Yet Another Cycling Forum
General Category => Audax => PBP => Topic started by: Wycombewheeler on 18 December, 2019, 11:51:00 am
-
I see some people are receiving their time stickers for their medals.
Is the a preliminary finishers list anywhere? Or is the only publicly available information the incomplete data on the tracking site?
-
(UK/Audax UK) parochially (449 riders listed): http://www.aukweb.net/results/archive/2019/listevent/?Ride=PB1200
-
The AUK list was reverse engineered from the unofficial results, so doesn’t offer any new information.
Have any Britishers received their stickers?
-
The AUK list was reverse engineered from the unofficial results, so doesn’t offer any new information.
Have any Britishers received their stickers?
Mine came today ;D
-
The AUK list was reverse engineered from the unofficial results, so doesn’t offer any new information.
Have any Britishers received their stickers?
Mine came today ;D
Mine too.
-
Me today.
Shame the printing on the insert isn’t great.
-
Me today.
Shame the printing on the insert isn’t great.
I stuck mine on, but I did consider just getting it engraved
-
It looks better than I thought it would...
Do we get the brevet ‘cards’ back as well?
-
Mine is here.
-
It looks better than I thought it would...
Do we get the brevet ‘cards’ back as well?
I was hoping to get mine back, but it seems a bit wasteful to post them seperately
-
The return address for today’s letter is a specialist trophy company, who probably have an established process for sending these out, and maybe even outsourced it to a generic print shop.
I doubt they’d appreciate being given several thousand dog-eared brevet cards to sort through and put in the same envelopes.
-
Got mine yesterday too.
The glue is very sticky!
It was surprisingly hard to remove from the backing card.
And you get one chance only to position it in the slot in the medal!
-
Generally PBP brevet cards arrived sometime early the following year. The brevet card is the thing that really counts. Trinkets like medals are just that, to me at least.
https://www.paris-brest-paris.org/index2.php?lang=en&cat=randonnee&page=agenda_epreuve notes
"Saturday, January 11, 2020: Awards ceremony of Paris-Brest-Paris Randonneur 2019
at 16:00 at Espace Charenton - 323 bis rue de Charenton - 75012 Paris.
You will get your finisher package; the remaining packages will be shipped in the following weeks."
-
Does anyone have a photo of a the sticker on their medal?
J
-
medal + sticker
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20191221/b9f2044546f04b748ccbe93db67bf92d.jpg)
-
medal + sticker
Chapeau
-
medal + sticker
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20191221/b9f2044546f04b748ccbe93db67bf92d.jpg)
Nicely done.
Thanks for the photo.
J
-
thanks both :thumbsup:
-
The AUK list was reverse engineered from the unofficial results, so doesn’t offer any new information.
Have any Britishers received their stickers?
Mine came today ;D
Mine too.
Slight issue. Not entirely sure where my medal is.
-
Not sure what the post lady has done with mine but had nothing yet!
-
Slight issue. Not entirely sure where my medal is.
[/quote]
Yes, same thing here, found it under a load of paperwork!
Also I’ve just remembered I ordered the DVD!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
my sticker turned up
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EMY_pkaWwAIOGVM?format=jpg)
you aren't going to beat that time. I am the winner
-
Official results seem to be up.
http://www.paris-brest-paris.org/index2.php?lang=en&cat=presentation&page=resultats_2019
There may be a few others to be added to the list eventually. There are a couple of folk who rode who aren’t listed as finished, HD, DNF or DNS.
-
Execellent!
I had a bit of a scare when I scrolled down to find my name and didn’t see it. Turns out I’d scrolled to the Abandons section.
(NP = nil points?) (= DNS?)
-
Non particip I guess, French version of DNS.
-
I guessed that NP was the French equivalent of Not Participating.
I also assume that NH means Not Homologated - I wonder what you had to do to achieve that.
-
Cheated in some way or perhaps time penalised beyond their time limit or missing brevet card stamps (I think this applies to a couple of riders I know).
There are a few AUKs listed as NH on the PBP website but listed as finishing PBP on AUK's website, which will slightly complicate things for the Recorder.
-
There’s a guy on Facebook says he got NH for missing “only one stamp”. According to the chip results he missed the control entirely.
AFAIK there was only one (well-publicised) person DQed for rule breaking.
-
I've made a quick stats spreadsheet for what it is worth - I'm sure someone has done another one/ a better one!
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1iB6afh8ugEp7T8j5URTOVaR5edk1SCJZCVobO2KZv7o/edit?usp=sharing (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1iB6afh8ugEp7T8j5URTOVaR5edk1SCJZCVobO2KZv7o/edit?usp=sharing)
-
There’s a guy on Facebook says he got NH for missing “only one stamp”. According to the chip results he missed the control entirely.
AFAIK there was only one (well-publicised) person DQed for rule breaking.
Had a quick look at chrono course (I've not got round to unistalling it) and the 3 GB NHs all seem to have a full set of chip times and nothing obviously dodgy.
Sent from my BKL-L09 using Tapatalk
-
Checking the 2019 PBP results against the repeat offenders listed at http://www.randonneurs.bc.ca/pbp/recidivistes/main.html is interesting. Many of the old hands (male and female) that started PBP19, finished. I wonder whether that cohort’s finish rate was higher or lower than the general finish rate, despite the effects of advancing age.
davocon, I think a more accurate DNF rate ignores those riders that DNSed.
-
davocon, I think a more accurate DNF rate ignores those riders that DNSed.
Thanks, I think I have updated accordingly now.
-
There’s a guy on Facebook says he got NH for missing “only one stamp”. According to the chip results he missed the control entirely.
AFAIK there was only one (well-publicised) person DQed for rule breaking.
When I realised my chip was not working reliably, I was told at the control "make sure you dont miss any stamps."
Failure to get a stamp can be rectified by checking the electronic timing record. But with no proof he was there they can't homogulate.
