COVID19 and Audax UK

[Greenbank]

AUK's role in this is not something that can be handled by a disclaimer.

• People are being asked to minimise their time outside.
• Exercise is an exception to this, yes
• But, by continuing to offer validation for rides, AUK is effectively encouraging some people to do things that they wouldn't normally do.

If you don't suspend validation and consequently things like SRs and RRTY then some people are going to feel pressured into going out and doing a ride that they didn't want to do before, because they don't want to lose their X year streak, or disappear further down or off some leaderboard on a non-competitive cycling website.

[Jaded]

If validation and points-led competitions are not suspended, then AUK is definitely encouraging behaviour that could be against lock-down rules.

If you want to go for a long ride, take a personal decision and choose whether to go for one. If you need AUK validation to get you out of the door, then perhaps have a look at your motivations...

[Philip Whiteman]

Wouldn't it be time to remove those rude users as well those rude posts?

Quite!

When observing some of the posters on YACF, mainly by an obnoxious but vocal minority, it is easy to come to the conclusion that audax is the 'nasty sport'.  Quite frankly, I don't want any of the Beacon RCC audaxes tarnished with that reputation so the obnoxious individuals who post on this board are warned to stay away. Otherwise they will find their entry fee return promptly. Our events are populated friendly people who are courteous to others and I intend to keep it that way.

As for lockdown, we will be running one of the first events post lockdown on 5th December.  Salt and Cotswold starts from Droitwich and x'rated.  Friendly people are welcome to enter. It is not for people who are hell bent on making audax the nasty sport.

[Davef]

AUK's role in this is not something that can be handled by a disclaimer.

• People are being asked to minimise their time outside.
• Exercise is an exception to this, yes
• But, by continuing to offer validation for rides, AUK is effectively encouraging some people to do things that they wouldn't normally do.

If you don't suspend validation and consequently things like SRs and RRTY then some people are going to feel pressured into going out and doing a ride that they didn't want to do before, because they don't want to lose their X year streak, or disappear further down or off some leaderboard on a non-competitive cycling website.

I don’t understand your argument

People are being asked to minimise time outside
Exercise is is an exception to this
Therefore encouraging people to exercise outside is wrong ?

Only shops selling essentials can stay open
Selling online is an exception to this
Therefore encouraging people to shop online for nonessentials is wrong ?

[Jaded]

AUK's role in this is not something that can be handled by a disclaimer.

• People are being asked to minimise their time outside.
• Exercise is an exception to this, yes
• But, by continuing to offer validation for rides, AUK is effectively encouraging some people to do things that they wouldn't normally do.

If you don't suspend validation and consequently things like SRs and RRTY then some people are going to feel pressured into going out and doing a ride that they didn't want to do before, because they don't want to lose their X year streak, or disappear further down or off some leaderboard on a non-competitive cycling website.

I don’t understand your argument

People are being asked to minimise time outside
Exercise is is an exception to this
Therefore encouraging people to exercise outside is wrong ?

Only shops selling essentials can stay open
Selling online is an exception to this
Therefore encouraging people to shop online for nonessentials is wrong ?

I think he is saying that exercise is not wrong.

But that continuing with an artificial (and unnecessary in a lockdown) points-based 'competition' that puts pressure on those that do not wish to or cannot go out in this way is wrong.

[iroiromono]

This thread is coming across as far too English-centric.

 When other home countries were under lockdowns there were not calls to suspend validations.

L1 and L2 areas of Scotland have no restrictions in place which would prohibit randonneuring and I think Audax should be encouraged in areas where it is safe to do so.

[Jaded]

Iy's a good point, in a situation where there were paid office staff to check and validate that would make sense.

[citoyen]

AUK cannot guarantee a brevet will be carried out following the rules and guidelines of a national lockdown, so staying local for instance, avoiding retail outlets in other areas etc.
If they can't guarantee that, then they can't cover the activity and risk being in a liable position...

I'm broadly sympathetic to this argument, but I would counter it by pointing out that there's already a large amount of trust involved in running audax events in normal circumstances - AUK is unable to guarantee that riders will follow the normal rules about riding on public roads during events, eg things like jumping traffic lights, using lights after dark etc etc etc. [ETA: reading back through the thread, I see Davef has already made exactly the same point!]

You can enforce the rules up to a point, but beyond that you just have to trust riders to be able to make their own decisions and behave as law-abiding citizens.

On the question of liability, is there any precedent for AUK being held liable for misdemeanours committed by riders on any of its events?

[citoyen]

by continuing to offer validation for rides, AUK is effectively encouraging some people to do things that they wouldn't normally do.

I thought it was more a case of enabling people who do normally do this kind of thing to continue doing it.

I'd be surprised if there were many newbies taking up audax for the first time during lockdown.

