The Spirit of the Tour Divide

[Done]

The silly ride is pointless, but how you act on the ride is of the utmost importance.

That's a nice summary!

I think if folks want to see accurate results lists that are meticulously maintained, we need to form some sort of sanctioning group.  Otherwise, we should be content with the ship we set sail on and have fun with the crew because it's an unknown for everyone. 

That might be necessary for 100% compliance. But I really hate the idea of a sanctioning group. I'd rather encourage a culture of tribal pressure that squeezes the weenies into, well, not being weenies!

[worntreads]

Ok, whose on the sanctioning committee? I've got jars of piss and they need to be shipped somewhere pronto!

[tanadog]

As a stalker who likes to see a fair game....

If you sign up to be tracked by trackleaders, aren't you accepting a service from them in relation to the race? They are tracking a race, not just a route (like the GDMBR tracker). If the service points out where you have "alternated" from the route as part of the service AND you knew this before you started (which was not the case in 2014) surely there would be little room for discontent? Other issues like outside help etc are more problematic.....

[trebor]

Marshal is a wise man. 

[Christopher R. Bennett]

Hi All,

Volume 6 of the Cordillera is now available for purchase from Lulu.com.

http://tinyurl.com/cordillera6

There is over 300 pages of stories from the 2014 TDR.

Thanks to all the contributors as well as David Phillps and Megan Dunn for helping with the proof reading. I'll try and have it up on Amazon Kindle next week.

Hope you enjoy.

[Done]

Volume 6 of the Cordillera is now available for purchase from Lulu.com.

http://tinyurl.com/cordillera6

Well done! A work of passion that benefits a wonderful little girl who lost her father far too soon. Thank you!

[dp]

Hi All,

Volume 6 of the Cordillera is now available for purchase from Lulu.com.

http://tinyurl.com/cordillera6

There is over 300 pages of stories from the 2014 TDR.

Thanks to all the contributors as well as David Phillps and Megan Dunn for helping with the proof reading. I'll try and have it up on Amazon Kindle next week.

Hope you enjoy.

It was a pleasure and an honor to proof the manuscript.  There is some truly great stuff in this year's Cordillera.

-dp

[Christopher R. Bennett]

Kindle Version is now available at:  http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00OZ47MEE

Amazon has a nasty pricing model so even at $30 only some $10 goes to Linaea's college fund vs $16 for the $27.50 paperback book from Lulu. So please buy the Lulu version if possible.

[JeffM-VT]

When Chris sent an e-mail soliciting additional names to attach to the forward I responded like so -

Hi Chris…  I’m struggling with this a little bit. 

As others have mentioned – I have the utmost respect for your efforts to put out the Cordillera (along with respect for your dedication to bikepacking, your riding ability, etc.) and empathy for the position that you’ve been put in this year.   And I agree that an afterword is a great idea to help remind everyone of what the “spirit” of the Tour Divide was meant to be.

However - I’m not sure I feel comfortable putting my name to the afterword based (mainly) on my opinion that the rule for “competitive time” should be stricken (I hated the forum discussions on this in 2013).  And I completely disagree with putting ‘Relegated’ next to someone’s name that fell outside this time as this could happen for any number of reasons (age, medical condition, mechanical problems during the race, health issues during the race, weather issues, etc.).

And I don’t think that we can neatly put all riders into 2 distinct groups.   I think it should more likely be described as a spectrum and everyone in that spectrum deserves equal respect.  Though I agree that the “spirit” of the Tour Divide is that it is a race and the website (and other Tour Divide literature) should be “encouraging” those wanting to race to show up.  However - if someone shows up that is only capable of doing the ride in say 35+ days that should be okay.  He/she should not be considered to be any different in TrackLeaders, in any listing of results, etc.  In my opinion..

I was drawn to this “sport” by the unique combination of adventure and competition and also the simplicity of it.  Just show up at the start line and get yourself to the finish line under your own power without support.  I do see the need for some rules but have always felt they should be as simple as possible (ride/walk every inch of the route, no support, no drafting, etc.).  Though I know that I’m likely being a bit naïve…

And I saw e-mails from at least 5 others who also didn't want their names included in the afterword.  Several voiced very strong opinions against the afterword.

In my opinion the afterword should have never have been published as written (and I'm totally disappointed that it was).  There should not be a self appointed few interpreting arbitrary rules on "competitive times" and relegation and putting racers/riders into categories.  That is not what the "Spirit of the Tour Divide" is about.  In my opinion... 

[Done]

There should not be a self appointed few interpreting arbitrary rules on "competitive times" and relegation and putting racers/riders into categories.

Do you truly believe the rules are arbitrary? Seems to me that Matthew Lee did a solid job of defining them, and this includes different "categories" of finishers (competitive, relegated, disqualified).

When I eventually find time to compete in the TD, I doubt that I'll be able to deliver a "competitive" time compared to the winners. I'll be too damn old! While that doesn't mean that I won't give the race my absolute best competitive effort, I will accept the result--even if that means that I don't finish with a "competitive" time.

