Cell phones have no place in bike races and should banned outright.    C'mon Toby let's go!

Easy now, just kidding.  

Mark, I totally hear you.  In '06 MC was so disgusted with what went on at KTR he just said fuck it to the whole shebang and in an instant what was a super catalyst of an event was vaporized and sent underground.  There were 56 starters that year IIRC...

I don't have all the answers, but I do know that clamping the rules down tight will not bring about the change you'd like to see.  If folks are clearly breaking rules now, how will more rules help?  It sounds like some of the things you saw were not even in the gray.  How will more rules make any change at all?

I have to think what you saw was the result of folks not understanding the rules - or perhaps they were not even part of the race.  Perhaps we need to find ways to either make sure the genre is understood, or discourage those who can't play according to its tenets.  

DH I have to agree that some people did not appear to understand the rules at the 09 CTR. That is no excuse. I was a rookie in 07 and played fair. I was the whole back of the pack that year though!

I guess I will just actually train this year so I can stay ahead of the 2010 CTR rear peleton and maybe keep up with Marshal! No more junk food, Jack Daniels and weed diet. But I will still micro-huck all the time and no way I am getting my power meter/hr monitor train on.

Dave the real irony of what I saw in the 09 CTR was that no one who "bent" the rules even came close to an official finish. Looking for loopholes meant quitting was not far behind.

Mark C.

Glad to hear that existing phones work fine for you. But they aren't enough for everyone.

Rules should focus on banning things that affect the outcome of the race, not things that could be misused to affect the outcome. In other words, ban race-related cell phone calls; but don't ban cell phones.

Banning cell phones because someone might break the rules and use one to make a race-related call is like banning water because someone might share it with another rider. Maybe we should ban thumbs, because the could potentially be used for hitchhiking? Or perhaps riders should wear earplugs, lest they happen to overhear conversations from other trail users that might reveal who's in what position?

If we can't trust riders to use their cell phones properly, then we can't trust them to follow any other rules either. Again, ban specific behavior that improperly affects the outcome of the race, and then let everyone do their own thing.

I am in the same boat as you Toby. I use my phone to run my business. But that has nothing to do with the CTR. I am willing to promote a rule I do not feel is necessary, and can impact my business, in order to provide a better framework for future CTR's. People were using cell phones improperly, drafting, sharing gear and calling just about everything "trail magic" in '09. I cannot prove 100% that anyone was actually using pre-planned support, but I have some serious doubts on that topic as well.

Think about it this way Toby. Having a rule allowing non-race-related phone calls means you or I could be DQ'd during a business call because the client mentioned a storm heading our way. Instant DQ in three seconds before you or I could hang up the phone. All phone calls allowed or none allowed is the best way to go. No grey areas. People were using cell phones in 09 to track other racers and IMO they were used to reserve hotel rooms and get weather forecasts.



Sorry to get the topic off-base- now back to the sharing of the twixes and such.


Mark C.

No sharing for large group events like the CTR. It is too open to interpretation to have any level of sharing.

Take my example in the "rules" thread about CTR night #1 (two bikes on the ground and one tarp/sleep kit). What really happened there? Was is a case of clear pre-planned teamwork? Or maybe they "interpreted" the rules to legitimize the sharing that night? Whatever happened other people saw the sharing and had it an affect on them (however slight that may have been). It was discussed the next morning by other racers.

Sharing should be disallowed at all large group ITT races/events. Same with cell phones, trail magic, drafting and of course pre-planned support. IMO all of these concepts have vague rules surrounding them that allow for grey areas.

I could see allowing cell phones just to call mtbcast, but for the CTR the pay phones work at Copper Mtn, Buena Vista and Silverton so no cell phones are needed really.

Events without the big turnout- I would say most of my opinons/points would be moot. More integrity in the smaller group ITT's IMO.


Mark C.

Do you think tightening the rules will change that mentality?  Does the prime directive of no pre-planned support fall apart somewhere?

