Should AUK require a fully checked GPX file on a calendar listing ?

[Ian H]

For all my events the routesheet for the previous year is available until I get around to updating for the current year. I generally show a warning to check back shortly before the event in case anything has changed.

[Marmitegeoff]

No.  Organisers have enough to do. I would prefer the route sheets to be available when the event is published rather than supplied a few days before the event.  Looking at where the route goes helps me decide if I want to do the event or not.  Creating gpx from route sheets is an interesting activity as frequently what is perfectly evident from the ground is a mystery when looking at the map.

I give an outline map on the AUK web site so potential riders can see the route ish.   However routes can change in the last couple of weeks before an event takes place.  Bridge out, Control closed etc.  So any pre issued route sheet is then out of date.

Geoff

[TimC]

However, I think AUK could provide some space online for a repository of user submitted GPS files that riders could make use of at their own risk. These routes could also be handily used as the basis of DIYs by GPS as well, which could cut down on the workload for DIY orgs.

+ 1

I see here an opportunity to do something like the various guitar tab websites, where more than one file is available for each piece (Audax), in different formats. So you could have multiple GPX/TCX files for an event, with different authors' ideas of how much information could be included. These could be 'rated' by users to give an indication of how useful/appropriate the files are.

[Ray 6701]

Apparently not 

[marcusjb]

It's interesting that the other survey https://yacf.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=81622.0 says that more than half of people (surveyed, on this board, who want to tick a box ) use GPS and yet the majority is against a compulsary gpx file

It's interesting but don't ask me to explain it

The two are not linked.

Partly because a number of people have commented they make their own anyway.

And partly, I think, because people don't want more hoops for orgs and prospective orgs to have to jump through. 

[ian_oli]

How about if an organiser offers a GPX but no route sheet? IMO GPXs are easier to create, maintain and routecheck than the routesheets. Anyone without a GPS could get turn-by-turn instructions out of a website. As fallback you could use your phone or trace the route on a cheap roadmap.

Actually if you're in a hurry you can google the event and the odds are one of the mapping sites will hold a GPX of that name. You can check whether it aligns with the routesheet's controls and if it does you can be reasonably confident that it will get you round.

[Peter]

However, I think AUK could provide some space online for a repository of user submitted GPS files that riders could make use of at their own risk. These routes could also be handily used as the basis of DIYs by GPS as well, which could cut down on the workload for DIY orgs.

+ 1

I see here an opportunity to do something like the various guitar tab websites, where more than one file is available for each piece (Audax), in different formats. So you could have multiple GPX/TCX files for an event, with different authors' ideas of how much information could be included. These could be 'rated' by users to give an indication of how useful/appropriate the files are.

Unfortunately, in the case of guitar tabs, there are countless titles (almost certainly most) for which all available versions are WRONG!

[Kim]

It's interesting that the other survey https://yacf.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=81622.0 says that more than half of people (surveyed, on this board, who want to tick a box ) use GPS and yet the majority is against a compulsary gpx file

It's interesting but don't ask me to explain it

Because we're capable or even prefer to roll our own GPS instructions?
Because we don't want to lose perfectly good events that happen to be organised by luddites or people who can't afford GPS?
Because we'd rather organisers provide good quality routesheets rather than grudgingly or incompetently produce poor quality GPX files?

[caerau]

Yup all of the above.


I am one of those, I am a GPSer but I would never advocate forcing or requiring the organiser to construct one and so voted no.  I never trust them anyway and unless I am truly strapped for time will check it and adjust it myself unless it comes from a very trustworthy source like BikeyMikey who I know is very dilligent at getting them right.


Incidentally on my last ride I was indeed very strapped for preparation time and just used the provided GPX file - on the Buckingham Blinder 400.  The file did work but it was HUGE (over 5 MB) and so was (a) very irritating - it had so many waypoints that the turn by turn directions were constantly telling me to go straight on, on long straights    and (b) so large that it hung a couple of times and took about an hour to calculate the course each time it was restarted.  It was a good job I had company at these times.

[Somnolent]

It's interesting that the other survey https://yacf.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=81622.0 says that more than half of people (surveyed, on this board, who want to tick a box ) use GPS and yet the majority is against a compulsary gpx file

It's interesting but don't ask me to explain it

Analoguous to the helmet issue surely ?
Most wear one, but the few are pro-compulsion.


I'm more surprised that slightly over 10% of respondents to the poll would vote for requiring org to provide a GPX fle - and yet in the textual responses we have just the one.  And to be fair, if I was that one, I wouldn't have time to create all my own GPX files even if I wanted to.

[Panoramix]

However, I think AUK could provide some space online for a repository of user submitted GPS files that riders could make use of at their own risk. These routes could also be handily used as the basis of DIYs by GPS as well, which could cut down on the workload for DIY orgs.

That would be cool, effectively AUK going web 2.0!

Eventually, this could be combined into a mesh of gpx across the UK. It should probably be members only.

Probably too much work for the webmaster though.

[mattc]

It's interesting that the other survey https://yacf.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=81622.0 says that more than half of people (surveyed, on this board, who want to tick a box ) use GPS and yet the majority is against a compulsary gpx file

It's interesting but don't ask me to explain it

Because we're capable or even prefer to roll our own GPS instructions?
Because we don't want to lose perfectly good events that happen to be organised by luddites or people who can't afford GPS?
Because we'd rather organisers provide good quality routesheets rather than grudgingly or incompetently produce poor quality GPX files?

d) as a non-GPS organiser, I supplied GPX files (mainly supplied by well-meaning riders). They generated more whinging than all other issues put together.



