15 years a Randonneur!
I became a member of Randonneurs USA in 2006 as RUSA #3100, just 8 years after the organization was formed. The things that initially drew me to randonneuring were simply the idea of riding my bicycle over long distances, often through new and interesting countryside and usually with a good friend at my side. The traditions of the sport, the self sufficiency, determination and resourcefulness required to do these rides were characteristics that I valued and admired. But, over my years of participating in the sport I’ve noticed that some things are changing and it has me thinking…..
Prior to randonneuring I had already been a long distance cyclist for many years. I did my first century ride in the mid 80’s and my first double century in 1988, eventually completing over 50 doubles in the California Triple Crown series of events. In the late 80’s I had also been doing some off-road metric centuries on my MTB which were being run by Chuck “Bodfish” Elliott in Northern California. Beginning in the 90’s there were 5 participation’s in the 129 mile Death Ride out of south lake Tahoe and in the late 90’s I was doing races on my MTB. In 2003 I became event director for a Double Century in southern Utah, the Desperado Dual Century. Moving into riding the longer distance of randonneuring events on my road bike just seemed like the natural thing to do.
In 2006 I became the Regional Brevet Administrator for Randonneurs USA in Utah and started organizing my own series of events. During that time I was also attending brevets in many other regions and experienced a lot of how other RBA’s organized their own rides. I continued as RBA for Utah until 2012, after which I started to back off doing some of the harder core events.
A changing landscape
Over the years of both riding and organizing events I began to notice some changes in attitude among randonneurs. The casual and social character of non-competitive long distance riding began to stray from what I had originally experienced and enjoyed as a rider. I began to see more emphasis on faster times, more mileage and even began to hear regularly about riders who talked of “winning” a brevet event. Also, many of the new routes being offered were becoming more and more difficult, often with ridiculous amounts of climbing and in remote locations with little access to services. The emphasis was shifting towards a more extreme version of the sport. To be sure there were still many “entry level” events out there but the direction of these events was clearly changing.
I have taken some time to consider the challenges that randonneuring is currently facing. My thoughts on the key things that are influencing change in the sport follow below:
Awards program
As a fresh faced and eager rider I was one who was motivated by awards. In fact I believe that I was the 17th rider to earn the RUSA R-12 award, for completing a 200 km event or longer in each of 12 consecutive months. Over the years I also earned a “Super Randonneur,” an “American Explorer,” a P-12 award and a few lesser mileage awards. The list of available awards kept growing and perhaps is part of the reason for the ever upward spiraling quest to achieve more and more in the sport. With some riders racking up annual awards for 40,000 kms in RUSA events, or 10 Grand Randonnee’s in a single year it started to seem a little ridiculous to me. Adjectives like Ultra and Super had begun to creep into awards program and suddenly randonneuring was beginning to feel like a competition to get the most awards!
Unintended consequence of using Google Maps
The popularity of Google maps as a route planning tool emerged in the early 2000’s. It was in fact a great help for planning routes but it suffered one major drawback. Often times route planners who relied on Google maps did not follow up with an in person check to see if all of the necessary street signs actually existed. For any brevet a cue sheet was still required with the distances and critical turns accurately noted. A directional sign that appeared on Google maps may not actually exist during the period when the ride occurred. On an event that I rode in 2009 (apparently planned with G maps but not checked in person) there were several critical directional signs missing on the route. I ended up as a DNF for that event, in part I believe due to the lack of route verification. The use of Google Maps as a primary planning tool is leading to a reduction in the accuracy route sheets. Route planners using Google Maps who do not check every turn in person contribute to this decline.
The intrusion of GPS
In the mid 2000’s GPS units started to become more common as a navigational tool for cyclists. I myself was an early adopter as I am for many such tech devices. For me personally as it turned out the device added a layer of complexity that I did not appreciate during a ride. Paying attention to the device, maintaining it’s charge and keeping it safe from weather were now additional tasks during a ride. GPS units also proved to be unreliable and twice during an event my device crashed and all data was lost. Since I considered a cue sheet to be an essential tool, the GPS device soon became an unneeded extra burden to me and I stopped using them on the bicycle.
The march of technology continues however and soon enough there was much talk in the rando world of using GPS as a primary navigation tool and even as proof of passage for an event, eliminating the need for a brevet card altogether! How this would affect traditional navigational methods seemed to be left out of the conversation. The inevitability of technology was the need that must be met, some proponents said! Bringing more young riders (who live on their phones) into the sport was the reasoning being used and the argument continues today.
The death of permanents
The withdrawal of the RUSA Permanents program (even if temporary) was a startling wake-up call to randonneurs. It came on the heels of the pre-virus cancellation of many other large cycling events in many states, both recreational and professional due to issues of red-tape. Liability concerns along with ever more burdensome permitting requirements have contributed to this issue and are a sign of things to come for all cycling events. I do not think that we can expect these issues to go away anytime soon. For me personally I would never be willing to act as an RBA again. The level of personal risk that an event organizer must assume these days is simply unacceptable for most of us.
