Transcontinental 2017 - TCRNO5

[fatbikephil]

I like the format of this event whereby you have to choose your own route between checkpoints. Am I right in saying that the WRT is similar? I keep thinking of a format like that for a bigger off road thing around the highlands but you only get the check points on the start line as per the polaris. Makes navigation part of the challenge (rather than just following the purple line on your GPS) and throws in a whole load of other variables for bike and kit choice.

Regarding the other stuff being discussed, sometimes, despite your best efforts, sh*t happens. Don't let it stop you

[Chicken Legs]

Correct me if I am wrong but the main reason for choosing your own route on the TCR is to avoid/limit the liability for the organisers
should the worst happen.
More s**t happens when riding for thousands of miles on roads.

[ScotRoutes]

Correct me if I am wrong but the main reason for choosing your own route on the TCR is to avoid/limit the liability for the organisers
should the worst happen.
More s**t happens when riding for thousands of miles on roads.

Statistically, yes, but then the Delloitte Ride Across Britain has around 800 riders doing 1,000 miles each in 10 days and I'm only aware of one serious (fatal) accident in all the years it's been running. That suggests it's still pretty safe.

[Chicken Legs]

Statistically, yes, but then the Delloitte Ride Across Britain has around 800 riders doing 1,000 miles each in 10 days and I'm only aware of one serious (fatal) accident in all the years it's been running. That suggests it's still pretty safe.

I don't think it is a fair comparison to compare the Delloitte Ride Across Britain to the TCR, the DRAB is a pre set route of just over 100 miles a day.
The riders are relatively well rested, riding in the daylight and anyone driving a route with 800 riders on will not be surprised to see cyclists, quite the opposite
of the TCR.

[PeterC]

Not going to say much about some of the points raised above, at least until I formulate my thoughts better. But,, next couple of days will be interesting as here in Hungary cycling on A roads is banned, full stop, period etc. Therefore, if a competitive cyclist makes use of an A road he will be breaking the law of the country that they are cycling through. Surely, from an organisers point of view, law breaking should mean disqualification?

[ScotRoutes]

Statistically, yes, but then the Delloitte Ride Across Britain has around 800 riders doing 1,000 miles each in 10 days and I'm only aware of one serious (fatal) accident in all the years it's been running. That suggests it's still pretty safe.

I don't think it is a fair comparison to compare the Delloitte Ride Across Britain to the TCR, the DRAB is a pre set route of just over 100 miles a day.
The riders are relatively well rested, riding in the daylight and anyone driving a route with 800 riders on will not be surprised to see cyclists, quite the opposite
of the TCR.

Can't disagree with any of that. And you've referred to tiredness/fatigue again.

[voodoo_simon]

I see the ladies are doing well, only two scratches from 50. Percentage wise, must be a lot lower than the mens category?

Think I remember reading an article somewhere on ultras, suggesting that males enter a race with a 'I can do that attitude' whilst females enter with 'must finish at all cost' attitude.

Either way, they're 'kicking butt!'

Edit: obviously they'll be exceptions

[Dave Barter]

One idea that Duncan mentioned in Spain which is a neat one is that race performance is measured on moving speed rather than overall time. That then takes the onus away from minimising stops and puts it onto maximising speed. I think it has merit and a few of the ITTs have required mandatory night/rest stops.

[voodoo_simon]

One idea that Duncan mentioned in Spain which is a neat one is that race performance is measured on moving speed rather than overall time. That then takes the onus away from minimising stops and puts it onto maximising speed. I think it has merit and a few of the ITTs have required mandatory night/rest stops.

I think one of the New Zealand races does that too, you have to be stopped for 6 hours everyday.

Great photo album here, so many riders in Hi Viz too
https://m.facebook.com/vanhullestijn/al ... d%3D&mdf=1

[Scud]

My mate from Kings Lynn, Robbi Ferri (cap# 19) scratched last night, he said that his head wasn't in racing anymore after 3 or 4 really close misses as he came into Italy and he said it messed with his head as had enjoyed a conversation and a few shared miles with Frank and had it reported to him that another rider had been badly hit too.

He explained that because of the deadlines for the CP's you have to choose a fast route and naturally that means using major roads and placing yourself further in harms way, an ideal route would be back roads and bike paths but they aren't competitive mostly.

So he has scratched from the race and is plotting a route which is safer and more relaxed and riding it now as a tour i think.

