How RUSA can do more about safety

[Old5ten]

i've been asked to submit what i think could be done by RUSA to promote safety. 

one the one hand, i appreciate the opportunity (although it feels like i'm doing others' homework) and am going to make full use of it, on the other hand i feel strongly that i've not been the only proponent on this issue and that the voices of all interested members should be heard, especially those who've spoken up before and been disregarded.   this type of discussion should be out in the open and not restricted to rusa board meetings.

obviously, most things stated here are my personal opinion and all the points made can be approached from many different perspectives.  i've tried to include various statistics and outside sources to give a foundation for my reasoning.  

lets briefly look at some national statistics for 2009 (the latest i could get my hands on): 70% of cycling fatalities occurred in urban areas, most cyclists killed were male, and of those, roughly 70% were between the ages of 35 and 74 years old.  it is noteworthy that the vast majority of randonneurs falls into the categories of male and age 35 to 74.

randonneuring obviously poses some of the same risks that all cyclists face, but i think we have to acknowledge that there are additional safety factors that could (and in my opinion) should be addressed.

in particular, i'm thinking about route design, sleep deprivation, group riding skills, and overuse injuries.

being an organized event, brevets follow specific routes.  imho, these routes should be planned around the tenets of safety and enjoy-ability.  unfortunately, they are governed by other factors, such as the location of controls/resupply stops, the specificity of distance, making sure that riders can't 'cheat' by taking short cuts, limiting the amount of climbing, etc.  the self imposed logistics of the ride supersede and restrict the spirit of randonneuring.  

many of us can probably think of examples when we're wondering: 'why the hell is this crappy (insert your reason here) section part of this (otherwise really nice) ride?'  for me, the most prominent example (there are others) is that of the sfr 400k, which includes a stretch of hwy. 101 and a section of country road that runs next to a casino.  

for those not initiated with norcal rides, this happens north of san francisco, in an area that has a good network of beautiful and solitary roads.  hwy. 101 is the main north/south traffic artery in this area.  it is only open to bicycles in a relatively short stretch that doesn't offer a nearby alternative.  although it has a relatively wide shoulder and a rumble strip (which riders occasionally touch), there is much high speed traffic in addition to debris on the shoulder.  it would be quite feasible to have an alternate 400k that avoids this particular section and the casino with it's potentially large number of inebriated patrons just a a few miles further down the road, but my sense is that various logistics (see above) get in the way.

below is a link to the cdc fact sheet for drunk driving and it's impacts.  the thing that stands out to me is that nearly one third of traffic fatalities in 2009 involved alcohol.

http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/impaired_driving/impaired-drv_factsheet.html

in the world of cycling, sleep deprivation can be associated with randonneuring and ultra events.  it is best characterized by that cloud of fog which obscures the mind when you've been riding all day and all night with little or no sleep, in certain instances multiple days and nights in a row.  science shows us that the effects of sleep deprivation are not encouraging and statistic show that the number of driving related accidents due to sleep deprivation is staggering.  as a society we regulate commercial truck drivers and airline pilots because we recognize the dangers.  the deaths of two bay area cyclists drive home the point for me.  kristy gough and matt peterson were killed on a morning training ride by a chp officer who fell asleep behind the wheel, crossed the center line, and plowed into their group.  it actually doesn't take a whole lot before sleep deprivation becomes the equivalent of driving under the influence.  there's a bunch of data to support this, but i'll simply leave you with a couple of links.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11359171

next time you're out on a 600k or riding pbp, check yourself on the stanford sleepiness scale (if you're alert enough).  i remember people falling asleep in mid-conversation during pbp.

  

http://www.stanford.edu/~dement/sss.html

i'd say most riders rank somewhere around a 4 and up at various points during a long ride ride.

finally we have group riding skills and overuse injuries.  group riding skills are essential and should be practiced in a variety of situations.  thinking of the start on pbp in 2007, i find many randonneurs lack even basic skills.  maybe an official randonneuring clinic could make a difference.  !rusa randonneuring 101! could be a clinic that covers things beyond just bike skills.

we don't have any statistics to back this up, but my sense is that within the greater sport of cycling, randonneuring has a disproportionate share of acute and chronic overuse injuries.  on a personal level, i never had achilles tendon problems until i rode a 600k brevet and never had knee problems until i rode pbp, even after doing long tours and doubles.  this should be studied and addressed.

the fundamental problem with randonneuring (in terms of safety) is the way it is structured.  riding long distances with time limits.  building routes around controls and other limiting factors.

what can be done (utopia):

allow distances to be variable, in order to accommodate better route selection.  don't let decisions be guided by arbitrary fixed lengths (400k etc.), control locations, the ability to 'cheat,' etc.

eliminate time limits, in order to allow riders more rest/flexibility.

eliminate fixed controls to allow better route selection

what can be done (other):

official sag on brevets as a standard, not an option.  the idea of being self-supported is absolute fallacy when you have to design your routes around controls.

potential chp/law enforcement on route (most bike races utilize that quite effectively to monitor courses, intersections, etc.)

collect data, conduct research, establish statistics relevant to the sport.  do this in a uniform, not haphazard, way.  i would go beyond jonathan berk's accident study suggestion, let's include incidents, injuries, mechanicals, etc.

establish criteria (reaction test, etc.) to prevent sleep deprived riders on the road

skills clinics and official safety promotion

randonneuring is growing as a sport.  i think it is time for the official governing body, rusa and its administrators, to take a long, hard look at safety.  imho, a helmet rule, a waiver, and a 'don't do stupid stuff!' at the start, while nice and appropriate, aren't enough.  ignoring jonathan's suggestions, making fun of peter's concussion stories, just doesn't seem like a good way to go.

let the heresy be enough, i'm running for cover 8^).

elmar 

.

[Rob Hawks]

Setting aside the specifics included in this posting for just a moment, one general but important take-away from this posting could be that progress and improvement will require contributions from many people. RUSA, as a 100% volunteer organization with no paid staff, and no reimbursement for time contributed, exists entirely because of those volunteer contributions. Has your RUSA membership lapsed? Consider renewing. See a candidate running for a RUSA position that you can support? Vote in the election. Are there RUSA/ACP events near you? Consider volunteering. See something that you think isn't as you feel it should be and it doesn't look like anyone is doing something about it? Send mail directly to a RUSA committtee or group and ask your questions. The RUSA web page has a very useful search function that will give you group email addresses to which you can send your questions or comments. 

rob hawks

[Steve Rice]

Elmar somebody wrote:
<snip>

lets briefly look at some national statistics for 2009 (the latest i could get my hands on): 70% of cycling fatalities occurred in urban areas, most cyclists killed were male, and of those, roughly 70% were between the ages of 35 and 74 years old.  it is noteworthy that the vast majority of randonneurs falls into the categories of male and age 35 to 74.

Really????  How many of those 35-74 year olds were randonneurs instead of guys riding around in the dark in urban areas without lights and reflective gear?

 

<snip>

what can be done (other):

official sag on brevets as a standard, not an option.  the idea of being self-supported is absolute fallacy when you have to design your routes around controls.

potential chp/law enforcement on route (most bike races utilize that quite effectively to monitor courses, intersections, etc.)

I know how I would respond if these were made into requirements.  I would immediately resign as RBA.  My region isn't big enough to pay police, or pay for a real sag.

Steve Rice

KY RBA

RUSA #1552

 

[Jan Heine]

>I know how I would respond if these were made into requirements. I
>would immediately resign as RBA. My region isn't big enough to pay
>police, or pay for a real sag.

Randonneuring is a big tent of riders who can have different outlooks
and priorities. This inevitably will reflect on the discussion of
safety. At this point, it seems that everybody has opinions, which
usually mesh with how they perceive the sport. Some believe that
riding fast is dangerous, so they may suggest speed limits. Others
think that riding slow is dangerous because you spend more time on
the road, so they may suggest shortening the time limits.

I think the big problem we have right now is a total lack of data. We
don't even know what the risks of randonneuring are.

If a police officer falls asleep at the wheel and ploughs into a
group of randonneurs, then mandating sleep breaks for riders won't
help. If riders are dying from heart attacks during brevets, then a
sag wagon won't be of any help.

I know it's an old subject, but it seems meaningless to try and
improve randonneuring safety as long as we do not know where the
risks lie, or even how great they are.

A quantitative study would allow us to assess the risks. Once we
agree on where the risks of randonneuring lie, we still can disagree
on how to mitigate them, but we are at least one step further. Such a
study has been suggested in the past through simple reporting of
incidents that occur at brevets. It would be a standardized form that
would take five minutes to fill out after every brevet. We had
several qualified people volunteer to analyze the data to figure out
which results are statistically relevant.

Everything else is just battling opinions in the absence of data.

Jan Heine
Editor
Bicycle Quarterly
http://www.bikequarterly.com

Follow our blog at http://janheine.wordpress.com/

[Old5ten]

while i agree that data collection is an important first step, i absolutely disagree that we can't act on the things we know.  there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that most, if not all randonneurs experience the effects of sleep deprivation on long brevets.  the effects of sleep deprivation have been studied and it's conclusive that operating a vehicle in a sleep deprived state is hazardous

as for steve 'somebody' rice: you can go ahead and argue any of the points i made.  i stated that at the the top of my post.  knock yourself out. 

On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Jan Heine <hei...@earthlink.net> wrote:

I know how I would respond if these were made into requirements.  I would immediately resign as RBA.  My region isn't big enough to pay police, or pay for a real sag.

Randonneuring is a big tent of riders who can have different outlooks and priorities. This inevitably will reflect on the discussion of safety. At this point, it seems that everybody has opinions, which usually mesh with how they perceive the sport. Some believe that riding fast is dangerous, so they may suggest speed limits. Others think that riding slow is dangerous because you spend more time on the road, so they may suggest shortening the time limits.

I think the big problem we have right now is a total lack of data. We don't even know what the risks of randonneuring are.

If a police officer falls asleep at the wheel and ploughs into a group of randonneurs, then mandating sleep breaks for riders won't help. If riders are dying from heart attacks during brevets, then a sag wagon won't be of any help.

actually, if the chp has an aed, the heart attack victim may very well be saved! 8^)
 

I know it's an old subject, but it seems meaningless to try and improve randonneuring safety as long as we do not know where the risks lie, or even how great they are.

