Audax "cheats"

[Euan Uzami]

I personally think that if it's even *possible* to cheat, then that's an inherent failure of the positioning of the controls/info controls.

With many AAA rides it's pretty much impossible to enforce this without adding a silly number of info controls. Several of the Scenic diversions (from the 2004 route) on the Bryan Chapman had no info controls to enforce them, but if you're entering that kind of ride it's unlikely you're going to cheat.

Cheats are very few and far between and don't affect me or the points competition. Adding rules/regulations/extra-controls will just penalise the thousands who don't cheat and won't do much at all to deter the few (if any) that do cheat.

Remember, under AUK rules, the route between controls is not mandatory. The spirit of AAA rides means you should stick to the planned route. Many of the scenic diversions on the Bryan Chapman have no info control to enforce the route, but everyone I saw dutifully turned off at the right time to go see the top of the nearest hill before rejoining

absolutely - it's only personal pride, not exactly as if there's any money in it for """winning""".
You *could* simply drive   - but what would be the point...  

I'm not one for taking audaxes that seriously.  All I hope for is a nice day out, riding someone else's favourite ride, maybe the possibility of some home-made cake in a community centre, somewhere I would never go under 'normal' circumstances. A bit of a chat with someone friendly is always a bonus.

As long as I don't get stuck near someone having one of those interminably boring audax conversations that makes me want to stab them in the eyes... you know the kind of thing:

"Of course, the eleventh time I rode the Scunthorpe 400 was with Derek Hymen, because Stuart Clitheroe did a DNS that year, the route was the same except it took the third left off the B637383 rather than the fifth left that takes you up that hill near Dimplook"  etc etc

nail on head, that's pretty much my exact attitude as well...

[Euan Uzami]

Can I just make one observation.

The routes are recommended and not compulsory.  Anyone who takes a different route between controls is not cheating.

so if there's an AAA event and it's possible to take a longcut that involves less climbing, and someone does that but still visits all the controls in the correct order, then technically they haven't """cheated""" because they've cycled between all the controls in the allotted time, but they have not done the climbing, so in my view there should have been an info control at the top of that climb.

For instance at the dales grimpeur 140 I got completely lost at the start. The route went up one climb then came back and past very near to the start, before going back out the other way. And due to the fact i programmed my gps craply, it got completely confused and didn't know which 'leg' of the route i was on. There was an info control at the top of the first climb, when i got back i got my brevet card out and said 'the color of the tape on that post was navy wasn't it?'    'Red!' he replied. So I crossed it out and wrote red, because I definitely HAD done AT LEAST the amount of climbing because i went up one hill about 3 times on different roads before giving up with trying to get it to follow the route and just used the 'go to waypoint' function to get it to simply navigate me to the first control. 

[vorsprung]

There was an info control at the top of the first climb, when i got back i got my brevet card out and said 'the color of the tape on that post was navy wasn't it?'    'Red!' he replied. So I crossed it out and wrote red, because I definitely HAD done AT LEAST the amount of climbing because...

If I'd have missed an info like that, I would not have put in the card and claimed the points

[StanThomas]

I personally think that if it's even *possible* to cheat, then that's an inherent failure of the positioning of the controls/info controls.

With many AAA rides it's pretty much impossible to enforce this without adding a silly number of info controls.

It's a question I've posed before, but, why do we think that audax riders will only go up a hill if there are points for it? Surely, the reason you enter a grimpeur event is to play on some climbs. Having to stop at the top of each one to scribble down an info answer detracts from the enjoyment.

Who's bothered if a tired rider skips the last climb of the day? If a rider does this often enough to challenge for the AAA competition it's going to be obvious. For the rest, it doesn't even register. So let's enjoy riding with our friends and feel smug, rather than affronted, when someone takes the easier option.

[mattc]

( I think Stan has made the point I was about to.)
Or:
Filling out loads of extra infos would dissuade me from riding AAA events, as I don't really care about the points, or indeed who wins any relevant trophies.

