GPS for PERMS

[PloddinPedro]

Great to hear a few thoughts.  Here is one to set you thinking.

I rode my Gospel Pass 200 Perm (Sat 6 Nov) (that's No 12 for my first AAARTY) and was using my gps trying to follow a track I had loaded.  Track did not read right but that did not matter as I happen to have ridden the GP Perm several times this year.  Here comes the point.  Whilst descending to Monmouth the screen went blank, uncommanded switch off!  Restarted and forgot to press start for 25km; OK, still no problem, as I could explain the resulting download.  On downloading to Training Centre, none of my ride appeared. Explain that to the Validator!  No problem for me, as I recorded normal paper and stamps (especially at Llanthony Half Moon , where they have a Sustrans stamp for Anglesey - Cardiff), and a few photos where I use infos.

As Organiser, I do not think I would look kindly to an excuse of the gps Track having been lost, if NO other evidence of the ride was available. Just a warning.

SteveP

Steve, your experience is just another illustration of that age-old Audax saying “if it can go wrong it will, so always have a back up”!

In the same way that traditional Audaxers usually carry a spare routesheet/map, etc. in case the first gets waterlogged, blown away or lost, then GPS users should carry a spare unit. In the case of rides to be evidenced by GPS, the second unit needs to be run simultaneously so as to record a back up tracklog. The problem here of course, is that GPS units are a lot more expensive than paper! Second hand stuff bought relatively cheaply on ebay comes into play here, but it does need a bit of preparation. Just like most things to do with Audaxing really!

[PloddinPedro]

.....The use of GPS validation could actually allow the range of perms to be extended.  For instance, when I rode my Upper Thames in July to check the route, I did it as a GPS perm.  If we move this way, I could well see me supplying a route with map co-ordinates instead of infos, especially as the location of my infos (and the number, being more than 1) does not otherwise make the route easily perm-able.

The trouble is that this makes audax a two-tier system, with much of the membership excluded from events because they don't have a GPS.  We have to accept that many people don't want a GPS.  I'm not comfortable with them being excluded because of this.

I don’t really see the emergence of GPS validation as creating “a two-tier system” at least in any material way. It seems to me that GPS validation is expanding the number of rides (mainly of the DIY nature at present.)

The only way that I can see “traditional” riders being disadvantaged by the move towards GPS validation is if rides presently available on a paper-based system switch to GPS validation only and become no longer available to traditional riders. I really can’t see this happening to Calendar events any time soon and Permanent organisers already have their rides working by paper.

The only way GPS validation impacts in this context is to increase the number of Permanents as a consequence of organisers inventing and publishing new Permanents because it’s now easier to do so if GPS is used. But this would serve to increase the total number of events available, albeit to only GPS users, rather than switch rides to GPS only. I see this as a good thing, although I accept that as far as these additional rides are concerned, they do create a two-tier situation.

Quite a bit of the Audax scene is “one-sided” if you look at it as a competition – some areas have far more events available without having to travel, some have a more favourable climate, the retired rider has more time, etc. But it’s not a competition is it (apart from the elite few)? It’s supposed to be about encouraging long distance cycling and the more opportunities to do this, the better surely?

[don black]

There is also the question of how to pass on route information long term.
Take the example of the late Andrew Manwells Applecross super grimpeur.
No one took this on but at the time it was a popular perm.
The controls have largely disappeared but I think it's a nice route
and quite a good one for GPS validation. I can remember the route,
but when I came to look for the route sheet it had got lobbed.
How can this ride be passed on in the cycling community? Is a gpx
file enough?
Don Black.

[PloddinPedro]

There is also the question of how to pass on route information long term.
Take the example of the late Andrew Manwells Applecross super grimpeur.
No one took this on but at the time it was a popular perm.
The controls have largely disappeared but I think it's a nice route
and quite a good one for GPS validation. I can remember the route,
but when I came to look for the route sheet it had got lobbed.
How can this ride be passed on in the cycling community? Is a gpx
file enough?
Don Black.

If anyone wanted to ride this as a DIY with GPS validation, providing the .gpx file would be all they would need to start with. They'd then just get the route approved by the relevant DIY validation person, buy a DIY by GPS electronic Brevet and go ride it.

