M
C
Colin Blackburn
Guest
David Martin wrote:
[of Audax navigation]
> I like the orienteers maxim of keeping yourself unlost.
Not that it did me much good on Saturday when I failed to be unlost
three times in a row!
The principle though is to keep a thumb on the map at the point where
your know you are or have just recently been to. Of course in foot
orienteering it can be a real thumb, on the bike it is an altogether
more awkward metaphorical thumb.
> It also helps
> to break down the longer stretches between nav points into thinking
> sized chunks.
Yes, using some notable intermediate points as the targets for each
chunk too.
Colin
[of Audax navigation]
> I like the orienteers maxim of keeping yourself unlost.
Not that it did me much good on Saturday when I failed to be unlost
three times in a row!
The principle though is to keep a thumb on the map at the point where
your know you are or have just recently been to. Of course in foot
orienteering it can be a real thumb, on the bike it is an altogether
more awkward metaphorical thumb.
> It also helps
> to break down the longer stretches between nav points into thinking
> sized chunks.
Yes, using some notable intermediate points as the targets for each
chunk too.
Colin
M
Mark Thompson
Guest
Danny Colyer wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> <URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/cycling/ridereports/cheddar05.htm
> l>
>
> I'd fancied trying an audax ever since I first read about them, years
> ago, but I'd never got round to it. This year I read several weeks in
> advance about the Tasty Cheddar 100km. It started and finished in
> Bristol, which was important - the thought of driving halfway across
> the country for a bike ride has never appealed to me. By the time I'd
> ridden to the start, and ridden home again at the end, the total
> distance would be about 80 miles. That's a long way to ride with
> October weather, particularly bearing in mind the hills. But I booked
> the time off from the family, registered, and just decided to be
> prepared to wimp out if it was wet and windy.
>
> A few days before the event, the forecast was for a grey day, with
> plenty of showers and stronger winds than I liked the idea of. It
> didn't change much as the day approached, except for the forecast
> winds to get lighter. Anyway, they were forecast to be stronger in
> the afternoon than in the morning, and in the afternoon they should be
> in my favour.
>
> Thursday and Friday were grey, damp and windy. When I went to bed on
> Friday the forecast was for more of the same.
>
> I left my alarm set as if for work and got up as soon as it went off
> (so 10 minutes earlier than I get up for work). I opened the curtains
> to a blue sky, glorious sunshine and not a breath of wind. I checked
> the forecast, it was to be sunny all day, with no mention of wind. No
> excuse to wimp out and visit the 2 local breweries that were having an
> open day, then.
>
> After a small bowl of cereal (all I can manage at that time of the
> morning), I left at 08:20. I should have got to the start for 09:00
> with no problems. Unfortunately I had trouble finding the Create
> Centre. I didn't actually make a wrong turning - I just thought I had,
> and spent quite a while trying to figure out where I /should/ have
> gone.
>
> (For those who know the area better than I do, I got my roundabouts
> mixed up in the centre of Bristol. I knew I wanted to turn right from
> what I thought was the Bedminster Bridge roundabout, and that's
> exactly what I did. I found myself on York Road, which I didn't think
> was right. I checked the A-Z and found that York Road was a left turn
> from the Bedminster Bridge roundabout, so I turned round and went back
> to the roundabout. Eventually I worked out that what I had /thought/
> was the Bedminster Bridge roundabout was actually the Temple Gate
> roundabout. By turning into York Road, I had been heading in the right
> direction all along, /towards/ the Bedminster Bridge roundabout. I
> hate trying to navigate in the centre of Bristol.)
>
> Anyway, I reached the Create Centre at 09:20. I had planned to have a
> sandwich before starting, and there was no way I was starting the ride
> without one. So I was half an hour late starting. That put a stop to
> my primary navigation plan, which was to ride with the bunch and hope
> that enough of them had done it before and would know where they were
> going. I forgot to check my mileage at the start, but based on my
> mileage at the first control it must have been about 10.
