AZTR Rules Carousel

[ScottM]

About this. I am glad that this will be changed to include non-neutral media crews instead of media crews. I only wanted to point out that people who are reading the rules need not be aware of previous precedents and other behind the scenes information that some know. Also, even if you know those things but have no further justification of them, it does come across as a double-standard or inconsistency. It is much more likely that the rule was bent in some cases than that it doesn't say what it should say. So writing that "Lael knew it wasn't a blanket ban" is a strong statement which I don't think follows from any information cited here. I think it's a real possibility that she believes it's a blanket media ban and that it just isn't enforced fairly -- which might explain some of the bad feelings if there are any. Luckily, it's easy to prevent this in the future by narrowing down the rule to personal media crews.

You could be right.  It's interesting because would she think that John was bending the rules so far, in her favor, by letting several media visits be OK?  But you are correct that people have been led to think the rules are being applied unfairly to her -- and yet he was willing to let them be applied unfairly in her favor, too.  How confusing...?  (This is all assuming there was a media ban, which there never was, as we know).

Nevertheless, it's not worth speculating about because as you say, we can do something about it in the future.  We agreed that this needs to be clarified and like I said before I think there should be a statement about how films and media are allowed and here are the guidelines for how to do it (limited # of visits, few or no remote filming, whatever).  That will make it crystal clear that media itself is not banned.

[ScottM]

A fairly balanced reporting of the whole fiasco

Yep, I was happy to see it was pretty balanced and not designed to stir the pot.  I particularly liked that it ended with the quote from John about there being no villains here.

Making money off of bikepacking is one thing, but I might think some of the volunteers who built the trail might take issue with the idea of a for profit high speed run, and the trail angels who place water don't put it out there for people who have a friend meeting them at the same spot with a car.  

This is an interesting point that here they were with an equipped sprinter van, yet she had to take so much water from the caches which are stocked by volunteers at their own cost.  That seems like bad form but also a weird consequence of following the self-support rules while also violating self-support rules (hmm it's almost like there's a reason for the visitation rule here...!).  Restocking a cache or two would be the thing to do, should future media crew people find themselves at a cache (whether doing "AZTR" or not), since they are there.

So do racers take over the Summerhaven Post Office as a normal thing? I have heard of people sleeping in the PO in Oracle but that's big enough to just take a corner. I was enjoying the video and getting past the idea that they were obviously driving to every trail head. Is this really the story the AZT bikepacking racers should be putting out. Too cheap to get a room in town, unwilling to carry warm enough gear to sleep out, you just take over a tiny towns PO?

Fair points to bring up and when you have that many eyes on you, your example matters.

[ScottM]

I listened to the podcast, thanks! Yes, Jefe seems absolutely reasonable. And if the rules are communicated the way he does it, I basically wouldn't have (m)any objections.

Glad you agree and we understand each other here on you objection primarily being to the communication and justification.

But I definitely agree that Jefe's take is one of the most friendly ones (together with your old rules). The current AZTR rules, with bold font, exclamation marks, capslock, 0-1% statements, etc. just come across unfriendly (but maybe I'm just an entitled snowflake...).

Snowflake? Anyone who can finish TTW is not fragile! 

By the way I believe that section of the AZTR rules that sounds more friendly to you (and indeed was quoted in the Outside article) was left out of John's site by mistake.  The header for it is there but the text somehow didn't make it.  I believe he intends to restore it.

I do think it's a fair point that the first part of the rules now comes off as a little abrasive and serious with the bolds and small percentages.  Thanks for that feedback.

Yes, one shouldn't race if they know they won't do it by the rules - agreed. And yes, I did notice that it's generally assumed here that whenever I object to something I have a personal stake in it.

It's a reasonable assumption: why else would anyone else care so much?  A Diogenes type person is very rare.

I really don't care about trail magic. It seems petty, sorry. Nobody can give you a new tire and pretend it was trail magic, and some coke or candies are inconsequential. As for sharing gear, that's a different issue I think, it's not a matter of self-support. If e.g. the 1st rider shares gear with the 2nd rider and makes his/her race possible or faster, they interfered in the race between the 2nd rider and the rest. They not only helped their own competition (that's OK), they also helped other people's competition. Unless they had a permission from the rest of the field to help that 2nd rider, they shouldn't have done it. An analogy is letting someone in in front of you in the queue. It's not OK if you don't have a mandate from all the people behind you to let that person in. It will extend all their queue times so you do need that mandate. I think it's because of this that gear sharing appears in the rules.

