Is an SR series without a 400 really an SR series?

[D.A.L.E.]

Well, yes. Yes, it is.

But is it really?

Current quandary; I'm officially SR for the 2018 season. I've ridden Deanos Peculier Old 200, the Snow Roads 300, the Three Steps to Severn 600 and the Mille Cymru 1000. But, for me anyway, the 400 is the most difficult distance and it just doesn't feel right to have not completed one towards the SR.

Anyone else been in this pickle? Justify me YACF, so I don't have to ride the dreaded DIY400...

While many 600s might be easier than a 400, the mill cymru is clearly not. You have definitely not taken an easy option. But you knew that surely, so presumably are just fishing.

Fishing? Give over. Merely an introspective observation thrown out to the wider world.

To expand on the original post; To me, each distance is different in the challenges it poses. So although a scenic 1000km ride might be on paper 'harder' than a 400, it's a different kettle of fish, slightly moved goalposts etc.

This isn't a manifesto.

[citoyen]

I've only ridden Porkers and Brimstone, but Porkers was a doddle compared. I stilll don't know if it was lack of sleep the night before or not (two hours before start and 35mins during ride) but I suffered badly on the 600. Came in with less than 30mins to spare, whereas I had a few hours on the 400.

I can see the logic as to why 4 is harder than 6, but I was wrecked after my 600. Absolutely wrecked.

The Brimstone is an especially difficult 600 though. I've also done the Beast From The East, which is a tough 600 but not even close to being as tough as the Brimstone. And the WCW is certainly not easy, but it's a walk in the park compared to the Brimstone.

Strong, fast riders probably find 400s easier than 600s because they are able to get round without the need for a sleep stop. This was certainly the case the first time I did the Severn Across - I was at my peak of fitness at the time and got back to the finish before 3am with no sleep stop (of course, the really fast riders were back well before midnight). When I returned to ride LWL, I was a lot less fit, and finished after 7am having found it a real ordeal, even though there was a lot more TLC provided. If you're an average rider, in the middle of the pack, 600s provide more opportunity to have a proper sleep stop around the 350km mark and still finish within the time cut. If you're a full-value rider, you may not have time for sleep on either and thus will naturally find 600s harder.

[grams]

I’ve never understood this - to complete a 600 you have to get to the 400 mark (assuming there’s a times control) at full randonneur pace or be out of time.

And by the same logic, a 1000 shouldn’t be a substitute for a 600 due to the lower average speed required to get to 600.

[L CC]

I like 400s. Suck it up.

[Greenbank]

I’ve never understood this - to complete a 600 you have to get to the 400 mark (assuming there’s a times control) at full randonneur pace or be out of time.

But there's scope for splitting the ride up and have a sleep at some point around the 360km mark and, by doing so, technically being behind out-of-time as you pass the nominal 400km point byt knowing that you will claw that back by the first control after the sleep stop as you're now well rested.

Sure you could just push on from the 360km control to the 400km mark but this is what can make 400s seem harder, these last 40km+ when tired and have been awake and cycling all day are harder than doing them (and the other 200km) after a nice 3 or 4 hour sleep (if you're lucky). It's the sleep deprivation aspect that makes it harder for most (it doesn't really get me so I don't find them horrible at all and I was definitely a full value rider).

Many 600s are engineered with this in mind. They have a big a sized gap as possible after the 'sleep' control, or the first control after the sleep control is an info control, or maybe the organisers just don't look too closely at the timestamps if it's a commercial control.

Sure, if there's a 600 with a control at 402km then there's no difference, but those kinds of rides are rare.

[j_a_m_e_s_]

I’ve never understood this - to complete a 600 you have to get to the 400 mark (assuming there’s a times control) at full randonneur pace or be out of time.

And by the same logic, a 1000 shouldn’t be a substitute for a 600 due to the lower average speed required to get to 600.

Good point

[Greenbank]

And by the same logic, a 1000 shouldn’t be a substitute for a 600 due to the lower average speed required to get to 600.

Time limits for rides longer than 600km aren't completely linear. ACP has some convoluted rules on this:-

http://www.audax-club-parisien.com/EN/322%20-%20Rules%20of%20BRM%20Worldwide.html

although I'm not sure AUK follows them for its own BR rides (or even BRM rides in the UK). (LEL certainly doesn't, but that's homologated by LRM not ACP.)