>
> The ride started by following the appalling (if you're on slick tyres)
> It was a nice ride, but would probably have been better with company.
> Thanks for organising it, Joe. Perhaps I'll try again next year.
> Maybe next time I'll find the start on time and manage to complete the
> route without making so many mistakes.
Wow, rain, hills, getting lost, flat tyre _and_ a dead badger. That's
proper that is.
news:[email protected]:
> <URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/cycling/ridereports/cheddar05.htm
> l>
>
> I'd fancied trying an audax ever since I first read about them, years
> ago, but I'd never got round to it. This year I read several weeks in
> advance about the Tasty Cheddar 100km. It started and finished in
> Bristol, which was important - the thought of driving halfway across
> the country for a bike ride has never appealed to me. By the time I'd
> ridden to the start, and ridden home again at the end, the total
> distance would be about 80 miles. That's a long way to ride with
> October weather, particularly bearing in mind the hills. But I booked
> the time off from the family, registered, and just decided to be
> prepared to wimp out if it was wet and windy.
>
> A few days before the event, the forecast was for a grey day, with
> plenty of showers and stronger winds than I liked the idea of. It
> didn't change much as the day approached, except for the forecast
> winds to get lighter. Anyway, they were forecast to be stronger in
> the afternoon than in the morning, and in the afternoon they should be
> in my favour.
>
> Thursday and Friday were grey, damp and windy. When I went to bed on
> Friday the forecast was for more of the same.
>
> I left my alarm set as if for work and got up as soon as it went off
> (so 10 minutes earlier than I get up for work). I opened the curtains
> to a blue sky, glorious sunshine and not a breath of wind. I checked
> the forecast, it was to be sunny all day, with no mention of wind. No
> excuse to wimp out and visit the 2 local breweries that were having an
> open day, then.
>
> After a small bowl of cereal (all I can manage at that time of the
> morning), I left at 08:20. I should have got to the start for 09:00
> with no problems. Unfortunately I had trouble finding the Create
> Centre. I didn't actually make a wrong turning - I just thought I had,
> and spent quite a while trying to figure out where I /should/ have
> gone.
>
> (For those who know the area better than I do, I got my roundabouts
> mixed up in the centre of Bristol. I knew I wanted to turn right from
> what I thought was the Bedminster Bridge roundabout, and that's
> exactly what I did. I found myself on York Road, which I didn't think
> was right. I checked the A-Z and found that York Road was a left turn
> from the Bedminster Bridge roundabout, so I turned round and went back
> to the roundabout. Eventually I worked out that what I had /thought/
> was the Bedminster Bridge roundabout was actually the Temple Gate
> roundabout. By turning into York Road, I had been heading in the right
> direction all along, /towards/ the Bedminster Bridge roundabout. I
> hate trying to navigate in the centre of Bristol.)
>
> Anyway, I reached the Create Centre at 09:20. I had planned to have a
> sandwich before starting, and there was no way I was starting the ride
> without one. So I was half an hour late starting. That put a stop to
> my primary navigation plan, which was to ride with the bunch and hope
> that enough of them had done it before and would know where they were
> going. I forgot to check my mileage at the start, but based on my
> mileage at the first control it must have been about 10.
>
> The ride started by following the appalling (if you're on slick tyres)
> It was a nice ride, but would probably have been better with company.
> Thanks for organising it, Joe. Perhaps I'll try again next year.
> Maybe next time I'll find the start on time and manage to complete the
> route without making so many mistakes.
Wow, rain, hills, getting lost, flat tyre _and_ a dead badger. That's
proper that is.
N
Not Responding
Guest
MSeries wrote:
> m0rk wrote:
>
>>
>> Id want to do a similar thing with the map and enter the route points
>> into the gps thingy and have it direct me there - keeping this map as
>> a last resort sort of thing.
