Reusing a perm brevet card after a DNF

[teethgrinder]

If you DNF then you have done the ride and failed.  I don't see why, in those circumstances, it would be considered reasonble to re-enter without paying the necessary fee.

Well, you've either done the ride, or failed to do the ride.
The fee has allready been paid, why should you have to pay twice? You're paying for a piece of card and someone to say yay or nay. Possibly a route sheet too. If the card is sent and the bod says nay, then I agree, you should have to pay again now that your card and validation is spent.

Isn't failure a consequence in itself?
And shouldn't we be encouraging perserverence?

Either way, a few quid on an event is small beer. If someone really wants a go, I doubt they'd balk at paying a few quid.
If the organiser doesn't need to charge for another go and it makes life easier or the same, it just seems a bit petty unless AUK needs the money. After all, it is all about encouraging long distance cycling.

Is the parallel not with a calendar event, where you pay for entry and the cost covers all ? If you DNS you can't ride it again the next year without re-entering.

Yes, that sounds fair. But I believe that some event organisers have permitted riders to use calendar event brevet cards for a permenent version of the same ride.

I'm not sure where the idea that you are "buying validations alone" comes from...

Then what exactly are you buying?
There's the card and maybe a routesheet as well.
Insurance?
Can't think of anything else that would cost money.

[Hummers]

Yes, there is at least one organiser who if you DNF your perm will not validate the retry i.e. you will need to re-enter. I know this because I DNFd one of them and received a certificate of non-completion which I cherish as much as the cloth badge for eventually completing it. .

H

[MSeries]

Yes, there is at least one organiser who if you DNF your perm will not validate the retry i.e. you will need to re-enter. I know this because I DNFd one of them and received a certificate of non-completion which I cherish as much as the cloth badge for eventually completing it. .

H

so let me get this straight

you said you were riding on say May 25th

on May 26th he asked if you had finished on time etc

you said no

he said tough shit mate, I've got your money you've got nil points ?

That's encouraging isn't it.

[teethgrinder]

the perm rules clearly state that you should fill in the details on the card when you start.

On the day, write the date in your brevet card and find a suitable start control for your ride

No way of course that the organiser can check this happens but if you DNF you have used up that card (or "validation" as I now call my e-brevets as there is no brevet)

Not if you use reciepts as most people do.

The details would be the details of the ride. If it says , "On the day, write the date...etc" then there's no reason you can't do this at the end of the day. You can always cross the date out and put in another, it will most likely be backed up with a reciept anyway.

[teethgrinder]

Yes, there is at least one organiser who if you DNF your perm will not validate the retry i.e. you will need to re-enter. I know this because I DNFd one of them and received a certificate of non-completion which I cherish as much as the cloth badge for eventually completing it. .

H

so let me get this straight

you said you were riding on say May 25th

on May 26th he asked if you had finished on time etc

you said no

he said tough shit mate, I've got your money you've got nil points ?

That's encouraging isn't it.

I know this organiser. He insists on rules being followed to the letter. His events had an excellent and also bad reputation and were/are an aquired taste, but there was a hard core of devotees and his events are a part of AUK folklore.
I wouldn't blame an organiser. AUK haven't made a clear ruling, hence this thread.

[Martin]

but if you've follwed the rules you've written the date in (or emailed you entry in the event of an electronic entry) so if you DNF you've used that card?

maybe we need to cut to the chase and have a Kangaroo Court a la I'm a Celebrity; in the absence of any hard and fast rules from the AUK website, and as it's a long time until the AGM; just put these queries up on YACF with a vote and go with the majority...

[MSeries]

but if you've follwed the rules you've written the date in (or emailed you entry in the event of an electronic entry) so if you DNF you've used that card?

maybe we need to cut to the chase and have a Kangaroo Court a la I'm a Celebrity; in the absence of any hard and fast rules from the AUK website, and as it's a long time until the AGM; just put these queries up on YACF with a vote and go with the majority...

or jsut shut up and carry on as we are.  That wasn't directed particularly at you Zoom BTW. We all are using the system as it is right now, I really don't understand why it's being stirred up.

[Martin]

 no prob 

I think the reason it was drug up was that with some orgs you send off your entry then send it back for validation having taken however many attempts (usually 1) and nobody's the wiser; whereas with others you need to specify a date

[MSeries]

is that so ? MSeries shakes head in disbelief and is upset that he continues to be surprised by cyclists.

