The Letter of the Law

[Lazarus]

Away from the sharp end, does it really matter if someone accepts a caramel wafer from a stranger?

I dont think it does anymore than one Haribo ruins a H550
to me these people are not racing they are just doing a long ride solo
Meeting random strangers who do acts of kindness is what travelling and touring is all about and I dont consider this cheating
Its gets more difficult when you have the racers because, if we allow this, someone will clearly place " strangers" to do acts of kindness at key points.


I think the real problem is not the grey areas its riders that walk straight past the boundaries as they dont posses either ethics or an ethos in keeping with the "sport"

Within the next 10 years someone is going to do it as a supported ride to smash the record though [ if it has not already been done]

[voodoo_simon]

Before we/I accept the rules on self-supported, who wrote them?

Is it just one (wo)mans ideology or a collective?

[Lazarus]

Not sure i get the relevance of that question

The rules exist either follow them or dont enter it as a ITT and just do it as a tour or as a pro race with support or however you see fit by your own moral compass. If you enter the race adhere to both the spirit and the actual rules as laid down by whomever is organising it.
I do question the sort of person who would cheat on what is essentially a personal challenge- it just seems so pointless.

[voodoo_simon]

Not sure i get the relevance of that question

Do you just blindly follow rules that are wrote down? Very odd approach.

Perhaps some fat IT geek who never rode a bike wrote the rules on self supported for a laugh and we’re daft enough to think they are the ‘rules’

Obviously I wouldn’t question the rules set by an organiser of an individual race, that’s how they want it doing and that’s the style I would do it in.

Edit - obviously I’m not calling anyone fat etc before the snowflakes call me on this

[Lazarus]

Do you just blindly follow rules that are wrote down?

Do you cheat every time you do something ? How odd
Realistically almost everyone will be somewhere between these two highly unlikely extremes

I see little point in debating whether they were set by a fat IT person who never rode a bike.

[jameso]

Not sure i get the relevance of that question

Do you just blindly follow rules that are wrote down? Very odd approach.

Perhaps some fat IT geek who never rode a bike wrote the rules on self supported for a laugh and we’re daft enough to think they are the ‘rules’

Obviously I wouldn’t question the rules set by an organiser of an individual race, that’s how they want it doing and that’s the style I would do it in.

Edit - obviously I’m not calling anyone fat etc before the snowflakes call me on this

The general self-supported rules have been established over time and a few events, no? Some events might be stricter on the details, some have rules based on the area but all come from riders and historic experience afaik, to the point that smart phones introduced questions about some aspects a while back.

[fatbikephil]

I believe (and I can't recall where I heard / read it) the ITT rules were derived from doing a route as if you were touring - i.e. you would not organise external support for a cycle tour, you'd either take stuff with you or buy it on route. So accepting a bottle re-fill from a random person is OK (my sin in the YD200 a couple of years back) as you would do that on a tour, and its also open to all people doing an ITT. So James Hayden accepting a pair of brake pads from a passing cyclist is OK as it wasn't pre-arranged.

The rules are arbitrary but were set by a bunch of folk looking for a way to do self supported challenges without the benefits of support cars etc as per pro road racing. Its up to us as to whether we choose to follow them and as noted the spirit is the key, not the letter.

OK now for the elephant in the room. "Nothing required, nothing prohibited" how many out there see this as carte blanche to use performance enhancing substances. I've always been of the view that as these aren't races, there are no prizes and nobody really cares how well you did outside of a very small number of people, no-one would think to cheat using drugs (or in any way). But given the chances of sponsorship and the money that could bring, maybe it is a problem?

[whitestone]

Sean, at last year's French Divide we were explicitly told that it was OK to knock on a house door and ask for water, I did it a few times.

There are a few variations on the general ITT rule set - The HT550 says no mechanised assistance in getting to/from the route to say a bike shop to get your bike repaired whereas the rules for the TDR state that hitching a lift for the same reason is fine (so long as you return to the point on the route where you left it). Then again the distances in the States are a bit bigger and on the out of town sections it could be a 100 miles or more to the nearest bike shop.

I think the helping of other riders cross swollen streams and rivers is simply not breaking rule #1 - don't be a dick! There's no way I wouldn't help someone else safely cross such risks regardless of what any rule said.

The "helping other riders" rule partly came about because some riders were simply unprepared for what they'd entered or had overestimated their abilities and were continually borrowing kit and spares from others who of course are then short of such items if they need them later in the ride.

A UK example where "helping other riders" can enter a grey area is gates: there's a proliferation on some routes and if they occur early in the race/ride are you seriously expecting every rider to open and then close the gate before the next person in the queue does the same?

[RIP]

performance enhancing substances - the ITT/race side of things isn't my scene but I do find these threads interesting, and that question crossed my mind earlier too.

Tongue in cheek I wonder where 'sustenance' overlaps into the 'drugs' bit of the venn diagram. Energy gels?

[ScotRoutes]

I think the helping of other riders cross swollen streams and rivers is simply not breaking rule #1 - don't be a dick! There's no way I wouldn't help someone else safely cross such risks regardless of what any rule said.

