How do we create the culture that this lesser category is still prestigious, and worthy of aspiring to?  I certainly think it is.  I don't know, but I like a lot of aspects of this idea, while still seeing some problems with it, too.
Thoughts?

I think that getting your butt from Banff to Mexico is an incredible feat, regardless of whether rules were broken in minor (and even major) ways. I feel the same way about the CTR.

I would choose to race the stricter version, even if though don't have a chance of winning. Why? Because I get a stupid degree of satisfaction from Doing It Myself. That's what drew me to this sport. I think that a lot of people feel this way, regardless of how quickly they race.

But there are definitely a number of very outspoken people in this thread who feel differently. And they have valid points for sure. I think that giving them their own race is a great idea. Neither approach is superior--just different.

Why not give it a try?

Just curious, would the format be OK with you if there were no purse.

There are two related things that rub me the wrong away about the race.
1. The hype. Phrases like "the hardest mountain bike race in the world" strike me as over-the-top sensationalism.
2. The money. But not just money. Rather, the way that the purse is promoted. The organizers keep hyping the cash, with statements to the effect that the other bikepacking races are inferior because there's no cash--just "ice cream."

In short, the whole thing just feels like an event designed to exploit the bikepacking genera, and cheapen it through over-commercialization and hype.

But I know that my perspective is probably not in the majority. Judging by the number of people who revel in "reality" television, Bear Grylls, and the other crap that is passed of with an abundance of superlatives, hype, and money, I expect that more people will appreciate the Munga than not.

The sad part about this thread is that somebody could actually take this too seriously and end up hurt or killed trying to follow the "rules" for this "race".

Yes, it is true that many outdoor sports and adventures carry with them a high degree of risk. I've spent a lot of time in the mountains as a climber, mountaineer and kayaker--and I have lost friends to all of those sports. It sucks. The Tour Divide is indeed dangerous--one rider (Dave Blumenthal) was killed a few years ago after crossing the center line on a long winding decent and hitting truck. Very sad, especially since he had a young daughter.

But the first "rule" of adventure sports is that riders must accept responsibility for their actions and decisions. Anyone who dies while trying to adhere to the rules of a bikepacking race is solely responsible for their own fate. Not Matthew Lee and not me. If someone has to choose between death and following the rules, they've really missed the point. The logical course of action is simply to quit the race--or accept a slower finish to avoid bad weather, etc.

Who cares if Toby respects your ride and if you really did it yourself the way he describes? (Sorry Toby I am sure you are a great guy it is just easy to point you out  )

I doubt that anyone cares whether I respect their ride, so no arguments there! But following the TD rules isn't "the way that I describe it"--it is how the founders of the race defined it. Yes, I am a vocal champion of upholding those ethics--but they aren't mine.

I say leave Tour Divide for the rule junkies and start riding "Tour Divided" from South to North (because starting in Banff and heading South at that time of year is stupid as C$ points out over and over).  Tour Divided can start the Saturday after the Friday grand depart from Banff and you can do whatever like stopping to smoke a legal joint in CO or skip some crappy section if you just don't feel like it.  Tour Divided will only suggest you do as much as possible and leave the rest to your own best judgement.

Sounds great to me! I'd much rather see people choose the race formats that fits their particular styles, than see people re-define existing races to fit their limitations. Tour Divided--I love the name!

First you set up a false premise, then you write: Why even enter a RACE if nothing other than your personal experience matters--and relative times, competition, and placement aren't important? Why not just go ride the route on some random day, alone or with friends?

To me you are clearly suggesting racers who don't see things your way 'go away" --your words Toby & you own them

Yes, I own those words. But I don't own your misinterpretation of their meaning.

I'll try again to explain what I do mean. Here goes: Several people have commented that they don't worry about what others do during a race (to paraphrase, but I think that I've captured the meaning). So far, so good, right? Now contrast this to the usual parameters of a race--which is to compare & compete with other racers. But if comparisons are made invalid by the unfair behavior of other racers, then things get kind of weird. At that point, why join the race? Why not just do an ITT or something?

I think that it's a fair question, because I am genuinely curious about the answer. From my perspective, I wouldn't race if I thought that those around me were cheating with impunity. With the TD in particular, I am very much looking forward to racing it at some point. But if I feel like there's going to be a lot of cheating, I'll probably just ITT it on my own schedule. But I wonder what motivates those who would choose to join the race even if they were aware of the cheating. Why do I care? Because I like seeing things from different perspectives.

Perhaps some racers who follow the rules don’t care if others cheat but I sincerely doubt it. That doesn’t apply to me, and I certainly didn’t get from my readings of the various posts where it applies to others.  Not caring about a rule breaker is way different from recognizing reality for what it is and working to minimize the impact it can have on one’s personal experience after toeing the line.

