Mandatory GPS routes...how strict?

[MAC]

Planning a DIY by GPS and looking at the mandatory route option as there an excessive number of controls otherwise. One question the AUK site doesn't seem to answer is: what happens if you have to deviate a tad from the route for a road closure, etc but rejoin at the earliest opportunity, still reach all the controls and meet the minimum distance. Does it still count?

[andyp]

yep, it's all very sensible and pragmatic – i did a DIY over the Severn bridge at the weekend, my planned route went over on the North side, but the south side was open, so i went that way to avoid the roundabout - the software picked up the deviation, and it was still all validated fine. essentially it seems that detours with a reason, that aren't big shortcuts or shortcuts for the sake of being shortcuts are permitted.

it's a really nice system 

Hope you have a great ride!

[marcusjb]

Yes, I have found that on the two times I have done it, a sensible approach is taken, particularly with road closures and safety challenges.

On my last one, I had huge problems with flooded roads, so was unable to cross rivers without some very significant diversions.  I did take photos at each point as evidence, but was not asked for them in the end. It all added distance and I was always aiming to be back on course as soon was possible.

[tonyh]

Good question MAC. Useful to notice this, the wording approved at the last AGM (my bold, for the bits particularly relevant to DIYs):

"Under mandatory routing riders follow the route set by the event organiser, subject only to dealing with any eventualities that might occur such as road closures or other factors which might render sections of the route inappropriate. Riders deviating from the route will be expected to rejoin the route at the earliest available opportunity and/or make general progress in line with the route in accordance with the published guidance for the event. So for example, for a regular Permanent with AAA points riders might be expected to follow the set route exactly, whereas for DIY Permanents some minor variation might be allowed subject to the rider demonstrably progressing in accordance with the registered route."

The "other factors" (first line) could include discovering that the intended route was off-road, underwater, lethally traficced at that time... (probably not all at once). Briefly inform the org when you send your track.

[Delph Cyclist]

The "other factors" (first line) could include discovering that the intended route was off-road ...

If it's a DIY mandatory Perm, finding that your route was off-road wouldn't come as a surprise would it?

[Ivo]

Aha, the "for DIY Permanents some minor variation might be allowed subject to the rider demonstrably progressing in accordance with the registered route." is interesting if there are two roads parallel to eachother whereby one is for example better lit for nightriding and the other quieter so better for rushhour-riding but unlit and dangerous in the dark.

[mattc]

The "other factors" (first line) could include discovering that the intended route was off-road ...

If it's a DIY mandatory Perm, finding that your route was off-road wouldn't come as a surprise would it?

It's quite possible that neither the rider nor the organiser check every mile of the route before-hand; the rider might just drag a google-maps(etc) route around until it's bang-on x00km, whilst avoiding big cities and big A-roads. Then just stick it on their GPS and follow the track.

[Manotea]

Its subtle stuff... the wording Tony quoted above was adopted to set a clear expectation that riders would follow the route (they) set whilst making reasonable provision for all the exigencies that might arise. So some minor variations to allow for minor diversions to visit shops, switch to alternate/parallel roads, etc., which in the context of an extended outing are trivial, are allowed for.

However if the (this) org gets the feeling the rider has disregarded the registered route to wander of somewhere completely different then questions will be asked, and any claims that the Brevet should be validated simply on the basis that the rider 'completed the distance' (which was a matter of great debate when the regulations and guidelines were being developed) are irrelevent and miss the point which is that riders are expected to respect the registered route.

Happily (my) experience is that diversions are exceptional/trivial and riders generally follow the registered routes exactly.

[Whitedown Man]

I've done a bit of minor off-route exploring whilst on Mandatory Route DIYs, as well as excursions to visit a particular shop or cafe, but always ride back and rejoin the route at exactly the point I left it - feels like the appropriate thing to do when I've selected the "mandatory route" option for my own convenience.

More generally, I suspect most Orgs will be applying Rule 1 above all others: "Thou shalt not taketh the piss".

