Maybe a daft question but... Are Sportives actually races?

Higs

I was once told by a sailing instructor "you can't have two boats on the same piece of water without it becoming a race" and I guess it's true of bikes - if you can compare, you can compete. But are Sportives actually organised as races?

I've entered a couple (Cumbrian Christmas Cracker & Lakeland Loop) and just view them as organised long rides. Comments on the Sportive vs. Audax thread suggest they're more competitive with timing chips etc.

I s'pose they're a bit like marathons and the like. One or two people are in with a chance of winning them, lots of people are trying to do it as quickly as possible (to the second) and lots of people are just in there for the craic?

sloboy

For most people I reckon Sportives fit in the category of "a very long time trial, where you all start more or less at once", in that people are generally challenging themselves in some way, either to complete or to do a time they think represents a good effort, but not engaging in competition as much as cooperation.

Kléber

It depends. The semi-official description from the AEC describes them as something like "a mass participation endurance cycling event open to all that includes a published individual classification".

But this is a lot different from what happens in Britain, where there is no mass start - riders usually start in smaller groups - and there are no prizes or published results, it's more like a fun run.

So a British sportive is not a race. But the original concept, the rides you get over the rest of Europe today are races. A bit ironic given that people use the French word "sportive" to describe something that means one thing in English but another thing in French

SouthernSportive

Interesting - this is an issue that is likely to rear it's head further in the next year. More and more organisers are becoming concerned about the police asking the very same question.

The simple answer is no - Sportives are not races and cannot be organised as such. They are not insured as races and would break every requirement of an organised road race. Insofar as 'race' means 'competition or test of speed between riders', they are not time trials either. Time trials are still contests between riders, with declared winners and specific restrictions that sportives don't adhere to (such as the requirement for a time gap between every rider and a ban on drafting).

Sportives are probably best defined as a 'challenge event' which allows riders to set personal targets to aim for, but without any element of competition (in fact, as Sloboy says, fostering a spirit of cooperation instead). That is currently how they understood and accepted by insurers and authorities.

It's worth remembering though, that none of that acceptance is enshrined in law, and Sportives are but a test case away from regulations that could have wide ranging implications for their scope and legality. And if it ever got that far, it's hard to see how it would go well for us as cyclists. Which is why, both as organisers and riders, we need to be seen to be taking responsibility for our own activities and need to be able to demonstrate categorically that what we are doing is not racing.

Philip Whiteman

I think that Southernsportive's account is a totally accurate reflection

There is one addition point I would like to add. Whilst the events are not races or competitions in the broadest sense, they do encourage individuals to act competitively. This falls back to the initial analogy of two boats on a section of water. Individuals may often be competitive against each other in spirit but not officially. Hence, the timings are useful for judging an individual's ability against another peer. However, it concerns me slightly that this activity could give the perception to others that they are indeed races, even though they are not.

Back to Southernsportive's view, we should stick to his view on our collective responsbility. Sportive's are possibly on fairly thin ice with regard to the police's view. So long at they are "not races" and are regarded as such, they greater the guarantee that sportives will continue without legal interruption.

SouthernSportive

Philip Whiteman wrote:

Whilst the events are not races or competitions in the broadest sense, they do encourage individuals to act competitively. This falls back to the initial analogy of two boats on a section of water. Individuals may often be competitive against each other in spirit but not officially.

I agree, although I wouldn't say that the events encourage competitive behaviour, rather that competitive behaviour doesn't need encouraging in some people . But I know what you're saying and you're right. There's a lot of truth in Higs' original analogy. And of course, if two riders decide to compete on the course, there's nothing we can do about it.

That in itself isn't a problem though, as long as that private competition is kept in proper perspective. The line of acceptability is as simple as road law itself. If two or more riders are 'racing' in the privacy of their own heads out on a sportive course, then as long as that private test of speed takes place on the right side of the law, then no harm is done. But as soon as one or more of them runs a red light, carves up a pedestrian or does anything else that would get them in trouble if they did it in front of a copper on their morning commute, then we have a potential problem.

wildmoustache

We had this discussion a while ago.

