Author Topic: Unsupported?  (Read 2174 times)

Re: Unsupported?
« Reply #25 on: July 31, 2019, 09:15:04 am »
I intend to organise brevets at some point and I wouldn't have an issue with that. Within the letter of the rules a motorhome shower would be 'illegal', while a reserved room in the Ritz with a champagne supper and a spa treatment would be fine because it's 'self supported' (???).

Seems right to me. As others have said, you take the terrain as you find it, and you take the support that's available on equal terms to all riders.

Well yes, but if *you* park a motorhome in the middle of Wales so you can use it on the way round an Audax, that's fine (self-supported), but if *someone else* parks the motorhome there for you to use, that's assistance and against the rules.

IIRC the rule is "no motorised support" rather than "no support from other people". So a motorhome not at a control is no good whoever parked it, whereas having your mate deliver a tent in a bicycle trailer is ok. Which again seems pretty sensible.

I do worry a little about what that rule means for ice cream vans etc., but I think that's covered by the "arranged" clause - if you serendipitously meet a motorhome on the road and they offer you a shower, that's ok, and if you ask your mate to park his ice cream van just before the big hill so that you can get a cornetto when you need it most, that's not ok.

frankly frankie

  • I kid you not
    • Fuchsiaphile
Re: Unsupported?
« Reply #26 on: July 31, 2019, 09:38:00 am »
Thanks to  grams  for pointing out about the incorrect Regs reference.

Establishments are available to all riders (maybe not the Ritz), whereas motorhomes are not. As I said above, if you want to park your motorhome in Dolgellau to avoid sleeping at Kings instead of spending money in a B&B, I think that's fair, but if you park it in the middle of Wales, where there is nothing around, that is not fair to other riders who do not have that opportunity...

Which basically is what the rule says about help at control points

So I think this is misinterpreting the rule.  It's not about 'fair' because there's no competition.  It's about not obstructing the route or, if you like, polluting the experience for other riders.
"This is a complex subject, with a need for more than one highlighter pen."

jiberjaber

  • ... Fancy Pants \o/ ...
  • ACME S&M^2
Re: Unsupported?
« Reply #27 on: July 31, 2019, 09:51:16 am »
I intend to organise brevets at some point and I wouldn't have an issue with that. Within the letter of the rules a motorhome shower would be 'illegal', while a reserved room in the Ritz with a champagne supper and a spa treatment would be fine because it's 'self supported' (???).

Seems right to me. As others have said, you take the terrain as you find it, and you take the support that's available on equal terms to all riders.

Well yes, but if *you* park a motorhome in the middle of Wales so you can use it on the way round an Audax, that's fine (self-supported), but if *someone else* parks the motorhome there for you to use, that's assistance and against the rules.

IIRC the rule is "no motorised support" rather than "no support from other people". So a motorhome not at a control is no good whoever parked it, whereas having your mate deliver a tent in a bicycle trailer is ok. Which again seems pretty sensible.

I do worry a little about what that rule means for ice cream vans etc., but I think that's covered by the "arranged" clause - if you serendipitously meet a motorhome on the road and they offer you a shower, that's ok, and if you ask your mate to park his ice cream van just before the big hill so that you can get a cornetto when you need it most, that's not ok.

Not sure I agree with that last statement.  If you arrange (i.e. in advance) for a mate with ice cream van to be at X location, then it is pretty much becoming a control (there have been audax rides where the control has been a campervan or a bunch of nutters on the side of a welsh mountain providing tea and cake).

If, however, you arrange for your mate to drive his ice cream van along with you so you can put your hand up when you need an ice cream, that is 'supported' :)  :thumbsup:
Regards,

Joergen

Re: Unsupported?
« Reply #28 on: July 31, 2019, 10:04:50 am »
Thanks Frankie

IIRC the rule is "no motorised support" rather than "no support from other people". So a motorhome not at a control is no good whoever parked it, whereas having your mate deliver a tent in a bicycle trailer is ok. Which again seems pretty sensible.

The current version of the regs just bans "personal support" between controls, nothing about being motorised. So an ice cream van available to everyone is ok, a tent delivered by a mate by any means between controls isn't.

I'd say the legality of parking your own motorhome on the route, or popping into a mate's house for tea, isn't currently codified one way or the other. The AUK regs are quite reactive and only ban things that have the potential to cause problems, or that someone's got in a huff about at some point in the past.

