Audax time limits

[Martin]

think of the poor organiser; I can only just manage to drive to the first checkpoint before the racing snakes with a 25kph maximum (on a 100k)

[Karla]

I did my first four audaxes on
 

It wasn't so bent at the time, that happened half an hour after my fourth audax.  It didn't look so bad before (!) though for my very first audax, it had flat bars. 

Could someone explain to me what the deal is with the 14.3kph lower limit?  BRM limits are 15kph, so were the BR limits set as 14.3 for the sake of making things a bit easier, or was there some other reason?  If so, would people now consider raising the BR limit to 15kph, since after all it's the ACP limit and it would lessen confusion.  It is also true that alu, carbon and Ti bikes weren't around when randonneuring was invented.

[Greenbank]

Could someone explain to me what the deal is with the 14.3kph lower limit?  BRM limits are 15kph, so were the BR limits set as 14.3 for the sake of making things a bit easier, or was there some other reason?

It's not even that simple. BRM 200s and 400s are actually 14.814kph. The other BRM distances (300 and 600) are 15kph. Above 600km you get the easier minimum average speeds (13.33kph, 12kph, 10kph and finally 8.33kph).

AUK - RM Guidelines 3

"
3. Details of modifications applicable to Brevets de Randonneurs Mondiaux

(i) Events are run at a minimum overall speed of 15kph and a maximum overall speed of up to 30kph, with the following two exceptions. The maximum time allowance for the 200km shall be 13 hours 30 minutes, and for the 400km shall be 27 hours.
"

200/13.5 = 14.814814814....

A 14.3kph limit means a 200km ride is near enough 14 hours (13 hours 59 minutes and 9.65 seconds).

[MSeries]

Most other sports have moved on .

Can you give us an example of how you consider 'most other sports have moved on'. I can think of loads of other sports where technology has changed their equipment, like cycling, but few where the rules have changed other than to ban or limit the use of the newer technologies in order to make it fairer for all competitors or less dull for the spectator. Since Audax has neither competitors nor spectators then I can't see any point in changing rules for those reasons. Enlighten me.

[Martin]

It's not even that simple. BRM 200s and 400s are actually 14.814kph. The other BRM distances (300 and 600) are 15kph. Above 600km you get the easier minimum average speeds (13.33kph, 12kph, 10kph and finally 8.33kph

is this where the urban myth about being able to do the Raid Pyrennean in about 5 days and still qualify comes from?

going back to the OP; my little hilly 100 usually attracts a few racing snakes; when I took it over I think 4.10 for 108km was the record. A clubmate did it a couple of years ago;missed all the controls (apart from a 5 min tea / sandwich) didn't bother with infos and got told off the whole time by another rider (who hadn't even entered FFS) for "not taking a turn on the front" to finish in about 3.58, so still inside a 30kph max.

I don't have any problem with riders doing this (as long as the controllers know they have passed through which they did) but is this what we as an organisation really want to promote?

[MSeries]

My fastest overall average for any randonee was on a 1999 steel racing bike. My fastest 200 on a mid 80s tourer converted to Fixed. I've never ridden a titanium or carbon fibre bike, only done two 200s on aluminium bikes and don't remember the times. Actually for me  better times are achieved by spending less time off the bike, it's not about the bike at all.

[Greenbank]

It's not even that simple. BRM 200s and 400s are actually 14.814kph. The other BRM distances (300 and 600) are 15kph. Above 600km you get the easier minimum average speeds (13.33kph, 12kph, 10kph and finally 8.33kph

is this where the urban myth about being able to do the Raid Pyrennean in about 5 days and still qualify comes from?

No. 8.33kph is for rides over 2499km as the requirement has dropped to just 200km a day (200/24 = 8.33). I'm not sure if LRM go up to these distances, their website is utter utter shite. These are the AUK speeds which are roughly in step up to 12kph at least...

The 'official' Raid Pyrenean - if you want to ride the traverse in line with the guidelines laid out in the 1950s by the Cyclo Club Bearnaise (i.e. you must complete the ride between 1st June - 30th September, within a 100-hour time-frame and have a pass-book (known as a 'carnet') stamped by e.g. cafe owners at key points along the ride)

So it's four and a half days for 710km. If it were an Audax then it would be 13.3kph = 53 hours. It might have honourary Audax status as it is a classic ride though.

[Wowbagger]

The time limits are one of the reasons that I can't be bothered with audax any more. Admittedly, they are not the major one: travelling a long way by train or car to get to the start and arriving home horribly late afterwards are more important.