I'd disagree with you on this one. Accepting it's not safe to cross as an individual should be a scratch.

[Bearbonesnorm]

I honestly can't see performance enhancers beyond pro-plus ever really becoming an issue. It's too small a world and the potential financial gains are tiny when compared to road cycling or any other mainstream sport. However, wasn't there someone on the TD a few years ago having regular transfusions or something like that - it's a vague recollection so could be mistaken.

and

How many people started this years TD? 150? I'd guess that at least half had no real idea about the ethos / ethics involved with a self-supported event. In part, it is up to event organisers to stipulate any particular 'rules' that they'd like riders to adhere to - then anyone breaking those has absolutely no recourse. It's not enough to simply say, "It's self-supported" because as we've seen, peoples ideas about what that means, can be quite different. Things often do need spelling out with big colourful crayons.

I'd disagree with you on this one. Accepting it's not safe to cross as an individual should be a scratch.

Again - pragmatism. What if you'd crossed and another rider appeared on the other side looking anxious and asked where you crossed. Would you refuse to tell them or would you share the information in the hope of keeping them safe? What would you do if they started to wade across and lost their footing? Would you shrug and ride on or would you help them? As James said earlier, there's no black and white out there. Every single situation is a judgement call made at that specific moment with no bearing on past or future decisions.

[ScotRoutes]

If I crossed safely I might help someone else. I'd likely hang about to make sure they were safe. Of course you're not going to let someone drown. That would DQ them but not me.

[dlovett]

Do we agree that as events like BB200, YD200 HT550 are listed on the self supported website, then the self supported rule apply. However if the organisers override them, like Stu did with last years bb and the river crossings and Stu Rider did at the YD2/300 with water, then the organisers's rules trump the self supported rules?

Guys lots of good points are being raised here, exactly what I wanted from the thread.

Thanks
d

[jameso]

If I crossed safely I might help someone else. I'd likely hang about to make sure they were safe. Of course you're not going to let someone drown. That would DQ them but not me.

Would it disqualify the second rider? Just asking as I'm not sure what the river crossing means to the HTR. If it's a significant and vital part of the route's challenge, fair enough. As long as that's clear from the start.

[ScotRoutes]

Do we agree that as events like BB200, YD200 HT550 are listed on the self supported website, then the self supported rule apply. However if the organisers override them, like Stu did with last years bb and the river crossings and Stu Rider did at the YD2/300 with water, then the organisers's rules trump the self supported rules?

That's exactly how I'd see it. Any event organiser can make up any rules they want.

[ScotRoutes]

If I crossed safely I might help someone else. I'd likely hang about to make sure they were safe. Of course you're not going to let someone drown. That would DQ them but not me.

Would it disqualify the second rider? Just asking as I'm not sure what the river crossing means to the HTR. If it's a significant and vital part of the route's challenge, fair enough. As long as that's clear from the start.

Alan has said that not doing the crossing, at the correct point, is a DQ. A number of riders would have had this crossing in mind when they scratched early on.

[fatbikephil]

Alan has said that not doing the crossing, at the correct point, is a DQ. A number of riders would have had this crossing in mind when they scratched early on.

This year Alan did actually say to cross where we felt it to be safe, but advised the official crossing point was the best option.

[Lazarus]

That would DQ them but not me.

Nothing in the rules about having to return alive so I am going with its ok to finish dead


Safety has to trump everything in that sort of situation IMHO and the dont be a dick rule.
What if you descend due to bad weather and see a struggling ill equipped shivering person - surely its ok to save their life , even if it includes providing kit, and finish the ride?

[ScotRoutes]

What if you descend due to bad weather and see a struggling ill equipped shivering person - surely its ok to save their life , even if it includes providing kit, and finish the ride?

Of course it is OK, but if I was the shivering person, the last thing on my mind would be whether or not I've been disqualified from a race and I'd feel I was most likely in that position due to bad equipment or route choice.

[jameso]

Away from the sharp end, does it really matter if someone accepts a caramel wafer from a stranger?

I dont think it does anymore than one Haribo ruins a H550
to me these people are not racing they are just doing a long ride solo

Good to remember that races go on mid-pack that are every bit as intense and ethical as up front, just out of the spotlight. In some respects they guys who are going all-out for a 25+ day finish have it harder, that's a long time to be repeating long days. They're racing. But sure, there are tourers in the races too. The guys enjoying longer dinners and regular shorter days. No reason why not, though I wonder why you'd line up at a grand depart and not give 100% all the way to the end (or scratch if you decide you'd enjoy touring it more, that's a good/respectable call). Racing isn't better than touring but it seems the tick of the event is worth something to some even if the style of completion isn't really 'in spirit'.

However, wasn't there someone on the TD a few years ago having regular transfusions or something like that - it's a vague recollection so could be mistaken.

From what I remember it was recovery/hydration thing, don't think it was during the race but could b wrong. It did get some flack on BP.net, from a 'wft are you doing with needles?' pov. I met the guy involved briefly in the TD '13 and this was related to his second run I think.

