Long Distance Competition/Ultracycling, Randonneuring and Endurance Cycling - First 600k and looking for advise

Like I said I have my first 600k at the end of this month and have a few qestions I would greatly appreciate any advise on.

First one is How should I carry tools, jacket, food, etc. Right now my bike has a rear rack, I have small panniers to go with it and I have a small saddle bag (just enough for tube, phone, multi tool) I am thinking a handlebar bag would be ideal but id rather not spend the money (fairly tight on money right now) on one if I can make my panniers work decent. Im just not sure if they would have much of a negative impact in added weight with the rack and wind resistance.

Fenders...it has rained for the last 2 weeks consistently and It doesnt look like it will be letting up anytime soon. Even though I am tight on money I feel this will be a very worth while investment 600k or not.

other than that what do you typically bring on a ride of this length? I am thinking obviously some food, knee and arm warmers and a light jacket. For lights I have a light n motion stella headlamp that claims it can get 10+ hours on med. Its battery life has been as advertised on high but i have yet to test it on med.

As to bike set up I think I am good there, the saddle I am using I have done rides with 12hr roll times (longest rides to date) with no disscomfort. The bike itself is a gunnar crosshairs so steel cross bike with room to raise the bars to be just slightly higher than the saddle.

The only bike concern I have is I am not sure about having a good enough granny. I am running a 34-28 as my lowest gear which I typically would consider a very easy road gear but part of this ride ends up on the cherohola skyway which leads to some extended and fairly steep climbs and I am not sure how I will handle something like that with 200+ miles in the legs.

I know this is alot of random questions but any insight would be wonderfull as I dont have any real rando experience. I have done alot of endurance mountain bike racing and long road rides have just been non-organized 100+ mile days. Thanks in advance

Check out the stories here of my 600Ks ... they might give you some answers to your questions:

http://www.machka.net/brevetstories.htm
http://www.machka.net/2007/2007.htm


A question for you ... it doesn't sound like you've progressed up the randonneuring distances in the usual way: 200k, 300k, 400k, 600k. Is there a reason why not? Once a rider has done a 200k, 300k, and 400k, the rider has a reasonably good idea about the things you're asking about ....... and usually asks questions about sleep/rest on a ride of that distance. :)

Check out the stories here of my 600Ks ... they might give you some answers to your questions:

http://www.machka.net/brevetstories.htm
http://www.machka.net/2007/2007.htm


A question for you ... it doesn't sound like you've progressed up the randonneuring distances in the usual way: 200k, 300k, 400k, 600k. Is there a reason why not? Once a rider has done a 200k, 300k, and 400k, the rider has a reasonably good idea about the things you're asking about ....... and usually asks questions about sleep/rest on a ride of that distance. :)

thanks for the links Machka, The main reason I havnt progressed in distance like most is because I am predominantly a mountain biker and when the trails are dry I will almost always prefer dirt to pavement which is why most of my long distance riding is in mountain bike events where they tend to be lap style events or at least semi supported with drop bags and aid stations every 15 miles or so. The weather has been terrible here recently so I have been spending alot more time on the road than usual and I have always been interested in long distance road riding and came across a ride that goes through some of the more beautiful areas of TN so it being so close to home is nice as well.

With that being said I am also very impulsive and want to try and experience all aspects of cycling and become proficient in them all because really I am very interested in them all (I also ride trials, bmx, xc mtb, downhill mtb, commute, tour whenever possible)

I'm told (by the RBA, who I rode with for a bit on a very soggy 200K in February) that that 600K route has something like 23,000 feet of climbing on it. I'm also told it's amazingly beautiful. Good luck!

I've personally never bothered with fenders, but some people tolerate dirt and grime on themselves and their bikes (and their riding companions) better than others. YMMV. As a mountain biker, I suspect you'd be fine without them. We Easterners don't throw volcanic ash on our roads all winter like they do in the PNW, so you really don't get all that disgusting if it's raining out.

Think hard about what kind of stuff you really need to bring on the ride. Machka and Randochap both have excellent blogs that describe some of the things that you might want to think about taking. I'd advise doing what you can to cut down what you carry, especially on such a hilly route, to things that you really do need. And economize -- take only the sun screen, lube, etc. that you need for the ride and not the whole container. Take only the food you need to get to the first control and then purchase food on the route. Consider whether you can bring a head covering and arm/knee warmers to deal with cold(er) temperatures rather than a jacket.

On gearing, it's a pretty personal issue (search the forum for various gearing threads and you'll see we're all over the map as far as what we use for brevets). I could climb Mt. Everst in a 34x28 (the lowest gear I've ever run on a brevet is 39x25 and I'll be riding 220 miles this weekend on a fixie with 49x18). But I know other people, very successful randonneurs who have a lot of fun on the road, who run 34x34 or even lower. I think it depends a lot on what works for you. It also depends on how heavy you and your stuff are -- I'm 165# soaking wet and I travel very light on a light bike. If you're a big guy carrying a bunch of stuff on a heavy bike then something like 39x25 isn't going to get you too far in the mountains of East Tennessee!

My only other advice would be to put some thought into what Machka said about sleep (or lack thereof). Have a plan for whether you're going to ride this straight-through or whether you're going to sleep (and where and for how long). If you think you want to get some sleep, then plan and budget for it and try to stick to a schedule that's going to get you that rest. Planning on sleep and then being deprived it really hurts. Planning on having no sleep at all is easier to deal with -- you know what's coming. A plan along the lines of , "Well, I'll get sleep if and when and where I have time" often results in a DNF for inexperienced distance riders.

Best of luck! Be sure to give us a report on your ride!

good luck!

(that's all i have to offer)

Since the brevet speed requirements are fairly "relaxed" - and since you don't seem to have a goal other than to ride the thing - why worry?

I wouldn't change or add anything, use the stuff you know works. Bring the clothes you've used before. Eat the foods you've eaten before. And pretty much, accept the fact that since the distance is "new" to you - respect it - and ride a little more slowly than you usually do,

All that being said, enjoy the ride and the scenery, mix it up with whoever will ride with you and you'll probably have great time.......

You'll be much more comfortable with fenders. Put on mudflaps!
http://phred.org/~alex/bikes/fendermudflap.html
Very important. For you, the front mudflap will matter most. Your riding companions will appreciate the rear flap. If you don't use fenders and mudflaps you may find yourself persona non grata in groups.

Your extra clothing will depend on the temperatures at the tops of the passes. Try to get an idea of the forecast for that. Even in truly awful 33° and sleeting weather, you should be able to get by with a good sized saddle bag and a small rucksack. More aero, if your back doesn't mind something there. But since you already have the rear rack, just put a trunk bag on top of it. That's all you'll need, no rucksack, no pannier.

