Yet Another Cycling Forum
General Category => Audax => Topic started by: Martin on 12 April, 2011, 01:14:50 pm
-
Sorry to appear to be discriminating against the digitally challenged but here goes;
I ran my first calendar event on Saturday; having previously ridden it as a DIY perm. I have always thought it would make a very good perm not least because you really need to choose your days to ride in that region (we were lucky on the day). The big advantage of making it into a calendar was getting the extra km you use to avoid the main roads to count by the cunning use of infos and thus getting it down to a reasonable distance.
Part of the incentive to run the event as a calendar was to force me to write a proper route sheet (which I've now done) so it can be used as a perm. But after several attempts to change the controls from firstly well over distance and then substitute receiptable controls for the infos I've given up; it's just not worth the hassle for the few riders that are likely to want to ride it. So it will remain as a DIY perm (228 by receipts against a minimum of 202 by controls, or 206 by GPS) on a "help yourself" basis.
Do others see traditional perms which go way overdistance in order to get receipts as an endangered species against the tide of technology that allows GPS perms to be nailed down to exactly eg 200km by the clever siting of controls? or is there still a demand for new perm routes?
Discuss...
-
Could you not devise a way in which info controls could be used on permanents? It seems unfeasible, but it's not really - it would be quite possible to devise a large "stack" of questions covering a fairly small area, each one of which would provide proof of passage through that area. Every time someone rides the permanent, one is simply plucked from the top of the stack, inserted into the brevet card, and disposed of.
The obvious issue is that they would be disposable, but this might not be too much of an issue depending on how many ride the permanent every year. There are efficiency savings you could make, for instance if several people are riding on the same date, they get the same question.
You'd probably know better than me whether it would be unworkable due to more people riding than it would be possible to invent questions for, but just a thought.
-
Infos are discouraged on perms for several reasons, not least of which is that the cards, and thus the questions, are sent out in advance of the event. I think it's best to accept that some routes, often very good ones, are not suitable for audax.
-
Infos are discouraged on perms for several reasons, not least of which is that the cards, and thus the questions, are sent out in advance of the event. I think it's best to accept that some routes, often very good ones, are not suitable for audax.
this includes gps perms and calendar events does it? an event should not have to go to a shop petrol station or cafe at every turn to be suitable for audax
I don't want this thread to descend into the usual "what is an audax" type, just asking if people think that with gps DIY now available (and hopefully soon for real perms too) the traditional paper based version will decline?
-
So it will remain as a DIY perm (228 by receipts, 206 by GPS) on a "help yourself" basis.
Will it be advertised anywhere?
228 is a fair bit overdistance, but if someone has gone to the trouble of finding nice roads and writing a route sheet should there be some "AUK" way of sharing that - even if it requires GPS to make it practical?
-
..... I think it's best to accept that some routes, often very good ones, are not suitable for audax.
But surely one of the beauties of the validation-by-GPS method is that this need not necessarily be so?
-
When I joined AUK, after a very enjoyable 100km BP, I thought the routesheet that was sent out before a calendar event was to help newbies sus out how Audaxes worked.
My thoughts of Permanent rides was different. I expected Permanent rides to be for the more experienced member and the instruction sheet merely a list of towns to visit. The rider decides the route between the nominated towns and does the maths to evaluate ETAs.
I soon took up the Midland Mesh because it was an array of towns and I could create any route around them to make up the desired distance.
I've done a few DIY perms. Simply because the route plan is mine.
About GPS. The cost of a GPS unit and maps buys a lot of real cards and SAEs. There will always be members who won't bother with GPS units and continue to use maps, routesheets and get signatures on real cards.
-
..... I think it's best to accept that some routes, often very good ones, are not suitable for audax.
But surely one of the beauties of the validation-by-GPS method is that this need not necessarily be so?
The routes that are not suitable for Audax are the ones that use the double width blue roads on the AA map.
-
Surely there should be some mechanism for publishing gps traces that are suitable for perms
Then I could browse through routes that other people have figured out and do some long distance riding
If the routes were just available on the www I wouldn't even need a gps, if I didn't care about validation
-
So it will remain as a DIY perm (228 by receipts, 206 by GPS) on a "help yourself" basis.
Will it be advertised anywhere?
it's on my club's website (and the route sheet will be soon), I'm happy to offer it as I'll be the one accepting it as a DIY by either means.
-
..... I think it's best to accept that some routes, often very good ones, are not suitable for audax.
But surely one of the beauties of the validation-by-GPS method is that this need not necessarily be so?
Could a "gps only" event work under existing AUK rules?
-
Infos are discouraged on perms for several reasons, not least of which is that the cards, and thus the questions, are sent out in advance of the event. I think it's best to accept that some routes, often very good ones, are not suitable for audax.
this includes gps perms and calendar events does it? an event should not have to go to a shop petrol station or cafe at every turn to be suitable for audax
That is the way I plan mine, if only because it's the easiest way.
I don't want this thread to descend into the usual "what is an audax" type, just asking if people think that with gps DIY now available (and hopefully soon for real perms too) the traditional paper based version will decline?
I think the issue currently is to make routes available to all as far as is practicable. Or, not to create an advantaged group who have access to gps technology, at least until the take-up is much greater than at present.
-
Martin's experience of trying to create a traditionally evidenced Permanent mirrors my own. I did a number of paper-evidenced DIY rides locally in East Anglia on lovely quiet roads and thought I'd like to share them as Permanents. But when it came to sorting controls with usable till receipts, things rapidly turned nightmarish and the routes were very soon severely compromised. If I found a workable set of controls, it would usually be OK Mon to Sat but a no-no on Sunday when places are shut. Not to mention the difficulty of writing a paper routesheet covering many junctions where there are no signposts or individual features at all to mark them out.
Now I have GPS, I don't even consider a paper-evidenced ride, except for those particularly attractive Calendar events such as The Dean or The Elenith, for which I'm prepared (just!) to travel and pay for accommodation.
Do others see traditional perms which go way overdistance in order to get receipts as an endangered species against the tide of technology that allows GPS perms to be nailed down to exactly eg 200km by the clever siting of controls? or is there still a demand for new perm routes?
My best guess is that the GPS method will progressively overtake the paper-based method far faster than many expect, even more so now that we can ECE a Calendar event by GPS, thus getting the best of both worlds i.e. not having to drive to the event and getting to social pleasure of riding with companions.
This does however raise what we might call an ethical question - and we may have discussed this elsewhere on another thread - as to whether it's acceptable for an organiser to create a fresh Permanent ride available only on a GPS basis, no paper routesheet available. Personally, I haven't thought this all the way through - as a knee-jerk reaction I think I'm for it but I can see how some people might object.
This is not the same thing as saying the GPS method will kill off the paper-based ride because it won't - there will long be a desire for the latter in part of our constituency and so it should remain - broad church and all that. It's just that I can't see many Organisers coming forward to incorporate new Perms on a paper basis when the GPS way is so much easier.
-
It seems to me that the question is not about DIY or GPS perms, but about routes that are "set up", often alongside a calendar event, and for which a routesheet is provided. I've done a number of these, and very much enjoyed them. Indeed, one of them I shall be doing again shortly, in the calendar version this time (New Forest Excursion).
It is a shame that new permanent events with infos will not generally be approved (minutes of the most recent AUK committee meeting refer, backed up by IanH's first post above), but I must admit that a route with an info that you know in advance always has seemed a bit of an anomoly.
It is an interesting idea to provide the route for an AUK to do by GPS verification. But this is only going to be practical for those organisers who happen to be GPS-perm validators, which is a fairly small number of people. Maybe this ability will be opened out to other perm organisers if there is a demand.
-
a route with an info that you know in advance always has seemed a bit of an anomoly.
Like the Down-to-Downs hilly 100k perm near me - I like this route, it's a good leg stretch in winter or an odd day off work, lots of hills, pleasant countryside, etc etc. But there is an info on it, and the second time I didn't bother to fill it in cos I'd done it already and it seemed a waste of time.........as indeed would all infos be on a perm for someone repeating it.
-
I have a nice GPS but still prefer to get receipts if possible.
The GPS must be recharged after 10-15 hours (mine only
has a built-in battery). And I don't want to haul around a USB
battery in general. Those are quite unreliable and awkward
to fit on the bike anyway. Plus the GPS itself has suddenly
shut itself off once in a while. So it's not a completely reliable
way of getting PoP.
Plus I quite like the procedure of getting receipts and filling
in the brevet card. Satisfying in some way.
-
This does however raise what we might call an ethical question - and we may have discussed this elsewhere on another thread - as to whether it's acceptable for an organiser to create a fresh Permanent ride available only on a GPS basis, no paper routesheet available.
That's not my intention; I do not have the will or resources to create a paper version of the route that is realistic in terms of distance. I'm certainly not trying to snub those who prefer the traditional way; just can't offer a ride they can do unless they want to go way overdistance. And I'm offering it outside of the normal AUK route much the same way people are when they put routes on Bikely.
I happen to organise a couple of hilly rides that are not suitable for fixed; is that also discrimination? ;)
I agree it's perfectly possible organise a paper based perm that is not overdistance (El S does one that's 201km) just that it becomes difficult where you have lots of nice lanes which are further than the main roads.
My ride could be made available as a 202km paper based perm but there is no way I'm having anything to do with sending riders along those A roads. You must be very lucky down your way to avoid them Ian H.
-
I happen to organise a couple of hilly rides that are not suitable for fixed; is that also discrimination? ;)
No, it's usually an invitation for some stupid people to try and prove you wrong...
-
I'm confused.
The Midlands Mesh had controls nominated on the maps where receipts are to be collected.
A DIY perm has controls nominated by the rider where receipts are to be collected.
