ECE the route check

[quixoticgeek]

Slightly unusual edgecase.

As an organiser of a calendar event, you can ride it upto 2 weeks ahead of the event, and it is still validated as if you did the ride. If I wanted to ECE the route check, that would in theory be ECEing the calendar event, but it's not on the date of the calendar event.

How does this work? Does the system allow for ECEing a calendar event on a different day?

J

[Manotea]

Working from first principles, the ECE is linked to a Calendar event, so the ECE would be deemed to have taken place on the date of the Calendar event.

The only additional step would be to notify the ECE Organiser why the date on the PoP differs from the date of the Calendar event.

An email to the ECE Org CC the Calendar event Org would probably suffice.

But really, the person to ask is the ECE Org.

[Martin]

yes no problem  as organiser you are allowed the same advantages as any rider which includes ECEing;

enter in the normal way (you don't have to have entered the calendar event via the entry page on the website) using the ECE this event button, and when you submit the track just let me know it's part of a helpers' ride so I can update the calendar not the ridden date.

[psyclist]

One additional point. If you are doing an RRTY you’ll need to let the RRTY person know that you rode it as a route check on a different day, if that was in a different month.

[frankly frankie]

How does this work? Does the system allow for ECEing a calendar event on a different day?

From a system point of view - currently, ECEs get paired with their 'host' ride because (a) it is the same (member) rider and (b) it is the same riding date.  Any results that match this get paired as an ECE'd ride.  It's an over-simplistic way of doing it and improvements are in the pipeline, but currently that's what happens.

So the system has no problem with your proposal provided both riding dates are correctly recorded.

However in practice it's unlikely that the event riding date will be correctly recorded - more likely than not it will default to the event calendared date.  This is because it's a condition of helper rides that they appear as part of the event, which means that  there is no system way for Organisers to notify the Validator that the ride is a helper ride, or to adjust the individual's date ridden themselves - there was no perceived need for this when the system was set up.

Either you apply to the Recorder to edit your event record to correct the actual date ridden - this is the best option because it results in a 'correct' reecord of what actually occurred - NB in this case despite the edit the visible event listings are not affected (event finish lists are not date-dependent), everything still works.  This also automatically addresses the RRTY point.

Or you apply to Martin to falsify your ECE date to match the (incorrect) default event date ridden.  This IMO is not the best option because you end up with two falsified rows of data - but it does work and I guess may be the more commonly-used option.

[Martin]

FF I take exception to the word "falsify"

All I'm doing is pairing up the ECE to the event so the helpers get the full distance on the same day, exactly the same principle as anyone riding an non ECE'd event under helpers' rules, do they all get the riding date amended to the correct one rather than the calendar date? I suspect the answer is almost always no.

The previous RRTY org had no problem with crediting the ridden date to a different month if that was required. To have the helpers and calendar rides in different AUK seasons is not really on

[frankly frankie]

These are ride records, to be archived in perpetuity.  It's what AUK does.  They should be an accurate representation of what actually happened.

The problem is that when people introduce bright new ideas** - as they are democratically entitled to do via an AGM motion and vote - they don't always consider the systemic implications.  As a result the system gets progressively fudged, rather than designed.
Historical examples of this include Helper rides, ECEs, ROA, DIYs with cards ordered in batches.  I do know that you engaged in a lot of consultation before you introduced ECEs, but with hindsight the end result is still a fudge, and that is in no way your fault.
Even so, the system can record ECE'd Helper rides correctly and so that is what should happen - it just means getting the Recorder (or the Validator) involved*** - and I don't imagine it's a frequent occurence.  But of course - apart from this thread - nobody knows this.

** this is not a dig at ECEs - I think they are a completely admirable development.  Likewise Helper rides.  I'm much less enthusiastic about ROA and DIYs generally - but obviously members have the right to evolve our club in any way they want.

*** for now - as I say improvents are in the pipeline, and they will remove any date dependency at all so all this would go away - but its unlikely they'll get implemented until the end of New Web Phase III

[Martin]

Thanks FF but Helpers rides have been around for at least as long as I've been organising (15 years) so they are not a new thing.

If AUK decide (by which I mean at an AGM) that having organisers ride on different dates to everyone else upsets the space time continuum fair enough, we can probably work with them as DIY,
(or even DIY+EPE!!) as long as they get the same AAA (let's not go into whether they also count for the points champs!)

[quixoticgeek]

Thanks FF but Helpers rides have been around for at least as long as I've been organising (15 years) so they are not a new thing.

If AUK decide (by which I mean at an AGM) that having organisers ride on different dates to everyone else upsets the space time continuum fair enough, we can probably work with them as DIY,
(or even DIY+EPE!!) as long as they get the same AAA (let's not go into whether they also count for the points champs!)

Except the DIY thing doesn't work if the calendar event is a BRM.


J

[Martin]

Thanks FF but Helpers rides have been around for at least as long as I've been organising (15 years) so they are not a new thing.

If AUK decide (by which I mean at an AGM) that having organisers ride on different dates to everyone else upsets the space time continuum fair enough, we can probably work with them as DIY,
(or even DIY+EPE!!) as long as they get the same AAA (let's not go into whether they also count for the points champs!)

