The Spirit of the Tour Divide

[richpips]

I'm not "into the rules."

Many of your postings on here, and a post on your blog suggest otherwise.

It is true that external enforcement of the rules is problematic at best.

That's the truth. Hence my earlier saying that being concerned with what others may of may not do is ultimately futile.

Internal enforcement requires that people fully buy into the ethics that built this sport.

Peoples ethics vary. It's very easy to point the finger sat at a computer screen.

There's a guy who walked across Australia shunning roads, Jon Muir, he carried everything (including food for his dog) and killed/harvested the rest of his food on the way. Maybe we need to take it to that level? No more shops, staying in hotels etc. That's unsupported.

The sport has evolved, and will continue to do so.

I'll leave it there. I've a race in January to train for.

Maybe see you in Banff 2nd weekend in June 2016. We'll be on a tandem looking to break a record. I'll check back in on the rules. 

[alanbossert]

I did the 'Tour Divided' in 2014. Grand depart in Banff, No Spot, skipped Richmond peak, rode most of the time with another racer (but never drafted because I HATE drafting), met my wife in Kremling, Took a soda off a camping family above the Pulvadera Mesa, etc...etc... But NEVER claimed I was 'racing'.

I have an idea...how about less rules period? The things I mention above actually slowed me down. Meeting my wife took 1/2 a day away from me. Riding with another racer messes with your schedule. Many nights I stopped early because my riding partner wanted to and I didn't want to ride alone. Begging people for food or soda also takes time away from riding. If you're that cheap and bad at resupplying then chances are you aren't in the front of the pack anyway. Can you picture someone knocking on a door and saying: "I spent all my cash on this titanium frame, got any Doritos?"

Keep the important rules: "Do the EXACT route, do it yourself and use a Spot to prove it."

I realize I don't have much footing to dive into this discussion based on all the rules I broke, but maybe it's time to examine just how much advantage one gains from some of these 'minor things'. Can't be more than the advantage of say a super-light carbon bike over a steel bike. We aren't policing these types of things. Maybe Rohloff hubs should be outlawed because they create an un-fair advantage. Think about that!

[Iowagriz]

Following along with all of the comments in this thread and remembering comments from past years race thread. I just don't see the controversy. If you sign up for the "race"; and want credit in the book, on a web page or respect from others that follow this niche sport, then you ride the same route (to me this seems to be the biggest controversy and advantage). The premise of a race in any sport is that we are competing on a set course or route. All other rules can be debated, but this cannot and should not be.

Starting with the Grand Depart and not planning on doing the exact route? Then you are not part of the race, but doing the route (which in itself is pretty damn cool!).

[AzTa]

All I got to say is until you do the race (Toby) shut the fuck up. You'll ruin it for everyone! Its more than u can comprehend!

[Done]

All I got to say is until you do the race (Toby) shut the fuck up. You'll ruin it for everyone! Its more than u can comprehend!

Way to elevate the conversation?

No, I haven't done the TD yet. But I have raced the CTR three times, and Kokopelli's twice. But it really doesn't matter what I've ridden, does it? When I find the time to line up for the TD, I am looking forward to racing it in good style--which includes, but isn't limited to, not telling other people to "shut the fuck up."

I really hate the way these discussions are often reduced to personal attacks, name-calling, etc. Aren't we better than that?!?

[AzTa]

NOPE!

[JRA]

All I got to say is until you do the race (Toby) shut the fuck up. You'll ruin it for everyone! Its more than u can comprehend!

Wow!
5 posts and he's already telling people to STFU.  Real class.

[AzTa]

Whatever I'm a douche because I don't reply much on here. But the fact is people that haven't done much other than a couple of ctrs and kokos shouldn't be making rules. The majority of the people that race aren't going to win. Instead of making a rule book people need to honor the RACE! Don't be an
ASS ride with honor !  AZT CTR Tour divide!  That's the problem. Honor is lost! I'm a middle aged douch bag that loves to race ultras.  Whether I strart with you or do an ITT i m doing it clean. I don't need bike packing.net to tell me I'm a bad ass I don't care. I ride to ride I follow the course they set I follow the rules. Problem is need people to take resposiblity for their actions! Rules or not people will find a short cut. If we continue with the rule books we will end up like a bunch of triathletes measuring our penisis . I love the grass roots feel.Add rule books and I'll and many others will find better things to do.

[JRA]

Lighten up Francis.

[AzTa]

Sorry I get carried away!

[JRA]

Sorry I get carried away!

There are plenty of good people here, including Toby.  No need to go nuclear.

