CTR 2012 Race Discussion

[Stefan_G]

If you still have a Spot and are wondering where to send it, please send it to:

Matthew Lee
Trackleaders
215 Stratford Drive
Chapel Hill, NC 27516

Trackleaders recommends you use a USPS Flat Rate Priority Envelope ($5.90) and then place 'Delivery Confirmation' service on it (an extra 70c).

[Done]

It must be wonderful to always know exactly what is right and wrong in any given situation, in a split second's time.

Yep, that's exactly how it works. I never need to think about gray areas, or contemplate the repercussions of a difficult decision. I just instinctively know exactly the right thing to do. /end sarcasm

On the CTR this year, everyone made decisions that reflected their relationship with the ideals of "self-support" and "equal opportunity." On one hand, some people chose to forego all "trail magic," never accepted anything from another rider, didn't call home when they felt emotionally drained, and etc. On the other hand, some chose to accept copious amounts of "trail magic," called ahead to have food prepared in advance, called to get help with navigation, etc. To me, these latter decisions are incompatible with the ideals of self-supported racing. If these are the sorts of moments that you find so full of gray that you want to flog me with sarcastic hyperbole, then we probably won't find much common ground. Which leads me back to my original argument:

Those who want to ride as close to a self-supported ideal can do so. Those who don't, are also free to do so. There's room for two very different approaches to the CTR, and neither one is inherently superior in the grand scope of the universe. One is closer to a Carnival Cruise (a very popular means of travel), while one closer to the Vendee Globe (a rare style of travel). Pick one, announce your intent, and go at it. Again, that's what I did this year, and I had a terrific experience. I crossed tracks with those who chose very different styles, and they were having a blast too. I don't dislike those who ride supported--but I do think that it's worthwhile to distinguish between those ride with support and those who ride without support. It's simply not the same race.

[Done]

Looks like Kurt Refsnider is rolling. I'm a little jealous of the weather forecast that he's got!

[Matt Schiff]

One idea to get people to think about the approach they will take when they race that involves no more written rules would be an extension of the short survey each person fills out to be on trackleaders. This could be 10 of the most contentious issues with a spectrum of either "highly agree" to "highly disagree" or written out options that cover the spectrum. This would gather all racers sentiment as well as serve as a non enforceable, publicly available contract on how you want to race. On grey areas there would be no right answers. If it turns out that you submit an answer that is blatantly a violation of a rule, you'll be notified by auto email some other such method (auto email of answer key after the survey, etc). There could also be room for a participant to write out anything additional they wish to.

Yes, there is thinking about things too much or beating a dead horse. But I just started thinking about this two weeks ago and some readers may have been seeing these threads for 6 months. There is also the approach of just being "cool/layed back" and it was those people who seemed to brake small rules without thinking about them that got me thinking as a first time bikepack racer, hmm, I guess this is how it works.

[Jilleo]

Yep, that's exactly how it works. I never need to think about gray areas, or contemplate the repercussions of a difficult decision. I just instinctively know exactly the right thing to do. /end sarcasm

On the CTR this year, everyone made decisions that reflected their relationship with the ideals of "self-support" and "equal opportunity." On one hand, some people chose to forego all "trail magic," never accepted anything from another rider, didn't call home when they felt emotionally drained, and etc. On the other hand, some chose to accept copious amounts of "trail magic," called ahead to have food prepared in advance, called to get help with navigation, etc. To me, these latter decisions are incompatible with the ideals of self-supported racing. If these are the sorts of moments that you find so full of gray that you want to flog me with sarcastic hyperbole, then we probably won't find much common ground. Which leads me back to my original argument:

Those who want to ride as close to a self-supported ideal can do so. Those who don't, are also free to do so. There's room for two very different approaches to the CTR, and neither one is inherently superior in the grand scope of the universe. One is closer to a Carnival Cruise (a very popular means of travel), while one closer to the Vendee Globe (a rare style of travel). Pick one, announce your intent, and go at it. Again, that's what I did this year, and I had a terrific experience. I crossed tracks with those who chose very different styles, and they were having a blast too. I don't dislike those who ride supported--but I do think that it's worthwhile to distinguish between those ride with support and those who ride without support. It's simply not the same race.

I think JoeyDurango was just trying to point out that the rules currently in place have fairly broad wording, so not everybody is going to arrive at the same interpretation as you. If you want everyone to conform to your strict interpretations, you're going to need more specifically worded legislation. Until then, you can't possibly expect most people to interpet "calling home" as a blatant rule violation, for example. 