But I've always found the times to be an added unwelcome pressure. If I'm going to go out of my way to go for a bike ride, it will be for the scenery and the company. No-one who wants to complete the audax wants to go at my pace because I'm too slow for them and if I'm always busting a gut to keep my overall average over 15kph then I don't get the chance to relax and enjoy the ride, or spend time in cafés and pubs.

In addition, all too many audaxes have used roads which makes me wonder why anyone would ever want to ride for pleasure along them.

[Martin]

thank you for that post Wow; all part of the broad spectrum of opinions this board is all about.

I think you will find you are in the minority in your opinion about the roads AUK events use; organisers go to great lengths to find ideal roads which offer a compromise between good riding conditions and pleasant traffic levels.  And the riders who come back year after year (and of course the new riders) to ride those events vindicate this.

[Justin(e)]

I'm with Martin on this one.

I understand the frustration of being at the back of the field, and there is no denying that a time limit will ostracise some riders. 

I like the idea of being challenged by time limits.  It floats my boat.

[mattc]

I think you will find you are in the minority in your opinion about the roads AUK events use; organisers go to great lengths to find ideal roads which offer a compromise between good riding conditions and pleasant traffic levels.  And the riders who come back year after year (and of course the new riders) to ride those events vindicate this.

You can't deny that most rides use a couple of miles of A-road that you COULD avoid if you were touring.

(e.g. the Midhurst 600 took us down the A49(?) to Ross. Not very far on a ride of 390 beautiful miles, but we COULD have avoided it on a different kind of event.)

But it's a very minor criticism of otherwise brilliant routes.

[jogler]

I agree with the "if it's not broke,don't fix it" comment.
AIUI,these time limits have been acceptable since AUK was formed:mid 1970's?That's 30 odd years of a level playing field using min. & max. parameters which are providing a speed spectrum that individuals can choose to use.
The minimum speed is interesting to me.I did 80km last Sunday at an average of 16kmh.:just within the minimum speed limit.This means that all my audax rides are likely to require the maximum time allowed per ride at a comfortable pace.If the minimum speed is raised I may lose interest in something that becomes more of a struggle.
With regard to technology having a significant impact:I think not.I am not noticeably slower on a 1986 all steel Longstaff than on a 2006 Trek  all carbon machine.The weight difference between the two is hardly worth considering particularly as this rider is at least 15kg overweight.In fact if I had acquired my Longstaff sooner I would not have parted with loadsa£ on the Trek which I bought before the unexpected circumstances arose which led to the  Longstaff (two actually) being acquired.

[salar55]

Ok  Think i have lost this one on time limits.  The other way of looking at it is the use of till receipts as opposed to a cafe stop.  Miss the good rests at a cafe / control then into the fire again wondering if the group will all make it to the next stop , sometimes you have a hard time and drop off the back , but who cares and you may get back on later in the day.    Better to push yourself and rest then you get fitter and faster.     

[MercuryKev]

...or you could view audax rides as a fun, relaxing thing to do.

[MSeries]

...or you could view audax rides as a fun, relaxing thing to do.

The way they regulations are allows for both. Riders can do either on the same ride and still get the same spoils. Everybody wins. Perfect.

[slowfen]

Just a thought , today all our cycling gear is better well lets say 90% better .  Bikes are lighter , wheels and gears reliable  . Cycling kit that work in all weather, shorts you can live in . First audax done in the early eighties was a challenge no 100 kms then , touring bikes of the day were heavy and slow to pick up speed.  No gels or sports drinks then only a mars bar and coke if needed .  Most other sports have moved on . Why not revise the time limits on some events and see what happens.

Isn't it called a sportive??

When I do an audax, it is a way of seeing other parts the country I would not normally cycle in and hence the scenery in all its forms is part of the enjoyment. By making the time allowed less, I would probably stop doing them, they would be less enjoyable.

[teethgrinder]

The time limits are one of the reasons that I can't be bothered with audax any more. Admittedly, they are not the major one: travelling a long way by train or car to get to the start and arriving home horribly late afterwards are more important.

But I've always found the times to be an added unwelcome pressure. If I'm going to go out of my way to go for a bike ride, it will be for the scenery and the company. No-one who wants to complete the audax wants to go at my pace because I'm too slow for them and if I'm always busting a gut to keep my overall average over 15kph then I don't get the chance to relax and enjoy the ride, or spend time in cafés and pubs.

In addition, all too many audaxes have used roads which makes me wonder why anyone would ever want to ride for pleasure along them.