£134 return to Paris + somewhere to sleep on saturday night, I guess I'll just wait for mine to come in the post
-
A few months back I downloaded all of the chip time data and started extracting some stats from it. Here's as far as I got back then:
Zero scans (DNS): 276
No start scan (but others): 23
No missing scans: 4377
Made it to Brest: 5536
Made it back to Rambouillet: 4667
Made it back to Rambouillet (missed Dreux): 136
Made it back to Rambouillet (missed Mortagne and Dreux): 111
Started more than 15 minutes late: 59
Started more than 60 minutes late: 7
Most delayed start: 648 minutes (rider J297)
Most delayed start (Sunday): 292 minutes (rider B199)
First person over the start line (Sunday): 16:02:50 (rider A090)
Last person over the start line (Sunday): 21:21:40 (rider U074)
First person over the start line (Monday): 04:18:11 (rider W005)
Last person over the start line (Monday): 05:38:16 (rider Z183)
Started more than 5 minutes early: 25
Started more than 15 minutes early: 5
Started more than 60 minutes early: 0
Most premature start: -40 minutes
In time at every control: 3819
In time at finish, behind at at least one control: 458
Out of time at finish, on time everywhere else: 3
Out of time at finish, behind at at least one control: 97
Obvious caveats about limitations of chip data and possible data mangling at various steps.
I haven't tried correlating any of it with the official results to see what their criteria were.
Edit: Ignore the struckthrough numbers.
-
Those 458 people who were behind at at least one control is an interesting stat. I worked my way through the timings for some people and found a few of those. I’m assuming they have been homologated or the finish rates would be even less.
I’ve posted before about following two guys heading to Tinteniac on the way back who pulled over with the intention of giving up as they were out of time for Tinteniac. It may have been they were totally done and couldn’t have made it any further, but they were conversing quite well and didn’t look all-in. If they had perhaps overslept or had mechanical problems and were reasonably fresh they might have made up time. I think that would haunt me for a long time that I had come so far and may have packed needlessly.
-
I cocked up the numbers earlier. The correct numbers, and the final outcome, are:
In time at every control: 3112
{ HM: 3101, HD: 2, NH: 8, AB: 1 }
In time at finish, behind at at least one control: 1017
{ HM: 1008, HD: 0, NH: 9, AB: 0 }
Out of time at finish, on time everywhere else: 0
{ HM: 0, HD: 0, NH: 0, AB: 0 }
Out of time at finish, behind at at least one control: 248
{ HM: 81, HD: 163, NH: 4, AB: 0 }
These are for riders with a full set of control scans. There are around a hundred more with at least one scan missing.
Edit: Updated 3/1/20 with corrected corrected numbers
-
4459 finishers, you have approx 4100 accounted for, that leaves 350ish who officially finished without a digital record.
About 8% failure rate on chip timing.
Strange that you have 27 riders in time everywhere except the finish. the time allowed from Dreux to Rambouillet was very generous as I recall.
-
One 90hr fellow basically lost his mind shortly after leaving Dreux in 2019 and repeatedly lapped some roads for about three hours (seen by other riders) before 'waking up' and heading to the finish about an hour out of time. Some people are at the limit of their endurance before the finish. Surprising but true.
-
4459 finishers, you have approx 4100 accounted for, that leaves 350ish who officially finished without a digital record.
4,359 homologated finishers, 7 of whom are entirely absent from my chip data (could be my fault). 4,190 of them have all their scans. That leaves 162 with at least one missing scan, of which 130 have start scans; 116 have finish scans.
Strange that you have 27 riders in time everywhere except the finish. the time allowed from Dreux to Rambouillet was very generous as I recall.
Total cockup on my part. I had the 80 hours limit not set to 80 hours in my control closing times list. All of those riders finished in time.
-
Cheated in some way or perhaps time penalised beyond their time limit or missing brevet card stamps (I think this applies to a couple of riders I know).
There are a few AUKs listed as NH on the PBP website but listed as finishing PBP on AUK's website, which will slightly complicate things for the Recorder.
Indeed it does!
Only two on the AUK list who are listed as NH. Both on 84h starts, both completed within time with all tracking data complete.
I am investigating....
Also trying to disambiguate three cases where it is unclear which of the similarly named AUK members is the one who actually completed
Most cases can be sorted by a rider's record (or lack) of a qualifying SR, or by a rider's stated club affiliation....but there are always a few....
And when some of the "possibles" don't provide an email address to the AUK membership secretary.... :facepalm:
-
I hope you'll be able to successfully negotiate with the ACP homologation team. There are a couple of instances of missing stamps where they appear to be taking an excessively strict approach, given the supporting evidence available. In the past, that sort of thing may have prompted a time penalty.
-
I hope you'll be able to successfully negotiate with the ACP homologation team. There are a couple of instances of missing stamps where they appear to be taking an excessively strict approach, given the supporting evidence available. In the past, that sort of thing may have prompted a time penalty.
In 2015 I missed a stamp at Loudeac on the way back. Given the nature of the tracking in 2015 (a mat at the entrance to card stamping room) Id missed both ie it was pretty much impossible to do one and not the other, which struck me as something of a flawed set up at the time (at the controls where I did manage to do the admin properly!) .
Approaching the finish I recall passing an official near the velodrome a few hundred yards from the bike park announcing to all and sundry that his position represented the finish. I checked my time (87.5x) and after a bit of faffing about at the finish my card was stamped with 88.0x.
I got a letter a couple of months after the event setting out that I had missed the stamp at Loudaec and proposing a 2 hr time penalty. I replied (in French) accepting the penalty on the condition that my ride would be validated and pointing out that my presence in Loudeac could be verified by several other riders if required. In the end I was credited with a 90-00 finish which suited me fine.
Id say that any rider who missed a stamp in 2019 but was properly tracked has a far stronger case than I did in 2015.
Good luck.
-
A friend checked the numbers of NH at previous PBPs.
1983 - 2
1995 - 1
2007 - 1
2011 - 2
2015 - 3
2019 - 24
Something has changed.
-
A friend checked the numbers of NH at previous PBPs.
1983 - 2
1995 - 1
2007 - 1
2011 - 2
2015 - 3
2019 - 24
Something has changed.
Absolute numbers are meaningless.
What is the total number of riders on each event?
How do things work as a percentage?
J
-
You can do that yourself but it doesn’t matter anyway! There hasn’t been an order of magnitude increase in PBP entrants between 2015 and 2019.
-
1983 - 2106 starters
1995 - ~3200
2011 - 5002
-
Do we know what the pre 2019 results looked like before appeals? And is 2019 after appeals already?
How does the system work? If you’re NH do you know before the list is published? Do they ever publish (possibly anonymised) reasons for NH?
-
NH was virtually unknown before this PBP as it was so uncommon (1 in 1000-2000). That is not the case this time (>1 in 250 in 2019).