Marshal,I think that you utterly misinterpreted the intentions of my question. First of all, it is actually a question--not a statement. I sincerely wonder why people race when they don't care about the comparisons that are inherently part of a race format. It was not a statement or a judgment, as you seem to imply. I was actually hoping that someone who races that way would share their thoughts.

Where did I get the idea that some people don't care what other racers do? Read this thread. Several people have stated as much.

But what really prompted me to respond was your pure ‘speculation’ about what motivates individual racers and then suggesting if their motivation doesn’t somehow match your passion about rule adherence they go away.  You do not know what motivates others to race!  And if someone doesn’t want to obsess about rules it’s not your call to suggest they go away!

Where have I EVER said that people who don't agree with me should "go away"? I haven't said it, because I don't believe it. I do think that people who willfully cheat during a race shouldn't race--which I don't think is controversial.

Toby you certainly have the right to continue your endless pursuit of the ‘rules’ subject (and actually I agree with many/most of your posts/views on rules).  But frankly I don’t think your obsession with ‘rules’ has been healthy for the self-supported community.  Nor in my opinion has it contributed to any lasting positive outcomes.

It's probably impossible to measure what the outcome has been, either way. Maybe I'm tilting at windmills. But I do know one thing: I'm not the guy who takes it to the personal level (although I will respond if personally attacked). I try to stick to the issues and the arguments. In my experience in the wider world, that approach does make a difference. Discussing ideas is generally a good thing. Making it personal, as you have just done, just makes it a pissing match about personalities--which sucks.

So, I'm going to ignore your efforts to make this whole thing personal. It's not. It's about what we want ultra-racing to look like in the future. It's about how the structure of racing is defined, and how we will achieve those goals. It's about the spirit of racing--not about Toby or Marshal.

As the "Do Whatever" approach to ultra-racing gains more traction, people will inevitably cut more corners to suit their whims. It's a cultural shift. And you're right, JRA, once it gets fully ingrained there's not much short of rigorous enforcement that can stop it. Not something that most of us want.

Which is why I invest so much time posting about rules issues. If enough people push back against the "Do Whatever" crowd, then the ethics of racing will stay strong and healthy. But if we sit back and accept the idea that anything goes, then ultra-racing will become a watered-down sport overtaken by weenies, cheats, and braggarts.

We'll never stop all of them, of course. But resistance is not futile. A guy cheated during my first CTR, and the response was swift and effective. He's never been back. The tribe won--because we took a stand rather than just accept it.

When small men attempt great enterprises, they always end by reducing them to the level of their mediocrity.
--Napoleon Bonaparte

Seems like many recent posters don't care if others in the race cheat, since they are out there for own personal reasons. Which seems to imply that they don't care how they place compared to others, since cheaters make objective and fair comparisons impossible.

Which begs the question: Why even enter a RACE if nothing other than your personal experience matters--and relative times, competition, and placement aren't important? Why not just go ride the route on some random day, alone or with friends?

...you make yourself look like clowns...

All the other stuff is meh.

Whatever.

Make what you want to make out of it. 

Meh.

This is not about me or you or triple crowns Toby. Its about the racer thinking of lining up for TD 15 or 16. They deserve better.

This is making the sport look bad. And it so much more than 1.5x and cheating and spreadsheets.

If you or Jeff or I or others never say anything nothing would ever change.

No, it's not about us. But I think that we are using our personal experiences and perspectives to illustrate our positions, rather than just speaking in abstractions.

I couldn't agree more with your sentiment that it's "so much more than 1.5x and cheating and spreadsheets." I hope that healthy exchanges like this will ultimately lead to improvements and fewer conflicts in the future.

Really Toby I have to disagree. I think that your last finish was impressive. 2012 CTR beat me easily right? Yes if you compare yourself to the 3 pros on the podium maybe you are right. But in any other MTB racing format you would have killed the "sport" guys and maybe done well in "expert" or whatever. I have never been close to the pros in regular racing. I am a lot closer in this one class style. No sandbaggers. I like it this way.

I PERSONALLY thought that both of my finishes were damn impressive! First time I ever raced my bike was for the CTR--and I managed to not arrive in Durango in last place.  In fact, in both races I've beaten a bunch of superior riders who quit!

But OBJECTIVELY, I was one of the slow guys who made almost everyone look fast.

No, I don't suck. Nobody who finishes any of these races in good style sucks. But the reality is that, compared to the fast guys, my finishes just aren't that impressive.

You upped the ante for the slow guys though Mark. By finishing all three races, you put yourself in an entirely different league. Individually, your times weren't objectively that impressive, but collectively it was off-the-charts amazing!

Using this type of thinking, my 11 day and change AZT750 result sucks too? Its over 1.55X the record. How many people could actually be competitive in the 750 then? I think my time is like 13th fastest in race history.

Or CTR. 6day and change sucks now? Even though it nearly got the podium this year? Huh?