Lately I've been doing more research on fastest known times. That community has widely accepted three categories. "Supported," "Self-Supported" and "Unsupported." "Supported" means as much support as you're willing to pay for. If you want to have buses full of food and massage therapists at every trail junction, pacers the enter way, etc., your record is recognized the same as the guy who has his wife meet him occasionally in towns.

"Self-supported" follows mainly the same aesthetic as the bikepacking community has adopted — food purchases in towns, hotel rooms, technology, etc. "Self-supported" casts a wide net and it doesn't appear that the FKT community spends much time quibbling about details. If you don't have a support vehicle, you're self-supported.

 "Unsupported" means alpine style — you start with everything you need, making no purchases or outside stops along the way. If you want to fastpack the Colorado Trail in 18 days, you have to start with 18 days worth of food, all of your water purification stuff, all gear, etc. Some purists even forgo all technology in favor of maps and compass.

Rather than continue to nitpick rules where a consensus will never be reached, perhaps the purists in this community can establish a similar unsupported category. It's the ultimate challenge — planning has to be perfect from the beginning, you have to be absolutely prepared for all mechanicals, and there are no questions about trail magic or calling ahead for meals, no gray areas about hotel rooms or mailing packages, because these issues don't even factor in the first place. It's certainly not the fastest way to go about these challenges, but purists can take satisfaction in being the most self-sufficient.

[pharmvet]

IMO, unless I am contesting in the top 3 racers (never for me), I am only "racing" myself.  To many of the leader types, the pace I ride would be quite laid back and more like a tour than a race.  Does that mean it's not an epic challenge for me?  I can assure you that I still find plenty of challenge on the course.  Do I care that my pace is a tour for some?  Nah, just as long as I get to Junction Creek before my buddy!  

The reality is that we all receive some degree of support out there.  To be honest, getting a bike shop to work on your bike, supply a part, etc., whether you call ahead or not, is receiving support.  Is it available to everyone?  Sure, but only if you get there when they are open, you have the money to pay for it, etc.  I don't know much about the Vendee Globe, but if you were riding across Antarctica or Outback, you couldn't just pull up at the closest bike shop for a repair or grocery store for resupply.  You would truly have to be self-sufficient, anticipating every possible issue/dilemma you may face and have the skills to address them yourself.  

Calling home to receive emotional "support" from my wife or daughter is yet another example.  Does that make me ride faster than I would otherwise or slower?  Hard to say.  I could argue either way on that one!  By receiving that support, does that make my "race" any less or, more pertinent to the current discussion, make someone else's "race" any less?  I would argue not but that's my decision to make.  Do we stipulate that phone calls can only be made from pay phones, telegraph, Morse code, smoke signals?  Where is the line?

And speaking of technology, I mean, come on, GPS units that beep as soon as you deviate from the track?  Frankly, we are riding a signed trail through the Colorado backcountry on pieces of technology (e.g., full suspension, carbon fiber frames) wearing pieces of technology (e.g., iPods, GPSs, SPOTs) that would appear truly alien to people from another time period.  Heck, even to people in this time period!

It seems like this argument is akin to how many angels can fit on a pinhead and unlikely to result in a definitive answer, other than the current rules.  Then, how to police (yikes!) those participating gets even more ridiculous.  It's becoming more of a "Are you a true believer?" and "If so, prove it!?" thing.  Let's be honest, this is a wholly created, self-imposed "adventure" that any one of us can take or leave at any moment.  None of us need to do this to eat tomorrow.    

Do I love bikepacking and the ultra racing format?  Definitely, and I'm sure we all do.  But arguing about minutiae and building these into unassailable bastions from which we launch attacks against each other is quixotic and much ado about nothing.  In fact, this discussion is very much like those had between religious types (e.g., Allah, God, Buddha, Yahweh, etc.)  The risk is that we try to legislate "epic" and, in so doing, destroy the very reasons we all go out there.  To push ourselves (as individuals) and our bikes  , enjoy a beautiful trail through some amazing country, meet some cool people, and score some sweet sponsorships afterwards  

Keep the rules simple.  Enjoy yourself.  Sleep.  Eat.  Ride.  More! (repeat)

[Matt Schiff]

Keep the rules simple.  Enjoy yourself.  Sleep.  Eat.  Ride.  More! (repeat)

and then get relegated for doing something wrong that never even crossed your mind.

I'm obviously coming at this from a different angle than others but I'm not the only one to worry about breaking the rules, you just have to read other blogs of contenders to see this. Although it usually involves missing a short section of trail (which is a clear rule to understand). People riding to post fast time have a fear of it all being messed up in the end by a mistake.