The main point I made was that sportives look exactly like races to non-cyclists. Imagine sitting in your garden and a group of 40 cyclists come by at 30mph all on fancy looking bikes, wearing the gear, with numbers stuck on. A race? Yes to the non-cyclist.

wildmoustache

SouthernSportive wrote:

Philip Whiteman wrote:

Whilst the events are not races or competitions in the broadest sense, they do encourage individuals to act competitively. This falls back to the initial analogy of two boats on a section of water. Individuals may often be competitive against each other in spirit but not officially.

I agree, although I wouldn't say that the events encourage competitive behaviour, rather that competitive behaviour doesn't need encouraging in some people . But I know what you're saying and you're right. There's a lot of truth in Higs' original analogy. And of course, if two riders decide to compete on the course, there's nothing we can do about it.

That in itself isn't a problem though, as long as that private competition is kept in proper perspective. The line of acceptability is as simple as road law itself. If two or more riders are 'racing' in the privacy of their own heads out on a sportive course, then as long as that private test of speed takes place on the right side of the law, then no harm is done. But as soon as one or more of them runs a red light, carves up a pedestrian or does anything else that would get them in trouble if they did it in front of a copper on their morning commute, then we have a potential problem.

In the event of a test case, I am not sure it would be quite that simple southernsportive. A court will only be able to establish some of the facts, and may have to make assumptions about the way in which people were riding etc. The existance of numbers, timing chips, results and so on, would all (I believe) be grist to the mill that the sportive in question was a form of bicycle racing.

JamesB

--thus another difference from Audaxes to cross to other threads debating this subject

Kléber

It boils down to the organisers trying not to make it a cyclosportive/ race but many riders there interpret it as one. Any court case would ask if the organiser took reasonable steps to stop it being a race and looking at how individuals behaved.

wildmoustache

Kléber wrote:

It boils down to the organisers trying not to make it a cyclosportive/ race but many riders there interpret it as one. Any court case would ask if the organiser took reasonable steps to stop it being a race and looking at how individuals behaved.

Kleber - How do you think numbers, timing chips, results sheets and gold, silver, bronze awards based on time would be interpreted? Supportive of the case for or against the event being a race?

Kléber

True, like I said elsewhere, organisers are sailing very close to the wind.

You're right that on the "if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and has feathers like a duck then it's a duck" test, then a sportive is a race. However, the organisers seem to be trying to tiptoe away from this, asking riders not to race and more.

Just as other countries have adopted special legislation and rules, from parliament and governing bodies, to define a sportive as a type of event, distinct from touring or racing, those in the UK urgently need to do the same. It could be a matter of time until riders jostle to go through a corner first and come to grief, maybe even colliding with oncoming traffic and worse, and the status of these events needs to be clarified so no one, whether riders, organisers or those coming into contact with an event, like a driver or a pedestrian, is uncertain what is going on.

SouthernSportive

Wildmoustache - of course a test case wouldn't be that simple, but it's equally simplistic to dub the events races because they look that way to a passer by. Yes, anyone trying to prosecute the case against sportives would use the evidence you suggest to present them as races, and those trying to defend the format will seek to present the difference between race and challenge formats, the use for timing for personal recording and the presence of bike numbers for identification and photography. Which way the decision went, would depend largely on whether the event had been clearly presented to it's participants as non competitive, and how those participants had conducted themselves in regard to that instruction.

The OP asked if Sportives are organised as races. The answer to that is a simple no, they're not. Not if if they want to stay on the right side of the law. That point is not open to debate. What riders or onlookers think is largely irrelevant. As long as the actions of riders and organisers are appropriate then that test case is far less likely to happen and more defensible if it does.

Kléber

But SouthernSportive, I'm not saying you are doing this but many organisers are doing everything but calling it a race. Offering food stops, medals, timing chips and more is tantamount to egging riders on.

Like I say, a sportive is a race in every other country in the world and it would be good if this British anomaly could be fixed.

Imagine if someone organised a car or motorbike equivalent!

SouthernSportive

Kléber wrote:

However, the organisers seem to be trying to tiptoe away from this, asking riders not to race and more.

That's not really 'tiptoeing away' from anything. That's stating a definition and conditions of entry to your event. When riders sign up to the event, they agree to abide by those things.

wildmoustache

SouthernSportive wrote:

Kléber wrote:

However, the organisers seem to be trying to tiptoe away from this, asking riders not to race and more.