A quantitative study would allow us to assess the risks. Once we agree on where the risks of randonneuring lie, we still can disagree on how to mitigate them, but we are at least one step further. Such a study has been suggested in the past through simple reporting of incidents that occur at brevets. It would be a standardized form that would take five minutes to fill out after every brevet. We had several qualified people volunteer to analyze the data to figure out which results are statistically relevant.

Everything else is just battling opinions in the absence of data.

once again, i think we can draw some conclusions from existing data.

elmar

[Jerry]

You do away with ultra-endurance nature of the sport and you've fundamentally changed the sport into something else. 

Sent from my iPad

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "randon" group.
To post to this group, send email to ran...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to randon+un...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/randon?hl=en.

[Ken Freeman]

Jan, that implies you have decided that the set of crashes the main body of cyclists have are not those of randonneurs.  What's the basis for that opinion?  If it's not opinion, it should be based on knowledge of what the cycling collision studies do say and what the stats of rando collisions are.  

But seems reasonable to me that since randonneurs are cyclists, at least some portion of rando collisions are of the same types as for the general population. And because the stresses and perhaps skills are higher, some unique crash types may be expected.  It's still valid to look at existing collision types, while at the same time exploring the crash type distribution for randonneurs.

On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 9:06 PM, Jan Heine <hei...@earthlink.net> wrote:

I know how I would respond if these were made into requirements.  I would immediately resign as RBA.  My region isn't big enough to pay police, or pay for a real sag.

Randonneuring is a big tent of riders who can have different outlooks and priorities. This inevitably will reflect on the discussion of safety. At this point, it seems that everybody has opinions, which usually mesh with how they perceive the sport. Some believe that riding fast is dangerous, so they may suggest speed limits. Others think that riding slow is dangerous because you spend more time on the road, so they may suggest shortening the time limits.

I think the big problem we have right now is a total lack of data. We don't even know what the risks of randonneuring are.

If a police officer falls asleep at the wheel and ploughs into a group of randonneurs, then mandating sleep breaks for riders won't help. If riders are dying from heart attacks during brevets, then a sag wagon won't be of any help.

I know it's an old subject, but it seems meaningless to try and improve randonneuring safety as long as we do not know where the risks lie, or even how great they are.

A quantitative study would allow us to assess the risks. Once we agree on where the risks of randonneuring lie, we still can disagree on how to mitigate them, but we are at least one step further. Such a study has been suggested in the past through simple reporting of incidents that occur at brevets. It would be a standardized form that would take five minutes to fill out after every brevet. We had several qualified people volunteer to analyze the data to figure out which results are statistically relevant.

Everything else is just battling opinions in the absence of data.

Jan Heine
Editor
Bicycle Quarterly
http://www.bikequarterly.com

Follow our blog at http://janheine.wordpress.com/

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "randon" group.
To post to this group, send email to ran...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to randon+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/randon?hl=en.

--
Ken Freeman
Ann Arbor, MI USA

[Jan Heine]

One simple fact is that more than 80% of cycling fatalities do not
wear helmets. A large portion of cyclist fatalities in the U.S. are
people who lost their driver's license and now ride bikes to bars -
no lights, no helmets, and inebriated on busy highways

Consider that a huge portion of cycling fatalities occur at night.
Most riders ride during daytime. Clearly, there is a group of riders
who suffer from most fatalities, who are not "mainstream" sporting
cyclists. (And they aren't randonneurs - we are too few to factor
into statistics.)

These disparate groups are a huge problem when you look at
statistics, whether it's the helmet debate or anything else.

Jan Heine
Editor
Bicycle Quarterly

2116 Western Ave.
Seattle WA 98121
http://www.bikequarterly.com

Follow our blog at http://janheine.wordpress.com/

At 10:13 PM -0500 2/2/12, Ken Freeman wrote:
>Jan, that implies you have decided that the set of crashes the main
>body of cyclists have are not those of randonneurs. What's the
>basis for that opinion? If it's not opinion, it should be based on
>knowledge of what the cycling collision studies do say and what the
>stats of rando collisions are.
>
>But seems reasonable to me that since randonneurs are cyclists, at
>least some portion of rando collisions are of the same types as for
>the general population. And because the stresses and perhaps skills
>are higher, some unique crash types may be expected. It's still
>valid to look at existing collision types, while at the same time
>exploring the crash type distribution for randonneurs.

--

[pamela blalock]

On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Old5ten <old5...@gmail.com> wrote:

> what can be done (utopia):
>
> allow distances to be variable, in order to accommodate better route
> selection.  don't let decisions be guided by arbitrary fixed lengths (400k
> etc.), control locations, the ability to 'cheat,' etc.
> eliminate time limits, in order to allow riders more rest/flexibility.
> eliminate fixed controls to allow better route selection

Hmmm, utopia seems a lot like independent bike touring, something
related, but fundamentally different from randonneurring.

Want to make riding a bike safer? Eliminate tolerance of drunk
driving. We have made progress in recent years, but I still hear
people joke and laugh about having too many and driving. People still
drive drunk all hours of the day and night and everywhere. Tell your
friends and family and children that this is just unacceptable. Make
drunk driving as socially unacceptable as cannibalism, and then the
streets will be safer for everyone.

pamela blalock
watertown, ma

blayleys.blogspot.com

[pamela blalock]

On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Old5ten <old5...@gmail.com> wrote:

> what can be done (utopia):
>
> allow distances to be variable, in order to accommodate better route
> selection. don't let decisions be guided by arbitrary fixed lengths (400k
> etc.), control locations, the ability to 'cheat,' etc.
> eliminate time limits, in order to allow riders more rest/flexibility.
> eliminate fixed controls to allow better route selection

Hmmm, utopia seems a lot like independent bike touring, something

related, but fundamentally different from randonneurring.

Want to make riding a bike safer? Eliminate tolerance of drunk
driving. We have made progress in recent years, but I still hear
people joke and laugh about having too many and driving. People still
drive drunk all hours of the day and night and everywhere. Tell your
friends and family and children that this is just unacceptable. Make
drunk driving as socially unacceptable as cannibalism, and then the
streets will be safer for everyone.

pamela blalock
watertown, ma

http://blayleys.blogspot.com

[Eric Norris]

Seems to me that sleep deprivation could be the cause of an accident if the cyclist him/herself falls asleep and crashes. It doesn't matter how alert you are if you are hit by a vehicle.

Dealing with lack of sleep is part of what makes randonneuring a unique sport. Whatever happened to individual responsibility, and trusting riders to know when to stop? 

--Eric Norris

[Erik Nilsson]

Jan,

Well said.

On Feb 2, 7:32 pm, Jan Heine <hein...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> One simple fact is that more than 80% of cycling fatalities do not
> wear helmets. A large portion of cyclist fatalities in the U.S. are
> people who lost their driver's license and now ride bikes to bars -
> no lights, no helmets, and inebriated on busy highways
>
> Consider that a huge portion of cycling fatalities occur at night.
> Most riders ride during daytime. Clearly, there is a group of riders
> who suffer from most fatalities, who are not "mainstream" sporting
> cyclists. (And they aren't randonneurs - we are too few to factor
> into statistics.)
>
> These disparate groups are a huge problem when you look at
> statistics, whether it's the helmet debate or anything else.
>
> Jan Heine
> Editor
> Bicycle Quarterly
> 2116 Western Ave.
> Seattle WA 98121http://www.bikequarterly.com
>

> Follow our blog athttp://janheine.wordpress.com/

[WMdeR]

>Such a
>study has been suggested in the past through simple reporting of
>incidents that occur at brevets. It would be a standardized form that
>would take five minutes to fill out after every brevet. We had
>several qualified people volunteer to analyze the data to figure out
>which results are statistically relevant.
>Everything else is just battling opinions in the absence of data.

Dear Jan,

(And apologies to non-RUSA readers)

From: http://www.rusa.org/minutes/2011-09.html

[....]
6. Safety. A candidate in RUSA's Board of Directors election had
raised safety and safety studies as campaign issues. The Board
considered what additional or different actions and positions RUSA
should be taking, if any, on the issue of event safety. Eric Vigoren
favored a qualitative approach, such as stating measures RUSA was
taking to enhance safety, over a quantitative approach, which could
result in a wide variety of disputable statistical conclusions based
on unknown or arbitrary assumptions. Options such as newsletter
coverage highlighting safety items, along with safety-related
articles, were considered by the Board.

[End Quote]

I wouldn't expect institutional support for such a reporting system at
this time. Given the attention given risk in the recent RUSA
election, you can expect a qualitative, "best practices" push from
RUSA. It won't hurt, but is it the best application of our efforts?
We won't know.

Turnout for the last RUSA election was around 10% of the active USA
brevet-riding community. Note that 196 votes was the maximum scored
by any given candidate in the last election, and the second board
member was elected with 126 votes. If you're fired up about an issue,
and want to see a change, bug the candidates about it, consider
running yourself, and don't forget to vote your interests. We're all
volunteers, and can use the help of committed, inspired people.

Best Regards,

Will
William M. deRosset
Fort Collins, CO
RUSA 2401

[Old5ten]

if you dig a little deeper you will find that sleep deprivation, even acute and relatively minimal (by randonneuring standards, is the equivalent to driving drunk!

elmar

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "randon" group.
To post to this group, send email to ran...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to randon+un...@googlegroups.com.

[John Jost]

Okay, funny, sad story.

When my wife and I lived in Champaign IL (1993ish) a guy who drove to a bar was too drunk to drive home.  He was smart enough not to drive, so walked home on the sidewalk.  He was killed by a drunk driver a few blocks from the bar he just left.

