bmike

+1

Take a look at some of the posts in this sub-forum, and the confusion works right in.
Any distance can be long.

Endurance too, can be relative, but it seems more apt for the forum name.
Any chance of changing it?

jcm

In observing this Forum, it is obvious to me that the term, "Long Distance Cycling" is relative. To me, it describes the amount of miles accrued, not necessarily the geographical area covered. I will sometimes ride 100 miles on a saturday and another 60 to 80 on sunday, but I return home each day. Seems to fit the bill for Long Distance Cycling.

I consider the term, "Touring" to more aptly describe a non-supported, multi-day or week bike trip to 'somewhere else.' Get there by ship, plane, train, or automobile, or ride there. Can be credit card variety. Under a week, local area, it's a Mini-Tour.

I wish I had the time for the latter. Til then, I'll live vicariously thru you folks... maybe Austria in May.

BobCan

Touring vs Longdistance
This is all new to me and I guess that's why I'm here.

I have been riding Bike for years, but they have always been powered by motors not by my own leg power. I would say that I have been used to touring a longdistance on my bikes in the past. Most of my trips are of the three week kind, and I do a normal 1,000k per day. I know that once I move to the bike without motors that this will drop to 100k per day if I'm lucky. The thing is when I'm touring I don't really care about distance, I just ride until I want to stop. Longdistance is a set amount of distance you want to do. Like an Iron butt ride 1000 miles in 24hours on a motorbike. I wonder what it would be on a bicycle? I guess the longdistance guys could tell you.

I'm planning to do a tour of Spain for a month on a bicycle. Although I don't own a bicycle at this point I'm hoping that you people here will help me on picking one out for my need. I'll need saddle bags to carry clothes camping gear and cooking gear. I guess I'm looking for brand names that will make the trip for me. I'm from Canada and will be flying to Spain, should I be buying the bike there or should I be bringing it from Canada.

Any help you can give would be great!

Thanks,

BobCan

Machka 

In the cycling world, our "Iron butt" rides are 24-hour challenges too where cyclists ride as much as 500-ish miles in 24 hours ... that's 24 hours straight through.

We've also got Randonneuring events where cyclists ride 1200kms (750 miles) in 90 hours or less, straight through.

Have a look at my website in the signature line below for some examples of long distance riding.


Touring, on the other hand, is generally multi-day riding where you sleep at night in between the days of riding. It's much more relaxed without set controls or a set distance. There is a touring forum here too, if you also wanted to have a look in there.

Rowan

It all comes down to the levels of personal challenge and the physical and emotional achievements that are derived.

Long distance *anything* is recognised by the broader community as an activity that involves a high degree of challenge and commitment and planning and training and intensity of participation that will decide success or failure.

Touring *anything* involves much less of a challenge and intensity of commitment and personal preparation; the outcomes or achievements are less physical, and the values more emotional.

I don't buy the idea, either, that one person's 10km jaunt is another person's marathon. The threshhold for long-distance cycling that is widely accepted is the imperial century in one ride within one day.

And yes, there are touring cyclists who do consistently 160km a day and who would be classified as long-distance riders... but they are few and far between.

wagathon

The term "touring" refers to rides where the rider has some measure of self-sufficiency, e.g., generally clothes, a tent and a sleeping bag at a minimum. Some of the more intrepid carry stoves and do their own cooking. Even "credit card" touring requires the rider to carry clothes and toiletries so there's more thought about what to bring and how to pack things than is involved in a ride--even a long distance ride.

I don't see touring as synonomous with involving less of a challenge when you consider that hundreds of miles may be involved . Additionally, on a tour, you take the road as it comes, e.g., on one day, a big hill with 30 lbs on the back of the bike after a big breakfast that has to last you to the next town that is many hours away, rain the next day, a head wind the next day, a campground on top a craggy knoll with nothing but a water spiggot the next day, spending hours cleaning up your ride after spending the night on a sandy island in the howling wind, &etec.

Rowan

In the majority of randonneuring events I have ridden, there has been no support. I've had to fend for myself... of be self-supported. There are many, many riders throughout the world who qualify as such. And yes, in a way, long-distance riders in the context of this forum are tourists; one of the reasons why I participate in randonnees outside my state or country is to "tour" new places, but in the end, I don't really see that much as I ride and event.

