gbduro

Are we sure about Josh his story? Because in the podcast at 01:02:45 he tells about taking shelter under a bridge to eat and drink and then push on because he was cold, not because the bridge would violate any rules. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/23-josh-ibbett-gb-duro-unsupported-self-sufficient/id1500400859?i=1000488316678
Maybe it's somewhere else in the podcast, haven't listened to the whole thing.

Sorry, I might be mistaken. I'm sure the discussion has been had. Either way, it relates to the difficult task of an organiser to either create a watertight set of rules or risk being critiqued when they enforce the spirit of the rules in a way that isn't universally accepted. Granted they did a U-turn with Angus, possibly because they read 'the comments'.

https://youtu.be/0IxEMZ9wKz8
Bridge bit is about 8.30 in. Don't think he mentions it's against the rules in this. Worth a watch if you've not seen it.

Wait, are people really discussing whether it's allowed to shelter under a bridge?

Bonkers if true.

Of course it must never be allowed, everybody should ride fixed, only one person should finish the race, etc.

Haha, it has generated almost as much chat as the race itself.

Comments section here shines some light on the organiser's decisions.

retrospectively stripping josh of his 2020 gbduro title for sheltering under a bridge.
we need to set an example. he must be punished.

Also stripping him of his TCR win in 2015 in which he had a close call with a bear. so that made him go faster. Unfair really to the rest of the field.

Comments section here shines some light on the organiser's decisions.

That seems to be only about the loan of the bike to Angus Young, though?

Yep, it addresses the original point from page three about Angus's DQ. Josh and the bridge might have been a red herring on my part (soz!) when discussing the wider issue of rules, interpretation etc.

It’s not only our riders who have moved fast on GBDURO, following the loan of a bike to Angus Young yesterday our GBDURO commentator (aka ‘Deadpool’) moved fast to get the news out. An insta story was posted immediately before the ride organisers had taken time to fully assess the situation. The story has now been removed. In it our commentator said that he thought the decision would be OK, but this was before the organisers had discussed the repercussions of this tricky subject. Once we, the organisers had talked it through, the action was decisive, even though it was far from our intended way to finish an event that we’ve spent over a year planning for. We do not believe this hiccup impacted decisions on the road and is the result of running a grassroots event where everyone involved is kindly volunteering their time.

This explanation doesn’t tally with the media post. To me it doesn’t sound like owning the mistake more like a rehashing of events.

Maybe we should start a rules thread 😂

Lol

1 Attachment

Just being devil's advocate (because I do think it's a fair dq) a stranger is someone you don't know. Ie I would be a stranger to Ed Sheeran. Most dot watchers are probably strangers

I think the justification for the DQ is that dotwatchers aren't strangers. Or if they are, their act of kindness isn't considered random.

The other thing I have not seen mentioned is that he had to leave his original bike somewhere. Surely that is against the spirit of ultra racing. Like leaving bags at the bottom of a big climb or dumping things you don't need along the route.

But then your down in the weeds and twisting it to suit your will. A stranger could be; a stranger to the event.

Personally I think we should see 'kindness of strangers' banned. It would prevent ambiguity and really if you're racing at the front your should be above reproach and thus not getting involved in areas of ambiguity anyway.

Didn’t you once receive some kindness from a stranger during an event…?

1 Attachment

Yes I did. Though results from the highland trail 550 in 2019 were never published. If they were i would have renaged my position. My opinion at the time was it was acceptable based on the context but in the intervening years its changed. Also I was 6th of a dozen and beaten by some old codgers, so hardly at the front where it matters the most.

If I were racing for a win I would ensure I was 100% beyond reproach. Its not worth it.

I’d agree.
I think you could also say you must complete on the bike you start with and only these consumables can be purchased.

Yep, fair enough, and agreed.

Again, just for arguments sake, there is no mention of the word "random" in regards to actions of kindness there. Aside from me just being difficult I do agree that trail magic should be removed.

As just a humble dotwatcher, I think it's fine but needs to be defined.
If you run out of water and take an offer of a drink from a random who isn't aware of the race, their being unaware suggests they would offer the same to anyone else competing if they were in the same position.
If a dotwatcher comes out because they know you're going to be on a section at a particular time and offers you anything, they've chosen to come and see/help you and likely wouldn't do the same for all the other riders, especially those at the back who don't have as many "fans"

Again, you're getting into the weeds (to play DA)

I haven't read their full rules, but I'd imagine they have 'race directors decision is final'

You can turn it as much as you want, taking anything from a dotwatcher is not in the spirit of unsupported.

Personally I think these events are as much about planning and research as physical capability.
Kindness of strangers generally only fills gaps in a participants planning and preparation as your example highlights.

Depends then on how lenient you're going to be on unforeseen circumstances then.
You never spilled a drink before?