what's the current state of UK Audax ?

[quixoticgeek]

Incidentally that could be introduced as a pilot and would give a wealth of insight on how many people are actually interested in ACP validation, when it comes as an extra...

Doesn't that depend on how much the extra is? If it's €1? or €3 or €5 or €10. Depending on how much the extra is, depends on how many people are likely to care. And if you're going to do this experiment, you should probably do one where you charge the same for both by way of a control.

I think this also needs to be done along side an explanation of what ACP accreditation actually gets you. Sure you can ride this 600 as a BR, you'll get the sticker back on your card instantly. But you can't use it towards your Randonneur 5000 award you were working on. If you don't do this, you're gonna get a lot of people screaming a year down the line when they realise that they saved €2 on a couple of rides, only to have to do them again to get the award they were working towards.

J

[Manotea]

Incidentally that could be introduced as a pilot and would give a wealth of insight on how many people are actually interested in ACP validation, when it comes as an extra...

Doesn't that depend on how much the extra is? If it's €1? or €3 or €5 or €10. Depending on how much the extra is, depends on how many people are likely to care. And if you're going to do this experiment, you should probably do one where you charge the same for both by way of a control.

I think this also needs to be done along side an explanation of what ACP accreditation actually gets you. Sure you can ride this 600 as a BR, you'll get the sticker back on your card instantly. But you can't use it towards your Randonneur 5000 award you were working on. If you don't do this, you're gonna get a lot of people screaming a year down the line when they realise that they saved €2 on a couple of rides, only to have to do them again to get the award they were working towards.

J

The point is that in the UK most AUK members are focused on the AUK wards; pursuing ACP awards is very much a niche activity, mainly populated by, ahem, the more senior members of AUK.

It's not actually about the money, it's about Organisers  having the option to choose between AUK Validation (Brevet Card returned on the day) or ACP validation (Brevet Card returned several weeks later with additional costs and effort for all concerned).

AUK policy is to encourage larger and better supported events; as events get larger these operational issue become more of an issue. Running an event with several hundred riders is a completly different experience to running an event with 50. Not many people know that.                         

[Manotea]

ISTM the reason the Board is dragging its feet on this is because there is a lobby which regards AUKs primary reason for existing being to support ACP validated activies in the UK and would see *ALL* Randonneur events run as BRMs.

Now, ACP requires Brevet Cards, and that is unlikely to change any time soon, and unlike AUK validation, ACP validation involves numbered stickers, and those stickers are attached by the validation secretaries.

Yes, Orgs could attach the ACP stickers but as with any manual process the likelihood of errors occurring is so high (and the process of resolving them so onerous, especially once the results have been recorded with ACP) that it probably is best handled centrally by the Validation Secretaries.

As it happens, the current practice of requiring the Valsecs to process Brevets for 300km+ events acts to encourage such events to be run as BRMs, because as the brevet cards have to be returned to base regardless there is no benefit in running the events as BRs. Which suits the ACP lobby just fine.

It does however disregard the thriving interest in AUK BR events and awards and rather acts as a sea-anchor against operational improvements such as instant validation.

Where we are is that AUK is positioning itself to employ staffers to handle centralised validation; once in place AUK would be positioned to withdraw instant validation for 200km events (so much simpler than refining the process to reduce or even eliminate operational overheads in the first place).

That instant validation is popular with riders and saves a great deal of effort and costs for organisers isn't a concern.

[jsabine]

ISTM the reason the Board is dragging its feet on this is because there is a lobby which regards AUKs primary reason for existing being to support ACP validated activies in the UK and would see *ALL* Randonneur events run as BRMs.

[Big snip]

Where we are is that AUK is positioning itself to employ staffers to handle centralised validation; once in place AUK would be positioned to withdraw instant validation for 200km events.

That this would be unpopular with riders and create a great deal more work and cost for organisers wouldn’t be a factor.

And you accuse me of disinformation!

*None* of this accords with my perception.

[Manotea]

ISTM the reason the Board is dragging its feet on this is because there is a lobby which regards AUKs primary reason for existing being to support ACP validated activies in the UK and would see *ALL* Randonneur events run as BRMs.

