[LEL17] Managing the spikes at controls

[Greenbank]

I'd be interested in the anonymised dataset (including drop bag checkout/checkin) to see what modelling could be done. The idea would be to analyse the complete set to extract behavioural patterns and identify different rider types (stamp and go riders, touring riders, longer stops at bag drop locations. riders up against time limits) and temporal patterns (average stop times at different times of day, average speed drops due to fatigue/terrain, etc) to build up the model. Then replay the minimal dataset (bag drop locations, rider arrival times) in chronological order in an attempt to predict the arrival times of riders at subsequent controls. I could also see how well a model worked against the LEL2013 dataset.

I don't think drop bag checkout/checkin would be much use. Certainly at Pocklington all we did was scan bags when they arrived on the van. We didn't scan them when giving them to riders, and after problems with controls scanning out bags further up the route (it was resetting the time in hand figure on the tracking display), we didn't scan them out of the control either.

Sorry, wasn't clear. I'd just want the locations of a riders bag drops, not the times that anything happened to them.

[mattc]

Are we losing the point of what Audax is, a (largely)unsupported long distance bike ride over a given time and distance, with controls as set points? Whether it's 1400, 1405km of whatever, no one is forced to enter if they don't like the arrangements?

It's not just 5km over-distance, and you know it. I'm not convinced that the over-distance is a problem, but there is an argument that an event much harder than entrants were led to believe is a problem.

It doesn't matter on a 200 too much, but this event is a 5-day experience/trip/holiday. If it's waaay harder than you'd planned, that could be 3 days of your holiday ruined. The counter-argument is that it makes for better stories/adventures!

Incidentally, "no one is forced to enter" would be a poor excuse for a shambolic event - fortunately we didn't put on a shambolic event, but I do see this defence used for all sorts of things over the years.

[Peter]

That's true, matt.  (Referring to the no0one is forced to enter defence for shambolic events - which this wasn't at all)

[alwyn]

It's not just 5km over-distance, and you know it. I'm not convinced that the over-distance is a problem, but there is an argument that an event much harder than entrants were led to believe is a problem.

If you're referring to LEL, then there is absolutely no evidence that this has been the case. Quite the opposite, actually.

[Brakeless]

It's not just 5km over-distance, and you know it. I'm not convinced that the over-distance is a problem, but there is an argument that an event much harder than entrants were led to believe is a problem.

If you're referring to LEL, then there is absolutely no evidence that this has been the case. Quite the opposite, actually.

Totally agree. I don't think anyone was lead to beleive riding 1400km is easy. I think a lot of riders under estimated the challenge, some by a massive amount, but that is down to them and not the publicity/information coming from the organisers.

[Duckfoot1606]

Totally agree. I don't think anyone was lead to beleive riding 1400km is easy. I think a lot of riders under estimated the challenge, some by a massive amount, but that is down to them and not the publicity/information coming from the organisers.
[/quote]

My point exactly, the official distance didn't change part way through the event and was visible pretty much from the time the route was confirmed, along with the climb profile.

Did anyone really believe it was going to be easy?

[αdαmsκι]

This is turning into the same discussion as we had after alwyn et al. put on the fabulous Windsor Chester Windsor 600 in 2015 as a PBP qualifier.

"It's not fair, it was over distance."

Yes, LEL was over distance. It did say on the route page of the LEL website: https://londonedinburghlondon.com/route/ the ride was 1,441 km long. That wasn't hidden away somewhere. The fact the times on the brevet card accounted for this extra distance may life a lot easier.

My PBP 2015 track is 1,237 km long, which as a percentage of the ride is more over distance than LEL.


"It's not fair, it was harder than expected."

Oh, there's climbing on LEL? Who would have thought that may be the case? Anyone looking at the profile going over 500m on the LEL website should have been prepared. And the AAA points on the AUK webpage would also have given a hint to anyone who understands how AUK gives out hilly points.


It's not fair people only got 100 hours

Well PBP has three different groups (80 hr, 84 hr & 90 hr).  Anyone riding in the 100 hour group decided to go for that group and knew (apart from Dominic* ) there was a 100 hour limit. Had I not been riding with my dad I would have gone in for the 100 hour group and if I had finished in 101 hours then c'est la vie.


"It's windy in the fens"

Yes, yes it is. Nowt the LEL team can do about the wind, apart from remove the chilli beans option from the catering.


*

Started with the 7.15am group not having realised that this put me in the 100 hour bracket (until I saw the e-mail about the diversion).