 

John Jost
"Reason is the first casualty of emotions"

-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "randon" group.
To post to this group, send email to ran...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to randon+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[Old5ten]

On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Bubba <tape...@gmail.com> wrote:

You lay out four problems that you think erode safety.  I think your case is compelling in one of the four.  That one is route selection.  I think the excuse "We couldn't use the backroad with less traffic there, because it would be too tempting for randos to take the shortcut, so our route had to include the high-traffic shortcut" is lame.  Randos in general are an honorable group and are frankly the group of cyclist most likely to prefer to take the long way.  If a rando cheats and finishes a brevet, I do not see how that affects me in the slightest, and I don't think that measurably cheapens the sport or the community.  I think the routing decisions that claim to address the temptation of cheating are a solution looking for a problem that does not exist.  

Second is sleep deprivation.  I don't think it's a convincing argument that Randos in general are so incapable of monitoring their own bodies that you have to implement field awakeness testing for their own good.  I don't believe there's some peer pressure of machismo forcing people to ride straight through on a 600 when they'd rather sleep halfway through.  I've never felt pressured by the community to finish faster.  I've only been doing it for a year, but it's been the opposite for me.  When I ask about trying to challenge myself to improve a time, I usually get more responses "Bubba, just take it easy and enjoy yourself".  Specifically, the tactic you propose is the elimination of time limits.  I think that suggestion only holds water if you can show that in a large percentage of events, people finish very close to the limit.  Then you could argue those people have been 'pushed' by the limit, potentially beyond their comfort level.  Maybe you could begin to make a safety argument based on that data.  I looked at the SFR 2011 results.  About 1000 participants, I counted 13 total rides that were within 30 minutes of the limit on a 200, or within an hour of the limit on anything longer.  That proves conclusively, in my view, that the time limit had nothing to do with it, and the elimination of the limit would be completely ineffectual.  A larger scan of RUSA results could prove that SFR is the exception, but I sincerely doubt it.

a couple of things on this:

sleep deprivation even on an acute and relatively minor basis has been found the equivalent to drunk driving.  there are plenty of drunks on the road, who think they're fully capable of driving.

note that my post specifically refers to sleep deprivation on 600k and higher rides.  a 200k is imho not a long distance ride, especially by randonneuring standards.  sleep deprivation should not be a factor even for riders going at a slower pace.

if you look at longer rides you'll find a larger group coming in much closer to the time limit, coming in right at the time limit, or going over the time limit.  my sense is that most of them did not sleep a whole lot.  on the flip side, faster riders are likely to be sleep deprived because they're pushing through with little or no sleep.
 

 

Third is group riding skills.  I know that if I ride in a pack with neophytes, that they might crash me.  That's not complicated.  I generally don't ride in packs.  I usually am a serial monogamist.  I ride with the person I just caught up with, or who just caught up with me, stick with them as long as we match, and part amicably at any event.  I'm sure PBP is a freakshow, but I don't see any compelling reason to implement training clinics and skills testing.  I think suggesting that one of SFR's quarterly meetings about ride prep devote a section to group riding is a fantastic idea.  I generally only cozy up to riders that I know aren't squirrelly.  Like the sleep dep argument, I think this goes to common sense and taking responsibility for oneself.  Noobs don't fly out of nowhere and take you out.  That's a problem that's easy to avoid, as long as you know it can happen, and the only people who don't know it can happen are probably the neophytes themselves

i guess you do have the choice of starting at the very end and staying by yourself for an entire brevet.  most of the brevets i've ridden involve groups at some point or other.  that involves 700 bodies in a mass start at pbp to maybe a handful during a ride someplace else.  i think skills clinics are a valuable tool and rusa should sanction them the way usa cycling does.  i've voluntarily taken a couple of those and found them worthwhile.
 

Finally is repetitive use injury.  Again, I don't see anything actionable here except to say "If you do something too much, especially if you do it wrong, you might hurt yourself".  Um, DUH!  What else can you do?  Outlaw long brevets?  Disqualify randos who train too much?  Statistics aren't going to tell you squat.  There is no pattern of cycling that is so gentle and so small that you can't find a single person that experienced pain from it.  There is no pattern of cycling so aggressive and so large that you can't find a single person that can do it pain-free.  All you can do is say "It might hurt.  The likelihood of hurting yourself can grow with distance.  If it hurts, consider backing off"  Personal responsibility again, in my opinion.

sorry, but this is just nonsense.  statistics can identify problem areas, separate outliers from averages, and tell us where to focus our efforts.
 

 

So, speaking for myself personally, I would like to somehow become involved in figuring out a way to use more backroads on routes and do away with the absurd constraint of cheat-prevention.  Routes designed like that would increase safety and enjoyment.  I accept that controls have to be somewhere, but I disagree that they must be placed to avoid cheating.  The other three topics of your concern I applaud you for being concerned about, but I reject the notion that RUSA has a clear path forward to address them, besides encouraging adults to be aware that they are responsible for themselves.  Frankly, it is hard for me to get behind you on the route part, because the other three make no sense to me, and because your rhetoric is so negative in tone.  People sometimes make jokes on the threads on this topic not to ridicule, but to lighten the mood.  

there's NOTHING light-hearted or humorous when someone is making fun of a person who's had a several accident related concussions. NOTHING!!!
 

Yet you take it personally and then complain about that.  

yes, i do!  my wife is one of those people and i have seen the impact of cycling accidents many times, the injuries, the recoveries, the losses and memorial services.  there is absolutely nothing funny about it.
 

I challenge you to try to couch your language in the positivity of making things better.  I'm absolutely convinced that your motives are positive, and that your heart is in the right place, but your language does not send the message, and I think it turns people off.  

i'm not here to win a popularity contest.  the language is there to actually get people thinking!

"RUSA is dropping the ball, it's stupid that I have to do this for them, but if they're too darn lazy then I'll do it.  RUSA wants people to hurt themselves because A B C and D".  That's honestly how some of your posts read.  I might be completely alone in feeling that way, but I doubt it.  You might not care what people think, but when trying to effect change in a community like this, you need to build consensus, and that is done with persuasion that is more positive.

i think you need to read the message and then actually comprehend what you're reading...

elmar

 

--
This message is from the San Francisco Randonneurs list at sfra...@googlegroups.com
Search the archives at http://groups.google.com/group/sfrandon
For SFR's schedule and general information, visit http://sfrandonneurs.org/
To unsubscribe, email sfrandon+u...@googlegroups.com

[Jan Heine]

At 10:02 AM -0800 2/3/12, Old5ten wrote:

On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Bubba <tape...@gmail.com> wrote:

You lay out four problems that you think erode safety.  I think your case is compelling in one of the four.  That one is route selection.  I think the excuse "We couldn't use the backroad with less traffic there, because it would be too tempting for randos to take the shortcut, so our route had to include the high-traffic shortcut" is lame.  Randos in general are an honorable group and are frankly the group of cyclist most likely to prefer to take the long way.  If a rando cheats and finishes a brevet, I do not see how that affects me in the slightest, and I don't think that measurably cheapens the sport or the community.  I think the routing decisions that claim to address the temptation of cheating are a solution looking for a problem that does not exist.

In Washington state, backroads usually parallel the highways. They may be a tad longer, so it would be nice if one could allow the alternative: "Take the highway if you prefer, but here is a backroad that provides a more pleasant alternative."

It would be easy to change the rules to allow that, as long as the shortest route between controls is still the required distance.

It appears that some riders have been doing this in the past, preferring to ride on a quiet and pleasant road instead of the highway, even if it adds a few kilometers and the risk of elimination if they miss a secret control.

In most cases around here, the problem has been a lack of awareness of the backroads. When I mentioned the alternatives to brevet organizers, the usual reply was: "I wish I had known about that road." The solution is simple: I now talk to brevet organizers as soon as the route is announced. Then they can change the route to take the backroads... Better yet, I also volunteer to organize a brevet, and make sure it is on backroads as much as possible.

Jan Heine
Editor
Bicycle Quarterly
2116 Western Ave.
Seattle WA 98121
http://www.bikequarterly.com

Follow our blog at http://janheine.wordpress.com/

-- 

[NickBull]

Hi, Elmar,

Without knowing the details of the route that you're describing, it is
hard to comment on what alternatives were available.

But what I can say is that when I designed a 400Km last year, route
safety was a very significant consideration for me. In some cases I
was able to justify uncontrolled mileage on safer roads because the
alternative roads were clearly not suitable for randonneuring. In
other cases, I put information controls on the course since the
alternative route was a 4-lane highway with wide shoulders and
probably pretty low traffic for the hours that people would
potentially be riding on it if they were to shortcut. Two info
controls in the span of thirty miles does not seem like an unwarranted
amount of stoppage time! All that said, there was a three-or-four
mile section near Charlottesville that had impatient drivers and was
unpleasant to ride, but was the only route in to a 24-hour control.
(Since this was a night-start ride to give practice for the PBP
nightstart, nearly all the controls had to be open 24 hours.) And
there was a 3.4 mile section on US522 that I could not figure out any
way to avoid that did not involve adding ten or more miles to the
route.

I'm trying to make three points here: 1) In some cases, RUSA will
allow uncontrolled mileage for safety reasons; 2) Judicious use of
info controls can help to justify mileage for safety reasons, and 3)
Sometimes it turns out to be very difficult to avoid all sections that
are less safe than one would like.

On your points about riding while sleep deprived, my rule for myself
is that it is more important to stop and take a nap, even if it means
having to DNF, than it is to try to "force myself to stay awake."
Rando is for fun, not a to-the-death struggle. How much sleep that
requires is an individual decision. For me, a total of 10 hours on
PBP was enough. Two to three hours each night, with fifteen-minute to
half-hour catnaps thrown in any time I was feeling noticeably drowsy.
I finished in 87h34m, so a comfortable amount of time in the bank, but
nothing to go around bragging about :-)

Still, that requires being able to sustain a pace that allows enough
sleep and still arrive with time in the bank. Can one maintain that
pace if one is at the time limit on a 600Km? I would say that the
answer is generally no, unless there are special extenuating
circumstances or you have improved your speed considerably between the
600 and 1200, which is probably not very likely. So based on my
experience in five grand randonnees, I think that the 600Km qualifying
time limit is a bad signal of your ability to complete a grand
randonnee safely. There's a pretty close correlation between how fast
I rode my 600 in a given year and how fast I rode a grand randonnee
later that year. Based on what I know now, if I get three hours of
sleep on the 600 and finish any later than 37 hours, then I'm not fast
enough to ride a grand randonnee later that year. I'm not saying that
someone who takes 40 hours to finish a 600, while getting no sleep,
should not be allowed to register and ride a grand randonnee. There
may be extenuating circumstances. But I think that strong guidance
should be provided to such a participant as to whether they are a
suitable candidate for the ride.