That's not really 'tiptoeing away' from anything. That's stating a definition and conditions of entry to your event. When riders sign up to the event, they agree to abide by those things.

Don't get me wrong as I think the sportif boom is great for the sport so far at least. I agree with Kleber ideally we would have some protection from the law, rather than be in a position of uncertain as you describe.

You have to recognise the point that while the T&Cs might say it isn't a race, the marketing and features of some events are characteristic of races ... indeed some explicitly market themselves as alternatives to the European sportifs which are races.

I would not be confident heading into court with my main defence that the terms and conditions said it wasn't a race but I'd provided medals, classifications, results sheets, numbers etc. etc.

SouthernSportive

Kléber wrote:

But SouthernSportive, I'm not saying you are doing this but many organisers are doing everything but calling it a race. Offering food stops, medals, timing chips and more is tantamount to egging riders on.

I know there has been some bad practice and fuzzy understanding as the format has evolved, but the position we have to take has become a lot clearer as the profile of cyclosportives has grown, and it really just comes down to understanding how the law applies to us.

You and Wildmoustache are quite right if you are saying that this issue of clarity needs addressing. And I think you're going to see it being addressed in the course of the coming year.

andy_wrx

The non-cycling public will regard it as a race, many participants call it 'a race' and ride as they would in a race .

You stick numbers on the bikes (OK, I know their real purpose is for the race photographer...) and you have timing chips and issue results, not just for the individual but for everyone else as well.
Even if they're published in name order, it's a simple matter to re-sort in Excel and compare yourself against others - besides, what other point could there be in issuing results not just for the individual but for everyone else as well ?

I'm afraid it is just a matter of time before some idiot who thinks he's in a race and so the Highway Code and just plain common sense don't apply, takes a corner blind and hits a car head-on, or a pedestrian or horse, or cuts-up another rider who then crashes.

Kléber

Perhaps the small print of an event which someone signed up for months in advance can be easily forgotten, I would suggest organisers need to remind riders in a very clear way on the start line about the status of the event.

But the efforts of organisers aren't the issue. For me, I think you need to lobby for it to be a race, but at a lower status than an official road race, so that the event can be similar to any other cyclosportive that's run around the world, having this ambiguous nature is awkward and potentially dangerous.

wildmoustache

Kléber wrote:

Perhaps the small print of an event which someone signed up for months in advance can be easily forgotten, I would suggest organisers need to remind riders in a very clear way on the start line about the status of the event.

But the efforts of organisers aren't the issue. For me, I think you need to lobby for it to be a race, but at a lower status than an official road race, so that the event can be similar to any other cyclosportive that's run around the world, having this ambiguous nature is awkward and potentially dangerous.

I agree. To avoid the uncertainty you either need to go the audax route and remove the timing chips and time-related classifications/results/medals ... i.e. hold an audax ... or else you need special protection for the race-like characteristics of sportifs.

It would be very sad to see sportifs forced off the road ... although maybe quite exciting to have an underground UK sportif scene

SouthernSportive

Sadly, the law is not going to change to accommodate us anytime soon. We're going to have to fit around it. Road racing is dying on it's feet because the police don't want to support it, so stripped down race status for sportives would have no chance of getting off the ground. We really need to establish and secure what we've got before we can think about pushing for extra privileges. Which means everyone involved agreeing and understanding exactly what a UK Sportive is and is allowed to be. That model is likely to be a bit of a compromise on what you might like in an ideal world, but that doesn't mean it has to be boring. Riding fast, in itself, isn't against the law.

On the whole, the police and local authorities don't want to close us down. They like healthy social and sporting activities, and you might be surprised just how much support and positivity us organisers get in our dealings with these departments. However, what they don't want is a whole pile of extra work because of us. But as long as we can control what we do and demonstrate the we can proceed without creating a nuisance, then there's no reason why sportives shouldn't thrive. And once the event format is established and trusted (maybe even embraced) by wider society, then there's no reason why we shouldn't find ourselves enjoying a little extra leeway. But I'm afraid we're going to have to earn it first.

Booboocp

As the organiser of one of the biggest, I'll give my views on this question.

The official line is that Sportives are NOT races. I make this quite clear.

