This could become a highly divisive issue.
-
- Posts: 727
- Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:33 pm
This could become a highly divisive issue.
Postby ausrandoman » Mon Mar 21, 2016 11:12 am
- cavebear2
- Posts: 2202
- Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 12:46 am
- Location: Perth
Re: This could become a highly divisive issue.
Postby cavebear2 » Mon Mar 21, 2016 11:03 pm
-
- Posts: 443
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 10:15 pm
Re: This could become a highly divisive issue.
Postby Smithstreet » Tue Mar 22, 2016 3:52 pm
They are allowed in UK Audax events (apparently), but are banned in France for mass start events, ie PBP, cyclosportives by French law.
Happy to be corrected if anyone knows different.
PS.. Fairly sure the 'being handed food' thing from a car is a bit suss though.
- find_bruce
- Moderator
- Posts: 10617
- Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 8:42 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: This could become a highly divisive issue.
Postby find_bruce » Tue Mar 22, 2016 5:19 pm
Seems pretty clear to me that obtaining assistance from any vehicle, moving or stationary, is contrary to the rules. Whether the riders did or not is another question, as is the appropriate penalty.Audax Australia Ride Rules wrote:11 Support
(1) Each rider must be self-sufficient however nothing in this rule prevents a rider from obtaining assistance (including buying food and drink), from:
(a) another rider taking part in the ride or
(b) a shopkeeper, local resident, passer-by or other disinterested person.
(2) No personal support of any kind (including a follow car) is permitted on the course. Personal support is only allowed at controls if agreed by the organiser. Any rider deemed to have received personal support may be disqualified.
Bicycles & equipment is covered by rule 8 - I don't see anything that would prevent aerobars.
- grantw
- Posts: 1792
- Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 11:22 am
- Location: Wollongong
Re: This could become a highly divisive issue.
Postby grantw » Tue Mar 22, 2016 8:47 pm
-
- Posts: 1152
- Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 5:02 am
- Location: Spearwood, WA
Re: This could become a highly divisive issue.
Postby just4tehhalibut » Wed Mar 23, 2016 3:18 am
- HappyHumber
- Posts: 5072
- Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 11:48 pm
- Location: Perth, (S.o.R.) W.A.
Re: This could become a highly divisive issue.
Postby HappyHumber » Wed Mar 23, 2016 7:53 pm
When it comes down to being enforced by a bunch of volunteers ...... What do you expect; consistency or something?
Hit me up via the BNA dm; I'll get an alert. If y'know, you know.
- Mulger bill
- Super Mod
- Posts: 29060
- Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
- Location: Sunbury Vic
Re: This could become a highly divisive issue.
Postby Mulger bill » Wed Mar 23, 2016 8:23 pm
How about if I was to drive alongside all participants in my private vehicle and offer to sell items of food or drink? Maybe better quality stuff cheaper for youfind_bruce wrote:From the Audax Australia ride rulesSeems pretty clear to me that obtaining assistance from any vehicle, moving or stationary, is contrary to the rules. Whether the riders did or not is another question, as is the appropriate penalty.Audax Australia Ride Rules wrote:11 Support
(1) Each rider must be self-sufficient however nothing in this rule prevents a rider from obtaining assistance (including buying food and drink), from:
(a) another rider taking part in the ride or
(b) a shopkeeper, local resident, passer-by or other disinterested person.
(2) No personal support of any kind (including a follow car) is permitted on the course. Personal support is only allowed at controls if agreed by the organiser. Any rider deemed to have received personal support may be disqualified.
Bicycles & equipment is covered by rule 8 - I don't see anything that would prevent aerobars.
Reductio ad absurdum I know, but 15 years back, who would have thought mechanical assistance would have fitted into a seat tube? Not many CXers I'll wager
London Boy 29/12/2011
- grantw
- Posts: 1792
- Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 11:22 am
- Location: Wollongong
Re: This could become a highly divisive issue.
Postby grantw » Wed Mar 23, 2016 9:52 pm
The spirit also extends to celebrating the achievement of all riders who can finish in the required time and a special place is reserved for the lanterne rouge - those riders who did not give up and who persevered.
The recent opperman record efforts, while impressive on the physical level, leave me a bit cold on the spirit side of things regardless of whether the teams bent rules, I believe that they started with the wrong idea.
- cavebear2
- Posts: 2202
- Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 12:46 am
- Location: Perth
Re: This could become a highly divisive issue.
Postby cavebear2 » Thu Mar 24, 2016 1:03 am
EXACTLY! Thanks Grant, I hadn't got around to putting my thoughts into words but you've said it for me.grantw wrote:For me, the attraction of Audax is in the spirit of the ride, the idea of being independent of outside support between controles except that which you can cadge or purchase, is an important part of that. If I get a puncture I've got to fix it with stuff I have carried with me. I have to carry the food that I might want to eat and anything else that I might use. I ride independently and I can cover vast distances under my own effort. The rules are there to require riders to stick to that sense of audaciousness.
The spirit also extends to celebrating the achievement of all riders who can finish in the required time and a special place is reserved for the lanterne rouge - those riders who did not give up and who persevered.
The recent opperman record efforts, while impressive on the physical level, leave me a bit cold on the spirit side of things regardless of whether the teams bent rules, I believe that they started with the wrong idea.
- Ross
- Posts: 5742
- Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 8:53 pm
Re: This could become a highly divisive issue.
Postby Ross » Fri Apr 01, 2016 10:56 am
http://cyclingtips.com/2016/03/oppy-rec ... the-rules/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
-
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2015 8:47 pm
Re: This could become a highly divisive issue.