I think that people need to suck it up a little and realize that not everyone deserves a blue ribbon and a T-shirt for every race that they enter. No, we're not "all equal"--which is why it's a race. Both times that I finished the CTR, I didn't even remotely consider that my accomplishment was on the same level as the winners. By comparison, I was pathetically slow. But I was faster than those behind me (and more successful than those who quit or cheated)--which was extremely satisfying. Those who won were hopefully even more satisfied!

[dream4est]

The quote from the rules:


"There is no finish time cut-off, however, current convention considers a competitive Divide Route finish time as approximately 1.5 times (x) course records. Currently this = 25days (~110 mi/day) for men, and 29.5 days (93 mi/day) for women. "

Where does it say one is relegated for finishing outside the competitive window? I dont see it. I see the quote above. I raced on that premise. I finished in 27 days and change in a year where the first 6 days sucked worse than anthying one could imagine.

I totally disagree with Chris if this is what is happening. No where in the TD rules do it say relegation for a 25 day plus time. I finished that damn race and beat nearly a 100 people and my time was competetive for the year and the circumstance.

Screw Y'all.



I finished a triple crown. I am a very competetive person. I think this thread is total bullshit and the spirit of the divide is a farce.



This lame bullshit is becoming a waste of my time. No results are published officially for this race since like 2010, and we leave it to a book writer to determine the list and who is relegated? Baloney. I feel completely disrespected.

Anyone out there who thinks they could have finished in under 25 days in 2014 bring it on in 2015. I will be there to race you.


Edit- I removed my 2 lines about cheating or attacking the book  or who wrote it. Maybe thats a little too much. Sorry.

[JeffM-VT]

Toby - saying that a "competitive time" is 25/29.5 days (or 1.55 X the winning time) seems pretty arbitrary to me.  Nothing like that is done in the Boston Marathon, Ironman triathlons, etc.  As was pointed out in one e-mail that I read - using the 1.55 rule, even Chris Bennett's time would have been relegated in 2013.

I'm not saying that everyone is equal - just that everyone deserves equal respect (at least with how they are represented in Trackleaders, in finish results, etc.) as long as they have ridden the entire course and not blatantly broken any rules such as drafting much of the way.

Speaking of rules - it's funny to me that we're not allowed to even share a piece of candy with another rider yet it is okay to pair up (or group up).  To me this is the biggest advantage any rider can get - getting the psychological advantage of riding with others for days or even weeks on end.  Knowing that if you crash, your GPS craps out, your bike falls apart (or whatever) you're not alone.  Not to mention the advantage of the camaraderie that helps the hours go by and keeps you from missing home.  Partly why I consider true ITT's to be much more difficult than Grand Departs.  I have more respect for someone that borrowed a bike pump or asked for directions (but rode solo most of the way) than those who rode in pairs or groups much/most of the way.  

There will always be differences of opinion on what the rules should be.  And I respect that.  I just felt strongly that the afterword should have not been included as written.  I met many Tour Divide riders who I have tremendous respect for who never post in bikepacking.net (or on Facebook) and I've often wondered what their opinion would be on topics such as this.

  

[dream4est]

Ultra racing need a race organization pronto. This way is not working IMO.

How come all of us were not in the email loop regarding this (TD 14 Racers?)
I never saw any draft?
Lame

[Christopher R. Bennett]

Ultra racing need a race organization pronto. This way is not working IMO.

How come all of us were not in the email loop regarding this (TD 14 Racers?)
I never saw any draft?
Lame

Hi,

The background to the draft is that in preparing the Cordillera I sent out queries on finishers times and received a number of, shall we say, strident e-mails back saying that some persons didn't race according the rules and should be relegated - or at least have that against their names - and others (sometimes the same) insisting that they should be included. Suffice to say that some of them were very nasty. I subsequently saw such tones on some of the bikepacking.net posts around 2015.

This sat very heavily with me so I worked on what would become the afterword, in many respects to try and clarify my thoughts (and emotions) on the matter. I shared this for comment with a few people who proposed improvements and said that they strongly supported it. On suggestion, I sent to a number of others who have contributed to the Cordillera in the past or have a high profile asking if they would like to put their names against it as an afterword in the Cordillera. About 80% said yes and those are the ones listed in the book.

There were a number of changes to it over time, in particular removing the bit about publishing the finish times and using this bikepacking.net forum to continue the discussion.

[mtnbound]

With respect to what is a "competitive time" for the Tour Divide according to the rules on the website, it is 1.5 X the current record.  Out of curiosity, what is the current records for men and women?  Bikepacking.net shows for the Great Divide (I think this is the same as the Tour Divide for this purpose but could be wrong), it is 15:16:04 for the men (Jay Petervary - 2012) which would mean a "competitive time" would be approx. 23.5 days for the men.  For the women, Eszter posted a time of 19:03:35 in 2012, which would mean a "competitive time" of 28.7 days (approx. 28 days and 17 hrs).

While I haven't taken a hard look at the Rules, I agree with Mark that it doesn't say that one should be relegated for not finishing within the "competitive time", particularly since it expressly states there is no "cutoff time".  The only time the Rules reference "relegation" is for violating the Rules.  Applying general rules of construction, one should construe a rule to be consistent and not contradictory.  To construe the Rule such that not finishing with a "competitive time" means relegation or violating the Rules is inconsistent and contradictory to the "one guiding principle" which is to "Cycle the GDMBR end-to-end, as fast as possible in a solo, self-supported fashion." (emphasis added) and to the statement in Item 3 "There is no finish time cut-off". 