A DIY by GPS doesn't need controls? The riding distance is on the .gpx file. The rider doesn't even need to stop during the entire ride.
-
I'm confused.
The Midlands Mesh had controls nominated on the maps where receipts are to be collected.
A DIY perm has controls nominated by the rider where receipts are to be collected.
A DIY by GPS doesn't need controls? The riding distance is on the .gpx file. The rider doesn't even need to stop during the entire ride.
With a DIY by GPS you still need to specify a list of controls (place names, grid refs, lat/lon locations) but you don't need to do anything to prove that you visited them other than submit the GPX file. The route between your nominated controls is still a free choice but the shortest distance between your named controls must still be over the 200km distance (or whatever distance you intend to ride).
You can't just go out and ride a 200km ride and submit the GPX file to claim 2 points. You need to say, in advance, what the rough outline of your route will be (i.e. a list of places you definitely will go through) and then ride it.
-
It depends upon how many riders you would expect to enter a perm without the existance of the GPS perm. I launched the Montgomery Madness last year, a 200km perm from Bewdley to Montgomery and back. I had 13 entries although not all rode. My purpose in developing the ride was twofold: (i) to provide an enjoyable and scenic route away from main roads that may not have otherwise been thought about. In other words riders could have an off-the-shelf ride, and (ii) to be perfectly selfish, it was nice to have close-by 200km perm that I could enter as often as a I wanted.
Beacon Roads Cycling Club (http://www.beaconrcc.org.uk/audax/perms/montgomery/index.html)
If the organiser frequently rides their perm then the route card can be kept upto date quite easily.
-
I hope not.
I don't have a GPS.
I do have a perm card for the Denmead - Newbury 200 that I am going to use this Saturday though.
H
-
This does however raise what we might call an ethical question - and we may have discussed this elsewhere on another thread - as to whether it's acceptable for an organiser to create a fresh Permanent ride available only on a GPS basis, no paper routesheet available.
That's not my intention; .......
I realise that Martin, I was just broadening the debate a bit; sorry.
-
This does however raise what we might call an ethical question - and we may have discussed this elsewhere on another thread - as to whether it's acceptable for an organiser to create a fresh Permanent ride available only on a GPS basis, no paper routesheet available.
That's not my intention; .......
I realise that Martin, I was just broadening the debate a bit; sorry.
that's OK; and I re-iterate; I'm not a perm organiser (apart from ECE's) if I was I'd supply a paper and gps version of the same events at the same distances. Nor am I likely to be; the SE is amply covered now in both calendar and perm 200s from the Venerable El S, Billy, Man of Kent and West Kent / Gravesend DA, and this is the only other region I know well enough to create a ride in.
The question I asked in the OP was that given how easy it is to create gps DIYs how likely is it that new paper perms will appear to replace those that are lost as existing perm orgs step down?
it's a bit like telephone boxes and mobile phones I suppose
-
My ride could be made available as a 202km paper based perm but there is no way I'm having anything to do with sending riders along those A roads. You must be very lucky down your way to avoid them Ian H.
I think it's fair to say that your part of the world suffers the most for this, Martin.
(and rural wales/scotland seem to be the best)
It's a shame we can't accept a bit more 'leeway' in the rules. We have calendar events along 60km of 1 A-road in one region, whilst elsewhere an organiser would rather ride 26km over-distance than use short stretches of A-road. The French seem happy with under-distance rides, and we all know about the LEL short-cuts.
Phasing out INfos on perms seems to be applying an overly strict attitude to the spirit of Audax. I'm not aware of riders cheating the INfos being a problem; yet riders may now feel compelled to buy and master GPS as they can't be trusted to ride perms the old way. I agree with Martin's prediction that, under the current regime, GPS validation will likely grow while new perms stop appearing.
The current setup seems to have gone wrong somewhere :(
-
......how likely is it that new paper perms will appear to replace those that are lost as existing perm orgs step down?
it's a bit like telephone boxes and mobile phones I suppose
Probably less likely. As you suggest, perhaps the perm will become the red phonebox of audaxing.
-
The question I asked in the OP was that given how easy it is to create gps DIYs how likely is it that new paper perms will appear to replace those that are lost as existing perm orgs step down?
How can I put this?
Perms and events are not just interesting as a way of getting a certificate or "points". They are interesting as routes in themselves. It is easy to make up a gps DIY but isn't that missing the point?
In Devon there are many roads you could take that would be a valid short(ish) path
But usually there is one preferred route that strikes a nice balance with whatever is a problem with the roads..ie too busy, too crappy, too lumpy, awful surfacing
Whatever mechanism you use to describe the route (gps track, route sheet, follow that bloke) it's the route that is of interest
By riding other peoples routes you go down that lane you never used before and it's often a gravel trap but just occasionally....
-
One consideration with GPSs is that they are pretty reliable but do have hiccups or even fail completely now and then.
I use them on a daily basis at work but have seen one recording 84 mph when at walking speed and had a few just give up and die.
If you were on a long audax relying on GPS valididation it could really ruin your day.
-
I'm completely against infos on perms; you might as well not have them, they only work on calendar events (they are allowed on AAA sub 200 perms but even then you can bypass the hills if you want to).
We have to do it properly; either a ride is 200 or it isn't. I just think in the desire to keep within the rules technology is overtaking the traditional rides. FWIW I much prefer plodding round a paper based perm and collecting 5 receipts than fretting about a gps too.
Perms and events are not just interesting as a way of getting a certificate or "points". They are interesting as routes in themselves. It is easy to make up a gps DIY but isn't that missing the point?
at first glance that comes across as elitist in the extreme but I'm sure it wasn't meant that way. There are thousands of miles of lovely cycling roads to great regions and places where you have no hope of obtaining traditional proof of passage (and that's a laugh too; until recently it was a stamp in a card; you could argue that anyone other than a rider can drive to an ATM or shop)
it doesn't make those roads any less suitable for audax.
-
...the SE is amply covered now in both calendar and perm 200s
If you have a car and don't mind driving 30~50 miles to pick up a route, maybe.
-
...the SE is amply covered now in both calendar and perm 200s
If you have a car and don't mind driving 30~50 miles to pick up a route, maybe.
oops; forgot to add the Venerable Mr O'tea with his new Ditchling Devil perm :)
-
I'm completely against infos on perms; you might as well not have them, they only work on calendar events (they are allowed on AAA sub 200 perms but even then you can bypass the hills if you want to).
Maybe the problem is that we haven't tried to make Infos work. The main objection seems to be seeing the question well in advance - well how about phoning/texting/emailing the question the day before? (That's just my first thought.)
As I said, there doesn't seem to be a concern that perms riders are cheating. We already have the 50% rule due to 1 or 2 riders allegedly cheating sometime in 1847. Are we fixing something here that isn't broken.
We have to do it properly; either a ride is 200 or it isn't. I just think in the desire to keep within the rules technology is overtaking the traditional rides. FWIW I much prefer plodding round a paper based perm and collecting 5 receipts than fretting about a gps too.
Well, as someone always says in these discussions, it will always be POSSIBLE to cheat. WE (AUK) decide our rules, how watertight we want them to be (accepting that 100% is impossible) and how we enforce them - the CURRENT rules look like they favour the new technology over traditional paper rides.
Another top-of-my-head possiblity - any GPS validation would only earn special "GPS" points. So your SR would have an asterisk by it etc. Why should anyone care, they're just bike rides? :)
(I'm in at least 2 minds about all this, as a mostly-non-GPS user who also wants to reduce our car dependence!)
-
Go for another approach instead of answering a question at an info control. The Israeli randonneurs take photos of themselves/their bikes at specific locations and the organiser checks their camera/mobile phone at the finish. Posting a photo (possibly during the perm) could count.
-
I'm completely against infos on perms; you might as well not have them, they only work on calendar events (they are allowed on AAA sub 200 perms but even then you can bypass the hills if you want to).
Maybe the problem is that we haven't tried to make Infos work. The main objection seems to be seeing the question well in advance - well how about phoning/texting/emailing the question the day before? (That's just my first thought.)
assuming the perm orgnaiser wants to be contacted thus (I can think of one that doesn't), no it's just not workable; an info is just that; something you have to ride to on the day to prove you've been there having no knowledge of what you are looking for beforehand.
or mobile phone photos as LWAB suggested
The only thing I can think of is those little spiky things that put a code on the card like in orienteering (which were IIRC largely replaced by transponders several years ago and now probably GPS too) but you could still go and get it stamped beforehand.
-
Can a permanent organiser (other than the DIY ones) accept a GPS track in lieue of receipts?
-
Can a permanent organiser (other than the DIY ones) accept a GPS track in lieue of receipts?
not yet
-
possible stupid idea, but what about something like a geocache?
Small something hidden at or attached to a location containing a piece of paper with a random number on it. Rider writes number in brevet, crosses it out, writes another random number on on the paper, writes that in the brevet as well. Sends card back to org who checks that the first number is the one submitted by the previous rider, and so on.
Just to beat the naysayers, there's nothing to stop someone riding to it, writing 6 numbers and then take them back to their ne'er-do-well mates who are only in it for the points..........
-
Maybe the problem is that we haven't tried to make Infos work. The main objection seems to be seeing the question well in advance - well how about phoning/texting/emailing the question the day before? (That's just my first thought.)
assuming the perm orgnaiser wants to be contacted thus (I can think of one that doesn't), no it's just not workable
No, it would be an optional way of doing things. Organiser already employ 'discretion' e.g. some accept GPS validation. I'm suggesting we look at other non-GPS options that organisers could choose to use.
...or mobile phone photos as LWAB suggested
Indeed.
-
I'm confused.
The Midlands Mesh had controls nominated on the maps where receipts are to be collected.
A DIY perm has controls nominated by the rider where receipts are to be collected.