That's a good point about affecting everyone's race and not having a mandate (as it respects to MikeC's original rules which allowed helping other racers).  Many of the same counter arguments you've given for visitation apply here: its affect is small, it's questionable self-support and bad vibes result from enforcement... so is it worth it?  That's something I'm trying to explore, trying to give your general arguments some credence.

Well, even you used the argument that "people show up to the race, so clearly many don't have a problem with the rules". If it's taken that by attending I endorse the rules -- which seems to be the case, then of course I regret it to some extent. Isn't that just a corollary?

Yes I see your point but you're taking it too literally.  I was speaking generally.  Of course I will permit that some individuals will show up anyway and I never meant that showing up implies tacit endorsement of all rules.  Generally speaking if the majority of people did not agree with the rules the race would see decreasing numbers or another race would pop up in its stead.

However, I think the solution is to relax/rephrase the rule, not try to separate the presence of the rule from the responsibilities that follow from it.

This could be helpful.  I still think there's weight to solo/self-support/bailout as I've said but changing the language on the web sites and in cases of enforcement is a really good point.

[AZTtripper]

Given Lael arrived late and left around 2am no one was likely to find her there in this case.  But a lot of eyes saw her "reportage" and might now think sleeping overnight in a PO lobby is a good idea.  Sadly a lot of people don't have the social awareness to realize they should be gone without a trace before anyone would show up in the morning.  It's only a matter of time before someone leaves a bunch of trash, or worse.  You only need to look at the Oregon Outback to see the worst case scenario.  https://www.bicycling.com/rides/a20022950/popular-bikepacking-event-killed-by-bad-behavior/.

Seems to me if we are concerned about protecting and minimizing the impact of the race this would be something that should be discouraged if not banned.  Not only does it seem like a bad idea, but may be illegal.  A google search "sleeping in post office lobby" pulled up Rules & Regs Re Conduct on USPS Property:  https://about.usps.com/posters/pos7.pdf .  Look at the "Disturbances" section, quoted below.   Seems directly applicable to sleeping in a lobby.   I know a bunch of post office lobbies around here (SoCal) are locked overnight now due to homeless sleeping in them.     

I don't think it matters what time it was, if you drove all night to get to your cabin and wanted to hit the PO knowing it's always open, and there's someone sleeping blocking the door. I know it's a stretch and no one showed up obviously. But by the link you posted it's a breach of a Federal regulation the same as riding a closed section of trail. And that's not just an * it's a DQ.

Fair points to bring up and when you have that many eyes on you, your example matters.

And that it was the first and only plan, you were able to get a room to sleep in up there in 06 right? She could have said I'll get up there and see what it's like, try to get a room, if all else fails then there's always the safety net of the PO. She said that at a Windy Point and then continued knowing it would be too cold to sleep out, and the PO is nice and cozy. And lets steal some juice while we're here, also felt staged.

Telling her story gets her the DQ no time recorded moved to the bottom of the results for the race that she signed up for. DQ'd with the * don't sleep in the PO and brag about it on line. 

The days of the RD being a nice guy ended with the Outback bs Evdog linked. In the years between Scott's mr nice guy rules and JOHN's RULE's a lot of BS went down, guys having at the cashes and still having to take water from hikers, and then blogging it for all the world, then we had someone drinking water with a clear save for a set person's name, clearly not public water taken hiker ends up calling 911, and I got an ear full from a trail angel at the State Line, we don't put that water out there for you racers!.

I have and will continue to support John as he has to make the tough calls.

[AZTtripper]

I would agree with that.  Don't forget the media company, who stirred up the internet mob in the first place.   I think they were both were aware of the rules and acted intentionally both in breaking them and how they responded after the * was applied.  I can't tell if Lael is just clueless or manipulative, or if she just doesn't give a shit.  Or maybe a combination of all three.  There certainly doesn't seem to be a lot of respect for the race or the bikepack racing community - or her fanbase for that matter, judging by the way they are being manipulated.  You can tell by what was said both before and after, and perhaps more importantly by what wasn't said.  There are a whole lot of things they could have clarified to Lael's fan base that would have quelled the outrage, but they chose not to.  The most amusing part is not pointing out to the fanbase that they are fawning over a FKT set in an event that is only a year old that only has 15 documented finishers so far.  That's not to say it wasn't an impressive ride - it definitely was.  But if you compare it to past ATZR750 results you can tell this FKT isn't going to stand for very long, asterisk or not.  I suspect there are going to be some very motivated racers lining up this fall.    