With touring, there is ample opportunity to stop on a whim, and stay for long, unplanned periods to expand an understanding of culture or to just chill. If the challenge gets too much, well, you can bail, or stop, or keep going at a much reduced pace.

This is less likely to happen in long-distance cycling because of the driven need (or mission) to cover X distance by Y time to get to Z place... and what is in between often is a blur, or is not indulged in for any period longer than to refuel, rehydrate, go to the toilet, change clothes and get going again. And... there are touring cyclists who have this mentality!!!!

When a cyclist moves into the long-distance mould, various factors start to come into play, including judging fuelling and rehydration issues, and physical issues such as bike fit and injury which for most touring cyclist are less critical. In fact, I would venture to say, that long-distance cyclists in whatever form (competitive or touring) rely less on commercial food outlets and commercial campgrounds, instead relying on their carried powders, energy gels and bars, and are prepared to doss down stealth-style anywhere they can. A touring cyclist can stop and recover from a niggling injury, and likely can compensate for numb fingers and hotfoot through improper fit; a long-distance cyclist needs to overcome these issues before starting out, because they can become dealbreakers.

Just as a further example of where I am coming from -- I drove across North America from western Canada to participate in BMB then drove back, competing in the UMCA 24H Race. Putting aside the cycling events, that drive was as long-distance "event" for me because it was against a time scale, it involved up to 24 hours a day of driving, and there was no stopping to "smell the roses". In other circumstances, when it might have taken two weeks across and two weeks back, it might have been called a tour.

Some of my background is in motor sport. The Indy 500 is different from a long-distance 24-hour Le Mans style race ...they both use racing cars but those cars are entirely different, and the drivers have different talents. A World Championship rally is run over quite short stages, and is quite different from the long-distance Paris-Dakar rally -- and the vehicles and drivers are different.

I know touring is not racing, and I am not denigrating the efforts and achievements of tourist cyclists because I am one, too. In fact, as a long-distance cyclist, I look forward to the less challenging wander of touring. They do have quite distinct personnas... something I *can* understand because I do both.

foggydew

I think that it is ridiculous and arrogant that some cyclists on this forum have some how convinced themselves that "long distace cycling" is reserved for some self-proclaimed elitist group who are able to do brevets and other "ultra-cycling" events. I will repeat my statement from a previous post -- a cyclist who gets off the sofa and 'TOURS" across North America is a "long distance cylist". The elitists on this thread can call themselves anything they want but the phrase "long distance cycling" will NEVER be reserved to someone who can endure a day or two or four of stress. Cycling tourists who go out on the road for 10 days or 3 weeks or 4 monts or 2 years are all long distance cyclists and deserved to be recongized as such.

And I must disagree with Rowan...long distance cyling IS relative for the INDIVIDUAL. If I have never cycled more than the 5km back and forth to work, then going out for a 40 km ride IS long distance for me. Maybe not for the "ultra-cyclist" but for the person doing the 40km, its like going around the world!!

bmike

There is a touring sub forum, a racing sub forum, a commuting forum, even a FOO sub forum. This sub forum is specific to brevets, randonees, 24 hour events, etc. as the people who lobbied for this forum have defined it, and called it "Long Distance Cycling".

I don't think anyone would argue that a touring cyclist is not a long distance cyclist... this sub forum could have perhaps been better named "endurance cycling" or "cycling really long distances within a time limit with a mountain dew strapped to your helmet and angry cagers running you off the roads while trying to open a gu packet and eating a turkey breast out of your handlbar bag", but instead, Long Distance was used.

Its semantics. In this context it works.

Rowans point is valid. There is a certain threshold distance which most people agree as "long distance". Sure, everything is relative. You don't really call yourself a marathoner if you've never done one... and that seems to be the benchmark for long distance running, much like the century is a benchmark for a long ride - as demonstrated by the thousands of organized events around the world each year. People rarely go to an organized event for 10 miles on a bike.... or 20. Half centuries and metrics start pushing you into "long distance" territory - but for racers and endurance cyclists, these are often training rides.

If I sit on the couch all day and eventually walk to the fridge to get a soda, then to the cupboard to get a bag of chips, I could argue that relative to my day, I was a long distance walker... but relative to most active people I'm just lazy.