"
Article 10 : Overall time limits vary for each brevet according to the distance. These are: (in hours and minutes, HH:MM) 13:30 for 200 KM, 20:00 for 300 KM, 27:00 for 400 KM, 40:00 for 600 KM, and 75:00 for 1000 KM.

Additionally, riders must arrive at each checkpoint between the opening and closing time for the checkpoint and calculated as follows:
Opening: 34 km / h (km 1 to 200); 32 km / h (km 201 to 400); 30 km / h (km 401 to 600); 28 km / h (km 601 to 1000); commercial rounded by the minute.
Closing: 1 hour + 20 km / h (km 1 to 60); 15 km / h (km 61 to 600); 11.428 km / h (km 601 to 1000); commercial rounded by the minute.
"

This actually makes the closing time of a checkpoint at 400km of a BRM 1000km EARLIER than you'd get a full 400km BRM ride:-
* BRM 400 gives you 27:00 for the entire ride.
* 400km at 15kph = 26:40, 20 minutes less

On PBP, you don't get 45h to get to Brest, I think it's something around 43h.

[FifeingEejit]

On the what's harder than what:
Having just done my first 400 and 600 in the last couple of months...

I get the idea how you find it is entirely down to how you operate.
The 400 felt much like the Solo 24hr MTB rides I've done in the past; finished just over the 24hr mark with just over 18hrs riding.
Other's were taking a quick snooze at the 360k mark or looking absolutely wrecked as soon as the sky went dark.

The 600 on the other hand was a totally new experience for me; I actually slept or at least I was lying in Johnstonebridge Services wrapped in a space blanket, soaking wet and had some form of (non wet) dream... so I reckon I got about an hour; which was enough to get me back and not feel sleepy until I sat in the car after sorting stuff out and showering; I ended up asleep at the wheel (parked next to my tent I must add, I'm not that daft) and only moved to the tent because my head rolled off the wheel and woke me up.
However the same people that looked wrecked on the 400 when it got dark also looked wrecked on the 600 when it got dark.
One of them was talking about hallucinations.

I don't think I found it that much harder than the 400... well not until my knees started screaming in Wooler and my left heel started hurting from all the unclipping; but that's happened in the past on imperial centuries so that's more about my knees, heels and ankles. But I was dreading it getting dark again; I just avoided it.

I'm starting to think I need to include a 1000 next year to get an idea of how it is needing to snooze more than once in preparation for a certain 1200 (if I make it there).

Can't offer much on the original topic though as I pretty much think that if the rules allow it then, Meh!

[GPS]

Why not ride a 400 that starts 100k away from your home? Then you could ECE it and thereby make it into an easier 600.

Sorted.

[Aunt Maud]

We'll all point fingers and call you a Jessie if you don't do a proper 400 in the rain.

[whosatthewheel]

I'm kind with you in the sense that if an SR series is 200-300-400-600, so it should be... although replacing distances with longer ones sounds badass (read audacious), it's not the way it should be done in my opinion.

The way I see it is that an SR involves taking part in the 4 classic randonneur distances... each of them has its own unique challenges. It's not even cast in stone that a 300 is harder than a 200 or a 600 is harder than a 400... they are just different events, held on different dates, different weather, different routes... you can't compare, really

[vorsprung]

I like 400s. Suck it up.

I used to prefer 300s as the best distance but there are some great 400 routes that are just as good.

Maybe try a different start time?  Starting at 6am on a 400 doesn't seem like the only plan, there are plenty that start at other times

[hellymedic]

My first 400 started at midday, my second at 11pm and my third at 6am.

There is much more variation in start times for 300s and 400s than 200s and 600s.

[citoyen]

My first 400 started at midday

Same here - the Invicta 400 was both my first 400 and my second. I didn't get on particularly well with the midday start time though. It's good from the point of view of making it easier to get to the start, but I found it was hard to manage the overnight riding - although that might just have been down to inexperience.

[Brakeless]

If you've ridden a 300 you've ridden a 200 within it. Ridden a 400 you've ridden a 300 within it. Ridden a 600 you've ridden a 400 within it. Ridden a 1000 you've ridden a 600 within it. Audax is about encouraging long distance riding, telling someone that their ride is too long kind of goes against that.

Should longer distances be allowed in place of shorter ones ? Of course they should, this is the Long distance Riding organisation isn't it?

[citoyen]

If you've ridden a 300 you've ridden a 200 within it. Ridden a 400 you've ridden a 300 within it. Ridden a 600 you've ridden a 400 within it. Ridden a 1000 you've ridden a 600 within it. Audax is about encouraging long distance riding, telling someone that their ride is too long kind of goes against that.