A DIY by GPS doesn't need controls? The riding distance is on the .gpx file. The rider doesn't even need to stop during the entire ride.
With a DIY by GPS you still need to specify a list of controls (place names, grid refs, lat/lon locations) but you don't need to do anything to prove that you visited them other than submit the GPX file. The route between your nominated controls is still a free choice but the shortest distance between your named controls must still be over the 200km distance (or whatever distance you intend to ride).
You can't just go out and ride a 200km ride and submit the GPX file to claim 2 points. You need to say, in advance, what the rough outline of your route will be (i.e. a list of places you definitely will go through) and then ride it.
What is needed then is "Brevet on Demand".
An e-mail to the DIY organiser saying I intend to ride a 200 DIY by GPS this Sunday, followed by another e-mail on Sunday evening with the .gpx attached.
He will then assign that ride to one of my 'virtual cards' and accredit it with a number, e-mailing me back the number for my files.
We have discussed on another thread the boundaries by which a ride can be accepted. It is up to the member to be conversant with the Regulations, be sensible and ride a wide loop or 'there and back' route, or even a 'figure 8' or 'cloverleaf'.... etc, etc.
-
What is needed then is "Brevet on Demand".
An e-mail to the DIY organiser saying I intend to ride a 200 DIY by GPS this Sunday, followed by another e-mail on Sunday evening with the .gpx attached.
He will then assign that ride to one of my 'virtual cards' and accredit it with a number, e-mailing me back the number for my files.
That's exactly what already happens ???
I'm suggesting we look at other non-GPS options that organisers could choose to use.
completely agree; it's just that unless you visit your perm regularly it's difficult to come up with any workable PoP that riders can just collect on the day that will be acceptable;
even the traditional postcard is likely to just say Peterborough
-
What is needed then is "Brevet on Demand".
An e-mail to the DIY organiser saying I intend to ride a 200 DIY by GPS this Sunday, followed by another e-mail on Sunday evening with the .gpx attached.
He will then assign that ride to one of my 'virtual cards' and accredit it with a number, e-mailing me back the number for my files.
That's exactly what already happens ???
I know... ;) except I wouldn't start the ride without the organiser's response from the first e-mail.
-
What is needed then is "Brevet on Demand".
An e-mail to the DIY organiser saying I intend to ride a 200 DIY by GPS this Sunday, followed by another e-mail on Sunday evening with the .gpx attached.
He will then assign that ride to one of my 'virtual cards' and accredit it with a number, e-mailing me back the number for my files.
That's exactly what already happens ???
I know... ;)
so what relevance is it to this thread which is about how to make traditional perms survive?
-
What is needed then is "Brevet on Demand".
An e-mail to the DIY organiser saying I intend to ride a 200 DIY by GPS this Sunday, followed by another e-mail on Sunday evening with the .gpx attached.
He will then assign that ride to one of my 'virtual cards' and accredit it with a number, e-mailing me back the number for my files.
That's exactly what already happens ???
I know... ;)
so what relevance is it to this thread which is about how to make traditional perms survive?
Why do you need to 'make' traditional perms survive?
AUK should have a reasonable handle on the number of members who don't have GPS units; and ride perms by collecting paper receipts and stapling them to a cardboard brevet card.
If ALL perms were only acceptable with GPS data evidence, how many members would bugger off.
-
What is frustrating is that we cannot use GPS for the class of route for which they would have most impact, namely hilly perms with AAA.
Similarly, whilst ECE facilitates riding from home for Calendar events there is no 'Extended Perm'. For example, the Down to Downs route is 50km from my door, and would make a perfect 200km BR with AAA outing. Now I could acheive this by riding a GPS DIY but would mean forgoing the AAAs. Similarly some of the best climbing territory in the London area - the Surrey Hills - is effectively off limits for AAA purposes. Am I bovvered? Well, that depends on my objectives for the year.
There are other similar anomalies kicking around. Most (not all; there is no perfect solution) will go away by allowing for Perm route validation by GPS (to confirm attendence at prespecified controls), and Extended Perm (exactly as for Extended Calendars). This approach does rather seem over complicated compared with simply allowing for all routes to be validated by GPS. The key issues are how to manage validation of AAA routes and to what extent AUK want to protect & preserve the role of the Perm Org. At the moment the 'lever' available to Perm Orgs is their monopoly on Perm AAA points which can only be acheived by completing a (handbook) listed Perms (i.e., not DIYs). This proposal would strengthen the position of Perm Orgs by making it simpler to develop AAA routes and for others to integrate them into their rides.
The alternative is an open policy where riders can develop their own (AAA) DIY GPS events, in which case Perm orgs and indeed (handbook) listed perms really are history. Whether that is inevitable or desireable depends on your vision of the future.
As for the GPS challenged, nobody is suggesting that the existing library of perms would be withdrawn so there is no reason not to move forward. Not to is simply to prolong the agony.
-
Go for another approach instead of answering a question at an info control. The Israeli randonneurs take photos of themselves/their bikes at specific locations and the organiser checks their camera/mobile phone at the finish. Posting a photo (possibly during the perm) could count.
Reasonable proof of passage is what is required. It's up to individual organisers to decide what's reasonable - in consultation with their colleagues if necessary.
-
Go for another approach instead of answering a question at an info control. The Israeli randonneurs take photos of themselves/their bikes at specific locations and the organiser checks their camera/mobile phone at the finish. Posting a photo (possibly during the perm) could count.
Reasonable proof of passage is what is required. It's up to individual organisers to decide what's reasonable - in consultation with their colleagues if necessary.
Having spent some considerable time writing a cycling-oriented GPS app for the iPhone (why? 'Cos I felt like it), I'd be quite happy to accept an appropriate GPS track with controls (info or otherwise) flagged as waypoints - this would work particularly well with info control sites since you can correlate the lat/long of the waypoint with a 'known' value. All that said, only two of my perms has info controls and the use of a GPS tag would do away with them quite nicely,
The only thing I'm missing is a suitable method of ensuring that a GPX track hasn't been tampered with, but maybe that's just my innate paranoia showing through.
GPS is a useful too, but it isn't the be-all end-all (or, if you prefer, "just because you can doesn't mean you should".)
-
If ALL perms were only acceptable with GPS data evidence, how many members would bugger off.
Me. Don't have a GPS. Don't want a GPS.
-
An observation in general.. :)
What has to be remembered is there are a lot of members who aren't 'tech savvy'; as the OP described as 'Digitally challenged’. ( a condescending remark if ever I heared one ).
GPS, posting photos, etc is not only 'hi tech', its expensive for a lot of folks.
REMEMBER ALSO... To be a fully paid-up member of Audax United Kingdom does not require the member to even own a bicycle.. ;) let alone a GPS, 3G phone etc etc....
They mostly do own a bike however, but spare a thought for those members who are trying to have a bit of fun ( and a medal at the end of it ) on a shoestring using a fourth hand bike they got from a neighbour.
-
As noted aboved, nobody (I believe) is suggesting that GPS validation be the only method allowed so to suggest otherwise is being disingenious.
Reasonable proof of passage is what is required. It's up to individual organisers to decide what's reasonable - in consultation with their colleagues if necessary.
So, if an Org (Perm or Calendar) is happy to accept GPS track as PoP then - in subject with consultation with their colleagues as might be appropriate - there is no reason why they could not proceed?
Danial's experience of validating calendars by GPS track are documented elsewhere - and thats not something I would like to take on at this stage - but validation of Perms by GPS track is a reasonably established process now.
-
I think this thread has almost turned full circle.
1/ GPS is becoming more used,, at a slow rate.
2/ There is still a need for paper Brevet cards.
3/ If a Perm Organiser wishes to attract new customers and retain his/her existing customers, he/she should have a 'new model year' of delights on offer at regular intervals.
-
If ALL perms were only acceptable with GPS data evidence, how many members would bugger off.
Me. Don't have a GPS. Don't want a GPS.
Me. Don't have a bag of crisps. Don't want a bag of crisps.
-
If my GPS died on the way round a DIY by GPS I'd collect receipts for the remainder and buy the validator a pint.
-
The only thing I'm missing is a suitable method of ensuring that a GPX track hasn't been tampered with, but maybe that's just my innate paranoia showing through.
I believe there's an app for that. Have you talked to Danial or one of the DIY by GPS team?
Now you've brought it up, the DIY by GPS page (http://www.aukweb.net/diy/gps/) doesn't have an organiser for N England. Is there one?
-
The only thing I'm missing is a suitable method of ensuring that a GPX track hasn't been tampered with, but maybe that's just my innate paranoia showing through.
I believe there's an app for that. Have you talked to Danial or one of the DIY by GPS team?
Now you've brought it up, the DIY by GPS page (http://www.aukweb.net/diy/gps/) doesn't have an organiser for N England. Is there one?
No and don't know. Respectively.
-
Now I've got a Garmin Edge 605. I've also got a PowerMonkey. Together, they have about 26 hours of supply.
If I was planning a SR, I would have bought a PowerChimp which uses rechargable AA cells, which can be renewed during a 600km ride. ( £9.99 Amazon )
Riding a DIY perm 600 can be done with a Garmin Edge which is hooked up to a PowerChimp.
This of course, is more expense, more planning, more husbandry and more stressful.
I personally, would use paper receipts and a card, and use the GPS only through town centres and fiddly back lanes, riding most of the distance on uncomplicated A roads.
-
An observation in general.. :)
What has to be remembered is there are a lot of members who aren't 'tech savvy'; as the OP described as 'Digitally challenged’. ( a condescending remark if ever I heared one ).
it was not intended to be condescending; it's a (PC aware and slightly tongue in cheek, nothing to do with one's ability to use the things) term I commonly use for people who are without either internet access a home computer android phones gps or even a bike odometer;
AFAIK none of the above bar you from full participation in all AUK events and perms apart from DIY by GPS...