Postby Virgil Walker » Mon Apr 04, 2016 11:14 am
- biker jk
- Posts: 7016
- Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:18 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: This could become a highly divisive issue.
Postby biker jk » Mon Apr 04, 2016 11:54 am
The "record-breaking" team that clearly broke the Oppy rules has its spin doctors working overtime in a pathetic attempt to claim a legitimate record.Ross wrote:Discussed by Cycling Tips
http://cyclingtips.com/2016/03/oppy-rec ... the-rules/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
- simonn
- Posts: 3763
- Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 11:46 am
- Location: Sydney
Re: This could become a highly divisive issue.
Postby simonn » Mon Apr 04, 2016 1:54 pm
Talking to Howard on a ride once upon a time (before I had two kids and no time, which you can tell because I was doing an audax ride) he told be that aerobars are allowed in Australia but not in France.find_bruce wrote: Bicycles & equipment is covered by rule 8 - I don't see anything that would prevent aerobars.
- simonn
- Posts: 3763
- Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 11:46 am
- Location: Sydney
Re: This could become a highly divisive issue.
Postby simonn » Mon Apr 04, 2016 1:56 pm
IIRC support cars are not even allowed to drive the same route as riders. They have to drive a different route between checkpoints to make sure these kind of shenanigans are impossible, and probably to keep more cars off the road and out of the way of a several thousand fatigued riders.Virgil Walker wrote:If someone rode PBP with rolling support they would be disqualified. What's different here?
I'm guessing the difference is that they were not experience audax riders and genuinely not aware of the rule that if they ate food from the support vehicle when not at an official checkpoint they were DQed.
- grantw
- Posts: 1792
- Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2009 11:22 am
- Location: Wollongong
Re: This could become a highly divisive issue.
Postby grantw » Mon Apr 04, 2016 2:04 pm
- biker jk
- Posts: 7016
- Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:18 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: This could become a highly divisive issue.
Postby biker jk » Mon Apr 04, 2016 2:21 pm
Yes, it's a pity they attempted the record as an official Oppy entrant and broke the rules for a brevet to be awarded. They may have a distance record (who knows?) but they clearly didn't meet the rules for completing an Oppy.grantw wrote:The Audax club is not the keeper of nor is it a ratifying authority for any records. The question here is about whether the brevet will be homologated under the rules. That author of that piece of writing on the internet seems to have not understood that.
-
- Posts: 647
- Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 2:26 pm
Re: This could become a highly divisive issue.
Postby BenGr » Mon Apr 04, 2016 2:47 pm
Its well short of the solo record (896km https://ultracycling.com/sections/records/stats/timed/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;). Haven't found anything on a TTT record.biker jk wrote:Yes, it's a pity they attempted the record as an official Oppy entrant and broke the rules for a brevet to be awarded. They may have a distance record (who knows?) but they clearly didn't meet the rules for completing an Oppy.grantw wrote:The Audax club is not the keeper of nor is it a ratifying authority for any records. The question here is about whether the brevet will be homologated under the rules. That author of that piece of writing on the internet seems to have not understood that.
For a well established record, with well established rules there's no point arguing over who owns the rules. The record for the Oppy is so much lower because there's a lot more to deal with. Even with rolling support the challenge of the end to end course makes it a tough way to get a distance record, so you may as well follow all the rules and go for the Oppy record.
- biker jk
- Posts: 7016
- Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 6:18 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: This could become a highly divisive issue.
Postby biker jk » Thu Apr 14, 2016 2:10 pm
- queequeg
- Posts: 6487
- Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2009 10:09 am
Re: This could become a highly divisive issue.
Postby queequeg » Thu Apr 14, 2016 3:25 pm
Yep, just saw the e-mail as well. While acknowledging the feats of endurance, the fact they had support outside their nominated controls , and had a "follow vehicle" made it a pretty straightforward decision to disqualify them.biker jk wrote:Team Brevet and Four Abreast both disqualified. Fair enough.
Return to “Audax / Randonneuring”
- General Australian Cycling Topics
- Info / announcements
- Buying a bike / parts
- General Cycling Discussion
- The Bike Shed
- Cycling Health
- Cycling Safety and Advocacy
- Women's Cycling
- Bike & Gear Reviews
- Cycling Trade
- Stolen Bikes
- Bicycle FAQs
- The Market Place
- Member to Member Bike and Gear Sales
- Want to Buy, Group Buy, Swap
- My Bikes or Gear Elsewhere
- Serious Biking
- Audax / Randonneuring
- Retro biking
- Commuting
- MTB
- Recumbents
- Fixed Gear/ Single Speed
- Track
- Electric Bicycles
- Cyclocross and Gravel Grinding
- Dragsters / Lowriders / Cruisers
- Children's Bikes
- Cargo Bikes and Utility Cycling
- Road Racing
- Road Biking
- Training
- Time Trial
- Triathlon
- International and National Tours and Events
- Cycle Touring
- Touring Australia
- Touring Overseas
- Touring Bikes and Equipment
- Australia
- Western Australia
- New South Wales
- Queensland
- South Australia
- Victoria
- ACT
- Tasmania
- Northern Territory
- Country & Regional
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
- All times are UTC+10:00
- Top
- Delete cookies
About the Australian Cycling Forums
The Australian Cycling Forums is a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.
Bicycles Network Australia
Forum Information
Connect with BNA
This website uses affiliate links to retail platforms including ebay, amazon, proviz and ribble.