[Billy Weir]

There is also the question of how to pass on route information long term.
Take the example of the late Andrew Manwells Applecross super grimpeur.

As I think you are implying, GPS is a force for good, as it means that once the routes are known/remembered (even in outline) it can allow classic, but defunct routes, to be ridden by others.  Indeed, validation by GPS (or similar) might be more likely to "preserve" routes as audax events than pure paper based perms.  It is simply less onerous to make certain routes available by GPS than by traditional "hard" controls.

An example that springs to mind is the Tayside Transgression 300, which was a noble ride run out of Powmill (nr Kinross) by (from memory) Fin that looped up to Pitlochry, along to Glen Lyon and then meandered down through Gleneagle.  It hasn't been run for a number of years and there are no hints that it will be revived.  I suspect it would be a real struggle to get the powers that be to accept that particular route as a paper based permanent (given some isolated info controls) but it would be relatively straightforward to make it available by GPS.  I am sure there are others.

Part of me wonders if and when we will see the rise of "GPS only" permanents that people like me (i.e. keen to share my knowledge and my favourite routes/roads with others) can offer; with risk assesments and all of the usual gubbins, naturally.

[Ivo]

I'd be very willing to ride a GPS Perm knowing that someone with local knowledge made the GPS route/track so I know it's a nice one. Same also the other way round, I'd be happy to share my own GPS routes/tracks of the rides in my area I'm satisfied about.
Currently I'm only one step away from organising classic permanents (still haven't found someone based in the UK who wants to function as the formal organiser), GPS validation would make it possible to run my 200 (based on my 200 BRM) via the nice route I'll use on the official event from next year on. Getting a paper receipt forces you to go around that route since it cuts trough a forest without services.

[Manotea]

Part of me wonders if and when we will see the rise of "GPS only" permanents that people like me (i.e. keen to share my knowledge and my favourite routes/roads with others) can offer; with risk assesments and all of the usual gubbins, naturally.

Its already here. Its called a GPS DIY Perm and its completely gubbins free. The  issue is that as yet there is no formal method for publishing the routes.

The Perm is Dead. Long live the Perm.

[mattc]

Part of me wonders if and when we will see the rise of "GPS only" permanents that people like me (i.e. keen to share my knowledge and my favourite routes/roads with others) can offer; with risk assesments and all of the usual gubbins, naturally.

Its already here. Its called a GPS DIY Perm and its completely gubbins free. The  issue is that as yet there is no formal method for publishing the routes.

Of course we already have a zillion routes posted on Bikely et al. But they lack two things:
- "controls points" i.e. what are the smallest number of fixed points on the route (AIUI the DIY orgs don't appreciate 50 controls per 200k)
- metadata; where is good to eat, which roads are sh1te on a saturday afternoon

I predict a chaotic mix of solutions to this problem i.e. the way everything happens on the web unless money is involved!

[Greenbank]

I think Manotea's point was that you can enter the Perm, buying the route and other such information such as cafe/control suggestions from the Perm organiser, and then use a DIY by GPS to ride that exact route without the need to stick to the Perm's proof-of-passage requirements. It'll only cost a little bit more since you're having to enter the DIY on top of the Perm.

[Billy Weir]

Part of me wonders if and when we will see the rise of "GPS only" permanents that people like me (i.e. keen to share my knowledge and my favourite routes/roads with others) can offer; with risk assesments and all of the usual gubbins, naturally.

Its already here. Its called a GPS DIY Perm and its completely gubbins free. The  issue is that as yet there is no formal method for publishing the routes.

The Perm is Dead. Long live the Perm.

If that is the case, then roll on the day when there is an online repository of routes that is well indexed and searchable.

At the moment, I am not entirely comfortable with the lack of shared routes between riders as it has the potential to fundamentally change the nature of participation in AUK events.  Indeed, I suspect it is already doing so - e.g. why bother making the effort to do a listed permanent or calendar event if it is so much easier to do an event from home at a time of one's choosing?  It may also make trophies and awards even more about one type of ability: availability.