Good point. It could have little or no effect. But it seems that too many people is not a good thing for these "races" as at a certain point the "riot/looter" effect happens. You know where people who normally are good go nuts and steal a tv set because everyone else is doing it.

Tighter rules and adding length/difficulty seems to be the only way to stop it IMO.

I really think we need harder races to discourage shenanigans and entrants just there to soak up the 15 minutes so to speak. If I can finish the CTR 09 it is too easy. I basically suck at this sport (2 for 6 lifetime with 3 CT's and 3 Grand Loop attempts. Neither finish time on CT impressive. I might have walked 150 miles in 09). Maybe this discussion can help start the ultimate bikepacking "race". You know what I am speaking of. The CDNST. With wilderness detours ala the CTR. Border to border. I would be down if some brave soul could map out/describe the route with detours.

I would rather do that than line up with 60 people with blogs and I-phones.

Mark C.

This thread could help stop the potential disaster of a KTR repeat for the CTR. That is what I foresee being a consistent "slow" racer or "fast" tourer or whatever. It is not the people posting here that are my concern, but rather the masses who just dont care about rules and such.

60+ people next year. Caches, support, sharing, etc. It could happen. Being at the back in 07, ITT'ing in 08 and rear admiraling again in 09 I saw the potential.  Back of the pack mentality in 09 was to look for loopholes instead of staying above the rules IMO.

This year a lot of hikers/cyclists/people in towns had knowledge of the "race". It was quite simply shocking to me. I was treated like I had reality-show quasi-celebrity status. For being last place in what i thought to be an obscure group ITT race.

The Spot/Leaderboard phenomena is too much of a influence to not change these rules IMO. People just want to be involved now with the CTR and TD. I had complete non-cyclists tell me they were tracking racers in the CTR.

More people will want this quasi-celebrity status. Make the rules so people understand and respect the sanctity of bikepacking.


Mark C.

Is partnering up a bad thing?  If it is, why go through all the organizational issues to set up a group start?

I've done lots and lots of time riding by myself.  ITTs are golden.  Riding off the front is not bad either.  This year I got to experience the best parts of the CTR route with a good friend, in a race setting.  It was a shock to me to be perfectly honest as I never have ridden with *anyone* for very long in a SS race (except my ass kicking sig other of course).  It was a welcome new experience.  

I will never be on board with discouraging "partnering up" in group starts.  There is always the ITT option.

It is also my understanding Stamstad had a film crew he met up with daily on his ride...

I meant more the kind of "partnering up" that is against the rules, like planned teamwork from the start. No inside support would just eliminate that. What you are referring to DH is all good in my book- I enjoyed the same comraderie you did out there. People who dont know how to "partner up" fairly ruin it for others- hence my opinion that inside support should be banned.



Mark C.

I'm not sure a consensus will be reached but I feel like the internal support debate is good. If a ban is what's needed to keep things clear to newcomers of the sport, keep the rules simple and make things black and white then I'm all for it. That way you can still give support in an emergency which I would always do even if I got DQ'd but then it's clear of the outcome of taking a physical "something" from another racer. Pretty much the same "look/talk but don't touch" as the SPOT stalkers.

I may be bummed not to share a Twix but then again, if I knew I could have shared during my first Grand Loop things might have been different and that was sure a hard knock ride that in hindsight (waaaaay hindsight) I really treasure.

The CTR flat out cheating (preplanned shared sleep gear has zero excuse) does really bother me. Can anyone who saw things first hand please tell Stefan directly. That's a crappy position to be in but I think it's important that Stefan know and decide himself on relegation.

Hey Chris I told Stefan exactly what I posted in my previous reply. I was not the only one who saw the sharing issue on that first night. I think I "know" who it was but I am not 100% sure (it was dark and I did not stop to see who was under the tarp). So Stefan probably cannot ascertain with confidence who were the two guys under the tarp.