Having online tracking and interim results is very new. Most historical appeals and suchlike had been done behind closed doors. What is being asked, who is asking it and how they ask can make a big difference to resolving disputed PBP results.
Sometimes casting a veil over the process is better. In historical times, the accepted wisdom was that the PBP controllers would instantly pull a rider's brevet card at intermediate controls if the rider was too late to that control, unless there was an 'extremely good reason' (assisting at a rider's medical emergency). The riders understood this and worked hard to stay within the control times. Occasionally somebody would arrive a few minutes late to an intermediate control and the controller may have had a 'clock with sticky hands' but it wasn't obvious outside that moment. Now, with staggered starts and online tracking, it is obvious that many riders are checking in significantly late at controls, sometimes at multiple controls. Is that a better situation for PBP and its mystique? I don't think so, given the natural tendency for riders to keep pushing the boundaries.
-
What is being asked, who is asking it and how they ask can make a big difference to resolving disputed PBP results.
;D ;D ;D
-
Here's a chart I've been wanting to make since August of exactly how late homologated riders get to their controls:
(http://fondantfancies.com/pbp2019tihchartthumb.jpg)
HI RES VERSION (http://fondantfancies.com/pbp2019tihchart.png)
The horizontal axis is the closing time of each control. Above the line is on time, below the line is late (according to chip time).
Lines are coloured according to final outcome (green = Homologated, orange = HD, red = Abandonded, purple = Not Homologated.
There's an awful lot of green in that lower right quadrant.
-
That is a surprising graph. I hadn't anticipated that so many riders were out of time at so many controls.
The graph is cropped of course, so the (comparatively few?) riders with many hours in hand at the finish aren't visible. That might skew the appearance a little but doesn't change the facts.
-
And PBP themselves have traditionally been more concerned about the time you LEAVE a control, not just the time you arrive. After all the purpose of a control closing time is to get that control closed - and you can't do that with unconscious bodies all over the floor.
The intermediates times thing is interesting because I have long campaigned for a relaxation within AUK's Regs - to better match what actually happens in reality - along the lines of "Intermediate Controls where staffed have predetermined opening and closing times" - because that's what control times is all about, limiting the time that helpers have to stay committed. No staff, nobody cares. Queries are common about the importance of intermediate control times on Perms - and of course the Regs say one thing whilst everyone in the real world say another.
With this prededent from PBP it might be easier to get a tweak like that through.
-
Here's a chart I've been wanting to make since August of exactly how late homologated riders get to their controls:
(http://fondantfancies.com/pbp2019tihchartthumb.jpg)
HI RES VERSION (http://fondantfancies.com/pbp2019tihchart.png)
The horizontal axis is the closing time of each control. Above the line is on time, below the line is late (according to chip time).
Lines are coloured according to final outcome (green = Homologated, orange = HD, red = Abandonded, purple = Not Homologated.
There's an awful lot of green in that lower right quadrant.
(https://img.gifglobe.com/grabs/partridgecloud/S01E06/gif/fmzVZFYpFUBO.gif) ;D
-
Nice to know I can ignore the control times and enter the 80 limit event, slerpnproperly and catch up during the day.
I suspect if you were to analyse time of day for all those below the line you would find most out of time people at the first control they reach in the morning, and everyone in green above the line by the end of each day, even by lunchtime.
I finished in just under 80 hours, my average speed was never less than 15kmh but I would have been out of time 4bor 5 times if my limit was 80 hours. Front loading the control times is the root cause of all these people being behind IMO
-
Over four hours out of time and making it up. I was worried about being 20 minutes late at two controls.
Controls were probably staffed for another 12 hours or more for 90 and 84 riders though.
-
And those responses show why this issue will become more widespread in 2023. For the past few PBPs, there has been evidence of a significant (and increasing?) number of riders arriving at intermediate controls out of time but getting to the finish in time and being homologated. Jo (formerly OTP) created a similar graph last PBP http://gicentre.org/pbp2015/ but it didn't look nearly as dramatic as this one.
In '99 and '03, some full value friends that had left intermediate controls as they closed mentioned how noticeable it was that riders were pushing hard to get their brevet cards stamped inside time. Apparently, as the intermediate controls closed for the 80hr and 90hr massed start groups, there was an obvious reduction in the number of riders arriving. With the more recent staggered starts, this behaviour wouldn't be obvious, except in the online timing, but it appears that riders are becoming more relaxed about being out of time at intermediate controls.
The original purpose of PBP Randonneur's intermediate control opening and closing times was to approximate the original Audax average pace schedule (now set at 22.5 km/h on the road). That was why early PBP randonneurs had to sign out of each control in addition to signing into controls. When the randoneur average speed limits were explained to new riders, they were told to imagine that one car was travelling along the route at the maximum allowable average speed and another car was doing the same at the minimum average speed. The rider's aim was always to stay between those imaginary cars, regardless of eating, sleeping, mechanicals or anything else. As soon as the second imaginary car passes the rider, the rider is out of the brevet. A similar system applies to riders and the broom wagon at cyclo-sportives and the Tour de France.
-
The graph is cropped of course, so the (comparatively few?) riders with many hours in hand at the finish aren't visible. That might skew the appearance a little but doesn't change the facts.
Here's the full uncropped "interactive" chart (may take a while to render, probably won't be much fun on phones):
http://www.fondantfancies.com/pbp2019tihchart.html
You can mouse over the datapoints to see bib numbers, although most are too close together.
Some of the more interesting lines on there will be scanning or more likely HTML-scraping errors.
I suspect if you were to analyse time of day for all those below the line you would find most out of time people at the first control they reach in the morning, and everyone in green above the line by the end of each day, even by lunchtime.
You can see quite obvious downward dips around Carhaix in both directions, which (having not done the analysis) likely correspond to people sleeping Monday and Tuesday nights.
-
Very well done on the data processing and representation.
I wonder if you'd consider doing one with just the NHs on, as I for one cannot differentiate their lines, even on the HiRes version.
-
Very well done on the data processing and representation.
I wonder if you'd consider doing one with just the NHs on, as I for one cannot differentiate their lines, even on the HiRes version.
Here:
http://www.fondantfancies.com/pbp2019tihchartnh.html
I can't see any pattern.
(BTW if you go to pbpresults.com and tick the "DNF" and "Has complete control data" buttons you get 22 of the 24 NHes, and the pace graphs there are more useful than my graph. Have a look at T094...)