It's pretty obvious that the journalistic integrity rant is all part of the show. The Mob insist that pro's have to be exempt from the media rule as it's how they make their money. The mob will soon move on, they know they need to cash in while they can it can all come to and end real quick.

Mr Journalistic integrity can't quite get that you don't send the spouse of the racer to cover the story, and then has the nerve to call out someone whose not pimping for Social Media, for leaving money on the table by not having a IG following.  

The actual FKT for the AZTR is 6.6.6 if they want to say google takes you to the old site then the course is the 750 and the record is 666.

By this fall the Catalina Wilderness bypass aka Lemmon Drop trails should be an option. For those that followed this springs ITT on Trackleaders.com, two people did SOBO 300's and skipped the highway completely. That could be enough right there to say the 300 riders all now need use the trails no more highway. Scott and I always agreed that if anyone skipped the highway and finished in the event then the course has to change.

It was obvious Nate's record wasn't going to last the current 800 isn't that much different then the Four Peaks option from 19 and JD finished that in 8 days as I recall http://trackleaders.com/aztr19i.php?name=Justin_Dubois

It was nice that Lael was able to jump in and get the overall record.

[jsliacan]

Water caches are the source of some of the biggest conflicts on the trail. Last thing anyone needs is thinking that the magic water fairies are out at all times replenishing water caches. Next thing you know someone will take her words in the video as a free pass to go out on day rides in dry areas and utilizing those like it's a tap. This message presented by her in the video is in my opinion even more troubling  than the actual FKT/supported discussion.

Agree, I also think that this is very important as it is a serious part of the event's footprint. Regarding this, what's the take on pre-stocking the water caches before your ride? It's not a great way to do an FKT from the fairness point, but technically it'd be OK if you were both a water fairy and the FKT rider. Then you could drink a lot . Not Lael's case I assume, just wondering for the sake of it.

[jsliacan]

So do racers take over the Summerhaven Post Office as a normal thing? I have heard of people sleeping in the PO in Oracle but that's big enough to just take a corner. I was enjoying the video and getting past the idea that they were obviously driving to every trail head. Is this really the story the AZT bikepacking racers should be putting out. Too cheap to get a room in town, unwilling to carry warm enough gear to sleep out, you just take over a tiny towns PO?

The issue of sleeping in pit toilets was also raised in a thread last year and I'd put that in the same category as PO lobbies.  

I strongly agree with all these. They naturally extend to sleeping in kids playgrounds, shop entrances, train stations, bus shelters, etc. All these places are not meant for sleeping, encounters are awkward, and the footprint of the event is in people's faces. My guess is that if it's clearly mentioned on the website that the impact of the event on the local communities must be minimized to preserve the event, people will approach it differently (I hope so at least). Illustrating the problem with examples mentioned above would go a long way too - imo. The severity of this phenomenon goes way past the issue of emotional support from my perspective. It's existential for the event and a matter of reputation for the bikepacking community. I was long wondering (first when reading about TCR over here in Europe) if sleeping all over the city parks, benches, etc. is a good idea.

[AZTtripper]

Agree, I also think that this is very important as it is a serious part of the event's footprint. Regarding this, what's the take on pre-stocking the water caches before your ride? It's not a great way to do an FKT from the fairness point, but technically it'd be OK if you were both a water fairy and the FKT rider. Then you could drink a lot . Not Lael's case I assume, just wondering for the sake of it.

Scott banned people from caching from the start of the event, that's always been a rule. However as the event grew someone has pre stocked and sometimes re stocked the Freeman rd Cache. And that's the only one you need. Hikers end up using way more nasty water sources then riders, the first cache she comes to is only 4 miles from a spigot and less then 14 past a flowing year round creek there's no reason for racers to take any water there. Also a lot of these boxes only went in in the last 5 years or so, we got by without them for years and no one had to have a 911 water drop. In the Outside article she claims to have been out of water for 5 hours when she met John out side of Picket Post, it's only 11 miles from the Gila River to PP and there's a rain water collector just off the trail about 7 miles from PP. After Picket Post it's a long run to Queen Valley and out of the way to go to the Arboretum or the town of Superior, but there's no reason anyone should have gone 5 hours without water.