[sean_iow]

Safety has to trump everything in that sort of situation IMHO and the dont be a dick rule.
What if you descend due to bad weather and see a struggling ill equipped shivering person - surely its ok to save their life , even if it includes providing kit, and finish the ride?

Let's not mix together helping someone because they are in trouble and helping someone who needs help to finish the race.

If someone was in trouble of course I would stop and help them and if that meant they needed any of my kit (warm clothing say) I wouldn't hesitate to help even if it meant the end of my race as well.

If someone needs help to finish the race due to poor preparation, say an inner tube, then they would have to understand that if I gave them a tube to save them a long walk out that their race would be over and they would be a dnf on the results even if they finished the course as they would have outside assistance. Alan took himself off the results of the HT550 one year as he had to repeatedly borrow a shock pump off another rider.

With regard to the discussion about 'trail magic' I think the rule on self supported is quite clear, you don't need to be a lawyer with the UCI to understand it

Only use commercial services that are available to all challengers - no private resupply, no private lodging

The key words are ONLY and COMMERCIAL SERVICES

So I read that at anything else is prohibited. That includes water from houses, food gifts, people offering their sheds/houses to sleep in or even brake pads from a member of the public. I wouldn't use any of these but as I've said perhaps I take the ethics too seriously?

On the subject of 'substances' which Phil touched on, it would seem that people are doping in backpacking races I guess it was bound to happen as for these type of distances there are prohibited drugs that would give an advantage. I only found out about this last week, which might be why I come across as such a grumpy old git in this tread with regard to ethics, but it's more that I'm disheartened that this is going on. If people are prepared to cheat like that will become very hard to do well riding clean. By coincidence I'm reading David Millar's book 'racing through the dark' at the moment which is on this very subject.

[ScotRoutes]

Folk have been caught doping for Sportives. I'd not think the TDR and others are immune. Peer pressure can be as intense as financial reward.

I'd not really considered the brake-pad example. I guess that "only" in the rules makes it clear if you are following the letter of the law.

[whitestone]

It's a tricky one with regard to "private resupply and lodging". I'd take that to mean something only available to one individual. The use of a room, food, water, etc. handed out to any rider who just happened to be there at the time is effectively public use rather than private. It's not like your mate has a house on the route and lets you stay the night.

I know Alan DQ'd himself but was that for simply borrowing the shock pump or repeatedly borrowing it?

A rather full and possibly proscriptive set of "rules" here: http://tobygadd.blogspot.com/2012/05/ul ... rules.html written some time ago now.

Taking ethics seriously? Have you ever met a rock climber? (hint, you have )

There are so many nuances in life that you can't possibly legislate for all of them. For the Bob Graham Round the contender notes about behaviour and the like got to four pages. It's a run ferrchrissakes! At four pages it was unlikely that the contenders and as importantly their helpers read them so we distilled it in to four bullet points:

Respect the route.
Respect those who live and work along the route.
Respect the history, traditions and ethos of the round.
Don't mess things up for others.

Even those shouldn't need stating.

Edit: Just re-read the page I grabbed the bullet points from. Might be worth reading, it's only short, but pertinent to this discussion - http://www.bobgrahamclub.org.uk/index.p ... =tradition

[Bearbonesnorm]

As we've touched on the subject of substances / doping, what would people put in those categories? From what I know of road cycling, things are pretty strict and a certain level of what may seem a mundane or everyday substance would be seen as cheating.

Is downing 3 large Costa's before heading off into the night 'cheating'? How about nicoteen patches? Vick's vapour rub? Half a packet of Pro-Plus?


Ooh and regarding the brake pad thing - many years ago my rear QR snapped while attempting the HT. There was no way to fix it so it was something of a deal breaker. I pushed the bike back to the nearest village and began looking in gardens until I spotted some bikes. Long story short is, I ended up buying a QR off a member of the general public. He wasn't a commercial outlet, simply a lad who lived in the village. DNF or not?

[sean_iow]

It's a tricky one with regard to "private resupply and lodging". I'd take that to mean something only available to one individual. The use of a room, food, water, etc. handed out to any rider who just happened to be there at the time is effectively public use rather than private. It's not like your mate has a house on the route and lets you stay the night.

Bob, I know that this is how it seems to be interpreted by some but I refer to my post...

The key words are ONLY and COMMERCIAL SERVICES So I read that at anything else is prohibited.

As we've touched on the subject of substances / doping, what would people put in those categories? From what I know of road cycling, things are pretty strict and a certain level of what may seem a mundane or everyday substance would be seen as cheating.

The substance I'm referring to is a controlled drug only available on prescription and on the UCI banned list. It's far more serious than just a skinny latte

I ended up buying a QR off a member of the general public. He wasn't a commercial outlet, simply a lad who lived in the village. DNF or not?

If I was running the event then you'd be a disqualified, see my interpretation of the rules above, sorry It's probably a good job I don't run an event or it would be impossible for anyone to get classified as a finisher as I'm bound to think of something that has upset me and think of a way to dqf them under the rules