-
and is open for two weeks I think. It's not FIBD so don't panic.
-
@frank9755 - can you remove the RWGPS embedded link, it kills all known browsers, especially on mobile.
-
It does. Souplesse would be New Oxford Street but can’t have it all.
-
Had a little mess around with the potential routes and there could be some serious variation this year.
- Is it still no particular order for checkpoints?
- Is the Ancona - Split ferry still allowed?
Routes:
1) Start: 1 -> 2 -> 3 -> 4 : 3,500km with 33,000 metres of climbing2) Start: 3 -> 1 ->2 -> 4 : 3,368km with 31,209 metres of climbing
3) Start: 1 -> 3 -> 2 -Ancona-Split ferry -> 4: 3985km with with 34,811 metres of climbing
4) Start: 1 -> 3 -> 2 -> 4: 3411km with 33,538 metres of climbing
I've only used Google walking map to do this, so it'll be definitely an underestimation. Using Frank's route as a better estimation of the 'conventional' route then you should add ~15% onto my distances and around 50% to the climbing.
- Is it still no particular order for checkpoints?
-
.
3 Attachments
-
-
And maybe even Geraardsbergen - 3 - 2 -1 slither down into the Po valley and down the Adriatic to 4.
-
I think those distances and elevations are well off from real.
Anyway, I think rules will change, meaning CPs need be done in chrono order. Seems a bit like gaming the race, to do them in different order to try get an advantage.
Plus with having to hit them before they close, you'd need to be doing 600 km for 3 days to meet CP1 if you went to cp2 first.
-
I wish, unfortunately I'm looking forward to an austere summer this year...
@skinny yeah absolutely, plus they're walking distances so it'll be down shitty paths but it still could be useful as an approximate comparison between the different routes.
I quickly had a look at the FB page so you've got to hit every checkpoint whilst it's officially open to be in the GC. However, have people in the past missed a checkpoint deadline but then made latter ones in time been put into the GC? I guess it's a different circumstance if they were doing the checkpoints as intended.
I do see your point about gaming the race, but part of the Transcontinental's appeal is that it's interesting to see the large variation in route choice and brings in the more tactical elements rather than just cycling really fast all day and night. For the spectators, it was pretty interesting when in '15 people headed for the ferry and in '16 when Hippy and Frank ditched the conventional route through the Alps and went from CP2 to 3 via the Po Valley.
It also means that it becomes more competitive as given more route choice there's a higher chance there's flatter course better suited to a 'TT-specialist' whilst the skinny guys can enjoy the scenery in the mountains :)
From the organizers perspective though, having people do the checkpoints in any order would be really tough on them in terms of driving. Also, it would be difficult to keep an eye on everyone if some people are heading across Germany whilst everyone else is heading South East to the CP1.
-
I agree with you about enjoying the route variations. However, in my opinion, playing with checkpoint order detracts from the race. It adds in another element, in an attempt to pick the best route. I'd like to see everyone semi-constrained in route choice, having to use the checkpoints in chrono order. It'll keep the racers on the same page, though still allowing some tactics. Rather than full out game play. Plus as you say. it's a mess for the organisers with people all over the place.
That said, with the distances that would need to be covered to meet checkpoint closing times, only the fastest would be able to consider it.
And I didn't like the ferry option in TCR3. No foul for people who did, but for me, it's a bit detracting. Let's see it raced out honestly, without gaming.
-
Interesting analysis, Joe.
Doing them in a different order occurred to me.
My first thought was that they must have done it intentionally to have several different routes through the controls all of similar length. So I looked up the control opening and closing times, and that makes most of the variations more challenging. Also long ferries won't be allowed (only river crossing ferries).
I reckon if you can still make it work with closing times, it would be ok to change the order though. Sure, in audax, you can't do that, but Mike wasn't from an audax background. I think his Valleycats were like that, and in 2015 didn't some people do controls in a different order?
It adds another dimension to the route planning, which favours those who are strong in that aspect (aka hill avoiders). -
playing with checkpoint order detracts from the race. It adds in another element, in an attempt to pick the best route. I'd like to see everyone semi-constrained in route choice, having to use the checkpoints in chrono order.
Speaking as an armchair endurance racer, I do agree with this.
There is enough leeway in how you route from one CP to another, to make it interesting.
Allowing CP to be hit in any order makes a nonsense of the race.
andyp
mæx
frank9755
jonny
Sam
gillies
fussballclub
bananaskid
skinny
Scilly.Suffolk
deleted-
Post a reply
About
Transcontinental Race No. 6 - TCR6 - #TCRN06 - 2018
Posted by
@hippy
We're going to Poland.
Forumengers riding:
Of interest: