COVID19 and Audax UK

[grams]

Honest question. What's the tangible benefit/purpose for people wanting their ride validated?

I look forward to reading your proposal for shutting down Audax UK as a clearly fraudulent enterprise.

And its cousins around the world.

And almost all other sporting awards bodies.

[LMT]

Honest question. What's the tangible benefit/purpose for people wanting their ride validated?

I look forward to reading your proposal for shutting down Audax UK as a clearly fraudulent enterprise.

And its cousins around the world.

And almost all other sporting awards bodies.

What are you going on about it?

People can still ride their bikes, 200, 300k and beyond yet despite this people are still having ago at AUK when there is nothing stopping them going out on their bike and riding a distance. Hence me asking the question if there is any tangible benefit to getting a ride validated.

[rob]

I’ve done 300 and 400k rides in the last few weeks and 2 200k perms in the last week.

Validation would be useful for me but only as part of an SR series.  I would like to extend my run just to have achieved something this year.  My total road mileage is currently ahead of last year which is unexpected.

[Lightning Phil]

Honest question. What's the tangible benefit/purpose for people wanting their ride validated?

It’s more a benefit to audax UK. The more people ride long distance without validation, the less they will care about it (validation). It may lead the situation in France where for many riders, brevets just become an activity every four years to qualify for PBP etc.

[Davef]

Honest question. What's the tangible benefit/purpose for people wanting their ride validated?

For some it might encourage them to ride when otherwise they wouldn’t. There were close to 400 booked to do the lejog audax and perhaps 3 or 4 actually did it unvalidated.

[LittleWheelsandBig]

+1 to both rob and Lightning Phil.

I am not seeing any reason that currently justifies not validating long perms generally, the exceptions being a couple of small regions.

[rob]

What is the advantage to AUK and to society in general of not validating solo and small group perms >200km? Please consider those other activities that are being actively encouraged during this time.

.

This ^

I felt that AUK were taking a cautious but logical approach up to 1 August (and came in for some unfair stick imho) but I dont think anybody can tell us what has to change now in order for perms over 200km to resume, unless AUK believe that in allowing a resumption at such distances there is a risk that AUK members will breach local regulations / the law.  Of course as mattc among others has pointed out that risk existed & was accepted pre Covid.

Self interest alert.....

If i knew that a validated 300/400/600 wasnt going to be possible by 30-09-20 Id make a plan to ride those distances just as bike rides, but if hanging on a bit meant those distances could be validated Id prefer that. 

However with 7 weekends left until the end of the season, doing both isnt going to be possible or practical.

I did suggest on the AUK forum a one-off extension of the season to the end of Oct for this year.

[FifeingEejit]

Honest question. What's the tangible benefit/purpose for people wanting their ride validated?

It’s more a benefit to audax UK. The more people ride long distance without validation, the less they will care about it (validation). It may lead the situation in France where for many riders, brevets just become an activity every four years to qualify for PBP etc.

There's an expensive IT refresh to pay for that covers all of the ahem... "wanky pish"* AUK do that ACP don't, surely that approach would result in AUKs collapse...


* I hesitated to use that phrase that I've become accustomed to use for extra stuff that isn't core to the purpose, but well... it is isn't it!

[bairn again]

Honest question. What's the tangible benefit/purpose for people wanting their ride validated?

Personally my 16th consecutive SR, and more generally validation of long bike rides subject to certain min-max speeds is AUKs raison d’etre.  Without validation we’re just doing bike rides.  Nothing wrong with a bike ride but audax events are fairly popular. 

I hear suggestions formal and informal that the 2019/2020 season will be extended into a “doubler” encompassing 1.10.2019 - 30.09.2021.   However that strikes me as unreasonable for the hard core who had already completed a SR pre lockdown. 

As I said ^ I believe that AUK are now in a position where the inability to validate perm rides over 200km isnt justified.

 Additionally the criteria for starting to do so (and therefore the likely timescale for such a relaxation) is also unclear. 

[mattc]

I’m not saying anything useful, let alone logical or reasonable.

FTFY

[mattc]

Honest question. What's the tangible benefit/purpose for people wanting their ride validated?

It doesn't matter - people want it, and it's one of AuK's core activities.

Are you sure you're in the right club?

[LMT]

Honest question. What's the tangible benefit/purpose for people wanting their ride validated?

It doesn't matter - people want it, and it's one of AuK's core activities.

Are you sure you're in the right club?

I'm not questioning AUK or their role. I'm questioning the thinking behind people's mindset when it comes to riding a bike and the need for it to be validated.