>
>
>
> Some folk use them on AUK events, I don't. They still get lost though. A
> GPS will not stop you getting lost if you make the wrong descision when
> loading the waypoints. The best you can hope for is that you make better
> descisions in the comfort of your own home than you do when out on the
> road, oh and you batteries doesn't die on you. They really are not
> necessary on AUK events if you can read. I have done many events without
> looking at a map nor a GPS, conversly I have over taken GPS users as hey
> change their batteries or worse as they return from a detour from the
> proscribed route !!!.
I use a GPS (Garmin something-or-other) and tracklogs PC based maps of
the UK. It is doubleplus good.
The best aspect from a route following POV is the fact that the GPS
tells you within 100 metres that you are Going Wrong. Paper maps and
routesheets usually conspire with the human mind to wait until you reach
the bottom of an enormous hill before telling you.
> m0rk wrote:
>
>>
>> Id want to do a similar thing with the map and enter the route points
>> into the gps thingy and have it direct me there - keeping this map as
>> a last resort sort of thing.
>
>
>
> Some folk use them on AUK events, I don't. They still get lost though. A
> GPS will not stop you getting lost if you make the wrong descision when
> loading the waypoints. The best you can hope for is that you make better
> descisions in the comfort of your own home than you do when out on the
> road, oh and you batteries doesn't die on you. They really are not
> necessary on AUK events if you can read. I have done many events without
> looking at a map nor a GPS, conversly I have over taken GPS users as hey
> change their batteries or worse as they return from a detour from the
> proscribed route !!!.
I use a GPS (Garmin something-or-other) and tracklogs PC based maps of
the UK. It is doubleplus good.
The best aspect from a route following POV is the fact that the GPS
tells you within 100 metres that you are Going Wrong. Paper maps and
routesheets usually conspire with the human mind to wait until you reach
the bottom of an enormous hill before telling you.
D
Danny Colyer
Guest
iakobski wrote:
> I absolutely _hate_ navigating from lists of instructions - those AA
> routes are the worst, but I also find Audax ones difficult. For
> example, all you have is "L SP Ambridge" there is no indication whether
> it's in 1 km or 30 km, if it's the first left or the 20th. So after 10
> km you're starting to worry whether you've missed it.
I discovered that one while looking for the 4th turning. I'd checked
the map a couple of times and was getting quite worried by the time I
found it.
> This year is my first year Audaxing, but what I do now is check the
> route beforehand on an OS 1:25000, then either cut out or photocopy
> bits of a motoring atlas in the right size to stick in the mapholder
> next to the instructions. I then use a highlighter to outline the
> route. I find it much easier to think of "third left onto B-road,
> heading due East". Another tip is to highlight every third line in the
> instructions, then it is easier to focus on and find your place while
> you're moving.
More good ideas to bear in mind for next time. Thanks.
--
Danny Colyer (my reply address is valid but checked infrequently)
<URL:http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/>
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine
> I absolutely _hate_ navigating from lists of instructions - those AA
> routes are the worst, but I also find Audax ones difficult. For
> example, all you have is "L SP Ambridge" there is no indication whether
> it's in 1 km or 30 km, if it's the first left or the 20th. So after 10
> km you're starting to worry whether you've missed it.
I discovered that one while looking for the 4th turning. I'd checked
the map a couple of times and was getting quite worried by the time I
found it.
> This year is my first year Audaxing, but what I do now is check the
> route beforehand on an OS 1:25000, then either cut out or photocopy
> bits of a motoring atlas in the right size to stick in the mapholder
> next to the instructions. I then use a highlighter to outline the
> route. I find it much easier to think of "third left onto B-road,
> heading due East". Another tip is to highlight every third line in the
> instructions, then it is easier to focus on and find your place while
> you're moving.
More good ideas to bear in mind for next time. Thanks.
--
Danny Colyer (my reply address is valid but checked infrequently)
<URL:http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/>
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine
D
Danny Colyer
Guest
MartinM wrote:
> Nice report; well done, do we have another urc customer for PBP ''07?
Thanks, but I really can't imagine being able to book enough time off
from the family to train for PBP! Maybe in 10-20 years...
