Rules?

[Done]

Can we get an example of an arbitrary one?

Hi Chris,

Good question. As I've said, I don't want to name names. But I'll try to be as specific as I can, while still honoring those who were involved. There was a race that didn't require or prohibit Spot trackers. It was stated that those who carried them could do so for "entertainment" purposes. So, some riders used them, and some didn't; some used them only sometimes. Turns out that a rider ended up being DQ'd by the race director because the Spot showed a relatively minor course deviation.

Here's why it's arbitrary: Since Spots aren't required by all riders, and up-front notification wasn't given that Spot data could be used for route enforcement, the rider ended up being retroactively held to a different standard than other riders. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with the verdict, but the process and overall fairness was a mess.

I know that nobody involved liked any part of it--and the whole thing could have been avoided a number of different ways with a little bit of planning. The kind of planning that seems to be taking place here, really.

I think that this discussion is good and productive because it'll likely reduce similarly painful events in the future. Yes, a newbie (me) started it--but so what?

[Done]

It's an honest group.

Yes, which is why I like it! Disagreements don't seem to be caused by issues of integrity, but rather by differences of opinion, interpretation, confusion, etc. I don't see anyone here cheating.

[ScottM]

FYI, Stefan has even relegated himself in the CTR...

Only temporarily.  I also volunteered myself as cutting the course (I followed the GPS track, on the road, not the new trail by Twin Lakes) in 2009, once I learned that Stefan relegated himself.

Since both the GPS and guidebook tell you to take the road, either route was deemed acceptable, and he reversed his relegation.

[Pivvay]

Toby,

Course deviation is and always has been a major, non grey area offense. I fail to see how the "method of detection" has anything to do with whether or not the offense took place. The standard is that you follow the course 100%. I fail to see how carrying a SPOT or not has any bearing on that standard?

[timroz]

the rider ended up being retroactively held to a different standard than other riders.

Wrong.  Same standard for everyone.

[Pivvay]

Only temporarily.  I also volunteered myself as cutting the course (I followed the GPS track, on the road, not the new trail by Twin Lakes) in 2009, once I learned that Stefan relegated himself.

Since both the GPS and guidebook tell you to take the road, either route was deemed acceptable, and he reversed his relegation.

As a total side note, I've got to go dig around at Twin Lakes again. I only remember riding trails around there but also following my GPS track which I think was different than what you guys used this year? I'm really curious what the difference is and if I did what you guys did or if I took the trail.

[Done]

Hi Chris,

I'm not going to re-argue the example that I gave, or take sides. I'm using it to illustrate an example of a serious conflict that arose from different interpretations and expectations--resulting in a tough call for a race director, and a mess for those involved. Arbitrary isn't always bad. For example in the example just given of the CTR "relegation-unrelegation," the decision ended up being fairly arbitrary. Seems like a good decision to me (from what little I know), and I truly admire the style in which everyone figured out what to do. In contrast to the aforementioned Spot conflict, this was handled very well--largely because the people involved SELF GOVERNED!

[ScottM]

As a total side note, I've got to go dig around at Twin Lakes again. I only remember riding trails around there but also following my GPS track which I think was different than what you guys used this year? I'm really curious what the difference is and if I did what you guys did or if I took the trail.

It's above the lakes, dropping from the Elbert trail down to Twin Lakes.  99% sure you took the road, as the trail was not completely done, nor was it signed until this summer.

I have long known about the ST dropping to Twin Lakes (they used part of the trail I've ridden many times as the new CT), but I also knew it wasn't CT, until very recently, apparently.

[ScottM]

Wrong.  Same standard for everyone.

Yep.

[ScottM]

Course deviation is and always has been a major, non grey area offense. I fail to see how the "method of detection" has anything to do with whether or not the offense took place. The standard is that you follow the course 100%. I fail to see how carrying a SPOT or not has any bearing on that standard?

Agreed.  Even Troy the anarchist, bless him, agrees that you must ride the ENTIRE course. 

I do agree with Jill's point about missing 6 yards of the course at a gas station, though, too.  Missing 40 miles is a different story.

[dwj]

this thread is becoming nauseating. nailing down a set of rules and trying to eliminate the grey areas is fine, but you guys are nit-picking the rules to death. i have a great deal of respect for anyone who has finished the gdr or ctr. i don't really care whether they took a candy bar from a fat man with a lisp, or called their girlfriend in the middle of the night so they could rub one out over the phone. the spirit of the race has always been a self-governing type of thing, if you can live with style in which you arrived at the finish then by god I can live with how you reached the finish.

that being said my thoughts on the rules are this.... race completely self-supported, with these exceptions, resupply only from commercial businesses. ship only to and from post-offices. give and receive trail magic only from the trail angel. cell phone use only if you are standing next to a pay phone. then it is ok to call whomever you want, for any reason you want. absolutely no pacers. if your friends want to meet you on the trail it shouldn't be pre-arranged. the trails are open to everyone so stopping people from coming out and enjoying the race from the trail would be impossible. most folks know the difference between having a "pacer" and having friends on the course to cheer them on. riding with other racers is fine as long as there is no drafting and/or sharing of a light source. sharing course beta and having some company for a while is just a neighborly thing to do in my opinion.   

i don't really care if you have abided by these rules in the past but these in general are my racing ethics and the ones i will follow in the future. in the past i have only deviated from these set of rules in the trail magic department. although the year i finished the ctr i only took trail magic from the trail angel.

chris is the only one who should be interested in this thread, he has a broken ankle, the rest of us should be out riding. if any one wants to debate the rules from the trail i'll be riding into bean fesst http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=555479 on saturday. i'm sure you'll be more than happy to except some of my flan and then you will be rethinking your stance on trail magic.   

and by you i'm referring to all of us, i'm not singling anyone out   

[timroz]

Isn't there a rule against flan?