[LittleWheelsandBig]

Wanting some recognition or validation for activities is a pretty common approach e.g. “If it isn’t on Strava, it didn’t happen!”

[Karla]

Accepting that there's some point to validation is surely the sine qua non of having an organisation in the first place?  If you just want to go out and ride your bike freestyle, there really is no point to AUK or any other governing body.

[LMT]

Recognition from who/what?

If you're comfortable with the person staring back at you when looking in the mirror, then recognition matters not n'est pas?

[Wycombewheeler]

Honest question. What's the tangible benefit/purpose for people wanting their ride validated?

I look forward to reading your proposal for shutting down Audax UK as a clearly fraudulent enterprise.

And its cousins around the world.

And almost all other sporting awards bodies.

What are you going on about it?

People can still ride their bikes, 200, 300k and beyond yet despite this people are still having ago at AUK when there is nothing stopping them going out on their bike and riding a distance. Hence me asking the question if there is any tangible benefit to getting a ride validated.

I thought it was quite clear.
1) people can do these rides and there is no benefit in validation
2) therefore audax uk serves no importance

I went out of a 100 mile ride today, in other times it would have been 200km, but it is quite clear to me that audax uk does not wish to validate rides, therefore why spend the extra 90 minutes riding on the heat?

At a time when the uk government had been actively encouraging people to holiday in the UK and to use cafes and restaurants to save peoples jobs and businesses,  audax uk still takes the position that events over 200km carry an unacceptable risk.  I'm not sure what that risk is.

Further they seem to have the opinion that we are all naughty school children who will form up into groups larger than 6 if we are not actively prevented from being on the same 200km course as each other. 

As others have said,  does auk wish to promote long distance cycling,  or does auk wish to be a body for validating pbp qualifying rides once every four years? Because the longer the mana of "you can still do these rides, there is no need for validation" is repeated the more people may come to the conclusion that rides do not need to be validated and consider what benefit they get from audax uk.

I would like to complete an sr series this year, I think I'd rather do it sooner than later, but the potential for valudation of rides in september incentives later, however without that riding on days with more daylight would be preferable.

So in the context of there being no reason to validate rides and we should all just enjoy riding without validation and stop complaining. Is the purpose of continued membership solely not to lose a place on lel, whenever it happens?

It has been clear for some time now that conditions in the country are not changing, ither than a few local outbreaks being identified and local precautions ramped up accordingly.

So what can we imagine being the trigger for a change in approach from the governing body?

[LMT]

Accepting that there's some point to validation is surely the sine qua non of having an organisation in the first place?  If you just want to go out and ride your bike freestyle, there really is no point to AUK or any other governing body.

Yeah there is. I'm lazy when it comes to organising a ride, so I pay an organiser a fee and then turn up and ride the event.

[Wycombewheeler]

Honest question. What's the tangible benefit/purpose for people wanting their ride validated?

It doesn't matter - people want it, and it's one of AuK's core activities.

Are you sure you're in the right club?

I'm not questioning AUK or their role. I'm questioning the thinking behind people's mindset when it comes to riding a bike and the need for it to be validated.

You keep saying validation is of negligible benefit, but then state you are not questioning the role of AUK. What is the role if not to promote and recognise the completion of long distance bike rides.

[Wycombewheeler]

Honest question. What's the tangible benefit/purpose for people wanting their ride validated?

Being 4 years into a brevet 250 attempt i'd rather not throw 4 years away and start again from zero, or have a completely unreasonable target of points in year 6.

Others in this place have suggested they would be unhappy with leniency on time frames suggesting either the pandemic should have been planned for, or that it should be considered as similar to bad weather in the winter.

[LMT]

Honest question. What's the tangible benefit/purpose for people wanting their ride validated?

It doesn't matter - people want it, and it's one of AuK's core activities.

Are you sure you're in the right club?

I'm not questioning AUK or their role. I'm questioning the thinking behind people's mindset when it comes to riding a bike and the need for it to be validated.

You keep saying validation is of negligible benefit, but then state you are not questioning the role of AUK. What is the role if not to promote and recognise the completion of long distance bike rides.

You're conflating AUK as a body which validates rides and my opinion where I ask the what the mindset is of someone in the current climate who won't go out and ride a given distance because it won't be validated.

It's important not to confuse the two issues here.

[rob]

Others in this place have suggested they would be unhappy with leniency on time frames suggesting either the pandemic should have been planned for, or that it should be considered as similar to bad weather in the winter.

There are some that have never quite got over the Winter where, due to a particularly inclement Feb, riders were given an extra chance to do a 200 and still complete RRTY.

[LMT]

Honest question. What's the tangible benefit/purpose for people wanting their ride validated?

