I agree that the open sharing of advice, experience, and stories is one great aspect of online communities. But attitude that all content should free is an unfortunate side effect of the Internet age. Adam isn't just a bikepacker, he's a writer. He undoubtably spent a lot of time and energy crafting his story, and I think it's fair to put it out on the market and see if it captures readers' imaginations, as any writer would do.

Undoubtedly you put a lot of time and work into your CTR contributions as well. For anyone who shares their stories online for free, that is their right and choice in the free market. It doesn't make their content worth any more or any less, it's just a different decision. And of course no one has to purchase anything they're not interested in. But demanding free content disturbs me as a journalist (now freelance) who's tried to make a living in an eroding industry for the past 14 years. I also wrote a book about the Tour Divide that I sell through multiple online outlets.

Although I've had Adam's book for a few weeks now I've admittedly been very busy and haven't had a chance to read it yet (I apologize, Adam.) I did skim through it though and it seems like a compelling read. I'm very much looking forward to it.

Yeah, she's probably going to be fine. But she was shooting for ten days, not 25-40--which suggests that she may not have planned to spend so many days on one of the driest, highest, and most exposed sections of the trail. Carrying that much water and food would be really tough!

Considering the circumstances, I don't think that there's anything wrong with being a bit concerned...

Yes, I also clicked on her Trackleaders link this morning because I was curious how she was doing. Her progress would indicate an issue, either mechanical or physical, but she is still moving forward on the route. If she was having concerning issues, it seems more plausible that she would head back toward Durango.

Hey, walkers go walking pace! ;-)

I was going to echo Eszter's statements. She finished the Tour Divide last year ~39 days? So she has some bikepacking experience. Maybe she's having a rough start but if there were a real issue she would probably signal for help.

People usually hike this trail in 25-40 days. It *is* possible to haul enough food and water to go that pace.

I can understand the reasoning behind having a time cut but in practice it doesn't make sense. TD is an ITT, right? The Grand Depart is to provide added motivation for that ITT effort, right? Or is it a race? The ITT vs. race issue is nearly always at the heart of these heated discussions it seems.

That really is the central issue isn't it? And until it's defined, it is pretty pointless to go into the semantics. As an individual time trial, every individual gets to set their own goals. It works, but as Kristin mentioned, there are implications to the group start "race" that may eventually force the issue. Every year I'm a bit surprised when there's no crackdown, by Parks Canada or the Forest Service or some other authority. Will there be in the future? Tough to say. Just how big can a grassroots "event" get before it's corralled into the restrictive channels of permits, insurance, and for-profit involvement?

Not to say that cut-offs should be used to somehow reduce the field. I honestly do not care about cut-offs, official or not, as they apply to anyone but myself. I'm an untalented but enthusiastic runner who's benefitted from entering races with cut-offs. They've helped me push my own limits, that I might not have otherwise if I didn't have some outside benchmark out there, lighting a fire under my ass. That's the only reason I spoke out in support of them when they were initially mentioned, and again when I was called out to defend my position. I don't think anyone should be encouraged to stop racing just because they hit some setbacks or unexpected difficulties. But to those who so adamantly disagree with an arbitrary standard of 25 days, I'm curious ... why? One of the greatest benefits of "racing" the Tour Divide as opposed to touring the GDMBR is attaining the impossible. Why go into this endeavor aiming for anything less?

Also, "corporate encroachment" is not a big issue. Matt Lee was a Cannondale Factory rider when he first rode the Great Divide Race in 2004. John Stamstad was sponsored by Chevy Trucks back in '99. Sponsorships are hardly a new thing in this game.

It's a time trial... it's you, racing against the clock, period. Racing, for each individual is relative. There are now pro's out there now, their pace shouldn't DQ a person doing their own thing racing against a clock or a calendar.  The point is for one to do their best, once they line up.  Just you, against the clock. or the calender. No more, no less.

Let me ask you this, how are you going to feel when someone is trying to make a cutoff, and ends up losing their life pushing themselves too far, to meet an arbitrary cut off or line in the sand, due to lack of talent, or training, or knowing their own limits?   Pretty selfish, I think, a stupid rule can possibly cost someone their life, just due to lack of time, talent, training, or a stupid cutoff.

Really, really bad idea.

I agree with you, but I also like to think that anyone lining up for a weeks-long self-supported race is going to have the wherewithal to make good decisions. I highly doubt that any arbitrary standard (and in a largely unorganized event, all standards are arbitrary) is going to prompt someone to say, "Wow, look at all that lightning directly ahead. Well, if I don't make my 112 miles today I won't get to keep my blue dot. Better ride right into it."

