So sportives aren't races?

imposter2.0

phreak wrote:

Imposter wrote:

phreak wrote:

I'm not talking about the scenery, I'm talking about the terrain. All of the races I mentioned were either in a park or around a village. I don't think there was a decent hill anywhere amongst them. There isn't really much for a non-rouleur is there?

The idea of competitive cycling either interests you, or it doesn't. Don't use the terrain as an excuse.

See my comment earlier about a clique'y vibe. That's not exactly a welcoming attitude is it? For what it's worth, I do compete, but only in hill time trials, as they're generally the only competitions with decent hills in them. If you can point me in the direction of some races with a lot of hills in this part of the world then I'll gladly give it a crack.

How is it 'cliquey' to say "if you want to race, then race - if you don't, then don't" ?? I have no idea what you mean by a race with 'lots of hills'. The majority of amateur circuits will use the same climb (or climbs) over several laps - and some races are hillier than others. It's not up to me to find hilly races for you - if you are genuinely interested in racing, you will find them yourself.

buzzwold

I shall invite the ire of all by asking everyone to take a step back and look at this thread and decide for themselves if this is yet another pub argument of no particular merit or value. I would hazard a guess that you know whether you've entered a race or not 'cos it tends to say so on the tin. Ergo if it's not a race, call it what you like.

drlodge

buzzwold wrote:

I shall invite the ire of all by asking everyone to take a step back and look at this thread and decide for themselves if this is yet another pub argument of no particular merit or value. I would hazard a guess that you know whether you've entered a race or not 'cos it tends to say so on the tin. Ergo if it's not a race, call it what you like.

Yes, it is one of those threads. I think people confuse "race" with "competitive".

A road race is a race and its competitive

A sportive has the option of being competitive (beat your own PB, someone elses time or just complete the distance) but its not a race

Time Trials are a race I think, but only against yourself officially (unless the person with the fastest time receives a medal :shock: ).

Old_Timer

Agree with these last two replies. Well said, gentlemen.

phreak

How is it 'cliquey' to say "if you want to race, then race - if you don't, then don't" ?? I have no idea what you mean by a race with 'lots of hills'. The majority of amateur circuits will use the same climb (or climbs) over several laps - and some races are hillier than others. It's not up to me to find hilly races for you - if you are genuinely interested in racing, you will find them yourself.

Because there appears to be a whole lot of criticism/snobbery from racers towards those who regard sportives as a race, yet very little in the way of a welcoming hand to tempt those people to give racing a go.

I've looked through the Surrey league courses and there didn't appear to be many hills in use. As I said, most seemed to be loops around a village, although as none actually provided any kind of profile map it is difficult to tell exactly.

As I said (several times now), there appears much the organisers could learn from one another, with marketing/customer service certainly something the race organisers could improve on.

iPete

phreak the race organisers, unlike the sportive organisers, are not being run for profit and are mostly run by volunteers. Your expectations are a little off the mark.

Its up to you if you want to go race, not up to someone volunteering to sell you the idea. Most people get into racing through clubs which is great because it means riders generally have some level of competence.

I agree information can seem a little scarce and maybe daunting (hell I even blogged about what was needed to get started) but this type of racing isn't big business, it is grass roots stuff.

imposter2.0

phreak wrote:

Because there appears to be a whole lot of criticism/snobbery from racers towards those who regard sportives as a race,

Because they are - self evidently - NOT races. I thought we'd covered this?

phreak wrote:

I've looked through the Surrey league courses and there didn't appear to be many hills in use. As I said, most seemed to be loops around a village, although as none actually provided any kind of profile map it is difficult to tell exactly.

Most races are loops of some sort or other, regardless of whether they happen to loop around a 'village', or some other definition on an urban/rural settlement. I'm not sure why you think a hilly race will be somehow more suitable for you than a flatter one, especially if you've never even raced before.

phreak wrote:

As I said (several times now), there appears much the organisers could learn from one another, with marketing/customer service certainly something the race organisers could improve on.