--
Danny Colyer (my reply address is valid but checked infrequently)
<URL:http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/>
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine
> Nice report; well done, do we have another urc customer for PBP ''07?
Thanks, but I really can't imagine being able to book enough time off
from the family to train for PBP! Maybe in 10-20 years...
--
Danny Colyer (my reply address is valid but checked infrequently)
<URL:http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/>
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine
M
MartinM
Guest
Danny Colyer wrote:
> MartinM wrote:
> > Nice report; well done, do we have another urc customer for PBP ''07?
>
> Thanks, but I really can't imagine being able to book enough time off
> from the family to train for PBP! Maybe in 10-20 years...
>
Train? what's that? ;-)
I will have to do it in 2 years when I am the average age of AUK
membership
> MartinM wrote:
> > Nice report; well done, do we have another urc customer for PBP ''07?
>
> Thanks, but I really can't imagine being able to book enough time off
> from the family to train for PBP! Maybe in 10-20 years...
>
Train? what's that? ;-)
I will have to do it in 2 years when I am the average age of AUK
membership
D
Danny Colyer
Guest
Mark Thompson wrote:
> Wow, rain, hills, getting lost, flat tyre _and_ a dead badger. That's
> proper that is.
<G>
There was a dead bunny somewhere, too, but I didn't think it worthy of
mention. It wasn't on the official course, anyway.
--
Danny Colyer (my reply address is valid but checked infrequently)
<URL:http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/>
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine
> Wow, rain, hills, getting lost, flat tyre _and_ a dead badger. That's
> proper that is.
<G>
There was a dead bunny somewhere, too, but I didn't think it worthy of
mention. It wasn't on the official course, anyway.
--
Danny Colyer (my reply address is valid but checked infrequently)
<URL:http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/>
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine
I
Ian Blake
Guest
On Sun, 02 Oct 2005 20:05:20 +0100, MSeries <[email protected]> wrote:
>David Martin wrote:
>I am a first year Audaxer but have completed 13 this year. I like to
>have traced the route on a OS map, road atlas version, beforehand and
>perhaps mark it up. If one does get lost, it is far quicker to be able
>to navigate back onto the route if one knows where the route is going
>to go. One does not have to complete every km of the prescribed route so
>one is allowed to join it later providing one knows where that point
>might be. This way, un planned detours are often not very much further
>and don't waste too much time.
Strictly when you go off route you should rejoin the route at the place you
detoured. In practice even the strictest organisers do not mind this rule
being broken provided you have not achieved a short cut or missed out a
significant climb.
If this was not the case some Audax rides would require info controls every few
miles which would be very annoying. On an Audax I hope to run next year it is
definitely possible to cheat to get under distance. I could lock it down but I
do not want to add a irritating info.
>David Martin wrote:
>I am a first year Audaxer but have completed 13 this year. I like to
>have traced the route on a OS map, road atlas version, beforehand and
>perhaps mark it up. If one does get lost, it is far quicker to be able
>to navigate back onto the route if one knows where the route is going
>to go. One does not have to complete every km of the prescribed route so
>one is allowed to join it later providing one knows where that point
>might be. This way, un planned detours are often not very much further
>and don't waste too much time.
Strictly when you go off route you should rejoin the route at the place you
detoured. In practice even the strictest organisers do not mind this rule
being broken provided you have not achieved a short cut or missed out a
significant climb.
If this was not the case some Audax rides would require info controls every few
miles which would be very annoying. On an Audax I hope to run next year it is
definitely possible to cheat to get under distance. I could lock it down but I
do not want to add a irritating info.
D
David Martin
Guest
Ian Blake wrote:
> On Sun, 02 Oct 2005 20:05:20 +0100, MSeries <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >David Martin wrote:
>
No I didn't. Get your attributions right please.