I don't favor getting rid of time limits, there's already a sport for
that!

On other topics: I think that tracking crashes and their causes and
outcomes is a potentially productive effort that would give us
information about the safety of the sport, possibly helping us to
provide rider training or other mitigation to make it safer, and
require very little time on behalf of busy RBA's (or some other club
volunteer, e.g. a club president like me). Tracking mechanicals and
overuse injuries doesn't seem like a remotely productive use of an
RBA's time.

Nick

[Jason Marshall]

Just my opinion here not an attempt to invalidate anyone else’s…

 

I strongly agree that organizers should not sacrifice route quality in an effort to curtail cheating.  In the end we are not racing so who is really being cheated?

I also tend to agree that the other three concerns are more a matter of personal responsibility rather than something that RUSA should try to regulate around.  I too have had serious bicycle related (though not brevet related) injuries.  I like to avoid getting hurt as much as anyone but I also value the opportunity to discover and push my limits.   From my experience the drive to take it too far (ex: riding in a dangerously sleep deprived state) is usually a self-inflicted punishment.    

 

I am all for passive and common sense safety measures (reflective gear, helmets, safe routes, etc.) but in the end I enjoy this sport because the rides are a bit of an adventure.  An element of danger comes along with this.  There are numerous other cycling endeavors that one can pursue if a higher level of safety is a priority.  Supported touring comes to mind.

 

Jason Marshall

Chicago, IL

*************************************************************************************************************************

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of C.H. Robinson Worldwide. C.H. Robinson Worldwide accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.

 

C.H. Robinson Worldwide, 14701 Charlson Road, Eden Prairie, MN, USA

*************************************************************************************************************************

 

[Jerry]

Interestingly I happened to have a meeting with a neurologist who specializes in sleep disorders over lunch today. I asked him about this issue specifically and his response was quite different and more nuanced than your blanket assertion. 

According to my friend, up to some level that's variable by person and to a fair degree trainable, the medicine shows that the impacts of sleep deprivation can be mitigated through training. That is, people can learn to function effectively on very reduced amounts of sleep as long as they work their way up to it and don't have to sustain it for indefinite periods of time. This is in stark contrast to alcohol. Which the effects of cant be trained for. 

Sent from my iPhone

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "randon" group.
To post to this group, send email to ran...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to randon+un...@googlegroups.com.

[Jan Heine]

At 12:37 PM -0700 2/3/12, Jerry wrote:
>Interestingly I happened to have a meeting with a neurologist who
>specializes in sleep disorders over lunch today. I asked him about
>this issue specifically and his response was quite different and
>more nuanced than your blanket assertion.
>
>According to my friend, up to some level that's variable by person
>and to a fair degree trainable, the medicine shows that the impacts
>of sleep deprivation can be mitigated through training. That is,
>people can learn to function effectively on very reduced amounts of
>sleep as long as they work their way up to it and don't have to
>sustain it for indefinite periods of time. This is in stark contrast
>to alcohol. Which the effects of cant be trained for.

That matches my experience. The first time I rode through the night
(on a ride back from a cross-state race), it was very hard. The
second time went better. Now I don't feel tired if I ride my bike for
24 hours straight.

In fact, I get so excited when I ride that even after finishing PBP
last year, I did not feel sleepy until hours after I finished. I
finally went to bed at 1:30 a.m. This was after riding for 53 hours
and sleeping 30 minutes along the way.

Jan Heine
Editor
Bicycle Quarterly

[Susan Otcenas]

>>Specifically, the tactic you propose is the elimination of time limits.  I think that suggestion only holds water if you can show that in a large percentage of events, people finish very close to the limit.  Then you could argue those people have been 'pushed' by the limit, potentially beyond their comfort level.  

 

I don't necessarily agree with this statement.  I know a number riders that finish near the time limits on longer rides because they choose to either take time to smell the roses (sit down meals, copious amounts of photo ops, etc.) *or* because they decide to get hours & hours of sleep at the overnight control.    Last May I organized our club's 600K.  My first rider in to the overnight control arrived around 9pm.  He got 8 hours sleep and was the amongst the very last to depart in the a.m.   My *last* rider in to the overnight control arrived at around 5am.   He got zero sleep.  Both riders finished.  The 8-hours-sleep guy finished more quickly, for sure, but nonetheless there was a far narrower gap in their finishing times than the 8 hour difference in their arrival times at the overnight.   My point is that simply looking at finishing times tells you little about the condition of the rider at the time they finish.

 

Susan

 

***********************************************

Susan Otcenas

Team Estrogen, Inc.

www.TeamEstrogen.com

877-310-4592

***********************************************

Follow our TE fan page on Facebook!

Look for "teamestrogen.com"

***********************************************

 

[Old5ten]

alright, give us some research that supports your friend's assertion.  let's get beyond the he said, she said phase. 

there's no doubt that some individuals respond better than others, there are varying degrees of most things.  i'm thinking of the masses, the one's falling asleep while eating or having a conversation at the controls.  the ones who get 2 or 3 hours of sleep and think they're fine.

as a brief aside, does your friend the doctor study sleep deprivation in people who ride their bike for hundreds of miles?

let's institute a simple test to check for the effects of sleep deprivation before leaving a control.  if it's not a big deal, as your friend claims, then there's nothing to worry about.  what do we have to lose in that scenario?

elmar

[Steve Rice]

On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 3:26 PM, Old5ten <old5...@gmail.com> wrote:

let's institute a simple test to check for the effects of sleep deprivation before leaving a control.  if it's not a big deal, as your friend claims, then there's nothing to worry about.  what do we have to lose in that scenario?

elmar

Who is going to administer that test?  What happens to the rider if he(she) fails? Who is going to enforce that rule?

Steven Andrew Rice
KY RBA
#1552

[Old5ten]

On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Steve Rice <sri...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 3:26 PM, Old5ten <old5...@gmail.com> wrote:

let's institute a simple test to check for the effects of sleep deprivation before leaving a control.  if it's not a big deal, as your friend claims, then there's nothing to worry about.  what do we have to lose in that scenario?

elmar

Who is going to administer that test? 

could be anybody.

 

What happens to the rider if he(she) fails?

sleep more.

 

Who is going to enforce that rule?

rusa.

elmar

[Jan Heine]

At 12:26 PM -0800 2/3/12, Old5ten wrote:
>alright, give us some research that supports your friend's
>assertion. let's get beyond the he said, she said phase.

One problem we have is that we don't know how many accidents occur
due to sleep deprivation. Is it a problem? If yes, is it the most
important problem we face?

Based on my (informal) experience of 14 years of randonneuring, more
accidents occur due to tires falling into cracks while descending
mountain roads than due to sleep deprivation. Of course, my sample
size is small and skewed, so I am NOT proposing to mandate a minimum
tire width for brevet riders...

If we get some numbers, we can figure out where to direct our
resources. Without data, we run the risk of focusing our resources on
perceived problems, rather than real ones.

One example of the value of real data is the British Doctors Study:
In the 1950s, a British researchers were studying lung cancer.They
thought that lung cancer was getting more prevalent due to car
exhaust fumes. So they surveyed doctors all over the country in a
long-term study. To their surprise, whether people lived and worked
near major roads did not seem to affect their rate of lung cancer,
which instead correlated strongly to whether they smoked or not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Doctors_Study

Nobody says that breathing car exhaust fumes is healthy, but if you
have limited resources, it makes sense to tackle smoking first. The
same applies to randonneuring. We can discuss sleep deprivation until
the cows come home (unless they fall asleep on the way), but if our
greatest risk is from drunk drivers, then we may be better off
focusing our resources on figuring out how to avoid drunk drivers, or
even, as Pamela suggested, how to get them off _our_ roads.

Jan Heine
Compass Bicycles Ltd.
http://www.compasscycle.com

[Jerry]

All I can say is I know a total dick when I see one. 

Sent from my iPhone

[Toshi Takeuchi]

-Not having done a 600k+ event myself, I do recall some people
claiming that the intermediate time checks of PBP were such that many
people had to undergo sleep deprivation to make the time check, when
more flexible intermediate controls could allow more flexible sleep
times. Apparently this had nothing to do with the ability to finish
the ride on time, but more when the sleep would be possible due to the
intermediate time control requirements.

[John Jost]

This first part is tounge in cheek, so don't fame me, this IS my sense of humor.

 

With the new rules, I am resigning as RBA. The next RBA will charge $1 per kilometer per rider per event, for police escort, sleep-alizer and common sense testing. All riders will ride audax style to keep everyone together and safe at all times. The RBA (the new one not me) or volunteer will wipe noses, change diapers and act as a tour guide to keep all rides interesting.

 

Now the next piece is not meant as humor.

 

Look everything in life has risks, rewards and responsibilities.  I once had a tee-shirt that said something like I can fall of the couch and die, I can fall down the stairs and die, or I can ride my bike and die.

 

As an RBA I will NOT be administering any tests.  if I pass someone as "fit" and they crash, fart, fall asleep, don't get kissed by the person behind the quickie mart checkout, or have a flat tire then I can be held liable.  No thanks.  Either the rider should be an adult, accept the risks AND responsibilities of endurance events, or choose not to ride.

 

John Jost
"Reason is the first casualty of emotions"

[Kole Kantner]

I am curious on other people's experiences with PBP control closing
times. I was up to 4 hours late this year on many controls and no one
seemed to mind. I finished in time at the end and appear to have
received official completion status. Do PBP officials enforce control
closing times aside from the final one? It certainly was pleasant not
to worry about intermediate control closing times.

Kole Kantner
Seattle, WA

[Eric Norris]

In 2007, my friend and I worked hard on the entire outbound leg to stay ahead of the closing times (it was raining and we were on fixies). We learned later that the organizers had added two hours to the closing times so as not to DQ large numbers of riders (the abandon rate was still about twice that of a "normal" PBP). Of course, nobody told us about this, so we kept riding and barely sleeping to stay on track with the official times.