-
Here's the full uncropped "interactive" chart (may take a while to render, probably won't be much fun on phones):
the analysis) likely correspond to people sleeping Monday and Tuesday nights.
You want to use a chart library that draws on the canvas element rather than SVG. Far far faster for ten or hundreds of thousands of data points. Then it should render interactive in way under a half a second.
-
(BTW if you go to pbpresults.com and tick the "DNF" and "Has complete control data" buttons you get 22 of the 24 NHes, and the pace graphs there are more useful than my graph. Have a look at T094...)
That’s quite an impressive upturn in speed from T094! Others are less clearly suspicious. What reasons do people think they are NH? Lack of a stamp? How would they have no stamp but have a chip time, could they have given their chip to someone else?!
-
A couple of NH folk didn't get stamps at secret controls, with no electronic timing happening.
-
A couple of NH folk didn't get stamps at secret controls, with no electronic timing happening.
Good point, I’d forgotten about those controls!
-
I spoke to some riders at Carhaix who had abandoned because they were out of time at the control and assumed the rules would apply as written (actually, what is chapter & verse on this issue for PBP?)
Seems a bit rough if the reality is more relaxed than people are led to expect ...
-
From http://www.paris-brest-paris.org/index2.php?lang=en&cat=randonnee&page=reglement
Article 14 : Opening and Closing Time of the Controls
Passage of the participants within the schedule of closure indicated on brevet cards is compulsory for every control. Opening hours will be also indicated but for information only. Only a serious material incident may be accepted as justification for late arrival, and the delay must be recovered at the latest within the next two controls.
Is this a 'tragedy of the commons' sort of thing? A few folk edging past the strict rule and being homologated is bearable but commonly flouting the rule isn't?
-
Article 14 : Opening and Closing Time of the Controls
Passage of the participants within the schedule of closure indicated on brevet cards is compulsory for every control. Opening hours will be also indicated but for information only.
As I recall the Brevet card just had the control's open time for the entire start group a rider was in. I wonder if it was intended at one point to have personalized opening/closing times too?
-
Numbers for riders scanning late who went on to be homologated:
Rambouillet: 0
Villaines-la-Juhel: 17
Fougères: 6
Tinténiac: 8
Loudéac: 33
Carhaix: 316
Brest: 228
Carhaix: 275
Loudéac: 431
Tinténiac: 841
Fougères: 693
Villaines-la-Juhel: 534
Mortagne-au-Perche: 532
Dreux: 268
Rambouillet: 6
That's 1,164 homologated riders with at least one late scan. Whatever the intention when the rules were written, I presume no one fancied disqualifying a thousand riders.
(I'm using each rider's start scan as their start time for cutoffs. Most riders started very close to their allotted time, so it doesn't make a huge difference. Also Villaines had the scanning mat at the exit on the way out, which might explain the 17 late scans)
-
My official time was adjusted for my start scan, by 4-5 minutes. This seems to have been taken into account, and the time shown is the chip time not the time on the card.
The numbers quoted above are an underestimate for lateness at the controller's desk. Many people will have been tight at the chip antenna and will then have taken time (at most controls probably 5-10 minutes) to park up and get to the controller's desk. I was in time by something like 10 minutes at Tintineac on the return, and my stamp was exactly at the control close time (sticky clock?).
-
And while I've got the spreadsheet out, the 90th percentile scan times for homologated riders in the 90 hours group:
Rambouillet n/a
Villaines-la-Juhel 139 minutes early
Fougères 198 minutes early
Tinténiac 194 minutes early
Loudéac 191 minutes early
Carhaix 7 minutes late
Brest 20 minutes early
Carhaix 24 minutes early
Loudéac 3 minutes late
Tinténiac 118 minutes late
Fougères 91 minutes late
Villaines-la-Juhel 32 minutes late
Mortagne-au-Perche 44 minutes late
Dreux 7 minutes early
Rambouillet: 55 minutes early
That is, the time when 90% of riders who went on to be homologated have scanned in, and 10% still haven't.
-
I'm genuinely amazed at how close some people ran it overall but, also, how little concern there is about being out of time at intermediate checks.
-
I have a vauge memory of discovering during the ride that it had been announced that due to weather conditions ??? ??? ??? ??? you only had to be on time at Brest and Ramboulliet.
I'm still baffled by the apparently existence of hills, head wind and the fabled section with a rough surface.
-
Numbers for riders scanning late who went on to be homologated:
Rambouillet: 0
Villaines-la-Juhel: 17
Fougères: 6
Tinténiac: 8
Loudéac: 33
Carhaix: 316
Brest: 228
Carhaix: 275
Loudéac: 431
Tinténiac: 841
Fougères: 693
Villaines-la-Juhel: 534
Mortagne-au-Perche: 532
Dreux: 268
Rambouillet: 6
That's 1,164 homologated riders with at least one late scan. Whatever the intention when the rules were written, I presume no one fancied disqualifying a thousand riders.
(I'm using each rider's start scan as their start time for cutoffs. Most riders started very close to their allotted time, so it doesn't make a huge difference. Also Villaines had the scanning mat at the exit on the way out, which might explain the 17 late scans)
Suggest large numbers on the 3x400km plan, sleeping at loudec in both directions, maybe with a hotel room booked for 2 nights.
-
I'm still baffled by ......... the fabled section with a rough surface.
Was it in the courtyard at the finish?
-
I'm still baffled by ......... the fabled section with a rough surface.
Was it in the courtyard at the finish?
Nah apparently it was a descent somewhere and someone was apparently posted there to warn you of it.
I suspect if it was a rough surface it was considered so under French standards not Scottish (The B7076 is smooth.... honest)
-
... a descent somewhere and someone was apparently posted there to warn you of it.
That was for a descent before Loudéac on the return. It wasn't really a bad surface (by UK standards anyway). Didn't some people get routed through a field to route around an incident with emergency services in attendance (or something)?
-
I have a vauge memory of discovering during the ride that it had been announced that due to weather conditions ??? ??? ??? ??? you only had to be on time at Brest and Ramboulliet.
I'm still baffled by the apparently existence of hills, head wind and the fabled section with a rough surface.
Aye, the headwind that was so smooth and gust free that you literally didn’t know it was there.
-
I have a vauge memory of discovering during the ride that it had been announced that due to weather conditions ??? ??? ??? ??? you only had to be on time at Brest and Ramboulliet.