[davew]

All I got to say is until you do the race (Toby) shut the fuck up. You'll ruin it for everyone! Its more than u can comprehend!

Whatever I'm a douche because I don't reply much on here. But the fact is people that haven't done much other than a couple of ctrs and kokos shouldn't be making rules. The majority of the people that race aren't going to win. Instead of making a rule book people need to honor the RACE! Don't be an
ASS ride with honor !  AZT CTR Tour divide!  That's the problem. Honor is lost! I'm a middle aged douch bag that loves to race ultras.  Whether I strart with you or do an ITT i m doing it clean. I don't need bike packing.net to tell me I'm a bad ass I don't care. I ride to ride I follow the course they set I follow the rules. Problem is need people to take resposiblity for their actions! Rules or not people will find a short cut. If we continue with the rule books we will end up like a bunch of triathletes measuring our penisis . I love the grass roots feel.Add rule books and I'll and many others will find better things to do.

Possibly there was a more eloquent manner in which these passionate messages could have been conveyed but it does highlight how personal and real this discussion is to those who enjoy these events. The sentiment was definitely evident and some valid points expressed.

Toby, the poor lad, is getting a lot of flak for his opinions but that is all they are, his opinions. His posts are passionate and may come across a little dictatorial/authoritarian and at times offer ill conceived arguments that are as appealing as snot on a chocolate eclair (my opinion) but its still food for thought whether your agree with him or not. It seems Toby sparks a little more life in some of us with his posts.

My opinion on the topic, for what it's worth, adding more rules to an already comprehensive rule set for the style of race (edited: where the style, or type, of race is self supported bike packing) they are to govern is akin to shitting beside the toilet. It makes other toilet users angry and people start to avoid that toilet.

Is it also possible that the focus here seems to be on behavioural modification on a small number of people while the rest/majority of us are out there doing our best? Statistics suggest these people will always be in our midst and it's a futile exercise writing rules for those who are not subscribing to them.

Lower your expectations, not your standards.

[mountainjah]

In re: to the topic of bending/breaking/shaking the rules, I can only be in charge of myself, but I'll be happy to purchase and read the next edition of the Cord. because this is a great race, with great people involved.

The bummer for me, is that seeing people take inappropriate way out of things, is that it pops me out of the strange, imagined world I've put myself in while racing. It's enough trouble when times are low to know that there's an easy way to get back home, or whatever. I need to focus, and that's hard when morale is lowered. I wanna focus on there being only one way to get back home.

Perhaps a Grand Fondo cat is in order: you're still going for a speed run, but rules are flexible. Friendly Class. Make it not a negative thing. Things happen on route and it's a way to honestly save face, keep enjoying yourself. Yeah OK: you needed someone to hand-deliver that part to you. For you, clock stops - there's no official finish time for you (or just like in above, a time is recorded as when you ended the ride), you take the part and you're now in Friendly Class, having the time of your life.

No matter about those 10 people that passed you, that's a whole difference race they're racing (as you're racing something else!) . People do this already, they just call it, "Touring it out". If I'm still racing, and I come across some dude that looks well rested or whatever my morale doesn't go down because they're like, "hey, not racing the Race, anymore, just in Friendly Class!). Oh! Sweet, carry on, my compadre.

I think that's a def. improvement of relegated yourself and thinking you need to stop cold. Pressures off to think you need to conceal your infraction and hey, there's a groupetto just ahead filled with people who needed to do similar things like I did. Time to get a motel room or two and commiserate, before banging this thing out! And hey, all our dots have turned into smiley faces! Guess that's an easy way to know I'm out of the race, but not out of the ride.

Just an idea, and not one that needs to be added to the already enormous rulebook. Just another way of stating, "Say what you did, and how you did it". The rules are just a shorthand way of saying, "this is how I did it" and it makes it easy for us to compare times.

Six pages deep, Justin's suggestion still seems the best solution to me. Everyone starts with the rigid Do It Yourself mentality but when things change, you declare a friendly and enjoy the ride. If folks continue to claim self-support after they violate the rules, then it's on them, not the tribe. My experience has been that these folks will not be around long...Ethics are what you do when no one's looking. It bothers me not that folks want to deceive themselves. Sounds like a crappy way to live.