Re: Unsupported?
« Reply #29 on: July 31, 2019, 11:13:25 am »
A lot of people are "happy with supporting" football and cricket, or cyclocross and mountain biking. That doesn't mean they'll apply the rules of one to the other. So the question is what are the rules of being supported or unsupported on AUK events (cos PBP is a special case) and how are they interpreted in practice?

I've always taken the view that an Audax looks very much like a road race, and that the rules are designed to limit the connection between the organiser and the rider, so that the actions of the rider do not become the responsibility of the organiser or AUK.

Quote
9.9 Rider Conduct
9.9.1 Riders agree that they are on a private excursion and are responsible for their own safety and conduct. Riders must follow the rules of the road and show consideration to other road users.
9.9.2 Riders are responsible for their own welfare and may stop for food and rest at any place. Organisers may provide route guidance and support such as food and rest facilities at controls. Personal support is only allowed at controls and riders are responsible for the behaviour of their personal helpers.
9.9.3 Riders who infringe AUK regulations, ignore event officials’ instructions, or behave in a manner likely to bring an event, an organiser, or AUK into disrepute may be excluded from the event and from future AUK events.
Participants may ride singly or in groups and may pace each other but may not be paced by any other cyclist or motor vehicle.
9.9.4 The organiser or AUK may impose additional conditions, provided these do not conflict with AUK regulations and appendices, and are published in the calendar and event literature.
9.10 Results: AUK events are not races and no timed results list or placings list of any AUK event may be published.

A 'team car', which follows a rider, or a group of riders, is an obvious example of racing practice. There are rules in Time Trials which ban handing-up from moving vehicles, and restrict support to the side of the road. There's also a limit to the number of times that a support vehicle can pass a rider, once in 10 miles is the rule. TTs also have a need to distance themselves from mass-start racing.

An interesting paradox arises from the idea of banning support outside controls. If it's not a competition, and  the support is not from a moving vehicle, then why does it matter? Imposing ethics from competition on a private excursion, where responsible actors have freedom of choice to eat and rest where they wish, tends to indicate an affinity with competition.

We can consider the difference between Transamerica and RAAM. RAAM is very expensive to enter, because a link of responsibility has been established between the organiser and the participant. Transamerica, and other adventure races, seem to be limiting their liability by having similar 'arm's length' regulations to Audax, which makes them affordable.

There comes a point at which the organiser has to demonstrate that the rules that they impose in order to dissociate the event from racing are enforced. On an event the size of PBP, there are bound to be rule-breakers, so there are bound to be examples of enforcement. In addition to the scale of PBP, there is the cultural clash between one-time participants, and dyed-in-the-merino-wool randonneurs. That's also true of LEL, possibly more so, as qualification imbues some of the Audax ethic into PBP riders.

So I take the rules to be saying that Audax is not a race, and anyone who seeks to introduce race-like practices into it can be distanced through non-validation. It is possible to construct an ethical position from that, and if that provides motivation for participants and volunteers, that's a good thing.

Cudzoziemiec

  • Solar powered, tea fuelled cycle-wol
Re: Unsupported?
« Reply #30 on: July 31, 2019, 01:19:25 pm »
I've always taken the view that an Audax looks very much like a road race,
That's an interesting view, because it's sometimes described as "fast touring". To me it doesn't feel anything like touring or a race. It certainly has potential to be turned into a race (ie some people treat it competitively) and there is a sort of likeness to touring in that it can be a way of seeing places, but to me it feels like something different to both of those.
sideways bounding monkey lounging under fruit tree

Kim

  • Timelord
Re: Unsupported?
« Reply #31 on: July 31, 2019, 01:22:52 pm »
I've always taken the view that an Audax looks very much like a road race,
That's an interesting view, because it's sometimes described as "fast touring". To me it doesn't feel anything like touring or a race. It certainly has potential to be turned into a race (ie some people treat it competitively) and there is a sort of likeness to touring in that it can be a way of seeing places, but to me it feels like something different to both of those.

I reckon audax exists in a state of quantum superposition between racing and touring, and where its wave function collapses is mostly down to how fast the observer can ride.   :)
To ride the Windcheetah, first, you must embrace the cantilever...

