You are reading a single comment by @frank9755 and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
I agree with this and think it is important.
When I think about entering an event my first question is 'who is organising it and are they credible?' I decided not to enter an event last year because the organiser didn't provide any info on themselves.
IT has a decent amount of experience so I naming himself as the org should be a positive. It would certainly make me feel more comfortable to enter than a random / no name org. Similarly, it is a negative if he is not willing to put his name behind it.
frank9755
Looking over the Via race (https://via-race.com/) and it certainly looks an interesting route.
I find it interesting that in audax, as an organiser myself - you need to cut your teeth organising 200s, 300s etc before you can just throw down a 1000km event in the calendar - 'brevets are not to be taken lightly', as I think the language goes.
No such hurdles to jump in this space it would seem, in that you can draw up a 4000km route and charge 400E or whatever entry costs right off the bat. I don't know if I know who the organiser of Via actually is, though that of course might just be my own ignorance it certainly doesn't seem obvious.
Of course there's no official governing body and these are commercial events that succeed or fail on the strength of their marketing, but the requirement to put trust / almost 2 weeks of your life in the hands of unproven / unknown organisers feels bold. Not throwing any shade on Via at all, by the way - I've just used them as an example here as I'm suddenly seeing a lot of their stuff around social media.
I guess more and more players will enter the space as these events become more commercially viable, trackers become cheaper and so on - more potential riders, more entries, more 'endurance' bikes and kit sold etc, more mapping apps and kit brands sponsoring/subsidising and it's ultimately down to the rider to decide whether or not to take the punt.