[mountainjah]

Whatever I'm a douche because I don't reply much on here. But the fact is people that haven't done much other than a couple of ctrs and kokos shouldn't be making rules. The majority of the people that race aren't going to win. Instead of making a rule book people need to honor the RACE! Don't be an
ASS ride with honor !  AZT CTR Tour divide!  That's the problem. Honor is lost! I'm a middle aged douch bag that loves to race ultras.  Whether I strart with you or do an ITT i m doing it clean. I don't need bike packing.net to tell me I'm a bad ass I don't care. I ride to ride I follow the course they set I follow the rules. Problem is need people to take resposiblity for their actions! Rules or not people will find a short cut. If we continue with the rule books we will end up like a bunch of triathletes measuring our penisis . I love the grass roots feel.Add rule books and I'll and many others will find better things to do.

It's funny because your stance appears to be aligned with Toby for the most part....However, there is very little sugar in your pronouncements.

[Done]

In summary, here are the NEW rules for the TD (as loosely taken from ideas and anecdotes noted in this thread):

1. Skipping a section  of the route is OK if it was an honest mistake.
2. Not being aware of the all of rules makes following then optional.
3. It's OK to beg for food from non-commercial establishments if you're really hungry.
4. It's OK to draft if you have an injury.
5. Visits by outsiders are OK, if they doesn't make you faster.
6. Bumming supplies from other racers is fine if you came unprepared.
7. Anything reasonable is acceptable unless it gives the racer an advantage.
8. Nothing really matters in 100 years, so who cares anyway.
9. Don't race the TD if you want official results.
10. Those who don't finish with "competitive" times should be relegated.
11 "Competitive times" are arbitrary, and the distinction should be removed.
12. Cut-off times should be added
13. Results should be published
14. Results should not be published
15. Racers should be pre-qualified
16. It's just a ride. Do do whatever feels good.
11. Riding in groups is fine. Or not. Whatever.
12. Just ride your bike.
13. Start a new category, where all rules are optional
14. Add a governing body or sanctioning committee to arbitrate the rules
15. the rule for “competitive times” should be stricken
16. Non-official results shouldn't be published
17. Anyone can post unofficial results
18. All results are unofficial
19. Someone needs to be in charge of the rules and race
20. It's your race. Do it the way you want to do it.
21. Rules are dangerous and will kill somebody, so make the rules optional
22. Codify a way of allowing people not to follow the rules to the letter
23. Racers should provide a complete GPX of the route
24. Add an "age" category
25. Replace the asterisk symbol with something more palatable
26. Only those who are going to a win need to prove 100% compliance with the rules and route
27. You can only tell people to STFU if you have posted X number of times.

[JeffM-VT]

Taking the suggestions made earlier, perhaps a solution is change it so the "Tour Divide" is for those wishing to ride/race and change the rules slightly so it allows for the 90% adherence and/or issues that don't affect (in the long run) standings/their race (including misunderstandings of the rules) so that those finishers still raced the "Tour Divide".  Then those wishing to strictly adhere to the rules, must expressly opt for it (with a different name - "Tour Divide Race"?? - or different category) in advance of the start. 

It seems like most riders are doing it for the experience (including the group experience) and to ride as hard as possible and have made a huge sacrifice just to line up (tremendous amount of time training, taking a month off of work and away from family, traveling long distance just to get to the start, etc.) and likely don't want to feel or be seen as being "downgraded", even though they may face minor rule bending after being in the saddle for weeks. Thus, the main category of riders will remain the same with a slight modification to the rules to adjust to this reality (but still have relegation for major/blatant cheating (however that is defined) so the "spirit" is essentially unchanged).  However, those wishing to go for the win or want strict rule adherence will have to expressly opt for it (perhaps they should swear an oath to "Do.It.Yourself" )   Anyway, just a thought on this cold, snowy day!

I personally like this idea (the idea of 2 separate races wasn't doing it for me).  Where most would be in a category where they would still be following the rules but recognize that anything could happen over 2,700+ miles including the bending of rules (and that they would not be relegated for minor rule bending).  Then there would be a category for those with an elevated status which would have to be requested when signing up on Trackleaders.  To get this elevated status the requestor would need to have an appropriate racing resume and would need to agree to abide by the strict definition of the rules.  And would need to agree that they could be removed from this elevated status at the discretion of the race organizers.

Maybe different dot colors for each of the 2 categories and possibly a 3rd color for those who break major rules and are relegated.  Or maybe no need for different colors if this would get too confusing.

If/when results ever get published again - maybe one would need to be in the elevated status to be listed as a top 10 finisher.  But if a person finished in the top 10 but was not in the elevated group, maybe they could be moved to that group post race by stating their case for having run a clean (with high standards) race.

Good luck with that. Every time someone suggests a rule change (to either tighten or loosen the format), everyone freaks out. What defines "major cheating" for one person is another person's idea of "Do what feels good." Which is what really brought us here in the first place, right?