I don't see how that's relevant, as the target audiences are clearly very different. Races attract competitive cyclists - sportives attract punters on bicycles. Some racers also ride sportives - some sportive riders also ride races, but I don't see that there is anything that one could learn from the other, as both types of event seem to be, in the main, well supported. Happy to be corrected though, if you think differently...

phreak

Have you ever changed your mind once on this site?

thomasmorris

phreak wrote:

I've looked through the Surrey league courses and there didn't appear to be many hills in use. As I said, most seemed to be loops around a village, although as none actually provided any kind of profile map it is difficult to tell exactly.

http://www.surreyleague.co.uk/courses/millandhill.htm
http://app.strava.com/activities/134819679
There are hills, however, race organisers can only work with the terrain they have, so you're unlikely to find courses with climbs longer than 4-5 minutes in surrey, but then you're unlikely to find sportives in surrey with climbs any longer either...

phreak wrote:

As I said (several times now), there appears much the organisers could learn from one another, with marketing/customer service certainly something the race organisers could improve on.

I'm not sure there is anything to be 'learnt' in marketing.

As a road racer I'm looking for a fair race, in a safe environment for a prices that I can afford to do many over the summer. (most road racers seem to do 1-2 events a week so they have to be affordable). To be fair the races have to be organised to several rules, one being the size of the field, so you just can't open it to more riders to get more cash. Therefore short circuits or loops seem the best solution to providing for this market.The margins are very low in road racing because of the market, and that's why you see comparatively few promoters making money and why it is largely run by enthusiasts.

Having taken part previously, and knowing more sportive cyclists than racers, the market is quite different. Again they want a safe environment, but none I know of are interested in a fair 'race' (as it's not a race), and rather would see a varied route taking them to places they might not normally see. All the sportive riders I know do only a couple a year, or at the most one a month over summer and see them more as one off events. As they do less they are prepared to pay more for extras such as feed stations and start / finish villages with entertainment. Doing less they're probably prepared to pay more, and sportives can be opened up to a larger field you see more professional organisations making a business out of it.

phreak

Thanks Thomas. By the lessons I guess I meant simple things like having the route profile that Strava shows on the Surrey League site to show people what kind of course it is.

racingcondor

I think most racers would accept that you need to do your own research on the course (it's part of racing and half the fun is working out which circuits you do well on and where on them you attack, pass, risk getting dropped). There's nothing stopping you sticking the in bikeroutetoaster or something similar to find the hill(s) or even better, pre riding the circuit a couple of times the weekend before if you're local. It's a massive advantage knowing the circuit well in a crit or a road race.

The thing that makes racing difficult is the other riders. Take a group of friends on a ride round Hog Hill (the Redbridge Cycle Circuit) and I imagine everyone will finish the lap thinking 'that's not hard'. Do it 18 times averaging 24+mph with little recovery (i.e. a typical 3/4 crit) and it's a different story.

I can see where you're coming from re advertising road races and quality of promotion but as others have said, it's the context you're missing. Sportives often have companies with resoures behind them (Kilotogo, Wiggle, Evans etc), road race websites are most likely thrown together by the committee member of a local cycling club who taught themselves HTML from a book. It works though, BC and RiderHQ have put together systems that allow anyone who is interested to track/bookmark races and enter them online with minimal effort and as a result road races are often full a couple of weeks in advance.

I think unfortunately a lot of the percieved snobbery etc comes from the information gap between people who have and havn't raced. I would argue that for instance while you clearly like hills if you haven't raced you don't actually know if you're fast up them (I'm slim enough that I spent a couple of years being told 'you must climb well'. Turned out that I suck when the road turns up).

e999sam

Road Racing is so much more than just finishing in the fastest time. There’s a myriad of tactics involved along with at times a little luck so a sportive is certainly not a road race and neither is a time trial where riders are not aloud to take pace from another rider.

Father Faff

ednino wrote:

Father Faff wrote:

Dictionary definition of "race" = noun
1.
a competition between runners, horses, vehicles, etc. to see which is the fastest in covering a set course.

Hmmm - sounds a bit like a sportive to me...!