[Alpinum]

One idea that Duncan mentioned in Spain which is a neat one is that race performance is measured on moving speed rather than overall time. That then takes the onus away from minimising stops and puts it onto maximising speed. I think it has merit and a few of the ITTs have required mandatory night/rest stops.

HT550 moving time was 61:28 hh:mm in 2016.
Have I won?
Have I won nothing?

Kind of a stage race then...
Unsupported stage race.

One of the things I like about this kind of event is the frame in which you ride when you participate. It's likely to make you ride an hour or two longer. It's normal to ride through the night to finish sub x days etc.
It hope we don't loose it.

He explained that because of the deadlines for the CP's you have to choose a fast route and naturally that means using major roads and placing yourself further in harms way, an ideal route would be back roads and bike paths but they aren't competitive mostly.

Now that sounds stupid.
They could/should locate the CP's at back roads instead.

Now I think of the TCR as something stupid. No matter what legacy.

[whitestone]

Then it effectively becomes a stage race, albeit one with varying stages. I'm with Alpinum on this (at least as far as off-road ITTs go) and keep them as a single stage leaving it to those riding as to how much or little sleep they take.

I rode through the last night on the HT550 and didn't feel too bad - I certainly wasn't anywhere near falling asleep on the bike. It might have been different if I was still riding the following day, but I don't know. I grew up on a farm where blocks of long days were common: lambing; hay making; etc. so I'm used to it.

[jameso]

He explained that because of the deadlines for the CP's you have to choose a fast route and naturally that means using major roads and placing yourself further in harms way, an ideal route would be back roads and bike paths but they aren't competitive mostly.

This is the dilemma that I'd not be happy with. There could be a black-listed roads list sent out when the CPs are released. It would let riders use quieter roads and remain more evenly competitive but may gets into a grey area of race planning and liabilty. Also might be impractical between certain points, but if considered at the same time as CP location I can't see major issues.

keep them as a single stage leaving it to those riding as to how much or little sleep they take.

Agreed, a simple end-to-end single stage race is much more elegant. Bottom line is that ultra-distance anything is partly about levels of sleep deprivation at the front end, like it or not.

[Bearbonesnorm]

In some regards I see road based ITT as quite different to their off-road brethren ... really couldn't see any reason (practical or otherwise) to impose ride time restrictions off road. As has already been said, doing that would simply make it a stage race / event and remove many of the elements that make bikepacking ITT what they are.

I like James's idea of a road 'blacklist' ... and yes, I understand that it shouldn't need to be imposed but I'm coming at this from a practical solutions angle rather than one of wishful thinking

[jameso]

I'm coming at this from a practical solutions angle

I'm only coming at it from an angle of 'what would it take for me to race the TCR', as i want to, but not quite enough in the current format to dust off the turbo trainer : )

As for enforcing a sleep time, that may help some avoid fatigue on a road event but here I think hit-run / drunk drivers etc are more of the issue. Also lets say you raced the baabaa bikepack event, you'll spend a lot of time on UK roads between 8am and 9am / 5pm and 7pm - the rush-hour (ish) times I avoid road riding - even if you slept 12-5am every night? Every country has rush-hour periods.

[Alpinum]

In some regards I see road based ITT as quite different to their off-road brethren ... really couldn't see any reason (practical or otherwise) to impose ride time restrictions off road

Some do it because of wildlife.

[whitestone]

But that's not too different to an off-road ITT where you need to pace things to get to shops/cafes when they are open, in the case of the Tour Auratoa (sp?) wasn't there a ferry involved that required a certain pace?

I'd see it as part of the strategy: to avoid excessively busy traffic. No different to being off the mountain passes of the TDR or CTR by the afternoon to avoid thunderstorms.

[Chew]

Still a bit sensitive about all this, so bear with me....

3 fatal accidents in 6 months, says that there is something wrong.
I'm far from a risk adverse person. I commute by motorbike, big fan of the IoM TT, and believe its better to live on the edge now and again, as it'll lead to a more fulfilling life, rather than sundays in Ikea and daytime tv.
Sometimes you have to realise that the risks are to high. Anyone else with an climbing background will understand. You may have spent a day hiking to the crag, being half way up an assent and the weather closes in. Part of you wants to continue, but you know the mountain will still be there tomorrow. You climb back down.


A couple of things:
Its a race so the most expedient way from A>B is always going to involve using A roads. You try and avoid them, but thats not always possible. If LEL was a free route, you'd just go up the A6 and no one would recommend that. A roads mean traffic and that means extra risk.