Good luck to those that _do_ care!

[BlackSheep]

I personally think that if it's even *possible* to cheat, then that's an inherent failure of the positioning of the controls/info controls.

With many AAA rides it's pretty much impossible to enforce this without adding a silly number of info controls. Several of the Scenic diversions (from the 2004 route) on the Bryan Chapman had no info controls to enforce them, but if you're entering that kind of ride it's unlikely you're going to cheat.

Cheats are very few and far between and don't affect me or the points competition. Adding rules/regulations/extra-controls will just penalise the thousands who don't cheat and won't do much at all to deter the few (if any) that do cheat.

Remember, under AUK rules, the route between controls is not mandatory. The spirit of AAA rides means you should stick to the planned route. Many of the scenic diversions on the Bryan Chapman have no info control to enforce the route, but everyone I saw dutifully turned off at the right time to go see the top of the nearest hill before rejoining

Well spotted Greenbank.

However, where the "Scenic" route varies from the "2004" - it's actually the 2004 that's the longer route.

The one exception being the bit at the top of the Dolfor climb, (so to pacify a past member of the route police) there's an Un-needed* info on that bit.

The routes are formed on the premise that the "2004" riders don't want the extra work to enjoy the "Scenic" bits. And even if you took the shorter "Scenic" bits where an advantage (in terms of distance cutting) could be gained - you'd still end-up cycling more than the prescribed 600km.

Another thought

Why does everyone follow the A466 from Monmouth to Chepstow, even though it's not the shortest route?
Anyone that had set their GPS to find the shortest route would get more beeps than the Jeremy Kyle show.
The "Making Hay" route is by shorter by some considerable distance.

In 2006 I offered a "600" BCM variant that was 601km, all the riders actually ended-up riding about 635km - The "600" route was a tad less easy for their liking.


* Un-needed because by the end of the ride, cyclists will still have covered at least 600km.

[Martin]

Can I just highlight what strikes me is the key point in GB's post.

The routes are recommended and not compulsory.  Anyone who takes a different route between controls is not cheating.

correct: however recommended routes that can be shortcut or else bypassed (especially on non "Audax- friendly" roads) are under scrutiny.

[Jaded]

I think the real problem would come when you became an MP.

Can you imagine the front page of the Daily Mail?

AAA MP Cheat

In a startling revelation the MP for Grimthorpe, Ben Taylor, admitted that he had claimed 2.25 AAA points he wasn't entitled to.

[red marley]

If there is a choice between allowing some 'cheats' to do their thing on a ride and having extra infos I'd always go for the former.

However this didn't stop me feeling somewhat peeved when I struggled over the hilly and wet northern loop of the Brian Chapman to earn my AAAs, only to find a couple of well known riders who had set off after me were in the warm and dry at Menai having taken the flatter coastal route out and were going to do the same back. In fact it would be possible to knock off about 10k and several 100m of climbing by taking the 'return' route from Dollgelau both there and back. Follows the letter of the law, but not the spirit.

Rather than apply some Route Police Brutality, I would suggest riders who do this donate their AAA points to charity.

[Euan Uzami]

I think the real problem would come when you became an MP.

Can you imagine the front page of the Daily Mail?

AAA MP Cheat

In a startling revelation the MP for Grimthorpe, Ben Taylor, admitted that he had claimed 2.25 AAA points he wasn't entitled to.

At no point did I lie.

[citoyen]

The case that always springs to mind when this subject comes up is the time I was overtaken by Mr Larrington on (IIRC) The Dean 300 - I'd stuck to the routesheet and went over a big old hill, while Monsieur Le Maire took a detour that was a wee bit longer but a lot flatter.

My sense of righteous virtue at having stuck to the official route was somewhat negated by the dull ache in my legs and the sight of a smug git on a recumbent vanishing into the distance.

d.

