Tour Divide race discussion

[Mathewsen]

I was looking at the new Dot colours and it is not easy to see how they were allocated. Totty - I looked at TH's track and he seemed on route other than taking an alternative before Cuba.

Tim appears to have missed Brooks Lake Rd in Wyoming. This is a segment nearly always packed with snow with a rich history of being missed initially, then recouped by riding back up to the pass to grab it. Happens every year to several riders, partic. if navigating from GPS, as initially the two closely parallel. I am hearing now that some riders skipped it because the map cues say, "road impassable when wet". I am not sure what to think about racers assuming that cue applied to them. The rules state pretty clearly that only 4 alternates to the GDMBR 'main route' are permitted. What would happen for riders who arrived before / after storms when this road would be dry? Time comparison would be impossible. It never occurred to me that such notes in the cues would be interpreted as TD-legal. As far as I am aware, that note never has been interpreted that way. I guess riding under the duress of days of rain / snow / mud can elicit rationalizations. In future years it will have to be made clear that any cues reference to 'impassable when wet' (there are a number of these notes across the full route) do not mean TD-legal.

[Krampus Snail]

It's too bad if some riders skipped a section in the incorrect belief that the section was optional in bad weather. And it's too bad if some riders told other riders it was OK to skip. It's going to be heartbreaking when riders who thought they were riding the legal course are DQed.

But it's up to the riders to know what the legal alternates are, and it's up to the riders to follow the course. Nobody said this was going to be easy. Riders who skipped that section have to be DQed.

[BobM]

It's too bad if some riders skipped a section in the incorrect belief that the section was optional in bad weather. And it's too bad if some riders told other riders it was OK to skip. It's going to be heartbreaking when riders who thought they were riding the legal course are DQed.

But it's up to the riders to know what the legal alternates are, and it's up to the riders to follow the course. Nobody said this was going to be easy. Riders who skipped that section have to be DQed.

IMO DQ would be appropriate for those who knowingly broke the rules.  If they can convince Race Admin that it was an honest misinterpretation, RA could choose to simply relegate them, which would give them an official finish, but no official time or placement.

[Krampus Snail]

There's a difference between relegation and DQ?

[Done]

Since official results haven't been posted for years (aside from record-setting runs), does any of this really matter? Without posted standings, everyone is in the same boat--regardless of whether they complied or not with the posted rules. As it stands, everyone can claim whatever level of success they desire, and there's nothing to contradict or support them. Finish in 20th place with a six people in front of you who broke XX rules--then declare your 14th place finish. Cut the course and had dinner delivered on the trail, but still want to claim your 30th place finish--then have at it. Without posted results, anything seems to go.

I'm not endorsing this position, but it does seem to be what's occurring by default. Maybe that's ML's intent?

[Mathewsen]

IMO DQ would be appropriate for those who knowingly broke the rules.  If they can convince Race Admin that it was an honest misinterpretation, RA could choose to simply relegate them, which would give them an official finish, but no official time or placement.

Almost correct, Bob. Relegation results in an asterisked elapsed time, but no official placement in the annual or historical GC. Here's an example: http://tourdivide.org/2009_TD_results In the new self-submitted times format, these riders can be set apart similarly.

[THE LONG RANGER]

I look forward to the discussion with the racers (Whoever would like to talk about it) about the issues that have come up I'm sorry Trackerleaders are getting so much stress thrown their way about it. I love watching the development of the Trackleader's app, though. It's way fun of a service - I've always thought the TD was used to beta ideas, as well.

In 2011, that turnoff for Brooks Lake Rd was so choked full of snow the roof of the outhouse right at the turnoff was barely poking through. Was my only sign there was a road, at all! I def. missed it myself, but something seemed wrong after I flew past the turn - I was going off the cues, and the cues started not making sense. It was a few miles backtrack, if I remember, it's right up besides a Togwotee Pass.  Always hard to say no to free downhill pavement miles. Once I started slogging up the hill, the cut in the hill for the Brooks Lake Road becomes much more apparent.

The Gold Dust trail has that same mess-with-year-headness, since it pops up right after a pass. It's a lot funner, though.