Um, no because its not a competition and its not to see which is the fastest
so it's in no way a race

Why do sportives post "results" and times then if it is not a race?

imposter2.0

Father Faff wrote:

Why do sportives post "results" and times then if it is not a race?

Serious question - do you genuinely think sportives really ARE races, or are you just being obtuse?

antsmithmk

Having read that blog post on the mortal site I pretty quickly came to conclusion it was a wee wee take. Surely no-one thinks that's genuine?

ravenvrider

He may be being obtuse but it is a fair question, it is clear that they are not "races" in the conventional or technical sense but it is also clear that there are many within a sportive that ride it on their limit and with a time at the end of it giving the chance of finding their "position" begs the question, are sportives carving out their own new style of racing format.

And yes "Ant" it was a "genuine" article, but importantly it was written as a promotional piece by a commercial company making the most of a performance of one of its sponsored riders, it is not a news article written by a journalist...big difference.

antsmithmk

Father Faff wrote:

ednino wrote:

Father Faff wrote:

Dictionary definition of "race" = noun
1.
a competition between runners, horses, vehicles, etc. to see which is the fastest in covering a set course.

Hmmm - sounds a bit like a sportive to me...!

Um, no because its not a competition and its not to see which is the fastest

so it's in no way a race

Why do sportives post "results" and times then if it is not a race?

Are you for real? A sportive is not a race. How can it be when you can start when you like and ride either solo or in a group?!

antsmithmk

ravenvrider wrote:

He may be being obtuse but it is a fair question, it is clear that they are not "races" in the conventional or technical sense but it is also clear that there are many within a sportive that ride it on their limit and with a time at the end of it giving the chance of finding their "position" begs the question, are sportives carving out their own new style of racing format.

Which begs the answer no. They are at best time trials

ravenvrider

antsmithmk wrote:

ravenvrider wrote:

He may be being obtuse but it is a fair question, it is clear that they are not "races" in the conventional or technical sense but it is also clear that there are many within a sportive that ride it on their limit and with a time at the end of it giving the chance of finding their "position" begs the question, are sportives carving out their own new style of racing format.

Which begs the answer no. They are at best time trials

They are a combination, an individual timed event with no real cut off point that you can draft and ride as a group in.

StillGoing

Father Faff wrote:

ednino wrote:

Father Faff wrote:

Dictionary definition of "race" = noun
1.
a competition between runners, horses, vehicles, etc. to see which is the fastest in covering a set course.

Hmmm - sounds a bit like a sportive to me...!

Um, no because its not a competition and its not to see which is the fastest
so it's in no way a race

Why do sportives post "results" and times then if it is not a race?

Really? Do you not check your time after a ride to see whether you improved or rode at your current standard? Every rider I know wants to know things like their average speed over a route and providing time sheets at the end of a sportive is just doing exactly that. A sportive doesn't mean it's compulsory for everyone to ride around on a Brompton or with a shopping basket on the front admiring the scenery and avoiding breaking out in a sweat.

DavidJB

philthy3 wrote:

Father Faff wrote:

ednino wrote:

Father Faff wrote:

Dictionary definition of "race" = noun
1.
a competition between runners, horses, vehicles, etc. to see which is the fastest in covering a set course.

Hmmm - sounds a bit like a sportive to me...!

Um, no because its not a competition and its not to see which is the fastest
so it's in no way a race

Why do sportives post "results" and times then if it is not a race?

Really? Do you not check your time after a ride to see whether you improved or rode at your current standard? Every rider I know wants to know things like their average speed over a route and providing time sheets at the end of a sportive is just doing exactly that. A sportive doesn't mean it's compulsory for everyone to ride around on a Brompton or with a shopping basket on the front admiring the scenery and avoiding breaking out in a sweat.

I don't care about my 'average speed' nor do I check it after a ride

florerider

on next Sunday's sportif I shall not be racing - but I will be looking for a good time

imposter2.0

florerider wrote:

on next Sunday's sportif I shall not be racing - but I will be looking for a good time

Those two statements are not incompatible, don't worry...

racingcondor

and in fact florerider's post is one of the most sensible ones in the whole thread.