But my next ride/race and those that follow will be different. I won't worry. Who is anyone else to verify or nullify my efforts? I'm riding for myself. Can you hitchhike forward or only backward in the TD if your bike brakes? I don't care! Nearest bike shop makes sense. Put an asterix next to my name. My effort and journey was pure!

(no disrespect to race organizers)

[Done]

All competitive (and many non-competitive) sports have rules, ethics, customs, etc. Many are esoteric, and many are contrived. But it's these very things that define a sport and make it what it is. Ultra-racing is a newly emerging sport, and we are watching it being defined in real time during every race. The trend toward eliminating as much self-sufficiency as reasonably possible is, in my opinion, a huge step backward. I'm surprised that so many people here seem to be in favor of encouraging it. I realize that I'm not going to change anyone's mind who already feels that practical self-sufficiency isn't a worthwhile ideal, but I'm hoping that many people at least consider whether the CTR will be the same if it becomes common practice to do many of the things that have been discussed in this thread. Personally, I think that something sublime will be lost if everyone adopts Matt's "whatever works for me" mindset. Nevertheless, I'll continue to race the CTR; and I'll continue to pass by the "trail magic" coolers; I'll continue to refuse support along the way. Because that's what got me out there in the first place: striving toward an ideal that challenges the concept of what's possible by restricting what's available. To me, that matters far more than the immediate pleasure of a fizzy drink, or the offer of a spare derailleur pulley. I my never reach the pinnacle of Jill's "alpine" style, but the allure of such an approach will drive my imagination.

Fortunately, I know that I'm not the only one out there who cherishes this vision. In fact, I'm nothing more than a follower of others have have already blazed the way. It's a cool path for sure.

Bailing out of this conversation for now. Thanks, it's been respectful and fun!

Cheers,
Toby

[Matt Schiff]

I think that something sublime will be lost if everyone adopts Matt's "whatever works for me" mindset.

To avoid getting a reputation as a maverick rider (and yes I've now said what I need to say) let me summarize my position beginning with the first post.

1. I'm an honest person and when I race I like to follow the rules and be on the same playing field as everyone else. As it is now the rules aren't clear enough for me to follow and I don't enjoy spending time while racing trying to decipher them. I don't have a big investment in what the rules are. I just want it to be easy to to act in "normal ways" when I'm riding.
2. I noticed people who seemed to be braking the rules, but to them either they weren't, or it wasn't a big deal (and really it wasn't changing the race outcome). It seems to be these kinds of people who think this conversation pointless, that we're splitting hairs, and we just need to go out there and ride our bikes since that's what it's all about.
3. If I were to take that attitude, and by the end of the conversation I'm starting to feel that way, I wouldn't worry what anyone else says about me and I'd just race my own race and in the grey areas do what makes sense to me, not what I think the rules should or need to be, but the danger in that is you just start to make your own rules.
4. This is a real topic of discussion, that needs discussion, that has focused more on what the rules should be and I'm saying just lay them out straight for me cause it's bugging me trying to remember or decipher them.

[pharmvet]

I too apologize if my posts have taken a "do whatever you want to do" attitude as well.  I can appreciate the need for a set of rules and for adherence to those when racing.

I guess I just don't see much ambiguity in the rules.

http://www.climbingdreams.net/ctr/ctr_rules.html

And it seems that we are introducing much more grey than intended.

If I wonder whether or not, then I won't.  If another does or does not, not my problem.  Ultimately, you're the only one who has to live in your head.

I still remember an email Stefan sent out the year I rode the CTR where he said for us first-timers, you only get to do this (be a novice) once, do it right.  Definitely stuck with me during the ride.

[gdillon]

One of the major things I keep in mind while riding this event is that it's okay to offer, but not okay to ask for.  If I'm taking a break with another racer eating gummy bears and I offer one, that person is free to take it or not.  Conversely, if they offer me a cheez-it and it sounds appetizing, I may accept.  This situation is similar to trail side repairs and navigation.  The "be a good citizen" part is huge for me, and at no time should I ask for assistance, or if I do, just call myself out.  With the ordering pizzas example, I agree that you shouldn't call ahead for a pie so it'll be there when you arrive, but that you could have that same pizza delivered to your hotel room once you'd already checked in.

Matt, I agree that it would suck to break a rule without knowing that you did, but in your examples above, my interpretation would be that anything you asked for (non-commercially available) or prearranged would be an infraction of the rules while offering up goods or information would not be.