I still haven't figured out how to handle sleeping. I'm riding 400km next weekend, and there is a 400km control on the 600k I'm riding which will be at the starting point. I figure I'll change clothes, take a shower and try to get a couple hours of sleep. I guess I better bring a calculator with me because i probably will not be able to add two numbers together at that point.

Like Machka and, I'm sure, other randonneurs here, I'm also wondering why you haven't followed the accepted progression from 200km up, and what club is willing to allow that?

As a brevet coordinator for my club, I'd have to be convinced that you had a background commensurate with the kind of experience needed to jump straight into a 600km randonnee. I would, after all, have ultimate responsibility for your safety and well-being.

Assuming that you have the fitness and road cycling skills you need, you might check out the randonneur pages (http://www.veloweb.ca/randopage.html) on VeloWeb for technical advice.

My 2008 600 (http://www.veloweb.ca/storypages/hatrick.html).

I would be seriously worried about getting through the night with only one light running on medium. Especially on a descent. That just doesn't seem like enough battery life or enough lumens.

Actually, it's the second night where the lack of lights will be even more of a problem... Both of my mere 300K's were made more interesting by the either lack of light or fear of batteries running out.

I would be seriously worried about getting through the night with only one light running on medium. Especially on a descent. That just doesn't seem like enough battery life or enough lumens.

definitely a good idea to bring spare batteries!

but in the future, a dynohub with some kind of stronger light is prolly a better idea.

Now I am new to cycling and I am only preparing for a half century in the next couple of weeks. I do know alot about training the human body as a physical educator and a track coach. As many have said, it makes almost no sense going to 600k without going through the other distances. Its like running a Marathon without having a least one run of 18 miles in you prior to the event. If you don't have the "base" your body will give out and you won't make it regardless of how slow you peddle. Just my thought. All of that said, I wish you luck with your goal of doing a 600k within the month.

Now I am new to cycling and I am only preparing for a half century in the next couple of weeks. I do know alot about training the human body as a physical educator and a track coach. As many have said, it makes almost no sense going to 600k without going through the other distances. Its like running a Marathon without having a least one run of 18 miles in you prior to the event. If you don't have the "base" your body will give out and you won't make it regardless of how slow you peddle. Just my thought. All of that said, I wish you luck with your goal of doing a 600k within the month.

The OP has done a number of 100+ mile rides ... his body isn't going to give out on a 600K as long as he keeps eating and drinking regularly.

Where he might run into problems is with his digestive system ... mine starts to shut down on me at about 400 km. And he might have trouble with the sleep aspect.

The OP has done a number of 100+ mile rides ... his body isn't going to give out on a 600K as long as he keeps eating and drinking regularly.

Where he might run into problems is with his digestive system ... mine starts to shut down on me at about 400 km. And he might have trouble with the sleep aspect.

yeah i'm thinking sleep deprivation will be a real ass kicker.

it is for me anyway on a 600.

As a brevet coordinator for my club, I'd have to be convinced that you had a background commensurate with the kind of experience needed to jump straight into a 600km randonnee. I would, after all, have ultimate responsibility for your safety and well-being.



why would you, or the club be responsible?
seems here in the states we sign all sorts of waivers.
and for many events there is little chance to get picked up or sagged back.
it will even state as much on the event website posting or cue sheet.
at the very least on the sign up form.

different north of the border?

i agree with the spirit that i think you intend - that as a club coordinator you would be worried for this persons safety and success and had you been able to counsel them you would have had them move through the typical progression...

but, aren't we all out there 'on our own' rides? are you legally responsible for a rider you send off?
if your cue sheet is crap can i sue you? (especially in a PBP year, if a miscue cost me a qualifier).

wondering aloud.

why would you, or the club be responsible?
seems here in the states we sign all sorts of waivers.
and for many events there is little chance to get picked up or sagged back.
it will even state as much on the event website posting or cue sheet.
at the very least on the sign up form.

different north of the border?

i agree with the spirit that i think you intend - that as a club coordinator you would be worried for this persons safety and success and had you been able to counsel them you would have had them move through the typical progression...

but, aren't we all out there 'on our own' rides? are you legally responsible for a rider you send off?
if your cue sheet is crap can i sue you? (especially in a PBP year, if a miscue cost me a qualifier).

wondering aloud.

Yes, the ride organizer is indeed legally responsible for the rider. And if it could be proven that the cue sheet led the rider astray in such a way that caused physical harm (or possibly mental/emotional harm too, but that would be harder to prove), the rider definitely could sue.

Ride organizers need to be very careful when they plan routes to make sure they are as safe as possible. Because I knew that I had three possible riders on my 300K this coming Saturday, my father and I drove the route to make sure it was safe. Good thing we did because we discovered 17 km of construction which the riders might hit as the sun was going down. So I modified the route and then we checked the new and improved route to make sure it was OK too. I believe I have done my "duty of care" with regard to the route ... every reasonable thing to ensure the route is safe for the riders.

Ensuring that the cue sheets are accurate is another way of performing "duty of care" with regard to the route. I make my cue sheets fairly detailed so that the riders know where they need to turn, and also know where they can get food and water etc. I don't want my riders stranded out there in the middle of nowhere without adequate supplies. For example, if it will be a long stretch before the next place riders can get supplies, I will mention that in a note and encourage riders to stock up.

Sure we all sign waivers, but we also know that waivers don't mean much if they were brought up in court ... especially if some significant harm was done by some sort of negligence by the ride organizer. That's why we (the riders) pay fairly hefty insurance fees to the club ... it's to help protect the club and the ride organizers should there be an accident (and law suit). Here in Alberta riders cannot ride with either of the touring clubs or the randonneuring club ... and I'm pretty sure they can't ride with racing clubs either ... unless they have signed the waiver and paid the insurance money.

And in theory the riders should know that they are responsible for themselves ... but in actuality the ride organizers and clubs can be held responsible if something bad happened.

thanks again for the advise everyone. So far I got some fenders on the way and I am thinking handlebar bag and a camel bak as per recomendation of the events site. Also I have an easy place to sleep as their are some cabins opened up to the riders at mile 250 so I will try to get a little sleep at that point (not sure how long, need to figure out pace, etc.)

I am not sure how my body will handle a ride this long but I know on rides around the 12 hr mark I dont have many digestive issues but I do plan to try to get in another really long ride of 10 plus hours this weekend mixed with another good sized ride monday morning before work plus a ride after work to try and get alot of time on the bike or on my feet in one last effort to find any little quarks with bike or body.

As to the comments about liability, you have to be a member of the groups club for insurance purposes but I never thought about the fact that they might not let me ride with their group. I'll send the organizer an email just to make sure things are a go. I know I am not going about this ride in the most traditional way but how fun is doing things the "normal" way all the time anyways??

Thanks again guys, your defintally helping me brainstorm

why would you, or the club be responsible?
seems here in the states we sign all sorts of waivers.
and for many events there is little chance to get picked up or sagged back.
it will even state as much on the event website posting or cue sheet.
at the very least on the sign up form.

different north of the border?

i agree with the spirit that i think you intend - that as a club coordinator you would be worried for this persons safety and success and had you been able to counsel them you would have had them move through the typical progression...

but, aren't we all out there 'on our own' rides? are you legally responsible for a rider you send off?
if your cue sheet is crap can i sue you? (especially in a PBP year, if a miscue cost me a qualifier).

What Machka said.

We have a lengthy waiver riders must sign along with club membership (which is required to ride our brevets) and an "event waiver" required at the start of each brevet.

Canadians aren't generally as litigious as Americans (but we have a lot of US randos come north to our events:D) however it comes down to the same thing -- you must take care of business. In that regard, I am covered by third party liability, as are all club volunteers.

As for my own judgement calls, that's between me and individual riders who apply or turn up for rides. I can't always keep track of who turns up and second-guess all the volunteers who run individual brevets. But I do instruct that riders are directed to follow the club "rules and recommendations," which are fairly consistent with most other clubs internationally.

I recently allowed 2 novices to jump straight to a very difficult 300, without doing the spring 200, because one rider had a scheduling conflict. Satisfied they had "equivalent" experience, I let them ride. They didn't break any records, were fairly knackered at the end, but happy with their accomplishment.

If, however, I had just said yes, without checking their "qualifications" and they'd turned up physically unprepared; then if they had been allowed to start with, say, inadequate lighting (the route traverses steep and narrow, winding forest roads after dark -- for all but the fastest) then there could certainly be a case made for negligence on the part of the club.

Even the strong (especially?) underestimate the logistics of riding the longer brevets. It is the responsibility of those of us who promote this sport that requires riding long distances, through the night, over often difficult terrain, with little sleep, to do everything we can to make sure those we sign up are at least prepared to meet the challenge in a reasonably safe manner.

Route sheets: Like Machka, I go to great lengths to prepare a decent route sheet. Almost every direction has a cue (e.g. @ Red Barn Market, first left, etc.) All routes are pre-ridden the weekend before the official ride. If this can't be arranged, the route is pre-driven. Often the route is pre-driven and pre-ridden. It is apparent from reading reports that not a few clubs in the US don't follow this protocol.

It doesn't mean that a minor miscue doesn't slip through the Excel labyrinth. We have also had a couple of disgruntled riders try to blame DNFs on sparsely cued route sheets. These complaints don't usually pass committee examination. One of the expectations of an experienced cyclist is that if one system fails, then they should have a fall-back position. In this case, a miscue on the route sheet should send one to the map and compass.

I'm presuming your question about route sheets is facetious. Overall though, let's just say, I'd rather deal with cue sheet faux pas, than disaster arising from an unprepared rider.

I'm presuming your question about route sheets is facetious. Overall though, let's just say, I'd rather deal with cue sheet faux pas, than disaster arising from an unprepared rider.

was bantering for sure about the route sheet. if your going to litigate and argue i could see that coming up... but i'm more of a self supported rider - if i don't pre-ride on the terrain map, local maps, or googlemaps, i haven't done my homework. caught an error on the last 200k - found a few folks climbing up on that error when i went through. had it highlighted in yellow...


glad that you take care of your riders, its a good thing.
just curious about the legalese up north.
thanks for the explanation.

Yes, the ride organizer is indeed legally responsible for the rider. ...

No, not in the US (where the rider is riding). In the US, they are on their own personal ride, undertaken entirely at their own risk.

In Canada, I would guess that you can decline to be responsible to this rider, and can tell him to take a hike. Here, the organizer's duty to this guy is to record either his finishing time or the fact that he DNF'd, and then post it along with everyone else's results to RUSA. I'm not sure that we'd be able to tell someone that they cannot ride.

This rider's duty to the organizer is to either arrive at the end or to phone the organizer to let him know he's DNF'ing. And not to whine about it, particularly since he has not undergone any of the relevant training. It would be a good idea for the rider to make sure that there is someone prepared to come and pick the rider up from wherever, whenever. The rider's duty to the other riders who have actually taken the time to prepare is to be completely independent of them, so as not to compromise their ability to complete the event. I don't mean he shouldn't ride with them, just that if he starts to get into trouble, it's his duty to tell them that they are not to stop for him.

Riding a century may possibly prepare you for a 200K, depending where the century is and how its terrain compares with the century. A 300K is a really long day in the saddle, but is pretty do-able if you can do a 200K. But a 400K is a real learning experience: Typically, it requires a lot of night riding, which often implies significant temperature changes at a time when your body starts to lose its ability to properly self-regulate, plus sleep deprivation, plus you're really starting to get into more challenging fueling conditions. All of those are essential learning experiences for the 600K. And the 600K itself, starts with all of that going on for the first 400K, and then you sleep an hour and a half or so (for many riders) and get up and ride a 200K. Nontrivial. An event like a 600K is something to be respected and taken seriously.

Nick

No, not in the US (where the rider is riding). In the US, they are on their own personal ride, undertaken entirely at their own risk.

In Canada, I would guess that you can decline to be responsible to this rider, and can tell him to take a hike. Here, the organizer's duty to this guy is to record either his finishing time or the fact that he DNF'd, and then post it along with everyone else's results to RUSA. I'm not sure that we'd be able to tell someone that they cannot ride.

This rider's duty to the organizer is to either arrive at the end or to phone the organizer to let him know he's DNF'ing. And not to whine about it, particularly since he has not undergone any of the relevant training. It would be a good idea for the rider to make sure that there is someone prepared to come and pick the rider up from wherever, whenever. The rider's duty to the other riders who have actually taken the time to prepare is to be completely independent of them, so as not to compromise their ability to complete the event. I don't mean he shouldn't ride with them, just that if he starts to get into trouble, it's his duty to tell them that they are not to stop for him.

Riding a century may possibly prepare you for a 200K, depending where the century is and how its terrain compares with the century. A 300K is a really long day in the saddle, but is pretty do-able if you can do a 200K. But a 400K is a real learning experience: Typically, it requires a lot of night riding, which often implies significant temperature changes at a time when your body starts to lose its ability to properly self-regulate, plus sleep deprivation, plus you're really starting to get into more challenging fueling conditions. All of those are essential learning experiences for the 600K. And the 600K itself, starts with all of that going on for the first 400K, and then you sleep an hour and a half or so (for many riders) and get up and ride a 200K. Nontrivial. An event like a 600K is something to be respected and taken seriously.

Nick


which is why i was posting the questions below... as my experience is entirely US based... thanks for putting out some strong words on this. this is what i feel is in the spirit of the sport - and while i did have the luck of being sagged in from a 600k (everything happened to align, except for my cleats and my knees...) - i would have gladly struggled home, called a friend... etc.

