Tour Divide and Technology (rules, lack of, and such)

[bmike-vt]

Don't want to gum up the TD 011 thread. Still lots of folks on course... can we bring it over here?

[DaveH]

Great idea, this one has the potential for a little expansion

I am not looking for more rules, maybe better communication with the GP, they don't read the TD rule page, (nor do some racers) but the weight shouldn't be thrown onto the racers shoulders, that's my opinion Jefe

Completely with Jefe on this one.  The place to educate the GP is where they get the info:  the trackers.  From a technology standpoint it's a simple addition.  

[muze]

Based on my reading of the rules, it sounded like outside visitation (including fan support) was prohibited. Thus, I was pretty surprised about all the visitation that I read about this year. It's definitely a double edged sword. If it were me, I would take comfort from the idea that people could find me...(just in case), but strangers in the middle of the night would be a bit freaky as well as distracting from the experience. I'll be interested in how this thread expands. Thanks!

[Done]

Did either of you (Jefe, Kurt) ever consider turning your SPOTs off to prevent the unintended visitors?  That's a tough one. 

For BlueDot, I am open to presenting a message to the user before rendering the map - something along the lines of what Joe is suggesting. 

Both of these are great ways of dealing with undesirable Spot stalking. Simple and logical.

But it gets more complicated when using Spots for verifying route compliance.

Since Spot data can be used to force a relegation or DQ for course deviations (whether a rider intended to deviate or just got confused), it does make for uneven application of the rules. For example, Rider A with a Spot misses a turn and gets back on track without realizing the error, and ends up disqualified. But Rider B, without a Spot, makes exactly the same error--and ends up ranking. The same scenario, but very unequal results. Awkward.

A third scenario is even more troubling. Rider C turns off his Spot, takes a car ride around a steep pass, and then claims that his Spot was off because he was tired of being tracked--and ends up ranking. Not cool.

It seems to me that all riders should be under the same burden to prove route compliance. There's really no other way to be fair. That means that all riders must always operate "live" Spots, or provide some other means of proof, such as GPS log data.

Or perhaps this is beyond the scope of ultra-racing, and people just need to recognize and accept that cheaters will sometimes get away with it, some honest mistakes will be noticed while some will not--and that that 95% of riders out there will race fairly and honorably.

[DaveH]

None of those scenarios are created by a rider selectively using a SPOT in stealth mode.  There is no requirement to use a SPOT, in fact, and IIRC there is at least one rider out there sans SPOT.

That said, I'm guessing that if fans knew the issues they could create for their favorite rider they would act differently, in a way consistent with that riders wishes.  If we had a way to inform the GP of those wishes my bet is there would be no need to go into stealth mode to avoid encounters.  They are out there because the riders inspire them - they wouldn't willingly do them any harm...they just don't know the boundaries.

[Done]

None of those scenarios are created by a rider selectively using a SPOT in stealth mode.  There is no requirement to use a SPOT, in fact, and IIRC there is at least one rider out there sans SPOT.

Agreed. There are really two issues here: the annoyance of Spot stalking, and the issue of using Spot data for enforce route compliance. I think that it's an important topic, as there have been a few instances where Spots have played a role in dealing with route deviations during major races. And whether someone is going into "stealth mode" to avoid stalkers or to cheat is likely going to become entwined in future races. Unfortunately, there are enough examples of people screwing up and/or cheating and/or bending the rules that it does at least raise the question: when a Spot is turned off, does it put that person at an unequal advantage of having their unintentional or intentional course deviations overlooked? I think that it does, which seems like it should be discussed...

[DaveH]

Well you are taking this thread into new pastures already...but SPOT stalking is more than an annoyance.  To hear Kurt's experience - he got a jolt of fear.  That is a major impact on the racer experience.  Bears, cougars, snow, scorpions, those things aren't so bad.  F'd up humans really suck and to think you've got some coming your way, well that's not cool at all (no matter how well intentioned in reality).  IMO it's simply and education issue and we have the means to educate.

The course compliance thing is whole 'nuther issue.  Since SPOTs are not mandatory, how can there be any rule against turning it off?

Ya can't stop a cheater from cheatin' and no amount of rules can change that.

[Georg66]

Based on my reading of the rules, it sounded like outside visitation (including fan support) was prohibited. Thus, I was pretty surprised about all the visitation that I read about this year.

