Yet Another Cycling Forum
General Category => Audax => Topic started by: j_a_m_e_s_ on 10 December, 2018, 08:32:30 pm
-
Prompted by recent awoowoo article and discussions in another thread.
Should AUK 1) Promote Everesting, and 2) Incorporate into the awards scheme.
My take is that, whilst clearly not Audax, it is long distance. AUK encourages climbing with the various AAA awards and OCD connection, so why can't Everesting be recognised? Like the AAA all-rounder award, perhaps it could be an unofficial recognition? And it should attract the 9AAA points.
Discuss.
-
I think the biggest impediment is that someone else already recognises it.
What if someone wants to just get 4AAA points by only doing 1/2 of the climbing of Everest? 2AAA points for 1/4 of the climbing, etc? Where do you draw the line?
Promoting it is one thing, finding a way to recognise it is much trickier.
-
I think the biggest impediment is that someone else already recognises it.
What if someone wants to just get 4AAA points by only doing 1/2 of the climbing of Everest? 2AAA points for 1/4 of the climbing, etc? Where do you draw the line?
Promoting it is one thing, finding a way to recognise it is much trickier.
The goal is Everesting. 8848m (or 8844 if global warming carries on)
You don't get 7points for packing halfway on LEL for example.
But yeah, the recognition else where could pose problems I guess. But then again, if overseas events can be used on AUK awards, maybe not?
-
As someone who has done an Everesting, it is not an Audax but a very specialised event and how would you get the stamps for it ? For example
-
As someone who has done an Everesting, it is not an Audax but a very specialised event and how would you get the stamps for it ? For example
Validation by GPS tracklog, as Everesting is currently done now (by Strava/etc).
Everesting came up a few years ago: https://yacf.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=10426.msg1817920#msg1817920
-
No
-
1) Yes, if it wants to. It is a form of (noncompetitive?) cycling, it is or can be long distance.
2) No. We've already got AAA points for climbing, let's not complicate things further by introducing more awards and more chances to compete.
-
As someone who has done an Everesting, it is not an Audax but a very specialised event and how would you get the stamps for it ? For example
Validation by GPS tracklog, as Everesting is currently done now (by Strava/etc).
Sure but goes against the spirit of an Audax which is about distinct point to point rides
-
You can't do a GPS DIY that is Everesting
Apparently, the repetitive way it goes up and down isn't in line with the Audax idea of going somewhere
Should we recognise it in some way?
No, sod it! We can't cover every crazy bike riding idea that someone comes up with
-
You can't do a GPS DIY that is Everesting
I'm sure you could if you actually rode up Everest :)
-
You can't do a GPS DIY that is Everesting
Apparently, the repetitive way it goes up and down isn't in line with the Audax idea of going somewhere
Should we recognise it in some way?
Yes, that was the question. If it was going to be recognised [by AUK] how could we validate it as receipts/photos/signatures just wouldn't work; the answer being by GPS tracklog.
-
There could always, of course, be routes involving "draughts at England's highest pub." :D
-
The High Rolleur concept that used to be clearly listed alongside Everesting but is now rather more difficult to find may be more Randonee Friendly
http://highrouleur.cc
-
You can't do a GPS DIY that is Everesting
I'm sure you could if you actually rode up Everest :)
Made a lot longer ride as you'd have to start at sea level.
-
Inventing arbitrary routes that happen to have lots of AAA points but don't go much of anywhere appears to be accepted practice, so I don't see much difference.
The goal is Everesting. 8848m (or 8844 if global warming carries on)
You don't get 7points for packing halfway on LEL for example.
Other mountains are avaliable.
-
I think the biggest impediment is that someone else already recognises it.
What if someone wants to just get 4AAA points by only doing 1/2 of the climbing of Everest? 2AAA points for 1/4 of the climbing, etc? Where do you draw the line?
Promoting it is one thing, finding a way to recognise it is much trickier.
The goal is Everesting. 8848m (or 8844 if global warming carries on)
You don't get 7points for packing halfway on LEL for example.
Sure, but you set out to complete the whole of LEL. My point was what if you only set out to just complete 1/2 an Everest? Or is it a case of "minimum of 8848m or nothing" like it is "minimum of 200km for a BR or nothing".
