Shortest distance between controls and info controls.

[LittleWheelsandBig]

I am watching how this issue develops as Australia is just starting a similar process of route validation.  Our routes are compulsory but according to our agreement with the ACP, checkpoint locations should prevent shortcutting, the worst of all possible situations.  Virtually all of our 200(+) brevets are BRM, so no extra time is allowed for over-distance routes.  We've just initiated permanents in Australia, so this routing issue is becoming more of a problem.

I think the means of validating the minimum distance needs to be robust too; for example; if I run my event (not one so far highlighted as requiring more than 5 controls  I should add) through either Autoroute or viamichelin it comes up consistently with a footpath; (a muddy one at that, not even a bridleway) which happens to connect a very lumpy and not very well surfaced lane to a humped and very private road- a footpath ie not rideable along- which eventually connects back up to the normal route having cut out about 3km of nicely surfaced and gently graded; not to mention lovely to ride route of the official ride, for which under the new rules I'd be obliged to add an extra info on the proper route 4km before the lunchtime control just to deter those adventurous riders whose GPS just happened to know this little detour.

A number of regions in Australia have many dirt roads but few asphalt roads.  Many times, the shortest distance according to Google Maps or other mapping programs is via dirt roads or even roads that have never been been constructed and never will be constructed (literally through a farmer's plowed field).  Pragmatically we are pretending that dirt roads don't exist (generally  ).

We are still coming to terms with consistency between the various regions.  Some allow routes with small loops and no intermediate controls (rather dubious IMHO), some are 'hardline' shortest distance.

Interestingly, this year some of our brevets are UAF-style 'Audax 22.5' brevets (aka Euraudax) and the organiser can tie the route completely up in knots, if desired, as the riding style prevents shortcutting.

[LittleWheelsandBig]

I share the concern expressed by Hummers et al and while it may be easy for others to shrug their shoulders and say 'rules is rules' it may be a different story when their local ride is dropped.

My first ever brevet required a 1000 km drive each way to get to the nearest event.  Every ride in Britain is local if you live in GB. 

[Jaded]

Ah, but if you were an AUK, you'd have ridden to it!

[Martin]

I use viamichelin for plotting DIY shortest routes as I don't have Autoroute and DIY's require proper places; is it possible to enter info locations (NGR?) on vm as putting the nearest town often sends it another way?

it works perfectly with postcodes; it's just shown me the shortest (even down to the bridleway I use to get out onto the main road) way to Mum's; so for AUK purposes all you need is the postcode of the info / normal control 

[LittleWheelsandBig]

Ah, but if you were an AUK, you'd have ridden to it!

I am not Teethgrinder

[Martin]

I've added the compulsory routes debate to this one rather than hijack MSeries one;

...But the organiser's route has been risk assessed; you stray from it at your own responsibility.

I'd disagree with that, in as much as you ride on any highway at your own risk, whether a designated AUK route or not. If something goes wrong, it's between you and the highway authority or the other road-user (or your very own fault). Nothing to do with the organiser.

of course; but if an organiser makes up a nice laney route and a rider decides to ignore it in favour of a busy A road (or vice versa) that's up to them is the point I was making

[steveindenmark]

I am pleased this post is here so I can add the views of a "Virgin Audaxer".

I have not ridden any Audax rides and so I have not be "Tainted" by anyone elses views. I have been looking into Audax since last November and my first 200 is next weekend.

As an outsiders view the first thing I can say is I am stunned at how many rules and regulation this sport has. I have never taken part in any sport with so many rules.

A lot of the rules seem to circle around the honesty of the participants of the sport the rules are there to support.
I thought to organise one of these rides all you would need to do was find an interesting route, put in controls at appropriate points and make an accurate route map so other riders can follow their way round the route.

But it appears you need a degree in quatum physics or some other suitable qualification to work out direct lines of transport so those people taking part in the sport cannot cheat and find shorter way.

But as understand it, finding a longer way is acceptable.

I cannot see why anyone would enter a ride with the sole intention of cheating. What would be the point in that?

I could devise some very interesting rides but I am certain I would get it all wrong just because of the reams and reams of red tape this sport appears to the outsider to produce.