[aaron w]

Ha! I missed that road in 2012.  When I got to the top of Togwotee Pass bombing down the other side just seemed like the logical thing to do.  I had dropped quite a few miles before I glanced at my gps screen which was completely blank.    I rode back up to the top and even then had a bit of trouble finding Brooks lake road.  That wrong turn didn't bother me nearly as much as when later that morning I discovered I had left most of my good food at the lodge where I had stayed the night...and to compound the situation the store/diner at the bottom of the pass was closed due to an electrical outage.  Good times!

[BobM]

There's a difference between relegation and DQ?

By my understanding, a DQ results in a DNF.  Relegation gets you an asterisk (see Matthew's post).  You're still a TD finisher, but your time cannot be compared to others because of a material difference in the route you followed.  Hopefully the tandem's fire re-route will be ruled "not materially significant" so their time will be comparable, at least for this year.  They finished far enough ahead of the ones behind them that it should make no difference.

[mtbcast]

TD14: Charlie Kharsa called in from Abiquiu after wrong turn and having to route back. And Bill Peschka called in from Abiquiu! He’s planning to take the alternate to Cuba and avoid the fire reroutes.

http://mtbcast.com/site2/category/td14/

[Mathewsen]

Since official results haven't been posted for years (aside from record-setting runs), does any of this really matter? Without posted standings, everyone is in the same boat--regardless of whether they complied or not with the posted rules. As it stands, everyone can claim whatever level of success they desire, and there's nothing to contradict or support them. Finish in 20th place with a six people in front of you who broke XX rules--then declare your 14th place finish. Cut the course and had dinner delivered on the trail, but still want to claim your 30th place finish--then have at it. Without posted results, anything seems to go.

I'm not endorsing this position, but it does seem to be what's occurring by default. Maybe that's ML's intent?

The short answer is yes, it matters, and no, posting results won't stop cheating, but since its all so cut / dry for Toby, I would like to delegate him to handle all the emotion, all the polemics, histrionics, all the communication with non-English speakers, etc., from 100+ riders / collective 300,000 TD miles ridden annually

In all seriousness, yes, I have passive-aggressively experimented with not publishing results lately due to the internal drama; drama not even the thirsty forums are privy to. For many riders, their result was the most important product of the experience. I am already exhausted by the end of TD because mid-race management is quite intensive. I've only had the luxury of not publishing b/c Trackleaders documentation is pretty thorough. My rationalization has been, "results in some nebulous form do exist... at the very least a rider can examine their track and know their time, regardless of who cheated around them & whether it could be proven". The fire detours, sometimes 3 different variations in the same year are also messy. I realize Trackleaders data alone is not a tenable solution long term. The historical GC *will* be backfilled. No TD effort will go unaccounted for. Ironically TD has been weathering the Ride the Divide popularity and its influx of unindoctrinated eager beavers ready to buy a mountain bike, learn to tour, then race TD all within a semester span...and many expect TD.org to have instructions on how to do it. I have at once felt responsible for this and retreated from it, all the while dealing with my own malaise from ceasing to race it annually...so, it's complicated. I would love for results generation to be an autopilot process, but unfortunately subjectivity must play it's usual tangled role.

[Done]

The short answer is yes, it matters, and since its all so cut / dry for Toby, I would like to delegate him to handle all the emotion, all the polemics, histrionics, all the communication with non-English speakers, etc., from 100+ riders / collective 300,000 TD miles ridden annually

Sorry, Matthew, for seeming ungrateful for all of the hard work that you put into the TD. I have no doubt that it's a massive effort, with an equally massive emotional burden. I think that everyone appreciates your efforts; I certainly do. Thank you.

..but since its all so cut / dry for Toby...

I never said that anything is "cut / dry." I'm just observing the consequences, both for better and for worse, of not posting official times. It has created some additional weirdness, which seems to be encouraging additional "weak sauce." But maybe it does encourage people to just race for the sake of the experience, rather then focusing on the results--which can be a good thing too. Your statement, "...so, it's complicated" seems to sum up the situation well.

Thanks for posting your thoughts on why the results haven't been posted. I'm happy to hear that you're going to backfill previous years. I hope that you don't receive too much crap for how you do it, because I doubt that everyone will be happy regardless of how it pans out!