Except the DIY thing doesn't work if the calendar event is a BRM.


J

no, and don't ACP etc require a list of riders on each BRM on the same date? the organiser might disappear from their own event results even if it's called the same ride.

[L CC]

What happens in AUK results is largely irrelevant to ACP.

[frankly frankie]

Thanks FF but Helpers rides have been around for at least as long as I've been organising (15 years) so they are not a new thing.

Sure they have, and the system has been around for a lot longer still (the fundamentals date back to the early 90s).
The ability to assign an individual 'date ridden' to an event ride dates back to the early noughties, so Helper rides could be correctly recorded from that date - but often weren't for the reasons I stated upthread, there was no real incentive given that Helper rides were supposed to be considered as 'part of the  event', and so no systemic aids were developed to help organisers/recorders to get it right.

However things started to get messy when, for example, a well-known member (and of this parish) did a helper ride to route-check a 400 and then rode another 400, on the other side of the country, on the event date.  Laissez-faire recording did not handle that well!

no, and don't ACP etc require a list of riders on each BRM on the same date? the organiser might disappear from their own event results even if it's called the same ride.

No an event results list isn't date-dependent at all.  The only date in use is in the list header, and so is common to everyone listed. This works for AUK or for ACP (who are fully signed-up to helper rides as a concept, following AUK's lead).
However if you switch to a rider's Rides List, the actual date ridden is used and that list is correctly sorted by that actual date.  This date ridden information is not passed to ACP.

[Martin]

Thanks FF but Helpers rides have been around for at least as long as I've been organising (15 years) so they are not a new thing.

Sure they have, and the system has been around for a lot longer still (the fundamentals date back to the early 90s).
The ability to assign an individual 'date ridden' to an event ride dates back to the early noughties, so Helper rides could be correctly recorded from that date - but often weren't for the reasons I stated upthread, there was no real incentive given that Helper rides were supposed to be considered as 'part of the  event', and so no systemic aids were developed to help organisers/recorders to get it right.

However things started to get messy when, for example, a well-known member (and of this parish) did a helper ride to route-check a 400 and then rode another 400, on the other side of the country, on the event date.  Laissez-faire recording did not handle that well!

well that's quite clearly verboten and more fool the organiser for letting it happen, and abuses of the helper ride agreement like that should not affect the facility that's well used by everyone else. A helpers ride is just that, a chance to ride the event because the rider will be manning a teapot or a control on the day of the ride.

In any case the system wouldn't prevent both rides being recorded on the same date for the rider

[quixoticgeek]

well that's quite clearly verboten and more fool the organiser for letting it happen, and abuses of the helper ride agreement like that should not affect the facility that's well used by everyone else. A helpers ride is just that, a chance to ride the event because the rider will be manning a teapot or a control on the day of the ride.

In any case the system wouldn't prevent both rides being recorded on the same date for the rider

Disagree. Part of the purpose of the helper ride is to check the route, to make sure that things haven't changed, or the plan is valid etc... As such, if the ride organiser can't make it, having a trusted helper ride the route check seems entirely within the rules both the letter and spirit.

If that person having volunteered to check the route then rides another ride on the day of the event, that is entirely fair too. They did their job by checking the route.

J

[Manotea]

Agreed. The problem above arose because of a limitation of the admin system not from a breach of the rules. The AUK DB records the officially recognised result which can differ from the actuality, so if helpers rides occur another day then it doesnt impact the event result as such. Whist it would be great if the systems issue could be designed out in the new website that seems extremely unlikely. Last year I proposed changes which would have addressed these issues and they were voted down by the Board. Pro tem such issues can only be addressed on a case by case  approach supported by the central admin team. Happily they are fairly few and far between.

[LittleWheelsandBig]

The original explicit justification for helper rides were solely for ride crew who were unable to ride the event itself because they were assisting during the event. Riding another event on the same day was verboten, except for organisers routechecking multiple events on the same day and not being able to ride those events on the day. The concept of ‘ride helper’ has broadened (in most organisations) since then but that was the original intent of the rule.

[Manotea]

The key word in that statement is 'original' and comes back to the perception that local practices which might touch on BRMs have to be signed off by ACP. The scope of AUK operations has moved on considerably since this particular issue was advanced. Things move on and AUK regulations, guidance and systems need to reflect that.

Unfortunately there is a strong reactionary influence in operation with many of the great and the good, including some on the AUK Board, who regret and given the option would simply scrap the various innovations implemented over the last twenty years, including DIYs, ECEs, instant validation, etc. and return AUK to being simply an arm of ACP running standard  BRM and other ACP awards. This is unlikely to happen however such attitudes slows progress and generally makes life more difficult. Such has always been the case...tensions between reactionary and progressive forces are nothing new.

[peter simplex]

Is progress always good?  As someone who perhaps rode with the great and good [although not so great or good] and organised and marshalled events 'back in the day' for no possible "points" recompense,  I am baffled by the range of 'add-ons'  which have appeared in recent years.  For what end, though?  Increasing the solitary miles ridden while increasing the bag of points?   I have no interest in this kind of 'progress' but as long as people are willing to administer it and calendar events are still central,  I'm relaxed about it, conservative, but not reactionary.

