riding non-AUK events as part of a perm

[teethgrinder]

the stats are against you TG (although I can't find an easy way of pasting the 2010 results into Excel) but numbers of riders on calendar events vastly outnumber those on perms. That doesn't make perms the bread and butter of AUK in my book

I never said permanents are the bread and butter. I just said that I think they should be. The stats tell us that they are not.

I'm not surprised  that this is true because of what I said before.

I think we need to do away with this Calendar is King and Permanents are peasants snobbery. An event is what you make it, or what an organiser makes of it.

Saying that, most of my points this season are from calendar events and I doubt I'll do enough permanents to meke up the difference. Then again, I'm only riding the special* events this year. Not the bread and butter ones.


*Elenith = A classic event
Wu'ze 400 = A Shawn Shaw event, say no more!
An El Supremo 600 and the Invicta 600 which I've fancied riding for some time. All worth the effort of travelling to.
Next is the Seething 600, which I've always wanted to ride because i heard about that event when i started Audaxing, but it was no longer running then. Mersey 24, then the Miglia Italia, which will certainly be special.
Then a few DIY/Middle road 600s for bread and butter to keep the legs turning so I don't seize up next season. They won't be special rides as such, but they will be done from home for convenience so that I keep my hand in and probably help a few others along the way.

[Martin]

on the subject of 24s; will the East Sussex one in 2011 be eligible for AUK points? I assumed so as I assumed all 24's were

still won't be riding it though...

[teethgrinder]

you've missed my point I think.

I don't think so.

Points ARE important to the people who want to make the DD into a DIY perm, it's why they want to make it into a DIY perm isn't it ?

You'd have to ask them. I expect that points are important to some of us. But I think we all have individual motives and I doubt that points are important or even relevent to some of us.

Do people really need to pay Martin, Ian, Joe, Alex etc a few quid to motivate themselves to do a long(er) bike ride ? if these organisers say 'no' will they not ride it ?

I can only speak for myself. Points chasing certainly motivated me. I could have just gone out for long rides, in theory. But I used the AUK points system as a way of getting myself out and setting myself a challenge. That was then.
This year I've ridden a permanent 600 in November to keep my hand in. Entering an event for me is my way of committing to a ride. It's very rare for me to DNS a DIY from home but there have been lots of times that I've not bothered going for a long ride that i was thinking of doing. I don't think it's just the paying money and filling in a form, allthough I think it helps. there is all of the planning and route planning that goes with it. it's a psychological build up to a ride. Like PBP, but on a smaller scale. I also invite others to join me, which is a further commitment on my part. It puts me under more pressure to be fit to complete the ride. I even promise that I'll wait for anyone who I think can finish the ride in time and do my best to help them finish. That isn't as easy as riding at your own pace and I have to make sure that I am able to do it if I need to fulfill my promise. If I fail, then I could lose integrity and future riders will think twice about riding with me.

If the DIY organiser rejects my ride on whatever grounds, I will change it until they OK it. A "No" isn't the end of the ride, it just means that the route I have given is unacceptable. If I was riding another event as part of a DIY and the organiser says "No". Then I'll have to decide which event I want to do the most. i could probably still ride a DIY to and another DIY from the event if I wanted.
Personally, I wouldn't bother trying to ride another event as a DIY. The other event in itself should be enough to get me out on my bike and I'd more than likely cycle there so I'd still be doing the ride.
But my ambitions in AUK are now the Miglia Italia, a 2nd 1000 point award (whatever it's called) my 2nd Ultra Randonneur and my 5th PBP. I have time to do other rides too, so it's not all that relevent to me, personally.

If I was points chasing, I'd not ride the other event in order to appease the DIY organiser. Points chasing for me has always been a dominant part of my life when I've engaged in it. (That's why I don't want to keep on doing it)
I can't say what is important for another indivdual. It's their dilema, or not.

[MSeries]

you've missed my point I think.

I don't think so.

Points ARE important to the people who want to make the DD into a DIY perm, it's why they want to make it into a DIY perm isn't it ?

You'd have to ask them. I expect that points are important to some of us. But I think we all have individual motives and I doubt that points are important or even relevent to some of us.

If they don't want the points, why bother with trying to make the DD into a DIY perm ? Just ride your bike

[teethgrinder]

on the subject of 24s; will the East Sussex one in 2011 be eligible for AUK points? I assumed so as I assumed all 24's were

still won't be riding it though...