[Stefan_G]

The rules debate is like an ugly Phoenix.  I’ve tried my hardest to keep it simple by sticking to only the 3 rules for the CTR, with a FAQ to go along with them.  Things like “self-supported” do need to be defined after all.  The rest I’ve left up to racers to decide for themselves what is in the spirit of the race.  i.e. Doing everything yourself and equal opportunity.

To start with the end, the CTR is what you make it.  The entire point of the rules is to lay out a baseline so the race is fair for all participants.  Prior to any sort of organized race on the CT, bikers (or hikers/runners) would just announce their intentions and style ahead of time, and then go for it.  With an organized race, some sort of rule set is clearly mandatory to keep the race fair.  Even then, the race is self-timed and self-policed and, ultimately, dependent on the integrity of every racer.

Cell phone use has been the biggest point of contention, but it really is simple folks.  If you are using your phone to call for directions, a pizza, a motel; that is outside or pre-arranged support.   Don’t do it.  By all means, keep in touch with your family, or take a conference call for work if that is your desire.  Or don't.  That is totally your prerogative.

The thing that really frosts me is that people who have cooler caches in the woods or call a friend to figure out where the route goes can go ride the exact course any time they want, yet they show up for the CTR?!!  If you’re not gonna play by the rules, don’t bother coming to the start – it just casts a negative shadow on everyone else’s experience.  The only prize in the CTR is having your name on the list of finishers, and all that really means is that you rode it in the style delineated by the simple rules.

I have done the CT supported.  And, believe me, it friggin’ ROCKS to show up to a TH and have a cold beer, dinner and a camp fire waiting for you.  But that’s not the CTR now is it?  The CTR is a different experience altogether.

So to reiterate, even though I think all this is covered well in the FAQ, any arranging of support is not allowed.  This includes leaving a cooler full of goodies for the entire field of racers!  I forgot to say it at the start this year, but if you are questioning a decision mid-race, imagine if there were 1000 racers in the CTR and all made the same decision.  What is the impact?  What are the consequences?  Will it affect the viability of future CTRs?  What if there were 1000 coolers along the trail?  Or just 1, but 1000 racers?

I know there will always be gray areas, but I refuse to create a complex set of rules that detracts from the spirit of the race. I find that giving people responsibility makes them responsible, and for the others... Well, hopefully karma will eventually sort them out.

[joeydurango]

Jilleo, Stefan - thanks.  You all said very well what I've been trying to.  Stefan, I especially like the last paragraph.

[Done]

If everyone actually followed Stefan's stated rules, and the notable clarifications that he has posted here and elsewhere, I wouldn't be stomping my feet. Instead, a growing number of people are cherry-picking from his broad directives, deciding that his "refus[al] to create a complex set of rules" is grounds to do all sorts of things that he explicitly condemns elsewhere--such as eating out of the proliferating "trail magic" coolers, calling ahead for services, etc.

While I truly admire Stefan's philosophy of stating broad principles with the hopes that people will thoughtfully apply them to encompass a wide range of activities--it doesn't work terribly well for a great number of people. Or at least many people don't seem to arrive at the specific conclusions that he seems to desire. This is not a hypothetical musing, but rather a simple observation of many comments in this thread and behavior on the trail.

That's why I took the time to post a set of rules that I follow on my blog. I don't believe that any of them conflict with Stefan's broad principles, and none of them are that complicated or "legalistic." I simply collected a bunch of existing concepts, principles and rules, and added some thoughts and clarifications that made interpreting specific situations simpler. It worked well for me this year--and it might have been worthwhile reading for a few riders in the CTR who really wanted to ride the kind of race that I believe Stefan defined.

[Matt Schiff]

I'm clear on many things, like friends bringing food and stashed coolers, but if the the main premise on which the rules are based is "fair race for all", I could see the rules being very different.

In Leadville I planned (the plan came after day one of the race) to stop at a bike shop because I didn't like the way my fork was working. I didn't have a shop number or know where one was located but then came the flood of what ifs. If I had a smart phone could I use it locate a shop? If I had a shop number could I call when I was say one hour from the shop to ask if they could help me and save time by not having to stop in the shop or locate it if they couldn't? Could I call while I was in town? Could I call from a pay phone? Must I only stop in? What if the bike was fairly wrecked and Leadville didn't have the part? Could I call Buena Vista? If they didn't have the part I know my ride is over. Must I ride to Buena Vista to find this out?

(I never stopped at the shop or located it because I'm impatient and don't like to wait)

If any of the answers to the above is no, how am I giving myself an unfair advantage?

While we're talking about CTR, the TD rules on this issue seem the same.