[Big snip]

Where we are is that AUK is positioning itself to employ staffers to handle centralised validation; once in place AUK would be positioned to withdraw instant validation for 200km events.

That this would be unpopular with riders and create a great deal more work and cost for organisers wouldn’t be a factor.

And you accuse me of disinformation!

*None* of this accords with my perception.

Some board members have been mooting elements of this - y'know, informally and unminuted - for quite some time.

I'm just joining the dots and generally looking to help move things along... 

Happy to hear counter arguements.

[whosatthewheel]

I tend to agree with Manotea, in that there is a perception in the highest spheres that everything revolves around ACP/PBP, whereas at "grassroot" level the reality is very different.
AUK is a self sufficient, self worth organisation that would survive very well even if ACP were to collapse tomorrow and PBP were to fold next year. Less than 10% of members enter PBP and probably an even smaller proportion are interested in ACP validation 75% of the time.

Personally, I think AUk should focus their effort on what happens in Rutland today, rather than what happens in Paris next year. People who want to go to Paris next year will find their way, they are surely motivated enough to get there without the need to turn every mile of tarmac into BRM hunting ground.

[quixoticgeek]

Ah, Britain. The Island...

[whosatthewheel]

Ah, Britain. The Island...

For the record, I am not British, so I am not here waving Brext flags... I just think when all your concerns are around an event run in france and you can't organise a 400 National event in the UK... maybe your priorities are wrong

[telstarbox]

Ah, Britain. The Island...

Several islands actually...

[jsabine]

Personally, I think AUk should focus their effort on what happens in Rutland today, rather than what happens in Paris next year.

My perception is that board meetings at least are about a third focussed on what is going on in Rutland today, a third focussed on ensuring that it can be developed to also go on in Rotherham in two or five years' time, and a third focussed on making organisers and riders lives easier.

The ACP relationship and the road to PBP really doesn't take up a lot of time.

[j_a_m_e_s_]

Do Rutland and Rotherham have some significance in Audax that I didn't know of? 😉

[whosatthewheel]

The ACP relationship and the road to PBP really doesn't take up a lot of time.

Admittecly, I have no idea, however, from what I read the all validation process by mail is a lot of work, work that certainly (as pointed out by others) will put off the next generation from doing. It seems to me that if you take out BRM validation, this work could be virtually eliminated, bar a few X rated events that have a postal finish.

That being the case, we should ask ourselves whether and WHEN we do need this ACP validation.

The necessity for a double check of brevet cards is something I do not buy into... it is a system which is in essence based on trust, no matter how many layers you want to add

[CrazyEnglishTriathlete]

I'm somewhat tired at the moment so my memory isn't as sharp as it should be, but I recall the rationale for our events being recorded as BRMs was to demonstrate to the ACP that AUK riders did actually do quite a lot of rides, ahead of (I think it was PBP 2011) where there was talk of national quotas based on the number of brevets ridden in that country.  So rides became BRM every year instead of once every 4 years.  Two questions

1) Is my weary mind correct on this case?
2) If so, is it still the case, or have the ACP moved on from this position?

[Redlight]

Do Rutland and Rotherham have some significance in Audax that I didn't know of? 😉

It's the top-secret plan for next year's National 400 

https://ridewithgps.com/routes/27917912

[whosatthewheel]

Do Rutland and Rotherham have some significance in Audax that I didn't know of? 😉

It's the top-secret plan for next year's National 400 

https://ridewithgps.com/routes/27917912

Very clever indeed... 

[j_a_m_e_s_]

  

[Ivan]

Ah, Britain. The Island...

Several islands actually...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Britain - "Great Britain, also known as Britain, is a large island in the north Atlantic Ocean"

[Fidgetbuzz]

Ok thread has diverted a bit .. but bringing my thoughts into this BRM thingy.  From my LEL  financial point of view I imagine PBP making a significant surplus every 4 years , (or finding a way to disburse such surplus that is undisclosed to us) .. and if you add in the BRM validation fees every year ..  the sheer scale of the financial surpluses  over in France ..should be staggering. What actually happens to these sums.. who knows ... anyone able to contribute an answer?

  We can see AUK piling up cash .. and raise questions about the the Boards decisions and plans if we wish to .. but ACP never disclose any financial information as far as I know ...  but it is where we are paying money to .. and for what?