The problem with this rule is that the rider him/herself can not be held responsible for been visited by whatever "fans". OK, he/she can deny any support, but not been visited ...

[Done]

Ya can't stop a cheater from cheatin' and no amount of rules can change that.

Not always true, Dave. There have been several instances of people being disqualified from major races for route deviations and rule infractions. In at least two high-profile instances, Spot data played a pivotal role in enforcing the rules...

Like it or not, the decision to carry a Spot, and when to turn it on and off, has the ability to change the outcome of a race--whether a racer is willfully cheating or simply making a route-finding error. Based on the subject of this thread, I think that it's a relevant discussion.

[DaveH]

You missed my point, which is essentially that if somebody wants cheat, they will find a way to cheat.

You simply can't have a rule that prohibits stealth mode if SPOTs are not required in the first place.  That's inconsistent.  Now, you could make SPOTs mandatory - but that opens whole nuther can o worms.  Since TD is not a business I don't ever see that happening.

Honestly, I have no interest in the above topics.  I've seen previous threads on the topic and they were quite emotional and inflamed.  No thanks.  For my events, there will never be mandatory SPOT use, and I simply trust folks, period.  There's never been an issue with that policy yet (lucky me) and until there is...

The item of interest here really is the SPOT stalking, for which there are rules, but the rider has no control over the actions of others.  I think we can improve this situation.  How best to do so?  I'll engage in that conversation.

[Jilleo]

Not always true, Dave. There have been several instances of people being disqualified from major races for route deviations and rule infractions. In at least two high-profile instances, Spot data played a pivotal role in enforcing the rules...

Like it or not, the decision to carry a Spot, and when to turn it on and off, has the ability to change the outcome of a race--whether a racer is willfully cheating or simply making a route-finding error. Based on the subject of this thread, I think that it's a relevant discussion.

I think this is a non-issue because SPOT use isn't compulsory and never should be. It is merely an interface between racers and spectators, not a rule watchdog. True, it has been used as such, but so has anecdotal evidence and witness reports, in the case of a Great Divide Racer who was outright disqualified, not relegated, for skipping parts of the course in 2008. But racers should be allowed to operate in "stealth mode" or avoid carrying a SPOT altogether if this is what they desire. Requiring SPOT tracking as a way to "keep the cheaters from cheating" is a bad precedent that won't work anyway.

However, I agree with Dave that spot stalking absolutely needs to be addressed somehow, especially for women on the course where there is already a fair amount of unease with the solo aspects of the race. It was already mentioned somewhere that Caroline decided to avoid riding through the reservation at night. I think it goes without saying that some will probably opt to not reveal where they camp at night by possibly turning off their SPOTs early. Others might not want to give up their positions for strategic reasons. There are a lot of reasons to go into stealth mode that have nothing to do with cheating.

Education is the best method. A simple reminder on the actual tracking pages (not the rules or discussion threads, which not everyone looks at) would suffice. You can't stop everyone but it will deter the well-intentioned fans, because it will help them think twice about how their actions effect those in the race.

[ScottM]

I like the idea of some guidelines/suggestions/stuff-to-think-about-before-stalking being added to the tracker and bluedot.  I think that's the place that makes the most sense.

I also agree with Dave that the interesting thing here is stalking etiquette.  Relegation and course compliance are based on many different sources, as Jill pointed out.  I don't think anyone has ever suggested SPOTs be mandatory for course compliance.  Besides the issues already mentioned, electronics also just simply fail sometimes.  There's no way to be sure you get a good SPOT track to verify your route.  But if you do, great!  You can use the individual page on trackleaders.com to show what you rode.

Now, what should a note about spot-stalking say?  I think Matthew will chime in and suggest that it is simply discouraged across the board.  I think I may have to agree with that.  I'd like to see some mention of the difference between stalking someone in town and out on the trail too.  And a reminder that these races are essentially concurrent ITT's, (emphasis on I) and that many racers do not want to be disturbed, especially out on the trail.

[DaveH]

I think the initial alert/notice needs to be quite brief.  If someone comes in expecting a map and gets a large chunk of text instead they might just go elsewhere.  Perhaps start out with the across the board stalking ban with something like "Please do not use this tracking tool to find and interact with riders currently racing", and then provide a link to a lot more - the whys, and the rules the riders are bound to, the implications/issues it causes the riders, in town vs. out of town etc.

