Measuring Running Routes
This article explore some of the most common ways for measuring how far you’ve run run
and offers advice on how to get the most accurate results.
Tips For Getting The Best Accuracy
If plotting a route on a map:
If recording a route using a GPS:
What level of accuracy should I aim for?
Before looking at the different options for measuring routes, it is worth commenting on accuracy in general. Whatever method of measurement you use, it is virtually impossible to measure the exact line that you took around a route. As a result, it is not unusual to get slightly different measurements each time for the same route and a small degree of inaccuracy is inevitable. Therefore, when reviewing the distance of a run, we suggest that you always allow for a potential inaccuracy of around 0.5% in your measurements. So, for example, for a route that is exactly 5 miles long, the distance you ran is likely be somewhere between 4.975 miles and 5.025 miles.
Even with the most accurate measurement methods, human error tends to account for most measurement errors, normally as a result of measuring a slightly different route to the one that was run. So, to get the best accuracy follow our suggested tips.
Even with the most accurate measurement methods, human error tends to account for most measurement errors.
Different Methods of Route Measurement
1. Jones Counter
This is the benchmark for accurate measurement of running routes and is the method used to certify the accuracy of many UK and International races. A Jones Counter is a small device attached to a bicycle wheel that measures distance by counting the revolutions, or partial revolutions, of the wheel. It is calibrated for use on a specific bike using a perfectly straight calibration course. Jones Counters normally produce measurements that are accurate to within 0.1%. You can find out more at the UK Road Running Course Measurement site.
2. Online Route Mapping Tools
There are a number of online route mapping tools available on the internet, including our Route Measurer on Good Run Guide. These work by determining the latitude and longitude coordinates of each point plotted on the map and then using a distance formula to calculate the distance between each point.
To get the most accurate measurement, we recommend using satellite maps as these are real-world images.
Different map types are normally available and it is worth bearing in mind that some map types may not match exactly the real world, as paths and roads can sometimes be moved slightly from their real-world positions to make the map easier to read. Ordnance Survey Explorer maps are a good example of this. To get the most accurate measurement, we recommend using satellite maps as these are real-world images. Like GPS devices, it can be difficult to measure accurately through wooded areas, where an aerial view of the path is obscured by trees, but unlike GPS devices, accurate measurement through built-up areas should not generally be an issue.
To test the accuracy of our Route Measurer, we measured four laps of a 400m athletics track using the satellite map view (see illustration below) and repeated the exercise 20 times. The results varied by only 0.32%, with measurements ranging from 1598.344m to 1603.518m. On all occasions, measurements were within 0.22% of the correct length with the majority being within 0.1%. To achieve good accuracy levels though, it is essential to plot points carefully, ideally while zoomed in to the maximum extent.
3. GPS Receivers/Watches/GPS Apps
GPS devices work by measuring the time taken for signals to be received from a network of 24 satellites in space. They work best when they have a clear view of the sky and need to ‘lock on’ to at least 3 satellites to work out your position. They can also work out your height above sea level in a similar way but need to lock on to at least 4 satellite signals to do this.
A wide range of GPS devices are available, with prices typically ranging from about £100 to £500. Compared with other options, this makes them expensive but they are very convenient as they do everything for you. As well as measuring your run, they record where you ran (not where you think you ran) and provide great instant feedback. But unfortunately GPS devices are not infallible. Even with a clear view of the sky, each individual position that is recorded is typically only accurate to between 3 and 5 metres, which can add up to quite a high potential error over a long route. Even greater errors can occur when recording your height above sea level.
The biggest GPS inaccuracies tend to occur in built up or densely wooded areas, as the signal can be delayed or prevented from reaching the GPS device. However, even in the open, devices are subject to errors from variations in atmospheric conditions. When a GPS signal is lost altogether, it results in the last two known positions being joined with a straight line, effectively cutting off any corners in between and producing a short measurement. When signals are reflected off buildings, straight paths can be recorded with kinks, thereby resulting in a long measurement. To illustrate this, the following picture shows an example of a section of a route recorded by a runner using a GPS device in central London.
We conducted a controlled test to assess the accuracy levels of popular running GPS devices. The test was carried out on two different open air athletics tracks, each with a clear view of the sky, using two modern GPS devices. Two runners recorded 20 separate measurements of a 1600m route by running four 400m laps of the track. The results varied by 7.4%, with measurements ranging from 1571.693m to 1734.660m. Most measurements were within 4% of the correct length but the most inaccurate result was 8.4% out.
The following picture shows an example of one of the recordings. The runner ran around the inside lane but you can clearly see that the recorded path often deviates from the correct position by around 3 to 5 metres.
In most circumstances though, runners usually find that the level of accuracy is satisfactory for their needs. Our advice is to always check that the route has been correctly recorded using a satellite map view of the route. You can then make any adjustments as required by editing the route on the map.
You can read more about GPS inaccuracies in this excellent article on the Sources of Errors in GPS.
To summarise: There are a number of different ways to measure how far you've run and each has different advantages. For convenience, GPS devices are great as they record the route for you but even with a good signal, accuracy levels can vary and in obscured areas signal loss can create quite large measurement errors.
Footpods enable you to measure your runs in any environment as they are not dependent on satellite signals. However if you want to see your route on a map you'll need to map it separately.
Satellite map measurement is very accurate provided you take care to plot the points in the correct place! This is normally easy to do but can be problematic through wooded areas.
As a guide, the table on the right shows indicative levels of accuracy using different methods. However, as it is almost impossible to measure the exact route you actually took, we recommend you always allow for a potential error factor of at least 0.5% regardless of which method you use.