[Mr Larrington]

In mitigation, I'd already ridden up Cleeve Hill on the previous year's Cotswold Corker, and had no desire to repeat the performance unless absolutely necessary.

Yes, I did ride the Corker on a recumbent trike.

[iakobski]

However this didn't stop me feeling somewhat peeved when I struggled over the hilly and wet northern loop of the Brian Chapman to earn my AAAs, only to find a couple of well known riders who had set off after me were in the warm and dry at Menai having taken the flatter coastal route out and were going to do the same back. In fact it would be possible to knock off about 10k and several 100m of climbing by taking the 'return' route from Dollgelau both there and back. Follows the letter of the law, but not the spirit.

They are the losers, though. That is a big highlight of the ride and even in poor conditions I wouldn't want to miss it. The only rationale might be if you were quite late and would cross the pass in complete darkness anyway.

[MSeries]

Can I just highlight what strikes me is the key point in GB's post.

The routes are recommended and not compulsory.  Anyone who takes a different route between controls is not cheating.

correct: however recommended routes that can be shortcut or else bypassed (especially on non "Audax- friendly" roads) are under scrutiny.

The term "Audax-friendly roads" is open to interpretation. There are roads that I'd use when traffic is light, some folk wouldn't though and some fold would use certain roads regardless of the traffic volumes.

[mattc]

In mitigation, I'd already ridden up Cleeve Hill on the previous year's Cotswold Corker, and had no desire to repeat the performance unless absolutely necessary.

And in further mitigation, on a normal bike that longcut is indeed a longcut in time as well as distance. (However, it's a much nicer route!)

The new improved Dave Hudson 600 also does Winchcombe-Cleeve Hill-Newent; the git put an info near the summit - grrr! (he could just as easily have put it in Bishops Cleeve or similar)

[BlackSheep]

And in further mitigation, on a normal bike that longcut is indeed a longcut in time as well as distance. (However, it's a much nicer route!)

The new improved Dave Hudson 600 also does Winchcombe-Cleeve Hill-Newent; the git put an info near the summit - grrr! (he could just as easily have put it in Bishops Cleeve or similar)
[/quote]

Can't think why there's an info at the top - it's already on the shortest route.

Or is there AAA points at stake on this ride?

[Greenbank]

Put it another way, given that the scenic Bryan Chapman is shorter than the 2004 route, it's possible to shortcut the 2004 route by doing more climbing by taking some of the Scenic diversions...

Is this a problem too? (My answer is a big fat resounding: No!)

[teethgrinder]

Maybe I should fess up.
When I rode the Bryan Chapman in 2008, I did a bit of my own route to avoid the bit around Bow Street.
It involved a scenic diversion around a lake , which was most likely hillier than the proper route and was certainly longer. (and I got a sodding puncture! )
Am I a cheat?

I still think that Pete Turnbull and Mel Kirkland should be given an extra percetage on their points total for the season.

[Greenbank]

They should only get extra points if they go at least 100km over distance on any one ride. LEO is a real opportunity for them!

[mattc]

...
And in further mitigation, on a normal bike that longcut is indeed a longcut in time as well as distance. (However, it's a much nicer route!)

The new improved Dave Hudson 600 also does Winchcombe-Cleeve Hill-Newent; the git put an info near the summit - grrr! (he could just as easily have put it in Bishops Cleeve or similar)

Can't think why there's an info at the top - it's already on the shortest route.

Or is there AAA points at stake on this ride?

I missed some info out. The route goes:
Cirencester (control) - Winchcombe (then info up Cleeve Hill) - Newent (control)

So without the info you could nip through Gloucester etc (lovely).
(If the info were in Winchcombe, or indeed one of the preceding 3 villages, then a 'Larrington would be on'. )

For the uninitiated, Cleeve Hill isn't very tough, but it's long, featureless and on a busy-ish road, so no fun at all. Then you do a stoopid chevron descent down the other side (which noone gains any time on, especially down-wrongs).