I don't think that Audax rides are for you anyway. You're more of a plodding leisure rider who likes to explore in detail.
I, on the other hand, was probably destined for Audax rides. As a young lad when all the other kids wanted to be the fastest on their bike I wanted to go the furthest. When I started doing 100 mile rides, I always had the pressure. I didn't just want to do miles, I wanted to go somewhere. As far away as I could. This meant a direct route along main roads and I also had a time limit because I had to get home and have my bike in the garage before my parents got home from work or I was in trouble and would have had my bike locked in the garage for the rest of the school holiday. Riding fast can also change the charecteristics of a road. Busy roads seem less busy at higher speeds where cars pass you less frequently and not as fast. They are also easier to ride at higher speeds. Lanes often need a lot of braking, whereas main roads very rarely do.
Getting home exhausted in the small hours and with a handfull of hours before I have to be at work is hard. But when you have several hundred miles of good riding resonating in your thoughts and a feeling of elation from achieving a hard ride, then it's nto so bad. Plus you can eat multiple portions of anything you like to replace all the fat you burned.

The way they regulations are allows for both. Riders can do either on the same ride and still get the same spoils. Everybody wins. Perfect.

A very fast rider can't really test themselves on an Audax because of the minimum time limit. Wowbagger can't relax too much because of the maximum time limit.

[drossall]

Surely it's easy? If it can be shown that no-one ever finishes in the last 20% of the time limit, the limits can be upped. If not, someone is going to be excluded if limits are changed.

Since I can always set myself any target time I like up to the minimum, and it doesn't affect me if others take longer, why would I want to exclude anyone else?

Actually, of course, it's me who would be excluded

[Chris S]

Actually, of course, it's me who would be excluded

Although, your cause would have been well served with some less explosive tyres this summer   .

[mattc]

A very fast rider can't really test themselves on an Audax because of the minimum time limit.

Folks might get to some early controls ...err... early, but 30kph is flippin quick for 200k on all but the flattest routes. Even Mr Wiggins would struggle with a decent sized saddle-bag, mudguards, riding without a bunch, etc. And if it was too easy for him, he could just get a cheaper/heavier bike!

And anyway, they don't HAVE to get their card stamped.

[drossall]

That was just adding to the challenge...

Very annoying actually, I'm not normally that far up the field, and indeed I wasn't any more after a few loud bangs.

It was only the other evening that I managed to bring myself to go through the large pile of tubes, consisting I think of all the spares carried by the entire field plus the extras I bought in Marlow on the way back, and work out which two were the reparable ones.

I'll be back...

[3peaker]

This is all about ‘Horses for Courses’

I started Audax back in ’82, when I would be close to min times.  They were (and still are) ideal training for long distance TTs and made the training miles pass in an enjoyable way.  My 1st SR in ’82 was rewarded with 421miles in the Nat 24hr.  Now at the other end of the time frame, I enjoy ‘finishing in time’, no matter what the time.  Also, I love maps and exploring, so the benefit of Organisers’ efforts to research routes and put together a days riding go well with what pleases me.  I am also into photography, so normally carry a compact to record riders or scenes, another bonus. 

Of course, as I slow (dratted age thing), then my attitude has changed.  But what Audax has going for it should be appreciated for what it is.  It is by choice after all and we have a great international organisation to back it up.  I have done the TT-scene and the Sportif thing and a bit of CTC.  I am also a Club Coach, so feel I have seen a lot of cycling behind me to know where I want to go.  I no longer criticise fellow cyclists; it is more an appreciation of their Journey and how the Spokes all fit into the Hub.

SteveP

[Greenbank]

The fast bunch on LEL were held back by the 30kph limit. They got to Thorne (320km) an hour before it officially opened but could use that time to rest and eat.

That section may have been flat and with a tailwind, but they were also (I haven't checked the timings spreadsheet) at Dalkeith (710km) within 24 hours, which means they got through the night, and hilly Cumbrian/Scottish bits and maintained 30kph average.

[Chris S]

Audax is a kind of bike riding that sits between:

1. The Racers (Those who were at the head of the field on LEL)
2. The Tourers (Those who like to ride bikes for the travel experience - such as Wowbagger)

For group (1), Audax limits are too low, and they end up waiting for controls to open, and generally wonder what all the fuss is about. Group (2) the Audax limits are too high and they end up spoiling their ride experience in order to keep up with the required pace.

As other's have said. Horses for Courses, or you put aside your ride requirements, and ride to the audax requirements instead.

[Ivo]

I usually cater my events for the slower riders. A few fast ones do participate though. None of them bothers with me still being out in the hills doing the secret control when they return. At my 600 one rider even arrived before the pub opened. He was aware of that, got his card stamped in another pub and just slid it under the door. No complaints by him. The slow riders are very glad that there's still someone waiting at the finish.