This year, some friends finished about 20 minutes outside the 90-hour limit (they were on a tandem; she was in tears) but were credited as official finishers anyway.

So ... In my limited experience, the organizers are somewhat flexible on both controls and overall times.

Interested to hear what others have to say.

--Eric N
Sent from my iPad2 

[pamela blalock]

Elmar,

I lost two dear friends 20 years ago when two different drunk drivers
travelling at over 100 mph, hit then head on - while they were
cycling. If I fall asleep on my bike, I might hurt or maybe even kill
myself, but it is highly unlikely I am going kill someone else. Your
assertion that sleep deprivation for a cyclist on a brevet and drunk
driving are equivalent is absurd and insulting.

I will agree that *driving a motor vehicle* sleep deprived and driving
a motor vehicle drunk can have similar/dire consequences. There have
been first hand reports from folks who learned the hard way the
dangers of driving home from a brevet when sleep deprived.

So let me stress again that the best way to make the roads safer for
everyone (cyclists, pedestrians as well as those in other motor
vehicles) is to drive responsibly and encourage everyone we know to do
the same. Stated quite simply... Drive as if it matters!

pamela blalock
watertown, ma

http://blayleys.blogspot.com

[WMdeR]

Hi, All,

Concerning sleep deprivation, most of us are dealing with acute, short-
term deprivation on longer (>400K) rides. What research I've read
(I'm an hydraulic engineer, not a doctor, and don't follow their
professional literature) doesn't indicate that one can actually
acclimate to acute sleep loss. The cognitive and motor skills
deficits (highly variable) are there.

However, one may develop coping strategies and limit its impact by
being well-rested to start with, by napping strategically, and by
using CNS stimulants.

However, you have to be fast enough to get those naps in and get up
the road before the next control closes.

The PBP time limits were designed with this issue in mind--they
figured that one was fresh and well-rested at the start, and should
make the shorter time cuts over the first 600K as a result. The
second 600K they built some ease into the schedule.

Here's a sample from a 2002 review of (medical resident) performance
under both chronic and acute sleep deprivation conditions:

from: http://www.colorado.edu/intphys/Class/IPHY3700_Greene/TIPS/sleep_medical/Veasey.pdf

...The most effective countermeasure for sleepiness is sleep.  A 2- to
8-hour nap prior to 24 hours of sleep loss can improve vigilance and
minimize sleepiness for 24 hours.  Naps as short as 15 minutes can
significantly ameliorate the performance decrements if provided at 2-
to 3-hour intervals during 24 hours of sleep deprivation.  Two-hour
naps every 12 hours ameliorate performance decrements across 88 hours
of sleep deprivation.  Naps must be no longer than 2 hours to minimize
sleep inertia.  The time of day most refractory to countermeasures is
the circadian nadir, 2 am to 9 am.  Bright light therapy during these
hours to activate the circadian system has been studied and may
improve vigilance performance.

[end quote]

These recommendations line up with my experience and with the
recommendations one gets from other experienced randonneurs.

Best Regards,

Will
William M. deRosset
Fort Collins, CO

p.s. Is sleep deprivation a significant factor in injuries sustained
while riding brevets? I don't think we've got the data to say, at
least for domestic brevets. However, I sure noticed a substantial
degradation in handling skills at PBP (including recognition of which
side of the road was the correct one--I got to dodge one left-hand fog-
line rider who was completely unresponsive, and I yelled at another,
who nearly came off of his bike when he awoke from his trance) among
the contrôle-closers whose paths I crossed when climbing from Brest
last year. They were up against the time limits, descending into
Sizun at 4am in the fog, and I was happy there was no traffic. --
WMdeR.

[William D. Volk]

The enemy of the good is the better.

Just starting with a review of routes to avoid the worst situations make sense.

In North San Diego country sadly that includes 101 in Leucadia. Vulcan being the better alternative (at night).

BUT let's stop blaming cyclists for the caviler attitude drivers have toward safety and cycling in general.

My guess is that commuting by bicycle is on the rise (at least here) and as this increases we'll see improvements.

William D. Volk
Carlsbad

[Eric Keller]

About PBP

On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Eric Norris <campyo...@me.com> wrote:

This year, some friends finished about 20 minutes outside the 90-hour limit (they were on a tandem; she was in tears) but were credited as official finishers anyway.

So ... In my limited experience, the organizers are somewhat flexible on both controls and overall times.

I have heard that the people at the controles don't check your time.  Although I have also heard that if you are 3 hours past time they will take your card.  Not sure how these two things match up, although if you get to the controle after it closes, that would be a clue.  I heard one guy arguing with the workers at a controle, I couldn't tell if they wanted to take his card or if he was arguing with them because he missed the time and they just routinely stamped it, it was confusing. 

I missed the cutoff at Dreux because I was asleep in a corn field just out of town, but they didn't say anything.  Then I took my time eating.  Then I had to ride like crazy to get to San Quentin in time.  I had heard they would excuse one missed controle as long as you finish on time, but looking at all the people that miss 90 hours and are still credited with a finish, I'm not positive the organizers know exactly what the criteria is a priori.

The one thing is clear, if I manage to ride PBP again, I'm not going to stress out about controle times like I might at a U.S. brevet.  I skipped sleeping as long as I wanted at Loudiac because I was afraid of missing my time at Carhaix.  Definitely should have slept more.

Eric Keller
Boalsburg, Pennsylvania

[Jeff Loomis]

On Thursday, February 2, 2012 2:14:47 PM UTC-8, old5ten wrote:

what can be done (utopia):

allow distances to be variable, in order to accommodate better route selection.  don't let decisions be guided by arbitrary fixed lengths (400k etc.), control locations, the ability to 'cheat,' etc.

eliminate time limits, in order to allow riders more rest/flexibility.

eliminate fixed controls to allow better route selection

 

I think this utopia already exists.  It is called "bicycle touring" and can be quite enjoyable.  It is not, however, the activity we know as randonneuring.

what can be done (other):

official sag on brevets as a standard, not an option.  the idea of being self-supported is absolute fallacy when you have to design your routes around controls.

potential chp/law enforcement on route (most bike races utilize that quite effectively to monitor courses, intersections, etc.)

collect data, conduct research, establish statistics relevant to the sport.  do this in a uniform, not haphazard, way.  i would go beyond jonathan berk's accident study suggestion, let's include incidents, injuries, mechanicals, etc.

establish criteria (reaction test, etc.) to prevent sleep deprived riders on the road

skills clinics and official safety promotion

 

I don't want to offend but I think I am at a fundamental disagreement with you on what randonneuring is all about.  I disagree vehemently that the ultimate goal of all modern activity should be greater safety.  Even ignoring this fact, what you propose is just not practical.  Ours is a grassroots activity.  We organize our rides on a minimum budget and no paid staff.  In many areas there is a single RBA organizing the rides alone.  We are all adults and if we think randonneuring events are too risky there are plenty of other ways to ride a bike.  In my area the local bicycle clubs organize huge group rides with sags, cops directing traffic, etc. that cater to someone who wants more handholding.  Many people are attracted to randonneuring because it is NOT all that stuff.  I find the idea that a RUSA official should be monitoring my sleep to determine if it is safe for me to ride to be borderline offensive.

 

With regard to routes, I agree that the rules are quite inconvenient due to the need to always take the shortest route eliminating pleasant roads.  I am not sure there is any evidence the unpleasant roads are less safe, however.  Riding a major highway with rumble strips and a wide shoulder is annoying but the cars are further from me and can see me from a long way away.

 

Jeff Loomis

[William Pustow]

On Feb 3, 2012, at 8:10 PM, Jeff Loomis wrote:

I don't want to offend but I think I am at a fundamental disagreement with you on what randonneuring is all about.  I disagree vehemently that the ultimate goal of all modern activity should be greater safety.  Even ignoring this fact, what you propose is just not practical.  Ours is a grassroots activity.  We organize our rides on a minimum budget and no paid staff.  In many areas there is a single RBA organizing the rides alone.  We are all adults and if we think randonneuring events are too risky there are plenty of other ways to ride a bike.  In my area the local bicycle clubs organize huge group rides with sags, cops directing traffic, etc. that cater to someone who wants more handholding.  Many people are attracted to randonneuring because it is NOT all that stuff.  I find the idea that a RUSA official should be monitoring my sleep to determine if it is safe for me to ride to be borderline offensive.

Jeff,

   I totally agree. Thanks, I could not find the words to express it as politely as you did. 

Bill Pustow

RUSA # 75

[rda...@carolina.rr.com]

+1

[Old5Ten]

... personally, i find the tone (rather patronizing) and the insults (sourpuss is a great example of being socially adept) significantly worse than what i've written.

thanks for your 'kind' words, i'll happily live without them.

let's stick to a reasonable discussion.  if you don't like my point of view then build and support yours!  cheap attempts at character assassination are just that: cheap!

elmar

On Feb 3, 2012, at 3:49 PM, Bubba <tape...@gmail.com> wrote:

OK, well that was positive and constructive.  ##bubba rolls eyes##

It's depressing to see somebody who is intelligent, passionate and motivated to effect change to improve his environment and community, and yet be so socially inept that they deliberately infuse their statements with bile and drive away the people who for the most part agree with him.  You undermine your own ability to contribute to solving the problems you lay out by being such a sourpuss.  Howl and shriek and name call and insult all you like, but it's a fact you are wasting your time at best, and working against the change you want to effect at worst by discouraging people.  I'm telling you, you'd be more effective if you were nicer to people.  Stick to your convictions, and be kind and respectful to others, and you'll get consensus and improve the world around you.  I'd work on a committee with a man of your convictions, who was willing to communicate with people like an adult.  

[William Pustow]

I'm sorry, while you have a point of view- which I strongly disagree with  - you offer no support other than personal opinion.

Bill Pustow

RUSA  #75

[WMdeR]

Dear Elmar,

you wrote:
what can be done (utopia):

> [1]allow distances to be variable, in order to accommodate better route
> selection. [2]don't let decisions be guided by arbitrary fixed lengths (400k

> etc.), control locations, the ability to 'cheat,' etc.

