A new kind of endurance cycling

[almostvegancyclist]

It occurred to me that endurance cycling could be done slightly differently.

In the audax format, you have a set distance to cover within a set number of hours. It's up to you how to use the time given, you can either cycle fast and rest more, cycle slow and rest less, or for some people indeed, cycle fast and rest little and finish early.

But what if it doesn't matter how far you've cycled? Instead you have to cycle for a certain number of hours and there's a limit on how long you can stop for. Say, the goal is to cycle for 24 hours and you fail if you stop for more than 2 hours overall. But the distance doesn't matter.

Since the distance doesn't matter, you don't need a fast bike. Instead more comfortable bikes would be preferred.

Would you try this format?

 

[Sharky]

Sounds like you want to try a 12 hour time trial.
Or a 24hr time trial.

 

[almostvegancyclist]

Sounds like you want to try a 12 hour time trial.
Or a 24hr time trial.

But in those events, it's the distance cycled within 12/24hrs that counts. I'm suggesting getting rid of that, and just cycling 12/24 or longer hours, with the requirement that stopped time should be less than a set number of hours (and perhaps also set a minimum distance as well).

In this scenario, it wouldn't matter at all how fast or slow you go, as long as you are constantly moving. So it discourages cycling fast.

 

[Jameshow]

I think most of us do this already!
@DogmaStu and @DCLane excepted!!

 

[rydabent]

It occurred to me that endurance cycling could be done slightly differently.

In the audax format, you have a set distance to cover within a set number of hours. It's up to you how to use the time given, you can either cycle fast and rest more, cycle slow and rest less, or for some people indeed, cycle fast and rest little and finish early.

But what if it doesn't matter how far you've cycled? Instead you have to cycle for a certain number of hours and there's a limit on how long you can stop for. Say, the goal is to cycle for 24 hours and you fail if you stop for more than 2 hours overall. But the distance doesn't matter.

Since the distance doesn't matter, you don't need a fast bike. Instead more comfortable bikes would be preferred.

Would you try this format?

Nope, at my age 86, I cycle strictly for fun and exercise. Besides, I dont like other peoples rules.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Where would you hold such an event, on a race track?

 

[Smokin Joe]

Where would you hold such an event, on a race track?

That's the problem, where would it start and finish? You'd have to use a circuit, and the more wide ranging the abilities the shorter the circuit would need to be.

 

[almostvegancyclist]

Where would you hold such an event, on a race track?

I guess I'd provide an advisory route that's about 100k long, so people can do laps. It might also be necessary to set a minimum distance, so people don't go insanely slow.

 

[almostvegancyclist]

That's the problem, where would it start and finish? You'd have to use a circuit, and the more wide ranging the abilities the shorter the circuit would need to be.

Participants can do laps around a loop that's not too long, so if they finish somewhere in the middle, they can still cycle back to the start/finish and receive refreshments. They can time it so that they finish at the finish line rather than in the middle of nowhere.

 

[Tenkaykev]

-

That's the problem, where would it start and finish? You'd have to use a circuit, and the more wide ranging the abilities the shorter the circuit would need to be.

There's still a cycle track in Poole Park. They erected a commemorative display and the information tells of crowds of many thousands attending in Victorian times. The circuit is 1/3 mile, with a cricket pitch in the middle to keep you entertained 😉