-
It's certainly on the spectrum between AUK and OCD.
-
I looked into Everesting and decided that riding up and down the same hill 100 times didn't interest me. I might try a hilly circuit and ride round that enough times to reach the height of Everest but that, apparently is not Everesting. Neither is it Audax, IMHO, as self-sufficiency is hardly tested when you can park a car at one end of the route and stack it full of supplies and even a spare bike should you wish.
That's not to belittle it. I reckoned I'd need to budget 20 hours. 20 hours of hard slog. That's far too close to a 24Hr TT for my liking. So Chapeau to anyone who does Everest.
-
No.
Having said that, I've got a hill marked out for Everesting next to Watlington campsite in The Chilterns that I still haven't looked at yet. I have it mind to try and do a group social Everesting using the campsite as a base for food, drink and sleep. I say sleep because I am thinking of doing 600km of hill reps to do ore than an Everest as a nod to Audax UK, but it definitely won't be an Audax ride. Just an Everest.
Not sure when but it'll probably have to be before May with everything else I want to do next year.
-
I don't think the connection with OCD is that obvious...
As far as I am aware, OCD is about "geographical cols" and it doesn't promote going up and down the same col n times... I think you can only claim one col 2 or 3 times in one year. In OCD there is also a minimum of 100 vertical metres for a col to be counted which would rule out half of the climbs people use for Everesting.
The connection with Audax? I would say it's antithetic... one has a rule to prevent riders from doing laps, the other has a rule that prescripts laps as the only acceptable way to achieve the result.
I also disagree that distance and mileage are the same thing. You can do 20 laps to go from Bradford to Leeds, but you haven't gone very far at all.
I can see the appeal to widen the "customer base", but then AUK should have jumped on the boat 5 years ago, when this thing was new and exciting and people were travelling the country to be the first to "Everest that climb"... now that all the "summits" have been Everested the novelty has worn off and it's time for something else...
-
Other mountains are avaliable.
How about Eiger-ing? Only 3967 mt, but the measurable section needs to be a slope with an average gradient > 10%.
(https://gripped.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Eiger-1-1024x768.jpg)
-
The "promotion" of Everesting so far has simply been an article in Arrivee. That's simply a recognition that some people who are interested in audax are also interested in Everesting. Obviously that overlap works in both directions and exists with many other cycling activities. People have mentioned that there already is a body recognizing Everesting but no one's named it (I presume it's British Cycing, but maybe there's a more specialist organisation?) so the overlap should hopefully be recognized from both sides. To an extent, it already does; it's probably no coincidence that the woman in the Arrivee article is a member of Bristol South rather than any of the various other clubs in the area, as they're a roadie sporty club whose jerseys are a regular sight on local audaxes. I think there are two people on YACF who are members of both Bristol South and AUK.
-
People have mentioned that there already is a body recognizing Everesting but no one's named it (I presume it's British Cycing, but maybe there's a more specialist organisation?) so the overlap should hopefully be recognized from both sides.
Not really a body: https://everesting.cc/
-
'Everesting' wasn't invented by them. They just popularised it in recent years, with a shiny website and some made up rules (along with Strava etc).
People have been cycling up big hills for years. If you want to cycle up the height of Everest, you can do so. And follow whatever rules you like. It could also be an audax if you want. It doesn't need to be hill reps.
-
No.
Having said that, I've got a hill marked out for Everesting next to Watlington campsite in The Chilterns that I still haven't looked at yet. I have it mind to try and do a group social Everesting using the campsite as a base for food, drink and sleep. I say sleep because I am thinking of doing 600km of hill reps to do ore than an Everest as a nod to Audax UK, but it definitely won't be an Audax ride. Just an Everest.
Not sure when but it'll probably have to be before May with everything else I want to do next year.
This is a great idea Steve!
(I think that hill would work quite well for the purpose, just in terms of profile. And of course being quite local to me ...).
pre-May sounds good (as I have a massive log-jam in my May/June calendar). Pencil me in - I'll take the photos, you can write the Awoowoo article :thumbsup:
Let me know if you want to co-ordinate.
-
I really can't think of anything that would come close to being as dull as Everesting, Watching paint drying would be more exciting. Going up and down the same hill climb for 10 or more hours a day? Fuck no ! Get a fucking life.
-
When I first heard of everesting it only counted if you were first to do it on any particular hill.
-
No. As WCTD points out (somewhat colourfully), audaxing and everesting are different things, and only one of them is interesting. I've no problem with getting 9 AAA points on a randonnee, but on a single hill...
Actually I once idly considered everesting my local hill (i.e. the one I live on), but a glance at the rules put me off as you have to go down the same route as you go up. I would much rather have done a loop on the lower part of the hill, as a U-turn at the busy T-junction at the bottom would not be a lot of fun. And I certainly wouldn't bother on a different hill.
-
It wouldn't be applicable for OCD - there's roolz about how often you can use the same hill or col and how high it needs to be
EDIT - just spotted WATW's post, really should read forwards from "new" not backwards from the last page.
-
It wouldn't be applicable for OCD - there's roolz about how often you can use the same hill or col and how high it needs to be
My mention of OCD was to show that not everything AUK administers/recognises/promotes/etc is strictly Audax. You can claim OCD cols/passes on rides other than Audaxes.
If AUK has a relationship with OCD (which aren't Audaxes) then AUK could have a relationship with Everesting.
Sure you can't do Everesting under the auspices of an Audax or OCD but what I'm saying is that: Everesting could be to OCD/AUK like OCD is to Audax.
-
No.
Having said that, I've got a hill marked out for Everesting next to Watlington campsite in The Chilterns that I still haven't looked at yet. I have it mind to try and do a group social Everesting using the campsite as a base for food, drink and sleep. I say sleep because I am thinking of doing 600km of hill reps to do ore than an Everest as a nod to Audax UK, but it definitely won't be an Audax ride. Just an Everest.
Not sure when but it'll probably have to be before May with everything else I want to do next year.
The longest Everesting seems to be 785km (in 43h38m climbing 20016m). (There are a couple longer but they seem impossible numbers, 23214km in 12h50m for example).
The most elevation is 30170m (641km in 100h34m, which seems very slow), someone else has done 29146m in 546km in 47h59m which seems more like it.
(Of course, this is just what the everesting.cc site lists.)
-
Doesn't AUK recognise the Mersey roads 24hr TT? Isn't that done on a circuit?
J
-
Doesn't AUK recognise the Mersey roads 24hr TT? Isn't that done on a circuit?
That's historical (the 24h TT used to be the only way to qualify for PBP before AUK existed). AUK simply awards points for distance covered in the 24h TT, it doesn't make it an Audax in any way.
-
When I first heard of everesting it only counted if you were first to do it on any particular hill.
Perhaps that should have its own term: Tenzing?
-
Don't - it only makes it worse.
-
If abroad then I reckon Tenerife is a contender. The El Medano - Teide road is a continuous climb from sea level to 2000m (edge of the crater) at an average of 6.5% (with no ramps over 10%) and can be done in just over 3 hours for the 23 miles - 50 minutes down! Mostly fantastic road surface and only a couple of junctions. Very light traffic.
I did it 5 times in a week in November. 4.5 times in a row should be possible ;)
-
It wouldn't be applicable for OCD - there's roolz about how often you can use the same hill or col and how high it needs to be
My mention of OCD was to show that not everything AUK administers/recognises/promotes/etc is strictly Audax. You can claim OCD cols/passes on rides other than Audaxes.
If AUK has a relationship with OCD (which aren't Audaxes) then AUK could have a relationship with Everesting.
Sure you can't do Everesting under the auspices of an Audax or OCD but what I'm saying is that: Everesting could be to OCD/AUK like OCD is to Audax.
Well put.
I'd also add that the OCD situation illustrates how AUK could extend it's activities to support many rides that are outside the current points-chasing declare-your-objectives min-distance-between-controls etc straight jacket.
The clubs remit/objective is to promote long-distance cycling* - I'd love to see us encourage people to ride a long way in formats outside the current setup :thumbsup:
*[that's the short version!]
-
The clubs remit/objective is to promote long-distance cycling* - I'd love to see us encourage people to ride a long way in formats outside the current setup :thumbsup:
*[that's the short version!]