And Welcome to Bikepacking.net I'm Tim, I'v been around here since the beginning. Being in the right place at the right time I got to be one of the first people to ride the whole AZT. The AZT is an amazing journey I hope you get to experience it someday. 

[AZTtripper]

I strongly agree with all these. They naturally extend to sleeping in kids playgrounds, shop entrances, train stations, bus shelters, etc. All these places are not meant for sleeping, encounters are awkward, and the footprint of the event is in people's faces. My guess is that if it's clearly mentioned on the website that the impact of the event on the local communities must be minimized to preserve the event, people will approach it differently (I hope so at least). Illustrating the problem with examples mentioned above would go a long way too - imo. The severity of this phenomenon goes way past the issue of emotional support from my perspective. It's existential for the event and a matter of reputation for the bikepacking community. I was long wondering (first when reading about TCR over here in Europe) if sleeping all over the city parks, benches, etc. is a good idea.

Well stated, it's unfortunate that this would have to be made a rule but here we are.

[ScottM]

Well stated, it's unfortunate that this would have to be made a rule but here we are.

This example brings up how nuanced the rules can be.  I don't think making a rule about this is wise, for the same reason I had to make taking motorized transport to medical facilities allowed. 

Here's what happened (I'm sure Tim knows this story).  A rider crashed hard and knocked himself out.  He woke up and continued on to the next tiny town, crawling and barely able to ride even flat ground.  Figured he'd sleep it off and get a cabin.  I start getting phone calls and messages from his friends/SO saying he thinks he needs to go to the hospital but is concerned he is breaking the race rules.

I was incredulous.  All I could think was "why are we having this conversation at all?  If he thinks he should go to the hospital, he should go to the hospital!"  Who cares about the silly rules and the silly race? 

Well, he did.

I had to get him on the phone and beg him to go to the hospital, promise he would not be relegated in any way if he was able to continue on.

As it turned out he had a major rupture of his spleen and was bleeding internally.  If he'd slept it off he may not have survived.

---

So for the same reason you can't ban sleeping in public places or structures.  Someone might take the race too seriously and make a poor decision in inclement weather or whatever.

But it can be discouraged and explaining the reasoning as Jakub is saying is the best way.  I'm definitely not too pleased when I hear people indicate they are planning to sleep in public places like out houses.

[ScottM]

The other thing that raised an eyebrow was the intro of the trip report where it sounded at first like Lael took a 90min nap at Manzanita rest area in the Grand Canyon.  Later in the trip report where she gets to the Grand Canyon she says she stopped there to meditate.  Don't know about any of you but by that point in the ride if I sat down and closed my eyes I was out cold pretty much instantly, so I find the meditation claim a bit dubious.   

There's some scrutinizing going on in this thread, but I guess it's fair given that she produced a video and that so many eyes are on it.

Of all the things (cache reliance, sleeping in PO) what you write here is perhaps the most troubling.  The rules remind riders that you need a permit to camp in the canyon.  Why is this rule so serious?  Because the privilege of crossing the canyon with bikes is very fragile indeed.  What is at stake isn't just the race but also tourists ability to cross the canyon in this very special way.  If the park bans bikes it's not just going to shut the race down but also all thru-riders.

Is napping camping?  Meditating?  How long before it becomes camping?  I don't know, but it's best not to tempt the park into making these kind of judgements.  Best to not go there at all or bring any attention to it.

There are a whole lot of things they could have clarified to Lael's fan base that would have quelled the outrage, but they chose not to. 

Yes this was the most disappointing part of the whole fiasco, to me.

The most amusing part is not pointing out to the fanbase that they are fawning over a FKT set in an event that is only a year old that only has 15 documented finishers so far.  That's not to say it wasn't an impressive ride - it definitely was.  But if you compare it to past ATZR750 results you can tell this FKT isn't going to stand for very long, asterisk or not.

Yep, I have to agree here. 

[taprider]

Yes, planning ahead of time to sleep in public places or fully restocking with water from hiker caches should be discouraged.
Those that plan to do such things are likely also packing much lighter than those who are packing extra water and cold weather bivy gear, so are getting a performance advantage.