> [3]eliminate time limits, in order to allow riders more rest/flexibility.
> [4]eliminate fixed controls to allow better route selection

> what can be done (other):

> [5]official sag on brevets as a standard, not an option. the idea of being

> self-supported is absolute fallacy when you have to design your routes
> around controls.

> [6]potential chp/law enforcement on route (most bike races utilize that quite

> effectively to monitor courses, intersections, etc.)

> [7]collect data, conduct research, establish statistics relevant to the

> sport. do this in a uniform, not haphazard, way. i would go beyond
> jonathan berk's accident study suggestion, let's include incidents,
> injuries, mechanicals, etc.

> [8]establish criteria (reaction test, etc.) to prevent sleep deprived riders
> on the road
> [9]skills clinics and official safety promotion

end quote. I've added numbers in brackets to ease the discussion
below.

My personal response:
1-4 Well, you can go randonneuring without doing brevets. Just ask
all those Diagonalistes, Cyclos Montagnards, BRA, and Raid Pyrénéen
riders.

That said, enact these four suggestions and brevets cease being
brevets as they
have been defined since Allure Libre randonneuring split from the
Audax movement in 1921. It is a sport. It has a structure and rules
that define the sport, just like American rugby ceased being rugby
and
started to become American football when they started allowing the
forward pass. Just as Allure Libre randonneuring is something
different from racing, touring, and fixed-pace Audax riding.

My club, RMCC, puts on three types of marquee endurance events.
The first, our brevet series, does not feature SAG nor (ordinarily)
staffed controls. It fits all the RUSA/BRM rules, and most of the
rides even are pretty close to the recommended "guideline" amount of
climbing per 100Km, etc, so fixed routes of lengths pretty close to
200, 300, 400, 600, 1000Km, obligatory controls, minimum and maximum
speeds, etc.

The second, a Challenge series, does have a support vehicle (and a
competitive edge to it). The Challenge events are not sanctioned by
RUSA, and a couple of them are actually UMCA events. It is intended
to
be closer to the American-style Double Century event. That series
has maximum time limits, a fixed course, and something that looks an
awful lot like a control card.

These two types of events are similar, but have different origins and
slightly different motivations, and we could have another discussion
about whether they were both part of the "big tent" of
randonneuring.

The third series are the Contrails, long-distance moderately-
supported
tours. SAG, no time limits, variable distances, over scenic courses.
There's a suggested route (and often only one good way to go), but if
you're excited to do something slightly different, that would be
fine. I don't think most observers would call the Contrail
randonneuring--it is firmly in the cyclotouring tradition.

They're all wonderful events, but only one of these series are
brevets. The rest are something else.

5. I've never ridden a domestic brevet that had more than one staffed
control, and most had zero. I could have ridden the same courses the
next day and found the same services, available to all comers. Most
of us would describe this state of affairs as "self-supported", and
in
the bicycling context, "unsupported", unless we had a follow car
meeting us at controls (allowed by the rules, but rare in domestic
practice). Brevets are low-overhead events by design. I paid $35
(my
club dues) to ride my SR series last year, and if I'd had more free
time and the inclination, I could have ridden seven times the brevet
mileage I did in 2011 on that same membership fee. I suppose adding
medals would have increased the cost, but our club volunteers stretch
that dime a long, long way. RUSA does likewise.

6. I've seen this kind of traffic control done at very large
"events", at PBP (with its 5,100 rider field), and at bike races.
These events have big entry fees (with the exception of PBP--how did
they do
it?), sponsors, etc, and the events are relatively compact. Our events
are small and can be spread out over up to a 45 hour window. Also, at
least locally, our biggest events are consistently smaller than two of
the larger weekly Fort Collins group rides (and we're far better
behaved).

Given the range of our paces, rolling closure, encadrement, or escort
just isn't a
practicable thing.

7. I believe Nick Bull and Jan Heine (above) gave relatively concise
responses. I would personally welcome an institutional initiative to
capture DNF-causing injury data.

8. RBA's and their designated volunteers already have the authority
to
pull someone's brevet card for cause. However, we're all on a
personal ride, according to the BRM rules. It is ultimately our
responsibility to monitor ourselves. See number 9.
9. I'd like to see (and I believe you will see) more emphasis in the
coming months on randonneuring skills and best practices. There is a
skillset involved in riding well on the road, and, in my experience,
American randonneurs both downplay its importance and suffer from
gaps
in their education. For instance, most of us just don't have stellar
group riding skills. I am no exception. Skills that aren't
practiced
get rusty, and eventually are no longer skills. However, I believe
the bar to entry in Randonneuring is not, and should not be, a high
one.

Our handbook, by the way, is a great resource and covers a lot of best-
practice ground without being too dogmatic. I reread my 2003 copy
after PBP, and it has aged well.

Best Regards,
Will
William M. deRosset
Fort Collins, CO

RUSA 2401

p.s. I would also argue in addition to the standard canon of daytime
paceline riding behavior, randonneurs would benefit from relatively
standard nighttime signals etc. But that's yet another different
thread.--WMdeR.

[Rob Dayton]

Elmar:
I find your whole thread rather patronizing.
First, who actually asked you to make Randonneurring safer? That was
your opening statement. So who was it?
The ACP? RUSA?
Secondly, this is the wrong audience. RUSA cannot change the rules.
You need to write to the ACP.
Thridly, I really can't take someone who has not riden many events
very seriously. I'll take the advice of seasoned veterans. If you want
to rest, train more and learn to ride faster.
Fourthly, when you ride for extended periods, as Jan has pointed out,
you really can't sleep well anyway.
Fifthly, the RBA and officials do look out for riders. At a control on
PBP there was a Japanese gentleman who was so confused he couldn't
figure out how to change a tire. And he was surrounded by officials
concerned
for his safety and were asking if anyone knew him.
Sixthly, the longer events are a real test of endurance and
perserverance. If you're not up for the test don't ride them.

And finally, if you don't like the rules, start you're own club.

And if you find this offensive, so be it.
But I value and cherish the long history and traditions of
Randonneuring. Many before us have had no problems completing these
events. And although I finished outside the time limit of PBP 2011 I
rode everly last kilometer and will be back in better shape to be
enterred into the "Great Book". I may have failed the PBP test, but I
will never ever wipe the tears from my eyes when I staggered into
Dreaux and the entire auditoreum stood up yelling "Bon courage!". And
the entire cycling team in training there came out to take pictures
with me and sent me off with cheers and pats on the back. In fact, I
was the Latern Rouge as they didn't allow any one to continue after
me.
I sure as hell don't want the rules watered down so I can claim some
hollow victory.

Rob Dayton
Charlotte,NC
RUSA 3294

On Feb 3, 9:37 pm, Old5Ten <old5t...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ... personally, i find the tone (rather patronizing) and the insults (sourpuss is a great example of being socially adept) significantly worse than what i've written.
>
> thanks for your 'kind' words, i'll happily live without them.
>
> let's stick to a reasonable discussion.  if you don't like my point of view then build and support yours!  cheap attempts at character assassination are just that: cheap!
>
> elmar
>

> On Feb 3, 2012, at 3:49 PM, Bubba <tapebu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > OK, well that was positive and constructive.  ##bubba rolls eyes##
>
> > It's depressing to see somebody who is intelligent, passionate and motivated to effect change to improve his environment and community, and yet be so socially inept that they deliberately infuse their statements with bile and drive away the people who for the most part agree with him.  You undermine your own ability to contribute to solving the problems you lay out by being such a sourpuss.  Howl and shriek and name call and insult all you like, but it's a fact you are wasting your time at best, and working against the change you want to effect at worst by discouraging people.  I'm telling you, you'd be more effective if you were nicer to people.  Stick to your convictions, and be kind and respectful to others, and you'll get consensus and improve the world around you.  I'd work on a committee with a man of your convictions, who was willing to communicate with people like an adult.
>
> > --
> > This message is from the San Francisco Randonneurs list at sfra...@googlegroups.com

> > Search the archives athttp://groups.google.com/group/sfrandon

> > For SFR's schedule and general information, visithttp://sfrandonneurs.org/

> > To unsubscribe, email sfrandon+u...@googlegroups.com- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Todd Williams]

Amen!

--

[Jim House]

Sent: Friday, February 03, 2012 3:40 PM
To: randon
Subject: Re: [Randon] Re: [SFRandon] Re: How RUSA can do more about safety

 

 

On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 3:26 PM, Old5ten <old5...@gmail.com> wrote:

let's institute a simple test to check for the effects of sleep deprivation before leaving a control.  if it's not a big deal, as your friend claims, then there's nothing to worry about.  what do we have to lose in that scenario?

elmar

 

Elmer,

 

Something like this could work:

I think the RBA should be responsible to contract with a physician service to provide testing at each control.

First step turn in your card to be signed – the inbound time in recorded and the control card is past to the testers.

The testers could draw blood and /or other needed body samples and start to perform the needed tests.

Results would be available within two hours.

Then after the experts interpret the test results – within four hours the rider if release would be given his/her control card back and allowed to continue.

The rider would be responsible to pay on site the $250 charge for testing and result verification.

Ride off to the next control and repeat this process.

 

If the rider did not pass the test they are able to have it administered again for let’s say a cost of $100.

 

Is this like something you have in mind?

 

With the above testing you could do a 600K for under $1000 and a 1200K for under $2000.

 

How many more must die before we are required to receive this needed testing?

 

Jim House

Maumee, OH

 

 

[Ken Freeman]

My guess is Elmer (?) had in mind something  in mind more like balance, coordination, or the name of the President.

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "randon" group.
> To post to this group, send email to ran...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to randon+un...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/randon?hl=en.
>

--
Sent from Gmail Mobile

[William Pustow]

Yes, but will the convenience store clerk know who the President is?

[pamela blalock]

On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 4:06 PM, William Pustow <BPu...@aol.com> wrote:
> Yes, but will the convenience store clerk know who the President is?

How many here know that the answer is Lois Springsteen!