[Davef]

AUK's role in this is not something that can be handled by a disclaimer.

• People are being asked to minimise their time outside.
• Exercise is an exception to this, yes
• But, by continuing to offer validation for rides, AUK is effectively encouraging some people to do things that they wouldn't normally do.

If you don't suspend validation and consequently things like SRs and RRTY then some people are going to feel pressured into going out and doing a ride that they didn't want to do before, because they don't want to lose their X year streak, or disappear further down or off some leaderboard on a non-competitive cycling website.

I don’t understand your argument

People are being asked to minimise time outside
Exercise is is an exception to this
Therefore encouraging people to exercise outside is wrong ?

Only shops selling essentials can stay open
Selling online is an exception to this
Therefore encouraging people to shop online for nonessentials is wrong ?

I think he is saying that exercise is not wrong.

But that continuing with an artificial (and unnecessary in a lockdown) points-based 'competition' that puts pressure on those that do not wish to or cannot go out in this way is wrong.

Park run are doing “not a park run” which is a validation of 5km runs to encourage people to unnecessarily go running during lockdown. My concern is that by suspending validation of rides it is giving the impression that going on long cycle rides is to be discouraged during lockdown. During the original lockdown at the start when there were indications that exercise should be limited in duration I was doing 40-50km rides every day - around 200-300km per week. When the duration hints were removed and we were told exercise was unlimited in duration I started doing 200km rides once a week.

[Geriatricdolan]

AUK cannot guarantee a brevet will be carried out following the rules and guidelines of a national lockdown, so staying local for instance, avoiding retail outlets in other areas etc.
If they can't guarantee that, then they can't cover the activity and risk being in a liable position...

I'm broadly sympathetic to this argument, but I would counter it by pointing out that there's already a large amount of trust involved in running audax events in normal circumstances - AUK is unable to guarantee that riders will follow the normal rules about riding on public roads during events, eg things like jumping traffic lights, using lights after dark etc etc etc. [ETA: reading back through the thread, I see Davef has already made exactly the same point!]

You can enforce the rules up to a point, but beyond that you just have to trust riders to be able to make their own decisions and behave as law-abiding citizens.

On the question of liability, is there any precedent for AUK being held liable for misdemeanours committed by riders on any of its events?

The solution to RLJ is simple... don't do it. What is your solution to "stay local" in a 200 km brevet?

[LittleWheelsandBig]

Points-led AUK competitions have already been suspended, many months ago. There will be no trophies for getting the most points. Suspending validations now (or not) has no bearing on that.

[Jaded]

Points-led AUK competitions have already been suspended, many months ago. There will be no trophies for getting the most points. Suspending validations now (or not) has no bearing on that.

Neatly emphasising the point.

There's no point in collecting points apart from personal, so there's no need for any National body to validate them. Collect them in your heads.

[citoyen]

The solution to RLJ is simple... don't do it. What is your solution to "stay local" in a 200 km brevet?

Simple... do it.

It's no more or less enforceable than any other rules that riders are expected to follow.

[Jaded]

AUK's role in this is not something that can be handled by a disclaimer.

• People are being asked to minimise their time outside.
• Exercise is an exception to this, yes
• But, by continuing to offer validation for rides, AUK is effectively encouraging some people to do things that they wouldn't normally do.

If you don't suspend validation and consequently things like SRs and RRTY then some people are going to feel pressured into going out and doing a ride that they didn't want to do before, because they don't want to lose their X year streak, or disappear further down or off some leaderboard on a non-competitive cycling website.

I don’t understand your argument

People are being asked to minimise time outside
Exercise is is an exception to this
Therefore encouraging people to exercise outside is wrong ?

Only shops selling essentials can stay open
Selling online is an exception to this
Therefore encouraging people to shop online for nonessentials is wrong ?

I think he is saying that exercise is not wrong.

But that continuing with an artificial (and unnecessary in a lockdown) points-based 'competition' that puts pressure on those that do not wish to or cannot go out in this way is wrong.

Park run are doing “not a park run” which is a validation of 5km runs to encourage people to unnecessarily go running during lockdown. My concern is that by suspending validation of rides it is giving the impression that going on long cycle rides is to be discouraged during lockdown. During the original lockdown at the start when there were indications that exercise should be limited in duration I was doing 40-50km rides every day - around 200-300km per week. When the duration hints were removed and we were told exercise was unlimited in duration I started doing 200km rides once a week.

Parkrun: 5km 15 - 60 minutes. No equipment.
Audax: Minimum 200km. Up to 12 hours, more for longer distances. Cycle capable of not having a mechanical over distance.

Not comparable.

Cycle Ride: Do it as you personally see fit...

[LittleWheelsandBig]

Points-led AUK competitions have already been suspended, many months ago. There will be no trophies for getting the most points. Suspending validations now (or not) has no bearing on that.