And I don't think anyone here is dismissing the accomplishments of touring, BMX, and racing folks. We just happen to like talking about a certain type of riding... and Machka worked hard to get a sub forum so we could do just that. Congrats on your 5k rides and your 40k rides. Perhaps this isn't the sub forum for you.

foggydew

Then why not change the name of this forum to "endurance" or "ultra" cycling. Why take a phrase like "long distance" and narrow it down to a definition that only describes some long distance cyclists? I would suggest that people on this forum do an Internet search for "long distance cycling" or "long distance touring" - you may be surprised about the results...

And yes, I go on 5km and 40 km rides --- and 200 km and 2000 km tours and have experienced day rides in the form of brevets of 200km and 300km. But who cares, its all relative...

wagathon

How about, "Extreme Dayrides?" Even a single day of a two-week tour could qualify as fitting the category.

bmike

I think the sub forum name has to stick for technical reasons... not sure though, but this has come up before.

Why not ask Joe if its possible, then start a poll to see who wants it changed, and then you can lobby a moderator and LD forum readers to press for this...

You seem pretty upset by this.

bmike

Most LD events are longer than a day...

400k - 27 hours
600k - 40 hours
1200k - 90 hour time limit

Then there is RAAM, the 508, the ADK 540, 24 hour time trials...

foggydew

How about both? You are touring. You are going long distances (270 miles in three days). Long distance touring, long distance cycling. The point I'm trying to make in my posts is that the description "long distance" can apply to any number of kinds of cycling - brevets, touring, racing,... I don't want to change the name of the touring forum to Long Distance Touring, Touring is just fine. My objection is the term Long Distance being narrowed down to only one kind of cycling.

foggydew

You're right. It is silly to get upset about something so trivial. It doesn't really matter what is defined on this forum as long distance cycling. What really matters is that we cycle. I will continue to do my 5km, 23 km, 56 km, 199 km rides and my long multi-day tours --- and they will be all GOOD...

Machka 

This forum was created to have a fairly narrow definition of long distance cycling. Just like the racing forum is about racing, or the single speed/fixed gear forum is about single speeds or fixed gears. Most of the forums here have a fairly narrow definition ... which is why they exist. They appeal to certain people, and rather than having threads about each of these very narrow areas disappear in one big general forum, separate forums have been created. In this case a long distance forum (which could be called an "endurance" forum, or an "ultra-distance" forum, I suppose, although "long distance" was chosen to include those riding centuries) was created so that threads about the events that appeal to long distance/endurance/ultra-distance cyclists would not disappear somewhere in the depths of the Road Forum or Touring Forum, as they were doing in the past.

It does NOT mean that people who tour do not cycle long distances ... that distinction was never implied. Instead it is about specific long distance events/goals, etc. See my Post #17 for further clarification.

Incidentally, I am a long distance (or endurance, or ultra-distance) cyclist, who also tours long distances. I do both. I post here about my long distance events (centuries, brevets, randonnees, etc.), and in the touring forum about my tours.

Most of the time, in my experience, there is a considerable distinction between the two ... although I did ride a century on one day of one tour, so the line does blur a bit now and then.


As it happens, the Paris-Brest-Paris 1200K is coming up in 2007 and there will be 4000+ cyclists around the world getting ready for it. Some of those cyclists will be posting here ... and that event was another reason that this forum was created. This is a place where those of us going to the PBP can discuss our training, equipment, nutrition, and where we can discuss our qualifying brevets.

Of course, in addition to that particular event, all those who are completing other long distance events (whether they are organized group rides or solo adventures) around the world are more than welcome to discuss their training, equipment, nutrition, and rides here too.


I don't know if anyone has noticed the little blurb under the heading Long Distance Forum. In case you haven't here it is:

"Do you enjoy centuries, double centuries, brevets, randonnees, and 24-hour time trials? Share ride reports, and exchange training, equipment, and nutrition information specific to long distance cycling."

That, in a nutshell, is what this forum is all about!

PurpleK

I'm with foggydew on this. Even though it is better defined by the little blurb under the heading, the title Long Distance Cycling is too broad a term for the relatively limited subject matter, If the forum was created to have a fairly narrow definition of long distance cycling, then a name more descriptive of the subject intent may have been better. (Someone suggested "Endurance Cycling." Sounds pretty accurate to me.) Anyone that rides from Chicago to San Francisco is a long distance cyclist, even if they did it in daily segments of fifty miles and slept eight hours in hotels every night. There is clearly a need for a forum to cover the intended subject matter, but the name - at least to me - is misleading.