If I remember correctly. (I was at the AGM when we made Mersey 24 TTs count for AUK points)
We passed the motion because the Mersey 24 was struggling for riders. We wrangled over it a bit because the Mersey 24 most definitely is a competitive event. However, we voted in favour because we thought that allthough it was a competitive event, it was still very much in the spirit of long distance cycling and we, as the Long Distance Cyclist's Association, should support a long distance cycling event and help the greater cause of cycling in general and in particular, long distance cycling.

I do believe that only the Mersey 24 counts for AUK points and that we specifically said that the Mersey 24 will count.
To be sure, we need someone with a better memory than me (Ian H? ) to give us chaoter and verse, or someone who has the minutes of the meeting or knows where it is written in AUK lore.

So, my guess is no.


And I think you should re-consider not riding.

[teethgrinder]

You'd have to ask them. I expect that points are important to some of us. But I think we all have individual motives and I doubt that points are important or even relevent to some of us.

If they don't want the points, why bother with trying to make the DD into a DIY perm ?

You'd have to ask them.

Maybe they do want the points. Maybe they don't care 

Just ride your bike

 

[Ivo]

and probably all wrapped up in my opinion that calendar events are the bread and butter of AUK, and jusdging by the 200 I rode on Saturday they need as much support as possible.

Calender events are indeed very important for all cycling federations, not only AUK. Enforcing this rule might lead to AUK's residing overseas/on holidays overseas to forsake non BRM local calender events in favour of DIY's, Hostel Darts or overseas permanents.

Ivo; I think this is a different debate; there is absolutely no rule preventing AUK members doing overseas Randonneur events and having them validated as DIY's;

what I don't know is why certain BRM events are elgible for AUK points (eg PBP, Lowlands 1200 and others (HBKH) are not.

AUK automatically recognises all BRM and RM events. HBKH isn't RM validated due to an internal German conflict. A very tiny amount of non BRM events have been validadet in the past (I got for example Trondheim-Oslo validated 5 years ago) but that's at the discretion of Neville. Since quite a numbe rof AUKs participated and will participate in HBKH there's an example set a few years back so HBKH is validated. SO no need to validate them as DIY's, I'd say even a need to extend the usual AUK rules to this.
What I am talking about are the bread and butter 200s on the continent which are often not organised along BRM lines. For example the enormous amounts of 200+ events which follow more or less the routes of the pro classics. These are interesting rides, certainly a challenge and the longer distances are all well over 200k. Since they often publish the route or enough details of it it is possible to make them into a DIY route and submit them via the usual procedures and ride them on the day of the event itelf, thus providing an extra rider for the event organiser. Nothing wrong with that I'd guess.

[Martin]

What I am talking about are the bread and butter 200s on the continent which are often not organised along BRM lines. For example the enormous amounts of 200+ events which follow more or less the routes of the pro classics. These are interesting rides, certainly a challenge and the longer distances are all well over 200k. Since they often publish the route or enough details of it it is possible to make them into a DIY route and submit them via the usual procedures and ride them on the day of the event itelf, thus providing an extra rider for the event organiser. Nothing wrong with that I'd guess.

nothing wrong with that as far as I'm concerned 

[Ian H]

If I remember correctly. (I was at the AGM when we made Mersey 24 TTs count for AUK points)
We passed the motion because the Mersey 24 was struggling for riders.

The clinching argument for the 24hr was that it was the UK qualifier for PBP before AUK came along and organised its own SR series.

[mattc]

Points ARE important to the people who want to make the DD into a DIY perm, it's why they want to make it into a DIY perm isn't it ?

You'd have to ask them. I expect that points are important to some of us. But I think we all have individual motives and I doubt that points are important or even relevent to some of us.

If they don't want the points, why bother with trying to make the DD into a DIY perm ? Just ride your bike

I think you two are arguing over semantics, but really saying much the same thing; when some people say
"ride for the points" they mean points total, SRs, RRTY, club ranking etc. Or even just seeing the ride on your own results list, so including 100s (oh, and FWC!).

Otherwise you would just set yourself a time target (which might be an AUK standard) and ride. So can we move on from this point?

[mattc]

My opinion is that there's a subtle difference between, say, the Dun Run, which is not part of a particular discipline, but just 'a bike ride', and a cycling event that is part of a different discipline with its own rules and awards structure.

Hmmm, a subtle difference indeed, my brain hurts ...

IMHO I personally draw the line at assistance; hence a sportive where you draft a lot, and get high-speed controls, and lots of backup (so you can carry less), is Not In The Spirit. Most TTs, too. (basically I would expect my average speed to be well over 15kph on these events).