I'm still baffled by the apparently existence of hills, head wind and the fabled section with a rough surface.
Aye, the headwind that was so smooth and gust free that you literally didn’t know it was there.
Sounds about right, I possibly didn't notice any loss of speed to it due to the gains of decent road surfaces.
-
Article 14 : Opening and Closing Time of the Controls
Passage of the participants within the schedule of closure indicated on brevet cards is compulsory for every control. Opening hours will be also indicated but for information only.
As I recall the Brevet card just had the control's open time for the entire start group a rider was in. I wonder if it was intended at one point to have personalized opening/closing times too?
If the brevet card had accurate opening and closing times personalised for the rider, then I’d have no problems with the rule being enforced. Given that the control closing times were only accurate if you were in the final group for each time limit, then it seems a bit harsh to follow the letter of the law. My control closing times were more than a couple of hours earlier than what were printed on our brevet cards.
-
I'm genuinely amazed at how close some people ran it overall but, also, how little concern there is about being out of time at intermediate checks.
It may not have been deliberate.
We only found out during our second stop in Carhaix that the control closing times on our brevet cards were for the last 90hr group, rather than the first 90hr group that we were actually in. It would have been quite easy for us to arrive late before that point, though I think we might have stayed in front of closing times, by luck. Our own fault for assuming it would be the same as 2015 when the printed closing times were for the first group, rather than reading the instructions.
-
I'm genuinely amazed at how close some people ran it overall but, also, how little concern there is about being out of time at intermediate checks.
It may not have been deliberate.
We only found out during our second stop in Carhaix that the control closing times on our brevet cards were for the last 90hr group, rather than the first 90hr group that we were actually in. It would have been quite easy for us to arrive late before that point, though I think we might have stayed in front of closing times, by luck. Our own fault for assuming it would be the same as 2015 when the printed closing times were for the first group, rather than reading the instructions.
That’s interesting. I wrote my plan out using the closing times I found on the website before heading out to France. I’m not sure I ever back checked this against the card. I’ll have a look when it comes back.
-
As a refusenik I kept my card. Closing times in it are written for a 5pm start Group E which matches with LWaB.
That would be bad if you started in group V and assumed control times were for group F :o
-
Any rider embarking on PBP (or other long ride) who knows they are anywhere near being a 'full value rider' would surely prepare properly: not just the obligatory qualification SR but understanding control closing times and the implications for the riding speeds needed. This might reasonably include preparing and carrying a simple, personal, visible or easily-available-to-access list of the controls with their closing time (data well advertised by PBP - with a bit of additional maths) and recognise that the closing times at the first control after each planned sleep stop are likely to be critical.
UK riders are used to brevets having accurate open/close times printed on the card - AUK/OI system seems robust: maybe this experience lulled some UK riders into a false sense of security. But relying on times printed on the (forin) PBP brevet (which riders won't get till registration at Rambouillet) builds in risk - as we have seen - and the need for arithmetic when tired. Requiring riders to maintain a significantly higher average speed to Brest complicates those sums - and even then the required speeds on the way east seemed non-linear.
It seemed generally understood before the ride that the French would be taking a stereotypical approach to the 'closing time' rules: write them down and not enforce them - at least until the 84 hour starts were due to come through (Y start closing time).
Do people know of riders whose cards were 'pulled' at controls? On our ride back to the ferry, snacking outside a supermarket, we met another rider (84hr Y) who'd been right on the edge, arrived at Mortagne (with 200km to go on the last morning) with the control stamping desk unmanned and things being dismantled, managed to find 'someone' to sign and 'time/date' his brevet and cracked on, getting to the chateau with minutes to spare (Dreux was less of a problem notwithstanding he was still well out of time there).
-
I finished PBP Randonneur #6 last time and my stoker #4. Yes, we should have read the instructions which stated the actual opening and closing times for Group F. We didn’t ‘prepare properly’ because we assumed the brevet card times were the same as 2015, which listed them for Group F. The brevet cards didn’t. This time, the opening times were for Group F but the closing times were for Group V. A newbie PBPer (can’t remember his name right now but we’re grateful for his intervention) told us the reality the second time in Carhaix. After that, we just did rough mental calcs along the way to stay ahead of closing times and finished with two hours to spare. Almost exactly the same finish time as in 2015.
-
Any rider embarking on PBP (or other long ride) who knows they are anywhere near being a 'full value rider' would surely prepare properly: not just the obligatory qualification SR but understanding control closing times and the implications for the riding speeds needed. This might reasonably include preparing and carrying a simple, personal, visible or easily-available-to-access list of the controls with their closing time (data well advertised by PBP - with a bit of additional maths) and recognise that the closing times at the first control after each planned sleep stop are likely to be critical.
That just about sums me up. As a 'full value rider' on my first ride over 600km I knew I needed to do everything I could to reduce the mental load on the ride and make sure I met all the closing times.
I had a copy of the official routesheet on the top of my barbag at all times. This was anotated with my closing times, which were checked against the brevet card times when I picked it up at registration. I reached all the controls within time but left a few after my closing times expecting to make up time before the next control.
A newbie PBPer (can’t remember his name right now but we’re grateful for his intervention) told us the reality the second time in Carhaix. .
I think that might have been me. I saw you at a few of the controls, but not on the road as you were travelling much faster and presumably getting more sleep!
-
UK riders are used to brevets having accurate open/close times printed on the card - AUK/OI system seems robust: maybe this experience lulled some UK riders into a false sense of security. But relying on times printed on the (forin) PBP brevet (which riders won't get till registration at Rambouillet) builds in risk - as we have seen - and the need for arithmetic when tired. Requiring riders to maintain a significantly higher average speed to Brest complicates those sums - and even then the required speeds on the way east seemed non-linear.
It's worth remembering that not every country enforces control closure times anyway. RNL don't care. As long as you are in time at the end, then it doesn't matter. Same seems to be true for at least some Belgians and Danes. This can lead to a false sense of security if all your rides have been RNL rides, and PBP is your first ride where closure times might matter.
We do make sure to print the right times on the brevet cards tho.
J
-
I think that might have been me. I saw you at a few of the controls, but not on the road as you were travelling much faster and presumably getting more sleep!
The more sleep may have been true. We were balancing our time on the bike and sleeping to prevent my stoker getting Shermer's Neck. Not as important as for the captain but still better to avoid. Thanks again for your assistance, Neil.
