LWaB

Ivo Miesen recently posted an item on "Yet Another Cycling Forum" about qualifying for 2011 PBP.

"In short, for 2011 there will be national quota based on the number of participants in PBP 2007 and the development of participation in local BRM's. Those who have done a BRM 400 in 2010 will be allowed to register earlier as those who have completed shorter BRM's in 2010. Those who have done no BRM's in 2010 will only be allowed to register their participation towards the end."

Full thread at https://yacf.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=17236.0

This suggests that prospective PBPers should complete up to a 400 brevet in 2010, for the best chance of getting their entry accepted in 2011.

mattm

wow, so it's official, eh?

i guess this is better than cutting down on finishing times..

robertkat

Most all of the randonneurs I know do at least one, maybe two, full series each year anyhow. Sounds like this change will only serve to exclude newer riders.

Machka 

Is this true, or is this an April Fool's joke among the Randonneuring crowd? I'm almost inclined to think it's a joke based on the timing. If you're going to announce something serious, you don't announce it right at the beginning of April.


And as for cutting finishing times, I think that was just idle speculation by the racerboys in the crowd. I highly doubt they'd actually do that ... if anything extending the times would make much more sense.

LWaB

Machka, you've been riding brevets long enough to know who Ivo is. You are welcome to find the original posting on the French forum, it doesn't take long.

Extending the time limits somewhat contradicts the entire tradition of brevets, 200 km between sunrise and sunset and all that. PBP time limits have only ever been reduced, originally 10 days (in the early days of the race) to 96 hours (for the early ACP brevets) to 90 hours with options for more restricted time limits.

bmike

10 days? Wow.
Sounds like a fun way to tour the French countryside.

My wife (who, for irony, runs marathons) would love to do a long long ride... but not in 90 hours. She'd rather tour along and enjoy the sites, stopping at every town for a bite to eat and a photograph. She does not understand why we need to 'finish' in 90 hours. Oddly, I don't understand why someone would want to run 26 miles (much less 10...).

USAZorro

If they're going to suck the fun out of the event, I may have to reconsider if I want to attempt it.

spokenword

The event itself is tremendous fun. I think the discussion is about ensuring that the event isn't overloaded by people who want to share in the fun.

Riding through the French countryside, being feted like a superstar by eager teenagers, getting lovely cakes served to you by noble grandmothers, laughing along with an international cast of tough, friendly and worthy cyclists, pillaging cafes between Paris and Brittany, giving a thumbs up to pretty girls cheering you on. That's all fun.

Sharing toilet facilities with 5000 other sweaty, dirty athletes. Competing for inadequate bed space when you're hoping to get at least 90 minutes of sleep in the next 36 hours. Queueing at interminable lines in overcrowded cafeterias at the controle. That's a little less fun.

"They" as in the ACP are not sucking the fun out of the event. Ruining the fun is being taken care of by "us."

USAZorro

It helps to have perspective. I was more referring to the possibility of them reducing the allowed time for completion. I'm hoping they don't turn it into an event that precludes the participation of the "fit, but not so fast".

CliftonGK1

Sounds like "they" are trying to keep PBP from becoming another STP.

STP is only a double (or back-to-back) and the rider cap is rumoured to be 10,000 this year. Not a typo: Ten Thousand Riders.
I worked out the math on this once before. Assuming 7000 evenly spaced riders (not counting the 1-day finishers who leave 1 hour earlier) leaving over a 2 hour period so the fastest ones are 40mi ahead. That's 1 rider every 30 feet, for 40 solid miles.
Someone told me the wait for the port-o-johns at the first rest stop was 25 minutes, and there was a line of about 30 of the things!

I don't have plans for PBP in my future, but I'd prefer not to hear of it becoming an insane mess like STP has evolved into.

spokenword

yeah, I think between the R60/80/90 talk last month and the scuttlebutt around PBP qualification changes recently, there's a lot of sentiment in US circles at least about focusing on faster riders for the sake of maintaining the challenge of randonneuring, but I think that there's a pretty healthy push back against that from folks who view randonneuring as a fast tour.

I think it's inescapable how randonneuring will always sit at this balance point between the tourists and racers. It's part of the sport's strength and appeal, but I only hope that it never changes such that it favors one side at the cost of the other.

Machka 

There is a lot of push back against reducing the times ... and I'm definitely one of the ones pushing against it. If they reduce the times ... I drop out of randonneuring all together. There are other aspects of cycling I enjoy that don't involve the hassle of struggling to meet a time requirement ... like 24-hour TTs, and tours. But in the past, the time dropped because of things like paved roads and better bicycles, but there's really no reason for it to drop again now.