A good sportive will have small groups going off at regular intervals. These groups may well group up and work together, but should split again on the major climbs - thats the organiser's skill in setting a good course.

However as a regular sportive rider myself, I know only too well what many of the riders want from my event, and that is a fast time and a hard challenge.

A sportive ride can not be a race if it follows the above, but there is nothing to stop riders racing against each other or against there own personal goals. That's what makes sportives great, it's for each rider to decide his own challenge.

I have just received a request from a rider asking if there are any time limits on my event, because he has just recovered from Cancer and want's to make the 183km event his goal for next year. He knows (and I have been there too) that this is going to be a very difficult challenge, so I'm going to make sure he has support for as long as it takes him. I hope he will allow me to put his letter on the website - truly inspirational and the other side of the "Is it a race" argument.

Tom Butcher

I'd have thought the main problem for road racing was traffic levels rather than lack of police support. Yes there may be some disagreements with the police but the root cause is that suitable circuits 40 years ago are no longer suitable.

As to whether a sportive is a race - no I don't think so and I don't think many people ride them as such - I don't know how it looks to the general public - I suspect most people would say it is some kind of charity cycle event rather than a race. Yes some people are trying to finish as fast as possible - but I do that on some training rides it doesn't make them a race.

wildmoustache

Tom Butcher wrote:

As to whether a sportive is a race - no I don't think so and I don't think many people ride them as such - I don't know how it looks to the general public - I suspect most people would say it is some kind of charity cycle event rather than a race. Yes some people are trying to finish as fast as possible - but I do that on some training rides it doesn't make them a race.

Tom - I'd suggest a trip to the forum at cyclosport.org to sense-check your theory. Or else trust me that many people ride them for the fastest time they can, and to come as high as possible against other competitors. In other words ...

And yes, training rides can feature racing too ... not formal organised racing as such, but racing to next road sign is still racing.

Kléber

It's one thing to ride hard on a training ride, solo or with club mates, even to sprint for a finish line at a sign or a bridge, but another thing to be racing for a real finish line, a time, a medal, a certificate and with a number on your back and a timing chip on your ankle.

Trying to tell riders "it's not a race" is understandable but it seems that this is merely a legal requirement, a piece of small print. It's like reminding a barman than serving someone who is drunk is a breach of their licence to serve them with alcohol, true in fact but totally ignored in practice.

It seems to me sportives risk going the way of time trials in the mid 20th century in Britain, with riders pretending not to race to the authorities but actually competing.

So rather than ducking the issue and relying on small print, what is stopping a revision to the law to allow a new class of event, "a mass participation edurance cycling competition"? It would only need the next Highways Act to include a tiny amendment, it took 10 minutes of parliamentary time to introduce a revision linked to the arrival of the Tour de France in Britain back in 1993. Rather than saying "this can't be done", why not explore this?

This way no one is confused and people can make of the ride what they want. For example, a sportive is a race in Italy or France but 95% of those taking part are in it for the personal challenge, not the podium. Why can't this be so in Britain too?

cookiemonster

Kléber wrote:

Imagine if someone organised a car or motorbike equivalent!

They have.

Road rally's have run for years and years on public roads ( http://www.msauk.org/site/cms/contentvi ... rticle=774 ). Very similar in style to sportives in that drivers are timed, and are "measured against the clock", but they must stick within the law and are not "racing" each other. I've a colleague at work with a pile of old british rusty tat that he drives all over the country in these events.

So, my take would be that just because sportives are more popular today than three years ago, there's little need for some of the hysteria. I mean, know we would all like to think that it looks like we're a bunch of carlos's making a break, but your average onlooker just sees a bunch of middle aged w*****s on expensive carbon bikes gasping their way up some little inclines (myself included ).

jon

nasahapley

It's been really interesting reading through this thread, and while I don't have huge experience of sportives (only done one!), I am vaguely familiar with the law, and I agree with Kleber and Wildmoustache. If litigation did arise against a sportive organiser and the question of whether or not it was a 'race' arose, I think said organiser would have a hard time arguing that it wasn't. Whether or not it is pointed out on the event literature or on the start line that it isn't a race wouldn't, I don't think, be all that relevant, and neither would how the public perceive the event. If you know full well that a significant minority are going to treat it as a race, and give them everything they need to treat it as such (timing chips, published results etc), then you're on fairly thin ice. As Wildmoustache said, the best way to demonstrate that the event isn't a race is to do without official timing (i.e. the chips), as it is a bit difficult to see what this is for if a sportive isn't a race.