Checking the timings, it looks like we checked in at least an hour (usually more) ahead of closing times all the way round.
-
The rules stated dong be after the closing time at printed on brevet card, so talk of being stopped for being outtsidevtfe time for your group is needless. As if someone on a control desk is going to do the mental maths and retain your card when they just want yo check everyone through as quickly as possible.
-
OK, let’s do the pedantic thing and go by the letter of the rule.
It matters if you are in the last group for your time. That PBP19 brevet card time limit is then a hard limit for you. Five minutes after the printed time and you are out. Not so for the rider in the first group.
Is it fair that the first 90 hr group gets several hours extra time compared to the last 90hr group? That extra time isn’t just for intermediate controls. It applies to the finish line too. That 90hr time limit can vary (depending on your start group) to more than 92hrs. My friend who (correctly) got HDed for being 15 minutes late at the finish line would have something to say about that.
-
I agree that it’s not fair. But was the rule applied this strictly? I don’t know but I was told what mattered was 80h at the finish not 81h we on the card.
The problem with this kind of thing is no one knows what the rule really is.
-
I believe that the 90hr (or 80 or 84) limit at the finish was applied pretty strictly (though there are always edge cases). My friend HDed PBP19 by 15 minutes after completing 5 x PBP inside time.
I am a little annoyed that the rule seems to be being completely ignored at intermediate controls (riders weren’t doing that two decades ago) but the conflict between the rule and the printed brevet card limit makes that rule untenable for intermediate controls in 2019. If the brevet card limits matched each rider’s start group, enforcing the time limits at intermediate controls would be entirely fair.
-
Is it fair that the first 90 hr group gets several hours extra time compared to the last 90hr group? That extra time isn’t just for intermediate controls. It applies to the finish line too. That 90hr time limit can vary (depending on your start group) to more than 92hrs.
I confess I don't follow that. We can see how earlier starters have more time (per times in the 90 hour brevet) at intermediary controls. But how does 'extra time' "appl(y) to the finish line too"? And how, in practice, can the "90hr time limit vary (depending on your start group) to more than 92hrs." Start 1715 specials: 90 hours up at 1115 on Thursday plus the odd minute that the rider was later than 1715 over the timing mat at the gate onto the road.
-
The rule says the rider must get to each control before the closing time written in the brevet card. That includes the finish control. A velo speciale could have crossed the PBP finish line a couple of hours after their 90 hours were up and still have been ahead of their brevet card’s Rambouillet closing time, which was based on the very last 90hr group’s finish time. Is that clear enough?
Basically, in future, PBP should issue brevet cards with control closing times personalised for each start time. Otherwise that particular rule is meaningless and riders will ignore intermediate control times to an even greater extent in future.
The concept of varying min. average speeds for outbound and return legs of PBP is intended to match the average rider’s physical degradation profile. Riders generally get slower through long brevets and this speed profile nudges riders to not linger outbound. There is a current Arrivee article about a couple that took too long to get to Brest and hoped to negative split to get back in time. Of course, that didn’t happen.
-
The rule says the rider must get to each control before the closing time written in the brevet card. That includes the finish control. A velo speciale could have crossed the PBP finish line a couple of hours after their 90 hours were up and still have been ahead of their brevet card’s Rambouillet closing time, which was based on the very last 90hr group’s finish time. Is that clear enough?
That’s not what they did though. According to the data, basically everyone who arrived within 80/84/90 hours of their start time was homologated, and anyone who arrived later was (edit:) NOT homologated. Lateness at intermediate controls was completely ignored.
Essentially the numbers in this year’s brevet cards were nonsense that had no bearing on anything.
-
The rule says the rider must get to each control before the closing time written in the brevet card. That includes the finish control. A velo speciale could have crossed the PBP finish line a couple of hours after their 90 hours were up and still have been ahead of their brevet card’s Rambouillet closing time, which was based on the very last 90hr group’s finish time. Is that clear enough?
That’s not what they did though. According to the data, basically everyone who arrived within 80/84/90 hours of their start time was homologated, and anyone who arrived later was homologated. Lateness at intermediate controls was completely ignored.
Essentially the numbers in this year’s brevet cards were nonsense that had no bearing on anything.
Unless you were on the 84hr start and then it gave warning know when the control would be closed, with no guarantee of stamping.
-
I'm really not sure why they bother keeping such a daft rule as intermediate control cut-off times.
It would be fairer if they just officially state that it's a guideline rather than a hard and fast rule.
I agree that it's less fair on riders in last group, although even without the rule there is no getting away from the fact that their arrival time is always going to be closer than the physical closing time of the control, or the time it runs out of food, etc.
-
The rule says the rider must get to each control before the closing time written in the brevet card. That includes the finish control. A velo speciale could have crossed the PBP finish line a couple of hours after their 90 hours were up and still have been ahead of their brevet card’s Rambouillet closing time, which was based on the very last 90hr group’s finish time. Is that clear enough?
https://www.paris-brest-paris.org/index2.php?lang=en&cat=randonnee&page=reglement
Article 14 of the regulations pasted below.
"Article 14 : Opening and Closing Time of the Controls
Passage of the participants within the schedule of closure indicated on brevet cards is compulsory for every control. Opening hours will be also indicated but for information only. Only a serious material incident may be accepted as justification for late arrival, and the delay must be recovered at the latest within the next two controls."
"An [early starter could have finished in 92 hours] and still have been ahead of their brevet card’s Rambouillet closing time." But they would have been NH (HD).
Are there (really) instances of early starters being homologated having taken longer than their allotted time (80/90/84) without special reasons/pleading eg @vorsprung? (Note: @grams has omitted a 'not' in his comment.)
As I said with regard to intermediate controls: "the French would be taking a stereotypical approach to the 'closing time' rules: write them down and not enforce them". And that was exactly the approach. I agree that it would be easy to just print brevets by batches, for each start time, with correct control closing times thereon.
-
Specific times or not on the brevet card the French would still reserve their right to apply them as they seem fit.
Sent from my BKL-L09 using Tapatalk
-
It would be fairer if they just officially state that it's a guideline rather than a hard and fast rule.
But that might cause the LEL (2017) problem with too many riders dawdling, mistakenly thinking they can make up time later.
