FNRttC 2017 (that's next year, folks) thinking ride thread

[velovoice]

I am shocked you think challenging precludes inclusivity. That surely belies the whole ethos of the FNRttC - to get ordinary riders to do extraordinary rides.

Do you not think 2012 & 2014 inclusive? Everybody who planned to do the whole lot did the whole lot. The range and capability of riders was pretty much the same as this year. The difference is some tours extend beyond our comfort zones and that gives to some an extra zist. The trick is to keep it still within the capability of the regular Friday rider. You have to admit that was done in 2012 & 2014.

I accept that some may wish to stay 100% within their comfort zone and a holiday is for seeing, drinking and making merry. Not for a bit of necessary but occasional sustainable discomfort to see new places make iconic destinations (another linchpin of the Friday movement or are we going to abandon Ditchling?). But it works both ways - we have to favour both viewpoints and the only real way to do that is vary the Tours from year to year.

That's why I am concerned that, for me, life-changing foray into continental touring doesn't stall because of lack of ambition and settle into a rut. We have had two flat rides to The Netherlands. Fine. Why not somewhere else next year and return in 2018 or 2019 if the leader is willing? Do we really want to get stuck in the mud?

Stuart, you have made a whole series of presumptions here based on what you think I said, not what I actually said!

Nowhere have I said that inclusivity and challenging are mutually exclusive.

I was not on the 2012 or 2014 tours so could not possibly comment.

I have not suggested for one instant that anyone wishes to stay 100% within their comfort zone! but I am pretty sure that no one wants to spend 100% of their time struggling and feeling demoralised.

I don't believe anyone has mentioned "ruts" or "mud" except for you.

There is certainly no lack of "ambition" in any of the proposals for 2017 made to date!

 

[StuartG]

Nowhere have I said that inclusivity and challenging are mutually exclusive.

Sorry - that is the way I read this:

I don't see the "choice" as being "revisit" versus "new", but a choice between aiming to be "inclusive" (as in achievable for most, with a reasonable amount of conditioning and preparation) versus "challenging" (as in, expanding the comfort zone of those who are already fairly comfortable with the "inclusive" option).

I have not suggested for one instant that anyone wishes to stay 100% within their comfort zone! but I am pretty sure that no one wants to spend 100% of their time struggling and feeling demoralised.

Surely no one would. Certainly not I. Perhaps we are getting confused by what we mean by inclusivity. The Tour as I understand it is primarily for regular Friday riders (though some newbies have done extraordinarily well without trying). That suggests the rider would feel comfortable doing 60-70 miles in a day or night. More might be demanding, less would be undemanding (and adjusting for hills and panniers obv).

Some riders have the power to do that without getting out of bed. Some of us have to work hard to get to that level. But it is a level. A level fair to the rider and fair to the group. No one wants a distressed demoralised rider. As I age I will fade. When I can't get up Ditchling I shall still do the Chalk'n'Cheese. When I can't do the Chalk'n'Cheese I won't be on tour.

Well unless I can do it on an e-bike

 

[StuartG]

You're just being silly now Stuart. Go back and read what I've said about the subject in the past. I find all the Fridays rides demanding, if you really want to know. So if people feel that the Tour should start tackling mountainous routes in Spain, as has been idly suggested in the past, then I and quite a few others will be excluded by dint of not wishing to torture ourselves when we don't need to.

If you did you may find I was on the same side as you. My analysis (knowing those passes) was that it was going to be very, very very hard for regular riders. Certainly not fun (except possibly the downhills) and some regulars wouldn't make it - which would be truly demoralising for everybody else.

The point TMN is we all do the rides for different reasons. Some for a stroll, some because they are achievable but demanding but they get a kick out of it. You say you find them a struggle and I have seen you go to hell and back on a bad day - not this year though. You looked much more comfortable. Certainly more comfortable than certain strong lads struggling out of Aachen. The point is you do all the rides, the easy, the hard but achievable. You must get something back in camaraderie or whatever that makes the pain worthwhile. Why are the Tours which can have a mix within them different?

 

[StuartG]

You might think less would be 'undemanding', but that is exactly what some of us are thinking about, in terms of allowing more time to explore the places that we arrive in and stay in, rather than rushing to unpack, shower, eat, then move on at the crack of dawn the following day. Being able to enjoy Maastricht and Gent in some leisure was a joy this year. It's a holiday, well it is for some of us anyway.

Hey something we can really agree on. The places we missed or roared through. It really comes down to at least two types of tour:

One where we go to see the country, not the 2 metres of tarmac in front. The bike merely as a method of conveyance between places we want to enjoy. Where mufti is more important than the lycra. I thought last year was the best example so far of that. Who can forget the tiny port whose name I have, or of the field of Windmills, gorgeous villages and eating places or the ferries?