I am not sure how my body will handle a ride this long but I know on rides around the 12 hr mark I dont have many digestive issues but I do plan to try to get in another really long ride of 10 plus hours this weekend mixed with another good sized ride monday morning before work plus a ride after work to try and get alot of time on the bike or on my feet in one last effort to find any little quarks with bike or body. I'm a little late to this party, but I just wanted to build on what thebulls, mattm and a few others have pointed out -- the biggest challenge with a 600k is dealing with the sleep deprivation. Most riders can finish a 400k in 25 hours or less, and thus finish the ride and sleep in the same bed that they woke up in earlier that day. On a 600k, you either have to choose if you're going to push through the night (which is not bad training for a 1200) or sleep at a hotel.

It sounds like you're opting to sleep and that your sleep stop is at the 400k mark. Personally, I'm not a particularly big fan of that distance for a sleep stop, and tend to prefer having to sleep at 300k and do some pre-dawn riding; but it is what it is. What I would recommend for your training regimen, if you have the time, is to do a long overnight ride. Maybe start 8pm and go until 2 or 4am. Get yourself accustomed to navigating in the dark, to being isolated and dealing with any disorientation that comes from being up way past your bed time. Randonneurs get introduced to such elements from their 400k and you may have had some exposure to it in your mountain bike races, but beyond the base factors of physical conditioning, nutrition and bike setup, I would say that night riding skills are one of the more crucial areas to develop, and usually one of the more neglected (since we have fewer opportunities to practice it).

I would also add, in that subject, if you feel like doing some homework, try to predict where you'll be on the course at a given time; and try to do some research on what services will be available if you happen to be on the road at 10pm or midnight. Even the hunt for something as simple as a cup of coffee can be demoralizing if you're stuck in the middle of wilderness, rolling past one closed out convenience store after another. If you know, ahead of time, that you're entering a 40 mile stretch of nothing, you can stock up ahead of time for things like food, water and batteries.

Oh, yeah, and final thing ... to add on to the concerns some folks have posted about battery life, since your light has a properietary rechargeable battery, I would consider picking up a decent AA battery light like the Cateye EL 500 to use as a backup or supplement to the Stella. That way, you could, if you needed to, run your Stella at high for nighttime descents and then switch over to a backup if you drain the battery. The benefit with a AA light is that you could, at least, pick up extra batteries along the way at 7-11s or gas stations as you need them. This sort of what I did during my first year of randonneuring, before I got a bike with a dynohub -- running a high power Sigma EvoX for the fast mountain descents, but relying on a weaker Cateye for crusing on the flats and illuminating the roads in the one or two hours before dawn broke, where the sky was gradually lightening.

I just lost my answer to this because this stupid forum just logged me out (again!) while writing! Arrg!

The gist of it was: I don't understand why a sporting club offering events (accepting a ride and club membership fee) anywhere wouldn't potentially be deemed responsible.

In a perfect world, everyone owns their own decisions. Unfortunately, that's not always the case. Hence, we do due diligence and make sure we're covered by a good policy.

As the oldest rando club in Canada (since 1979) we try to look after both our volunteers and riders.

On edit: I'm not sure that we've ever refused anyone a ride, but we certainly reserve the right. Surely, if someone turns up for a long brevet without lighting any club would refuse to let them participate? On this particular subject, we require lighting on all series brevets. We've been known to lend lights to novices on their first 200.

I just lost my answer to this because this stupid forum just logged me out (again!) while writing! Arrg!

The gist of it was: I don't understand why a sporting club offering events (accepting a ride and club membership fee) anywhere wouldn't potentially be deemed responsible.

In a perfect world, everyone owns their own decisions. Unfortunately, that's not always the case. Hence, we do due diligence and make sure we're covered by a good policy.

As the oldest rando club in Canada (since 1979) we try to look after both our volunteers and riders.

On edit: I'm not sure that we've ever refused anyone a ride, but we certainly reserve the right. Surely, if someone turns up for a long brevet without lighting any club would refuse to let them participate? On this particular subject, we require lighting on all series brevets. We've been known to lend lights to novices on their first 200.

We follow pretty similar procedures, here. In these litigious times, you can never be too careful. Part of the reason that riders are required to sign a waiver that says that they are on their own ride and are responsible for themselves is an insurance company requirement to make sure that there is no grounds for suit.

FWIW, DC Randonneurs itself is only a few years old, but it was formed when the randonneurs in this area split off from the biggest local bike club -- randonneuring in this region has been going on since the early 90's, and before that, people used to drive to events in North Carolina.

We have lighting inspections before any events longer than a 200K. The rules are at the RUSA website. But, basically, you have to demonstrate that you have a headlight and backup (which could be an extra bult), plus a tailight and backup, plus reflective ankle bands and sash or vest. If the OP showed up with everything else described, but only the Stella headlight, he wouldn't be allowed to ride. So the advice to buy a Cateye with AA batteries is good -- and it'd be a good idea to carry a set of spare batteries.

If you are out on the course after dark and you don't have your lights & reflective stuff on, you could face a time penalty or you could be DNQ'd. This is true on a 200K, too, even though we don't have lighting inspections on those.

Every randonneuring organizer has to demonstrate to RUSA that they have the required insurance coverage. At the club level, we also pay for insurance to cover our Board. The insurance company dictates what waivers will be used, and so that is what we use. As is the case for many rando clubs, our insurance is through League of American Bicyclists.

My wife points out that on a 1200K, there are entrance requirements, such as having to ride an SR series in that year, or a 1200K in the prior year. So why couldn't we impose an entrance requirement on a 600K -- e.g. having to have ridden the prior events? Maybe we should, if only out of fairness to the other riders. If I'm riding a 600K, and I come across some newbie rider who hasn't gained the relevant experience and is suffering from hypothermia or heatstroke, I'm potentially going to end up spending a lot of time helping them out. In principle, I might be able to get time credit added on, if I need it. But the bottom line is that by getting out there without knowing what they're getting into, they have just potentially ruined mine or someone else's event.

I realize that may sound heartless. Things happen on these rides that are unpredictable, and they can happen to even the best prepared randonneurs, and happen more-often to the somewhat less-prepared. For someone who is in trouble, who I know has been training as hard as they can, and who has made a diligent effort to ride through the series and learn all they can, I'm not going to resent spending time helping them out. An example is a fellow who got hyothermic at 2 am on a 400K -- the five of us who were riding together stopped for an hour to wait for him to warm up in the control (never again will he do a steep climb with all his clothes on, get sweaty, and then do a fast, five-mile descent in 40 degree temps). Someone who has had their derailleur cable fail twice in two years and who wants help -- well, I'll help them if I can, but they'll hear a few words about their failure to maintain their bike. Someone who comments that they're riding their bad wheel today and they hope that spokes don't fail, and then is sitting by the side of the road -- well, I still stopped to help them, but not for very long. My buddy who I rode three days of BMB with and who ended up with hypothermia at 4 am on the morning of the 4th day -- I would have stayed with him if necessary, even if it meant DNF'ing the event (as it turns out, though, as soon as we stopped, he called for a sag, and we got out of the wind and rain and wrapped him in a space blanket, and he warmed up, and insisted that I continue; and then he was there at the next control waiting to help me out -- he was a lifesaver for me, since at that stage I was pretty confused).