[Flinch]

"...influx of unindoctrinated eager beavers ready to buy a mountain bike, learn to tour, then race TD all within a semester span...and many expect TD.org to have instructions on how to do it..."

Oooooo - I smell opportunity here! Think of your new side business " Beginners Tour Divide Course". Have to add a rule "9. Riders will be DQ'd for use of training wheels."  

Plus it gets you out on the course again! ;>

[Mathewsen]

Sorry, Matthew, for seeming ungrateful for all of the hard work that you put into the TD.

nah, nah. I was just joshing (mostly).

I never said that anything is "cut / dry."

Yes, I realize... unintended perceptions from your often B&W view of when humanity meets rules. I am not troubled by it, really.

[Krampus Snail]

  But maybe it does encourage people to just race for the sake of the experience, rather then focusing on the results--which can be a good thing too. 

What is the point of "racing for the sake of the experience rather than focusing on the results"? Isn't that called "touring"? And shouldn't we encourage tourists to tour, rather than saying they are racing when they aren't?

I'm a big fan of touring. I'm a tourist myself,  and plan to tour the Divide next summer. I'm not denigrating touring at all. But it's not the same thing as racing. If you are racing, you are by definition trying to minimize your time.

[Done]

What is the point of "racing for the sake of the experience rather than focusing on the results"? Isn't that called "touring"? And shouldn't we encourage tourists to tour, rather than saying they are racing when they aren't?

I'm a big fan of touring. I'm a tourist myself,  and plan to tour the Divide next summer. I'm not denigrating touring at all. But it's not the same thing as racing. If you are racing, you are by definition trying to minimize your time.

Racing has always seemed pretty black and white to me as well. Go as fast as you can, while strictly adhering to the defined rules and general ethics, so that you can finish with the best possible individual time and comparative placement.

But you've got to have official results and enforced rules--or else times and placements are arbitrary and meaningless. If results can't be trusted or compared, it's no longer a race--it's a tour. Based on what I hear from TD racers, it's becoming a tour (or an unfair race) for a greater number of riders. This is partly a consequence, I think, of having had no official results or rule enforcement for several years. When people start bitching about being disqualified for breaking one of the bedrock rules of the race (ride the entire course), it's obvious that there's a problem.

Why do I care? I'm really looking forward to racing the TD in the future. If I weren't so damn busy starting a new business this year (and wrapping one up last year), I would have already done it. Something to look forward to--which is probably why I'm wasting way too much time on this forum.

[Krampus Snail]

I can understand the feelings of someone who (incorrectly) thought they had followed all the rules, when they are faced with relegation. They feel like they've been racing for so long, it was one tiny section, they honestly believed they didn't have to ride it, and now their entire race is taken away from them. That must be awful. A big dream, crushed by a little mistake.

I'd still relegate them, though.

[Mathewsen]

Back in the day--i say it sort of tongue-in-cheek, b/c did 'BITD' really happen if it wasn't blogged--it used to be a fellow had to search long and hard to know what was the true time to beat for a given challenge b/c those sort of 'results' weren't broadcast. They were more personal. A result can indeed be a personal thing, validated internally, not necessarily by their position in a list. Maybe there's a way to score TD more like golf. Player vs par for course. Handicaps and all 

[Done]

Back in the day--i say it sort of tongue-in-cheek, b/c did 'BITD' really happen if it wasn't blogged--it used to be a fellow had to search long and hard to know what was the true time to beat for a given challenge b/c those sort of 'results' weren't broadcast. They were more personal. A result can indeed be a personal thing, validated internally, not necessarily by their position in a list.

That works on a small scale. But maybe not so much when there are 70+ competitors? Hard to put the genie back on the bottle once you've posted rules, results, and enforced relegations and disqualifications.

[Mathewsen]

That works on a small scale. But maybe not so much when there are 70+ competitors? Hard to put the genie back on the bottle once you've posted rules, results, and enforced relegations and disqualifications.

Right. Not trying to put the genie back in the bottle. Maybe there's a way to score TD more like golf. Player vs par for course. Handicaps and all   Mulligans or no mulligans?