> >I am a first year Audaxer but have completed 13 this year. I like to
> >have traced the route on a OS map, road atlas version, beforehand and
> >perhaps mark it up. If one does get lost, it is far quicker to be able
> >to navigate back onto the route if one knows where the route is going
> >to go. One does not have to complete every km of the prescribed route so
> >one is allowed to join it later providing one knows where that point
> >might be. This way, un planned detours are often not very much further
> >and don't waste too much time.
>
> Strictly when you go off route you should rejoin the route at the place you
> detoured.
Says who? You are free to chose any route between controls. the quoted
route for the ride is the shortest route, not necessarily the
recommended one. As long as you visit all the controls..
> In practice even the strictest organisers do not mind this rule
> being broken provided you have not achieved a short cut or missed out a
> significant climb.
The climb is more to do with the spirit of the AAA award, not the
distance. It shouldn't be possible to do an Audax and come in at under
the posted distance whilst visiting every control. OK, you may do 205
instead of 210 km, but that is still a 200. The last 200 I did had a
listed distance of 201km but a distance of 205 on the route sheet.
> If this was not the case some Audax rides would require info controls every few
> miles which would be very annoying. On an Audax I hope to run next year it is
> definitely possible to cheat to get under distance. I could lock it down but I
> do not want to add a irritating info.
It is down to appropriate route selection. Obviously this is harder in
some places than others.
...d
> On Sun, 02 Oct 2005 20:05:20 +0100, MSeries <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >David Martin wrote:
>
No I didn't. Get your attributions right please.
> >I am a first year Audaxer but have completed 13 this year. I like to
> >have traced the route on a OS map, road atlas version, beforehand and
> >perhaps mark it up. If one does get lost, it is far quicker to be able
> >to navigate back onto the route if one knows where the route is going
> >to go. One does not have to complete every km of the prescribed route so
> >one is allowed to join it later providing one knows where that point
> >might be. This way, un planned detours are often not very much further
> >and don't waste too much time.
>
> Strictly when you go off route you should rejoin the route at the place you
> detoured.
Says who? You are free to chose any route between controls. the quoted
route for the ride is the shortest route, not necessarily the
recommended one. As long as you visit all the controls..
> In practice even the strictest organisers do not mind this rule
> being broken provided you have not achieved a short cut or missed out a
> significant climb.
The climb is more to do with the spirit of the AAA award, not the
distance. It shouldn't be possible to do an Audax and come in at under
the posted distance whilst visiting every control. OK, you may do 205
instead of 210 km, but that is still a 200. The last 200 I did had a
listed distance of 201km but a distance of 205 on the route sheet.
> If this was not the case some Audax rides would require info controls every few
> miles which would be very annoying. On an Audax I hope to run next year it is
> definitely possible to cheat to get under distance. I could lock it down but I
> do not want to add a irritating info.
It is down to appropriate route selection. Obviously this is harder in
some places than others.
...d
M
Mike K Smith
Guest
David Martin wrote On 10/03/05 23:06,:
> Ian Blake wrote:
>>Strictly when you go off route you should rejoin the route at the place you
>>detoured.
>
>
> Says who? You are free to chose any route between controls. the quoted
> route for the ride is the shortest route, not necessarily the
> recommended one. As long as you visit all the controls..
Did this change? When I was previously a member of AUK (1981-1986
timeframe) I'm sure there was such a regulation. There was also a rule
that riders on an event must not be accompanied by any other riders who
weren't participating.
In those days events had manned secret controls, rather than info
controls, too.
Mike
> Ian Blake wrote:
>>Strictly when you go off route you should rejoin the route at the place you
>>detoured.
>
>
> Says who? You are free to chose any route between controls. the quoted
> route for the ride is the shortest route, not necessarily the
> recommended one. As long as you visit all the controls..
Did this change? When I was previously a member of AUK (1981-1986
timeframe) I'm sure there was such a regulation. There was also a rule
that riders on an event must not be accompanied by any other riders who
weren't participating.
In those days events had manned secret controls, rather than info
controls, too.