[Martin]

I've validated DIY perms that used existing perm routes (the rider presumably having already entered the proper perm once so as to get the route sheet) no idea whether this is morally right

I have a DIY perm that fulfills all of mattc's suggestions; but because it's too long I've found the easiest way to shorten it; run it as an X calendar event and use info controls

http://www.egcc.net/display-items.asp?intTypeID=90&intItemID=579

I think perms that allow validation by GPS are a bit of a half-way house as you still require a route sheet and physical controls to allow a level playing field for those without GPS; DIY (with a good shared database of approved routes) is the way to go

[Billy Weir]

Who knows what is moral and what isn't.

All I can say is that I would find it a tad cheeky and borderline rude if I found out someone was using one of my routes as a DIY event, particularly a permanent event that I specifically went to the time and expense of pulling together and maintaining, and which are not time limited (unlike calendar events).  Likewise if anyone did my calendar events close to the date of the event running (unless they ask me in advance - normally I would say yes but would at least be aware of how alternative dates etc that might attract more entries).

As a related aside, I've already withdrawn one permanent event of mine for lack of entries.  It would be a pity if this lack of entries reflected it being done, but as a DIY by GPS.  I have no way of knowing though.

[Martin]

Who knows what is moral and what isn't.

All I can say is that I would find it a tad cheeky and borderline rude if I found out someone was using one of my routes as a DIY event, particularly a permanent event that I specifically went to the time and expense of pulling together and maintaining

oops   just realised I did that on Saturday; don't worry I'll see you right for that; a great route  

the example above was someone who wanted to do a 200 at short notice and the perm in question happended to go past his house which the proper perm did not have a control anywhere near; plus he was unable to get an entry in time from the proper organiser.

but I digress; organisers don't own the roads; and an awful lot of perm and calendar routes around the UK use the same section of road for the simple reason that they are very nice

[mattc]

Who knows what is moral and what isn't.

All I can say is that I would find it a tad cheeky and borderline rude if I found out someone was using one of my routes as a DIY event, particularly a permanent event that I specifically went to the time and expense of pulling together and maintaining,

Even if they'd already paid you once to ride it?

[It seems unlikely that anyone would do this, but I can see a use for tweaking a route slightly e.g. to start from home and/or convenient station. Or to extend to a longer event - we don't have ECEs for perms!]

[Martin]

Who knows what is moral and what isn't.

All I can say is that I would find it a tad cheeky and borderline rude if I found out someone was using one of my routes as a DIY event, particularly a permanent event that I specifically went to the time and expense of pulling together and maintaining,

Even if they'd already paid you once to ride it?

[It seems unlikely that anyone would do this, but I can see a use for tweaking a route slightly e.g. to start from home and/or convenient station. Or to extend to a longer event - we don't have ECEs for perms!]

I've strung DIY's and Dinner darts together from bits of old routes I especially like;

as I said earlier we don't own the roads

[Billy Weir]

oops   just realised I did that on Saturday; don't worry I'll see you right for that; a great route  

Meh, it's not listed properly yet and you more than repayed me by venturing out and giving it a bash.

but I digress; organisers don't own the roads; and an awful lot of perm and calendar routes around the UK use the same section of road for the simple reason that they are very nice

To my eyes, there is a fundamental difference between being inspired by stretches of an event (I do it myself) and taking an established event and essentially copying it verbatim (with the only modification being a short hop to get from home onto the event route proper).  As I said, there is time and expense involved in setting up permanent events and also maintaining them.  It would be fine if AUK organised all events centrally, but instead one person's efforts (the event organiser) is - to coin a phrase - lining the nest of another (the DIY organiser).

Even if they'd already paid you once to ride it?

Yes.  As an aside, for multiple entries I do provide a discount when asekd (e.g. for a recent bulk order of 12 for the Surrey Hills, the fee reduced to £1.50 a card.  Which covered costs of £1 for (upfront) printing of the brevet card and £0.50 for postage when sending to John Ward for validation.

Also, simply asking a permanent organiser "can I start from home and what proof of control can I give you" more often than not will result in a helpful outcome.

I do worry about the future of AUK if individuals really cannot be bothered entering into a dialogue with organisers, doing a little planning ahead or compromising a little by cycling to a suitable control location from home.