I don't think that ANY serious effort to finish "sucks." But my relatively slow CTR finishes aren't objectively as impressive as those of the much faster winners. I'm OK with that reality.

If I were an organizer, I wouldn't choose to differentiate between "competitive" and "non-competitive" finishes. But ML has decided to make that distinction, so that's how the TD is raced. Whether it's a category or not, there's no doubt that it has the effect of separating those who finish before the 1.5x time and those who do not.

We don't need spreadsheets and non-official race results published. Really we dont. It just leads to this type of bizarre micro-management and improper interpretations of rules.

Yeah, I agree. If ML doesn't post the results, then nobody else should. I don't even like the Trackleader "results," since they don't distinguish between outright cheaters and honest finishes. That said, I wish that ML would post results!

To clarify: I don't think that relegation and a "non-competitive" finish are at all the same. There's no establish precedent or anything in the official TD rules that seems to suggest that they are. But the rules do seem to define three types of finishes: competitive, relegated, and disqualified. As for what the Cordillera included, I don't know since I haven't bought the book yet.

Jeff: Many of the races that you referenced have cut-off times or qualifying events. While I don't know ML's true intent when he added the "competitive" distinction, I suspect that it is about keeping the "race" in the race--much as the other events that you mention do.

Whether every finisher deserves "equal respect" is debatable. Personally, I don't feel that way. I respect all sorts of finishers and racers, depending on speed and style--but I don't consider them to be equal. A guy like Mark C., who finishes the triple crown has earned whole lot more of my personal respect for his accomplishment than someone who rode faster but bent the rules. But personal opinions aside, the RACE is about elevating those who finish more quickly (while following the rules) above those who finish more slowly. Which is why I wouldn't mind being excluded from a "competitive" category if I'm WAY behind the winners. Not relegated though, since that has historically been limited to racers who unwittingly break rules.

Unfortunately, the whole "rules" issue seems to be more contentious than ever these days, especially for the TD. I suspect that the largest contributing factor is that ML hasn't posted results or publicly enforced rules for a number of years. This has led to a growing number of looser interpretations and in-ride tensions. I don't know if we need an "organizational body" for the sport, but I think that an engaged organizer would keep things a little steadier and level, more like the earlier days of the TD.

There should not be a self appointed few interpreting arbitrary rules on "competitive times" and relegation and putting racers/riders into categories.

Do you truly believe the rules are arbitrary? Seems to me that Matthew Lee did a solid job of defining them, and this includes different "categories" of finishers (competitive, relegated, disqualified).

When I eventually find time to compete in the TD, I doubt that I'll be able to deliver a "competitive" time compared to the winners. I'll be too damn old! While that doesn't mean that I won't give the race my absolute best competitive effort, I will accept the result--even if that means that I don't finish with a "competitive" time.

I think that people need to suck it up a little and realize that not everyone deserves a blue ribbon and a T-shirt for every race that they enter. No, we're not "all equal"--which is why it's a race. Both times that I finished the CTR, I didn't even remotely consider that my accomplishment was on the same level as the winners. By comparison, I was pathetically slow. But I was faster than those behind me (and more successful than those who quit or cheated)--which was extremely satisfying. Those who won were hopefully even more satisfied!

Well done! A work of passion that benefits a wonderful little girl who lost her father far too soon. Thank you!

Volume 6 of the Cordillera is now available for purchase from Lulu.com.

http://tinyurl.com/cordillera6

Well done! A work of passion that benefits a wonderful little girl who lost her father far too soon. Thank you!

The silly ride is pointless, but how you act on the ride is of the utmost importance.

That's a nice summary!

I think if folks want to see accurate results lists that are meticulously maintained, we need to form some sort of sanctioning group.  Otherwise, we should be content with the ship we set sail on and have fun with the crew because it's an unknown for everyone. 

That might be necessary for 100% compliance. But I really hate the idea of a sanctioning group. I'd rather encourage a culture of tribal pressure that squeezes the weenies into, well, not being weenies!

"It's just a ride!"

Maybe for some. But for me, it always seems pretty damn real.

Riding late into the mystery of the night, high in the glorious mountains, is soul-enriching. Sharing the day's adventure with another inspired rider draws me closer to others. Struggling to excel within the constraints of a race environment strengthens my self-discipline and focus. Searching for the beauty and purpose to continue pushing through pain and exhaustion gives me perspective and builds my resilience. Battling the dark hours of isolation and self-reflection reveal insights into my relationships with family and loved ones.

Life is what we make of it, I suppose. The only time that I feel like "it's just a ride" is when I'm screwing up and not living with purpose.

I've always been skeptical of those who place the significance of money above all else, which is why I've been disgusted with the Munga's pitch. There are so many intrinsically sublime reasons for racing, and none have anything to do with the crude allure of cash.

And then there's Toby.

I'm in the first group. Slow, but committed. I think that you are too--just about a zillion times faster!