Call me what you want, Dave--and enjoy keeping score. I really don't care anymore--I simply don't find any credibility or consistency in how you choose to ride or behave. That said, I did enjoy reading your CTR blog--it is obvious that you ride hard, and it's truly inspiring.

Other than engendering Dave's wrath, I think that this thread has been successful. I've learned how I'll approach my rides next summer. Specifically, I'll ride according the the written word of the rules--and when situations arise that don't have written rules I'll, a DIY philosophy will be my guide. This means that accepting support from other racers if it helps me proceed down the trail would result in a self-imposed DQ. It doesn't matter if it's pre-arranged or not. I think the ideal of self-sufficient racing is very cool and it's why I am attracted to this sport.

So, thanks to everyone who helped me arrive at this conclusion. I'll certainly abide by any new/modified rules that the organizers determine are desirable, even if means no cell phones (although I may not be able to enter those if they are long). I'm looking forward to giving it 97%!

Happy trails!

Cheers,
Toby

Hi pbasinger,

If you read back through this thread, and others, I think that you'll find that the BLM actually handed out ticket(s?), etc. in order to stop the KTR. They were effective--people no longer approach it as a large organized event like they did. So, the race really doesn't exist in the same capacity. Some people still ride together as informal group rides (which is legal), but if it goes beyond the BLM would likely shut it down again, which would be ugly. So no, the KTR isn't a real event any more, from what I understand. If this doesn't make sense, please contact people offline for a better explanation.

Cheers,
Toby

Hi Dave,

Up until the moment that you decided to tell me how I should ride my bike, I haven't attacked, degraded, or insulted anyone on this forum. Even then, I simply suggested that, in return for your peace, I wouldn't cross the line.

The ironic truth is that YOUR CTR experience is one of the reasons why I started this thread. I thought it inappropriate to name names, because I am an outsider and didn't want to pick a fight with an obviously experienced and respected rider. But I couldn't understand how the rules worked, because you accepted support in the form of an inhaler--and then finished the race and were placed in the rankings. I certainly think that it was justified to accept medicine in your condition (dying is bad), but I couldn't understand why you didn't DQ yourself from an official standing. I also couldn't figure out the part about getting help fixing your hub. If this sort of assistance is allowed on the CTR, despite the rules, then its either acceptable to break the written rules, or I don't understand them--despite their apparent simplicity. Don't you think that it's strange that you're one of the reasons I started this thread, and now you're the one who's ripping me apart--despite my efforts to keep the discussion abstract so that you didn't feel singled out?

So I'm a troll because I look for clarification on the rules? And I should limit my riding to bikepacking because I occasionally need to take a brief business call?

Why so much anger and hate?

Hi Dave,

Yes, in a perfect world there wouldn't be the need to balance work, family, play, etc. We could dedicate 100% (110% being a statistical impossibility) to the task at hand.

But the world isn't perfect, is it? And many people have actually gotten pretty good at multi-tasking. Hell, I can even chew gum and ride at the same time (200%)!

The unwarrented and condescending tone of your last sentence is disappointing. Let's make a deal: you don't tell me what I want to do on my bike, and I won't tell you where to shove yours. Truce?

I think the point is that there is no more organized racing. Sure, a few buddies get out there and ride together--but it's not an event any more than a bunch of guys from the office deciding to meet up after work. Probably good to keep it that way, unless the BLM is willing to sanction something more official. If that doesn't work out, I'd love to meet up with some people sometime--but we'll see what transpires between now and then. If the BLM doesn't want to talk about it, then an ITT sounds like fun too. 

Hi Dave,

Banning cell phones is kinda rough on people like me. I own a business, and there are moments when people REALLY need to talk to me. If I properly plan ahead, those moments are few and far between. But still, staying in some degree of touch is  important to me, and I'm be a fool to jeopardize my business and the careers of my employees by entering a race where I am forced to chose between answering an important call and being disqualified. I do understand the reasoning behind banning phones, but it ends up unnecessarily discriminating against folks who have legitimate (and non-cheating) reasons for needing them.

