How many controls for a 200?

[S2L]

It always amazes me the number of info controls on AUK events. I've only had 3 across the events I've done in NL/DK/BE. Had a few photo controls tho...

J

Nobody wants them... they are only required to make sure the minimum path between controls is in the 200 km ballpark. It might be that in other countries organisers use more main/straight roads and there is less need for infos

[quixoticgeek]

Nobody wants them... they are only required to make sure the minimum path between controls is in the 200 km ballpark. It might be that in other countries organisers use more main/straight roads and there is less need for infos

Nah, we just do mandatory route... There may be a secret control on any event we do.

J

[bludger]

I think my ride might have a secret control - I really don't want to have many infos, so hopefully the 'there may be a secret control' promise should satisfy the validation panel that the riders won't be tempted to take short cuts.

[Greenbank]

Does it really matter, so long as it's answered in good faith?

In good faith, we can agree that such info is redundant

Trust, but verify.

[Manotea]

I don't see infos as good or bad; they are simply part of the event, and therefore, part of the fun.

There was interest in the Anfractous becoming the AAAnfractous, which was done but at the cost of adding a couple of infos to an event that already had infos. Number of complaints after five years or so, zero.

I guess it helps those infos are at the top of hills and most riders are ready for a breather...

The larger question is whether you'd rather have an event with infos or not have an event?

Having said this as an org it makes my life much simpler if I can do without them... the answer to that is in my hands though sometimes my hands are tied by geography.

Before anybody checks, the AAAnfractous isn't running this year, however the number of infos is not a factor in that.

[Kim]

I guess it helps those infos are at the top of hills and most riders are ready for a breather...

That and infos at the top of hills to force you to climb them tend to be easier to find.  Though the exceptions tend to get filed under "well I'm not going back down there to look".

[S2L]

I think my ride might have a secret control - I really don't want to have many infos, so hopefully the 'there may be a secret control' promise should satisfy the validation panel that the riders won't be tempted to take short cuts.

I would be surprised if your local area supervisor would allow you to get away with a "secret control" in place of a no. of infos for your first event, but keep us posted, it might become a convenient shortcut* when planning troublesome routes

* I have the feeling most secret control are actually bollox and are not patrolled

[FifeingEejit]

The larger question is whether you'd rather have an event with infos or not have an event?

Having said this as an org it makes my life much simpler if I can do without them... the answer to that is in my hands though sometimes my hands are tied by geography.

This argument was done to near death in the thread on Infos; as Bairn Again and I pointed out, you need infos to keep riders off certain roads since the law doesn't (A9 and A90)

[quixoticgeek]

This argument was done to near death in the thread on Infos; as Bairn Again and I pointed out, you need infos to keep riders off certain roads since the law doesn't (A9 and A90)

Or you just make it mandatory route...

J

[Phil W]

It always amazes me the number of info controls on AUK events. I've only had 3 across the events I've done in NL/DK/BE. Had a few photo controls tho...

J

Purely a symptom of advisory routes, and a web of lanes. Make an event mandatory route and many of the Infos could be ditched.

[S2L]

Or you just make it mandatory route...

J

It's not simple. To have a point, a secret control needs to be quite late in the ride... if it's too early, then riders will just shortcut from there. If it's late, then you need someone to stay in one spot for hours, which is a joyless task, let's face it.

If you just threaten but then don't actually have a secret control, you are just creating problems down the line and for other organisers

[bludger]

I've definitely seen 'there may be secret controls' before e.g. http://audaxclubhackney.co.uk/events/the-shark/ .

[Cudzoziemiec]

It is a stupid question to ask in an Info control, seeing that colour blindness is more common than people think

Not to mention the way men and women think about colour differently:

https://blog.xkcd.com/2010/05/03/color-survey-results/

I'd say it's a grey area, but having read Randall's work, I'm not sure what grey is anymore...

J

By sheer coincidence, my son has just described to me why colour blindness affects men more than women. It's because the Y chromosome is smaller and lighter than the X chromosome(which is why for every 100 baby girls born there are 102 baby boys) and one of the pieces it lacks is the gene that controls colour vision. Colour blindness is recessive, so girls inherit two copies and are thus more likely to get a recessive gene overridden by the other X, whereas boys only get one copy.

Another thing affecting the way we perceive colour is our language; different languages have different numbers of words (basic words like green and blue, not tints like aquamarine and emerald) for colours. Although of course that's only perception in a conscious descriptive sense, not the eye's function.

But none of this really matters for info controls. If you're colour blind, just state what it looks like to you. An organiser who quibbles about it – I doubt very much if any do – might be worth avoiding anyway.

[jsabine]

Or you just make it mandatory route...

J

It's not simple. To have a point, a secret control needs to be quite late in the ride... if it's too early, then riders will just shortcut from there. If it's late, then you need someone to stay in one spot for hours, which is a joyless task, let's face it.

If you just threaten but then don't actually have a secret control, you are just creating problems down the line and for other organisers

I don't get either of your points - a secret control early in the ride does not preclude there also being one (or more) later on.

Equally, why does saying that there 'may' be one or more secret controls, and then not actually having any create any problems for you or subsequent organisers? It doesn't create any sort of binding precedent.

[Phil W]

I've definitely seen 'there may be secret controls' before e.g. http://audaxclubhackney.co.uk/events/the-shark/ .

Mandatory route. You can't have secret controls on an advisory, for obvious reasons.