A few years ago my mother-in-law ended up in a local hospital while
she was over visiting. They asked her a few standard questions and
initially thought she was very confused, when she told them Mary
Robinson was president. When they asked he where she was they thought
she was being a smart-alec when she said America.

pamela blalock
rusa #12

[pamela blalock]

Uhoh. It has been pointed out to me that clearly I am too sleepy to
operate a keyboard safely - or at least too dependent on the paper
publications sitting on my desk, since Mark Thomas is now our
president!

Thank you to all who updated me. Now off to bed with me!

pamela blalock
watertown, ma
RUSA #12

http://blayleys.blogspot.com

[Old5ten]

did you by any chance open the links that i included in my original post?  how is research compiled from/by the cdc, nih, and stanford university NOT support?  that just doesn't make sense!

elmar

[William Pustow]

Elmar,

   You never answered the question. Who asked you to examine the question of randounnering safety?

Bill Pustow 

RUSA #75

[Old5ten]

On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 7:09 PM, William Pustow <BPu...@aol.com> wrote:

Elmar,

   You never answered the question. Who asked you to examine the question of randounnering safety?

Bill Pustow 

RUSA #75

my apologies.  i didn't reply to all.  here it is:

On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 6:22 AM, Rob Dayton <rda...@carolina.rr.com> wrote:

Elmar:
I find your whole thread rather patronizing.

i clearly stated in the beginning that my post was personal opinion and that i tried to provide some factual background.  please check the links and see the reasoning for what i have to say.  i don't quite see how that is patronizing.
 

First, who actually asked you to make Randonneurring safer? That was
your opening statement. So who was it?
The ACP? RUSA?

it was someone within rusa.  he is aware of this thread, but shall remain anonymous unless he chooses to come forward.

Secondly, this is the wrong audience. RUSA cannot change the rules.
You need to write to the ACP.

yes, i would agree with you.  there are the utopia changes.  however, other changes can easily be made, in particular with regard to the road choices on brevets, controls, etc.
 

Thridly, I really can't take someone who has not riden many events
very seriously. I'll take the advice of seasoned veterans. If you want
to rest, train more and learn to ride faster.

that's funny, we should go for a ride together 8^).
 

Fourthly, when you ride for extended periods, as Jan has pointed out,
you really can't sleep well anyway.

tell that to the riders that fall asleep in mid-conversation.  hmmmm... haven't seen any of those?  i saw plenty at pbp.
 

Fifthly, the RBA and officials do look out for riders. At a control on
PBP there was a Japanese gentleman who was so confused he couldn't
figure out how to change a tire. And he was surrounded by officials
concerned
 for his safety and were asking if anyone knew him.

so, what exactly are we saying here?  we've got someone riding pbp whose so confused that he can't change a tire?  do we consider that safe?  this is exactly the type of situation i'm talking about!

 

Sixthly, the longer events are a real test of endurance and
perserverance.  If you're not up for the test don't ride them.

And finally, if you don't like the rules, start you're own club.

i actually prefer a different approach: if you don't like the way things are going try to change them.  call me one of the 99%.
 

elmar

 

[Steve Rice]

Elmar Somebody

I asked a very simple question earlier in this discussion about who would administer this test and who would enforce the results.  You gave the flippant response of Anybody and RUSA.  I would like to ask those questions again and perhaps I need to be a bit more specific.  

When there is a control at a convenience store staffed only by the convenience store worker and NO RUSA volunteer is present, who administers the test to determine if the rider is alert enough to continue?  Do you expect the clerk to administer the test?  

Let's assume that there is a valid answer to the prior question and that it is determined that the rider is unfit to continue, who prevents the rider from continuing?  Is someone then responsible for then picking up the unfit rider?

Steve Rice

RUSA #1552

[Steve Rice]

Elmar wrote:

First, who actually asked you to make Randonneurring safer? That was
your opening statement. So who was it?
The ACP? RUSA?

it was someone within rusa.  he is aware of this thread, but shall remain anonymous unless he chooses to come forward.

Well as someone else within RUSA, I'm asking you not to do this.

I am not remaining anonymous

Steve Rice

[Old5ten]

you'll probably disagree, but if you take away all the anger, this discussion has been thought provoking and if you go through all the posts, you'll find that even some of my most vocal detractors agree with some of the points i've made, in particular to course design, time limits at controls, and statistics. 

i understand you'd like a nice clear cut answer to your questions and i'll be up front and say that i don't have anything better to give you at this point than what i have.  that doesn't mean i'm not working on a solution that might work for you (if you have an open mind).  part of this is and should be a solicitation of ideas and input from others.  something along the lines of what WMdeR wrote.

elmar

--

[joekr...@comcast.net]

A ride report of the first permanent in northern Arkansas.  I designed this route to be used during my extended stay in the area of Mountain Home, Arkansas. I actually reside in New Jersey.  I'd welcome company if anyone is close enough to ride it with me. 

http://mellowyellowbent.blogspot.com/2012/02/mammoth-run-100k-permanent-arkansas.html

Joe Kratovil
RUSA 3416

---

From: "Old5ten" <old5...@gmail.com>
To: "Steve Rice" <sri...@gmail.com>
Cc: "randon" <ran...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 4, 2012 10:38:23 PM

Subject: Re: [Randon] Re: [SFRandon] Re: How RUSA can do more about safety

[Old5ten]

pam,

On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 2:31 PM, pamela blalock <el...@blayleys.com> wrote:

Elmar,

I lost two dear friends 20 years ago when two different drunk drivers
travelling at over 100 mph, hit then head on - while they were
cycling.

i've experienced two similar losses: a friend and teammate, who died as a kid on his prom night when his car was hit head-on by a drunk driver.  his prom date got ejected and maimed.  the second was a couple of years ago when a friend crashed into a tree.  he was dui at the time.

If I fall asleep on my bike, I might hurt or maybe even kill
myself, but it is highly unlikely I am going kill someone else.

before we look at the potential scenarios with what you stated, i'd like to make you aware of a (relatively) recent incident:

http://www.planetizen.com/node/50910

yes, you are completely right, this example is extremely rare, but it happened.  let's consider a few other implications:

for a moment, assume that drunk driving and sleep deprived driving is equivalent.  i'm basing this on the conclusion in the following study:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11359171

now imagine that you're riding in a brevet (let's say pbp) at night in a group of people who have the reaction time and reflexes of someone who is dui.  would it be fair to say that the risk of injuring and potentially killing someone else has just increased?  ultimately we don't know for certain because we lack statistics and base our conclusions on stats derived from motorists.  however, i believe it is a valid point.

let's consider another scenario.  the notion that it's an individual choice to ride in a sleep deprived (drunk equivalent) state and that we're only going to hurt ourselves.  over the years, i've gone to (too) many memorial services.  the friends i've mentioned above, a climbing acquaintance who decked from beverly's tower in yosemite (i started wearing a helmet after that because he would have lived if he had one), suicide of another acquaintance, a handful of cycling accident victims, and relatives.

the one thing that stuck out to me was the devastation their death caused among the remaining, the husbands, wives, parents, kids, close friends, and co-workers.  yes, we make those individual choices, no we don't just hurt ourselves when something happens.

a good friend of mine busted his neck mountain biking two weeks after his son was born.  he was lying in the hospital moving two fingers on one hand when i saw him for the first time.  his wife was faced with the task of supporting a newborn and a quadriplegic husband at the same time.  believe me when i say that his accident had an incredible impact on her.  my buddy is now shuffling along with a walker, he'll never teach his kid how to mountain bike, swim, or play ball.  his accident has a tremendous impact on the way his son grows up.  my son just started mountain biking.  he loves it.  there isn't a second i'm not thinking about him busting his neck when he's cruising single track and hammering fire trails.  my buddy's accident has had an impact on me...

finally, there are financial implications.  my wife crashed hard twice, both times she was the third person in line to go down and both times the person who initiated the crash walked away, while my wife took a trip to the hospital.  the first time it was in a helicopter.  the bill: $25,000 for the trip.  another $25,000 for a one day stay at the hospital.  the second time she refused the helicopter and took the ambulance.  surgery and 3 days in the hospital.  total cost once again roughly $50,000.  we're lucky because we are double covered and had usa cycling secondary insurance on top of that.  let's briefly think about someone who is in a less fortunate position.  what would the impact of your individual decision be when you're faced with $50,000 in medical bills and have limited or now insurance?  it would be pretty devastating!

elmar

[Chris Heg]

On Feb 4, 7:15 pm, Old5ten <old5t...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > And finally, if you don't like the rules, start you're own club.
>
> i actually prefer a different approach: if you don't like the way things
> are going try to change them.  call me one of the 99%.
>
> elmar
>

I have to ask. If you think the risks are so high and the rules are so
bad why do you do it? What is in it for you? I'm wondering what aspect
of the sport you would like to preserve after the rules are changed.

[Rob Dayton]

Elmar:
I guess you've called me out.
So I've done some homework.
I am assuming you are Elmar Stefke RUSA number 3869.
Are a swiming instructor.
And also a Cat 4 in USA Cycling. Mostly participate in Road races.
Aren't they awfully dangerous?
Participated in 2007 PBP with a nice time of 81.07 and hail from
Austria.
Did a couple Brevets in 2010

You are a good ten years younger.
I really don't race anymore but did in the 80's.
I've struggled through some pretty intense abdonimal surgeries.
So I'd have my work cut out for me but can get very serious about
training again.

But I'm game.
There's a nice 1200K in NC over Labor day.
Come on down.

On Feb 4, 10:15 pm, Old5ten <old5t...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 7:09 PM, William Pustow <BPus...@aol.com> wrote:
> > Elmar,
> >    You never answered the question. Who asked you to examine the question
> > of randounnering safety?
> > Bill Pustow
> > RUSA #75
>
> my apologies.  i didn't reply to all.  here it is:
>

> > On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 6:48 PM, William Pustow <BPus...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >> I'm sorry, while you have a point of view- which I strongly disagree with
> >>  - you offer no support other than personal opinion.
> >> Bill Pustow
> >> RUSA  #75
>
> >> On Feb 3, 2012, at 9:37 PM, Old5Ten wrote:
>

> >>  if you don't like my point of view then build and support yours!- Hide quoted text -

[pamela blalock]

I will no longer feed the troll.