Cheers,
Toby

One more issue: Is somebody a jerk for refusing to share an extra spoke or role of duct tape with somebody on the CTR, when the rules state that it's not allowed? Personally, I'd feel like an absolute turkey if I came across somebody who I could help this way, and I refused. But if doing so disqualifies the other rider if they accept, then I'd also feel bad for offering to help! Arrghhh!

Am I just worrying to much?

Something that has been said a few times in this forum seems very confusing. To paraphrase (so as not to name names): "if it's not planned or pre-arranged assistance, then it's trail magic and therefore acceptable."

This would suggest that it's OK to receive unplanned tangible items, not just companionship and motivation, because it's "trail magic." Yet if it's planned, then it's not OK. Yet the written rules don't make any such distinction, instead simply defining the transfer of any tangible items as forbidden.

It seems to be that the concept of self-sufficiency, and the written CTR rules, would dictate that planned or unplanned assistance is unacceptable. So I need some help understanding the distinction, since I'm obviously missing something. Perhaps trail magic supersedes the written rules? Thanks.

Clarifying the rule that Scott quoted would really help me as a newbie.

Here's a specific example that would help: If my bike breaks, and someone comes along with extra tools that I don't have, and perhaps a spare part or two that I really need, is it OK for me to accept help? The rule makes it pretty clear, I think, that the answer would be no. Tools and parts aren't really companions, right?

Along the same lines, would I be breaking any rules if the reverse situation were to arise--and I had tools and parts that would get someone back in the game?

Cheers,
Toby

I'd love see what comes out of that thread. I think it would really help newbies like myself understand what's actually expected during a race, far better than reading blogs--which are, otherwise, an excellent source of inspiration, motivation, and education. But I'm not going to start a new, for fear of being assigned the dreaded 0 for 3 by any excitable score-keepers ( ).

"Birthday" ride?

Don't worry, I'm not going to mess up the status quo. Seems like it couldn't get much worse anyway, from what Chris suggests. I do appreciate the advice though, and I'll certainly be very careful.

But I am going to see if there's any willingness at the BLM to allow some sort of legal organized ride--one that still preserves the DIY ethos of past events. If you don't want to join this effort, then no worries. Ride one, ride the other, ride none--whatever floats anyone's boat. I expect that there would be a lot of riders who would be excited to ride this with the BLM's blessing. But who knows--this might get nowhere, and I'll be doing an ITT next spring.

I'm on it, and I'll make some calls later this week. The worst that the BLM can do is tell to go away! I'll post any progress, or lack thereof, on this forum.

I don't like being told that I can't do something fun on public lands either. But the BLM has been charted to make sure that the public lands are managed according to public desires. Obviously not as easy task, as some people think that "public" means that it's OK to plunder ancient artifacts, drill zillions of gas wells, shoot any living thing that moves, ride their bikes over sensitive virgin earth, etc. In the past, they've been pretty receptive when approached respectfully, and with a little recognition that they are just doing their jobs--and that a well-planned event isn't going cause mayhem. I actually rode a few trails with the then-current BLM guy in charge of recreation, and the poor guy shared with me how much crap he had to take from everyone--for his bosses, to every special interest group. People constantly bombarded him with problems and conflicting demands, without offering up any solutions, and it did make him rather testy.

At any rate, I think it's worth trying to cooperate with the BLM. Hopefully I won't be proven wrong, because I'd like to ride as a free man next spring!

Money has a way of f*cking things up all the time, eh?

Any idea how much the BLM wanted? Personally, I like free events too--but I can understand why the BLM is begging , they've had their budgets slashed for years. I wonder if they would agree to a smallish fee, like $25/rider--which would be more money than fining one "organizer"? Those who want to do the renegade ride still could (in secret, of course ), but those who don't enjoy the excitement of being chased by rangers might be willing to ante up a few bucks. Something to consider anyway, especially if it hasn't been tried. We could even consider a sponsor or two if money is truly limiting--although adding more entities never seems to make anything easier...

Chris, I appreciate the discussion. I hope that we can make this go someplace!