[mattc]

...
 As I said, there is time and expense involved in setting up permanent events and also maintaining them.  It would be fine if AUK organised all events centrally, but instead one person's efforts (the event organiser) is - to coin a phrase - lining the nest of another (the DIY organiser).

The Rise of the DIY (2005-, DVD colour / Hardback 324pp) has, in my view, been encouraged by the patchy information available for existing "proper" perms. We've discussed this issue before, but as the online mapping gets better, and more folks use GPSes, the DIY looks ever more appealing. If a real perm exists in my area, I'd rather ride that, but unless a rider has stumbled across a good perm (by riding the calendar version, or knowing the organiser) he/she doesn't know that it is worth finding!

Even if they'd already paid you once to ride it?

Yes.  As an aside, for multiple entries I do provide a discount when asekd (e.g. for a recent bulk order of 12 for the Surrey Hills, the fee reduced to £1.50 a card.  Which covered costs of £1 for (upfront) printing of the brevet card and £0.50 for postage when sending to John Ward for validation.

Also, simply asking a permanent organiser "can I start from home and what proof of control can I give you" more often than not will result in a helpful outcome.

I do worry about the future of AUK if individuals really cannot be bothered entering into a dialogue with organisers, doing a little planning ahead or compromising a little by cycling to a suitable control location from home.

Fair enough 

[Martin]

but instead one person's efforts (the event organiser) is - to coin a phrase - lining the nest of another (the DIY organiser).

I do worry about the future of AUK if individuals really cannot be bothered entering into a dialogue with organisers, doing a little planning ahead or compromising a little by cycling to a suitable control location from home.

This was a one off situation done at 2 days notice; it was not possible to organise the proper perm (which required an entirely postal entry with no dialogue) at such notice and it was as a DIY by GPS; that's all  

believe me I'm inundated as it is (3 trips to the post box last night between 21.00 and 23.00 to post DIY cards and completed DIYs/ ECE's; not to mention correcting erroneous AUK numbers that some numpty had entered) so I'm not trying to attract extra business;

if someone were to ask me could they ride say from Edenbridge to Green St Green to...

I think I'd point them to the right person pronto  

FWIW I CNBA much with proper perms anymore unless they are new routes (like yours Billy) or ones I've ridden a few times and have already prepared a gdb for. Preparing a gdb from a sheet of paper has its drawbacks.

[Ivo]

I have no problems at all if anyone wishes to use one of my BRM routes for DIY purposes. I've designed the routes to be ridden, not to be my own property.

[vorsprung]

The xmas local 200 + a pub at xmas is a DIY by GPS this year.

Fortunately I don't care as I have to cut off early to get to a prior enguagement.  I guess if I was very keen and riding the full distance I could just get a copy of one of the other peoples GPS tracks, as we are riding in a group

But it shows the way things are going, I'm going to have to get a GPS at some point

[frankly frankie]

I guess if I was very keen and riding the full distance I could just get a copy of one of the other peoples GPS tracks, as we are riding in a group

er - that would make a nonsense of the validation wouldn't it?

Or was that the idea?

[Ian H]

I guess if I was very keen and riding the full distance I could just get a copy of one of the other peoples GPS tracks, as we are riding in a group

er - that would make a nonsense of the validation wouldn't it?

Or was that the idea?

It raises an interesting question. Both the organiser of the route and the regional DIY co-ordinator are down to ride this event and therefore are likely to be in a position to verify V's ride. Can/should they be considered as independent observers to sign his card?

[vorsprung]

I guess if I was very keen and riding the full distance I could just get a copy of one of the other peoples GPS tracks, as we are riding in a group

er - that would make a nonsense of the validation wouldn't it?

Or was that the idea?

Well, I don't see that it is nonsense to use a copy of a digital track

Provided that the second person providing the track rides exactly the same route, it is the same information that would be supplied if the first person had a GPS recorder unit.  All the unit is doing is recording where someone is. 

So if you are with the unit, it doesn't matter if it is your unit, if it is on another bike or if the second person will also use it to make a claim

[Martin]

So if you are with the unit, it doesn't matter if it is your unit, if it is on another bike or if the second person will also use it to make a claim

so by the same token if you are both riding together does only one of you need to get receipts, or bother with a DIY card?  

[Ian H]

So if you are with the unit...

How do we know that?