Heltor Chasca
Out-riding the Black Dog
Whereas Audax events require you to have mudguards fitted,
No longer the case.
However at least one rider is required to have sandals and a minimum 1% of the field has to be hirsute.
Whereas Audax events require you to have mudguards fitted,
Yes, it's silly, like most sportive rules. I don't know why they bother setting such mad rules. Is it so they can disqualify anyone on a whim if they start asking questions?Well hats off to you for searching for things to nit pick, but I'm afraid I'm not particularly impressed. Of course I didn't carry a headset press, that's just being silly.
It wouldn't be the first time a charity let its logo go cheap. Surely it's a matter for all buyers? If you're told a purchase supports some cause, don't you ask how much of the purchase they're getting?As to the donations, that's a matter for the charity directors. If it was just a pound they'd be selling their logos rather cheap.
No scouring required. The rules were dripping with mad stuff. That was just one I don't remember seeing before and found amusing because of the unreasonable wording "any mechanical failure". Any. Not my hyperbole. Theirs. Any. You agreed to ride equipped to deal with any mechanical failure. It's a farking hilarious idea, a sportive of people basically lugging the contents of entire bike workshops around the course.I'm sure you're aware that I was referring to your hyperbole when I used the word "silly", and not to the rule itself. If, after scouring the rules for something to complain about, the best you could come up with was a requirement to be prepared for the event, then that's hardly an indicator of pointless self gratifying bureaucracy out of control.
That's a shame but I guess it's how those "charity collection bag" businesses keep going.As to your second question, in a word, no.