Hi Chris,

Yep, I'm serious about putting some energy into this. While I'll happily ride the trail as an ITT, I think it would be very cool to bring a bunch of people together for a (legal) event.

You hint at some pretty bad blood in past years. I agree that we don't need to go into the ugly details in this public forum--but perhaps there's some benefit to trying something positive. Mountain bikers and the BLM have clashed for years, but there have also been some truly cool cooperative moments that far outweigh the bad times.

Does anyone think that it's worth trying?

Hi Chris,

Having worked with (never for!) the BLM, I agree that they aren't the easiest agency to understand. I found that the local guys actually had a fair bit of decision-making latitude, and they were sometimes easy to win over if approached positively.

As I recall, they didn't like events that put too many people in one place at one time, because it often led to people parking in pristine areas, pooping all over the place, etc. With a little organizational preparation (Porta Potties, clearly-marked parking areas, etc.), they might be more receptive.

That said, I don't know if this approach has already been tried. If so, I don't want to beat a dead horse. But if not, it might be productive--and I explect that lot of people would love to see it work out!

Hi Timroz,

Rather than sneer at my ignorance, perhaps you could enlighten me as to why it's not OK to discuss the Kokopelli Trail Race? If the BLM killed it, has there ever been an attempt to work with the agency to gain official approval? Has it been determined that the BLM will never allow it?

I worked with the BLM a number of years ago when I was writing a guidebook. I found them pretty decent to work with, especially when dealing with non-sensitive trails (like the Kokopelli Trail, which they took an active role in constructing with COPMOBA). There were even a number of events that they partnered with local bike shops to support. I don't know if they've changed, but this would be a good place to find out, eh?

So, forgive me if I'm inadvertently treading in thin ice, but I really don't see anything wrong with discussing this issue. I'm simply trying to understand why this race died, and explore ideas for bringing it back. Seems pretty positive and constructive.

Cheers,
Toby

Hi Jilleo,

Thanks for the history. I actually wasn't aware of the Tour Divide issues (I apparently didn't read all the blogs!), and I can see now that my questions probably came at an unfortunate time.

I agree very much with your first sentence. My attempts to detail my thought process without singling anyone out really blew up in my face. Probably too thin of a line to attempt to draw--I certainly wouldn't do it that way again. Lesson learned, thanks for nailing it so succinctly.

You're making me think a little more about trail magic, and what approach I'll take. I think that you're spot-on about nobody wanting to diminish the race by accepting greater degrees of unplanned assistance, but I suppose that it could end up changing the dynamics pretty seriously. I think that this would be a good new thread, so that people don't have to wade through the first two pages of this one.

Thanks for the post, Jilleo. I like your style, and a truly appreciate your constructive insight. I'll trade you a Twix anytime (if it's OK with your conscience  ).

Cheers,
Toby

A ITT group ride sounds like fun too. If anyone is willing to help me get in the loop, I'd be very appreciate.

I wonder if it would be possible to resurrect the race? Does anyone know if this was tried?

I've been trying to find more information on the Kokopelli Trail Race. From what I've been able to dig up so far, it looks like the BLM clamped down pretty hard on this a couple of years ago (?) on the grounds that it wasn't a properly-permitted ride--or something along those lines. Someone even got fined. Frustrating, for sure.

Well, where there's a will, there's a way, right? Does anyone know what might happen next spring? I'd really, really like to do this race to prepare for bigger things later in the summer. Of course, I could just go out there and do it alone, but it seems like it'd be more fun to race with a group...

Ideas?

Cheers,
Toby

Legit? Well, I don't know about THAT!  

My only claim to mountain-biking fame is having published a guidebook to the Grand Junction area about fifteen years ago. In the context of this discussion, it's ironic that the semi-humorous "rules" section of that book was adopted by a couple of other entities. But I'm a ultra-racing newbie (pre-newbie, since I haven't actually competed yet?).

Alright, I'm signing off. If anyone wants to start a "Shoot Toby for his deeply subversive agenda to rob ultra-racers of their legitimacy," please feel free.