[BlackSheep]

I missed some info out. The route goes:
Cirencester (control) - Winchcombe (then info up Cleeve Hill) - Newent (control)

So without the info you could nip through Gloucester etc (lovely).
(If the info were in Winchcombe, or indeed one of the preceding 3 villages, then a 'Larrington would be on'. )

For the uninitiated, Cleeve Hill isn't very tough, but it's long, featureless and on a busy-ish road, so no fun at all. Then you do a stoopid chevron descent down the other side (which noone gains any time on, especially down-wrongs).

OK, I can see where you (or the ride's) coming from now.

It's easy to be wise when the route's on your manor - so no criticism's aimed at the organiser.

An info in a hamlet like Gotherington or Gretton would give a lovely route, And missing-out the rather gruesome* climb up Cleeve Hill from Winchcombe and the nasty desent down the side lane.

* gruesome - just keep your eyes peeled for the flowers and plaques, in memory of those that have perished.

[citoyen]

For the uninitiated, Cleeve Hill isn't very tough, but it's long, featureless and on a busy-ish road, so no fun at all. Then you do a stoopid chevron descent down the other side (which noone gains any time on, especially down-wrongs).

Yeah, that about sums it up. The road up is horrible and then you have that right turn across an often busy main road. And the descent is far too steep, narrow, twisty and badly surfaced to be any fun.

I don't blame Mr L for taking the detour - I'd have followed him if I'd known about it.

d.

[mattc]

It's easy to be wise when the route's on your manor - so no criticism's aimed at the organiser.

An info in a hamlet like Gotherington or Gretton would give a lovely route, And missing-out the rather gruesome* climb up Cleeve Hill from Winchcombe and the nasty desent down the side lane.

Yes, that road is nice (7Across uses it to get to Tewkesbury), but would add 3-4K, and El S probably doesn't want us to have any more ammunition to complain about over-distance.

I liked that road 'cos I discovered the Prescott Hill-Climb* circuit is on it - I wonder if they have a control-friendly caff?!?

(*Sorry, vroom-vrooms)

[Greenbank]

An info in a hamlet like Gotherington or Gretton would give a lovely route, And missing-out the rather gruesome* climb up Cleeve Hill from Winchcombe and the nasty desent down the side lane.

That's exactly what the Larrington Manoeuvre is. In Winchcombe (where routesheet says L@T), go R@T, 1st L (North St), SO (Gretton Rd), Fork L after Gretton, through Prescott, L in Gotherington (Cleeve Road) back to Bishop's Cleeve, and R@T to rejoin the route.

Or, if you do climb Cleeve Hill, there's the Volio Variation to miss out the nasty descent down the side lane. Instead of turning R across the busy road to go down nasty steep Stockwell Lane, stay on the B4632 and descend to Southam and take the 3rd or 4th R (New Road) back towards Bishop's Cleeve. Adds about half a mile.

[BlackSheep]

That's exactly what the Larrington Manoeuvre is. In Winchcombe (where routesheet says L@T), go R@T, 1st L (North St), SO (Gretton Rd), Fork L after Gretton, through Prescott, L in Gotherington (Cleeve Road) back to Bishop's Cleeve, and R@T to rejoin the route.

Or, if you do climb Cleeve Hill, there's the Volio Variation to miss out the nasty descent down the side lane. Instead of turning R across the busy road to go down nasty steep Stockwell Lane, stay on the B4632 and descend to Southam and take the 3rd or 4th R (New Road) back towards Bishop's Cleeve. Adds about half a mile.

As some of my (and Mrs. Blackseep's) rides take the former course, I will put that bit on the route sheets as "take 'The Larrington Manoeuver'". 

The 'Volio Variation' makes sense - as the Cleeve Hill inclines up and down are better suited for those members of the darkside,