How much pain is involved in doing a grimpeur Audax ride

Discussion in 'UK and Europe' started by vernon, Sep 6, 2005.

  1. vernon

    vernon Guest

    Soory if this post appears twice, the previous attempt appears to have
    disappeared into the aether...

    I signed up for the Bransdale 115 Audax starting from Wiggington this
    weekend because it had a 0.5 AAA rating on the Audax site and I fancied a
    more challenging 100k Audax. Now that I have received the route details,
    it has an AAA rating of 1.25 for the middle 51k because there is 1234m of
    climbing though it's too short to qualify but permission has been granted
    for the bronze grimpeur badge to be awarded. Does this make the ride a
    gruelling one?

    Route details can be seen at
    http://www.amkirby.demon.co.uk/NYDA/Events/R050910A.htm

    I'm glad that i didn't chose the 170km ride - it includes a 3rd cat, a 2nd
    cat and two 1st cat climbs one of which is Rosedale Chimney, gulp.......

    cheers

    Vernon
    not an ounce lighter after LEJOG but acquired thighs like anvils
     
    Tags:


  2. MartinM

    MartinM Guest

    vernon wrote:
    > Soory if this post appears twice, the previous attempt appears to have
    > disappeared into the aether...
    >
    > I signed up for the Bransdale 115 Audax starting from Wiggington this
    > weekend because it had a 0.5 AAA rating on the Audax site and I fancied a
    > more challenging 100k Audax. Now that I have received the route details,
    > it has an AAA rating of 1.25 for the middle 51k because there is 1234m of
    > climbing though it's too short to qualify but permission has been granted
    > for the bronze grimpeur badge to be awarded. Does this make the ride a
    > gruelling one?


    Gruelling; yes, do-able as a first Grimpeur? also yes. 1234m over 100k
    would not qualify for 0.5 AAA but over 51k that is quite serious. The
    ride could well have been devised under the old regs so the award is
    kept. You should be fine ;-)
     
  3. MartinM

    MartinM Guest

    actually it has 1672m so qualifies for 0.5AAA which is a bronze under
    the current regs. If it had less than 1500m it would be worth 0 points,
    so you have probably already done quite a few rides that are near to
    the amount of climbing on the Grimpeur. It's not as if they wheel out
    special hills for Grimpeurs, just lots of 'em! My first Grimpeur was
    1.5AAA, that did hurt.
     
  4. Tony B

    Tony B Guest

    MartinM wrote:

    > Gruelling; yes, do-able as a first Grimpeur? also yes.


    Dunno about that, I did 2500ft in 14 miles to get to the top of Holm
    Moss for ToB last week, it wasn't too bad although I was breathing a bit
    hard (!) at certain points... which would suggest I have done a Proper
    Climb? it's by far the hardest climb I've ever done, much worse than the
    Snake and a fair bit harder than the climb out of Edale via Rushop Edge.

    However, this weekend I was motorcycling up Rosedale Chimney and the
    thought struck me that it seemed impossibly difficult to cycle up. Scary
    even. Maybe the back of a motorbike is no place to be assessing cycle
    climbs from?

    I also came across a 1:3 somewhere on the way to the Lake District, that
    WAS impossible...

    PS before I went up Holm Moss I had a read up on hillclimbing at

    http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/Rapids/3892/tips.htm#souplesse

    which seemed to help :)

    hth,

    Tony B
     
  5. vernon

    vernon Guest


    > However, this weekend I was motorcycling up Rosedale Chimney and the
    > thought struck me that it seemed impossibly difficult to cycle up. Scary
    > even. Maybe the back of a motorbike is no place to be assessing cycle
    > climbs from?


    One of my colleauges has successfully cycled up Rosedale Chimney. He admits
    to finding it nearly impossible and apparently was suffereing from rear
    wheelspin
    on his mountain bike as he wiched himself up it. I have no aspirations
    whatsoever
    of conquering it :).
     