[Done]

Isn't there a rule against flan?

Only if you throw it at a business colleague.  But using it to "rub one out" is OK.

 

[Mike Brown]

I agree with the comment above about this thread being nauseating.
If I was new to the concept of ultra racing, this thread would make me run away screaming like a scared 3 year old. 
It's also totally turns off a pretty damn experienced  person like me who was thinking about trying one of the "big ones" (AZT 300) next year but has no desire to have my ride soured by this kind of rubbish.   When did NORBA become re-incarnated and involved?
I'll enjoy my touring attitude instead. 

[Chad B]

It's also totally turns off a pretty damn experienced  person like me who was thinking about trying one of the "big ones" (AZT 300) next year but has no desire to have my ride soured by this kind of rubbish.

I guarantee there is a level of racing an endurance race that cannot be seen even in touring. Pushing the limit, extreme camaraderie from the beginning of the race w/ people you have never met, seeing the sunset/sunrise, etc. If you forgo doing a race like this in light of anything said in this thread, you will be missing out. I have abstained from these conversations like you, but that has not distanced me from the love of both touring and racing ultra-races. I encourage you to continue on your course, in light of the thread, knowing that other riders are trying to guarantee an equal race for everyone.

[Marshal]

 1  

[Marshal]

Some heartfelt comments to all current and future self supported racers who have plowed through this thread --------

Each rule set is always going to have a Twix vs Hanger or Parking Lot vs 40 mile example. And as I have stated before, the event organizer gets the final say in clarifying these matters. 

Personally I think Twix’s and Parking lots should be generously granted by a organizer but Hangers and 40 miles should mean ‘relegated’ on the final result sheet.  I think making a call on Twix or Hanger has to be one of the most unpleasant things a organizer could do, especially if a personal friend is involved, but if this is never done then we just end up with long group rides, not races.

My apologies to any who are offended or nauseated by this thread.  It’s not the first contentious thread about rules, and I am sure it will not be the last one.  But after reading some of the widely varying opinions from racers with as much or more self supported experience than myself I would ask each of you; do we as a community want to hash out and work towards a commonly agreed upon rule set or was the OP correct with his original question/contention:


"So, here's the question: Are the rules actually rules, or are they simply guidelines? Or perhaps it's really up to each rider to decide--which seems to be the unwritten reality?”

Ok, I am off to ride, maybe I will break my ankle

[ScottM]

I guarantee there is a level of racing an endurance race that cannot be seen even in touring. Pushing the limit, extreme camaraderie from the beginning of the race w/ people you have never met, seeing the sunset/sunrise, etc. If you forgo doing a race like this in light of anything said in this thread, you will be missing out. I have abstained from these conversations like you, but that has not distanced me from the love of both touring and racing ultra-races. I encourage you to continue on your course, in light of the thread, knowing that other riders are trying to guarantee an equal race for everyone.

It's about time this thread has some words of wisdom from Chadalicious. 

DWJ - thanks for the comments.  We're not perfect and this is not the perfect conversation.  But I think it's the best public one we've had to date.  Realize that some of us may be a little more invested in this stuff than others, esp. those that organize races.  I don't think there's anything wrong with putting a lot of thought into it.

I do agree that nit picking actual wording on rules (written by someone who is not present) for an event that has already occurred lacks tact and doesn't serve the conversation.

As for us all riding, the esteemed DaveH is just now starting an ITT of the Coconino Loop.  His priorities are straight. 

[Done]

Yeah, this hasn't always been the most pleasant thread. Obviously these are important issues, otherwise there wouldn't have been such passion. But I think that it's been a useful discussion. I expect that future races will have clearer rules, and newbies will have a better understanding of expectations. A couple of the tangents also seem important, as they addressed future considerations such as Spot tracking--and being proactive will prevent future misunderstandings and pain.

Despite the beatings that I took, and the one or two that I returned, I'm truly excited to join this group for real next year. Sharing some tracks and stories will smooth out the kinks.

Cheers,
Toby

I love this icon:

[Pivvay]

I agree arguing about rules is boring to most but it is important to some of us. In the past races have been small, issues few and the rules sufficient. I think the passion that some of us debate/argue with is only to try to preserve the same pretty seamless rules we've had up until this point in large fields that more recent races have drawn.

So basically, if this is unappealing conversation I understand if you all don't jump in. But don't take the debate as mean spirited, it's just some passionate people trying to keep future events with a level playing field and still keep them fun with as few rules as possible.