But someone who hasn't done the training and then runs into trouble because they don't know what they're doing and are not prepared is imposing a hardship on their fellow riders that is so deeply unfair that it's hard to find words for it.

Nick Bull

If you are used to wearing a Camelbak when you ride offroad I find that to be a good solution to long distance riding as well. As for gearing, unless there are some really, really steep sections you should be good with the ratios you have. I found a background of long rides off road to be great training for long distances on the road. The moot question is who do you ride with ? A larger group of evenly matched riders can blow through 600 km in well under 20 hours, alone with bad weather you could need all 40 to survive it.

Randochap -- I don't think any of the Americans on this discussion have indicated that their clubs are immune from litigation and take completely heartless approach to the welfare of their riders. All brevet clubs are rather small and, at the very least, most board members and randonnering vets get to know each other rather well over the course of a season or two, and in many respects overlap between brevet clubs and other road clubs or cycling advocacy groups makes for a rather small, tight-knit community. Thus, most admins tend to defer to the rider's individual judgement as to whether or not they are fit to do a ride. In the New England series, most lighting inspections are fairly lax, and we don't require club membership or a prior randonneuring history for any registrants on a ride. The organizers assume that you know the risks and the requirements. They give you credit for being a responsible adult and they tell you, of course ...

"If you don't think you can finish, then don't start."

With that said, I've seen folks being talked off a ride if their bike demonstrates some kind of fatal weakness, like a wobbly bottom bracket or visibly cracked/worn rim. So it isn't like the organizers abscond of all responsbility. However, I think that, in the end, there is a greater bias to defer to and trust in the rider's individual judgement of their own capabilities. There are many ways to develop the skills and conditioning that are essential to endurance cycling, and randonneuring is only one of several avenues.

just so you guys know, I am completely aware that a 600k is no joke and riding through the mountains at night 30 hrs in should not be taken lightly. Because I am unexperienced in true long distance cycling I WILL have plans in place should I need to bail so I can have a friend come save me.

I like the idea of doing a ride from like 8pm till 4-5am, I think their would be alot i could learn about about myself and what to expect.

If you are used to wearing a Camelbak when you ride offroad I find that to be a good solution to long distance riding as well. As for gearing, unless there are some really, really steep sections you should be good with the ratios you have. I found a background of long rides off road to be great training for long distances on the road. The moot question is who do you ride with ? A larger group of evenly matched riders can blow through 600 km in well under 20 hours, alone with bad weather you could need all 40 to survive it.

On what kind of terrain do you ride a 600K in well under 20 hours? The fastest finish time on our 2005, 2006, and 2007 600K (we don't have records for 2008) was about 26.5 hours. Average time is 34.8. Our 600K's typically have 25,000 feet of climbing. That's probably about what Tennessee will be like, maybe more. (The ride report on their web page says 26,000 feet on a Polar, which typically reads about 3/4 of my GPS -- so relative to our rides, theirs might have another 5 or 6 thousand feet of climbing.)

A Camelback in the woods isn't too bad because it's shady. A Camelback on an open road with the sun beating down on your back can be very hot and unpleasant. Tennessee at the end of May could sure get hot, I'd guess. Our Shenandoah 600 has had temps into the high 90's or low 100's both years that I've ridden it. Plus, the Camelback puts more weight on your hands and butt. And you can't easily pour water on your head to keep cool. For those reasons, I switched away from riding a Camelback and now carry three large water bottles.

Nick

(1) Has anyone ever heard of a lawsuit against a randonneuring club based on an injury that occurred during a club event? What was the result of the suit? As a lawyer, I cannot imagine one recovering against a club. Waiver or not. And note that the law in the U.S. and Canada (and the U.K. and Australia) is for all practical purposes the same in this regard. I'm glad to explain foreseeability and proximate cause to anyone interested. Curious to know, if there are any attorneys here from other common law countries, whether the concept of "ultrahazardous activity" that we have in the U.S. exists in your country. Skiing is an ultrahazardous activity in the U.S. I'd bet my bar cards (I have two) that randonneuring would be, too.

Do you really think that someone could succeed in a claim when they're engaging in an activity where people openly brag about the hallucinations they have because they're so zonked, and where some people who ride 1200Ks suffer permanent damage to their ulnar and perineal nerves? I frankly dare someone to sue a randonneuring club. The cross-examination of the plaintiff using material pulled right here from BF or from the randon google group would be hilarious.

All that said, I would suggest that posting on the internet that your club is legally responsible for what happens to the riders of its events probably isn't a good idea. Although it may not be the law that you have a certain duty or owe a certain standard of care, you definitely do have a duty if you say you do!

(2) This is a curious thread in light of the recent concern here and elsewhere about qualifications for PBP. Does the forum realize that, from a risk management perspective, the best way to reduce risk from participants in randonnees is most likely to remove the slow(er) riders from the field? They expose themselves to the risks that are uniform in the sport (interactions with motorized vehicles would be the big one) over a longer period of time than the faster riders. They are also more likely to ride at night which increases exposure to drunk drivers, road hazards that are not easily seen, nocturnal animals that have a tendency to run out in front of you, etc., and it also means they're less likely to get sleep or rest with the increased saddle time, resulting in poor judgment, slow reflexes, and the aforementioned hallucinations. If you get the lawyers and the actuaries involved -- people who are professionals in assessing and measuring risk and making business decisions based on it -- no one is going to be talking about something ephemeral like "experience." There are a few metrics that would quickly eliminate most of the risk pool, and I'll bet you that those metrics, when applied, would eliminate the slower folks disproportionately.

(1) All that said, I would suggest that posting on the internet that your club is legally responsible for what happens to the riders of its events probably isn't a good idea. Although it may not be the law that you have a certain duty or owe a certain standard of care, you definitely do have a duty if you say you do!

I haven't heard of any law suits against cycling clubs in general, or randonneuring but it is a possibility especially with the increased number of riders out there. So far, I think it just hasn't occurred to riders that they could take action because randonneuring is a sport that celebrates independence, self-reliance, etc. ... or perhaps nothing has gone terribly wrong yet.

Nevertheless, I think that clubs should not become careless and lazy when it comes to things like producing safe and accurate cue sheets, maps, and routes ... and providing a variety of foods in consideration of those with allergies if they advertize their rides as fully supported.