[3peaker]

I would like to think that riders do my routes for the quality of the route and the support I provide to them. Solo Perms can be pretty lonely rides. The rider will receive his Card with whatever fumbles/re-writes/starts.  I register a completed Brevet ride and do not need to swell my bank account by charging 2 or 3 times to match 2 or 3 starts.  The website records will show the completed ride. The card fee I pay includes Permanent Sec and website support for Cards I validate.  The difference between that fee and what I charge the rider covers my Admin efforts to assist a (finally?) successful ride.  We cannot police much of the Perm system; we even assume we ride our bikes/trikes, rather than drive round.  Yes, out come the perennial ‘Trust’, ‘Honesty’ ‘You only cheat yourself’ arguments. But we DO have a ‘Proof of Ride’ system based on a broad respect for the privilege offered by our 'Cycling' Club.

[teethgrinder]

but if you've follwed the rules you've written the date in (or emailed you entry in the event of an electronic entry) so if you DNF you've used that card?

That's really what we're trying to find out.
I think it needs to be done at an AGM with people present that know the ins and outs. I think it does need to be done, especially now that we're going digital.
I'm with Nesbit, just get on with what we have for now, it's worked well enough for decades, so it should see us till the end of the season.
It doesn't matter much what YACF thinks, it's what AUK say.

[L CC]

Is the parallel not with a calendar event, where you pay for entry and the cost covers all ? If you DNS you can't ride it again the next year without re-entering.

Welllllll....

anecdatally, if you inform the organiser in good time that for Good Reason you wont be able to start they may well offer to return your entry fee/ hold it over till next year's edition...

[Martin]

Is the parallel not with a calendar event, where you pay for entry and the cost covers all ? If you DNS you can't ride it again the next year without re-entering.

Welllllll....

anecdatally, if you inform the organiser in good time that for Good Reason you wont be able to start they may well offer to return your entry fee/ hold it over till next year's edition...

Not the official line; but it did happen to me following my off for a few events I'd entered (no money having been paid to AUK at the time) which I thought was jolly decent  
But there's several good reasons why you cannot give refunds; not least because a lot of events would be out of pocket if the weather took a turn for the worse the night before.

[border-rider]

or jsut shut up and carry on as we are.

+1.  see also boab's comment, the stuff in which doubtless could be construed as being against a rule or something

My own view is that this issue is a "don't ask, don't tell" one; different orgs will treat it differently and I'd leave the call to them.   Airing it in the open sufficiently loudly to force an official answer may not lead to the most helpful outcome

I'm hoping this thread might be a kind of lightning conductor and keep the issue from popping up on other threads (as it has been doing)but i'm hoping that we don;t get a definitive answer...

[Hummers]

so let me get this straight

OK, I will work with you Mr Nesbitt.

you said you were riding on say May 25th

No I didn't but for the purposes of this exercise I will go along with the illusion although I was nowhere near Hemyock at that time of night and nothing untoward happened between me, IanH and certainly not with any livestock.

on May 26th he asked if you had finished on time etc

you said no

I told him by email but go on...

he said tough shit mate, I've got your money you've got nil points ?

To my recollection, no scatalogical references were cited and regarding money, such things are beneath gentlemen and are somewhat sordid. As mentioned earlier, I did receive a certificate of non-completion which was rather jolly but as I didn't complete the ride (it was a DNF) I cannot see how the outcome could have been any different. Besides which, I knew the organiser's conditions for riding before I sent in the entry form so by default had accepted these as being part and parcel of attempting what is a cracking ride.

That's encouraging isn't it.

Yes, you're quite right, it was encouraging. I have ridden the event twice since the DNF with both veterans and newbies to this series of perms - none of whom have had a problem with the conditions for entry either. I hope to ride this perm and the other perms in this organisers SR series if not this year, then definitely next year as these are excellent rides.

Hope this sets things 'straight'.

H

[Manotea]

Sadly, I believe AUK's position has been made clear though you have to be paying strict attention and adept at reading smoke signals to capture the fine nuance of official statements or even be aware that one has been made. However that doesn't mean to say I have to agree with it, especially when we are constantly being told how overloaded AUK admin are (no disrespect intended, really) when this would save everybody hassle and (I believe) encourage long distance cycling.

It's really not about the money. It it were I'd never enter an event unless I was absolutely sure I could and would complete it. Hardly audacious.

Happily, the next AGM is only 9 months away. Something to look forward to!

[Martin]

wise words MV; although a very small part of the lightning is glancing off once again to some of the AUK admin who are trying to do their best to keep things going on an even keel

[3peaker]

That's really what we're trying to find out.
I think it needs to be done at an AGM with people present that know the ins and outs. I think it does need to be done, especially now that we're going digital.
I'm with Nesbit, just get on with what we have for now, it's worked well enough for decades, so it should see us till the end of the season.
It doesn't matter much what YACF thinks, it's what AUK say.