I really hope sportives can carry on exactly as they are - I plan on doing many more and wouldn't want them to change - but I wouldn't be surprised if they have to in some small way.

SBezza

Having numbers, timing chips, medals etc, doesn't make it a race. Everybody gets the same item on completion, whether it is a medal, certificate etc so you are only racing against a clock in reality.
As mentioned above certain races were cancelled this year, due to the Police, Highway Agency and the like, if you wanted to put on a sportive as a race you would get increased entrance fees to cover the additional costs, and people moan they are too expensive now, if indeed it was allowed to go ahead.

In an Audax, you are still timed, you might not have a timing chip, but you are timed all the same, whether a list of times is published again doesn't make it a race, timing chips are used to make it easier for the organiser. It could be said reliability trials are races, again having to complete a course in a particular cut off time.

Those that see sportives as races perhaps might want to look into racing instead. I will do a sportive to get the fastest time I can, but I don't give a hoot for the time anyone else gets to be honest, I think the majority are of a similar mindset.

wildmoustache

SBezza wrote:

Having numbers, timing chips, medals etc, doesn't make it a race. Everybody gets the same item on completion, whether it is a medal, certificate etc so you are only racing against a clock in reality.
As mentioned above certain races were cancelled this year, due to the Police, Highway Agency and the like, if you wanted to put on a sportive as a race you would get increased entrance fees to cover the additional costs, and people moan they are too expensive now, if indeed it was allowed to go ahead.

In an Audax, you are still timed, you might not have a timing chip, but you are timed all the same, whether a list of times is published again doesn't make it a race, timing chips are used to make it easier for the organiser. It could be said reliability trials are races, again having to complete a course in a particular cut off time.

Those that see sportives as races perhaps might want to look into racing instead. I will do a sportive to get the fastest time I can, but I don't give a hoot for the time anyone else gets to be honest, I think the majority are of a similar mindset.

I do "race", but also do the odd sportif. Another case is triathlons and duathlons which are explicitly races, and I believe are described as such with the police ... perhaps the insurance is different for these than with sportifs ... hence the high entry fee?

There's a confusion on this thread around the fact that while many people don't give a stuff about their time, some do, and amongst those that do some also give a stuff about their place in the results sheet. It's hard to argue these guys are not racing. Again - have a look at the cyclosport.org forum or indeed the overall sportif trophy that was organised for further evidence.

andy_wrx

SBezza wrote:

Those that see sportives as races perhaps might want to look into racing instead. I will do a sportive to get the fastest time I can, but I don't give a hoot for the time anyone else gets to be honest, I think the majority are of a similar mindset.

Many people coming into sportives, having seen them hyped-up in Cycling Weakly or C+ or on cyclosport.co.uk, do so because they're thinking they are races.

There are regularly newbies posting on here 'I want to do such-and-such a sportive, where do I find out about this race ?'

If the idea is to do a sportive in the fastest time you can, then great, you have a computer on your bike which will tell you your time.
There is no need for timing chips and published results for that, nor to know the times of everyone else - the only need for that is not to see your own time but to see how you do against other people.

Audaxes do time, generally by human&watch method, but they don't publish these times, the objective is to finish within the time limit, and if that's, say, 12 hours you've succeeded just the same whether you did it in 6:00 or 11:59, not done better by getting a faster time or beating your competitors, as in sportives

SBezza

The worst thing I can see about sportives is having the Gold, Silver and Bronze standard times, I have raced around trying to get a Gold time before, but if there was no incentive like this, I would have gone slower riding with another club member, and probably not suffered so much, and still had a good time

I have done sportives where the timing is by human and watch, and the results published a week later, for larger numbers of people a timing chip is probably easier for the organiser I would imagine. If some people are racing within the event (and this even happens in things like fun runs), then no-one can really stop then, some people are very competitive. I would imagine most of the time it is club mates trying to beat each other.

If you get large numbers of people doing the same event, you will get people trying to beat other people.