  6. MSeries

    MSeries Guest

    vernon wrote:
    > Soory if this post appears twice, the previous attempt appears to have
    > disappeared into the aether...
    >
    > I signed up for the Bransdale 115 Audax starting from Wiggington this
    > weekend because it had a 0.5 AAA rating on the Audax site and I fancied a
    > more challenging 100k Audax. Now that I have received the route details,
    > it has an AAA rating of 1.25 for the middle 51k because there is 1234m of
    > climbing though it's too short to qualify but permission has been granted
    > for the bronze grimpeur badge to be awarded. Does this make the ride a
    > gruelling one?
    >
    > Route details can be seen at
    > http://www.amkirby.demon.co.uk/NYDA/Events/R050910A.htm
    >
    > I'm glad that i didn't chose the 170km ride - it includes a 3rd cat, a 2nd
    > cat and two 1st cat climbs one of which is Rosedale Chimney, gulp.......
    >
    > cheers
    >
    > Vernon
    > not an ounce lighter after LEJOG but acquired thighs like anvils
    >
    >


    its hard to say. I did a ride with 1.75 AAA points in April, a 100km. It
    was easier than the last two 200s that I have done which each had 0.75
    points. The climbs were longer but interspersed with flat and long
    downhills. I was dissappointed that the 600 I did with 5340m of climbing
    failed to qualify, a 600 has to have more than 6000m to qualify !!!
    You'll never know until you try. You seem like the sort of person who
    can rise to a challenge, good luck
     
  7. vernon

    vernon Guest


    > its hard to say. I did a ride with 1.75 AAA points in April, a 100km. It
    > was easier than the last two 200s that I have done which each had 0.75
    > points. The climbs were longer but interspersed with flat and long
    > downhills. I was dissappointed that the 600 I did with 5340m of climbing
    > failed to qualify, a 600 has to have more than 6000m to qualify !!!
    > You'll never know until you try. You seem like the sort of person who
    > can rise to a challenge, good luck


    I'm not backing out of it. I was going to strip the Galaxy for
    refurbishment this
    week but have postponed it to take advantage of its megarange gear cassette.

    It will be an interesting experience. I'm confident that I'll complete it
    but not
    confident that it's going to be a comfortable ride.

    vernon
     
  8. davek

    davek Guest

    vernon wrote:
    > One of my colleauges has successfully cycled up Rosedale Chimney. He admits
    > to finding it nearly impossible


    My only experience of Rosedale Chimney is on foot and I found that
    difficult enough. I find it hard to imagine riding a bike up it.

    The thing about AAA points is that they only account for altitude, not
    gradient, so it's hard to judge an individual ride just from the AAA
    rating -you could have one ride with a large overall altitude gain but
    most of that might be made up in "rolling" roads, or long, relatively
    gentle climbs, whereas another ride might have less climbing overall
    but will be made up in a few short but very nasty climbs. Unless you
    have some /very/ low gears, the latter category can be much more
    painful.

    It sounds like your ride is pretty firmly in the latter category.

    Bear in mind also that many rides have no AAA rating simply because the
    organiser hasn't worked out the figures - lack of an AAA rating does
    not necessarily indicate flatness!

    And there are some rides, like the 300 I did earlier this year, that
    are mostly flat but chuck in a few really nasty little climbs along the
    way just for fun.

    I'm doing Martin's ride in October, which also has 0.5 AAA points.
    Looking at the route sheet, one of the climbs seems to be the road over
    Ashdown Forest, which is actually not that bad - it goes on forever but
    isn't really all that steep. I'm rather hoping the rest of the route is
    along the same lines... I can at least be assured that won't be
    anything in the same category as Rosedale Chimney. Right, Martin?

    d.
     