-
Similarly some of the best climbing territory in the London area - the Surrey Hills - is effectively off limits for AAA purposes.
I've done a couple of GPS DIYs with AAA points in the Surrey Hills. I didn't get any distance points as its hard to get a minimum distance between controls of 200km without using s**tloads of controls. I think I got 2.5 or 2.75 AAA pts for about 170km riding (including riding from London out to the hills and back)
-
Having spent some considerable time writing a cycling-oriented GPS app for the iPhone (why? 'Cos I felt like it), I'd be quite happy to accept an appropriate GPS track with controls (info or otherwise) flagged as waypoints - this would work particularly well with info control sites since you can correlate the lat/long of the waypoint with a 'known' value. All that said, only two of my perms has info controls and the use of a GPS tag would do away with them quite nicely,
The only thing I'm missing is a suitable method of ensuring that a GPX track hasn't been tampered with, but maybe that's just my innate paranoia showing through.
GPS is a useful too, but it isn't the be-all end-all (or, if you prefer, "just because you can doesn't mean you should".)
Are you making that generally available, Simon? Or is it already?
*bats eyelids*
-
Having spent some considerable time writing a cycling-oriented GPS app for the iPhone (why? 'Cos I felt like it), I'd be quite happy to accept an appropriate GPS track with controls (info or otherwise) flagged as waypoints - this would work particularly well with info control sites since you can correlate the lat/long of the waypoint with a 'known' value. All that said, only two of my perms has info controls and the use of a GPS tag would do away with them quite nicely,
The only thing I'm missing is a suitable method of ensuring that a GPX track hasn't been tampered with, but maybe that's just my innate paranoia showing through.
GPS is a useful too, but it isn't the be-all end-all (or, if you prefer, "just because you can doesn't mean you should".)
Are you making that generally available, Simon? Or is it already?
*bats eyelids*
It's not generally available *yet* but will be - I'm still bug-squashing.
The 'simple' version of the app is currently in App Store Purgatory[tm] and has been for the past few weeks :(
It's quite functional, though - I've used it a fair bit in the car for surveying bits of the Eastern Peak & Plain Mesh, and it's worked fantastically when I've been out on the bike. I'll send you a PM with info on how to get your hands on a test build :-)
[EDIT: You have PM ...]
-
Most kind :D
-
Most kind :D
Yeah, I'm nice like that ;)
You should have an app in your mailbox right about .... now.
-
Similarly some of the best climbing territory in the London area - the Surrey Hills - is effectively off limits for AAA purposes.
I've done a couple of GPS DIYs with AAA points in the Surrey Hills. I didn't get any distance points as its hard to get a minimum distance between controls of 200km without using s**tloads of controls. I think I got 2.5 or 2.75 AAA pts for about 170km riding (including riding from London out to the hills and back)
Thanks Kcass, and for the links to relevant threads on YACF from last year. I will follow up with the powers that be to clarify the situation.
-
An observation in general.. :)
What has to be remembered is there are a lot of members who aren't 'tech savvy'; as the OP described as 'Digitally challenged’. ( a condescending remark if ever I heared one ).
it was not intended to be condescending; it's a (PC aware and slightly tongue in cheek, nothing to do with one's ability to use the things) term I commonly use for people who are without either internet access a home computer android phones gps or even a bike odometer;
AFAIK none of the above bar you from full participation in all AUK events and perms apart from DIY by GPS...
Hi,
You'll probably remember the days before the internet when AUK sent out a seperate Handbook and Calendar book. Now, the calendar is on the last pages of the Winter edition of Arrivee.
Corrections and addendums to the calendar were published in Arrivee.
Everything was conducted by snail mail.
For some, including myself ( I am a traditionalist ), this is still the way its done.
Lately, I've been using the calendar on the website to check ride details and sending e-mails to the DIY and MidMesh perm organisers. I still like collecting receipts. The young waitresses in the cafes wow !!!! I still like receiving a real Brevet card through the post to put in its place in my filing cabinet. :)
I would commence DIY by GPS if there was some way of replicating a Brevet card for me to print out on card. I don't know. Does the DIY Organiser send the 'Virtual' card out as a picture file?
-
Validation by GPS for perms will probably happen. Now it's been proven with DIYs it's just a matter of rolling out the necessary technology (i.e the validation app) to those who wish to offer it.
It will remain an optional extra though, in addition to traditional validation by brevet card. So GPS only routes will remain a no-no for quite some time.
Info controls aren't suited to perms, but with a bit of creative thinking there are alternatives. For the MC1K Perm for those few places where there's either no brevidence or only limited opening hours then I'll accept a GPS track or photo (in conjunction with the recipts from the other places). Just talk to the Perm Sec nicely - as 3peaker says, acceptaple pop is what's acceptable to the organiser as they're the ones who determine whether the ride has been completed or not.
-
I'm glad I read to the end as that last post now makes it clear what the problem is.
So there are routes which can't be traditional perms (no PoP is possible) which therefore can't be perms at all, as GPS-only PoP is a no-no?
-
I'm glad I read to the end as that last post now makes it clear what the problem is.
So there are routes which can't be traditional perms (no PoP is possible) which therefore can't be perms at all, as GPS-only PoP is a no-no?
It's hard to imagine a route that has nowhere that could be used as a "traditional" control. It would be like a calendar event relying on infos alone - it just wouldn't get approved.
-
When constructing 100 DIYs, I pick three towns and measure the distances between then with ViaMichelin.
If the route is 15% over, hey ho, that's tough luck on my part. At least I will have plenty of opportunity to get a PoP at each town.
I have 150km DIY routes that are 10% over. Ease of getting a PoP over-rides exact distances.
-
Go for another approach instead of answering a question at an info control. The Israeli randonneurs take photos of themselves/their bikes at specific locations and the organiser checks their camera/mobile phone at the finish. Posting a photo (possibly during the perm) could count.
Reasonable proof of passage is what is required. It's up to individual organisers to decide what's reasonable - in consultation with their colleagues if necessary.
if that's the case can I just ask for a mobile phone picture at the non-receiptable locations? I don't think a phone with a camera is a barrier to anyone these days (just about to throw another one away thanks to Orange bloody update errors)
-
The only thing I'm missing is a suitable method of ensuring that a GPX track hasn't been tampered with, but maybe that's just my innate paranoia showing through.
There isn't a way of doing this. Anyone/anything can write a GPX file and it's not that hard to make one for an arbitrary route that looks authentic.
-
if that's the case can I just ask for a mobile phone picture at the non-receiptable locations? I don't think a phone with a camera is a barrier to anyone these days (just about to throw another one away thanks to Orange bloody update errors)
If the phone in question supports geo-tagging of images (the iPhone does, for example, and no doubt countless others do as well) then I personally wouldn't have a problem with this given that I have appropriate tools to extract such information.
If the PoP conveys information relating to location, be it lat/long or an actual place name, and time then I'm happy to accept it.
But that's just me.
-
Assuming GB does not have his tongue in his cheek:
The only thing I'm missing is a suitable method of ensuring that a GPX track hasn't been tampered with, but maybe that's just my innate paranoia showing through.
There isn't a way of doing this. Anyone/anything can write a GPX file and it's not that hard to make one for an arbitrary route that looks authentic.
The current 'official' line is that a faked GPX would not get past the 'official' GPX checking software. (which does fiendishly clever things, that AFAIK have not been revealed in any detail)
(This post is purely FYI).
-
The only thing I'm missing is a suitable method of ensuring that a GPX track hasn't been tampered with, but maybe that's just my innate paranoia showing through.
There isn't a way of doing this. Anyone/anything can write a GPX file and it's not that hard to make one for an arbitrary route that looks authentic.
But for most mere mortals that's harder than riding the event. ???
-
you may have noticed a few regular posters have been absent from this board for a while
They are the ones we rumbled fiddling their gpx tracks; we sent the boys round :demon:
-
The only thing I'm missing is a suitable method of ensuring that a GPX track hasn't been tampered with, but maybe that's just my innate paranoia showing through.
There isn't a way of doing this. Anyone/anything can write a GPX file and it's not that hard to make one for an arbitrary route that looks authentic.
But for most mere mortals that's harder than riding the event. ???
It's amazing how many AUKs are not mere mortals!
But ultimately Audax is about trust. Make the validation process reasonably robust to keep everybody focused. After that it's down to rider integrity. This is why quibbles about routes being underdistance by a few 100m when they they are vastly overdistance 'on the road' can be so frustrating. Happily GPS DIYs make this less of an issue. Counter intuitively, it is calendar events which tend to be over distance nowadays. Whether that is an issue rather depends on whether you are on a 'good day' or not!
-
I'm sure that GPS will take over eventually. I remember a thread a while back where GPS loggers were talked about, which seemed to me like a great idea. A little black box that just records where I've been.
I often manage to press the wrong button on my GPS, & end up with a "hole" in the middle of the ride. Not a problem as I've never done anything needing validation by GPS. That's why I've chosen to do traditional perms to date. The other mistake I often make is to not turn the thing off. One of the Denmead rides over winter I appear to have ridden home at 70mph down the M27. :-[
Hence a simple black box solution for the logging / validation would really appeal to me.
-
I'm glad I read to the end as that last post now makes it clear what the problem is.
So there are routes which can't be traditional perms (no PoP is possible) which therefore can't be perms at all, as GPS-only PoP is a no-no?
It's hard to imagine a route that has nowhere that could be used as a "traditional" control. It would be like a calendar event relying on infos alone - it just wouldn't get approved.
Isn't this another way of expressing my point? You can't have a calendar event / perm because of the difficulty proving passage, but GPS proves passage, thus making the event approvable (if ridden with GPS) and more importantly, approvable at a reasonable distance.
I think the fear that a gpx trace could be falsified is an odd one. Even if it was easy to do, it's also very easy to drive round controls and get receipts - probably having a lovely time out while you're at it!
Even if I knew some people were actively doing this, it's hardly of any concern to me (as I whizz along enjoying a brevet). Perhaps if one's reason for living is to "win" at audax one would be concerned at any suggestion of cheating?
To me it's like worrying that other people at a 10k fun run might be cutting corners to run less than 10k. Well, it will hardly get me a slower time!
-
Increasingly on DIYs, I put my SatNav into my saddlebag and let it log my route from in there. I find otherwise I'm always fiddling with it, checking my distance etc.
My DIY by GPS last weekend worked very well in that respect. I stopped at two of my three controls, but sped through the last one on the way to somewhere with better facilities. I also didn't bother with PoP at the start and finish, i.e. home.
But anyway, yes, I'd happily support any moves to using GPS units more to validate any perm. A cheap logger costs about the same as a new tyre, and nearly everyone has a PC these days. I say we pushpushpush to encourage more validation this way, and close down card-based validation once it becomes an overwhelmingly minority pursuit.
-
EF:
You're right, most people are totally unaffected by 90% of these rules; we just ride for our own satisfaction, and couldn't care if anyone else cheats. But the logical extension of this is to have no validation at all - we could all use YetAnotherBikeJournal.co.uk instead.
So what rules do you think we should have?
I think the fear that a gpx trace could be falsified is an odd one. Even if it was easy to do, it's also very easy to drive round controls and get receipts - probably having a lovely time out while you're at it!
I bet you a billion pounds that once someone works out how to fake a GPX, the 2nd one will not take a tenth of the time of your drive-round tactic, and won't require anyone to even leave the house. Then they submit a 3rd etc ...
You can't have it both ways - either we scrap validation altogether, or we accept some 'reasonable' framework has to be agreed.
-
I say we pushpushpush to encourage more validation this way, and close down card-based validation once it becomes an overwhelmingly minority pursuit.
I say we live with the fact that neither method of validation is going to go away any time soon and make allowances where necessary - if an organiser doesn't want to accept GPX tracks for validation then so be it1. To try and force something like this on people is a sure-fire way to alienate them.
1 - As I've already said, if a proof of passage gives me sufficient evidence of location and time then I'll accept it, whether it's a receipt, a GPX track with appropriate waypoints or a carved stone tablet chucked down from Mount Sinai by a guy with a big beard.
-
I think the fear that a gpx trace could be falsified is an odd one. Even if it was easy to do, it's also very easy to drive round controls and get receipts - probably having a lovely time out while you're at it!
We've done this one to death before.
Any form of proof is open to cheating, however some are much easier than others.
Which is easier?
a) getting in a car and driving round an event (over the space of 12 hours, or 40 hours for a 600km ride) collecting receipts
b) spending 15 minutes plotting the route on bikehike, downloading it and then running a program to jiggle it and apply timings based on gradients/weahter/nominated-stops/pauses to it so that the resulting GPX file will pass an inspection.
There's little or no cheating currently because of (not in-spite of) the current requirements for proof-of-passage.
I think the vast majority of people would agree that having absolutely no requirement for proof-of-passage above the rider's word would be unworkable (for Audax UK) in the long term.
So it's down to a question of where you draw the line for acceptable proof. Personally I think GPX file alone is too weak, which is why (in another thread) I suggested that at least one proof-of-passage was obtained on the route although it doesn't need to be exactly specified where in advance.
GPS loggers would be another option, either you submit the unit for validation, or the output file contains a cryptographic checksum/signature that prevents the output from being faked.
-
GPS loggers would be another option, either you submit the unit for validation, or the output file contains a cryptographic checksum/signature that prevents the output from being faked.
Strangely enough, I implemented exactly this last night ... cryptography is fun!
-
...
So it's down to a question of where you draw the line for acceptable proof. Personally I think GPX file alone is too weak, which is why (in another thread) I suggested that at least one proof-of-passage was obtained on the route although it doesn't need to be exactly specified where in advance.
Sounds utterly sensible to me.
-
The only thing I'm missing is a suitable method of ensuring that a GPX track hasn't been tampered with, but maybe that's just my innate paranoia showing through.
When I said earlier that it was impossible, I meant impossible for devices such as a GPS which just outputs GPX.
If you're writing the software for a device that is in control of writing out the GPX file then do the following:-
1) create a public/private encryption key pair.
2) publish the public key
3) when writing out the GPX file your application creates a message digest of the data and encrypts the digest result using the private key, you'd have to slightly butcher the GPX file spec to do it, but you might get away with something like:-
</gpx sign=02938ae2929fd992ea>
at the end, without breaking other software. I dunno.
Anyone wishing to check the validity of the file can use a utility to check the hash value and check that it matches the encrypted version (since they have the public key). They can't tamper with the file as that would change the hash value, and they can't correct the resulting encrypted version as they don't have the private key.
[EDIT] x-post with your recent message, but I'm not going to waste the contents...
-
I think the fear that a gpx trace could be falsified is an odd one. Even if it was easy to do, it's also very easy to drive round controls and get receipts - probably having a lovely time out while you're at it!
I could do that but I'd have more than the wrath of IanH to worry about, as I'd have to steal a car and then drive it uninsured and without a license.
Paging Mr Teethgrinder, Mr Teethgrinder to reception please. How about you and I win-but-don't-win the championship with a load of faked GPX perms, to prove the point the point that non-drivers can't fake their events using cars? I have a GPS, are you up for it?
-
Isn't this why we have the 50% rule?*
*of course it doesn't apply to the altitude award :thumbsup:
-
GPS loggers would be another option, either you submit the unit for validation, or the output file contains a cryptographic checksum/signature that prevents the output from being faked.
Strangely enough, I implemented exactly this last night ... cryptography is fun!
Presumably only as secure as the media you're using to store the signing key, though? This is actually one of those corner cases where having some keys stashed away securely in a tamper-proof TPM makes a certain amount of sense (which isn't the same as saying that I think trusted computing is a good idea...).
-
Providing a receipt from a control near(est) to the halfway point would be one simple check.
-
[...]
3) when writing out the GPX file your application creates a message digest of the data and encrypts the digest result using the private key, you'd have to slightly butcher the GPX file spec to do it, but you might get away with something like:-
[...]
"XML is like violence - if it doesn't solve your problems then you're not using enough of it."
Let's just say that there are Ways To Get Things Done ;D
-
Isn't this why we have the 50% rule?*
*of course it doesn't apply to the altitude award :thumbsup:
Yes, that's why we'd win but not win. TG has previous on this front, dontcha know.
-
I could...
Design my own Awards with something like "The National Federation of Endurance Cyclists" on them, numerated in MILES.
Print them out and put them in a display case. No-one would be none-the-wiser, 'cus no one around me gives a toss about my AUK awards.
What does AUK offer? A medal, a badge, a mugshot in the magazine, bragging rights on an internet forum?
-
Isn't this why we have the 50% rule?*
*of course it doesn't apply to the altitude award :thumbsup:
Yes, that's why we'd win but not win. TG has previous on this front, dontcha know.
I don't think I could motivate myself to cheat if I wasn't going to win* that's why I could never be a proffesional**
*depends on your defenition of win
**I'm pretty sure that's the only reason
-
What does AUK offer? A medal, a badge, a mugshot in the magazine, bragging rights on an internet forum?
if you like; yes
most of us do it for a personal challenge though
-
...
So it's down to a question of where you draw the line for acceptable proof. Personally I think GPX file alone is too weak, which is why (in another thread) I suggested that at least one proof-of-passage was obtained on the route although it doesn't need to be exactly specified where in advance.
Sounds utterly sensible to me.
This would get my vote. Something like a start/end control plus an intermediate every 100km would do it.
The pro is that it allows the GPS track to replace intermediate controls, which IIRC was the major arguement advanced originally.
The con is that it requires some supplementary evidence, geotweets, receipts, whatever, which is inconsistent with the utopian vision of a self contained automated online administration system.
The reality is that the technology for the utopian vision is several years away and we will be living in a hybrid oldskool/techskool world for some time to come.
Better to embrace that now and put an end to the wibbling about relying exclusively on GPX tracks for validation.
-
EF:
You're right, most people are totally unaffected by 90% of these rules; we just ride for our own satisfaction, and couldn't care if anyone else cheats. But the logical extension of this is to have no validation at all - we could all use YetAnotherBikeJournal.co.uk instead.
So what rules do you think we should have?
Simply that the 50% margin for points from calendar events be manipulated to offer the desired protection - say, 90% of points must come from calendar events (AAA points count from calendar events only, etc)?
Since it's easy to cheat either way (you can certainly create a passable receipt using home PC equipment, just as you might fake a GPX trace), only by excluding the rides do we ensure the purity of audax and that those who "win" at audax are doing so without resort to foul means?
-
My 2p worth. I'd happily remarket the 3Down as a perm if the 2 info controls can be accomodated. As it happens there are pubs close by each but they're only open limited hours...
If I could accept the ride evidence as a mixture of receipts, GPS and/or cell phone photos, that would be fine by me and an effort to fake.
My thought for photos is that I could email an applicant and say something like "at Control x I want you photo'd to the left of the post box with a finger stuck in your right ear". With, say, three objects at a location, four limbs, several orifices and readily available cycling accessories for imaginative posing, I would ensure a Kama Sutra's worth of cycling positions before someone could reuse a photo.
-
Probably.
-
I'm glad I read to the end as that last post now makes it clear what the problem is.
So there are routes which can't be traditional perms (no PoP is possible) which therefore can't be perms at all, as GPS-only PoP is a no-no?