Machka 

Well, "Endurance Cycling" might be a good name, and if it can be changed, and enough people care about changing it, I suppose it could be changed.

However, to me, "Long Distance" is more inclusive than "Endurance". You see, to me, endurance rides start at somewhere around the 300K or double century, and ultra-distance rides start at the 24-hour point. Long Distance rides, then, include centuries and those training for centuries. But that might just be my perspective.

Nevertheless, the blurbs under the headings are there to further describe the forums if the titles of the forums happen to be a bit vague ..... although I do kind of wonder how many people read them.

bmike

Machka,

I think the forum is fine as it is... its arguing about semantics at this point.

If some people want it changed maybe they can start a poll and lobby for it... you've done enough work getting us this far - we LDrs who post here aren't discounting or disparaging any type of riding - its just that in this specific forum we've defined things in a certain way... if people don't agree, there are other forums that may be a better fit for their riding style.

PurpleK

Yep, but semantics are important in helping someone find what it is they are searching for. It doesn't help when the title is misleading. Tourists are clearly long distance cyclists, yet this forum seems to discount that. If tourists are to be excluded - and I have no problem with that as there is a separate forum more suited to that topic- then the current name is inappropriate and should be amended to something more specific to the intended purpose of this forum.

...I don't think anyone should have to start a poll or lobby for anything. This is not a beauty contest in which who gets the most votes wins, it's pointing out an inaccuracy which can lead to confusion. Those of us who think the name is misleading are just pointing that out in an effort to help make the intended purpose clearer to all.

If things are defined in a certain way, then define them in the certain narrow terms which accurately reflect what the forum is intended to serve instead of broader terms whose true purpose is known only to the relatively few people who make it mean what they want it to mean.

The Octopus 

I'm late to the debate, but I'll take up the semantic challenge:

(1) If I rode 50 miles a day, every day after work for two months out of my front door here in Ohio, it's unlikely that anyone would call me either a cycle tourist or a long distance cyclist. Sure, that's a lot of miles and plenty of people, even some serious riders of all stripes, would think this an impressive feat. But it's not long distance. And it's sure not touring. Even if I stop to smell all the roses, take photos, and camp in a tent in my back yard. Still not a tour.

(2) Now if I rode 50 miles a day from Ohio to the Bay Area, taking 2 months to do the ride.... Probably no dispute that I'm now "on tour." Note that there's really no fitness difference at all in accomplishing (1) and (2) -- no matter how one does either ride. I could, if I wanted to, do (1) and (2) on the same bike carrying the exact same gear, whether that's a lot of gear or absolutely nothing that I don't already take on my 50-mile after-work club ride. The critical difference, and why we'd fundamentally treat (1) and (2) differently, is that now I've actually gone somewhere. Traveled. Of course, Ohio to Sausalito is "long distance." But it's not any longer than racking up 1500 miles a month in my backyard. And I could, if I wanted, impose the exact same financial constraints on both rides. I could also makes both rides look alike experientially -- either fast or slow, planned or not, whimsical or focused, whatever. I guarantee you that I (and many, many others) could do 50 miles a day across the country on a racing steed carrying little but a credit card. And it'd be a great workout, but I could also hang with the guys and gals at the local 50-mile training rides on a fully loaded touring bike (sans BOB trainler, of course!). No one is ever going to tell me, though, that successive 50-mile rides in my back yard, carrying gear, even never traveling the same road twice, is a "tour." Carrying all the crap that is indicia of a "tour" on such a ride doesn't make it one. Smelling the roses doesn't make it one. Going some place, over some extended period of time, is a "tour." The distinction is really one, at its core, of geography -- going somewhere by bike. Nothing more. Some tours are longer than others. Some faster. The distance traveled on tour is, usually, a long distance. But it's not "long distance cycling." It's touring.

(3) Long distance cycling requires covering some considerable distance, usually -- but not necessarily -- under some time constraint. Long distance cycling can, but need not, occur on a tour. If a long-distance ride spans multiple days, then there's usually -- but not necessarily, if the rider is fast enough -- some element of sleep deprivation and significant degridation of riding speed involved. The longest "long distance" rides out there don't usually last more than a few weeks (RAAM; Le Tour Direct; the Elite PAC Tour). Sea-to-sea is definitely a "long distance" no matter how you do it. But you won't convince many folks that solo RAAM finishers and those taking the summer to do the same ride fall into the same category.