As Scott wrote, rules to asterisk/relegate such activities is not warranted.  However, I am thinking of other sports like mogul skiing and ski jumping where the person that stands on top of the leaderboard at the end is not the fastest (as in mogul skiing) or sails the furthest distance (as in ski jumping), but also scores well for style points or technical difficulty (such as many other sports).
I am not recommending devising a point scale for different styles/levels of difficulty (with official judging) to determine if an FKT'er that hoovered caches and hogged outhouses, and was two hours faster than another racer (that bivouacked outdoors in approved places every night, filtered water and only used the Freeman cache, rode to the start, built there own gear, etc.) should have the official FKT.  We already give separate official FKTs to singlespeeders (a style category), and bestow greater prestige to winners of Grand Departs (or free-solo-style or oxygen-tank-free mountain climbers). So maybe there should be lots of discussion on the internet or the real media ahead of time, indicating that style matters and that planning to use outhouses instead of packing the extra gear will taint your race result. Instead of asterisking an FKT, maybe there should be a buzzing fly adjacent to the posted time?

[davew]

Finally got time to watch the LW video.

Is it my imagination but around minute 10:00 it seems to jump from riding somewhere near oracle to an alpine area further north and then back to the ride into Freeman cache or am I mistaken?

I did not realise the post office box area was so small in SummerHaven.

[phatmike]

Is it my imagination but around minute 10:00 it seems to jump from riding somewhere near oracle to an alpine area further north and then back to the ride into Freeman cache or am I mistaken?

There definitely was some jumping around that wouldn't be noticed by anyone who wasn't familiar with the route.

[jsliacan]

By the way I believe that section of the AZTR rules that sounds more friendly to you (and indeed was quoted in the Outside article) was left out of John's site by mistake.  The header for it is there but the text somehow didn't make it.  I believe he intends to restore it.

I think that'll make some difference in terms of how welcoming the event seems. Nice.

I do think it's a fair point that the first part of the rules now comes off as a little abrasive and serious with the bolds and small percentages.  Thanks for that feedback.

Great - thanks.

It's a reasonable assumption: why else would anyone else care so much?  A Diogenes type person is very rare.

Hah. Though ideas are more interesting than one-offs (experiences).

That's a good point about affecting everyone's race and not having a mandate (as it respects to MikeC's original rules which allowed helping other racers).  Many of the same counter arguments you've given for visitation apply here: its affect is small, it's questionable self-support and bad vibes result from enforcement... so is it worth it?  That's something I'm trying to explore, trying to give your general arguments some credence.

Yeah, I agree that it's unclear whether it's worth it. But from my point of view it depends on the other rules in the ruleset - if self-support visitation rule is worth it, this is too (someone loses navigation and is given a new one by another rider... it is probably significant for their race). That said, I'm finding it hard to understand the importance of the distinction between "fairness" rules and "self-support" rules. So that might have an impact on my opinion here.

[jsliacan]

First off to be an ambassador to the sport and claim to not have read the rules is a bit hard to believe.  There's a ton of research that goes along with preparing for a race/ride like this and you have to do your homework.

Whether she should've read the rules or not is one thing. But I think it's believable that she didn't read them. She had read them in 2015/6 and they did not include media clause (visitation rule was same/similar though; water caches too, etc.). And given her load of races and events that she does, I can imagine how it slipped. So I don't think she's dishonest about not having read them. And suspecting her of lying is a bit... where's the benefit of the doubt?

I honestly feel like it's pretty clear. Also it allows for people taking pictures in trail, doing interviews or whatever, just not "a camera crew to document your ride"
...
But back to the personal media crews, I feel like Johns rule as written actually covers that... AND allows other types of coverage.

This is a very "confident" reading of the rules, to put it nicely. A person who is new to these races will never dare to suspect that the rule below allows for neutral media crews. The first 2 sentences are ruthless. The rest of it reads like this: "Big/professional media crews are out of question as stated, but don't think you can get away with a personal crew either."

2. No support crews, this includes pre-arranged camera/media crews. The AZTR views this as support. Feel free to self-document all you like. If you want a camera crew to document your ride, either do it on your own or expect an *, no record times will be noted for media support.

[jsliacan]

There are a whole lot of things they could have clarified to Lael's fan base that would have quelled the outrage, but they chose not to.

I suspect they don't understand the rules in depth. I was asking and reading answers about the rules for the past 6-7pages in this discussion, I read a good bunch of other discussions too, and I would still not have the audacity to interpret the nuances of the rules to the public. That's not to say more communication on their part wouldn't be beneficial. I am just saying that it takes a lot of studying and digging to get the sense of how literally or symbolically each rule is supposed to be taken, and what it tries to achieve. And I don't think they had the time to do that (I might be wrong).