[Hedgebanger]

As an organiser its simple;1) You devise a route,with controls to make riders follow it.
2) Get the route validated by Area organiser for Audax.
And 3) (The hard bit ) Put the event on !

[Manotea]

As HB suggests, the rules are in fact very simple. Ensuring rider compliance with the rules is not, and it is that which generates the endless debate.

[Alouicious]

As a rider its simple.

1) I receive a routesheet for me to deduce the locations of controls and INFOs.
2) Plan MY route to improve efficiency.
3) ( the hard bit ), Make sure no-one 'freeloads' on MY initiative.

[AndyH]

But it appears you need a degree in quatum physics or some other suitable qualification to work out direct lines of transport so those people taking part in the sport cannot cheat and find shorter way.

It helps if you've also got a mate who is a lawyer  

The rides are all validated and there is an awards structure Steve. It's reasonable therefore to take steps to ensure that the distances are accurate, no?

The problem arises with different routes between control points. Therefore the validated distance of a route has to be the shortest route between control points. This, however, may use roads that the organiser does not want to send you down, the route then becomes overdistance using the org's preferred route. The rider can choose to use the shorter route if he/she wishes

The current tools for measuring the distance are Autoroute and Via Mchelin. This seems to be where the fun starts.

[vorsprung]

As an outsiders view the first thing I can say is I am stunned at how many rules and regulation this sport has. I have never taken part in any sport with so many rules.

Is it a sport?  I thought it was just touring.  With funny rules.

[Manotea]

As an outsiders view the first thing I can say is I am stunned at how many rules and regulation this sport has. I have never taken part in any sport with so many rules.

Is it a sport?  I thought it was just touring.  With funny rules.

The cycling bit is a past-time. The sport is in playing the rules.

[MSeries]

steveindenmark, the rules don't really get in the way though.

[Alouicious]

There are four rules in Audax.

1/ You cannot use motorized assistance.
2/ You must not let anyone else get your brevet card stamped.
3/ You must get your brevet card stamped within the time gates.
4/ You must get the info answers correct.

Having observed these four rules, the rest is an exercise in initiative.

[LittleWheelsandBig]

Denmark's brevets are slightly different (AUK is the odd man out in randonneuring organisations). In most countries, the organiser's route is mandatory, in Britain it is advisory.

[Alouicious]

Take for example a ride I went on last century.

A group of riders entered from the same club. They all had to get the stamp at the controls, but each rider was assigned an INFO. They met up at the finish and shared their answers.

[drossall]

There are just so many ways you could cheat if you wanted to. Get a lift with a family member to the event, and send them to the info controls. Chat up another rider and say "Drat, I forgot to stop at that last info, what was the answer?" Heck, you could drive round the whole thing and get your bike out round the corner each time!

I'm in the "I joined to get nice touring rides in pleasant company" camp, so I don't really care about short cuts. I'm more grateful to organisers than ever after reading this, though; I hadn't thought about having to avoid the possibility of an A-road route being shorter.

[Hot Flatus]

Take for example a ride I went on last century.

A group of riders entered from the same club. They all had to get the stamp at the controls, but each rider was assigned an INFO. They met up at the finish and shared their answers.

Good idea.  Having to look out for infos is a pain in the arse. 

[Alouicious]

If I wanted "a nice touring ride in pleasant company", I'd go to Brueton park every Sunday and ride with Heart of England CTC.

Nah, the AUK organiser has set a challenge and its my job to beat it....

[Hot Flatus]

You aren't beating it by taking short-cuts, as long as you've filled in all the infos and been to all the controls. It is perfectly legit, Jim.

[Jaded]

If I wanted "a nice touring ride in pleasant company", I'd go to Brueton park every Sunday and ride with Heart of England CTC.

Nah, the AUK organiser has set a challenge and its my job to beat it....

You sound like an Organiser's Dream Rider.

[marcusjb]

I'm not one for the short cuts etc.  I like to follow the route sheet exactly - that's how the organiser intended the ride to be, and that's what I want to see.

Be a bit like listening to an album on shuffle, feels disrespectful to the creator!

[Alouicious]

You aren't beating it by taking short-cuts, as long as you've filled in all the infos and been to all the controls. It is perfectly legit, Jim.

You're watching too much Star Trek.

[Hot Flatus]

I don't watch tv, Jim