route for an audax

[yello]

I think Yello was agreeing with you there .

Indeed he was! Thanks RT!

I ride for myself, for the personal challenge of doing the distance, so I can't quite understand someone that pretends to have done it. It makes no sense to me at all. I don't care personally whether other riders cheat or not, or whether they are found out or no, - but I figure they'd know. So, yes, they're only really cheating themselves.

 

[Randochap]

I think Yello was agreeing with you there ... I think "who else actually gives a rat's arse if you do the course or not anyway?" translates as "the only person you're doing Audax rides for is yourself." I might be wrong, of course.

Hard to say, though the thought did cross my mind. Need a translator.

Anyway, just to prove we're not anal Canucks, here's a few snaps of our friendly secret controls. We always have treats on hand and riders are always happy to have an excuse to stop. In most cases, we put them at the top of big friggin' hills!

 

[yello]

....um, randochap

http://www.cyclechat.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=535581#post535581

 

[Randochap]

....um, randochap

http://www.cyclechat.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=535581#post535581

Apologies. I interpreted your post to mean those who expected riders to stay to the route sheet were "retentive" types.

AUK seems to have some strange conventions. The only time we have "shortest route" rules is on a fleche.

We strictly enforce keeping to route on brevets. It isn't fair to those who have ridden the exact route for others who take shortcuts to be awarded the time they signed in at the end.

 

[yello]

No problems, I realised there was a simple misunderstanding at the heart.

Clubs, of any kind, are curious. They have rules that, on the scale of things, really do not matter. But that is what a club is - a group of people agreeing to adhere to a set of rules. If you don't agree then don't belong. You're not compelled to - it's not as if anyone cares either way. That's why I can't get my head around people cheating on an audax.

 

[Randochap]

No problems, I realised there was a simple misunderstanding at the heart.

Clubs, of any kind, are curious. They have rules that, on the scale of things, really do not matter. But that is what a club is - a group of people agreeing to adhere to a set of rules. If you don't agree then don't belong. You're not compelled to - it's not as if anyone cares either way. That's why I can't get my head around people cheating on an audax.

Cheers.

At BC Randonneurs, we are constantly challenged to "update" rules and guidelines. For instance, the advent of mobile (cel) phones, which riders are inclined to use to call in help has caused us tighten up the "no assistance between controls" rule. This recently created a real barney between the "don't be so anal" crowd and those of us trying to maintain the spirit of self-reliance that, I believe, has formed the central tenet of the sport.

Some riders these days don't even know how to replace a gear cable

 

[yello]

Mobile phones - that's interesting. Personally, I'd be happy with a 'no mobiles' rule. No big thing. I would however carry one with me AND use it if I decided the situation required it.

It seems obvious to me that a situation where you'd need to use a mobile would also be one that prevented you completing the audax anyway! Surely, a DNF on your record is trivial compared to getting yourself home safe and sound or, worse still, to hospital!

I could change a gear cable (if I had a spare!), or complete on a single gear/chainring if needed. I was once riding with someone whose rear mech broke - so I removed it, shortened the chain and we completed the ride. But that was our decision. We could have equally made a phone call and got a pick-up. The truth is that we didn't want to hang around waiting. Whether it was a DNF or not was not an issue at that point. Getting the situation resolved was way more important. That's what I mean by anal. Not the rules themselves but the people that loose sight and just HAVE to play by them.

But then I'm not one to keep my completed brevet cards either. They lie around for a bit and then get binned when I have a clean up!

I'm sure there are many riders like me and, generally speaking, I suspect we are all the same in that we greatly appreciate the work put in by organisers. We're really not going to get all hot and bothered by something that, as I say, on the scale of things just does not matter. If it so contravenes a sense of fair play (or whatever) then don't belong - simple really.

 

[Nuncio]

The ‘only cheating yourself’ argument is an interesting one. Audax UK claims to be a non-competive organization, so the ‘only cheating yourself’ argument should apply. But Audax UK also has a points system. And what do points mean? Trophies and championships, both for individuals and groups (clubs, CTC districts etc). So as soon as that comes into the equation, there is the possibility that you could be cheating others. For some people, this matters. I am not one of them.

 

[yello]

Fair point Nunio. And one where my argument does fall down! I personally don't care about the awards and trophies as I have my own goals.

I can understand that someone who was going for a points award would feel pretty pissed off if they knew they'd been beaten by someone that cheated - that is, IF they know. They may not. So they wouldn't necessarily feel cheated (or, if they did, others would too thereby making it an unrecognised victory!). Besides, it hasn't robbed them of their points nor lessened their achievement in any way

The cheater, however, will always know they've cheated. They are the only person that will know, with any degree of certainty, that they did not win. In that sense, they only ever cheat themselves.

Is this starting to sound like 'Crime & Punishment' yet!!

 

[ColinJ]

Apologies. I interpreted your post to mean those who expected riders to stay to the route sheet were "retentive" types.

AUK seems to have some strange conventions. The only time we have "shortest route" rules is on a fleche.

We strictly enforce keeping to route on brevets. It isn't fair to those who have ridden the exact route for others who take shortcuts to be awarded the time they signed in at the end.

What about longcuts ? I did the North-West Passage 200 in 2007 but I decided that I didn't like all the A-roads so I did my own route between controls taking in much nicer scenery and lots of extra hills. I think that I ended up doing about 220 km with many hundreds of metres more climbing.

 

[Randochap]

What about longcuts ? I did the North-West Passage 200 in 2007 but I decided that I didn't like all the A-roads so I did my own route between controls taking in much nicer scenery and lots of extra hills. I think that I ended up doing about 220 km with many hundreds of metres more climbing.

You get the "Beyond The Call of Duty" award!

But now you know whose routes to pass up.

 

[ColinJ]

You get the "Beyond The Call of Duty" award!

But now you know whose routes to pass up.

I chose to do the Mini-North-West Passage instead last year because it takes a shortcut along some nice roads in the Forest of Bowland and misses out the A65 and other roads that I didn't want to do.

I'm not knocking the main event - it's a sensible route for mid-February - if you don't mind fast, busy roads. My scenic detours wouldn't have been possible in icy conditions, but I wouldn't have ridden a 200 in icy conditions anyway .