[Greenbank]

The "other factors" (first line) could include discovering that the intended route was off-road ...

If it's a DIY mandatory Perm, finding that your route was off-road wouldn't come as a surprise would it?

Years ago I planned a DIY400 down to Cornwall and checked various unfamiliar roads on Streetview (where possible) and OS maps and all looked good.

I remember one road (between Crondall and Well, by Swanthorpe Farm) was marked on the OS map as "minor road with passing places".

Either end looked ok-ish on Streetview but it quickly turned into an unrideable road which was more like a dried river bed so I ended up walking the bike for 1km.

[Fidgetbuzz]

My only mandatory route ride .. persuaded me to never use the system again. I plotted what for me is a fairly standard route including coming up the east coast from aldeburgh .. and as this is ridden quite frequently ..I did not check EXACTLY the route that I was expected to take, as i knew the road that would be taken. Wrong .. whatever mapping system I was using .. identified that if I took farm tracks I would save xx yards .. so that was the mandatory route I submitted. On three separate occasions these  routes were absolutely unrideable.. with the standard audax route paralleling the route but maybe a few hundred yards to the west. Fortunately my controller was sympathetic to my explanations .. as of course i rode further than the route I had submitted. If you are going to use mandatory, you need to be very careful using street view etc to make sure that you are not expected to ride an unrideable section of off road

[Somnolent]

I've done a bit of minor off-route exploring whilst on Mandatory Route DIYs, as well as excursions to visit a particular shop or cafe, but always ride back and rejoin the route at exactly the point I left it -

Rejoining the route at the point you left it is what is defined in the original BRM rules as set down by ACP .... so that doesn't count as a deviation.
And the software the organisers use to compare the tracks ignores excursions which rejoin the intended route at the same point.

But for the rest of it - yes, a little extra care in checking the route is certainly worthwhile.  Streetview for large sections would be tedious though.  Checking it follows 'yellow' roads as opposed to 'white' tracks (OS Landranger view in Bikehike or GPX Editor) is almost always good enough. 

[Pingu]

Planning a DIY by GPS and looking at the mandatory route option as there an excessive number of controls otherwise...

Just wondering what constitutes an excessive number of controls on a DIY by GPS?

[MAC]

Planning a DIY by GPS and looking at the mandatory route option as there an excessive number of controls otherwise...

Just wondering what constitutes an excessive number of controls on a DIY by GPS?

Not sure how AUK define excessive but I stopped trying at 16 when I had not even got halfway as that was too many for me! I could change the route of course but I plan to meet up with a colleague on his attempt at the Manchester 100 so have to follow that for quite a way.

The relevant AUK page is here

[Ivo]

Its subtle stuff... the wording Tony quoted above was adopted to set a clear expectation that riders would follow the route (they) set whilst making reasonable provision for all the exigencies that might arise. So some minor variations to allow for minor diversions to visit shops, switch to alternate/parallel roads, etc., which in the context of an extended outing are trivial, are allowed for.

However if the (this) org gets the feeling the rider has disregarded the registered route to wander of somewhere completely different then questions will be asked, and any claims that the Brevet should be validated because the rider 'completed the distance' (which was a matter of great debate when the regulations and guidelines were being developed) are irrelevent and miss the point which is that riders should respect the registered route.

Happily (my) experience is that diversions are exceptional/trivial and riders follow the registered routes exactly.

Thanks, that sounds sensible. It would make it more appealing for me as I quite often have the choice in river valleys between a briddlepath/bikepath along the river and a valley road all in the same rivervalley but sometimes on different sides of the river. Depending on the time of passing either one or the other would be a better choice and this explanation of the rules are sensible enough for sensible decisions on the road.

[Feanor]

I've only done 1 'Mandatory Route' DIY.

The reason was because I was trying to re-create a historic calendar event, and the original controls didn't qualify for minimum-distance-between-controls under current rules.
But the actual route-sheet distance did.
I wanted a way to ride the route of the actual original event, but without having to put in dozens of controls to force the route.
So I chose to ride the event under Mandatory Route rules.