And as others have pointed out, everyone sets their own goals anyway. But do I think any determined and reasonably fit rider can meet a 25-day benchmark? Absolutely, I do. And if they don't, who really cares? Whatever the experience means to them is all that matters. But just like the established self-support rules help set the parameters of experience for the Tour Divide, I think a soft cut-off (no DQ) could also spark beneficial experiences. As others have pointed out, the Great Divide Race had one — 24 days — and it did seem to provide positive external motivation for riders in that race.

Jill Homer, another proponent of the cut-off, you are a game and gutsy rider and write excellent books, but you belong on the People's Page too.

And what's wrong with being on the People's Page?

But I agree with bmike — racing is a state of mind, for both the top tier and the rest of us that belong to endurance racing's "99 percent." That's why I support cutoffs in the events I participate in — because it provides a benchmark for me, something to fight for. Should I keep pedaling late into the night? Should I ride into that storm? These decisions take on more weight and meaning if I am battling a cutoff. Absolute parameters can be strong motivators, so when I think I might be "doing the best I can," if it's not good enough, I'm just going to have to try harder. There are a lot of rewards to overcoming these mental hurdles, and benchmarks serve as that extra boost we'll need.

As a competitor, I support cutoffs. But as part of the peanut gallery, I could honestly care less.

This Tumblr has some photos and a short report about the extent of some of the damage to the Canadian section of the GDMBR. They took the Fernie Alternate and also detoured north of Elkford and Goat Creek, then rode into Canmore but were not allowed to ride the highway into Banff. Even missing most of the Flathead, some of the stuff they had to cross looks pretty rough, including crossing of fast-flowing and debris-choked streams. These tourists built bridges to do so.

http://ridethedivide.tumblr.com/

Regardless - 25 days seems pretty liberal if the winners are doing it in 15 or less.  I don't know of any other sport where finishing that far behind the leader would be considered "competitive".

Most ultramarathons generally fall into the 2x winning time range — meaning a 100-miler with a cutoff of 30 hours often has a ~15-hour winner, 36 hours and an ~18-hour winner, and 48 hours with a ~24-hour winner. In these races, there is usually a large percentage of the field, often greater than 50 percent, who finish within 5-6 hours of the cut-off, 10+ hours after the winner. For most of the runners, just finishing the race is the achievement they're aiming for, but finishing under the cut-off is a huge part of that. That's why we enter races rather than just go out and hike the trails on our own time. The parameters prompt us to push ourselves harder and really test our limits. I have been timed out of races, told to go home at mile 80 of a 100 miler, and it sucks. But I learn something every time, and have a richer experience for trying.

So, speaking as someone who fought really hard and barely made it under 25 days myself in my own TD go-around, I think a 25-day "cut-off" is fair. If I ever go back, I know I can do better. I'd guess a lot of us could.

Is there a contradiction here? In the first part of this post you suggest that there is one annual race consisting of ITTs and GD combined. If that is correct, in 2012 JayP won the race and set the record.

I'm not sure what you mean. In the first part of my post I was talking about the Tour Divide and the Great Divide Race, which existed as two separate events in 2008 and in 2009, when the GDR effectively dissolved.

Beyond that, I don't understand the rest of your points. The only person in position now to possibly break the record is Jesse, and he'll have to face the same detours as Mike. If he finishes, Mike will win the race while JayP will hold onto the record, regardless of Mike's finishing time. If, later in the race, people are able to return to the closed roads, then I'm guessing they'll have a choice of whether or not to do so. If they want to challenge themselves on the GDMBR, they'll take the formerly closed route. But if they want to contest their position with the frontrunners in the 2013 Tour Divide *Race* (and I'm speculating here), I'm guessing they can take the same detours. Either way, this is mainly a self-regulated and self-recorded endeavor. But Mike Hall still wins the race. Just as Kurt Refsnider won the 2011 TD but didn't set a new record because of detours.

Nice work Casey. Looking forward to checking out this route at some point.

Riders contested the border-to-border route from 2004-2009. You covered the GDR on its event blog in 2008 Jill! (and I think a couple of guys did it the following year).

Massive respect to Mike Hall - his pace is phenomenal!

You're right. I was oversimplifying the situation. In 2008 there were actually an equal number of riders in both the Great Divide Race and Tour Divide, I believe 18 each? Jen Hopkins established the women's singlespeed record that I believe still stands. I love covering these events — it's like watching a novel unfold. I'm blogging daily updates of Divide racing again this year if you're interested at http://halfpastdone.com.

To those who are questioning the record parameters, historically in this type of racing, the idea was for individuals to challenge the entire route as it stands. Choosing the right time to avoid snowy passes, fire detours, etc., is part of the strategy, in a way. The Tour Divide "race" is actually the contrivance in this case, held for the benefit of competition and camaraderie. But it's intended to be viewed as a concurrent ITT. The race has a winner but there are always those who contest the record outside the race, as JayP did last year. The "record" is not the fastest completion of the Tour Divide; it's the fastest completion of the latest incarnation of the GDMBR, which, it's true, is continuously evolving.