If there are 40 Perm Organisers, there will be 40 different ways we/they ‘Manage’ their events.  All we 'See' is the Validated ride recorded.  How complicated do we want to make it?

[Greenbank]

the perm rules clearly state that you should fill in the details on the card when you start.

On the day, write the date in your brevet card and find a suitable start control for your ride

No way of course that the organiser can check this happens but if you DNF you have used up that card (or "validation" as I now call my e-brevets as there is no brevet)

I dunno, maybe they could cross that out, or even paper over it just like organisers do with their spare cards from previous events (some of which DNS-ing entrants have paid for).

<----- smiley

[Martin]

<----- smiley

<Larrington>

<----- shovel

</Larrington

[frankly frankie]

All we need is clarification on what your money buys you - in the absence of a "card".

Your entry fee buys you a Ticket to Ride.

Tickets usually have an expiry date, and very occasionally they are transferable too.

Which applies equally to a rider reusing a card from a DNF. They aren't depriving AUK of anything by doing so.

This argument is on the assumption that AUK makes no money out of issuing a brevet card (which is very probably true).

If cards were priced in such a way that printing and issuing a card was a clear money-earner for AUK, and if entry fees were set such that each event entry was a clear money-earner for the Organiser -
none of these issues would arise.  AUK would be taking a tougher line on '1 ride, 1 card' and Organisers would take a tougher line on '1 entry, 1 ride' - and what is more, everyone would understand that process and accept it is 'normal'. (Obviously the surplus would be ploughed back into cycling, that's understood.)
It's because the margins are so tiny (or possibly even negative) that nobody can be a*sed.

I have no idea what 'official' policy is on card re-use (I very much doubt if there is one) but the practicality is clear enough - if a card comes through the system to be validated and it's obviously re-used, or photocopied, or circumventing the system in some other way - the validators are hog-tied, there's nothing they can do, they have to validate as normal.  It's well understood that anything else would be penalising the Rider for the sins of the Organiser.

[sub55]

forgive me, as i am still fairly  new at this game. but is there really a big issue here.
i wont pretend to understand the validation process or what  monies go to whom.
But surely there cant be that many DNS/DNF in perms.   
Personally , i`ve never DNF`d any ride.  The time allowance means that all but anything can go wrong and you`ll still be able to complete the ride on time. 
So how many people do DNF?    On a regular basis  and of those ,how many are going to then try and reuse the card?   
Strongly suspect that the issues here are so small ,they are not issues at all.

[mattc]

 
Personally , i`ve never DNF`d any ride.  The time allowance means that all but anything can go wrong and you`ll still be able to complete the ride on time.  
So how many people do DNF?  

To help you answer this question, you might want to have another look at your username.

(Yes, some people DNF due to terminal mechanicals/accidents/illness/lack-of-moral-fibre. More often they suffer some of the above, leading to them being out of time "on the road", and then accepting the (almost) inevitable. )

I can't say if it's a big issue; it is an issue for some riders, who have decided to raise it in this venerated chamber.

[Manotea]

AFAIAA, DNFs on Perms are few and far between. I've had a long running battle with a couple of 600s and that's about it. What is really being debated is the underlying principles of managing Perms.

Why is this important? Well, I value the human face of Audax, the recognition of what is important and what is not, a cameraderie of shared suffering if you will. However it's only a matter of time before skynet becomes self aware Audax administration goes fully online at which point it will be a case of 'the computer says no'. So the time to have these debates is now.

Please don't take this as some form of statement that I disrespect da rules. I like rules. Rules are friends of mine. However the rationale and operation of some rules has become somewhat opaque over time and this has caused a certain confusion. So we debate the rules and hopefully come to a concensus. Or not.

[Chris S]

AFAIAA, DNFs on Perms are few and far between. I've had a long running battle with a couple of 600s and that's about it. What is really being debated is the underlying principles of managing Perms.

And even more specifically, Perms wot don't have a card. Or any other "real" paper-based matter.

If I'm buying "a ticket to ride", and the validation is an immutable encapsulation of that - then I should have no right to reuse my entry, once submitted.

If the validation is separate, and that's what I'm actually paying for (remember - this is an automated online entry, no cards required) then it might seem reasonable to reuse an unused entry.

I'm happy to work with my Organiser on this if that's the unofficial line. He's a nice chap   .