The most amusing part is not pointing out to the fanbase that they are fawning over a FKT set in an event that is only a year old that only has 15 documented finishers so far.  That's not to say it wasn't an impressive ride - it definitely was.  But if you compare it to past ATZR750 results you can tell this FKT isn't going to stand for very long, asterisk or not.  I suspect there are going to be some very motivated racers lining up this fall.   

It might not be such a bad FKT* for the women's side of the event. Do you think it will be improved by another 1.5d next? I suspect the iterations might be closer to each other now. Besides, there already is one really proud FKT holder on the women's side, so the "excitement" over this FKT* doesn't really stand out.

[jsliacan]

Scott banned people from caching from the start of the event, that's always been a rule. However as the event grew someone has pre stocked and sometimes re stocked the Freeman rd Cache. And that's the only one you need. Hikers end up using way more nasty water sources then riders, the first cache she comes to is only 4 miles from a spigot and less then 14 past a flowing year round creek there's no reason for racers to take any water there. Also a lot of these boxes only went in in the last 5 years or so, we got by without them for years and no one had to have a 911 water drop. In the Outside article she claims to have been out of water for 5 hours when she met John out side of Picket Post, it's only 11 miles from the Gila River to PP and there's a rain water collector just off the trail about 7 miles from PP. After Picket Post it's a long run to Queen Valley and out of the way to go to the Arboretum or the town of Superior, but there's no reason anyone should have gone 5 hours without water.

I can't really tell what water caches Lael was using or why. The topic just made me think about a hypothetical scenario of re-stocking/pre-stocking the cache. In which case it wouldn't be selfish to use it. Caches in general are forbidden though, so it seems like a bad idea. But then water caches are exempted. So that's what made me ask.

And Welcome to Bikepacking.net I'm Tim, I'v been around here since the beginning. Being in the right place at the right time I got to be one of the first people to ride the whole AZT. The AZT is an amazing journey I hope you get to experience it someday. 

Thanks and thanks. I'm Jakub.

[phatmike]

I can't really tell what water caches Lael was using or why. The topic just made me think about a hypothetical scenario of re-stocking/pre-stocking the cache. In which case it wouldn't be selfish to use it. Caches in general are forbidden though, so it seems like a bad idea. But then water caches are exempted. So that's what made me ask.

Based on what was documented in the film, and the lack of time spent at normal "filtering" spots (according to trackleaders dots) I'm going to make the assumption that any water cache she came upon was fair game. Outside of the aforementioned freeman cache (that's the one where she is talking to the other hiker at ~10:00 in the vid) everything else should really be considered hiker only. Especially given the pace which she rides at. I am a much slower rider (thus needing more water in theory) and I have no issues with carrying enough still struggled to carry enough at times. The trail has gotten so busy in fact that many of the other caches are not even close to being guaranteed. Allowing a personal film crew to place water at every possible hiker cache for a rider changes the game entirely. Maybe they stocked each cache with 10 gallons (doubtful, but maybe). While a kind gesture for those behind her, it is an unfair advantage knowing you have guaranteed "public" water at each cache.

Too bad they couldn't get the crew back to the water collector after the gila so she wouldn't have gotten thirsty heading to picketpost.

[ScottM]

Yeah, I agree that it's unclear whether it's worth it. But from my point of view it depends on the other rules in the ruleset - if self-support visitation rule is worth it, this is too (someone loses navigation and is given a new one by another rider... it is probably significant for their race). That said, I'm finding it hard to understand the importance of the distinction between "fairness" rules and "self-support" rules. So that might have an impact on my opinion here.

I don't know that you can weight one has being more important than the other, they're just ideals to strive towards.

I'm considering the implications of relaxing the rule about helping other racers.  The good Samaritan in me wants to never discourage anyone from helping, period.

But there's a "preservation of the event" or "preservation of the bikepacking community" argument in all of these self-support rules, I suppose.  And it's this: the more self-reliant the field is, the better.  The less people get in trouble and have to rely on others the better the event looks.  Getting help from other racers doesn't make "us" look worse, but it might result in a less prepared field?  Racers begging trail magic does make us look worse and maybe results in a less prepared field, too.  This argument also applies to visitation and only adds to the general preservation one (impact, footprint, 74 limit, etc).

Taking this further of course that means ITTs (without media crews!) are generally going to be the most prepared.  But then we've agreed we want to do a group start / race.