(2) This is a curious thread in light of the recent concern here and elsewhere about qualifications for PBP. Does the forum realize that, from a risk management perspective, the best way to reduce risk from participants in randonnees is most likely to remove the slow(er) riders from the field? They expose themselves to the risks that are uniform in the sport (interactions with motorized vehicles would be the big one) over a longer period of time than the faster riders. They are also more likely to ride at night which increases exposure to drunk drivers, road hazards that are not easily seen, nocturnal animals that have a tendency to run out in front of you, etc., and it also means they're less likely to get sleep or rest with the increased saddle time, resulting in poor judgment, slow reflexes, and the aforementioned hallucinations.

I disagree ... riding slowly on long events is a lot safer than fast riders think it is. Slow riders have time to take in what's going on around them ... and can avoid things like hallucinations by eating regularly.

Allowing slower riders on the course doesn't violate any "duty of care" in any way, shape, or form ... provided that the club has planned out a route that is as safe as possible for all riders, has given all riders accurate cue sheets so that everyone can find their way around, and has made sure that ample food is available for all riders no matter what their speeds are if the brevet is advertized as fully supported.

For example, when I had to reroute my 300K route last week, I eliminated certain roads as options because I knew that if there were riders out there after dark ... slow riders ... those roads would not be appropriate because of their condition, and because of the drivers on those roads. I planned my route with riders of all speeds in mind.

I haven't heard of any law suits against cycling clubs in general, or randonneuring but it is a possibility especially with the increased number of riders out there. So far, I think it just hasn't occurred to riders that they could take action because randonneuring is a sport that celebrates independence, self-reliance, etc. ... or perhaps nothing has gone terribly wrong yet.

Nevertheless, I think that clubs should not become careless and lazy when it comes to things like producing safe and accurate cue sheets, maps, and routes ... and providing a variety of foods in consideration of those with allergies if they advertize their rides as fully supported.





I disagree ... riding slowly on long events is a lot safer than fast riders think it is. Slow riders have time to take in what's going on around them ... and can avoid things like hallucinations by eating regularly.

Allowing slower riders on the course doesn't violate any "duty of care" in any way, shape, or form ... provided that the club has planned out a route that is as safe as possible for all riders, has given all riders accurate cue sheets so that everyone can find their way around, and has made sure that ample food is available for all riders no matter what their speeds are if the brevet is advertized as fully supported.

For example, when I had to reroute my 300K route last week, I eliminated certain roads as options because I knew that if there were riders out there after dark ... slow riders ... those roads would not be appropriate because of their condition, and because of the drivers on those roads. I planned my route with riders of all speeds in mind.


I don't think Octo is judging that a slower rider may well be safe on the road - but he's applying the logic of the folks that make these decisions based on risk assessment - a very different thing to a professional as opposed to what you or I may assess your risk at for any given event. We all know that you are a seasoned pro at this... and that I never make a bad decision. :thumb: It is the Lake Woebegon effect... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Wobegon_effect) that raw data tries to eliminate.

Good points though, and the point I was trying to make in the 'go faster, but not really' thread. The longer you are on the road, the higher potential for things well outside your control to affect you...

But, I'll be on the road for 24 hours this coming weekend, for the NE Fleche.
And I'll be on the road for a good 13-16 for the 300k in July.
And more than that for a 400.
And still more than that for a 600... pushing the R90 award for that one, for sure.

Good points though, and the point I was trying to make in the 'go faster, but not really' thread. The longer you are on the road, the higher potential for things well outside your control to affect you...

But, I'll be on the road for 24 hours this coming weekend, for the NE Fleche.
And I'll be on the road for a good 13-16 for the 300k in July.
And more than that for a 400.
And still more than that for a 600... pushing the R90 award for that one, for sure.

Don't they say that most accidents happen at home or near home? If we go with the longer we do something, the higher potential for bad things to happen theory, then the longer we stay home, the more chance we have of an accident ........ so heading out for a ride that takes 24 hours out of a 168 hour week is a good thing. :D

I haven't heard of any law suits against cycling clubs in general, or randonneuring but it is a possibility especially with the increased number of riders out there. So far, I think it just hasn't occurred to riders that they could take action because randonneuring is a sport that celebrates independence, self-reliance, etc. ... or perhaps nothing has gone terribly wrong yet.

Anything is possible. Anyone can sue in the U.S. for absolutely anything. All you have to do is walk down to the court house with the filing fee in hand. You can hand-write the complaint -- there are forms in the clerk's office that tell you how to do it. Don't need a lawyer, even. There would be nothing novel or creative about suing a randonneuring club. The cause of action -- negligence -- has been around longer than the United States has been a country.

This is why I ask for anyone to find any example of a suit against a randonneuring club. Heck, I'll settle for first-hand knowledge of a suit against any cycling club for an injury that occurred on an event. And what the result was.... I have trouble imagining that any such suit could survive summary judgment (dismissal before you get to trial) unless it was based on something other than mere negligence (i.e., the organizer routed people over a cliff in the dead of night).


I disagree ... riding slowly on long events is a lot safer than fast riders think it is. Slow riders have time to take in what's going on around them ... and can avoid things like hallucinations by eating regularly.

I know lots of folks here will disagree. I can only give you my opinion based on what I do for a living, and this is pretty much it: The more a person exposes him or herself to a risk, the more of a risk that person is. The slower riders spend more time exposed to the risks of randonneuring. The biggest risk to a cyclist -- from a loss perspective -- is getting hit by a car. Everthing else is small ball. Disagree if you want, but I can pretty much guarantee you that if your club hired a professional to assess its risk and make recommendations for how to best reduce it, those recommendations would disproportionately affect the slower riders. People can talk all they want about lighting and carrying extra stuff, but I'd appreciate someone putting up some data that shows how running an E6 or carrying a kevlar spoke keeps you from getting hit by a car.


Allowing slower riders on the course doesn't violate any "duty of care" in any way, shape, or form ...

It's not a duty issue, it's a risk reduction issue. Duty was #1 in my inital post. My opinion is that a randonneuring club in any common law country owes its riders pretty minimal duties under the law (unless it expressly says otherwise) -- duties that are easily discharged. I also believe that any injury that resulted on a ride would almost certainly not be the responsibility of the organizer or club. Responsibility would lie, legally, with the rider or some third party.

Risk reduction was issue #2. So you don't think there's much liklihood of someone succeeding in a suit, but still, suits are expensive to deal with -- and no one wants people getting hurt, no matter who is at fault -- so how to do reduce the incidence of injury on the activity and, therefore, the number of claims that you're likely to see? That's risk.

just so you guys know, I am completely aware that a 600k is no joke and riding through the mountains at night 30 hrs in should not be taken lightly. Because I am unexperienced in true long distance cycling I WILL have plans in place should I need to bail so I can have a friend come save me.

I like the idea of doing a ride from like 8pm till 4-5am, I think their would be alot i could learn about about myself and what to expect.