Mike
D
David Martin
Guest
Mike K Smith wrote:
> David Martin wrote On 10/03/05 23:06,:
> > Ian Blake wrote:
>
> >>Strictly when you go off route you should rejoin the route at the place you
> >>detoured.
> >
> >
> > Says who? You are free to chose any route between controls. the quoted
> > route for the ride is the shortest route, not necessarily the
> > recommended one. As long as you visit all the controls..
>
> Did this change? When I was previously a member of AUK (1981-1986
> timeframe) I'm sure there was such a regulation. There was also a rule
> that riders on an event must not be accompanied by any other riders who
> weren't participating.
>
> In those days events had manned secret controls, rather than info
> controls, too.
I checked the regulations in the handbook. There is no requirement to
take any particular route, as long as you visit all the controls in the
correct order between the times stated.
...d
> David Martin wrote On 10/03/05 23:06,:
> > Ian Blake wrote:
>
> >>Strictly when you go off route you should rejoin the route at the place you
> >>detoured.
> >
> >
> > Says who? You are free to chose any route between controls. the quoted
> > route for the ride is the shortest route, not necessarily the
> > recommended one. As long as you visit all the controls..
>
> Did this change? When I was previously a member of AUK (1981-1986
> timeframe) I'm sure there was such a regulation. There was also a rule
> that riders on an event must not be accompanied by any other riders who
> weren't participating.
>
> In those days events had manned secret controls, rather than info
> controls, too.
I checked the regulations in the handbook. There is no requirement to
take any particular route, as long as you visit all the controls in the
correct order between the times stated.
...d
M
Mike K Smith
Guest
Hi David,
David Martin wrote On 10/04/05 13:49,:
> Mike K Smith wrote:
>>Did this change? When I was previously a member of AUK (1981-1986
>>timeframe) I'm sure there was such a regulation. There was also a rule
>>that riders on an event must not be accompanied by any other riders who
>>weren't participating.
>>
>>In those days events had manned secret controls, rather than info
>>controls, too.
> I checked the regulations in the handbook. There is no requirement to
> take any particular route, as long as you visit all the controls in the
> correct order between the times stated.
I'm not disputing what you say. I checked the regulations on the AUK
website before posting. However, I believe that the regulations have
changed from what they were 20 years ago. Just wondering if there are
any AUK old-timers on the newsgroup who can reassure me that I'm not
suffering from "Wossname's Syndrome".
Mike
David Martin wrote On 10/04/05 13:49,:
> Mike K Smith wrote:
>>Did this change? When I was previously a member of AUK (1981-1986
>>timeframe) I'm sure there was such a regulation. There was also a rule
>>that riders on an event must not be accompanied by any other riders who
>>weren't participating.
>>
>>In those days events had manned secret controls, rather than info
>>controls, too.
> I checked the regulations in the handbook. There is no requirement to
> take any particular route, as long as you visit all the controls in the
> correct order between the times stated.
I'm not disputing what you say. I checked the regulations on the AUK
website before posting. However, I believe that the regulations have
changed from what they were 20 years ago. Just wondering if there are
any AUK old-timers on the newsgroup who can reassure me that I'm not
suffering from "Wossname's Syndrome".
Mike
I
Ian Blake
Guest
On Tue, 04 Oct 2005 14:17:28 +0100, Mike K Smith
<[email protected]> wrote:
>I'm not disputing what you say. I checked the regulations on the AUK
>website before posting. However, I believe that the regulations have
>changed from what they were 20 years ago. Just wondering if there are
>any AUK old-timers on the newsgroup who can reassure me that I'm not
>suffering from "Wossname's Syndrome".
>
I checked an old handbook and a new handbook and it seems the rule is
no longer there. Not sure which year it disappeared. There was a
vote against secret controls perhaps the precise route following was
removed as unenforceable at the same time.
There is a movement to reestablish secret controls. Many organisers
want them.