It's hard to imagine a route that has nowhere that could be used as a "traditional" control. It would be like a calendar event relying on infos alone - it just wouldn't get approved.
In my, very limited, experience many calendar events involve manned controls miles from the nearest shop or cashpoint. These routes benefit from not being diverted into extra towns. GPS, it seems to me, allows some perm routes to be designed around the route rather than the facilities. The necessary kilometres can be had one way or another - why always choose cashpoints and all night garages over the right roads for the ride?
-
Similarly some of the best climbing territory in the London area - the Surrey Hills - is effectively off limits for AAA purposes.
I've done a couple of GPS DIYs with AAA points in the Surrey Hills. I didn't get any distance points as its hard to get a minimum distance between controls of 200km without using s**tloads of controls. I think I got 2.5 or 2.75 AAA pts for about 170km riding (including riding from London out to the hills and back)
I can confirm that The AAA Man is happy for a hilly 100km section to be incorporated into a longer GPS perm; so you really can have your cake and eat it with these rides;
Please respect AAA organisers' routes though and don't just pinch them without asking (and buying them a pint :))
-
Credit to you, Mr Zoom, for a constructive and forward-thinking thread topic
The idea of a freeing a perm route from the necessity for control points where there are ATMs, open shops etc appeals to me. As does the idea of freeing it from the tyranny of needing to validate travel on a minor road in this way if (as is normally the case almost anywhere in the UK) there is a shorter A-road equivalent.
So why haven't I embraced the GPS unit?
- Maps and home-made routesheets work fine for me as far as the act of getting from A to B is concerned, just as they did for every touring cyclist through the 19th and 20th centuries. The Rixen & Kaul mini map holder remains the best Audax-specific kit investment I ever made. If (at least when it comes to route-finding) this stuff ain't broke, why fix it?
- GPS units still feel very expensive for something so functionally specific. For the same (or, in some cases, less) money you could get an i-Phone which does several thousand additional things.
- In fact GPS units remind me of the mobile phones or digital cameras of 15 years ago. Chunky, costly, poor graphic capability, even worse battery life. Yet another bit of tech where I'm not convinced it pays to be an early adopter - as ever, just wait and see what'll be around in a few years' time.
So how to marry my perfect-perm desires with my early adoption phobia??? Has anyone considered one of these tiny cheap mini trackers for the basic purpose of route validation, and just leaving the navigation to the good old Rixen and Kaul map / route sheet set-up?
BUY GPS MINI TRACKER WORLDS SMALLEST GPS LOGGER (http://www.gpswholesale.co.uk/gps_mini_tracker.html)
-
What do Perm Organisers wish to do?
Make their perms accessible to ALL Audax UK members, or
Restrict their rides to only those members who have electronic trip recorders?
-
GPS only events, permanent or calender will never happen until they become fail proof & cheap enough for all mankind.
Software gadgets/electronics fail. So on that note you will always need the paper route sheet as a back up
Im not on the market for GPS at the moment as I can't be meitherd with all the faffin about and Im not a lover of gadgets.
Maybe one day I'll get one ? Though I doubt it. Just got rid of my all singing all dancing Blackberry smart phone. It was fantastic. Google Earth, even street view on a phone ! WOW ! Though at the same time it was so annoying and glad to see the back of it
GPS on a bike is just a geeky gismo. Move on.
Im sure weve had these arguments loads a times :)
-
Please respect AAA organisers' routes though and don't just pinch them without asking (and buying them a pint :))
This is unrealistic. People will snaffle routes where they can, not telling current permanent organisers because there is no need to and also for convenience (wait two weeks for a postal entry or two minutes for an email entry?).
If DIY by GPS becomes prevalent, I will stop putting together new paper and card permanent routes and will probably eventually withdraw the ones I have issued if and when the number of entries decline to low single figures. I've no problem with this, but it just means AUK will need to think about how to encourage riders to share non-standardised routes.
Certain advocates for GPS should keep in mind that the traditional perm isn't fixed in stone - routes and route sheets are tweaked over time in an attempt to take on the best ideas about roads to take etc. Every route I offer has benefited in some way from the comments received from entrants - some implemented directly and others considered and not used. A lot of thought and effort goes into such routes, it's not just a case of spending 15 minutes hunched over bikehike and "voila" a route is created. Consideration is given to ease of getting to start controls, availability of food, traffic density, scenery, points of interest etc etc. And it becomes tried and tested - both by the organiser and by many other riders.
I do have some concerns with the potential for GPS to ultimately lead to a change in the nature of AUK, with collective experiences becoming fragmented, isolated and self-centred. Being more about the convenience of doing the minimum distance necessary to rack up the appropriate acheivement points, rather than an ethos of bold touring.
-
I'm glad I read to the end as that last post now makes it clear what the problem is.
So there are routes which can't be traditional perms (no PoP is possible) which therefore can't be perms at all, as GPS-only PoP is a no-no?
It's hard to imagine a route that has nowhere that could be used as a "traditional" control. It would be like a calendar event relying on infos alone - it just wouldn't get approved.
In my, very limited, experience many calendar events involve manned controls miles from the nearest shop or cashpoint. These routes benefit from not being diverted into extra towns. GPS, it seems to me, allows some perm routes to be designed around the route rather than the facilities. The necessary kilometres can be had one way or another - why always choose cashpoints and all night garages over the right roads for the ride?
I was not suggesting that ALL control points should be capable of ATM/receipt type of validation, merely that at least some of the control points will be. This was in response to EF raising the possibility (as I understood him) of an entirely info controlled event or perm. Even on those rides where the organiser sets up a roadside control in the middle of nowhere, other control points will be more traditional.
-
What I do have some concerns about GPS is that it will ultimately lead to a change in the nature of AUK, with collective experiences becoming fragmented, isolated and self-centred.
I don't think this will happen quickly, if at all. It is easy to read threads like this and get the impression that there is a majority champing at the bit to go fully electronic, and dump the old fashioned controls. That is certainly not how I perceive it on the road. The core of audax is the calendar event, and the majority of those riding these events are not reliant on electronic gismos (even if, like me, they are carrying and using GPS; we still carry the routesheet, jic).
I think it is great that AUK has embraced the technology to give members an additional choice for DIYs - a choice that I have been happy to use myself on several occasions. Equally I find it disappointing that the Mesh rides are to be withdrawn as this is a reduction in choice (though I gather that the door is left ajar for these to continue subject to distance integrety checking).
But relatively few AUKs use perms as their primary events - most of us do more calendar events.
-
Some AUK members have a library of Brevet cards with validation stickers on them dating back over twenty years or more.
They wish to continue enlarging their library.
-
I was not suggesting that ALL control points should be capable of ATM/receipt type of validation, merely that at least some of the control points will be. This was in response to EF raising the possibility (as I understood him) of an entirely info controlled event or perm. Even on those rides where the organiser sets up a roadside control in the middle of nowhere, other control points will be more traditional.
As someone who has never bothered to ride a non-calendar event (I can go for long solo bike rides whenever I like) you'll understand I'm playing devil's advocate here a little, but which part of AUK's mandate of promoting long distance cycling requires tradition to be upheld?
What if (I'm not sure this is the case, but for the sake of argument) allowing traditional-control-less events resulted in an great increase in audax participation? I'm not sure what value position is being defended when we say that traditional controls are an integral part of long distance cycling. There's been no suggestion that calendar events should be scrapped in favour of solo perms, right?
(Personally I feel fully catered-to by the range of calendar events on offer and the possibility that, if I want to try and fight Tim for Audax Ecosse recumbent glory, I can do a bunch of GPS DIY 300km out-and-backs to Longtown from Edinburgh...)
-
A large part of the enjoyment of Permanent rides is the social interaction with cafe waitresses.
How do I chat up a waitress to put her signature on my GPS?
If the Brevet card disappears, I will print my own.
When that becomes the case, I have no further use for Audax United Kingdom.
My route cards will be 'The Popular British Endurance Cyclist's Front"... IN MILES.
-
What do Perm Organisers wish to do?
Make their perms accessible to ALL Audax UK members, or
Restrict their rides to only those members who have electronic trip recorders?
This permanent organiser wants to offer freedom of choice.
Nothing more. Nothing less.
-
<Topol> Ah, Tradition. Tradition! </Topol>
For me, part of the challenge and romance (?) of Audax - is of being part of the shared experience of riding established routes which have been loving crafted over time. Riding DIYs is all very well but without that frisson of shared experience I'm just a bloke on a bike out for a ride. It's a motivation thing really, to both ride and complete the route.
In our Brave New World, the established Perm library will not disappear overnight; it will simply whither on the vine.
Alas, poor Perm! I knew him, a fellow of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy: he hath borne us on his back a thousand times; and now, how abhorred in our imagination he is!
-
I'd have thought that perms by GPS would increase the number of routes available, not reduce them.
Routes are easier to create, due to flexibility of controlling. This opens up a lot more routes. Yet people still like to have readymade routes - owning a GPS doesn't reduce that need.
What i think we need to do is think about how we can harness these new opportunities.
-
<Topol> Ah, Tradition. Tradition! </Topol>
For me, part of the challenge and romance (?) of Audax - is of being part of the shared experience of riding established routes which have been loving crafted over time. Riding DIYs is all very well but without that frisson of shared experience I'm just a bloke on a bike out for a ride. It's a motivation thing really, to both ride and complete the route.
In our Brave New World, the established Perm library will not disappear overnight; it will simply whither on the vine.
Alas, poor Perm! I knew him, a fellow of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy: he hath borne us on his back a thousand times; and now, how abhorred in our imagination he is!
There's no ( ? ) about it. If it was simply a chase for points to get one's name in the handbook, I wouldn't do it.
Freah air, birdsong, the smell of the countryside, the stench of the city, the peculiar 'wet knickers' smell of yellow rape seed blossom.
