Long Distance Competition/Ultracycling, Randonneuring and Endurance Cycling - 600 k nonstop or sleep

If all goes well I will ride the 600 the coming saturday. What are the pros and cons of doing it without sleep ? Someone said that one absolutely should go to Brest before sleeping. If that is correct it seems reasonable to try going without sleep. I can join a group that will ride in around 25-26 hours.

I've heard it go both ways. Advocates of straight-through riding say that the level of sleep deprivation that you endure on the end of the 600 reflects what you would feel on the 2nd or 3rd day of a 1200. Advocates of the sleep stop say that since you will eventually need to sleep on a 1200, then sleeping on a 600 will train you up for getting back on your bike after two or three hours of sleep and restarting cold muscles.

Me? I did my first (and so far only) 600 last year with a two hour sleep stop; and that was largely because I didn't feel safe pressing on in darkness (micronapping, hallucinating, etc.) I plan on doing that again on this year's Boston 600, but am also considering following it up with the Westfield 600 the next week and trying to do that without sleep.

Also, from what I've read, the conventional strategy is to sleep at Loudeac -- ride to, then return from Brest -- sleep in Loudeac again -- then return to Paris. What this means, of course, is that Loudeac is crowded with riders looking for lodging, so it does make some sense to push on and sleep at Brest, but that's totally dependent on how far and fast you are willing to go. Sleeping in Loudeac is convenient if you've got a hotel room booked there, and can use it on both nights. If you don't have such arrangements, then one can just plan on sleeping at any old roadside or control along the route.

Having done it both ways -- straight-through and while sleeping at the 400K point -- I'd recommend, especially if this is your first 600K, that you try to sleep at about 400K. I think it'll increase your chances of finishing, which is all you should want to do if you want to go to Paris.

That said, if you're fast enough to make 600K in 25-26 hours, then you can probably forget the sleep. Just make sure if you're keeping that pace that you don't put yourself in the red. In the only 1200K I have done I rode the first 600K in 26 hours. It took me 37.5 hours to ride the next 600K. And most of that second half of the ride hurt pretty bad.

Having done it both ways -- straight-through and while sleeping at the 400K point -- I'd recommend, especially if this is your first 600K, that you try to sleep at about 400K. I think it'll increase your chances of finishing, which is all you should want to do if you want to go to Paris.

That said, if you're fast enough to make 600K in 25-26 hours, then you can probably forget the sleep. Just make sure if you're keeping that pace that you don't put yourself in the red. In the only 1200K I have done I rode the first 600K in 26 hours. It took me 37.5 hours to ride the next 600K. And most of that second half of the ride hurt pretty bad.

+1

I've also done it both ways. My very first 600K was 36 hours straight through. It was OK. I've done a few with about 1 hour sleep around the 400K point. They weren't OK. 1 hour is just enough for me to wake up feeling very nauseated and horrible. And I've done some with about 2 hours of sleep. That's a decent amount. It gets me over that 1.5 hour REM cycle, and leaves me feeling relatively refreshed.

But if you are able to do 600K in 25-26 hours, why bother sleeping? I don't sleep on a 400K or 24-hour race ... it's only 1 day of riding ... you can sleep later.

Oh, and I should mention that for me, there's no way on earth I'm going to ride the first 600K to Brest in one go. I didn't last time, and I don't intend to this time. The someone who said "that one absolutely should go to Brest before sleeping" is either a very fast cyclist who can make it there in about 24 hours, or one who has never done a 1200K.

Thanks for the input. I think I will stay with the fast guys and try for nonstop. The guy who adviced against sleep before Brest is around 60 and well capable of getting there in 24 hours. He wore his 2003 PBP jersey on the 400 which we did in a little over 16 hours.

His name isn't Ken Bonner is it? :D

His name is Haakon Wattum and his time in 2003 was just under 70 hours. He is one of these incredible old Norwegians who are seasoned XC skiers who take up bicycling late in life.

I did under 70 hours in 1999 and slept in Carhaix. Ride what feels right.