Whearas most charidee rides (certainly the L-to-B, haven't done Dunwich) seem OK.

However, I'd struggle to put this in rule form, mainly cos of the huge bunches on PBP! And of course you can ride any event as a team if you want. So a personal thing, in my view.

[Manotea]

My opinion is that there's a subtle difference between, say, the Dun Run, which is not part of a particular discipline, but just 'a bike ride', and a cycling event that is part of a different discipline with its own rules and awards structure.

Hmmm, a subtle difference indeed, my brain hurts ...

IMHO I personally draw the line at assistance; hence a sportive where you draft a lot, and get high-speed controls, and lots of backup (so you can carry less), is Not In The Spirit. Most TTs, too. (basically I would expect my average speed to be well over 15kph on these events).

Whearas most charidee rides (certainly the L-to-B, haven't done Dunwich) seem OK.

However, I'd struggle to put this in rule form, mainly cos of the huge bunches on PBP! And of course you can ride any event as a team if you want. So a personal thing, in my view.

Audax (bless it) has it own peculiar rules and regs and other disciplines have theirs. Mixing the two is a lot harder than it looks.

Historically, when I've looked at building a AUK DIY around some other event its usually clear this will involve compromising that event. Either the controls/stopping points are in the wrong places or you simply don't have opportunity to stop. If you are on a time trial or sportif, are you really going to stop to collect a proof of passage? If you're riding with a group do you really want to drop off to collect a PoP? A West London-Dunwich double involves going SIGNIFICANTLY over distance with silly long cuts to make up the distance and dropping off at odd places to collect PoPs (and good luck to anybody attempting to build a 200km around the BHF London Brighton). Would the TRAT organisers be happy with any rider who wanted to make additional stops for PoPs?

Most times it simply is not practical/worth the bother, so a rider will only do this if he/she is deeply motivated for whatever reason.

This situation will change subtly with the advent of GPS DIY perms, though their impact might be mitigated by retaining the requirement for regular physical PoPs.

There are also other examples of AUK overlapping with other competitions, merit systems and insurance schemes, e.g., CTC district competitions, CTC/BC insurance being allowed for AUK events.

What I think we should avoid at all costs is placing Orgs in a position where they are required to make (seemingly arbitrary) decisions as to what is/is not permissable. The Orgs are there to validate the ride as conforming to AUK rules, its for the rider to manage the ride.

[Martin]

If I remember correctly. (I was at the AGM when we made Mersey 24 TTs count for AUK points)
We passed the motion because the Mersey 24 was struggling for riders.

The clinching argument for the 24hr was that it was the UK qualifier for PBP before AUK came along and organised its own SR series.

that's a big downer for the ESCA 24; they were rather hoping for a good AUK turnout.

[mattc]

Still time for an AGM motion?

[Oaky]

My opinion is that there's a subtle difference between, say, the Dun Run, which is not part of a particular discipline, but just 'a bike ride', and a cycling event that is part of a different discipline with its own rules and awards structure.

Hmmm, a subtle difference indeed, my brain hurts ...

IMHO I personally draw the line at assistance; hence a sportive where you draft a lot, and get high-speed controls, and lots of backup (so you can carry less), is Not In The Spirit. Most TTs, too. (basically I would expect my average speed to be well over 15kph on these events).

I've found little difference in this regard between sportives and some 200km Audaxes I've done.  I rode last year's windmill ride, for example, in a succession of fast-ish groups, and there was at least one "high speed" control / feed stop at Chrishall or thereabouts that only differed from the sportives I've done in the detail of getting a car stamped.  There were bananas and water on offer in much the same way.

I'm not sure what other sort of backup you refer to?  Are there sportives with mechanical assistance then?  I've not done any.

Do you think bag-drops should be disallowed in Audax since they allow you to carry less?

Whearas most charidee rides (certainly the L-to-B, haven't done Dunwich) seem OK.

However, I'd struggle to put this in rule form, mainly cos of the huge bunches on PBP! And of course you can ride any event as a team if you want. So a personal thing, in my view.

[Weirdy Biker]

If I remember correctly. (I was at the AGM when we made Mersey 24 TTs count for AUK points)
We passed the motion because the Mersey 24 was struggling for riders.

The clinching argument for the 24hr was that it was the UK qualifier for PBP before AUK came along and organised its own SR series.

that's a big downer for the ESCA 24; they were rather hoping for a good AUK turnout.