(4) Long distance is distinct from racing. Randonneuring is long distance. To some, it can also be racing. Ultra events are races. Sure, there's a lot of overlap: some long distance cyclists are also endurance bicycle racers. Every endurance bicycle racer is a long distance cyclist. In the same vein, some tours can also take on aspects of a long distance ride. But note that very, very few long distance rides are tours. (The super-long RUSA free-ride permanents come to mind as falling into both categories.)

We can all discuss these categories at the margins, but in the end, I think most cyclists would see them as distinct categories and would not be confused in discussing them. Nor would many be misdirected in seeking out information about "long distance riding" and "touring" on BikeForums. That there's overlap on the margins of each category (is the 30-day, fully supported PAC Tour a "tour" or a "long distance ride"? How about the 17-day version? Is this one also a "race," since you can RAAM-qualify on it?) is hardly surprising. I think that semantic overlap is a good thing -- we can each learn a lot by taking a look at how other people like to ride bikes.

And, of course, none of this makes any value judgments or establishes some bull**** heirarchy of cycling worthiness. There's nothing superior, in any way, to riding 50 miles versus 500 in one day. And there's no more moral righteouness attached to crossing the country as compared with doing laps in my neighborhood. Folks who see cycling that way, well... they ought to ride more to help lessen the anxiety, self-worth issues, and anger in their lives.

wagathon

You're setting the stage here, I understand that, but just to make sure, we all agree this is called exercise, right? I think what may be confusing is that, some folks (like me) did not come to the discussin realizing that what was being discussed was organized rides--from point A to B--perhaps lasting longer than 24 hours and even several days, involving competion with other riders, and probably some personal, team and/or event support personnel and facilities, i.e., we were simply drawing on our own experiences in solo riding and riding with friends and trying to fit them into what we thought was some kind of objective scheme for catagorizing these experiences.

prestonjb

Unfortunatly I think it is all in the mind's eye.

Let's see... prestonjb's view...
1) Touring: Loaded bike... Riding 120+ miles a day... Cross the USA in 25 days.
2) Long Distance riding: 24 hours of Sebring
3) Touring: Leaving the house to ride in two days to Mt Dora to do the bicycle festival(168 miles firstday, 135 miles second day)
* NOTE: Only carried the jersey on my back and a zip lock bag with a toothbrush!!!
4) Touring: Riding 168 miles to go to a 200K brevet
5) LDC: Riding the 200k the next day

Hey I just figured out the difference:

A) Touring... Riding long distances carrying a tooth brush
B) LDC... Riding long distances without a tooth brush!!!!

hee hee hee...

kreg

This is a very interesting topic.

I have often wondered how to describe the cycling i do and have sometimes called it long distance commuting... it works for me but confuses everyone i talk to.

I dont race competatively. I dont stop to smell the roses either and like to move as fast as i can to justify the flapjacks im eating.

I dont cycle for just for the sake of it, just to get a good time, or to get some nice photos. I do it primarly to get from a to b ASAP.

For example im at university in Cardiff Wales and my brother was arriving at liverpool airport 200 miles away and i wanted to meet him. I left cardiff in the morning and cycled 10 miles to the hospital im at in newport (on the way) did a days training then left at 6ish and cycled 30 miles till the light went camped in a tesco parkinglot and then cycled the rest of the way 160 miles in the morning to arrive intime to meet my bro off his flight at 2pm.

I was carrying one backpacks worth of cloths, things to give my brother, a small tool kit, a sleeping bag and lots of flapjack.

Was i touring or LDC?

Kreg

Bekologist

what if we're long distance cyclists but abhor riding with crowds or in organized events?

what if ones' perspeceptive is that organized sporting events, brevets, randoneuering, whatever, are LAME. That getting together with 4,000 other people to ride Paris to Brest to Paris and back- sounds like NO FUN at all?

If I'll go ride 200K in a day for fun but don't rely on any 'club' for emotional howdy doos, snazzy jerseys, or the chance to brag about my organized accomplishments later,

Am I still a long-distance cyclist? Can I still browse this forum and chime in occassionally?