I was quite strict in my interpretation, and these are the guidelines I used when deviating from the submitted track:

1) Side of the road. Not an issue. This is not an exercise in GPS accuracy. If you are on the B90012 that's good enough.

From this I extend the following:

Bridges: If the cycle route is on one side or the other, it doesn't matter a hoot. You are still on the B90012 from X to Y.

Roundabouts: Some GPX planning sites are USA-centric and take you the wrong way round roundabouts. Your track will deviate by perhaps a few hundred metres for a short while.   I don't classify this as deviation from your planned route.  You are still on the B90012 from X to Y.

Complex junctions: same logic. If the routing takes you one way, but there's a bike route on-the-ground, it's not a deviation. You are still on the B90012 from X to Y.

2) Deviations into towns for facilities: If I deviated from my submitted route into town for facilities, I would re-trace to the point I left it.   This is not a deviation.

3) Taking different routes. More tricky, and may require justification.  A cycle path that runs along the side of the road, fine. Point 1. It's not an exercise in GPS accuracy. If the cycle path takes a significantly different route, then that's less fine.  It comes down to the discression of the org.

Taking a different route for Unforseen Circumstances is covered.  Like Police road closures or floods. But poor planning is not really Unforseen.  To paraphrase a DIY org: If your submitted route takes you over a mountain-goat track, or through someone's back garden, that's not really unforeseen.

[Martin]

I did a mandatory route DIY in January; using Google maps to plot the route and Ride with GPS to extract a GPS; it was a seemingly straightforward return from Hampshire back to Surrey along quiet roads

moral; don't believe either will take you along actual rideable roads and have a good look at the route on Streetmap before you hit send on the DIY entry

[frankly frankie]

2) Deviations into towns for facilities: If I deviated from my submitted route into town for facilities, I would re-trace to the point I left it.   This is not a deviation.

This is the main point at issue IMHO.  Deviating into a town for facilities and then continuing to rejoin the route should surely be acceptable.  Slavish retracing is just ... slavish.  But who knows?

[Ivo]

2) Deviations into towns for facilities: If I deviated from my submitted route into town for facilities, I would re-trace to the point I left it.   This is not a deviation.

This is the main point at issue IMHO.  Deviating into a town for facilities and then continuing to rejoin the route should surely be acceptable.  Slavish retracing is just ... slavish.  But who knows?

Something like that you have to enter and exit the town via the road in your track but within the town itself you're allowed a bit of deviations for facilities and unexpected one way streets (especially cycling exceptions are often not visibile on the map).

[MAC]

Thanks for all the replies. Very helpful and has eased my mind with regard to mandatory routes. Doing my first such DIY tomorrow so will let you know how it goes 

[jsabine]

the requirement [is] to follow the route as closely as is practical but for the whole thing not to become a jobsworths charter for rejecting rides.

I think that's quite a good way of putting it. AUK is (or at least tries to be) more about enabling and validating rides rather than looking for excuses to reject them: as ever, if you assume that Rule 97 (thou shall not take the piss) applies, you're likely to get a sympathetic hearing. Extract the micturate too much, and there's a risk you'll find that the sympathy begins to evaporate.

[marcusjb]

^ that's it in a nutshell I reckon.

I've done over 3000km of mandatory route DIY and not had any issues with rerouting/deviation from the planned route due to floods, roadworks, not a road and the challenges of one-way streets in big cities (where, particularly in tiny little medieval streets in French towns, GPS might fail you as well as the turns are too frequent and the reception poor due to the buildings etc.).

I have taken photos of floods or roadwork closures etc. as devidence (diversionary evidence!), but have not been called upon to present those to the DIY org as yet.

[flashpeddler]

I've done 2 mandatory routes by GPS (300 & 600kms) and I've found my organizer brilliant.  I had absolute confidence that if I had a good reason to take a diversion and could explain myself, I would be fine - as long as I completed the stated minimum distance.  I felt I was being encouraged and supported with no intent to catch me out.