Seems to me that the "Tour Divided" should defined as a race where people ride most the route, from Banff to Antelope Wells, in whatever style suits them. Need to skip a wet section because it's too muddy? Go for it. Need to beg some food from a residence along the way? Go for it. Need to draft another racer because your knee hurts? No problem. Accidentally miss a section of the route? No worries, just get back on track as soon as you can. That seems to be what a lot of people have been arguing for, so why not make it happen?

In other words, make a race without rules. Just a suggested route & start date, and a bunch of like-minded people out doing their own thing together.

I really don't like this portrayal of a possible 2nd race.  This and other similar posts seem to paint a picture of a race for the ethical and a separate race for the non-ethical or outright cheaters.  I believe that most of us see the need for certain rules (if you're looking to be part of the race) but as Scott indicated, the current rules were "designed with highly competitive racers in mind".

I never wanted to be one of those folks (either in these forums or in Facebook groups) that was always posting about their exploits.  What I call a "look at me!" mentality.  But am starting to feel that I need to mention a little more about my TD background to help explain my positions.

I could probably have been the poster child for the "mid pack" racer in 2013.  Finishing 48th (out of 143 starters - 83 finishers - if I'm remembering correctly) in a time of 23 days and 17 hours.  And I was perfectly happy with that.  The most important goal was to finish (due to the fundraising that I was doing) but a secondary goal was to finish in 23 days.  I'm sure that I spent a fraction of the time preparing (on and off the bike) as most others that raced so it was probably the best that I could have hoped for.  It was exactly the experience that I was looking for and I thought all the other racers were incredible people and the camaraderie on the course was great.  As far as I could tell - they were all there for the right reasons and all had outstanding character.  Thus absolutely no complaints...  I wouldn't have changed a thing about the 2013 race.

Thus my opinions against some of the rules and the wording of the Afterword are not self serving.  Some things just seemed wrong to me.  The "competitive time" rule was a big one (how can we arbitrarily tell someone that they are competitive and somewhat that is a day behind them that they are not competitive?).  And I never liked the categorizing of riders into separate groups - like those riding ethically vs. those willing to break rules, those racing vs. those just riding the course, etc.  It seems that it is a spectrum of riders and that we can't look at things in such a black and white manner.  Relegating someone after they've made such a huge commitment to do the race can not be done lightly.  Especially if the relegation is made based on rules that some/many might consider to be outdated or too stringent for most racers.

So again - I like the idea that mtnbound has proposed above.  But maybe it is about time for this discussion to end (I know that I've gotten tired of it)  and maybe Matthew Lee and Scott Morris should review all this feedback and decide what (if any) changes should be made.

One last opinion - I don't see a need for age groups.  I'm in the over 50 crowd and feel that I've been competitive with younger racers.  At least in the shorter races and I hope to return to the TD and be more competitive in that race soon.  Look at what Blake Bochus has done out west...

And kudos to the job that Chris has done with the Cordillera.  I was an outspoken opponent to the Afterword but after reading all the posts and e-mails related to the topic I now better understand why he thought it was important to include it.  And think that something good might come out of this.

I would have liked to have seen more from the 24 that endorsed the Afterword (why did they endorse and what do they see as possible solutions?).  I know that Toby and Justin offered their opinions but I didn't notice that opinions were coming from any of the other endorsers (though hard to tell based on the handles used by forum posters).

[Done]

Relegating someone after they've made such a huge commitment to do the race can not be done lightly.  Especially if the relegation is made based on rules that some/many might consider to be outdated or too stringent for most racers.

That approach is pretty much at the crux of my entire position regarding ultra-racing rules. I think that a lot people believe that they are racing fairly, but also maintain that they are free to deviate when they find rules that "some/many might consider to be outdated or too stringent..."

Racing does seem pretty black and white to me. You either adhere to the rules and ethics of the event, or you don't. There's a massive amount of freedom within the structure and rule-set to make a personally meaningful and individual experience. I just don't understand why people feel entitled to cut corners when racing against people who aren't.

I realize that my position isn't terribly popular with a lot of people here, which has resulted in some increasingly hostile and personal responses. There's not much more for me to say, so I'm moving along.

Cheers!