That all sounds good. There's a 300K and a 400K out of St. Louis next Saturday and the Saturday after. Any chance you can make it up there? Or we have a 300K out of Frederick, MD next Saturday. There's a 300K out of Atlanta on the 23rd. Go to www.rusa.org and click on Rides to see the schedule. Or you could ride a "permanent" (look it up on RUSA) -- there's a 320K out of Nashville and another out of Pasquo. If you can finish the permanent in 16 hours or less then you've got a good shot at timely completion of the 600. If you start the permanent at 9 pm then you'll be riding until lunchtime. Plenty of chances for sleep deprivation :-) Find a buddy to ride it with. One of the things you haven't done (or haven't described) is to ride really long. What can be tolerable for 12 hours can be agony at 24. That's part of what the progression through the SR series helps you to learn. What works for you and what doesn't. So if there's any chance at all to get out and ride at least a 300K and preferably a 400K, then that would be a great opportunity.

Nick

Don't they say that most accidents happen at home or near home? If we go with the longer we do something, the higher potential for bad things to happen theory, then the longer we stay home, the more chance we have of an accident ........ so heading out for a ride that takes 24 hours out of a 168 hour week is a good thing. :D

touché!

It is the Lake Woebegon effect... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Wobegon_effect) that raw data tries to eliminate.

Exactly. "Experience" is worthless, frankly, in making a reasoned judgment about who ought to be able to start a brevet if what you're concerned about is people being safe and avoiding injuries to participants. What you'd really want to know is, "How long are you, Dear Rider, going to be out there in that risky environment? The less time that is (either because you give up and quit or because you finish), the less concern I have about you starting my ride."

That all sounds good. There's a 300K and a 400K out of St. Louis next Saturday and the Saturday after. Any chance you can make it up there? Or we have a 300K out of Frederick, MD next Saturday. There's a 300K out of Atlanta on the 23rd. Go to www.rusa.org and click on Rides to see the schedule. Or you could ride a "permanent" (look it up on RUSA) -- there's a 320K out of Nashville and another out of Pasquo. If you can finish the permanent in 16 hours or less then you've got a good shot at timely completion of the 600. If you start the permanent at 9 pm then you'll be riding until lunchtime. Plenty of chances for sleep deprivation :-) Find a buddy to ride it with. One of the things you haven't done (or haven't described) is to ride really long. What can be tolerable for 12 hours can be agony at 24. That's part of what the progression through the SR series helps you to learn. What works for you and what doesn't. So if there's any chance at all to get out and ride at least a 300K and preferably a 400K, then that would be a great opportunity.

Nick

I would love to make the 300k's but St. Louis is a really long drive for me and saturdays are nearly impossible to get off since I work at a shop and its our busiest day by far.

I like the idea of one of the permanents out of Pasquo though, any experience with either the Music City, or Natchez trace 200 milers? Which would be closer in terrain to the middle Tn 600k? I am going to do that and possibly try to ride from after work, through the night and into my mid week day off.

I would love to make the 300k's but St. Louis is a really long drive for me and saturdays are nearly impossible to get off since I work at a shop and its our busiest day by far.

I like the idea of one of the permanents out of Pasquo though, any experience with either the Music City, or Natchez trace 200 milers? Which would be closer in terrain to the middle Tn 600k? I am going to do that and possibly try to ride from after work, through the night and into my mid week day off.

The ride organizer for your brevets runs one of those permanents, the one out of Nashville. Contact him at the email address on the RUSA website, let him know your plans (including the night start), and see what he has to say about which permanent to ride. Maybe he knows someone else who'd be interested in riding with you. Let him know your experience level and that you're trying to get ramped up at warp factor 9 for the 600K. See what he has to say about your plans. You'll never get a better feel for things than you will from talking with him.

By the way, there are later 600K's not too far away from you, including one out of North Carolina in September. So you could still consider doing some of the "shorter" rides like the 300 and 400 to build up to the 600.

Nick

[QUOTE=thebulls;8892262]On what kind of terrain do you ride a 600K in well under 20 hours?

I do not mean that one should try to go that fast ; it would be racing more than randoneuring. However my teammates of only amateurs does 540k in 13:34 with 15000 feet elevation and would have no problems whatsoever going well under 20 hours even with quite a bit more climbing. My point was to try to go with a group of strong riders, it is amazing how much easier that is.
As for the Camelbak, I did PBP with it and a blazing hot 600. I like the feeling of a light bike and do not mind the backpack at all. I do not carry all that much though.

[QUOTE=thebulls;8892262]On what kind of terrain do you ride a 600K in well under 20 hours?

I do not mean that one should try to go that fast ; it would be racing more than randoneuring. However my teammates of only amateurs does 540k in 13:34 with 15000 feet elevation and would have no problems whatsoever going well under 20 hours even with quite a bit more climbing. My point was to try to go with a group of strong riders, it is amazing how much easier that is.
As for the Camelbak, I did PBP with it and a blazing hot 600. I like the feeling of a light bike and do not mind the backpack at all. I do not carry all that much though.

I'm skeptical--can you provide published results? Some of our riders are Race Across America (RAAM) riders who know what they're doing and are extremely fast. Personally, I consider RAAM to be _the_ hardest athletic event in the world, much more challenging than Tour de France. As I mentioned, the fastest 600K finish in the last three years was about 26 hours. The fastest finish on the Urbana 200K (12000 feet of climbing) in the last five years is just under 7 hours.

Nick

Like Machka and, I'm sure, other randonneurs here, I'm also wondering why you haven't followed the accepted progression from 200km up, and what club is willing to allow that?

As a brevet coordinator for my club, I'd have to be convinced that you had a background commensurate with the kind of experience needed to jump straight into a 600km randonnee. I would, after all, have ultimate responsibility for your safety and well-being.


I find the North American tendency to require a graduated approach to brevet riding quite amusing. On more than one occasion, riders have completed the 1400 km London-Edinburgh-London as their first ever brevet. I don't know of any rider rider DNFing LEL when it was their first brevet.

I haven't heard of any law suits against cycling clubs in general, or randonneuring but it is a possibility especially with the increased number of riders out there. So far, I think it just hasn't occurred to riders that they could take action because randonneuring is a sport that celebrates independence, self-reliance, etc. ... or perhaps nothing has gone terribly wrong yet.


Well, I know of a few Australians that have died during brevets and races and several Brits also. There doesn't seem to have been successful law suits (I don't recall any law suits) as a result of these incidents.

There must have some deaths of cyclists in North America during brevets and races but the only death that lead to law suits (that I've noticed) came from a cyclist death during a recent RAGBRAI. I can't recall the details. No doubt there are others.

I'm skeptical--can you provide published results?