[frankly frankie]

Having a good idea of where riders are (without GPS trackers) requires:-
a) Details of departure times
b) A good model (basing things on a riders previous speeds between controls, group speeds between controls to account for differing weather/terrain, etc)

You know, rider tracking was on the agenda for LEL as long ago as the 2005 edition (the last edition I had any involvement).  Having been used successfully by PBP controllers since 1987 (using Minitel), and publicly web-based for the first time by PBP in 2003.  With my access to the AUK online database, I offered to (try to) provide some sort of similar service for LEL in 2005.  There was no enthusiasm for it from the controllers, who felt (then as now) that they had other priorities, and couldn't envisage the benefits to them.  (I should add that the organiser and most of the control personnel were of course completely different then from now, this is not a comment on the present LEL organisation.)

Having tracked linger time for a large percentage of riders on LEL2017 it may be possible to create a reasonable model for future LELs based on this data that just requires control arrival times (which are collected like they are now with no extra technology required). From there you might be able to extrapolate to have a reasonable prediction for the bulk of riders.

This planning was done in 2005, and I think also back in 2001, using data from previous editions.  I'd be astonished if it wasn't extensively researched for each subsequent edition as well.  Obviously more data is better, but even with only arrival times and no departure times, it is still very usable because it's pretty clear just from arrival times the general road speed for each leg, and the numbers choosing to feed or sleep.

This stuff is nothing new, is all I'm saying.

[alwyn]

Us controllers met in May and discussed the rider tracking system. We all agreed a common approach, albeit one that would result in different outcomes from each control. We agreed that we would scan everyone in, and encourage everyone to scan out. Our ability to do this would always rely on our capacity. So if a control got swamped, there was less encouragement to scan out.

The controllers know why this information is useful, and understand how it makes managing their control easier next time. So they were very supportive of encouraging people to scan out.

I believe we have a 65% scan out rate, which is superb. It’ll be really interesting to see what that tells us about how long people stop for, and when.

[alwyn]

This planning was done in 2005, and I think also back in 2001, using data from previous editions.  I'd be astonished if it wasn't extensively researched for each subsequent edition as well.  Obviously more data is better, but even with only arrival times and no departure times, it is still very usable because it's pretty clear just from arrival times the general road speed for each leg, and the numbers choosing to feed or sleep.

This stuff is nothing new, is all I'm saying.

I had some 2005 data in 2009, but nothing earlier. Just departure data but you're right that just the departure data in itself is very useful. It was that data that drove the push to have better sleeping facilities.

[Phil W]

Us controllers met in May and discussed the rider tracking system. We all agreed a common approach, albeit one that would result in different outcomes from each control. We agreed that we would scan everyone in, and encourage everyone to scan out. Our ability to do this would always rely on our capacity. So if a control got swamped, there was less encouragement to scan out.

The controllers know why this information is useful, and understand how it makes managing their control easier next time. So they were very supportive of encouraging people to scan out.

I believe we have a 65% scan out rate, which is superb. It’ll be really interesting to see what that tells us about how long people stop for, and when.

We have matching departure scans for 70% of arrival scans.  At Great Easton they had self scan on departure, with a big TV wide screen so riders could see how far ahead of the time limit they were as they scanned on departure.  Should have taken a photo of the setup, maybe Iddu did. So for something that wasn't mandatory but was encouraged I'd say we got a very good take up rate from riders.  I'm sure a higher take up can be achieved next time.

Bed scanning was less successful in it's take up.  We captured 1100 riders as they scanned in to sleep.  But just under half scanned back out after they'd had a sleep.   So we know when they went into the sleep area, but we don't know when they came out and how long they hung around a control before departing.   Still we'll know how long they spent at a control they slept in, for a high percentage of riders.

Interesting the lead 5am riders were some of the best for scanning at every opportunity. We know Anco didn't sleep at all (in a sleep area at controls) and longest time in a control was 24 mins and shortest 1 minute . We know Darren Franks and Jasmin Muller entered sleep areas in a couple of controls for approx. 20 mins each time.  But I also know from speaking to them at the finish that they wouldn't really call it sleep.

[GPS]

We didn't scan any of the sleep at Moffat because we were short on volunteers. I thought it was better to make sure the riders got what they wanted/needed first and scanning at that point just seemed like a 'nice to have' rather than essential. With more volunteers that would've been different.

Scans on leaving the control went ok. Riders knew it was something we were doing and why it benefitted them, so they went along with it willingly. They often asked about time in hand too - I'm not surprised Iddu's inspired screen idea went down well.

[mattc]

...
"I'm not convinced that the over-distance is a problem, but there is an argument that an event much harder than entrants were led to believe is a problem. "

If you're referring to LEL, then there is absolutely no evidence that this has been the case. Quite the opposite, actually.