Rename it then... instead of long distance, use "high mileage" and you can include all sorts of activities... indoor cycling, track cycling, lapping of Richmond Park, commuting to work and even Everesting
Long distance implies going somewhat far... for example: "Oh dear, you've done quite a lot of mileage to cover such a short distance"
-
Rename it then... instead of long distance, use "high mileage" and you can include all sorts of activities... indoor cycling, track cycling, lapping of Richmond Park, commuting to work and even Everesting
Long distance implies going somewhat far... for example: "Oh dear, you've done quite a lot of mileage to cover such a short distance"
I've done quite a lot of long distance cycling this year, I've cycled zero miles... just 10300km...
J
-
It wouldn't be applicable for OCD - there's roolz about how often you can use the same hill or col and how high it needs to be
My mention of OCD was to show that not everything AUK administers/recognises/promotes/etc is strictly Audax. You can claim OCD cols/passes on rides other than Audaxes.
If AUK has a relationship with OCD (which aren't Audaxes) then AUK could have a relationship with Everesting.
Sure you can't do Everesting under the auspices of an Audax or OCD but what I'm saying is that: Everesting could be to OCD/AUK like OCD is to Audax.
Well put.
I'd also add that the OCD situation illustrates how AUK could extend it's activities to support many rides that are outside the current points-chasing declare-your-objectives min-distance-between-controls etc straight jacket.
The clubs remit/objective is to promote long-distance cycling* - I'd love to see us encourage people to ride a long way in formats outside the current setup :thumbsup:
*[that's the short version!]
Support or promote? AUK already supports OCD, I think the point made here and in other contributions to this thread is that it could be far more heartily promoted.
-
The clubs remit/objective is to promote long-distance cycling* - I'd love to see us encourage people to ride a long way in formats outside the current setup :thumbsup:
*[that's the short version!]
Rename it then... instead of long distance, use "high mileage" and you can include all sorts of activities... indoor cycling, track cycling, lapping of Richmond Park, commuting to work and even Everesting
Long distance implies going somewhat far... for example: "Oh dear, you've done quite a lot of mileage to cover such a short distance"
That's already catered for with the Mileater Award
http://www.aukweb.net/results/mileater/
-
Going up and down the same hill climb for 10 or more hours a day? Fuck no ! Get a fucking life.
Not my idea of fun either, but then that's most peoples attitude to Audax, including most cyclists though maybe less so recently.
-
It wouldn't be applicable for OCD - there's roolz about how often you can use the same hill or col and how high it needs to be
My mention of OCD was to show that not everything AUK administers/recognises/promotes/etc is strictly Audax. You can claim OCD cols/passes on rides other than Audaxes.
If AUK has a relationship with OCD (which aren't Audaxes) then AUK could have a relationship with Everesting.
Sure you can't do Everesting under the auspices of an Audax or OCD but what I'm saying is that: Everesting could be to OCD/AUK like OCD is to Audax.
Well put.
I'd also add that the OCD situation illustrates how AUK could extend it's activities to support many rides that are outside the current points-chasing declare-your-objectives min-distance-between-controls etc straight jacket.
The clubs remit/objective is to promote long-distance cycling* - I'd love to see us encourage people to ride a long way in formats outside the current setup :thumbsup:
*[that's the short version!]
Support or promote? AUK already supports OCD, I think the point made here and in other contributions to this thread is that it could be far more heartily promoted.
"
encourage, promote, develop and control the sport and pastime of non-competitive long distance cycling in all its forms
"
I like "encourage" best :)
("non-competitive" doesn't fit very well with the sport of Tenzing :-\ So perhaps that stays out. )
-
Going up and down the same hill climb for 10 or more hours a day? Fuck no ! Get a fucking life.
Not my idea of fun either, but then that's most peoples attitude to Audax, including most cyclists though maybe less so recently.
At least Audax has a future... in 10 years time half the bikes will be electric... and I believe there is a great future for e-bikes in Audax... you can see how seriously all those everesting claims will be taken. Already the all Strava segments saga is becoming a joke and Everesting is the same thing in essence...