Re: Unsupported?
« Reply #32 on: July 31, 2019, 02:00:13 pm »

I reckon audax exists in a state of quantum superposition between racing and touring, and where its wave function collapses is mostly down to how fast the observer can ride.   :)

Indeed, and when you've got a motorbike, you get to see more of the racing aspect. There's also a strong observer effect, especially when the aim is to tell a story that appeals to a general interest. Just pointing a camera at people makes them speed up.

I did explore the relationship between Audax and Touring in a film.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIdSJTQCRmI



bludger

  • Randonneur and bargain hunter
Re: Unsupported?
« Reply #33 on: July 31, 2019, 02:20:55 pm »
I've always taken the view that an Audax looks very much like a road race,
That's an interesting view, because it's sometimes described as "fast touring". To me it doesn't feel anything like touring or a race. It certainly has potential to be turned into a race (ie some people treat it competitively) and there is a sort of likeness to touring in that it can be a way of seeing places, but to me it feels like something different to both of those.

When I supported Paul's 200k Ditchling devil ride at the 130k mark, there are definitely different tribes coming in. We 'processed' 365 riders. I've got the spreadsheet from the day detailing what time which numbers came in, which I compiled on my phone.

Firstly were the speed demons who actually arrived literally at the point when we were getting the table out. Tellingly they came over and said something like 'I think we're first' - clearly had been working together to go as fast as they can. Which is no problem to me. No saddlebags on this lot, they were purely in roadie get up. Not even 'fuel bags' from what I could see. They scarcely stopped despite the exceptional spread the volunteers had laid on. 5 in this mob. From what I could see they were all wearing Look Keo or SPD-DL cleats. Lots of carbon.

Secondly in were the faster randonneurs, who had some actual bags on their bikes, but were clearly giving it a bit of beans. Generally had a cake but they didn't hang around. 8 of these guys? Carbon bikes predominated.

The third lump was of 115, who I would associate myself with personally. Bigger bags, averaging probably 22-25 km/h while moving, and had a nice leisurely stop, and a decent lump of scran, usually with one or two cups of tea to wash it down and took photos of Gwyn the control dog.

Fourth lump of 200 were the same sorts of people going a bit slower. These made up the lion's share.

25 riders came in with 30 minutes or less to go before the control 'shut'.

Lastly we had 20 who were late by a matter of between one and fifty minutes. I actually caught 3 of them on the way to Guildford after they'd left about 15 minutes before I did. Looked like it was turning into type 3 fun tbh but that's audax sometimes.

It's interesting supporting a ride, you get a nicer idea of what other sorts of people get up to. Plenty of cake left at the end! ;D
YACF touring/audax bargain basement:
https://bit.ly/2Xg8pRD


Re: Unsupported?
« Reply #34 on: August 01, 2019, 04:49:45 pm »
Mrs. M fits the same profile as morite's other half. We also have a motorhome .
I am still unsupported on all my rides. :(

Re: Unsupported?
« Reply #35 on: August 02, 2019, 12:18:50 pm »
Would morite be ok meeting his wife if she offered the same tea and cake to all riders on the ride?




Re: Unsupported?
« Reply #36 on: August 02, 2019, 02:37:20 pm »
Would morite be ok meeting his wife if she offered the same tea and cake to all riders on the ride?

Provided that offer was advertised to all riders (rather than "open to anyone who happens to look behind the hedgerow at point x which only morite knows about") I'd say that's within the spirit of the rules; the way to do it within the letter of the rules is for her to run a control (or to advertise her parking spot as an optional control).

Re: Unsupported?
« Reply #37 on: August 02, 2019, 02:51:33 pm »


What would be the rules around meeting her on the route for lunch or similar and if we did meet up am I allowed to get "stuff" from her like drinks, food etc?

As others have said, this would be "against the rules" but this this inequitable when compared to a participant that stops off at a pub, cafe or shop mid-stage.
KIDDERMINSTER KILLER AND CLEE AUDAX, 20th July 2019; SOUTH SALOPIAN, 5th Oct 2019. http://beaconrcc.org.uk/audaxes/

morite

  • World's Slowest Audaxer
Re: Unsupported?
« Reply #38 on: August 16, 2019, 05:21:58 pm »
Would morite be ok meeting his wife if she offered the same tea and cake to all riders on the ride?

Don't tempt her, she would be baking cakes before you know it...proper mother hen