[Steve Rice]

Nor will I.

I just added another email address to my junk filter.

Steve Rice

[Todd Williams]

Never wrestle with a pig.  You’ll both get muddy and the pig will love it!

 

 

 

From: Steve Rice

Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2012 8:09 AM

To: randon

Subject: Re: [Randon] How RUSA can do more about safety

Nor will I.

 

I just added another email address to my junk filter.

 

Steve Rice

On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 8:06 AM, pamela blalock <el...@blayleys.com> wrote:

I will no longer feed the troll.

pamela blalock
watertown, ma

http://blayleys.blogspot.com

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "randon" group.
To post to this group, send email to ran...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mailto:randon%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/randon?hl=en.

[Bill Olsen]

Rob -

The TC is a GREAT 1200K!

http://tc1200.bicycleforlife.org/

Tony does a wonderful job of providing support, but still running a very low-keyed event...perfect to match the scenic back-roads of northern and eastern North Carolina - and a very little bit of South Carolina, but then you know how nice the roads are as you are fortunate to have these to ride anytime you wish.

I was fortunate to have the opportunity to ride the inaugural event and made sure to get my registration in early so as to be able to enjoy the experience again this year.

See you on the 28th, if not before.  

Bill

> Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2012 22:55:49 -0800
> Subject: [Randon] Re: [SFRandon] Re: How RUSA can do more about safety
> From: rda...@carolina.rr.com
> To: ran...@googlegroups.com

[Old5ten]

On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 10:55 PM, Rob Dayton <rda...@carolina.rr.com> wrote:

Elmar:
I guess you've called me out.
So I've done some homework.
I am assuming you are Elmar Stefke RUSA number 3869.
Are a swiming instructor.
And also a Cat 4 in USA Cycling. Mostly participate in Road races.
Aren't they awfully dangerous?
Participated in 2007 PBP with a nice time of 81.07 and hail from
Austria.
Did a couple Brevets in 2010

hey, give yourself a pad on the back and an A+ for finding things that are in pretty plain view.  there aren't too many elmar's in rusa, are there?  is my (or your) profile relevant to this discussion?

You are a good ten years younger.
I really don't race anymore but did in the 80's.
I've struggled through some pretty intense abdonimal surgeries.
So I'd have my work cut out for me but can get very serious about
training again.

But I'm game.
There's a nice 1200K in NC over Labor day.
Come on down.

to be honest with you, my 1200k brevet days are over.  i had a less than stellar time at pbp and would like to keep my knees in their current state or better.  plus, the riding is just fine in california...

elmar 

[Old5ten]

in a previous post, WMdR mentioned two particular styles of events in his neck of the woods, the challenge series and the contrails, a mix of which would be most in line with what i envision.  in a nutshell, fast (with a little bit of a racing aspect but not like an ultra race), relatively long, scenic, without the limits of bureaucracy.  it's more organized than free form touring and focuses on the riding, not controls/control times, awards, etc.

in terms of the risks being high.  we don't know because we haven't studied them.  there are a number of members who have suggested and endorsed the collection of statistics. 

on a personal level, i've participated and continue to participate in activities that are relatively high risk, from climbing to racing.  however, within those activities i do the best that i can to minimize risk.  my point, in terms of rusa and safety, is that there are things that could be done to minimize risk, ranging from the way brevets are routed to addressing the underlying factors of sleep deprivation.

elmar
 

[Chris Heg]

>Rob Dayton Wrote:
>Elmar:

>I am assuming you are Elmar Stefke RUSA number 3869.
>Are a swiming instructor.
>And also a Cat 4 in USA Cycling. Mostly participate in Road races.
>Aren't they awfully dangerous?
>Participated in 2007 PBP with a nice time of 81.07 and hail from
>Austria.
>Did a couple Brevets in 2010

I know the answer now - you don't do it. You are one of the 99.999%.
You might have better luck with this in a sport you actively
participate in.

[Old5ten]

yes, you are right.  i may do the occasional 200k or might do a 300k in the future, although i'm not really all that keen on getting a receipt from 7/11, so i can show that i was in the right place at the right time or taking a busy highway when i can do a different route that is more scenic.  imho, there's just too much fun riding out there, to participate in something like that.  heck, i might have to try some of the events in colorado.

elmar

[Steve Palincsar]

>
> in a previous post, WMdR mentioned two particular styles of events in
> his neck of the woods, the challenge series and the contrails, a mix
> of which would be most in line with what i envision. in a nutshell,
> fast (with a little bit of a racing aspect but not like an ultra
> race), relatively long, scenic, without the limits of bureaucracy.
> it's more organized than free form touring and focuses on the riding,
> not controls/control times, awards, etc.

So, cutting to the chase, you simply do not like those aspects that
characterize randonneuring as opposed to other forms of cycling sport.
That's fine - go do them instead.

[Rob Dayton]

Elmar:
I've been riding since 1970. My knees are fine.
But I get it.
You are weak-kneed.
L8r
PS Offer is open though. There's always Assualt on Mt Mitchell. It
actually started as a part of a Brevet.

On Feb 5, 11:47 am, Old5ten <old5t...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >http://groups.google.com/group/randon?hl=en.- Hide quoted text -

[Chris Heg]

Let's get back to the original topic. A basic premise of Allure Libre
Randonneuring is that the participants are capable of making their own
decisions about risk, effort, and pacing. We all do it every time we
do a brevet. In that context there is nothing wrong with providing
more information to people so they can make better informed
decisions.

If we start with the idea that the rules are what they are and that we
just want to make things as safe as we can within those restrictions.
it a good idea to collect and discuss information about accidents.
Right now we are arguing about anecdotes and speculations. It will
take a long time to get out of that mode. We are operating in the
realm of small numbers, of incidents that occur rarely for a wide
variety of reasons. Unless and until we a significant history of
accidents to discuss there is no validity to deriving statistics and
acting on them. We don't even know if a particular change will make
matters better or worse. Intuition is a very poor guide (see the book
Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman). What seems obvious is not
necessarily true at all. If you see an accident, post a message about
when, where, and what. Eventually there will be enough information to
talk rationally about (and I hope it takes a hundred years).

In the short term, use your judgement. Observe other riders and tell
them if you think they are making bad decisions but ultimately we are
responsible for ourselves. Some people jump out of airplanes. Some
dive with sharks. We ride long distances with time limits. Bad things
can happen. Be careful.

[Old5ten]

for something of that length, i'm partial to the 'sweet terrible one.'  i have absolutely no desire to ride in the south, any length, any time.

yep, weak-kneed.  can't all be smart and strong guys like yourself.

btw, chris is right.  let's stay on topic.  if you want to continue this silliness, let's spare everyone else and take it off line.

elmar

[rda...@carolina.rr.com]

Elmar:
In person we'd probably find out we get along great over a good lager or ale.
I was trying to get your goat as good as you got mine.
And the South can be much more dangerous than any Brevet.
Imagine training for the local Crit in the 80's, and being harrased and yelled at.
Then after making a ertain hand gesture in response have a 357 pointed at your head.
So with that in mind. I'll be polite.
Virtual handsahke accepted?

[Old5ten]

yes, i like that 8^).

elmar

[PedalPink]

I've been reading the comments about safety with interest. The
conversation has been wide ranging (safe routes, sleep
deprivation,rider health).

Please, before you read further. I'm not advocating mandatory medical
control points to check cyclists for sleep deprivation, high pulse
rates that won't come down, Shermers neck, dehydration etc.

But I am aware of other sports whose model includes greater medical
oversite for the safety of the participants. I'd like to share how a
different organization I belong to deals with some of the same issues
- in this case health focus.

I was formerly an endurance equestrian rider. An Endurance ride is a
timed test against the clock of an individual horse/rider team’s
ability to traverse a marked, measured cross-county “trail” over
natural terrain consisting of a distance of 50 to 100 miles in one day
and an occasional ultra event. (Distances are not as long as RUSA
events, but the routes are less accessible). Entry fees are $50-$300.
Rides are sanctioned by various groups, primarily American Endurance
Ride Council (AERC) in the US and the Federation Equestre
Internationale (FEI) worldwide (with extensive rules just like RUSA
and ACP). There are nearly 400 FEI endurance competitions held in
Europe, Asia, and over 700 rides in America.

Horses are required to pass a pre-ride vet check for soundness before
they are allowed to start (which is similar to our pre ride checks for
lights, vests, and so on). Riders carry a control card, just like
cyclists. The ride begins as a group start when the trail is "opened"
at a specific time to all riders in each mileage division. The riders
are then free to go at their own pace throughout the ride as long as
they do not exceed the time limit for their ride distance, or the cut-
off times (if applicable) for the vet checks.

Endurance rides have manditory "holds" (like our controls) except the
horses must pulse down to meet a specific heart rate parameter --
anywhere from 60 to 68 bpm (beats pr minute) -- before they are then
checked by qualified veterinarians to ensure the horses are fit to
continue. There's a standard set of tests conducted; it takes about
5-10 minutes with immediate results recorded on a standard form.
Horses that do not pulse down within a specified time, or fail to pass
the vet check, are pulled from the competition and not allowed to
continue. There may also be surprise vet checks along the route like
our surprise controls. At the finish, the horse is again checked by
the vet to ensure it is "fit to continue" (if not, the horse and rider
are ineligible to win despite their good time).

These events are typically staffed with 1 or 2 veterinarians (paid for
their time) and numerous volunteers to assist (depending on the number
of participants and length / route of the course). Notice that the
focus is strictly on the horse (I've seen riders in very bad shape,
including myself, continuing).

I think other events such as ultra distance running events do similar
medical checks of the runner, examining weight loss since start, pulse
rate, etc. At Ironman Triathlons medical personnel are stationed
along the bike and run but it is voluntary for the competitor to seek
medical help (more similar to PBP). Both Triathlon and Marathon groups
have been struggling with the issues of participant safety as their
sports grow and some participants have died competing in the events.

Again, I'm not proposing implementing medical checks at our control
points. Just describing how some other groups are handling the
issues.
Jacqueline Campbell
Ohio Randonneurs, RUSA #5872