Nope, wasn't referring to LEL - just explaining why significant over-distance CAN be a bad thing.

(IMO, it would be nice to get LEL down towards 1400.0km, but as stated by many already there are huge logistical factors getting in the way of this! Everyone knows that PBP is over-distance - despite being compulsory route.  )

[Delph Cyclist]

... because we were short on volunteers

And that is perhaps the limiting factor for LEL.  Danial and the team have shown that there is apparently no limit to the numbers of riders willing to take on the LEL challenge; buying in professional catering and hiring bigger control venues can be included in the higher entry fee which ever more riders appear to be happy to pay.  Goodness knows how many is the maximum, but PBP shows it could be thousands.

As a club, Audax UK needs to ask; are we prepared to support LEL by persuading our ever increasing membership to help out at a control in 2021.  The role of volunteer is better now that we are doing what we are good at - greeting the riders and generally getting them sorted out with sleeping, bike fixes, etc - and if we have enough numbers we can even have a decent shift system.

[CrinklyLion]

I got asked a _lot_ who I was "supporting" by some of the other volunteers, and never really knew what to answer. I mean, I vaguely cheerlead for the VC167, and the Fridays, and I had quite a lot of mates riding and one brother-in-law (although I didn't get out of bed when he came through southbound cos I'd only got into my bed a couple of hours beforehand). I volunteered to support 'em all - even Mr High Maintenance with his bloody iced tea demands. A much bigger and more expensive event would lose me as a volunteer, because why would I give up a precious week off if it wasn't to support my friends and my community in their frankly ridiculous and borderline self-harming endeavours?

Altho the EldestCub has just worked out he'll be old enough in 4 years time...

[madcow]

... because we were short on volunteers

And that is perhaps the limiting factor for LEL.  Danial and the team have shown that there is apparently no limit to the numbers of riders willing to take on the LEL challenge; buying in professional catering and hiring bigger control venues can be included in the higher entry fee which ever more riders appear to be happy to pay.  Goodness knows how many is the maximum, but PBP shows it could be thousands.

As a club, Audax UK needs to ask; are we prepared to support LEL by persuading our ever increasing membership to help out at a control in 2021.  The role of volunteer is better now that we are doing what we are good at - greeting the riders and generally getting them sorted out with sleeping, bike fixes, etc - and if we have enough numbers we can even have a decent shift system.

Given some of the comments that volunteering is more taxing than riding the event, you could try offering 14 audax points for volunteers

[Fidgetbuzz]

Team debrief to come .. but my pennorth is that we are  now at the limit in several areas.

1 Central team .. Danial is under pressure for many many consecutive months .. but seems to cope and hold a job down .. but if he opts out .. any new boss would be stunned at the demands of the task . Can not comment on Phil and the time he put in  .. but his skill level is  high and he was absolutely essential.  Me .. well you just need an old honest guy with time .. but even fitting this .. my wife is making threatening noises about 2021 .. ( never mind the risks of Old Father Time )

2 Controllers .. it is really tough to be a controller .. this time we were lucky we have several experienced ones.. who know exactly what they are doing .. and we also had people stepping up for the first time .. BUT .. to the best of my knowledge .. there is  not  a large pool of willing potential volunteers for this role .. so could get tricky

3 Control locations .. really hard to find schools that are willing to step in and allow us to put 1500 riders thru .. bed and catering pressures are substantial .. and we can not extend the start times any more.. so how on earth could we ease the already existing headaches of Night 1

4 Volunteers. Known to be really rewarding as a task .. but also incredibly hard work .. I dont think there is a bigger pool available .. we would have taken more this time if we could find them

I accept that for an overseas rider whether is £319 or £419 is immaterial when paying for flights already .. but a higher price allowing more bought in skills .. just does not fit comfortably with our AUK background.. so I dont think a higher price is a way forward to take more entries, and a much higher price to take fewer entries is just not audax

just my pennorth

[alwyn]

Personally, I think the event is just the right size now.

[Von Broad]

Well, FWIW, I agree with both the above posts by FB and Alwyn. Spot on. Especially FB's first two points:

1 Central team .. Danial is under pressure for many many consecutive months .. but seems to cope and hold a job down .. but if he opts out .. any new boss would be stunned at the demands of the task . Can not comment on Phil and the time he put in  .. but his skill level is  high and he was absolutely essential.  Me .. well you just need an old honest guy with time .. but even fitting this .. my wife is making threatening noises about 2021 .. ( never mind the risks of Old Father Time )

I can only imagine.