  9. vernon

    vernon Guest

    > My only experience of Rosedale Chimney is on foot and I found that
    > difficult enough. I find it hard to imagine riding a bike up it.
    >

    Thankfully riding up Rosedale Chimney will remain in my imagination
    as I have no intentions of taking on a ride that incorporates it :)

    > whereas another ride might have less climbing overall
    > but will be made up in a few short but very nasty climbs. Unless you
    > have some /very/ low gears, the latter category can be much more
    > painful.
    >
    > It sounds like your ride is pretty firmly in the latter category.


    I do have very low gears on my Galaxy - about 18" only one hill on LEJOG
    beat me and that was probably in my head as I didn't even attempt to climb
    Berriedale Brae.
    >
    > And there are some rides, like the 300 I did earlier this year, that
    > are mostly flat but chuck in a few really nasty little climbs along the
    > way just for fun.


    My ability to cope with hills varies from day to day. Some days, long
    grinds
    are taken in my stride, on others, short sharp shocks fit the bill. Wish I
    was
    a tad more consistant.

    I am looking forwards to the ride. It will be my first long-ish distance
    ride
    without a touring payload in a month.
     
  10. MartinM

    MartinM Guest

    davek wrote:


    > I'm doing Martin's ride in October, which also has 0.5 AAA points.
    > Looking at the route sheet, one of the climbs seems to be the road over
    > Ashdown Forest, which is actually not that bad - it goes on forever but
    > isn't really all that steep. I'm rather hoping the rest of the route is
    > along the same lines... I can at least be assured that won't be
    > anything in the same category as Rosedale Chimney. Right, Martin?


    no it doesn't do Ashdown Forest over the top (Gill's Lap, probably
    where you went on the 300) it will do next year but from the South, I
    had to stick with the old route from last year. It skirts the bottom
    edge but you get a taste of the Forest. There are two very nasty little
    climbs, Cob Lane and Balcombe Lane in Ardingly, both short but probably
    about 1/5; I'm sure Cob lane may even reach 1/4 or 1/3. But you get a
    good run up and should not have to dismount, I did it a few weeks ago
    on a 39x26.
     
  11. David Martin

    David Martin Guest

    MSeries wrote:

    > its hard to say. I did a ride with 1.75 AAA points in April, a 100km. It
    > was easier than the last two 200s that I have done which each had 0.75
    > points. The climbs were longer but interspersed with flat and long
    > downhills. I was dissappointed that the 600 I did with 5340m of climbing
    > failed to qualify, a 600 has to have more than 6000m to qualify !!!


    That isn't strictly true. If you can find a shorter stretch (eg 100k)
    that exceeds the measure for that distance, then it should be eligible
    for the points. The person to ask is Peter Coulson but he is not on
    email. I'll write him a snail mail letter at some point.

    It is a question of the organiser presenting the appropriate data in
    the right format to get it verified.

    > You'll never know until you try. You seem like the sort of person who
    > can rise to a challenge, good luck


    ...d
     
  12. MartinM

    MartinM Guest

    David Martin wrote:
    > MSeries wrote:
    >
    > > its hard to say. I did a ride with 1.75 AAA points in April, a 100km. It
    > > was easier than the last two 200s that I have done which each had 0.75
    > > points. The climbs were longer but interspersed with flat and long
    > > downhills. I was dissappointed that the 600 I did with 5340m of climbing
    > > failed to qualify, a 600 has to have more than 6000m to qualify !!!

    >
    > That isn't strictly true. If you can find a shorter stretch (eg 100k)
    > that exceeds the measure for that distance, then it should be eligible
    > for the points. The person to ask is Peter Coulson but he is not on
    > email.


    He is; maybe he only gives it out to organisers.

    It's all explained in the AUK handbook (not helpful if you are not a
    member I suppose).
     
  13. davek

    davek Guest

    MartinM wrote:
    > There are two very nasty little
    > climbs, Cob Lane and Balcombe Lane in Ardingly, both short but probably
    > about 1/5; I'm sure Cob lane may even reach 1/4 or 1/3.