Martin, debating this on the forum is not going to get you where you want to be.  Write officially to the committee asking them to consider this.  The Mersey Roads establishes a precedent (not one I agree with, but there we are) that they will find difficult not to apply to other 24hr TTs (albeit they may stall into 2011, under cover of requiring a motion at the AGM) unless they disapply the provision for Mersey Roads.

[Ian H]

If I remember correctly. (I was at the AGM when we made Mersey 24 TTs count for AUK points)
We passed the motion because the Mersey 24 was struggling for riders.

The clinching argument for the 24hr was that it was the UK qualifier for PBP before AUK came along and organised its own SR series.

that's a big downer for the ESCA 24; they were rather hoping for a good AUK turnout.

Perhaps I should have said a 24hr.

7. Additional Individual Awards Points Credit
AUK members who ride and appear on the result sheet of an official 24-hour time trial road ride organised under the rules of Cycling Time Trials or any successor body, may claim 1 point for every 100 km ridden in that event to a maximum of 7 points provided the member covers a minimum distance of 360km. Subject to a claim being made by the member, such points will count towards AUK individual and club awards for the AUK season within which the 24-hour ride occurs.

[Weirdy Biker]

Game, set and match IanH 

[mattc]

I'm not sure what other sort of backup you refer to?  Are there sportives with mechanical assistance then?  I've not done any.

Do you think bag-drops should be disallowed in Audax since they allow you to carry less?

Well yes, of course some sportives have mech backup (as do some Audaxes - lots of LEL bikes were fixed by kind controllers).
I don't really see what bag-drops have to do with this particular discussion, please elaborate.

As for your other comments:
If you read my post in its entirety, what I wrote does not disagree with your reply. I think.

Matt

[Oaky]

I'm not sure what other sort of backup you refer to?  Are there sportives with mechanical assistance then?  I've not done any.

Do you think bag-drops should be disallowed in Audax since they allow you to carry less?

Well yes, of course some sportives have mech backup (as do some Audaxes - lots of LEL bikes were fixed by kind controllers).
I don't really see what bag-drops have to do with this particular discussion, please elaborate.

From the your original post:-

IMHO I personally draw the line at assistance; hence a sportive where you...[get]...lots of backup (so you can carry less), is Not In The Spirit....

A bag drop (at an intermediate control as on LEL, for example) also allows you to carry less.  I read your post as suggesting that things that allow you to carry less are apparently "Not In The Spirit".  Perhaps I've misinterpreted.

As for your other comments:
If you read my post in its entirety, what I wrote does not disagree with your reply. I think.

Matt

Indeed.

[Manotea]

Where does it all end, eh?

Is being young, slim and fit 'in the spirit'?

Should AUKs bikes be handicapped to acheive a standard rider/bike weight by means of lead weights, so as to level the playing field'?

Hmmm?

[mattc]

IMHO I personally draw the line at assistance; hence a sportive where you...[get]...lots of backup (so you can carry less), is Not In The Spirit....

A bag drop (at an intermediate control as on LEL, for example) also allows you to carry less.  I read your post as suggesting that things that allow you to carry less are apparently "Not In The Spirit".  Perhaps I've misinterpreted.

So: which 3-5 day sportive are you comparing LEL with, which AUKs might try to to register as a DIY?

It should be pretty obvious that I mean MORE assistance than on an Audax, where one does, in general, get SOME assistance*. But as I made clear, it's not a hard line e.g. PBP.

I think that is pretty much what I said in my post, if one reads it as a whole.

*In fact the Org Guidelines insist on it!

[LittleWheelsandBig]

Wrong approach.  You can have as much assistance on a brevet as you like (many Europeans have their motorhome at each PBP control) but only at controls.

Getting assistance from people taking part in your brevet (e.g. drafting at PBP) is fine but you aren't supposed to draft a cyclist who isn't taking part in your brevet.  So you can't draft the other 'cyclosportive riders' who aren't carrying a DIY perm card that matches yours.

[mattc]

Yes LWAB, that seems fair.
(although only _you_ will know if you have drafted any of the 'normal' cyclosportive riders - hence a rule is near impossible to draft and enforce. Like I said, it's more of a personal stance).

[kcass]

Getting assistance from people taking part in your brevet (e.g. drafting at PBP) is fine but you aren't supposed to draft a cyclist who isn't taking part in your brevet.  So you can't draft the other 'cyclosportive riders' who aren't carrying a DIY perm card that matches yours.

Is this a rule for Perms too or just DIY Perms. I'm just curious  as I was told categorically that I couldn't do the Marmotte as a Perm. No mention of 'as long as you don't draft'.