Anyone who's been out on the road 18 hours, day after day, knows it doesnt leave you feeling 100% and it affects your decision making ability. Combined with the above isnt a great mix.

Easy to see all this with hindsight, but sometimes you need to experience things first hand. Other people with similar experience to myself have gone out there with similar intentions and returned with the same conclusions.


Personally I think they should stop the race.
I've emailed them twice with my thoughts about this.

It's more the case of when the next fatality happens, rather than if.

[PeterC]

I think James and Stuart have put it better than I did about roads. I have looked at the tracks and a number of riders have elected to use 'A' roads in Hungary where cycling is not allowed, whereas some are sticking to quieter roads, maybe not as direct, but quieter, could this be because they know the legal situation and are complying with the law? In that case it could be argued that the riders using A roads are gaining an unfair advantage.
I happen to live on Route 44 the main route from Kecskemet (where the motorway from Budapest ends) into Northern Romania. This road is in dire straights as it was never designed for the volume of traffic it now carries. On a skinny tired road bike in daylight it would be a challenge never mind in the dark when fatigued. And at all costs avoid it when the road is re opened at 8pm on a Sunday evening as it's just a constant stream of article for two or more hours.
I'm not trying to get at the people who do this race, who I admire greatly, but Hungary has an appalling cyclist death rate. On quiet country roads I generally find Hungarian drivers pretty good, but on A roads it's a different story, doesn't matter who or what is slowing them they are going past anyway.

Good to see James Hayden doing so well this year.

Edit. Chew posted while I was writing this, sort of similar outlook, and yep I've had to bail out of a few routes too in less than favourable conditions.
It would be great if cycling on A roads was safe, but it's not and it's not going to be safe anytime soon either.

[Blackhound]

PeterC - rules are that you must obey local traffic laws. It was known that certain roads in Hungary were banned to cyclists and racers were not to ride them. We did our research to not use A roads.

I believe they will be dq'ed if using the wrong roads. I turned round on seeing a no cycling sign in Belgium but I understand others didn't and continued down the road past the sign.

I do not know what is happening this year but last year TCR dot watchers noted down all transgressions and passed them to Mike for a final decision that could be a time penalty. These were not made public and something similar is occurring this year.

Personally in light of the 3 deaths I would dq the riders for taking a banned road.

[pistonbroke]

Since Dave B has mentioned a conversation we had on the Spanish C2C (where's the f***kin writeup? ) I'll try to clarify my feelings. IMO these events could be seen as insomniac racing, to be able to function day after day on next to no sleep is not an athletic skill and something that only a rare few can acheive. The temptation to push beyond ones safe limit can bring great advantages, you don't have to be Einstein to work out an extra 2 hours riding a day over a 2 week event could get you 400 miles further up the road. I'm all in favour of chosing your route within the limits of mandatory avoidance of dangerous roads, it was one of the things i found great about competing in Trailquest and doing WRT events. I'd favour having a 6 hour in 24 rest period in all events where the expected winning time is greater than 5 days or more than 1000km in length using the shortest practical route. The danger is that these events get banned by people who really don't know the sport but merely see the fatalities.

[Dave Barter]

where's the f***kin writeup?

This will sound odd but I need to get in a flow then it will all come out. Struggling to find it at the moment for some reason across all writing projects.

[pistonbroke]

Only joking, reminds me of the bumper sticker I saw back in the day, Accountants work it out with a pencil.

[Alpinum]

rather than sundays in Ikea and daytime tv.

Now that is living on the edge in my books!

[jameso]

I have looked at the tracks and a number of riders have elected to use 'A' roads in Hungary where cycling is not allowed, whereas some are sticking to quieter roads, maybe not as direct, but quieter, could this be because they know the legal situation and are complying with the law? In that case it could be argued that the riders using A roads are gaining an unfair advantage.

PeterC - rules are that you must obey local traffic laws. It was known that certain roads in Hungary were banned to cyclists and racers were not to ride them. We did our research to not use A roads.

I believe they will be dq'ed if using the wrong roads. I turned round on seeing a no cycling sign in Belgium but I understand others didn't and continued down the road past the sign.

Out of interest is this 'a few' riders like a handful or less, or more? Hard to track and regulate perhaps looking at the spread of routes and 300 riders.
Comes back to the TD thread point of awareness of rules and spirit of the ride maybe. 1st point of these races is to ride in the right manner.

Edit, PeterC, 'A roads' in Hungary, are they the ones that show on trackleaders as green box numbered roads?