    Sounds like... er... fun? :)

    > I did it a few weeks ago
    > on a 39x26.


    My lowest gear at the moment is 30x25, so I think I'm well covered for
    most eventualities.

    Well, I say that, but my gears are jiggered at the moment (started to
    fit the STIs but haven't had time to finish the job) so I'm currently
    stuck in 42x16. Fortunately the hill that's on my new route to the
    station since I moved house is just about doable in that gear, but it's
    something I really must sort out before October...

    d.
     
  14. David Martin

    David Martin Guest

    MartinM wrote:
    > David Martin wrote:
    > > MSeries wrote:
    > >
    > > > its hard to say. I did a ride with 1.75 AAA points in April, a 100km. It
    > > > was easier than the last two 200s that I have done which each had 0.75
    > > > points. The climbs were longer but interspersed with flat and long
    > > > downhills. I was dissappointed that the 600 I did with 5340m of climbing
    > > > failed to qualify, a 600 has to have more than 6000m to qualify !!!

    > >
    > > That isn't strictly true. If you can find a shorter stretch (eg 100k)
    > > that exceeds the measure for that distance, then it should be eligible
    > > for the points. The person to ask is Peter Coulson but he is not on
    > > email.

    >
    > He is; maybe he only gives it out to organisers.
    >
    > It's all explained in the AUK handbook (not helpful if you are not a
    > member I suppose).


    It's mostly explained in the handbook. I just want to know what
    criteria he applies, so I can present the data appropriately.

    ...d
     
  15. vernon wrote:
    >
    > I signed up for the Bransdale 115 Audax starting from Wiggington this


    > http://www.amkirby.demon.co.uk/NYDA/Events/R050910A.htm


    That route doesn't look toooooo severe and it's really, really pretty.

    Basically you have White Horse Bank (hard), and then the ride round Bransdale
    which is hilly but so pretty you won't notice.

    After you get to hutton le hole that's all the real climbing done

    I'd say you're well capable of doing it. It's probably easier than
    the CTC ride from the York Rally that you did.


    --
    Arthur Clune
     
  16. As a rule I am Not Fond of climbing hills, though they are a necessary evil
    if one is to descend the other side, grinning manically and cackling like a
    fool. However, the Tour of the Hills last month - with 1.5 AAA wossnames -
    wasn't anything like as scary and 'orrible as I had been led to believe.
    After the LEJOG business, I reckon you'll be fine. Just don't go at it too
    hard.

    --
    Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
    Pepperoni and green peppers, mushrooms, olives, chives!
     
  17. MartinM

    MartinM Guest

    davek wrote:
    > MartinM wrote:
    > > There are two very nasty little
    > > climbs, Cob Lane and Balcombe Lane in Ardingly, both short but probably
    > > about 1/5; I'm sure Cob lane may even reach 1/4 or 1/3.

    >
    > Sounds like... er... fun? :)


    My name for Cob Lane is Il Mostro ;-)

    nothing too bad; if you imagine Yorkshill and One tree Hill from the
    Invicta they are each about half the length. There's a few little 'uns
    as well. It's almost flat after lunch (but that's changing next year
    have evened it out a bit)
    get working on that gear changer!
     
  18. MartinM

    MartinM Guest

    David Martin wrote:
    > MartinM wrote:
    > > David Martin wrote:
    > > > MSeries wrote:
    > > >
    > > > > its hard to say. I did a ride with 1.75 AAA points in April, a 100km. It
    > > > > was easier than the last two 200s that I have done which each had 0.75
    > > > > points. The climbs were longer but interspersed with flat and long
    > > > > downhills. I was dissappointed that the 600 I did with 5340m of climbing
    > > > > failed to qualify, a 600 has to have more than 6000m to qualify !!!
    > > >
    > > > That isn't strictly true. If you can find a shorter stretch (eg 100k)
    > > > that exceeds the measure for that distance, then it should be eligible
    > > > for the points. The person to ask is Peter Coulson but he is not on
    > > > email.