I did not want to start any poop throwing here but I felt Scott and DH were kind of getting a bad rap about the unplanned sharing when other things went down that were not kosher.

If you really want to get technical I saw other things too (a possible planned bivy in a friends car at copper mtn gas station on night #2, but it is a possibility that other campers were using the parking lot that night). But the worst violation I encountered was the asking for water on Westridge. I did not see it, but the day rider informed me that the other racer behind me had asked for water. When asked about it, the racer replied to me that trail magic goes both ways with unplanned meetings on the trail (that is you can ask a stranger for anything as long as it is unplanned).

The back of the pack racers in the CTR need to honor the rules the same as the leaders. It makes slow people like me real pissy when others are looking for loopholes and the easy way out when I know it is a long hike-a-bonk to Durango.

To add some positive things I did see most of the "slow" competitors following the rules properly (even if it seemed they were not out there to finish but to simply "experience" it).



Mark C.

[much]

To be clear Scott I am referring to actual rules violations I saw at the back of the pack (or heard eyewitness reports of). The stuff was really unacceptable and I will not name anyone but people really need to understand how important it is to follow the rules. You cannot draft. Nor can you plan to share sleeping gear and asking for water from a day rider is not trail magic.

Apple the USFS guy was a wild card- his actions seem to contradict the rules (Spot stalking) but since no one knew he would be there or was waiting for anyone that IMO food taken from him falls under the pre-race discussion of the rules (being able to accept trail magic). I would say his actions (Spot stalking) should exclude him from interaction with next years racers (even though I ate and was grateful).

Scott and DH sharing the tent and the inhaler fell under the current rules IMO (not pre-planned). I saw several other instances of spontaneous sharing like this that I feel were also legit under the 2009 rules. But I also observed a clear example of pre-planned gear sharing on night #1. In order to eliminate future problems I think for the CTR all this stuff should just be banned.

Mark C.

In light of what I wrote earlier today about KTR and what dream4est and others (from Colorado) say, I do see that banning both sharing and trail magic may make sense for the CTR.  I think some of the disagreement here is that some of us are speaking about SS racing in general, others are focused on the CTR only.

CTR had nearly 40 people, and maybe more next year.  It's large enough, dare I say 'cool' enough that I think it may make sense to tighten it down a bit.  But I don't know.

Yes, Matt, I think the trail angel was borderline.  Since Harris and I are the continual targets of this thread, I do feel it necessary to say that I think what we got from the trail angel was much more questionable, and makes me feel less purely 'self supported' than jumping in Dave's tent for ~1 hour as a light storm passed us by (I did not sleep a night in the tent as previously reported and I carried more sleeping gear than any previous CT bikepacking trip, of which I have done several in much worse conditions).

The fact is that the trail angel was providing the crux service (food) during the crux section of the route.  I cannot say that I would have finished, for certain, without the calories I got at the tent.  I can say for certain that I would have finished had I not used Dave's tent.

Hair splitting is fun, isn't it?  I'm off for the week to design/layout one of the last pieces of AZT.  I'll catch up with the thread later on...

I think in light of what I observed at this years CTR, If I were Stefan I would change the following for next year:

1. No trail magic/inside support. Just ban it all. Too much temptation and too much interpretation. This would encourage less "partnering up" and eliminate all grey areas. Stamstead did it that way so should we. Fix your own bike, sleep in your own bivy, etc. No grey areas.


2. No cell phones. Eliminates grey areas and interpretations and Spot stalking.

3. No provisional finishes for using alternate detours. It affects other racers in various ways when a competitor is planning on riding less than the full route.

4. No drafting on Hwy 285.  The best alternative is putting the Tarryall Detour back in. This would space out the pack quicker and put the hurt on people (no day 1 resupply), making the idea of what happens IF you run into a situation like a racer who needs mechanical help a moot point anyway (cause you got more important things to worry about- your own pain!).