A couple of threads up from there is a conversation about average speed. Odd thing about that is that average speed is much more relevant in a sportive than it is a road race (where it means practically nothing even though it's likely to be very high). In a sportive your average speed is about how hard you've pushed yourself and the personal challenge. In a road race it's just the speed that (assuming you didn't get dropped or break away) the bunch travelled at and says almost nothing about how much work any one person did.

neeb

Just as a matter of interest, do people not ride in a bunch at the front of UK sportives? The ones I have done in Finland have been like that, even when I've entered in the non-racing category and the racers have gone off first, at the front of the sportive there is always a big bunch riding it almost like a race or a brisk club run. It feels moderately safe because you get the impression that most people in the front group know what they are doing - hand signals, warnings for obstacles etc. But maybe that can't happen very easily if the faster riders don't start nearer the front?

saprkzz

I do a around 3 or 4 sportives a year and we ride them like I would on any ride, to my best ability. I don't think of them as races even when they are timed. Yes I am interested at the end for "how did I come", but I stop at junctions and feed stations etc.

There is only one sportive a year that I "race" but this is held local to me, and I am only racing myself. I train on the same route a couple of times a month (60 miles) and try to improve on it as it has some tasty hills. On the day of the sportive I try and beat my time each year, I set myself a target for the day and try to smash it. I still obey road rules and other riders, but this is my personal challenge. Conclusion, I don't call them races!

adr82

neeb wrote:

Just as a matter of interest, do people not ride in a bunch at the front of UK sportives? The ones I have done in Finland have been like that, even when I've entered in the non-racing category and the racers have gone off first, at the front of the sportive there is always a big bunch riding it almost like a race or a brisk club run. It feels moderately safe because you get the impression that most people in the front group know what they are doing - hand signals, warnings for obstacles etc. But maybe that can't happen very easily if the faster riders don't start nearer the front?

No, they do tend to up with bunches of faster riders at the head of the field, which is why I can't agree with racingcondor about average speeds. I'd bet that in most events it's quite possible to find a bunch to sit on the back of for all or most of the route, and so you'd easily get a much higher average speed than you could have done solo.

I agree that these front bunches will tend to have a higher proportion of riders who know what they're doing... but it probably won't be all of them. Some of the riders in your typical front group will be really strong, but used to riding on their own apart from the occasional sportive and prone to do silly things in a bunch.

ednino

Father Faff wrote:

ednino wrote:

Father Faff wrote:

Dictionary definition of "race" = noun
1.
a competition between runners, horses, vehicles, etc. to see which is the fastest in covering a set course.

Hmmm - sounds a bit like a sportive to me...!

Um, no because its not a competition and its not to see which is the fastest
so it's in no way a race

Why do sportives post "results" and times then if it is not a race?

because people want to know their time :shock:

Moonbiker

Just as a matter of interest, do people not ride in a bunch at the front of UK sportives?

I think they may do but im to slow to ever see for my self.

They guy that "won" the last sportive I did was a nation Welsh RR champion & has won the sportive 3 years in a row now riding solo from looking at the results. Judging buy the chip times there wasn't a bunch, maybe some sportives with a stronger field bunch more at front?

http://www.tdl.ltd.uk/race-results.php? ... t=chiptime

Makes an average speed of 21.3 mph over 104 Miles with approx 8900ft climbing for the winner.

StillGoing

Moonbiker wrote:

Just as a matter of interest, do people not ride in a bunch at the front of UK sportives?

I think they may do but im to slow to ever see for my self.

They guy that "won" the last sportive I did was a nation Welsh RR champion & has won the sportive 3 years in a row now riding solo from looking at the results. Judging buy the chip times there wasn't a bunch, maybe some sportives with a stronger field bunch more at front?

http://www.tdl.ltd.uk/race-results.php? ... t=chiptime

Makes an average speed of 21.3 mph over 104 Miles with approx 8900ft climbing for the winner.

No he hasn't because it simply isn't a race. All it means is he was the first rider home. There may have been other riders fully capable of whipping his arse on the ride who chose to ride it at less than their optimum pace. Unless he can show he was racing against the rest of the entire field he has not won a race.