 Left to myself I would not get involved in BRMs except for those who wish to have them in PBP and the preceding year, and those individuals wanting  BRM validation would pay a little more to have their ride as a BRM ride.

[whosatthewheel]

Ok thread has diverted a bit .. but bringing my thoughts into this BRM thingy.  From my LEL  financial point of view I imagine PBP making a significant surplus every 4 years , (or finding a way to disburse such surplus that is undisclosed to us) .. and if you add in the BRM validation fees every year ..  the sheer scale of the financial surpluses  over in France ..should be staggering. What actually happens to these sums.. who knows ... anyone able to contribute an answer?

  We can see AUK piling up cash .. and raise questions about the the Boards decisions and plans if we wish to .. but ACP never disclose any financial information as far as I know ...  but it is where we are paying money to .. and for what?

 Left to myself I would not get involved in BRMs except for those who wish to have them in PBP and the preceding year, and those individuals wanting  BRM validation would pay a little more to have their ride as a BRM ride.

Exactly... 

[Somnolent]

I've made a pitch for instant validation for 300km events on the AUK Forum. 

Whilst it may well have cropped up in informal conversations before, the pitch in AUK forum in the early hours of this morning, is the first formal suggestion to the Board along these lines that I can recall.  Requests to the Validation Secretaries, who are after all delegates, and operate only along the guidelines handed down by the Board, don't count!     

To then read, less than 12 hours later on here, that the 'Board is dragging is feet on this' along with what appears to be an attempt to conflate & confuse the issue with the BR/BRM debate is at best unhelpful, at worst somewhat offensive to the volunteers concerned.

If anyone wants the Board to consider changing the balance between BRs and BRMs in some way, then a separate pitch in the AUK forum would be appropriate.
Just for the record though, there is no AUK policy to prioritise BRMs over BRs except in PBP years when there is a big demand for BRM as qualifiers, and it doesn't cost the organiser any more to have their events as BRM than it does to have them as BR. 
BRMs do still create a small amount of extra workload for the validation team, but it is far less of a burden than the scrutiny required of events created by a new organisers (and sorting out the mayhem of some experienced organisers** who should know better).

** not posters on this thread I hasten to add.

[Divingrob]

Not read through all the posts, but what I would like to see is certainly a bit more information on the perms, you look at rides "local to me" and get for example a ride that starts over 200 miles away with nothing more than DIY Permanent series as a title with no description that is any use to me. I would like to know where I'm riding to before committing.

[whosatthewheel]

Not read through all the posts, but what I would like to see is certainly a bit more information on the perms, you look at rides "local to me" and get for example a ride that starts over 200 miles away with nothing more than DIY Permanent series as a title with no description that is any use to me. I would like to know where I'm riding to before committing.

Which goes back to my older point about info... no point in knowing that a ride starts in Poynton, if that's all you get

[mattc]

The Kevin Bacon of AUK discussions 

[JonB]

On the issue of BR/BRM. I got my ACP Randonneur 5000 award earlier this year and I am really pleased to have done so. With a bit more work over the coming years I may be able to get the 10000 (especially now we have a Super Randonee available in the UK).  These awards are made possible by UK rides being given BRM status and whilst I wouldn't want to see all rides over 200 being BRM, the current mix of BR and BRM feels about right so I'd favour leaving it as it is.

[whosatthewheel]

On the issue of BR/BRM. I got my ACP Randonneur 5000 award earlier this year and I am really pleased to have done so. With a bit more work over the coming years I may be able to get the 10000 (especially now we have a Super Randonee available in the UK).  These awards are made possible by UK rides being given BRM status and whilst I wouldn't want to see all rides over 200 being BRM, the current mix of BR and BRM feels about right so I'd favour leaving it as it is.

If the new validation secretary is happy to look at 500 events and therefore receive two packages a day of cards to look over, then I also see no reason to change things... I am trying to figure who would want to do that The role description mentions particular attention to longer events and BRM.

Out of curiosity, if there was an equivalent R5000 only endorsed by AUK and therefore achievable with BR, would you not go for it?

It seems to me the ACP sticker is just an extra tax to get nothing in return