2 Controllers .. it is really tough to be a controller .. this time we were lucky we have several experienced ones.. who know exactly what they are doing .. and we also had people stepping up for the first time .. BUT .. to the best of my knowledge .. there is  not  a large pool of willing potential volunteers for this role .. so could get tricky

This point I was much closer too.

We hear quite a lot about volunteers [and that's nice because I was one ] but what people are probably not so aware of is the enormous amount of work that each controller wades through to lay down the bare bones of the structure before anybody's even turned up on site. Most volunteers treat the event like cyclists, in that they basically turn up and do what needs to be done, just taking it for granted [not in a bad way] that everything's been organized and all they have to do is do whatever they're asked. Let's see what the rota says. Sure, there's a lot of self-initiative that goes on, and it would drive controllers barking mad if volunteers didn't have some kind of initiative, but all the jobs allocated to volunteers hasn't happened as if by magic, it's been set down in a very carefully considered system by each controller weeks and months before hand. It's a lot of work. This is the job of the controller - chief volunteer of the control if you like - a largely thankless and most definitely low glamour job going on quietly in the background.
This is really essential work.

Things can always be improved, and they should be, but event success trickles down from the top. Get the top positions right and it makes everybody's job that much easier - especially that of the volunteers.

[Veloman]

+1 to Roger and Danial.

Increasing the capacity would increase the challenge of beds and feeding and places like Brampton would suffer greatly as space is limited.

My own experience from PBP in 2015, after also experiencing 2011, was that it had grown too large and problems arose.  Hopefully, LEL will not follow that example and will remain as a very niche event that will be much sought by riders.

[Somnolent]

Personally, I think the event is just the right size now.

... PBP in 2015 ... grown too large & problems arose.  Hopefully, LEL will not follow that example and will remain as a very niche event that will be much sought by riders.

+1 to both.

1 Central team .. Danial is under pressure for many many consecutive months .. but seems to cope and hold a job down .. but if he opts out .. any new boss would be stunned at the demands of the task . Can not comment on Phil and the time he put in  .. but his skill level is  high and he was absolutely essential.  Me .. well you just need an old honest guy with time .. but even fitting this .. my wife is making threatening noises about 2021 .. ( never mind the risks of Old Father Time )

I can't help wondering if the central team isn't too small for the size of the event.
Seems to me there are some substantial but fairly discreet chunks of the work that could be delegated if the right people can be persuaded to step forward?

[The French Tandem]

1 Central team .. Danial is under pressure for many many consecutive months .. but seems to cope and hold a job down .. but if he opts out .. any new boss would be stunned at the demands of the task . Can not comment on Phil and the time he put in  .. but his skill level is  high and he was absolutely essential.  Me .. well you just need an old honest guy with time .. but even fitting this .. my wife is making threatening noises about 2021 .. ( never mind the risks of Old Father Time )

Thanks to all of you, you did a wonderful job!  A special mention to Phil who received many criticisms for the little errors in the tracking system. Phil was excellent and didn't deserve these criticisms.

3 Control locations .. really hard to find schools that are willing to step in and allow us to put 1500 riders thru .. bed and catering pressures are substantial .. and we can not extend the start times any more.. so how on earth could we ease the already existing headaches of Night 1

In my view (rider in 2013, volunteer in 2017), the most stringent limiting factor was always the number of available beds. Food can always be bought in greater quantity, bed space can not. So could we imagine selling two sorts of entry tickets for the next time? A first class LEL with beds at controls, and a second class LEL with no beds?  People who buy second class tickets know in advance they will have to book their own hotels. Just a suggestion, tell me if you think it's silly!

[Duckfoot1606]

. So could we imagine selling two sorts of entry tickets for the next time? A first class LEL with beds at controls, and a second class LEL with no beds?  People who buy second class tickets know in advance they will have to book their own hotels. Just a suggestion, tell me if you think it's silly!

Actually I think that is a great idea! Use controls for proof of passage only and on your way.

Probably an admin nightmare but a great idea all the same!

[jsabine]

. So could we imagine selling two sorts of entry tickets for the next time? A first class LEL with beds at controls, and a second class LEL with no beds?  People who buy second class tickets know in advance they will have to book their own hotels. Just a suggestion, tell me if you think it's silly!

Actually I think that is a great idea! Use controls for proof of passage only and on your way.

Probably an admin nightmare but a great idea all the same!

It was discussed (fairly briefly I think) a while ago, and largely rejected, on the grounds that i) the organisers didn't want a two-tier event and ii) it would place an extra burden on volunteers determining exactly what facilities an individual rider was entitled to.

[Duckfoot1606]

What about additional sleeping facilities in Marqee's in a field along the route between controls? Just beds and portaloo's, no other facilities.