<[email protected]> wrote:
>I'm not disputing what you say. I checked the regulations on the AUK
>website before posting. However, I believe that the regulations have
>changed from what they were 20 years ago. Just wondering if there are
>any AUK old-timers on the newsgroup who can reassure me that I'm not
>suffering from "Wossname's Syndrome".
>
I checked an old handbook and a new handbook and it seems the rule is
no longer there. Not sure which year it disappeared. There was a
vote against secret controls perhaps the precise route following was
removed as unenforceable at the same time.
There is a movement to reestablish secret controls. Many organisers
want them.
T
Tim Hall
Guest
On 3 Oct 2005 01:37:16 -0700, "David Martin"
<[email protected]> wrote:
<audax route sheets>
>
>Various, but they are all different.. I have seen good, bad and
>indifferent ones. My preferred format is tabular with one direction per
>line, four blocks per A4 page.
>
>typically there are a bunch of abbreviations used, most of which are
>obvious. The other thing is that only junctions where you do not have
>priority are noted.
>
>Abbreviations:
>
>L, R, SO (left right straight over)
>at T
>Imm (Immediate, eg L Imm R for a staggerred junction)
>SP (signposted)
>RO (Roundabout)
If a place name is in CAPS you go through it. I've also seen $ in
place of SP.
X cross roads
So "L at T $ Crawley" means left at the T junction, signposted
Crawley, while "R at X $ THREE BRIDGES" means right at cross roads
signposted, and ending up in, Three Bridges.
Tim
<[email protected]> wrote:
<audax route sheets>
>
>Various, but they are all different.. I have seen good, bad and
>indifferent ones. My preferred format is tabular with one direction per
>line, four blocks per A4 page.
>
>typically there are a bunch of abbreviations used, most of which are
>obvious. The other thing is that only junctions where you do not have
>priority are noted.
>
>Abbreviations:
>
>L, R, SO (left right straight over)
>at T
>Imm (Immediate, eg L Imm R for a staggerred junction)
>SP (signposted)
>RO (Roundabout)
If a place name is in CAPS you go through it. I've also seen $ in
place of SP.
X cross roads
So "L at T $ Crawley" means left at the T junction, signposted
Crawley, while "R at X $ THREE BRIDGES" means right at cross roads
signposted, and ending up in, Three Bridges.
Tim
M
MartinM
Guest
Tim Hall wrote:
>
> So "L at T $ Crawley" means left at the T junction, signposted
> Crawley, while "R at X $ THREE BRIDGES" means right at cross roads
> signposted, and ending up in, Three Bridges.
a curious other bit of convention I've noticed is that if the SP points
to nowhere on the ride the bottom destination is always that which goes
on the route sheet ie;
London 38
Canterbury 25
Figgleworth Badger 1/4
it is SP Figgleworth Badger
>
> So "L at T $ Crawley" means left at the T junction, signposted
> Crawley, while "R at X $ THREE BRIDGES" means right at cross roads
> signposted, and ending up in, Three Bridges.
a curious other bit of convention I've noticed is that if the SP points
to nowhere on the ride the bottom destination is always that which goes
on the route sheet ie;
London 38
Canterbury 25
Figgleworth Badger 1/4
it is SP Figgleworth Badger
D
Danny Colyer
Guest
MartinM wrote:
> a curious other bit of convention I've noticed is that if the SP points
> to nowhere on the ride the bottom destination is always that which goes
> on the route sheet ie;
>
> London 38
> Canterbury 25
> Figgleworth Badger 1/4
>
> it is SP Figgleworth Badger
Makes sense to me. Figgleworth Badger is the place you're most likely
to be able to find on the map when checking your course.
--
Danny Colyer (my reply address is valid but checked infrequently)
<URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/>
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine
> a curious other bit of convention I've noticed is that if the SP points
> to nowhere on the ride the bottom destination is always that which goes
> on the route sheet ie;
>
> London 38
> Canterbury 25
> Figgleworth Badger 1/4
>
> it is SP Figgleworth Badger
Makes sense to me. Figgleworth Badger is the place you're most likely
to be able to find on the map when checking your course.