-
You can't do a GPS DIY that is Everesting
I'm sure you could if you actually rode up Everest :)
:) In theory, yes. But I suspect that the lack of roads and oxygen might be unwanted complications
-
It wouldn't be applicable for OCD - there's roolz about how often you can use the same hill or col and how high it needs to be
My mention of OCD was to show that not everything AUK administers/recognises/promotes/etc is strictly Audax. You can claim OCD cols/passes on rides other than Audaxes.
If AUK has a relationship with OCD (which aren't Audaxes) then AUK could have a relationship with Everesting.
Sure you can't do Everesting under the auspices of an Audax or OCD but what I'm saying is that: Everesting could be to OCD/AUK like OCD is to Audax.
Everesting already has it's website and list of riders. I think it better for Audax UK to acknowledge, unite with and publicise what already exists and hopefully, they do likewise with AUK, so that we both grow stronger without trying to take over from each other doing the same thing much less efficiently.
-
The longest Everesting seems to be 785km (in 43h38m climbing 20016m). (There are a couple longer but they seem impossible numbers, 23214km in 12h50m for example).
The most elevation is 30170m (641km in 100h34m, which seems very slow), someone else has done 29146m in 546km in 47h59m which seems more like it.
(Of course, this is just what the everesting.cc site lists.)
I'm not after the longest Everest. The hill I am thinking of needs less than 600km to do an Everest, so I'd be doing more than an Everest. I can't remeber but I think it was something like 2.5 Everests, or whatever. Just thought I'd do 600km, however many or few Everests it comes out at, so long as I get at least 1 Everest so I can tick that one off the list.
-
This is a great idea Steve!
(I think that hill would work quite well for the purpose, just in terms of profile. And of course being quite local to me ...).
pre-May sounds good (as I have a massive log-jam in my May/June calendar). Pencil me in - I'll take the photos, you can write the Awoowoo article :thumbsup:
Let me know if you want to co-ordinate.
:thumbsup:
-
Long distances in AUK are about the journey, not just the number of miles cycled.
Although my own view matters not a jot, I personally look on Everesting as a peurile and self-centred form of cycling at odds with the ethos of randonneuring, which forms the foundation of our organisation.
-
Long distances in AUK are about the journey, not just the number of miles cycled.
Although my own view matters not a jot, I personally look on Everesting as a peurile and self-centred form of cycling at odds with the ethos of randonneuring, which forms the foundation of our organisation.
I'd agree, up and down the same hill for 12 hours, i'd get bored and go for a ride.
-
I know a couple of people who've Everested and have great respect for their efforts. For me it doesn't seem any more obtuse or OCD than a doing a hilly 600 in shitty weather.
The Tenerife suggested above would be more or less guaranteed fantastic weather and stunning scenery (which would certainly bear a few passes).
In terms of ratifying or recognising, TG probably has it right. Easiest to keep things as they are.
-
Long distances in AUK are about the journey, not just the number of miles cycled.
yes, yes, yes...
In Everesting all the elements of an adventure are stripped off
-
If you're a regular audaxer a lot of rides (probably most) don't go anywhere you haven't been before, and they become as much about how long you can keep the pedals turning for as anything else.
As a physical challenge I'd say audax has more in common with Everesting than, say, the leisurely cycle tours that often feature on the pages of Arriveé that I've never seen anyone complain about.
-
Ive never understood why AUK spends time effort and money promoting stuff that isnt long distance cycling.
-
Doesn't AUK recognise the Mersey roads 24hr TT? Isn't that done on a circuit?
That's historical (the 24h TT used to be the only way to qualify for PBP before AUK existed). AUK simply awards points for distance covered in the 24h TT, it doesn't make it an Audax in any way.
When Wilko rode 541 miles on the Sussex 24 Hr TT, I estimated he'd completed 7000m ascent, so a little shy of an Everest. But not bad for someone setting a distance best on a TT.
The closest I got to Everesting was on the Cambrian 4C, where I'd complete about 7700m ascent at the 24 hour mark.
-
Ive never understood why AUK spends time effort and money promoting stuff that isnt long distance cycling.
How much money are they wasting in your opinion? ::-)
-
Has anyone noticed there appear to be no lights, red rear reflector or pedal reflectors (hard to confirm I know) on the bike on the front cover? I thought I’d know if the Highway Code had changed 🤔
-
Audaxers have to ride a machine complying with road traffic laws. Highway Code doesn't enter into it.
-
6 pedant points to FF. The Highway Code is a summary of various Road Traffic Laws, we all know what the OP meant.
Technically, to out pedant the pedant, they do not *HAVE* to ride a machine complying with road traffic laws.
Reg 9.3.2 states "The responsibility for ensuring that a machine complies with the road traffic laws rests solely with the rider." i.e. there is no responsibility on the organiser or AUK.
Indeed, very few machines I've seen on Audaxes comply with all of the road traffic laws, so if it was an AUK requirement then plenty of people would have their validated Brevets struck from the lists.
-
Has anyone noticed there appear to be no lights, red rear reflector or pedal reflectors (hard to confirm I know) on the bike on the front cover? I thought I’d know if the Highway Code had changed 🤔
Unless the photo is taken between the hours of sunset and sunrise, then there is no requirement to have reflectors or lights. They are only required by law if you are riding in the hours of sunset and sunrise. There is some debate on if this is the case if you are a foreign national riding a bike from abroad, at which point the vienna convention applies, which seems to have no mention of which hours the lights need to be operational, nor does it specify that the reflectors have to be fitted only at night.
When it comes to road traffic laws as they apply to human powered vehicles, many people don't realise that their bike doesn't comply. When I entered RatN earlier this year, rule 1 said obey Dutch traffic laws. So I ran the text through google translate and read it. Which is when I realised that the race rules regarding reflectors/lights, contradicted Dutch traffic law, when taken at the common interpretation. I put far more effort than I perhaps needed to, into making sure that my bike did comply with both the rules of the race, and the law of the land. I need to put the reflectors back on my wheels (I took them off when truing the wheel), so that it once again complies with the vienna convention before I venture to Germany in a week or so.
J
-
I’ve no issue with people Everesting, although it wasn’t an Audax (neither was the C2C story in this latest issue, but it still made for good reading if the editor didn’t receive rough Audax reports), but it is obviously dark in the cover photo (car headlights). I know Audax UK wouldn’t condone breaking road traffic laws, I just wondered if this was spotted before the mag was printed.
Aside from that, the only times I’ve ridden up a (short) hill several times have been on an hour’s training ride, hoping to improve my climbing ability. If they became Audaxes, I’d find them easier to dnf. Interesting to read about Everesting, but yes, keep them separate.
-
I’ve no issue with people Everesting, although it wasn’t an Audax (neither was the C2C story in this latest issue, but it still made for good reading if the editor didn’t receive rough Audax reports), but it is obviously dark in the cover photo (car headlights). I know Audax UK wouldn’t condone breaking road traffic laws, I just wondered if this was spotted before the mag was printed.
Pedantry. Lighting up time for motor vehicles vs pedal cycles is different. Not to mention that all vehicles in the EU sold since 2011. The presence of a motor vehicle with the lights on is no conclusive indicator that a bike was required to also have lights on.
Aside from that, the only times I’ve ridden up a (short) hill several times have been on an hour’s training ride, hoping to improve my climbing ability. If they became Audaxes, I’d find them easier to dnf. Interesting to read about Everesting, but yes, keep them separate.
My first DIY Audax was done primarily as an attempt at a hill (Signal de Botrange). I wanted to see if I could do a 100k audax whilst also including a boat load of climbing. Not quite enough for an AAA point, but it was an interesting exercise. 34°C temperatures.
I don't think everesting should be something that AUK actively seeks to include in it's validation system, however if we wanted to do so, then it could perhaps be done as an exception, the say way Mersey Roads is, you'd have to cover at least 200km, you'd have to do it in under 13.5 hours, and you'd get 8.75 points out of it. Validation as done by GPX. I don't think there's any pressing need to do this, but it's perhaps a methodology that would permit it. Tho it does go against the current rules on not normally validating a DIY that uses the same bit of road. The regs say "not normally validated", so I assume there is some discretion in there somewhere.
J
-
Ive never understood why AUK spends time effort and money promoting stuff that isnt long distance cycling.
How much money are they wasting in your opinion? ::-)
I on the other hand have enjoyed Arrive so far, its great to read a breadth of stories such as that of Alice's and also that interview in the most recent issue where they had a professional cyclist and an audaxer asked the same questions. It was great to read their responses and draw comparisons.