    > >
    > > He is; maybe he only gives it out to organisers.
    > >
    > > It's all explained in the AUK handbook (not helpful if you are not a
    > > member I suppose).

    >
    > It's mostly explained in the handbook. I just want to know what
    > criteria he applies, so I can present the data appropriately.


    he doesn't; you fill in the climbing and the points on the entry form.
    It was easy for me I just had to use the old data.
     
  19. David Martin

    David Martin Guest

    MartinM wrote:
    > David Martin wrote:
    > > MartinM wrote:
    > > > David Martin wrote:
    > > > > MSeries wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > > > its hard to say. I did a ride with 1.75 AAA points in April, a 100km. It
    > > > > > was easier than the last two 200s that I have done which each had 0.75
    > > > > > points. The climbs were longer but interspersed with flat and long
    > > > > > downhills. I was dissappointed that the 600 I did with 5340m of climbing
    > > > > > failed to qualify, a 600 has to have more than 6000m to qualify !!!
    > > > >
    > > > > That isn't strictly true. If you can find a shorter stretch (eg 100k)
    > > > > that exceeds the measure for that distance, then it should be eligible
    > > > > for the points. The person to ask is Peter Coulson but he is not on
    > > > > email.
    > > >
    > > > He is; maybe he only gives it out to organisers.
    > > >
    > > > It's all explained in the AUK handbook (not helpful if you are not a
    > > > member I suppose).

    > >
    > > It's mostly explained in the handbook. I just want to know what
    > > criteria he applies, so I can present the data appropriately.

    >
    > he doesn't; you fill in the climbing and the points on the entry form.
    > It was easy for me I just had to use the old data.


    You misunderstand. The route has not been assessed for AAA due to it
    being too much faff for the organiser. (No criticism intended, he is a
    nice guy who runs excellent events well.) I have offered to measure
    things up but want to know how Peter wants that data for verification
    that the AAA points are justified.

    ...d
     
  20. David Martin

    David Martin Guest

    David Martin wrote:
    > MartinM wrote:
    > > David Martin wrote:
    > > > MartinM wrote:
    > > > > David Martin wrote:
    > > > > > MSeries wrote:
    > > > > >
    > > > > > > its hard to say. I did a ride with 1.75 AAA points in April, a 100km. It
    > > > > > > was easier than the last two 200s that I have done which each had 0.75
    > > > > > > points. The climbs were longer but interspersed with flat and long
    > > > > > > downhills. I was dissappointed that the 600 I did with 5340m of climbing
    > > > > > > failed to qualify, a 600 has to have more than 6000m to qualify !!!
    > > > > >
    > > > > > That isn't strictly true. If you can find a shorter stretch (eg 100k)
    > > > > > that exceeds the measure for that distance, then it should be eligible
    > > > > > for the points. The person to ask is Peter Coulson but he is not on
    > > > > > email.
    > > > >
    > > > > He is; maybe he only gives it out to organisers.
    > > > >
    > > > > It's all explained in the AUK handbook (not helpful if you are not a
    > > > > member I suppose).
    > > >
    > > > It's mostly explained in the handbook. I just want to know what
    > > > criteria he applies, so I can present the data appropriately.

    > >
    > > he doesn't; you fill in the climbing and the points on the entry form.
    > > It was easy for me I just had to use the old data.

    >
    > You misunderstand. The route has not been assessed for AAA due to it
    > being too much faff for the organiser. (No criticism intended, he is a
    > nice guy who runs excellent events well.) I have offered to measure
    > things up but want to know how Peter wants that data for verification
    > that the AAA points are justified.


    Just completed the measurement. There is a 104km stretch with 1682m
    climbing. That is twice the average bumpiness of a 100km ride in UK.
    Overall height gain is 2900 in 205km which isn't enough for any points
    if averaged over that distance.

    ...d
     
Loading...
Loading...