When doing a route via GPS, you can plan in all cafe stops etc to the GPS track - this way, every meter counts and you never divert for refreshment.  Worst case is you don't need a stop and simply ride on by!
I only put in 7 checkpoints for my 600 - the furthest points of the compass and my start and finish - the mandatory GPS track pretty much negates this but it is important to maintain some checkpoints to support the spirit & tradition of Audax.
To avoid farm tracks etc, I never plan a route that Google haven't taken their Street View vehicle down - All you have to do is drag the little orange man onto the map, and if the planned lane doesn't turn blue, avoid it.  Works every time in keeping me on good tarmac.

Following a bad accident, I am nervous on busy roads and simply don't enjoy riding them - GPS mandatory routes are just fantastic for me and I am so grateful they have been permitted.  I can now ride on beautiful quiet lanes and not clock up huge over-distances.  Brilliant!

[tonyh]

Thanks for all the replies. Very helpful and has eased my mind with regard to mandatory routes. Doing my first such DIY tomorrow so will let you know how it goes 

Have a good ride tomorrow MAC, and thanks for starting this useful thread off!

I hope potential riders of Mandatory Routes are thoroughly reassured and encouraged - the system, as designed and intended, is working very well:

Its subtle stuff... the wording Tony quoted above was adopted to set a clear expectation that riders would follow the route (they) set whilst making reasonable provision for all the exigencies that might arise. So some minor variations to allow for minor diversions to visit shops, switch to alternate/parallel roads, etc., which in the context of an extended outing are trivial, are allowed for.

However if the (this) org gets the feeling the rider has disregarded the registered route to wander off somewhere completely different then questions will be asked, and any claims that the Brevet should be validated because the rider 'completed the distance' (which was a matter of great debate when the regulations and guidelines were being developed) are irrelevant and miss the point which is that riders should respect the registered route.

Happily (my) experience is that diversions are exceptional/trivial and riders follow the registered routes exactly.

That (all three paragraphs) is my experience too. I'm always grateful for riders' brief notes about such deviations as were made - if you keep the org informed, the org can support you better (see also the Trains and ferries thread at http://forum.audax.uk/index.php?topic=1137.0 )

AndyC's two posts this morning (9.50 and 10.26) are spot on.

[jiberjaber]

I've done 2 mandatory routes by GPS (300 & 600kms) and I've found my organizer brilliant.  I had absolute confidence that if I had a good reason to take a diversion and could explain myself, I would be fine - as long as I completed the stated minimum distance.  I felt I was being encouraged and supported with no intent to catch me out.

When doing a route via GPS, you can plan in all cafe stops etc to the GPS track - this way, every meter counts and you never divert for refreshment.  Worst case is you don't need a stop and simply ride on by!
I only put in 7 checkpoints for my 600 - the furthest points of the compass and my start and finish - the mandatory GPS track pretty much negates this but it is important to maintain some checkpoints to support the spirit & tradition of Audax.
To avoid farm tracks etc, I never plan a route that Google haven't taken their Street View vehicle down - All you have to do is drag the little orange man onto the map, and if the planned lane doesn't turn blue, avoid it.  Works every time in keeping me on good tarmac.

Following a bad accident, I am nervous on busy roads and simply don't enjoy riding them - GPS mandatory routes are just fantastic for me and I am so grateful they have been permitted.  I can now ride on beautiful quiet lanes and not clock up huge over-distances.  Brilliant!

^^^ This in spades.  Though I have been caught out using the street view car approach, so make sure you are zoomed in enough to see that the car did indeed cover the whole length of the road and not just either end   COR is always a bit of a worry 

MAC - My biggest worry on DIYbyGPS mandatory is the recording getting ballsed up, so I now tend to stop recording and start a new activity on my Garmin Edge 1000 at my cafe stops - it reduces the risk of it happening in my mind. 

Echoing the thanks to the DIY organisers also, Paul's my local one and been very understanding (as is Martin for the ECE's too )