Should longer distances be allowed in place of shorter ones ? Of course they should, this is the Long distance Riding organisation isn't it?

OTOH if you enter a 400 an abandon after 300km, it counts as a DNF not as a 300.

[Brakeless]

If you've ridden a 300 you've ridden a 200 within it. Ridden a 400 you've ridden a 300 within it. Ridden a 600 you've ridden a 400 within it. Ridden a 1000 you've ridden a 600 within it. Audax is about encouraging long distance riding, telling someone that their ride is too long kind of goes against that.

Should longer distances be allowed in place of shorter ones ? Of course they should, this is the Long distance Riding organisation isn't it?

OTOH if you enter a 400 an abandon after 300km, it counts as a DNF not as a 300.

That's because you haven't finished the ride that you set out to do. Totally different to saying 4 x 600 shouldn't make you a Super Randoneer which is what people are effectively saying.

[j_a_m_e_s_]

How do our Parisien masters view it?

Can I enter PBP next year having only ridden BCM, Brimstone, Buzzard and Benjamin Allens Summer Tour?

[LittleWheelsandBig]

ACP accepts longer brevets for shorter for PBP qualifiers. They do not otherwise accept brevet substitutions for a SR. You wouldn't be the first to qualify for PBP with 4 x 600s. By the way, ACP aren't our masters, just the master of PBP.

[citoyen]

Totally different to saying 4 x 600 shouldn't make you a Super Randoneer which is what people are effectively saying.

And what ACP say for their version of the SR, as LWaB notes. So you could qualify for PBP without qualifying for the SR award.

I can't remember which year it was but whenever it was I did the Brimstone, I abandoned after >400km. I completed a different 600 that season, as well as a 200 and 300, so I could claim I rode an SR that year. But I didn't.

[hellymedic]

My first 400 started at midday

Same here - the Invicta 400 was both my first 400 and my second. I didn't get on particularly well with the midday start time though. It's good from the point of view of making it easier to get to the start, but I found it was hard to manage the overnight riding - although that might just have been down to inexperience.

I was OKish with the midday start. Reactive hypoglycaemia made 10am-12noon starts my least favoured though.
(I have recorded a BM of 2.8 on several occasions.)

[j_a_m_e_s_]

ACP accepts longer brevets for shorter for PBP qualifiers. They do not otherwise accept brevet substitutions for a SR. You wouldn't be the first to qualify for PBP with 4 x 600s. By the way, ACP aren't our masters, just the master of PBP.

I meant it a bit tongue in cheek.

FWIW - i still come back to if it says SR by your name, its SR. (But you should have a 2,3,4 & 600)

[mattc]

If you've ridden a 300 you've ridden a 200 within it. Ridden a 400 you've ridden a 300 within it. Ridden a 600 you've ridden a 400 within it. Ridden a 1000 you've ridden a 600 within it. Audax is about encouraging long distance riding, telling someone that their ride is too long kind of goes against that.

Should longer distances be allowed in place of shorter ones ? Of course they should, this is the Long distance Riding organisation isn't it?

Well put sir 

[However,

(click to show/hide)

we are also twinned with the Internet Pedantry Association*, so someone is bound to point out your error:

You could complete a BRM300 without riding any 200k subsection at BRM minimum speed e.g. ride two very fast 150k legs, with a long stop at halfway.

<shoves glasses back up nose>

Of course, anyone who proves me wrong mathematically will own my pedantry soul - like in Highlander.


*unlike AUK, they have no badges or awards - good pedantry is its own reward.    ]

[teethgrinder]

If you've ridden a 300 you've ridden a 200 within it. Ridden a 400 you've ridden a 300 within it. Ridden a 600 you've ridden a 400 within it. Ridden a 1000 you've ridden a 600 within it. Audax is about encouraging long distance riding, telling someone that their ride is too long kind of goes against that.

Should longer distances be allowed in place of shorter ones ? Of course they should, this is the Long distance Riding organisation isn't it?

Yes.
But I rode a few 1500km permanents in 2007. There's a whole SR worth of kilometers in there but it only counted as 1 600 (or shorter) towards my *number* of SRs that year.
Waaaah!
No fair!
 

[mattc]

While we're at it, I don't agree with anyone claiming more than 1 SR in a year.

So there. 


_{[or claiming for "concurrent RRTYs", but that's for another thread ... ]}