-
I'd have thought that perms by GPS would increase the number of routes available, not reduce them.
Routes are easier to create, due to flexibility of controlling. This opens up a lot more routes. Yet people still like to have readymade routes - owning a GPS doesn't reduce that need.
What i think we need to do is think about how we can harness these new opportunities.
Choice is a great thing. Consider Television. Zillions of channels and hardly anything worth watching.
-
The next thing you'll hear is some idiot suggesting PoP could be 11 hours of Helmet cam footage,,, ;)
-
Please respect AAA organisers' routes though and don't just pinch them without asking (and buying them a pint :))
This is unrealistic. People will snaffle routes where they can, not telling current permanent organisers because there is no need to and also for convenience (wait two weeks for a postal entry or two minutes for an email entry?).
If I find anyone has snaffled either of your perm routes as a DIY without having agreed with you (and hopefully paid you for an entry) I shall not be happy as a DIY org and may even question validating it, as the rider only knows that the route is worth AAA in advance though your hard work. I have no problem with them taking my calendar routes as I very much doubt this will stop the rider riding the proper event once a year.
I suppose this could be solved by an "Extended perm event"where there are two separate rides but I'm not about to start administering those as well, if anyone else wants to feel free to contact John Ward (assuming he wants to as well)
-
I'm glad I read to the end as that last post now makes it clear what the problem is.
So there are routes which can't be traditional perms (no PoP is possible) which therefore can't be perms at all, as GPS-only PoP is a no-no?
It's hard to imagine a route that has nowhere that could be used as a "traditional" control. It would be like a calendar event relying on infos alone - it just wouldn't get approved.
In my, very limited, experience many calendar events involve manned controls miles from the nearest shop or cashpoint. These routes benefit from not being diverted into extra towns. GPS, it seems to me, allows some perm routes to be designed around the route rather than the facilities. The necessary kilometres can be had one way or another - why always choose cashpoints and all night garages over the right roads for the ride?
I was not suggesting that ALL control points should be capable of ATM/receipt type of validation, merely that at least some of the control points will be. This was in response to EF raising the possibility (as I understood him) of an entirely info controlled event or perm. Even on those rides where the organiser sets up a roadside control in the middle of nowhere, other control points will be more traditional.
OK, sorry. My real point was that calendar events have other means to control the best route - GPS adds a useful extra where these aren't available - so much the same. I'd rather a nice route (climbers might talk about the aesthetics of the line) where cafe stops were the nicest cafes not just the ones nearest the corners of the route.
I do have some concerns with the potential for GPS to ultimately lead to a change in the nature of AUK, with collective experiences becoming fragmented, isolated and self-centred. Being more about the convenience of doing the minimum distance necessary to rack up the appropriate acheivement points, rather than an ethos of bold touring.
Could the GPS perm, as opposed to DIY, be a means to maintain the shared experience - in space if not in time?
While I'm being enthusiastic, I'd like to add that I'd be even keener on a GPS perm that:
a) allows validation by place from GPS, but also
b) draws on the experience and knowledge that several have mentioned, routing me via a nice cafe, along good roads etc, in a way that I can't do from bikeroutetoaster
c) provides a route sheet, because much as I like my GPS I find a paper route easier to use for navigation.
-
I agree with peoples view that GPS can only be a good thing and increase ride availability. Though if GPS perms are all we have then it will damage audax in my opinion.
Also I find the title a little annoying in this thread though to myself and towards audax in general. Rant over.
If anyone is thinking of ditching there paper perms in the north west region for DIY GPS Im more than happy to consider taking them on to keep the audax dream alive.
John
-
Please respect AAA organisers' routes though and don't just pinch them without asking (and buying them a pint :))
This is unrealistic. People will snaffle routes where they can, not telling current permanent organisers because there is no need to and also for convenience (wait two weeks for a postal entry or two minutes for an email entry?).
If I find anyone has snaffled either of your perm routes as a DIY without having agreed with you (and hopefully paid you for an entry) I shall not be happy as a DIY org and may even question validating it, as the rider only knows that the route is worth AAA inadvance though your hard work. I have no problem with them taking my calendar routes as I very much doubt this will stop the rider riding the proper event once a year.
I suppose this could be solved by an "Extended perm event"where there are two separate rides but I'm not about to start administering those as well, if anyone else wants to feel free to contact John Ward (assuming he wants to as well)
There is NO room for plagiarism in this University.
Expulsion is the only punishment.
-
Looks like we have a worthy replacement for the 'mudguard debate' ... ::-)
-
Looks like we have a worthy replacement for the 'mudguard debate' ... ::-)
This is going to be worse than the 'mudguard debate' for the reason Organisers don't want a pile of printed, bought and paid-for brevet cards hanging around waiting for three or four 'old timer' members to buy them.
The ideal for the Organiser is a 'paper free office'.
But alas, there will always be some members who want real Brevet cards to get signed by cafe waitresses.
-
Actually that's a good point. I was thinking that GPS-ification is downside free (because there's nothing about adding a GPS route that removes existing or future old-style routes) but might it be the case /in practice/ that orgs will stop offering paper routes because the advantages of GPS are so compelling? Then riders without GPS would be stuffed, which would suck.
-
Not aimed at anyone in particular
(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5109/5618809270_cf290c4c11.jpg)
-
Certain advocates for GPS should keep in mind that the traditional perm isn't fixed in stone - routes and route sheets are tweaked over time in an attempt to take on the best ideas about roads to take etc. Every route I offer has benefited in some way from the comments received from entrants - some implemented directly and others considered and not used. A lot of thought and effort goes into such routes, it's not just a case of spending 15 minutes hunched over bikehike and "voila" a route is created. Consideration is given to ease of getting to start controls, availability of food, traffic density, scenery, points of interest etc etc. And it becomes tried and tested - both by the organiser and by many other riders.
I have been on the receiving end of Billy's carefully constructive criticism of my routes, and it's much appreciated. I don't get out to ride them all that often so updates from riders are important.
All my routesheets, and gpx files are freely available. There is a donation button but no one has actually used it.
-
Not aimed at anyone in particular
(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5109/5618809270_cf290c4c11.jpg)
Looks like Bill Oddie ...
-
Yebbut, who's the guy doing the shovellling?
-
Have ya not seen the the Goodies on there tandem :)
-
Yebbut, who's the guy doing the shovellling?
Hes not shovelling it, hes stirring it lol
-
I like collecting brevet cards. Looking at an emailed validation number doesn't have the same memory-prompting spark, particularly a year or more afterwards.
-
Yebbut, who's the guy doing the shovellling?
Hes not shovelling it, hes stirring it lol
Aha, then it must be Alouicious. :-*
-
I like collecting brevet cards. Looking at an emailed validation number doesn't have the same memory-prompting spark, particularly a year or more afterwards.
As a DIY perm organiser I have to say that the GPS is much easier from my point of view. But not nearly as interesting as seeing how many pints of Stella or bags of prawn flavoured crisps a rider can get through on a 200.
-
Actually that's a good point. I was thinking that GPS-ification is downside free (because there's nothing about adding a GPS route that removes existing or future old-style routes) but might it be the case /in practice/ that orgs will stop offering paper routes because the advantages of GPS are so compelling? Then riders without GPS would be stuffed, which would suck.
Exactly, coming up with a route using roads that you want to use and that's only just over 200km is easy if you can nominate a control anywhere.
Coming up with a route that uses the roads you want to use and still be close to 200km shortest distance, even with info controls, can be tricky.
Coming up with a route that uses the roads you want to use, bound by the limitations of conventional controls suitable for 25+ riders who may want to sit at a cafe table and eat, with minimal use of info controls and not having it be 10% overdistance is very very tricky. The existing organisers have put in a lot of hard work to do this.
-
Coming up with a route that uses the roads you want to use, bound by the limitations of conventional controls suitable for 25+ riders who may want to sit at a cafe table and eat, with minimal use of info controls and not having it be 10% overdistance is very very tricky. The existing organisers have put in a lot of hard work to do this.
I suspect that I have it fairly easy in the Southwest. We have a fairly good balance between major and minor roads. It gets more difficult further into Cornwall.
Routing a DIY 600 from West London to the SW and back was interesting.
-
Coming up with a route that uses the roads you want to use, bound by the limitations of conventional controls suitable for 25+ riders who may want to sit at a cafe table and eat, with minimal use of info controls and not having it be 10% overdistance is very very tricky. The existing organisers have put in a lot of hard work to do this.
+1
There's a big difference between a DIY for your own personal consumption (especially where you know the hedges and cyclepaths you need to nip through in advance and also the quickest way to the nearest ' spoons) and an advertised calendar or perm. I was pleasantly surprised at how well the transition went on my one last weekend
-
Have ya not seen the the Goodies on there tandem :)
It was a 'Trandem'.
There were two. Both red.
-
Actually triplets (four seaters are quads, 5 = quints).
-
Actually triplets (four seaters are quads, 5 = quints).
OT: I'll see your quint and raise you a It's now 30 years and the National Enquirer still owes me a story - Wellsphere (http://www.wellsphere.com/biking-article/it-s-now-30-years-and-the-national-enquirer-still-owes-me-a-story/625597)
-
Actually triplets (four seaters are quads, 5 = quints).
And 'tandem' just refers to the seating arrangement (in a line one behind the other as opposed to side by side) and not the number of seats/riders.
-
Actually triplets (four seaters are quads, 5 = quints).
OT: I'll see your quint and raise you a It's now 30 years and the National Enquirer still owes me a story - Wellsphere (http://www.wellsphere.com/biking-article/it-s-now-30-years-and-the-national-enquirer-still-owes-me-a-story/625597)
See your Oct, and raise you a Tandem bicycle : Map (The Full Wiki) (http://maps.thefullwiki.org/Tandem_bicycle)
-
I've only ever ridden bikes up to a quint (ancient velodrome pacing machine) but have ridden several hundred km on a quad. It is fun to descend on something that easily pulls away from drafting tandems.