I look forward to reading your proposal for shutting down Audax UK as a clearly fraudulent enterprise.

And its cousins around the world.

And almost all other sporting awards bodies.

What are you going on about it?

People can still ride their bikes, 200, 300k and beyond yet despite this people are still having ago at AUK when there is nothing stopping them going out on their bike and riding a distance. Hence me asking the question if there is any tangible benefit to getting a ride validated.

I thought it was quite clear.
1) people can do these rides and there is no benefit in validation
2) therefore audax uk serves no importance

I went out of a 100 mile ride today, in other times it would have been 200km, but it is quite clear to me that audax uk does not wish to validate rides, therefore why spend the extra 90 minutes riding on the heat?

At a time when the uk government had been actively encouraging people to holiday in the UK and to use cafes and restaurants to save peoples jobs and businesses,  audax uk still takes the position that events over 200km carry an unacceptable risk.  I'm not sure what that risk is.

Further they seem to have the opinion that we are all naughty school children who will form up into groups larger than 6 if we are not actively prevented from being on the same 200km course as each other. 

As others have said,  does auk wish to promote long distance cycling,  or does auk wish to be a body for validating pbp qualifying rides once every four years? Because the longer the mana of "you can still do these rides, there is no need for validation" is repeated the more people may come to the conclusion that rides do not need to be validated and consider what benefit they get from audax uk.

I would like to complete an sr series this year, I think I'd rather do it sooner than later, but the potential for valudation of rides in september incentives later, however without that riding on days with more daylight would be preferable.

So in the context of there being no reason to validate rides and we should all just enjoy riding without validation and stop complaining. Is the purpose of continued membership solely not to lose a place on lel, whenever it happens?

It has been clear for some time now that conditions in the country are not changing, ither than a few local outbreaks being identified and local precautions ramped up accordingly.

So what can we imagine being the trigger for a change in approach from the governing body?

Given that worldwide it's 19.9m cases and 732k dead I don't believe the 'trigger' that you refer to will be coming anytime soon.

I'm sure AUK want to promote long distance cycling and validating such rides but given the above stats and the fact that we are in a worldwide pandemic it's probably a ways down the list of things that are uber important right now.

And if you want to go out and ride a SR series then do it FFS. It should matter not, getting your name mentioned in some magazine or on a website.

[Lightning Phil]

Honest question. What's the tangible benefit/purpose for people wanting their ride validated?

It’s more a benefit to audax UK. The more people ride long distance without validation, the less they will care about it (validation). It may lead the situation in France where for many riders, brevets just become an activity every four years to qualify for PBP etc.

There's an expensive IT refresh to pay for that covers all of the ahem... "wanky pish"* AUK do that ACP don't, surely that approach would result in AUKs collapse...


* I hesitated to use that phrase that I've become accustomed to use for extra stuff that isn't core to the purpose, but well... it is isn't it!

I presume you mean AUK when you say approach.

There no approach involved from the riders perspective.  It’s just a simple fact of how habits and hobby’s form and also dissipate.  New hobbies will replace old hobbies if you can no longer do the old hobby in a meaningful way (for you)  for a long enough period. The gap will be filled by new activity (cycling related or not) and the gap for fitting in audax (for that rider) may not reform for some time, if at all.

An example may be that a rider kept meaning to do more touring but audax took up the time. So now they finally get round to the touring and never get back to audax. Carrying on touring with the time freed up.

[FifeingEejit]

Wanting some recognition or validation for activities is a pretty common approach e.g. “If it isn’t on Strava, it didn’t happen!”

It's a form of Gamification, the award at the end of it is encouragement to do it in the first place.

Your first ever 100 and 160km rides probably and  200km possibly rides came from a wish to see if you could ride the distance.
Once you've done it once, you've removed that game because you know you can do it.
But you'll throw more into the game to do it again, hillier? Faster? In a club group? For cake at the turn? Overnight? Able to do again after injury? Tile bagging? Going balls out to the shops to see if you can do it faster?  To collect points towards something bigger?

All little games to make you repeat the challenge.

There is no reason at all for any form of Sport if you remove the game from it.

Cycling, sailing, driving and wheel Barrow pushing would just be transport.
Arrow throwing would just be a form of War.
Football, Rugby would have no reason to exist at all.

Sent from my BKL-L09 using Tapatalk

[FifeingEejit]

People grumbling about the break in service not counting towards results are just being curmudgeons imo.

Theres been a period where no one's been able to meet the requirements for awards, it makes sense to discount that time period.

Maybe if they had their pensions recalculated to remove any leave from their servuce length...

Sent from my BKL-L09 using Tapatalk