Finally, under the heading "Relegation", it states "Tour Divide reserves the right to relegate a rider from the TD General Classification (GC) for confirmed rules violations."  Taken all together, to read Item 3 regarding "competitive time" to mean that not being within a "competitive time" is a "rule violation" that requires "relegation" is inconsistent and even contrary to the "one guiding Principle" to ride to the end as fast as possible and that there is no cutoff time.  It appears that "competitive time" was inserted just to have some type of guideline, but not make it a rule such that violation results in relegation. Anyway, just my opinion.

[dream4est]

Sorry if I came off harsh, but I dont like whats going on and it makes me angry.


edit- Not mad at Chris- just the whole process sickens me.

[Done]

To clarify: I don't think that relegation and a "non-competitive" finish are at all the same. There's no establish precedent or anything in the official TD rules that seems to suggest that they are. But the rules do seem to define three types of finishes: competitive, relegated, and disqualified. As for what the Cordillera included, I don't know since I haven't bought the book yet.

Jeff: Many of the races that you referenced have cut-off times or qualifying events. While I don't know ML's true intent when he added the "competitive" distinction, I suspect that it is about keeping the "race" in the race--much as the other events that you mention do.

Whether every finisher deserves "equal respect" is debatable. Personally, I don't feel that way. I respect all sorts of finishers and racers, depending on speed and style--but I don't consider them to be equal. A guy like Mark C., who finishes the triple crown has earned whole lot more of my personal respect for his accomplishment than someone who rode faster but bent the rules. But personal opinions aside, the RACE is about elevating those who finish more quickly (while following the rules) above those who finish more slowly. Which is why I wouldn't mind being excluded from a "competitive" category if I'm WAY behind the winners. Not relegated though, since that has historically been limited to racers who unwittingly break rules.

Unfortunately, the whole "rules" issue seems to be more contentious than ever these days, especially for the TD. I suspect that the largest contributing factor is that ML hasn't posted results or publicly enforced rules for a number of years. This has led to a growing number of looser interpretations and in-ride tensions. I don't know if we need an "organizational body" for the sport, but I think that an engaged organizer would keep things a little steadier and level, more like the earlier days of the TD.

[dream4est]

Since this is one class racing, there is no competitive category. It makes no sense whatsoever. Pro riders with money backing will destroy me every time. If someone cheated to beat them you all would freak out. But for 25th place? No biggie you people are not competitive! In a race with no categories against sponsored actual racers. I would say finishing even dead last in one class racing is tough.

I noticed that results posted in others places (bikepacking magazine?) did not mention anything more than name and time off the spots. Thats fair and what should have happened here since the TD doesnt post official results.

[dream4est]

Using this type of thinking, my 11 day and change AZT750 result sucks too? Its over 1.55X the record. How many people could actually be competitive in the 750 then? I think my time is like 13th fastest in race history.

Or CTR. 6day and change sucks now? Even though it nearly got the podium this year? Huh?

[mtnbound]

Toby, I believe you are right that "relegation" and "non-competitive" are not the same.  However, I don't believe there are three classes.  The Rules only state that you are either General Classification (GC) or relegated.  The Rules state "Any determined cyclist may challenge the Great Divide Route at any time, in either direction, to qualify for the Tour Divide (TD) General Classification (GC)", which is the Rule that creates the classification of GC.  

The Rules also defined relegation: "Relegation: Tour Divide reserves the right to relegate a rider from the TD General Classification (GC) for confirmed rules violations."  There is no Rule on "disqualification", though the Rules do state "Note: If a racer voluntarily scratches from the GC mid-race, yet continues on to finish the GDMBR, their individual tracking page will remain online/updated for informational purposes, however, they will be removed from the group (GC) tracking map." (emphasis added).  Thus, you are either GC or relegated from GC for a rule violation (not disqualified, though the Rules use the term "scratched" when appearing to referring to when one is being relegated).    

Unfortunately, the Rules create confusion with just one sentence "There is no finish time cut-off, however, current convention considers a competitive Divide Route finish time as approximately 1.5 times (x) course records."  There probably is room for interpretation about what this sentence means without ML (or someone else taking over for him) providing guidance on this sentence.  However, since there is just GC or relegation under the Rules, and to be consistent with the rest of the Rule (as I previously outlined above), it seems within the classification of GC, one can be "considered" to be "competitive" based on course record X 1.5.  However, this does not change that a finisher that follows the rules, no matter how "slow", is still a GC finisher if they go "as fast as possible" (per the "one guiding principle" and that Rule that there is no "cutoff time").  The Rules seem pretty clear that one is racing if they are going "as fast as possible" under the guiding principle.

Also, while I may be parsing the Rule, when it states "current convention considers a competitive Great Divide finish time. . .", it uses the term "considers" which I take as a guideline but not a rule or different classification.  Anyway, just my thoughts.