Something along those lines anyway.  It doesn't need to be the same for bluedot and trackleaders - on the phone bd has a lot less room to work with. 

It's definitely an event specific thing - I'll put in whatever the event organizer would like.

More switches for the config file eh?

[Done]

One option is to just keep your Spot off of Trackleaders and Blue Dot. From a racer's perspective, the tracking sites don't really offer many benefits. Friends and family can track you just fine on your personal shared Spot page--and it can be used, along with your GPS track if you carry a GPS, if there's ever a question of whether you followed the route (or if anyone else deviated, which I helped determine in the 2010 CTR). Custom messages, OK's, 011, etc. still work just fine. You won't have to worry about super fans, crazies, or other racers knowing your location. Simple enough solution, and fully legal.

Sure, as a spectator I enjoy Trackleaders. But maybe satisfying the vicarious pleasures of spectators isn't really worth the trouble...

On a side note:
Discussions like this remind me that ultra racers are basically schizophrenic. On one hand, we rejoice in commercial exposure such as the "Ride the Divide" film--not to mention articles in glossy cycling magazines, published books, etc. But on the other hand, we love to believe that we're all participating in "unorganized" races, where all that truly matters is our personal experience on the trail. We love having fans cheer us on, but then we bitch about them when they act like fans. We preach the ethos and trust of "gentleman's agreements," eschew "big brother" verification tactics--but then we use all means available to enforce the rules. We argue about whether cell phones introduce too much technology to a wilderness experience, but then we embrace new smartphone apps that report the precise position of every rider at any given moment. We claim to be out there for own reasons and to define our own experiences, but then we argue about whether other riders are staying in hotels too often. We claim to dislike the spotlight and commercialization of "organized" races, but then we write blogs featuring the brands and products of our sponsors. We claim that the rules of our sport are simple, but then we argue about them for hundreds of pages. We claim to welcome newcomers, but then flee into the Good Old Boys club when newbies ask questions. Even when we're agreeing, we seem to be arguing--and when we're arguing, we're actually agreeing.

Well, nobody ever claimed that unopinionated conformists were good at this sport, right? On second thought, don't answer that question!

[rfutah]

This might be a good place to ask this question.  I will be starting my ITT from AW next week.  As I understand the rules:
"Abide by TD Rules, carry a SPOT GPS tracker or other brand of GPS logger/tracker, and finish in no more than twice the standing course record..."
I am planning on carrying, but would only like to activate 1-3 times a day for battery usage, since it is an emergency beacon as well.  Having had real stalkers at other times in life, I would prefer this from what I am hearing.  Meeting strangers with unknown intentions in the middle of nowhere, is downright disturbing.
So my question is do I need to have this thing pinging every 10 min, or can I ping it in the morning, midday and evening?  Not real keen on giving away my sleeping locations.
Thanks for any help with this.

[Done]

rfutah, why even put your Spot on trackleaders? It's not required. Just send your friends and family a link to your shared Spot page, and go with that. No stalkers to worry about since only those who you allow can see your current location. FYI, Spots last for many days in tracking mode, and batteries are readily available and not too heavy.

[DaveH]

rfutah - the SPOT trackers are not required.  You can use it as little or as much as you like - it's your choice.

Have a great ride and good luck!

[rfutah]

rfutah, why even put your Spot on trackleaders? It's not required. Just send your friends and family a link to your shared Spot page, and go with that. No stalkers to worry about since only those who you allow can see your current location. FYI, Spots last for many days in tracking mode, and batteries are readily available and not too heavy.

Thanks for the clarification.  Probably go with that for now. I thought the trackleader was required for ITT.
All my years in the forest, the most dangerous animal I have found, travels on two legs.

[rhino]

Can someone briefly (and politely) tell me what this "Spot Stalkers" is all about? I must be naive and clueless, I don't understand.

[Done]

Can someone briefly (and politely) tell me what this "Spot Stalkers" is all about? I must be naive and clueless, I don't understand.

Spot stalkers are people who use Trackleaders, Blue Dot, or shared Spot pages to locate riders and then either show up unannounced to meet them, or tell other riders where they are.