[grams]

I’ve had info controls written in by organisers/controllers*, and sharing of “missed” infos is pretty rampant amongst riders. The idea that they keep people honest in a way that the possibility of secret controls doesn’t seems pretty dubious.

(* I take photos and write them in at the finish, so they’re blank before then)

[Ian H]

To be clear, a mandatory route is not a licence to ignore the shortest distance rule.  The controls still have to control.

[FifeingEejit]

Or you just make it mandatory route...

J

It's not simple. To have a point, a secret control needs to be quite late in the ride... if it's too early, then riders will just shortcut from there. If it's late, then you need someone to stay in one spot for hours, which is a joyless task, let's face it.

If you just threaten but then don't actually have a secret control, you are just creating problems down the line and for other organisers

You also need enough volunteers, very few of the other Scottish rides I did this year had organizers anywhere other than the HQ.
Tour of East Lothian had club members at each control, including the top of the redstane ride
The organizers of Hellfire Corner and NCC600 was able to work the controls with 2 control teams. (I didn't ride either)
Bairn Again was able to provide 1 manned intermediate control on the Auld Alliance, and that was him...
Argyll Alps, thanks to the layout of the roads on Cowl, the organizer was able to get to the top of the Rest and Be Thankfull before any riders got there, wait for the stragglers to get to the top and blast along to the Ballochindrain, by the time the last riders were through there he needed to hot foot it back to the ferry.

In some areas to have full manning of controls and secrets, you'd have a bigger Helpers ride than actual ride.

[quixoticgeek]

You also need enough volunteers, very few of the other Scottish rides I did this year had organizers anywhere other than the HQ.
Tour of East Lothian had club members at each control, including the top of the redstane ride
The organizers of Hellfire Corner and NCC600 was able to work the controls with 2 control teams. (I didn't ride either)
Bairn Again was able to provide 1 manned intermediate control on the Auld Alliance, and that was him...
Argyll Alps, thanks to the layout of the roads on Cowl, the organizer was able to get to the top of the Rest and Be Thankfull before any riders got there, wait for the stragglers to get to the top and blast along to the Ballochindrain, by the time the last riders were through there he needed to hot foot it back to the ferry.

In some areas to have full manning of controls and secrets, you'd have a bigger Helpers ride than actual ride.

For the event I'm organising we have a team of 2, and are looking for fully crewed start, finish, and one of the intermediate controls.

For an event where we hope to have 50+ riders.

Some of the comments on here about secret controls make me want to put a secret control outside of the arrivee...

J

[grams]

To be clear, a mandatory route is not a licence to ignore the shortest distance rule.  The controls still have to control.

There’s always a secret control around the next corner, so job done.

[Phil W]

To be clear, a mandatory route is not a licence to ignore the shortest distance rule.  The controls still have to control.

But isn't shortest distance calculated differently for mandatory? The defined route dictates the distance not min distance between controls. So you can define your event route , then place controls at suitable distances along it.  Whereas with advisory; infos often turn up in an effort to hit the minimum distance but the advised route is plenty over the min distance.

[Ian H]

To be clear, a mandatory route is not a licence to ignore the shortest distance rule.  The controls still have to control.

But isn't shortest distance calculated differently for mandatory? The defined route dictates the distance not min distance between controls. So you can define your event route , then place controls at suitable distances along it.  Whereas with advisory; infos often turn up in an effort to hit the minimum distance but the advised route is plenty over the min distance.

No.  It's still the shortest route (within reason, as with advisory).  Any loops ( eg. to avoid a major trunk road) need the possibility of a secret control.  If more than a couple of legs are like that then the route needs a rethink.   In fact it's the same as any of the continental events, which have never been 'advisory'.

[S2L]

Equally, why does saying that there 'may' be one or more secret controls, and then not actually having any create any problems for you or subsequent organisers? It doesn't create any sort of binding precedent.

If unmanned secret controls became the norm, then I argue that even validation loses completely its point. As Ian says above, a mandatory route is not a good reason for poor practice

[Cudzoziemiec]

To be clear, a mandatory route is not a licence to ignore the shortest distance rule.  The controls still have to control.

But isn't shortest distance calculated differently for mandatory? The defined route dictates the distance not min distance between controls. So you can define your event route , then place controls at suitable distances along it.  Whereas with advisory; infos often turn up in an effort to hit the minimum distance but the advised route is plenty over the min distance.

No.  It's still the shortest route (within reason, as with advisory).  Any loops ( eg. to avoid a major trunk road) need the possibility of a secret control.  If more than a couple of legs are like that then the route needs a rethink.   In fact it's the same as any of the continental events, which have never been 'advisory'.

I'm not sure I understand that. I can see that if you have a mandatory route you need controls to make sure people follow that route. So what does 'shortest route' refer to in the case of a mandatory route? Surely the idea of mandatory is that you have to follow the route as specified, anything else should not, strictly, be validated?

[S2L]

I'm not sure I understand that. I can see that if you have a mandatory route you need controls to make sure people follow that route. So what does 'shortest route' refer to in the case of a mandatory route? Surely the idea of mandatory is that you have to follow the route as specified, anything else should not, strictly, be validated?

What he means is that you can't polish up a badly thought out route with the "mandatory route" sticker. If the route has too many "sections" that can be avoided by taking a different (and shorter) route, then the threat of one secret control is not good enough and either there are proper controls or the route needs a rethink