Curious...  Is there a summary of the major detours and closures for the last few years ?   Just thinking that between some snow detours that I remember reading about, and lots of fires in NM over the years, do we have more than one or two years where the whole route could be done ?    ( Other than the year they made the movie ? )
  

All of the 2012 southbound finishers rode the full route. There were snow detours in 2011 and I believe a fire detour in 2010 (?) 2009 and 2008 finishers rode the full route. Riders contested the border-to-border route from 2004-2007.

If you want to be literal about it, though, no one has ridden the exact same route during any year of the Tour Divide. In 2008 they rode the Fernie route through Canada. In 2009, the Flathead segment was added. In 2010, fire detours. In 2011, snow detours. And in 2012, there were the two singletrack sections (Gold Dust Trail and CDT in NM) that had been added a few years earlier, which the 2009 crowd did not ride. And this year, it seems there will be fire detours again. So, in that regard, it's always been a little different.

[and including Forest Road 150]

Yeah, the incident report indicated that FR 150 is included in the Silver Fire closure: "Starting at the intersection of Forest Road 150 and State Hwy 35 (T15S, R12W, sec. 23) and proceeding north along and including Forest Road 150 to Forest Road 4069G (T11S, R12W, sec34)"

http://www.inciweb.org/incident/article/3433/18760/

Seems like smoke concentration and air quality in the Del Norte area is pretty bad right now. Mike Hall already reported having breathing problems back in Montana, so I wonder if he's going to be conservative about his forward progress in these conditions. http://apcd.state.co.us/colo_advisory.aspx

If I could wave a magic wand, I'd wish for self-supported ultra racing to stay as self-supported as is reasonably possible.

There is a way. It's called "unsupported." People have hiked the CT this way; no reason it can't be biked without any resupply or outside intervention. Honestly, I think it would be an awesome challenge. Not one I'd be ready for any time soon, of course. But maybe a shorter route, someday (and probably hiking.) :-)

South Fork isn't all that far from the GDMBR. About 10 miles west of Del Norte? I wonder about smoke concentration and other dangers going over Indiana Pass. http://gazette.com/wildfire-roundup-crews-say-town-of-south-fork-likely-to-be-consumed-by-blaze/article/1502587

I think that they should throw out the results this year. Not enough rain and snow to justify a true Tour Divide! I know some riders from last year and their pace is way ahead of where they were last year. I guess we need to drag out the snow machines!

There's still a lot of time for the weather to gain the upper hand. Rain in NM is so much worse than snow in MT.

I can't think of any couple combos outside the tandem contingent. I think in 2010 or 2011 there was an Italian couple that started together but dropped early (not sure.) Sounds like this is not your plan, but beyond the race ethics, I think it's risky to start these multi-day endurance races with the plan of traveling with someone else. The faster person is going to be worn down by traveling at the slower person's speed, and the slower person is likely to feel a level of tension or intimidation by the pacing alone. This is before you even throw in interpersonal issues.

The general consensus is that traveling in a "team" setting is an unfair advantage in these self-supported races. I actually disagree. It may feel more comfortable (psychologically), but I think the overall effect is a slower pace or more wasted energy versus what one might accomplish solo. Making all of your own decisions can be a wonderful thing (says the person whose major race this summer involves a team of three.)

I too am disappointed with the overall ratio this year, although excited for the three out there. Something tells me 2014 might be a bit different. ;-)

I think that we agree. Time-trails have, and continue to be, a part of the race. That's why JP's effort established a new record, even though it was a time trial. Likewise, Stamstad and Curiak both raced in the same style.

But all of this is pretty irrelevant, except for the question of what the future of the race should look like. It seems to me that if an organizer stops organizing, than someone else should be welcome to step up. This is already happening in many respects, in that the the Google doc sign-up wasn't established by Matthew. And the rules are now archived on the web--not maintained by Matthew. Finishes are no longer recorded by Matthew or anyone else--except for course records which now live on bikepacking.net.

All that I'm saying is that if Matthew Lee is finished, or if he remains publicly mute and abandons the website, then others will perpetuate the event--as is already occurring. Is that a bad thing?

I think you answered your own question. There doesn't need to be any race "organizer." The Tour Divide is motoring along just fine as it is, with a big group ride in mid-June and various time-trials outside the main event. I think of it more as a Fastest Known Time endeavor, with a similar community, forum-based tracking, and ethics code.

As the above poster mentioned, there are too many permitting issues and other problems to preclude an official event on the GDMBR. Anyone who puts their name on such an endeavor is just asking for legal scrutiny, whether they collect any money or not. You know what went down with the KTR in 2007. Time trials on that route have quietly taken place ever since with no laws broken. It seems as though that's the best course of action for Divide racing as well.