-
Actually triplets (four seaters are quads, 5 = quints).
And 'tandem' just refers to the seating arrangement (in a line one behind the other as opposed to side by side) and not the number of seats/riders.
"side by side", called 'Companion' .
-
Actually triplets (four seaters are quads, 5 = quints).
And 'tandem' just refers to the seating arrangement (in a line one behind the other as opposed to side by side) and not the number of seats/riders.
"side by side", called 'Companion' .
or Sociable.
-
Have ya not seen the the Goodies on there tandem :)
It was a 'Trandem'.
There were two. Both red.
the original was a tandem with an extra seat on the back for Bill (do a Google video search for the original opening credits)
-
Yeah but this one floats in the sky. Ha ha ha
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/aboutthebbc/goodies1.jpg)
-
Actually that's a good point. I was thinking that GPS-ification is downside free (because there's nothing about adding a GPS route that removes existing or future old-style routes) but might it be the case /in practice/ that orgs will stop offering paper routes because the advantages of GPS are so compelling? Then riders without GPS would be stuffed, which would suck.
I fear posters are missing the point. On the one hand many Orgs will simply cease offering Perms (the term 'Perm Org' will be an anachronism), and on the other, few new Perms with route sheets will be offered. There is precious little motivation or encouragement to develop Perms with paper routesheets. Any such will likely simply be perm versions of new calendar event (and one gets the distinct impression that these are also an endangered species).
It seems the future model will be more akin to a library of tracks on Bikely/RouteYou. The challenge will be to foster a system/community which encourages riders to identify, develop & promote interesting / preferred routes.
-
Any such will likely simply be perm versions of new calendar event (and one gets the distinct impression that these are also an endangered species).
do you mean the perm versions or the calendar events; I very much doubt any of this wizardry will threaten the calendar event, it's an experience head and shoulders above a perm IMHO;
but the folly of it all was brought home to me whilst riding a calendar event a few weeks ago; the organiser said "actually the calendar event uses a much nicer route than the perm" remind me again what the fundamental difference between them is...
-
It seems the future model will be more akin to a library of tracks on Bikely/RouteYou.
Possibly. But then, the solo perm has always (in my view) been of that ilk anyway. I've ridden them in the past as a convenient way of getting a nice distance in using a route that someone has already thought out for me, but increasingly these days I tend to ride the route and not bother with the card or validation. I'm not bothered about points these days, and riding just to get points isn't something that appeals to me. I'd rather just ride my bike.
I do like riding perms in company though; that common purpose thing and the way it feels kind of like a calendar event elevate it (to me) to something more in the spirit of audax than a solo perm.
-
Please respect AAA organisers' routes though and don't just pinch them without asking (and buying them a pint :))
This is unrealistic. People will snaffle routes where they can, not telling current permanent organisers because there is no need to and also for convenience (wait two weeks for a postal entry or two minutes for an email entry?).
If I find anyone has snaffled either of your perm routes as a DIY without having agreed with you (and hopefully paid you for an entry) I shall not be happy as a DIY org and may even question validating it, as the rider only knows that the route is worth AAA in advance though your hard work. I have no problem with them taking my calendar routes as I very much doubt this will stop the rider riding the proper event once a year.
I suppose this could be solved by an "Extended perm event"where there are two separate rides but I'm not about to start administering those as well, if anyone else wants to feel free to contact John Ward (assuming he wants to as well)
My attitude to snaffling has changed and I'm currently not bothered if people do use my permanent routes as the basis for their DIYs. The consequence if that happens and it leads to a small number of entries for my paper and card version will simply be that I don't renew the events when cards eventually run out. Supply and demand etc etc. It would also make it less likely I'd put as much or indeed any effort into future permanents in my vacinity. So if people enter using one of my permanent routes, I'd suggest you should let them as it feels wrong to dictate what roads they can and can't use.
I personally feel the desirability of using calendar/permanent routes as the basis for DIYs would be a matter for AUK to address, should they care about such things, rather than for me or you as organisers. I can 't imagine there is much will to regulate such things, as fundamentally AUK exists to encourage long distance cycling, regardless of the format of validation.
-
Much of the labour of making good routes can be automated, given the data. Take the routing information from openstreetmap.org (http://www.openstreetmap.org/), the scenic-ness database from mysociety.org (http://scenic.mysociety.org/), and (the missing bit for now) an up-to-date gazeteer of cafés and grocery stores with opening hours, and generating routes ought to be a push-button affair where you pick a couple of places to visit along the way and the computer does the rest of the work.
So I think there will come a point where hand-crafted routes will no longer be all that important, though of course people may still make and share them for the fun and history of it.
-
Much of the labour of making good routes can be automated, given the data.
It's an interesting idea, but I don't really think so. Route setting is qualitative as well as quantitative. After all, a computer won't ever have the emotions to judge what a route "feels" like.
-
It's an interesting idea, but I don't really think so. Route setting is qualitative as well as quantitative. After all, a computer won't ever have the emotions to judge what a route "feels" like.
I'd very much agree with this
When we moved here a couple of years ago I had a blank slate in terms of routes, and even after poring over maps and stuff I didn't get a feel for various roads in terms of "nice to ride" factor until I'd ridden them.
There are A roads that should be ghastly but aren't (in mid-Wales) and lanes that should be lovely but actually are draggy and dull.
-
Route setting is qualitative as well as quantitative. After all, a computer won't ever have the emotions to judge what a route "feels" like.
That's what the scenic-ness database is for: to tell the computer how humans respond emotionally to different bits of route.
-
Any such will likely simply be perm versions of new calendar event (and one gets the distinct impression that these are also an endangered species).
do you mean the perm versions or the calendar events; I very much doubt any of this wizardry will threaten the calendar event, it's an experience head and shoulders above a perm IMHO;
but the folly of it all was brought home to me whilst riding a calendar event a few weeks ago; the organiser said "actually the calendar event uses a much nicer route than the perm" remind me again what the fundamental difference between them is...
I'm reflecting posts by eminent AUKs to regarding the number and quality of calendar events. From my POV the reason I ride perm is because of the shortage of calendar events, or at least my reluctance/ability to travel the country searching them out.
The flip side of this coin is that my Faccombe Willy route (the Willy Warmer with Altitude) is best ridden as a GPS DIY. I collected some info questions last time round but I've not gotten a round to listing it as a Perm.
I do agree the with MV, group perms are the most sociable (translation: I don't get dropped). And I sympathise with his view on points. As always, it depends on your personal objectives. Last year I did rode several pointless rides myself and gasped at the illicit thrill of riding x00km without a Brevet!
I similarly agree with Billy. As a new Org I was rather jealous of the time and effort put into developing a new route. Nowadays I'm happy simply for feedback. The routes are online. Riders only need come to me if they want a Brevet for the listed event.
It's a shame we don't have any posters called Nick or Dave so I could agree with them as well.
-
Route setting is qualitative as well as quantitative. After all, a computer won't ever have the emotions to judge what a route "feels" like.
That's what the scenic-ness database is for: to tell the computer how humans respond emotionally to different bits of route.
Unfortunately, teleportation between scenic locations isn't possible. 87% of any ride is getting between these views. It's those bits that often determine whether a ride is well received or not.
Whilst some routes write themselves (e.g. my Glen Tae Ben, which follows the only roads available in a very scenic area) others need quite a bit of work to refine.
For example, Redhill Beach Trip, which me and another forumite rode at an early stage, realised it needed work and then put on a much better route by changing the roads used. This was despite the original looking, on paper, as a decent route - there was a 15km stretch that materially affected the feel of the ride. Even simple little things, like the direction in which the Beachy Head road was done (anti-clockwise is much better that clockwise) made a noticeable difference.
I suspect a computer would find it difficult to make such judgements without human intervention. Of course, if the idea is to have a reasonable route rather than the best route, then such refinements may be irrelevant
-
The DIY perm.
Pick three towns.
Check on ViaMichelin they add up to the required distance.
Enter the route on the on-line Entry form.
Get a confirmation from the Organiser.
Get a start PoP.
Find the first town in 'Cities' on my Garmin. Press 'Navigate', and see what fun the day brings.
-
That would be a DIY by GPS would it not? - Riding a DIY permanent by GPS (http://www.aukweb.net/diy/gps/) - as you're creating the course.
A GPS perm would be more along the lines of:
Look through list of routes online and pick one
Click online entry and paypal buttons
Recieve route sheet and track file
Fiddle track file onto gps unit for navigation, OR just follow the route sheet with gps unit just for tracking
Have a lovely relaxing bike ride following a route vouchsafed by someone who's put a lot of effort into it.
Get home, have cup of tea
Plug in GPS unit, email/upload your track file from the unit
Org checks that GPS track confirms you passed through points x,y,z,a,b, possibly checking that you only went between a+b via BIG HILL if needed and all within the time limit
If it all checks out, you get the points/warm fuzzies from completing the ride within the rules.
-
It would be a Lead-me-by-the-nose-up-the-garden-path-without-a-paddle Perm.
-
I'm reflecting posts by eminent AUKs to regarding the number and quality of calendar events. From my POV the reason I ride perm is because of the shortage of calendar events, or at least my reluctance/ability to travel the country searching them out.
as I often find myself riding into and out of That London I can see why you would find a shortage of calendar events convenient to you; and the vaguries of train travel from our capital city at weekends and especially Sunday compounds it;
Audax events tend to be Local Events for Local People with the exception of the classics where people travel from all over to ride them. (I think this belongs in the Audaxing without a car thread)