That idea was proposed by a few racerboys as a way to reduce the number of DNFs on the PBP ... based on the info from the 2007 PBP. Well ... there were DNFs from the fast rider crowd, from the slow rider crowd, and from everything in between. Why? Because the weather was particularly bad. Reducing the qualifying times wouldn't have made any difference at all. I was one of the DNFs on the 2007 PBP ... not because of a time factor, but rather because I was having some personal issues out there, and also just wasn't enjoying myself anymore ... and Rowan and I had two more weeks of touring planned for after the PBP which we did want to enjoy.

However, I can see the idea behind encouraging people to ride at least one brevet in 2010, and then the whole series in 2011, because it gives people more experience wirh riding long distances.

I can even see the idea of encouraging people to start their 400Ks at night. In Manitoba, our 400Ks always started at 4 am, and even though I'm not a morning person, I liked that. I like starting my rides in the dark and seeing the sun come up.

And I love the 10 pm starts of the RM1200 and the PBP ... that's when I'm the most awake and energetic, and I can usually maintain that energy until near sun-up. And then ... it's a wonderful feeling to see the sun come up, to look down at your computer, and to realize that you've already covered 140 or 150 kms of the event.

mattm

so there's talk in this thread of shortening qualifying times, but is there any official talk of that?

i got the impression they're doing this two-stage/early reg thing instead of lowering finishing times..

Machka 

No.

But like I said, the day they do is the day I'm out of randonneuring. Shortening the times any more than they already are makes the event a race, and if I want to race, I'll do a 24-hour TT.

Fortunately there are a large number of French people involved and the French ride the PBP like a rolling picnic. They've got the right attitude about it all. I can't see them being enthusiastic about turning it into a race ... having to ride fast would eat into the mid-ride restaurant and wine time!

LWaB

Audax Australia recently received more information from the ACP (also
circulated to the other members of LRM) regarding 2011 PBP
qualification. You can read it in French and English at
https://audax.org.au/public/index.php...363&Itemid=333

LWaB

Not so, there are plenty of people in the 80 and 84 hour start that are just aiming to finish. Check out the 'lump' of people finishing PBP in the last 5 hours for each start time, it looks very similar. I did the 84 hour start in 2007, versus 90 hour in '99 and '03. I may pick the 80 or 84 hour start next time and I won't be racing.

mitchel

No danger of that. The Europeans don't need no Porta Potties. They just whip it out on the side of the road, in plain view of traffic, and often without getting off of their bikes. It's a cultural thing.
During the PBP, on the outskirts of any town, you'd see hundreds of pizzlers. During the last PBP, portapotties and restrooms were mostly occupied by bikers wrapped in space blankets or plastic trying to warm up and get some sleep.

Machka 

If I'm not mistaken the biggest group of riders is the 90 hour group ... and many of them would be racing to finish in 84 hours or less. Just because some people are speed demons doesn't mean all of us are ... or want to be.

LWaB

A faster PBP still would not be a race, just a more difficult brevet - like the Endless Mountains 1200 is a more difficult brevet than PBP because of the greater elevation gain.

Machka 

Well so far reducing the time limits isn't in the official discussion, and hopefully people like me can keep it out of the official discussion. Hopefully the voice of the slower riders .. the riders who want to keep randonneuring as a happy medium between racing and touring, will be heard.

LWaB

Don't be surprised that many of the faster riders also enjoy randonnees as the happy medium between racing and touring.

CliftonGK1

Not that I have any plans for a 1200 lined up in my immediate future, but as a proud member of the DFL club and having eeked out a finish by just 1 minute on the clock during my first event this year, I'll speak up. I don't have plans of joining the R60 crew. Hell, I can't even imagine myself ever riding that fast. I like riding at a slow to moderate pace and enjoying the scenery. I like sitting at a park bench under the full moon for 15 minutes and eating a sandwich when a "ride-by" would have worked just as well for the info control. I'm sure I'm not the only one, because there were still riders coming in after me last Saturday. Maybe they're the ones working their way up to riding PBP, and I'm sure that lowering the qualifying times would hurt their (or someone's) chances.

spokenword

basically, to summarize the additional info -- two key takeways are
So, if you want to maximize your chances of getting to PBP - the message is simple: finish a 400k in 2010 and finish as many brevets as you can in your home country starting now, also encourage as many people as possible to finish brevets in your home country. Nothing fancy or flashy. The focus is just on participation and on finished brevets.

... either that or move to Poland ...

noteon 

It never occurred to me that being the father of twins could prepare me for long-distance cycling events.

Machka 

Actually, the information we've been given here in Canada is that it only applies to the clubs here that have more than 50 members. Each individual club in Canada is at the level of RUSA, Audax UK, Audax Australia, etc. So we're guessing the ruling only applies to the BC Randonneurs and maybe the Ontario Randonneurs. Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Nova Scotia only sent a small handful of members to the 2007 PBP, so it might not apply to them.