Cycling is cycling.
-
Doesn't AUK recognise the Mersey roads 24hr TT? Isn't that done on a circuit?
That's historical (the 24h TT used to be the only way to qualify for PBP before AUK existed). AUK simply awards points for distance covered in the 24h TT, it doesn't make it an Audax in any way.
The way that happened was that 24 hour TTs were in decline, and may have disappeared completely. It became obvious that the event was being sustained by Audax riders who were treating it as a challenge. Points were a way of bolstering the Audax support.
The composition of the board, and the AGM attendance, naturally supported an event they had experience of. It's entirely possible that it would be possible to mobilise support for novel forms of validated ride.
The main barrier to following fashion would seem to be the cost of altering the website to accommodate changes.
-
So going by her Strava we have a start time of 5:30 and an elapsed time of 12:30, finishing around 6 pm. Sunrise was 6:01 am and sunset was 8:24 pm on August 19. So I suspect the picture was taken at dawn. Civil twilight was at 5:25 am.
So it was probably still fairly dark when she started but rapidly getting lighter. Seems fair enough to me.
-
Has anyone noticed there appear to be no lights, red rear reflector or pedal reflectors (hard to confirm I know) on the bike on the front cover? I thought I’d know if the Highway Code had changed 🤔
Does that mean that I won the 24 hour TT in 2015 as I can disqualify all the riders without orange pedal reflectors, a legal requirement when riding in the dark? I reckon my SPD pedals (with sandals of course) gave me a winning edge.
-
Does that mean that I won the 24 hour TT in 2015 as I can disqualify all the riders without orange pedal reflectors, a legal requirement when riding in the dark? I reckon my SPD pedals (with sandals of course) gave me a winning edge.
Careful. Only throw those stones if you can be 100% certain your bike complies with every single letter of the law. Make sure any reflectors you have comply with the right BS standards, make sure your lights comply with a BS standard, or equivalent EU standard (how this one works come April is anyone's guess...). Plod, at least one who knew their shit, could pretty much stop every single cyclist and fine them for something...
J
-
Has anyone noticed there appear to be no lights, red rear reflector or pedal reflectors (hard to confirm I know) on the bike on the front cover? I thought I’d know if the Highway Code had changed 🤔
Does that mean that I won the 24 hour TT in 2015 as I can disqualify all the riders without orange pedal reflectors, a legal requirement when riding in the dark? I reckon my SPD pedals (with sandals of course) gave me a winning edge.
Did you have front/rear reflectors too (or lights with built in reflectors that had a BS/EU stamp on them)?
I was pedal reflector legal in the 2016 Mersey Roads 24TT thanks to my Click'r pedals but I didn't have front/rear reflectors (and my lights didn't have built in reflectors), so wasn't fully legal when riding at night.
-
Wheel and front white reflectors at night are optional. We had a co-ordinator who’d send letters to the schools saying the kids bikes had to have a red rear reflector on them. We’d point out only at night. Lots of parents were in the habit of buying their kids a new bike ready for Bikeability, then having to take the seatpost reflector off to get the saddle low enough so that they could reach the floor!
-
Good point, forgot it's only the rear reflector (and pedal) reflectors that are required at "night".
-
Where is that post about making Arrivée more dull? I have an idea for an article ...
-
So going by her Strava we have a start time of 5:30 and an elapsed time of 12:30, finishing around 6 pm. Sunrise was 6:01 am and sunset was 8:24 pm on August 19. So I suspect the picture was taken at dawn. Civil twilight was at 5:25 am.
So it was probably still fairly dark when she started but rapidly getting lighter. Seems fair enough to me.
The picture is pointing east (the climb is north to south), and the sky is light in that direction, so I'd say you're right :thumbsup:
-
My brother did it yesterday on Farleigh Hill, just south of Basingstoke - 160 reps of about 1 mile.
https://www.strava.com/activities/4286969925 (https://www.strava.com/activities/4286969925)
-
Good point, forgot it's only the rear reflector (and pedal) reflectors that are required at "night".
Unless the saddle at its highest point when safely adjusted is less than 635mm. In which case there is no requirement. So some kids bikes will be exempt, as well as some recumbents.