--
Danny Colyer (my reply address is valid but checked infrequently)
<URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/>
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine
I
Ian Blake
Guest
On Tue, 04 Oct 2005 17:02:10 +0100, Ian Blake <NoNotMe@NotAnywhere> wrote:
>There is a movement to reestablish secret controls. Many organisers
>want them.
Actually they are back. In LEL this year and many others next year some emails
on the Audax list about this now.
Another comment pointed out that every other audax group affiliated to ACP
requires precise route following. This implies BRM routes should have this
rule enforced.
>There is a movement to reestablish secret controls. Many organisers
>want them.
Actually they are back. In LEL this year and many others next year some emails
on the Audax list about this now.
Another comment pointed out that every other audax group affiliated to ACP
requires precise route following. This implies BRM routes should have this
rule enforced.
D
Dave Kahn
Guest
Ian Blake wrote:
> I checked an old handbook and a new handbook and it seems the rule is
> no longer there. Not sure which year it disappeared. There was a
> vote against secret controls perhaps the precise route following was
> removed as unenforceable at the same time.
>
> There is a movement to reestablish secret controls. Many organisers
> want them.
Yes, it changed quite recently I think. I only started audaxing this
year so I can't be sure. The controls must all be visited but the route
is advisory. I believe secret controls are now permitted though their
inclusion in events seems to be rare. Obviously where there are secret
controls the route effectively becomes compulsory until the last one has
been visited.
--
Dave...
> I checked an old handbook and a new handbook and it seems the rule is
> no longer there. Not sure which year it disappeared. There was a
> vote against secret controls perhaps the precise route following was
> removed as unenforceable at the same time.
>
> There is a movement to reestablish secret controls. Many organisers
> want them.
Yes, it changed quite recently I think. I only started audaxing this
year so I can't be sure. The controls must all be visited but the route
is advisory. I believe secret controls are now permitted though their
inclusion in events seems to be rare. Obviously where there are secret
controls the route effectively becomes compulsory until the last one has
been visited.
--
Dave...
M
MartinM
Guest
Dave Kahn wrote:
> Ian Blake wrote:
>
> > I checked an old handbook and a new handbook and it seems the rule is
> > no longer there. Not sure which year it disappeared. There was a
> > vote against secret controls perhaps the precise route following was
> > removed as unenforceable at the same time.
> >
> > There is a movement to reestablish secret controls. Many organisers
> > want them.
>
> Yes, it changed quite recently I think. I only started audaxing this
> year so I can't be sure. The controls must all be visited but the route
> is advisory. I believe secret controls are now permitted though their
> inclusion in events seems to be rare. Obviously where there are secret
> controls the route effectively becomes compulsory until the last one has
> been visited.
Apparently according to an Elder AUKsman (who happens to be catering
for me next week) they are not strictly allowed as you cannot force
riders to use a certain route; only to visit the controls and ride the
distance. I bring this up as I noticed that the main hill on my event
can actually be by-passed. This is an insurance issue. No restriction
on info's though.
> Ian Blake wrote:
>
> > I checked an old handbook and a new handbook and it seems the rule is
> > no longer there. Not sure which year it disappeared. There was a
> > vote against secret controls perhaps the precise route following was
> > removed as unenforceable at the same time.
> >
> > There is a movement to reestablish secret controls. Many organisers
> > want them.
>
> Yes, it changed quite recently I think. I only started audaxing this
> year so I can't be sure. The controls must all be visited but the route
> is advisory. I believe secret controls are now permitted though their
> inclusion in events seems to be rare. Obviously where there are secret
> controls the route effectively becomes compulsory until the last one has
> been visited.
Apparently according to an Elder AUKsman (who happens to be catering
for me next week) they are not strictly allowed as you cannot force
riders to use a certain route; only to visit the controls and ride the
distance. I bring this up as I noticed that the main hill on my event
can actually be by-passed. This is an insurance issue. No restriction
on info's though.