As a noob, thinking I had to respect control times certainly kept me "honest" and pressing on rather than easing off - and with only 30 mins in hand at the end this was probably a Good Thing for me. If I had one criticism it was that I thought the extra time could be better amortized over the return: too much extra time was injected into the final two legs, where it wasn't so necessary.
Perhaps there is method in this inscrutable Gallic rules madness? The field is encouraged along by the potential threat of riders being DNF's for late controlling, but also the number of finishers is maximized.
-
Reducing dawdling and getting people to halfway in less than half the time is great, but where it falls down is if someone takes 3 1hour sleeps at consecutive controls for fear of being late at the next control, instead of one 3hour sleep which would be more beneficial, take less time and be cheaper.
I thinks it's a reasonable statement that people will not negative split the event, but there is enough time in a day to catch up on sleep time.
-
But that might cause the LEL (2017) problem with too many riders dawdling, mistakenly thinking they can make up time later.
Why is that a problem?
If the answer is "because if they dawdle they will eventually be out of time at the finish", then surely the objective of preventing them dawdling is still achieved if you say "we recommend that in order to finish on time, you should arrive here by xx:xx."
If they ignore the recommendations then that's their own lookout, but if they know what they're doing, let them.
I don't buy anyone would dawdle to such an extent that they will be out of time at the finish with only recommended intermediate control timings, but wouldn't dawdle if they said they might enforce them but in reality never did (as is the case now).
Here's a theory, and it is only a theory, maybe someone can prove/disprove: if anyone finishes with a minute to spare, if they have slept at all, or even not gone a constant speed all the time, they must by definition have been out of time at some point.
(That point may not necessarily be a control, but it could be argued that is a moot point.)
The point where they were most out of time being just after they have woken up from their last sleep.
Whether they are out of time by the next control, then simply becomes a case of where they can place their sleep stop, and thus imho limits choice of location unnecessarily. Just after a control and you might be ok, but if there's an ideal sleep stop about 5km before a control it's a PITA.
-
The rule says the rider must get to each control before the closing time written in the brevet card. That includes the finish control. A velo speciale could have crossed the PBP finish line a couple of hours after their 90 hours were up and still have been ahead of their brevet card's Rambouillet closing time, which was based on the very last 90hr group's finish time. Is that clear enough?
That's not what they did though. According to the data, basically everyone who arrived within 80/84/90 hours of their start time was homologated, and anyone who arrived later was (edit:) NOT homologated. Lateness at intermediate controls was completely ignored.
Essentially the numbers in this year's brevet cards were nonsense that had no bearing on anything.
Yes, the rule was meaningless this year and accordingly wasn't enforced. That rule was generally complied with and enforced in historical PBPs and, if the brevet cards were correctly printed, could justifiably have been enforced this year.
Completely ignored isn't quite correct. Some riders arriving quite late at intermediate controls this year did have difficulty getting their brevet cards stamped. Surely you've also read some of those accounts.
Did you miss the bit where I said
"OK, let's do the pedantic thing and go by the letter of the rule."
in reply to Wycombewheeler's
"The rules stated dong be after the closing time at printed on brevet card, so talk of being stopped for being outtsidevtfe time for your group is needless. As if someone on a control desk is going to do the mental maths and retain your card when they just want yo check everyone through as quickly as possible."
My statement that you've quoted showed the logical conclusion of following that rule with the times actually printed on the brevet cards this year. Riders in early groups would have had more time to complete PBP than those in later groups. Obviously that rule could not have been followed this year, for reasons of unfairness.
By the way, there were PBPers homologated with more than 90 hour finishes in 1991 (181), 1999 (104) and 2003 (26). I don't have the justifications for all of them. In PBP99, an unexpected roadworks diversion meant an extra two hours were allowed, which accounts for quite a few folk.
-
I'm really not sure why they bother keeping such a daft rule as intermediate control cut-off times.
It would be fairer if they just officially state that it's a guideline rather than a hard and fast rule.
I agree that it's less fair on riders in last group, although even without the rule there is no getting away from the fact that their arrival time is always going to be closer than the physical closing time of the control, or the time it runs out of food, etc.
I gave the background for that rule upthread and I suggest you read it again. Intermediate control opening and closing times developed from UAF schedules for brevets with specific times for arriving at and departing from controls.
ACP feels that riders get slower as the event gets longer and the varying PBP minimum speed limit reflects that. PBP has been a randonneur brevet since 1931 and the minimum speed requirements have changed over the decades (originally 96 hours). LEL's constant minimum average speed doesn't result in a lower DNF rate overall, though it may be more comfortable for slightly faster riders. Slower riders are just encouraged to time out on the return leg by not making enough progress outbound.
-
Here's a theory, and it is only a theory, maybe someone can prove/disprove: if anyone finishes with a minute to spare, if they have slept at all, or even not gone a constant speed all the time, they must by definition have been out of time at some point.
(That point may not necessarily be a control, but it could be argued that is a moot point.)
The point where they were most out of time being just after they have woken up from their last sleep.
Whether they are out of time by the next control, then simply becomes a case of where they can place their sleep stop, and thus imho limits choice of location unnecessarily. Just after a control and you might be ok, but if there's an ideal sleep stop about 5km before a control it's a PITA.
Rocco's Rocket rode PBP quite quickly (with decent sleep stops) some years ago but they sat at a cafe near the finish for ages to collect Willesden members who then ceremonially rode to the finish in a huge bunch to great acclaim. They finished with more than a minute to spare but could have complied with your hypothetical situation without ever being out of time. The ride from the cafe to the finish line just needed to be slower than the minimum average speed.
-
Yep, there are a myriad ways you can do a brevet and finish with a minute to spare and never be out of time at any point. Ben’s theory holds about as much water as a sieve.
-
Individual start times were only pre-determined from 2015 onwards. My experience before this system was introduced was in 2007 and 2011 - cards were stamped with a start time based on your position in a queue (15 minute blocks as now, IIRC).
To pull a rider for being late at a control would have required the mental arithmetic alluded to above. I don't know if people in early waves were having cards pulled or not. I honestly don't think they were looking that closely. I only finished with 2h10 in hand in 2007 (90h) and I must have been tight at Mortagne. I didn't have time to sleep there.
-
Yep, there are a myriad ways you can do a brevet and finish with a minute to spare and never be out of time at any point. Ben’s theory holds about as much water as a sieve.
Agreed. But...