Neatly emphasising the point.

There's no point in collecting points apart from personal, so there's no need for any National body to validate them. Collect them in your heads.

Missing the point entirely, I see.

People would like validated brevets (which might be 50km, 100km or longer) for reasons that have nothing to do with AUK competitions. Don’t use collecting points for competitions (which don’t currently exist) as a reason to stop validations.

[Jaded]

Points-led AUK competitions have already been suspended, many months ago. There will be no trophies for getting the most points. Suspending validations now (or not) has no bearing on that.

Neatly emphasising the point.

There's no point in collecting points apart from personal, so there's no need for any National body to validate them. Collect them in your heads.

Missing the point entirely, I see.

People would like validated brevets (which might be 50km, 100km or longer) for reasons that have nothing to do with AUK competitions. Don’t use collecting points for competitions (which don’t currently exist) as a reason to stop validations.

Just ride. No need for Validations.

[grams]

I’d love to know what these people who think arbitrary validations don’t matter are doing hanging round the audax forum.

[Karla]

AUK cannot guarantee a brevet will be carried out following the rules and guidelines of a national lockdown, so staying local for instance, avoiding retail outlets in other areas etc.

They've never been able to guarantee that.  Any argument you make that is predicated on that, is false.  You are an adult, what you do out on a bike ride is your own responsibility.

I might murder someone while out on an audax just to make this point more forcefully.

If they can't guarantee that, then they can't cover the activity and risk being in a liable position...

Rule 1 for life: if anyone raises insurance liability to try to justify a restrictive argument that they've already dug in on, they're talking rubbish, don't have a clue what their insurance contract says and are idly speculating. 

I've never known this rule to fail.

[Davef]

AUK's role in this is not something that can be handled by a disclaimer.

• People are being asked to minimise their time outside.
• Exercise is an exception to this, yes
• But, by continuing to offer validation for rides, AUK is effectively encouraging some people to do things that they wouldn't normally do.

If you don't suspend validation and consequently things like SRs and RRTY then some people are going to feel pressured into going out and doing a ride that they didn't want to do before, because they don't want to lose their X year streak, or disappear further down or off some leaderboard on a non-competitive cycling website.

I don’t understand your argument

People are being asked to minimise time outside
Exercise is is an exception to this
Therefore encouraging people to exercise outside is wrong ?

Only shops selling essentials can stay open
Selling online is an exception to this
Therefore encouraging people to shop online for nonessentials is wrong ?

I think he is saying that exercise is not wrong.

But that continuing with an artificial (and unnecessary in a lockdown) points-based 'competition' that puts pressure on those that do not wish to or cannot go out in this way is wrong.

Park run are doing “not a park run” which is a validation of 5km runs to encourage people to unnecessarily go running during lockdown. My concern is that by suspending validation of rides it is giving the impression that going on long cycle rides is to be discouraged during lockdown. During the original lockdown at the start when there were indications that exercise should be limited in duration I was doing 40-50km rides every day - around 200-300km per week. When the duration hints were removed and we were told exercise was unlimited in duration I started doing 200km rides once a week.

Parkrun: 5km 15 - 60 minutes. No equipment.
Audax: Minimum 200km. Up to 12 hours, more for longer distances. Cycle capable of not having a mechanical over distance.

Not comparable.

Cycle Ride: Do it as you personally see fit...

The only time I have needed rescuing recently was a mechanical failure in my right achilles when running.

[FifeingEejit]

What's amusing, is this is the same arguments rehashed when brous prematurely lifted England's lockdown and the same people were screaming that they must be allowed to ride.

I don't remember seeing any Welsh riders screaming that AUK must now stop all Validations because they were locked down.
Or Manchester, Liverpool etc. riders.

But now it's all of little insignificant 1/4 of UK England, all hell breaks loose.

Sent from my BKL-L09 using Tapatalk

[rob]

I’d love to know what these people who think arbitrary validations don’t matter are doing hanging round the audax forum.

Indeed.   Some of the most vociferous opinions are coming from people that don't take part in AUK events.

Do I hang around running forums telling people not to go for long runs ?   No.

[Jaded]

I’d love to know what these people who think arbitrary validations don’t matter are doing hanging round the audax forum.

Having just had a look at the Audax Forum, I can't see much activity there. Who are these people?

[Ajax Bay]

I’d love to know what these people who think arbitrary validations don’t matter are doing hanging round the audax forum.

Having just had a look at the Audax Forum, I can't see much activity there. Who are these people?

@grams means this sub-forum @Jaded

[Karla]

I'm looking forward to riding this weekend's 200, whether as a calendar, a DIY or just a route.  Then there's a 300 next month.  It's almost tempting to do a complete SR of non-events.