so it was a good size. Competition up front looked good; there were several guys who I knew could run near 1:10:00 or in the mid- to low-teens. I myself thought I could hit around 1:11 to 1:12, based on some recently workouts and my total training volume. I thought I had some chance of winning, but so did four other guys. Due to some tendon issues and setbacks, I had been scaling my weekly mileage back to the 40s, including  a fair amount of elliptical cross training.

The race ended up going really well for me. We started with a pack of seven at the 2nd mile that drifted to a pack of four by the 5th mile, and a pack of two by the 7th mile. That pack of two included myself, and I felt strong and snappy through about Mile 9, but then the distance of the race wore on me and my pace slowed, from about 5:20/mile to 5:30/mile. My competitor, Jeff McClellan, did not slow whatsoever, and cruised to the victory with a time of 1:10:59. I chugged in with a 1:11:31, which I was count as both a “January PR” and a “post-A.S. PR”. And thankfully, I don’t have to figure out what the time is “worth”, since it is worth exactly what it is: 1:11:31. But this race gave me confidence that I can go under 1:09:00 and get a lifetime PR later this May in Indianapolis, provided I get in some good training.

I would do the Painters Half again. I thought it was fairly well-managed. The course had a lot of hills, but none were too steep or too long. It was not an extremely fast course, but it was not slow either. There were a lot of 90-degree turns, which slowed things down, and also threw off everyone’s GPS units (sharp turns really mess up the distance accuracy of Garmins…but that’s what certification is for), but other than that I liked the route a lot. It was not monotonous, and snaked its way through several different neighborhoods, bouncing on and off the local trail system. There were several very nice views, some cool red rock outcrops, and a bridge crossing over the Virgin River. The race started and finished at the Dixie Center, which featured a huge amount of easy parking and lots of bathrooms (very important!).

Good times, and perhaps I’ll be back.

Many people think that GPS is always used to map routes, but this is far from the truth. When I create race course maps, I almost always capture the course remotely using high-resolution aerial photography. Rather than engaging in time-consuming and costly travel and GPS capture, I can sit in the comfort of my office and on-screen digitize the route very accurately and precisely. I don’t have to worry about satellite connection, tree cover, and topographic obstructions. In the end, it saves the client money and creates a quality product that can be trusted.

But the cool thing about digitizing data in a GIS is that you can later convert the data to a GPS-ready format, and load it into your GPS unit for easy GIS-based navigation. For my mapping, I tend to store and edit my data in either shapefile (.shp), MS Access geodatabase (.mdb), or an ESRI file geodatabase (.gdb). While these are good formats for GIS consumption, they do not help GPS users, but I can export to a more universal, “friendly” format, such as Keyhole Markup Language (.kml), which is similar to XML. Many software programs can read and convert KML files, and it can be used to make data GPS-ready.

Most people’s GPS units can accept GPX format, which is also similar to XML. Thus, to get my GIS data into a GPS, export to GPX would be optimal. However, no GIS software that I’ve seen (yet) converts directly to GPX. But most GIS software can import and export KML, and KML is easy to convert to GPX. So the general process is:

1. Convert your GIS format to .kml format. I use Manifold Systems to do this, but there are several free plugins for ArcGIS that can do this as well. Just search Arcscripts for “kml”.
2. Convert the KML to GPX. There are several programs that can do this. I personally use GPS Babel for all GPS conversion tasks, and Babel handles KML to GPX (and vice-versa) very well. Also, I do know that Garmin Trackmaker Free works for this, but I have not actually used it myself.
3. Load the GPX into your GPS unit. Every GPS software will be a little bit different, but people have had a lot of success loading the files I’ve given them with Garmin Mapsource, so I know it at least works with that. But GPX is a pretty generic file type, and I expect compatibility to be pretty good.

Many participants have been contacting me and requesting the Ragnar Relay Del Sol route. The race is coming up in a few weeks (Feb 29-Mar 1), and they want to import the course route and exchanges into their GPS units to help them prepare for the race, navigate the van, know exactly where the exchanges are, and avoid getting lost during this 24-hour, 190-mile race in the desert.

Due to popular demand, I’ve decided to just post my GPX files here. Over the next few months, I intend to post and make public the GPX files for all seven Ragnar relays.

• Download Relay Del Sol KML files (for Google Earth)
• Download Relay Del Sol GPX files (for GPS)

So I’ve made a decision: I’m crossing over to the “nerdy side” and will soon be buying a Garmin Forerunner 205. Ah yes, now I’ll finally be able to to measure my runs to two decimals and take quarter-mile splits. I’ve elected not to get the heart rate monitor (ie - the Forerunner 305), simply so that I can have more speed and distance stats simultaneously available to me on that glorious, honkin’ huge watch face.

We runners sure love our nerdy gadgets, and it’s been getting worse and worse. And thanks to the distractions of iPods and Virtual Training Partners®, our social running will further spiral as well. Thank goodness for running blogs and the wonderful social interaction they provide (heh heh).

But the real question is: which is nerdier, the Garmin Forerunner 205/305 or the old Casio calculator watches? Although the Garmins score points with pace alerts and a customizable screen, the calculator watches have that irresistible ’80s retro flair. Hmmm…I’ll have to ask my Virtual Partner® and get his opinion on this one.

The Marathon GIS map of the week is of the Carlsbad Marathon, which is being held today, January 21. This event is hosted in Carlsbad, CA, just west of the San Diego. In fact, before 2005, it was called the “San Diego Marathon.” The event also consists of a large half marathon, which sold out for the first time in 17 years, with an entry total of 7000 runners. The total number of participants in the event (Marathon + Half Marathon + kid’s mile) is over 10,000 runners and walkers. Congrats to InMotion Events!

Needless to say, I was excited when InMotion contracted me (Marathon GIS) to update their maps and profiles. Despite never visiting the course, simply making the maps made me want to go out there one of these years and run the race. Both half and full marathon courses primarily hug the coastline and offer splendid views of the Pacific Ocean. The marathon course, although containing a noticeable hill near the middle, is considered a good Boston qualifier, and running at sea level will only serve to help.

The half marathon course looks to be flat-out blazing, with only a few very small rolling hills. Someday I would like to run the half, if nothing else just to get out of northern Utah in January! But it is a definite PR course as well, as demonstrated by very fast men’s and women’s course records of 1:02:06 and 1:11:23, respectively.

Making any course map is a challenge, but my progress was greatly helped my InMotion supplying me with GPS coordinates of the start, finish, mile markers, and u-turns. This ensured that both the maps and profiles were calibrated with the USATF certification, accommodating very accurate maps and profiles.

Others factors that helped me with the mapping was an abundance of high-quality GIS data available publically for the greater San Diego area. Good, attributed street data was key, and was complemented by the availability of 2005 color aerial photography and 10-meter digital elevation model (DEM) data. All these contributed to help with not only the accuracy of the maps and profiles, but also the aesthetics of the finished products.