By AUK rules it's impossible not to be technically "out of time" right at the start of the ride.
By ACP rules it's not impossible.
The difference is that AUK has just a minimum and a maximum average speed. So, if you don't break the rules by starting early, then at exactly the time the ride starts you need to instantly accelerate from 0kph to the minimum average speed or you'll be behind the required pace.
ACP has different rules for the first 60km.
From: https://rusa.org/pages/acp-brevet-control-times-calculator
In the French variation, the maximum time limit for a control within the first 60km is based on 20 km/hr, plus 1 hour
Under this rule you can start up to an hour later than the official start time and not be out of time, and you've still got 4 hours to get to the 60km point.
-
Nobody says you need to be stationary when the brevet starts. You could cross the start line at exactly the start time while travelling above the minimum average speed. This is all angels dancing on pin head stuff though.
-
Ok then, my theory holds IF a rider's moving average stays the same throughout the ride. Which although their actual moving speed probably slows down a bit, is less far from the truth than you might think because I would hazard a guess that most of the slowdown in the later stages comes from simply stopping more, not from actually moving more slowly on the road.
-
Ok then, my theory holds IF a rider's moving average stays the same throughout the ride. Which although their actual moving speed probably slows down a bit, is less far from the truth than you might think because I would hazard a guess that most of the slowdown in the later stages comes from simply stopping more, not from actually moving more slowly on the road.
I'm sorry, I don't get the point you're trying to make.
If someone moves at a 20kph average then it's quite easy to both grab some sleep (not huge amounts I grant) and not be out of time at any particular control or other point on the ride, it's roughly how I used to ride Audaxes. If I was lucky then on the early part of the ride I may have a 25kph moving average, which means I get a bit more time in hand.
[EDIT] Oh, I see, if they finish with a minute to spare. Well, yes, unless they get to within a few hundred yards of the finish with hours in hand and then decide to have a long stop/sleep and then wake up and finish off the ride with a minute to spare. So the theory doesn't really hold up completely.
-
I'm sorry, I don't get the point you're trying to make.
If someone moves at a 20kph average then it's quite easy to both grab some sleep (not huge amounts I grant) and not be out of time at any particular control or other point on the ride, it's roughly how I used to ride Audaxes. If I was lucky then on the early part of the ride I may have a 25kph moving average, which means I get a bit more time in hand.
The wider point is sort of that a rider who manages to achieve the same or similar moving average throughout the ride but wants to maximize sleep* is likely to be out of time at some point, so they have to jump through hoops (that imho should be unnecessary) by restricting the location of their sleep stop in order to keep that out of time zone away from a control.
And, ergo, the rule does that rider a disservice.
*By riding to a schedule that allows them finish close to the cut off
-
The closing times (2015) of the controls were for me the basics to calculate if PBP was for me possible at all. Riding a 1200 is 4 days should not be a problem for me, in normal circumstances. But my body needs a good sleep to finish these kind of rides.
For me in the 84h-group the most important closing times were:
Day 1: To go beyond Tinteniac and be at Loudeac the next day at 8:22
Day 2: To go beyond Loudeac and be at Tinteniac the next day 13:18
Day 3: To go beyond Montagne au Perche and be at Dreux at 13:16
Day 4: To finish before 17h
If there were no closing times to be worried about. A 4days with 2 stops in Fougeres and one in Brest would make life so much easier and more a holiday ride.
In my opinion a good way to prepare your self for a big ride is to make a ride scedule and read stories from earlier editions.
I experienced that on flat rides in NL, I do normally with a riding average between 28-32km/h This was on PBP just over 24km/h.
My 77:14h could be devided in 51:07h on the bike; 22:75h 3 long breaks (includes 16,5h of sleep); 2:30h at the 14 controles max. 10 minutes/control
-
In my opinion a good way to prepare your self for a big ride is to make a ride scedule and read stories from earlier editions.
RUSA have a great spreadsheet (input pace & chart in MPH but doesn't really diminish the usefulness)
https://sites.google.com/a/rusa.org/pbpusawiki/planning/2019-pbp-planning-spreadsheet
It very well demonstrates that for the full value rider you only build up time in hand from the last few controls and before that it can be a struggle to stay ahead of the clock
-
.......
2:30h at the 14 controles max. 10 minutes/control
That's incredible, how did you eat?
-
Eat while riding, common when racing.
-
Eat while riding, common when racing.
In my case I kept forgetting to clean my teeth at controls. Fortunately it was all in the frame bag so was an easy task to complete whilst riding.
-
Where did you acquire the food? Most of the controls if you did *anything* other than get your card stamped you’d be over 10 minutes.
-
Where did you acquire the food? Most of the controls if you did *anything* other than get your card stamped you’d be over 10 minutes.
I started with a bag full of sports food. This meant I could ride the first 220k non stop before having a proper meal. I then ate properly at every other control and just grabbed snacks the rest of the time.
I had my last gel about 20k from the finish, just because I wanted to have an empty fuel bag.
-
Some of this emphasises to me how much time I wasted. 54 hours on the bike and 86 in total. I spent over 2 hours queuing for toilets. More than 5 queuing for food. The joys of the bulge.
-
Some of this emphasises to me how much time I wasted. 54 hours on the bike and 86 in total. I spent over 2 hours queuing for toilets. More than 5 queuing for food. The joys of the bulge.
Your moving time us very similar to mine but my total time is 79 hours. I doubt I ever spent more than 10 minutes queueing for food. At a cafe in Gorron i spent longer than that waiting but sat at a table so didn't mind too much. what was your start wave? I've looked back over my times and I think I made most of my time in hand on the first two controls.
-
Some of this emphasises to me how much time I wasted. 54 hours on the bike and 86 in total. I spent over 2 hours queuing for toilets. More than 5 queuing for food. The joys of the bulge.
Your moving time us very similar to mine but my total time is 79 hours. I doubt I ever spent more than 10 minutes queueing for food. At a cafe in Gorron i spent longer than that waiting but sat at a table so didn't mind too much. what was your start wave? I've looked back over my times and I think I made most of my time in hand on the first two controls.
I was in wave Q. According to that graphical representation I spent more or less my whole ride at the peak of the bulge. I ate almost exclusively at controls, probably due to lack of experience. I often holiday in France, speak a bit of schoolboy French, so I’d have been quite comfortable eating in cafes, but somehow didn’t.
I was in wave Q. In that graphical representation