Listen to this public MTBcast on the same issue http://mtbcast.com/site2/2012/06/10/mtbcast-td12-%E2%80%93-jarral-ryter-called-in-from-eureka/

How can Jarral Legally get brake parts if they aren't commercially available?

Law students go to work

[Done]

In Leadville I planned (the plan came after day one of the race) to stop at a bike shop because I didn't like the way my fork was working. I didn't have a shop number or know where one was located but then came the flood of what ifs. If I had a smart phone could I use it locate a shop? If I had a shop number could I call when I was say one hour from the shop to ask if they could help me and save time by not having to stop in the shop or locate it if they couldn't? Could I call while I was in town? Could I call from a pay phone? Must I only stop in? What if the bike was fairly wrecked and Leadville didn't have the part? Could I call Buena Vista? If they didn't have the part I know my ride is over. Must I ride to Buena Vista to find this out?

Before the race started, I Googled bike shops, restaurants, grocery stores, etc. to figure out where they are, their hours, etc. I put all of the info on a sheet of paper, and tucked it away for the race. Not only am I more efficient that way, but it also means that I don't need to deal with the ethical dilemmas that your describe.

Edit: When I broke my derailleur pulley on the climb up Gold Hills during the CTR, I did indeed walk and coast to Copper to see if they had  parts. Even though I had a cell signal, I didn't call shops in Frisco, Breckenridge, or Copper to see who had what. Stefan's rules make it clear that calling ahead is considered support, and I take that very much to heart.

[Platform Power]

Awwww Reply #420 ---been waiting for you

Congratulations Matt and Toby for riding your mountain bikes from Denver to Durango on the beautiful and treacherous Colorado Trail whenever possible!!!  

[Done]

Dominic, you make me smile. I can't find the proper icon for you, but this is sorta close: 

[TruthRider]

I understand that some aspects of the rules could be ambiguous.  I don't understand why the phone/pre-arranged support issue is one of them.

In Leadville I planned (the plan came after day one of the race) to stop at a bike shop because I didn't like the way my fork was working. I didn't have a shop number or know where one was located but then came the flood of what ifs.

If I had a smart phone could I use it locate a shop?  [NO, although this is likely the most grey question here.]
If I had a shop number could I call when I was say one hour from the shop to ask if they could help me and save time by not having to stop in the shop or locate it if they couldn't? [NO - clearly pre-arranged.]
Could I call while I was in town? [NO - clearly pre-arranged.]
Could I call from a pay phone? [NO - clearly pre-arranged.]
Must I only stop in? [YES - anything else is clearly pre-arranged.]
What if the bike was fairly wrecked and Leadville didn't have the part? [WALK to BV]
Could I call Buena Vista? [NO - clearly pre-arranged]
If they didn't have the part I know my ride is over. Must I ride to Buena Vista to find this out? [YES - anything else is clearly pre-arranged.]

If any of the answers to the above is no, how am I giving myself an unfair advantage? [This is changing the debate, from whether pre-arranged support is against the rules to whether pre-arranged support is an unfair advantage]

Toby is taking a hard rap here, but I agree with almost everything he's espousing here, except perhaps the judgmental tone.  Personally, I do think that it's hard to argue a rider was truly SELF SUPPORTED when he purchased a bike part at a store.  Or bought groceries.  That's what I think is the flaw in Toby's argument - I think he's attempting to blend Jilleo's Self Supported category with the Unsupported category.  To me, neither accepting trail magic nor walking into a bike store and buying a pulley breaks the CTR rules.  They are both ok within the CTR definition of Self Supported.

Stefan's point is what carries the day for me - this is the CTR.  The CTR defines "self-supported" according to the CTR ethos.  If you follow that ethos, you followed the CTR rules.  If you don't want to follow that ethos, then ride it a week later!  [Or please give guys like me up to two weeks to clear the course.  ]   It's [sort of] a free country so we can't prohibit you from joining the CTR at the same time as the rest of us and then using your phone to get a pizza delivered.  If you do so, you'll know in your heart that you didn't really follow the rules, and when you see your name on the finisher's list, well, if you can live with it that's your deal. I don't care. I'm pretty sure Jefe, Ethan, and Jesse don't care.  They know in their hearts what they did.  [I'm still stunned at 3d23h38m].

Matt if you truly are just trying to get more clarity so you don't unknowingly break rules, hopefully the above answers to those questions clarifies them.  I am not speaking for Stefan here but everything I've seen from him the last two years tells me he would agree with those answers.

[Woodland]

Kurt is crossing Searle and Kokomo at roughly the same time I did...minus a day