The other is the destination. 2012 was all about that (though the destination was the least worthwhile place to visit). But JoG kept us going north, it was the driver and it was an achievement I value. Sorry if you didn't.

All I'm asking is for us to do both types in different years. In 2012 we had to be careful of not stopping too long on the way. It was all about making progress. Perhaps this year we were a little too concerned about progress and not stopping more to enjoy the countries. Do you now see where I'm coming from? Maybe we won't all be happy at the same time but we will all be happy sometime.

 

[StuartG]

As so often, I find your tone pretty patronising.

I wrote the above before I read your post. I hope it puts to rest some of your questions and fears.

 

[StuartG]

There you go again, you just can't help being patronising can you ...
No it doesn't; you could answer my questions about where you want to go and would you like to lead.

Well you can see it as patronisation - I see it as confusion. If you enjoyed it great. We both did. You just seemed to be against that type of Tour so I assumed you didn't. That's what I'm certainly guilty of.

What questions have I not answered?

I've said I will go wherever the leader wants to go. And it is where he wants to go, not me, that matters. That he should be free to choose that and not be badgered into going to a specific place and he won't be by me. And a change is as good as a rest.

I don't think you want me to lead TMN and you know just as well as me I don't have the experience (amongst other things) to do so.

 

[StuartG]

@User13710 I'm sorry but you keep alluding to me words, actions and thoughts I have not written or thought or even agree with. Which makes response difficult. I have tried to be polite, honest and helpful but have obviously failed. This exchange between us is adding nothing to the thread and probably exasperating others. So I will bow out and leave it to those who have something more constructive to add to what I hope will be a highlight for us all in 2017 no matter where we go.

 

[mmmmartin]

I think some hyperbole was spouted about the difficultness of some of this year's tour

I found it hard, perhaps because of the heat, which always affects me badly. The day off after that very hot day was very welcome, then we had two consecutive days of 120k: the idea of @User and @User13710 to ride 30k on the day off and ride to Maastricht, to have a shorter day to Ghent then end the Tour there, by taking the train, meant they didn't have those two 120k days, which really took their toll on me.

 

[swansonj]

I think some hyperbole was spouted about the difficultness of some of this year's tour, possibly just for the sake of posturing, who knows.

As an outsider (and I accordingly offer this diffidently), it was weird reading the unfolding day by day accounts. Simultaneously, there was a litany of discomfort, heat, exhaustion, mechanical breakdown, health breakdown, and various recourse to trains; and a litany, sometimes I think from the same people, of how this was the best tour ever and how much people enjoyed it.

 

[Flying Dodo]

If you've got a linear tour, only stopping 1 night in each place, then 8 days at 105k makes sense. However, building in a rest day if you're based somewhere for several days gives other options, as then people can potter around like we did in Utrecht last year, or go and do their own thing as others did. I'd prefer that sort of tour, to give people an opportunity to actually look at the places we're in, rather than zooming through.

 

[velovoice]

As an outsider (and I accordingly offer this diffidently), it was weird reading the unfolding day by day accounts. Simultaneously, there was a litany of discomfort, heat, exhaustion, mechanical breakdown, health breakdown, and various recourse to trains; and a litany, sometimes I think from the same people, of how this was the best tour ever and how much people enjoyed it.

Yes, there was all that and more, I'm sure! As an "insider" reading the same posts, I also saw lots of in-jokes and ample evidence of the kind of kinship and camaraderie for which The Fridays are rather famous.

 

[Flying Dodo]

Yeah but, that still leaves 7 places to zoom through and only one to see at all properly.

105k does allow a more leisurely bit of cruising and looking around, compared with 120k per day, so you'd have less time pressure to get to point B at the end of the day. And I think the best sort of tour would be one which wasn't a different town each night, but allowed at least a couple of nights in one place on at least one occasion, to factor in some out and back routes to interesting places.

 

[StuAff]

As it was I got to see a museum in a bike shop, walked through the old town, had lunch. So, out of adversity came good things.

Gent is lovely just to bimble around. When I went there on my tour last year (also, a good thing out of adversity) the plan was to have a test ride in a WAW velomobile. That got cut short (probably not a good idea for a first ever recumbent ride) but a terrific day in a great place. I'll definitely go back....

 

[StuAff]

105k does allow a more leisurely bit of cruising and looking around, compared with 120k per day, so you'd have less time pressure to get to point B at the end of the day. And I think the best sort of tour would be one which wasn't a different town each night, but allowed at least a couple of nights in one place on at least one occasion, to factor in some out and back routes to interesting places.

Good plan.

 

[swansonj]

Outsider?

To Fridays tours . But thank you.