[frankly frankie]

They're just other ways of encouraging more people to cycle further, which is AUK's mission statement.  I would agree that mission has crept away from AUK's origins as "exclusive club for cyclists that are well'ard" but that creep did set in pretty early on.  Personally I have always thought that DIYs are 'a step too far' for our type of regulated riding, and I think globally most national bodies agree with that - but it can't be denied they are a terrific success story in terms of the mission statement.

I think route-checks have always been recognised as a legitemate Helper ride within AUK, ever since Helper rides became an acknowledged thing maybe 30 or 35 years ago (of course they happened long before that date as well but were kept quiet).

[Martin]

This is what I'm working to (2017); so riding another event on the day when you've done the helper's ride is against guidelines

6.2.4 The Helper’s Ride To help you check your route, as well as encouraging people to volunteer to help, Audax UK allows the organiser and helpers to ride the event on another date and still be credited with completing the calendar event. This rule allows riders to help on events without losing an opportunity to ride. There are however a few rules to be aware of when riding a “helpers ride”:

• Organisers and helpers may ride up to 14 days before the event for all events, or 7 days afterwards for BP and BR events only.
• This concession is available only to the organiser and those who have given substantive help in preparing or running the ride which may include route checking, however it is expected that route checking will be performed by one or two riders only. Helpers riders should not be used as a device to run secondary events or enable riders to resolve scheduling problems. 
• You (or a helper) cannot ride an event as a Helpers Ride, and then ride another event (calendar or permanent) on the day of the event as this is not an option that would be available to a normal entrant.
• All riders must complete a standard AUK entry form so they’re covered by AUK’s insurance.
• Riders will need to obtain their own Proof of Passage, as if they were riding a Permanent. If there are no alternatives (e.g. the event uses a staffed control with no alternatives nearby or outside opening hours) then you should collect a receipt from the nearest available location instead.
• Process the Brevet cards and submit your Helpers Riders for validation with the rest of the results of your event.
• It may be possible to edit the date for BR and BP events only from the event date to the date the helpers’ ride was actually ridden. Contact the Recorder for more details.
 

[Ivo]

The key word in that statement is 'original' and comes back to the perception that all local practices regarding BRMs have to be signed off by ACP. The scope of AUK operations has moved on considerably since this particular issue was advanced. Things move on and AUK regulations, guidance and systems need to reflect that.

Unfortunately there is a strong reactionary influence in operation with many of the great and the good, including some on the AUK Board, who regret and given the option would simply scrap the various innovations implemented over the last twenty years, including DIYs, ECEs, instant validation, etc. and return AUK to being simply an arm of ACP running standard  BRM and other ACP awards. This is unlikely to happen however such attitudes slows progress and generally makes life more difficult. Such has always been the case...tensions between reactionary and progressive forces are nothing new.

A number of other audax organisations do keep an eye on the various extra's started by AUK. Especially the RRtY has been copied by several audax organisations, for example on the continent the Netherlands, Belgium and Romania. All clearly following the example set by AUK.

[LittleWheelsandBig]

The whole concept of permanents being free date analogues of calendar brevets was transferred to RUSA and Audax Oz by AUK expats. That concept didn’t come from ACP.

[frankly frankie]

And RUSA also consulted with AUK concerning how we run DIYs - and then backed away from the concept.

This is what I'm working to (2017); so riding another event on the day when you've done the helper's ride is against guidelines

6.2.4 ...
• This concession is available only to the organiser and those who have given substantive help in preparing or running the ride which may include route checking, ...
• You (or a helper) cannot ride an event as a Helpers Ride, and then ride another event (calendar or permanent) on the day of the event as this is not an option that would be available to a normal entrant.
• ...
• It may be possible to edit the date for BR and BP events only from the event date to the date the helpers’ ride was actually ridden. Contact the Recorder for more details.

I see - well I sit corrected Martin - that's very interesting. 
Though I could cite several instances of where it has been done, including a local Organiser who annually runs three concurrent events and rides one on the day** having route-checked the other two and put them down as Helper rides.  I think one instance (the 2x400 cited earlier) even had a bearing on a Championship outcome - but that would have pre-dated this Regulation tweak I think (possibly even prompted it).

That last bullet point is totally unnecessary - it's just a misconception of how the system works - a date edit on a BRM would be contained within AUK and not be passed on to ACP.
Just the same as if a BRM is ECE'd, it is the event distance minus the ECE that is passed on to ACP (for example for PBP qually), while the event distance plus the ECE is used internally (for things like SR lists). 
In both cases it's the same thing - the Distance (or Date) is a property of the Event (for ACP) or of the Ride (for AUK).

** personally I think an Organiser riding in his own event is also highly questionable - unless he has an army of helpers.  But of course it's commonly done.

[Martin]

I usually ride my own calendar 200 on the day, no army but one very willing and able helper  and it's an X event. If I need to route check I do that as a DIY beforehand