Have a look at the results for events like Trondheim-Oslo (540 km). http://www.styrkeproven.no/

The Scandanavians have some very strong riders, well experienced in riding long-distances in fast groups. I don't know how much climbing the events have, not having taken part yet, but I've driven a fair chunk of the country and most of it is fairly hilly.

just so you guys know, I am completely aware that a 600k is no joke and riding through the mountains at night 30 hrs in should not be taken lightly. Because I am unexperienced in true long distance cycling I WILL have plans in place should I need to bail so I can have a friend come save me.

I like the idea of doing a ride from like 8pm till 4-5am, I think their would be alot i could learn about about myself and what to expect.

I'm not sure if you're reconsidering your lighting, but one more point is that you have nothing as a helmet light - the Stella won't help you see your cue sheet at night. I used a small helmet light that was okay for reading the cue sheet, but useless for seeing things like street signs and more importantly, how close the barking dogs were getting to my ankles.:( Can't stress enough how much easier a ride is when you can see where you're going.

On what kind of terrain do you ride a 600K in well under 20 hours?

i've heard a story of a 12 hour 400k out here, so perhaps a 16-17 hour 600k would be possible with a strong/determined group.




(2) ... Does the forum realize that, from a risk management perspective, the best way to reduce risk from participants in randonnees is most likely to remove the slow(er) riders from the field?

wuh? you don't think faster speeds are more hazardous?

i don't drive a car or have car insurance, but aren't sports cars assigned the highest risk by insurance companies (e.g. their lawyers)? surely they get from a->b faster, and therefore "reduce risk", right? a rough parallel, sure - but applying your logic the slower cars would have higher rates.

look at how often pro tour riders crash, compared to how often randos crash. there is a crash just about every race. and the pros are only out there for 4-6 hours max!

there may be more DNFs from the rear of the pack, but i haven't heard of more injuries.


They expose themselves to the risks that are uniform in the sport (interactions with motorized vehicles would be the big one) over a longer period of time than the faster riders. They are also more likely to ride at night which increases exposure to drunk drivers, road hazards that are not easily seen, nocturnal animals that have a tendency to run out in front of you, etc., and it also means they're less likely to get sleep or rest with the increased saddle time, resulting in poor judgment, slow reflexes, and the aforementioned hallucinations.

one could argue that anyone entering a 600k+ brevet is already exercising "poor judgment" just by trying to do such a ride.. =]

Have a look at the results for events like Trondheim-Oslo (540 km). http://www.styrkeproven.no/

The Scandanavians have some very strong riders, well experienced in riding long-distances in fast groups. I don't know how much climbing the events have, not having taken part yet, but I've driven a fair chunk of the country and most of it is fairly hilly.

Thanks. Unfortunately, I can't read Scandinavian :-)

The fastest 600K in a decade's worth of Seattle International Randonneurs records is 22h48m, by Jan Heine, in June of 2006 (I looked back as far as 1998).

I'd say that any suggestion that any randonneur riding a course that will be as challenging as Tennessee could hope to finish in less than 20 hours is grossly misleading. Unless the fast group you're riding with keeps changing members and is towing you along with bungie cords.

A more-realistic finishing time for a strong and experienced randonneur would be in the range of 32 to 38 hours experienced by the majority of riders finishing 600K's in the DC Randonneurs region (that's the average time + or - one standard deviation). But, of course, the OP should be prepared to be out there for 40.

Nick Bull

A more-realistic finishing time for a strong and experienced randonneur would be in the range of 32 to 38 hours experienced by the majority of riders finishing 600K's In the mid west there have been a dozen or more finishes in the 20-25 hours range. I've completed 600ks at three different venues -all at less than 30 hours.

Pretty weird thread. Brevet riding - just to finish - is hardly an "extreme" event. Although, I guess for some one over weight at a hilly venue - or of course, riding through a tornado - I guess one could consider the need for medical intervention.....

I tried to get a link to the results of Trondheim Oslo but that seems to be impossible. Bjoern Hamre was on the record setting Rye-group in 2005 when they did 13:28. He was 54 at the time. I did it in 16:52 last year and had a very good ride.

i've heard a story of a 12 hour 400k out here, so perhaps a 16-17 hour 600k would be possible with a strong/determined group.

Not here in Ohio. Since I've been randonneuring, the fastest time on a 600K here is around 28 hours. Doing Jan's R60 here would be very, very impressive in this state. If you're looking for a flat, fast 600K, try the Central Florida group or North Carolina (the route to Wilmington, not the one in the mountains!).


wuh? you don't think faster speeds are more hazardous?

i don't drive a car or have car insurance, but aren't sports cars assigned the highest risk by insurance companies (e.g. their lawyers)? surely they get from a->b faster, and therefore "reduce risk", right? a rough parallel, sure - but applying your logic the slower cars would have higher rates.

Nope, not right. With sports cars and their relatively higher insurance rates, what you're looking at is the amount of time that vehicles are likely to spend at high rates of speed -- which tends to be more dangerous especially if other traffic isn't moving as fast. You're also looking at how crash-worthy an auto is, and sports cars tend to perform poorly in crash tests (especially ones involving relatively high rates of speed!). They also tend to be owned by males, who are more aggressive drivers (aggressive here meaning that they're more likely to drive fast... and to drive after drinking alcohol). Thus the high insurance rates.

I'm using the exact same logic here -- it's the exposure to the risk (in the case of a car, to high speeds and speed differentials; in the case of a cyclist, exposure to motorized vehicles on the roadway) that determines how to price that risk. I'm not saying that slower riders are more dangerous (though in some ways -- i.e., the likelihood of suffering sleep-deprivation-induced hallucinations -- they probably are). I'm saying that slower riders are exposed to the risks of randonneuring for a longer period of time. They're riskier, and therefore risk reduction measures would disproportionately impact them.

Continue with the auto hypothetical that you propose -- the speed limiter that exists on my Passat doesn't impact me. I don't drive over 132mph (which is what the chip is programmed for). It does impact those in the riskier pool -- in the case of autos, those drivers who drive really friggin' fast. Those chips are risk reduction measures designed to protect auto companies from products liability lawsuits. The risk reduction measures disproportionately impact those in the riskier pool, and have no impact at all on the rest of us. And guess what, no one cares how experienced you are at driving faster than 132 mph. It's totally irrelevant to the calculation. Actuaries and lawyers will think the same thing about your randonneuring or long-riding "experience."


one could argue that anyone entering a 600k+ brevet is already exercising "poor judgment" just by trying to do such a ride.. =]

Exactly. Which is why I'm curious to hear of any lawsuits at all, let alone successful ones, involving randonneurs.

Short version is, clubs should think hard about creating solutions to problems that don't exist. And if clubs want to reduce risk for themselves and their riders, then they ought to engage professionals in the exercise rather than guessing or, worse, thinking they know what the risks are in the sport. They should especially think about just who those risk reduction measures will impact. Many people here and elsewhere -- some very "experienced" riders -- will not like the results.