[mikepro]

I like the challenge of riding a bike along the full GDMBR from North to South, as fast as I can, under the current terms written and described in www.tourdivide.org.  The spirit of the "gentlemen's agreement" described on the website is very clear and easy to understand.  I like that it's hard, that snow levels fluctuate from year to year, that weather is variable, that it's long, that there are tons of logistics to figure out before during and after, that navigation and route-finding is involved, that suffering on some or all levels is involved, that it's a huge undertaking, that it attracts all manner of "challengers", that there's a suggested "competitive time", that there's a suggested "competitive time" for both sexes, that trackleaders.com is involved, and that I finished it in 2010 but without the Polvedera Mesa due to forest-fire reroute.  Actually, I love all these about the challenge.

I love that I have a signed Ride the Divide poster that I got from a fundraising event hosted by 2009 finisher Eric Bruntjen, that my wife framed for me and has been hanging on my wall since early 2011.  I love that my sister made me a framed "Tour Divide Battle Royale Certificate" for Christmas that same year; I'm sure it's one-of-a-kind.  I love that I have a now-worn-and-tattered-and-too-small-after-too-many-washings Ride the Divide t-shirt that's soon to be a rag in the garage.  I love that I reached out to the Cascade Cycling Club and got to speak and answer "what was it like" questions at a screening of the RtD movie at the REI flagship store in 2011 with my friend and fellow 2010 finisher Derek Richert and sold more copies of the then Cordillera vols I and II, at the same event, thereby raising more money for Linnea's fund.  I love that I raised over $5k during my 2010 race for my friend's sister's life-saving kidney transplant.  I love that it was one of the hardest things I've ever accomplished in my life.  I love that some of my pictures are still on the website along with others, under '10 Race Updates slide show.  I love that I do not consider my time from 2010 as 'official' due to the Polvedera reroute, and look forward to taking the challenge again.  I love that my wife supported me and let me take the challenge while caring for our at-the-time 2-year-old and 6-year-old kids.  I love that I was able to meet and share stories and perspectives with Alice Drobna here in Bend, OR, before and after her record women's single speed TD finish earlier this year.

I do not like the idea of changing the terms of the challenge spelled out on td.org, on the basis that some, or many, people might consider the terms out-dated, or confusing, or too hard, or whatever.  Don't like the terms before the start?  Then don't take the challenge.  Don't like the terms but still take the challenge?  Great, kudos to you ... just don't argue, whine, or justify in any way that the terms don't or didn't apply to you.  That's weak sauce, in my book.

I do like finishing times posted each year, and like the format of name, time, sex, rookie vs finisher, geared vs SS vs tandem vs fixie, and hope that some day soon the times from '11 to '14 are posted (or spreadsheets linked) to the website.  I like one GC classification, not age groups, but wouldn't mind ages shown next to names.  I like comparing myself to others near my age, and love seeing how many 50-yr-olds are faster.  Or, simply, how many people in age group entered, finished, didn't finish, etc..  I like that all finishing times are listed, not just ones within the suggested competitive time.  I can do the math, if I feel like disseminating the data it that fashion.  I like the section of 'relegated' for course deviation, using support, etc.  It's just another way of disseminating data for me, not a reflection of character.

[HughieP]

I think rum should be the spirit of the Tour Divide.  Bourbon is a bit old school and tequila is too clichéd these days. Rum also has a fine American revolutionary history. The Colonial Army and Navy ran on rations of rum.  George Washington famously ordered a double-ration of rum for his troops on second anniversary of the Declaration of Independence in 1778, and celebrated his first inauguration as President of the United States in 1789 with barrels of rum being offered to his guests.

Other than that, I agree with everything Mike said.

[Jilleo]

I also would echo the sentiments of Mikepro, with obvious differences in individual experiences. The parameters of a race do matter, as parameters are all there are to define a "race" versus "a really cool adventure." The current self-support paradigm has been well developed in the past ten years. It's more defined now than it was in 2009, and I appreciate all of those adaptations, too.

I like the idea Scott presented. Trackleaders has become the main documenter of the TD; for better or worse (worse because I'm sure they hear a lot of flack they don't deserve), many see it as sort of an administrator now. I didn't follow the 2014 race at all — I was completely offline during month of June — so I'm not sure how it was managed last year. But things like course deviations, self-relegation, etc., could be transferred to a sort of "adventure class" tracker, separate from the competitive tracker. If people don't know the rules, or intentionally cheat, well ... that happens always and it's no one's job to out these people, although course cutters were called out by other competitors even before Trackleaders got involved. Obviously if this is implemented, there will be complaints from those who feel they were unjustly relegated. It's unfortunate that someone has to make some kind of call about it, but as long as data is broadcasted, it will be scrutinized.

I also share the sentiment that a person does not need to be right at the front of the pack to be "competitive" in a race. Everyone is trying to do the best they can within shared parameters. Striving together.