I had a great time out there, but some of the people I rode with early on were not out there to finish. I wish that people would worry more about things like commitment and personal fortitude than what sections should we ride or what level of inside support/trail magic is acceptable. This is kind of a jab at about half of the CTR entrants, those who never really had plans of riding fully SS and/or finishing the complete race route. Those people really should have ITT'd the route outside the group ITT event.

I would like to see this thread move into a positive direction of clarification, because it is detracting from the super-awesomeness that is the CTR/CT ITT. For us regular guy trail day-riders, it is the Everest of the sport.

Mark C.

I am in as well Stefan. I will see you in Boulder on Saturday for the pre-meeting.

Mark

Scott I felt the amount of rain that fell saturated the ground to the point of mud riding all day today. It was great to ride in the light rain Friday/Saturday when the ground was just tacky but I believe the desert was impassable today. And then it rained more here in Moab.

I was planning a victory coast into Moab. Just wanted to mix it up and try something different. The Koko is a nice ride going to Loma. But starting with fast people to pull you along on Friday will be a nice change to total solitude.

Conditions for Friday look to be 85 degrees and scattered showers. That would work for my non-desert skills, which seem to have a limit of about 87-88 degrees.

BTW Cottonwood creek was barely a dribble. Lets hope it is at least that much next Saturday or things will be tough after Dewey.

I just came back from trying a reverse route and was rained out. I left Moab late Thursday for a 35 mile pre- ride warm-up. I started from Fisher Creek and got in 69 miles Friday but rain stopped me at Westwater. Then Saturday rain stopped me after about 50 miles in Fruita. This morning it poured after raining all night so I called it. But I will see you guys Friday. I feel really strong, have a new bike and was on a 3:12:00 pace easily while eating and drinking and taking long breaks. Hopefully I can carry this momentum through the week and not get all hike-a-bonky like last year. I actually enjoyed myself this time and that is a first for me.

Mark

I voted to add the extra segments. I will be there for the race start and probably will ride those segments even if Stefan decides to not add them. My feeling is that since the CTR is the best route of the unsupported races/rides why not add all the legal ST? Since the Grand Loop is not a race anymore it would make sense to improve other routes. People are finishing the current route in impressive fashion.

If I were Stefan, I would add the 3 segments and change the first detour to Hwy. 285. I would rather hike in the woods/tundra than ride an extra 50 miles in Tarryall. I did the 285 way last year on my ITT and it is not that dangerous. That would make a nice "trade" of mileage from detour to ST.

Whatever happens it is still the king of all ITT's IMO. I am stoked to be heading to Durango for the third straight summer. I may even head out for a pre-CTR ITT the first/second week of July. Maybe start from Durango. Anyone else interested in a practice lap?

Mark C.

Do it Stefan. It makes total sense to add in the extra singletrack where it hurts (right before hitting towns after long mileage from the last refuel). Last year when I TT'ed the route I did CT to Miner's Creek and them wussed out on Peaks to Frisco. Same with sections 22-23 I intended to turn left on hwy 149 but I rode into Lake City and did the detour. So I think in the race it will makes things much harder as one will want to detour and eat at Breck and Lake City but that will cost time. The Breck 7-11 is not far from the route though so that detour would only be a few minutes.

I am in if you add pain and bordering on insane hike-a-bike. The amount of food needed to ride from Mt. Princeton to Silverton via sections 22 and 23 would be a substantial weight and be a key race strategy. Camping on Cateract Ridge would be awesome in good weather I bet.

The course is already great but adding those sections would break up a 100-mile easy detour, add 45+ miles of ST and make the race much harder to finish without detouring for food. You will still have 25+ starters but less % will finish.

Imagine riding Georgia Pass, Ten Mile Range and Searle/Kokomo in one day without being killed by lightning! The 09 race sounds like it could be the best one on the schedule if you update the course.

Mark