I think it's notable that 9/10 "compulsionists" are too cowardly/lazy to also post here. (I disagree totally with Mikey, but he's posted a reasoned case. It just happens to be wrong!)

[red marley]

Routesheets are written as a ‘suggested’ route which has been Risk Assessed by the Organiser.
Even so, Routesheets are not mandatorily required.

All that is needed from the Org’ is a list of Grid refs, Addresses or Lat/Longs of the controls.

The Org has had approval that the distance of the event qualifies, so the participant should be prepared to devise their own route and sus the distances and inclines between controls for nutrition purposes.

For BRs, we are all ‘Big Boys’ now.

While that may be technically true, in my experience the organiser has usually spent much time crafting a route along nice roads, taking into account the time of day you pass along them and how far into the ride you are when you do so. I therefore like to follow the route suggested in the routesheet as closely as possible when transcribing to the GPS. Also, given that in many cases one ends up riding with others, using the official route seems the most sociable.

[caerau]

I have to say if I saw a ride that was just a bunch of grid references 


There does have to a balance, I'm sure the Org does actually want people to do their ride.  Compelling a gps file with the can of worms detailed muchly above is a step too far I think.  They have already done quite a lot of organisation in my opinion - devised the route, checked the route, risk assessed the route, organised controls, got volunteers for controls, done adminstratory stuff with AUK presumably, taken entries, sent out routesheets by post or online...


As someone said, this is a volunteer led operation, give them a break.

[mattc]

I can't quote you Chapter and Verse, but I believe AUK would be Very Unhappy Indeed if an organiser just supplied control locations (for a calendar event).

[mcshroom]

I thought Megajoules Expenditure did that a couple years back: -
https://yacf.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=63500.0

[caerau]

Did anyone ride it?  That would only attract the hardest core I would have thought.


I've done a permanent where only the controls were specified but a calendar event - er no.  I want something more from a calendar event.

[mattc]

I thought Megajoules Expenditure did that a couple years back: -
https://yacf.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=63500.0

I don't know the event, but in that region it's probably not too tricky to navigate between towns. It wouldn't put me off riding (probably).
But the Organiser guidance - IIRC - discourages it.

(as usual, trying to argue a point to cover all situations/cultures/planets is doomed to failure!)

[contango]

It's interesting that the other survey https://yacf.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=81622.0 says that more than half of people (surveyed, on this board, who want to tick a box ) use GPS and yet the majority is against a compulsary gpx file

It's interesting but don't ask me to explain it

I think Ben T summed it up pretty well. I use a GPS but to make it mandatory for the org to provide a GPX file doesn't guarantee that they will provide anything that is useful to me. If they provide five waypoints and a route connecting them I'm only marginally further forward because the routing on my GPS will probably turn the 200k minimum distance into something that makes LEL look like an afternoon bimble. If it's a track log from BikeRouteToaster it will work in my GPS but Mapsource won't read it so I'll still need to go through Mapsource to figure out where the controls are so I can add them.

Ben's post might have appeared a little pedantic but it's pointing out the differences between a file that works and a file that doesn't, and on the ground that's anything but pedantic.

[Dibdib]

Did anyone ride it?  That would only attract the hardest core I would have thought.


I've done a permanent where only the controls were specified but a calendar event - er no.  I want something more from a calendar event.

Surprisingly, yes -16: http://www.aukweb.net/results/archive/2013/listevent/?Ride=12-546

(I love that the AUK website is so logical with its URLs.)

As for me, at some point of extreme-bare-basics-ness I'd probably just do a local perm instead but I suppose the company of a calendar event would be nice. It'd have to be pretty cheap though.

[Ningishzidda]

Being a ‘Long Distance’ cycling club, would it be reasonable to Organise an event which starts at ‘a’, goes to ‘b’ 200 km away, calling at x, y and z; followed by a return to ‘a’ via z, y and x?

Is it the distance, or is it the scenery?

[LittleWheelsandBig]

Sounds like the Buckingham Blinder 400.

[bikey-mikey]

It's great to hear from you all - I didn't think it was time to move on just yet either, but we can't stare at our navels for ever, we have to look ahead sometimes....   

Of course, it occurs to me that if the org has someone do a helpers ride beforehand, to check for missing signs, demolished bridges etc etc, and that someone happens to have a garmin or similar, they could record the route, which could then be posted for others to use as a base...

From the high praise you have all given the orgs, I doubt that any of you would refuse to help in this way.... 


My understanding is that any route that is actually a recording of an actual ride, is bound to produce an extremely bloated gpx file, indeed some such huge files have been mentioned upthread - it also can be quite inaccurate, since the gpx calculated position is often as much as 30 or more metres in error - I have used files like this before, to find that they are an entire street out in a town area....   

[contango]

I'm all in favour of encouraging organisers to provide GPX files but just don't think compulsion is the way to go, at least not yet.

If anything is going to be mandated I'd rather it was accepting entry fees by PayPal and providing an email address.

[frankly frankie]

I can't quote you Chapter and Verse, but I believe AUK would be Very Unhappy Indeed if an organiser just supplied control locations (for a calendar event).

Current AUK Regs:
"9.1  AUK and organisers are responsible only for indicating or agreeing control points to confirm that a participant has completed ... "