Squabbling over the rules
Every sport has its rules, and randonneuring is no exception. The rules adopted by RUSA are rooted in tradition which is appropriate given randonneuring’s heritage. I have witnessed over the years an increase in discussions about modifying the rules to suit a more modern ethic. Everything from eliminating brevet cards to allowing photographic proof of passage and even using a digital GPS track as proof of completing a given event are topics that are being discussed. People often get petty and spiteful when articulating their position and can sometimes forget what the sport is really about at it roots. I have removed myself from most of the groups where these discussions occur since they often devolve into non-productive bickering. Tradition is at the heart of randonneuring and that should not be forgotten.
A prognosis of change?
Most recently the pandemic of the Wuhan virus has shut down all virtually cycling events nationwide. As we figure out how to proceed in the future I fear that many of the voices calling for change will find some traction in this new environment. Tradition versus change, that will be at the heart of the coming discussion. Do we abandon the traditions of randonneuring and embrace a more virtual version of the sport? Responding to the current crisis is one thing, but using a crisis to fundamentally change the sport is something else. I hope that does not happen!
Parting thoughts
Randonneuring is a sport that many people have still not heard of and perhaps even fewer understand. It has a tradition and a history which are as old as cycling itself. The cue sheet and the brevet card are a fundamental part of the randonneuring experience. The calls to replace these tools with a more modern equivalent should considered guardedly. I applaud the elected officials of RUSA for resisting some of the current pressure to change randonneuring into something it has not been before however I suspect that the calls for change will continue.
I believe that the awards program should continue but there should be a greater emphasis on the lesser achievements as opposed to mainly aggrandizing the mass accumulation of awards. The rider who completes their first 200 km event is often overlooked in favor of a guy who completed his 10th 1200 km event for the year. Continuously praising over-achievers while virtually ignoring the less accomplished rider feels a lot like patting ourselves on the back excessively and it seems wrong to me.
Maintaining traditions seems to be something that is looked down upon these days. Too many people want to affect change, often for personal reasons and usually not for the greater good. I am not as active in the sport as I used to be, but I will continue to be a supporter of randonneuring in the traditional sense as I know it.
January 17, 2024 at 5:36 am
Hello. I enjoyed reading your post. I was surprised that it was written in 2020 though. It seemed to me to be something that had been written back in 2014, 2015 or 2016 except for the reference to the Covid-19 thingy that decimated the RUSA perm program for a bit. I joined RUSA in 2017 (member #11633) and remained a member through 2019. Didn’t ride for a couple of years, then rejoined RUSA for a year in 2022. I think RUSA’s biggest problem is that it has an identity problem. Many of the powers to be in the organization would like to think of randonneuring as a sport, including you. But in reality, it’s merely an activity that people can participate in. The achievement awards are silly and many of them promote excessive compulsive behavior which is not good. While a RUSA member there were so many occasions when I’d be out on a perm ride and pass a friend going in the opposite direction. I didn’t turn around to ride with him (or her) since I had to stay on the perm’s course or not get RUSA credit for the ride. Another problem with RUSA is it doesn’t stick to long distance bike rides. Most of the rides it offers are only 200k in length. That barely constitutes a training ride for an authentic long distance bike ride. And many of the perms are even shorter than 200k. You mention in your post that you have a problem with route creation and route navigation. You’d like them to remain traditional. However, there has been no need for cue sheet accuracy since at least 2016 when cue sheets were no longer needed. During all four years as a RUSA member I never used a cue sheet to navigate the rides I did for RUSA credit. Designing a rando route so an old timer can use a cue sheet to navigate it takes a tremendous amount of time and energy. And if you look at the result pages on the RUSA Web site you will see there are very few “old timers” even riding. So that’s a lot of effort for a very small audience. Old timers have low RUSA member numbers. Not many of them around today. Which leads into yet another problem RUSA has: being boring. I don’t know about you, but I don’t like riding a route over and over again. Most members at RUSA seem to join for 3 years or less, then quit due to nothing new being offered. They might quit because they do not have time to ride, but I think the main reason is because RBA’s don’t come up with new routes, long routes, and/or both. And there are not many long perms out there for a member to ride.
November 16, 2021 at 2:41 pm
I became a member of RUSA in 2018 but am, by no means, an ‘ultra’ anything. I’ve done a handful of 200Ks, but for this older body, they generally turned into a slog and stopped being fun. So now I do 100K permanents, solo or with a buddy or two, and enjoy them. They are structured and long enough that they feel like a special event to me. I am working on my first P-12.
I joined RUSA before brevet cards went away, and I avoided GPS use at first. Now, I use a Garmin, but I also keep a cue sheet in plain view on the handlebar. And rather than go back and forth with USPS mailings, I find it much more convenient to log on to my RUSA account, sign the waiver electronically, and go for a long ride the next day if the spirit moves me. (I confess to watching the weather before committing…)
For me, it is fun, and a good motivation to keep riding my bike.
Thanks.
-NJgreyhead #12705
p.s. I found my way to your site via bikeforums.net
November 18, 2021 at 4:05 am
Another advantage of the new RUSA system for riding permanents is that, when registering online, you only have to choose the ride date; the start time is not required to be entered. That makes things more relaxed. You just start riding when you are ready to start.
And when you finish, you enter your results online as soon as you want. No more mailing back the brevet card, with receipts, and waiting for the route owner to enter your results.
-NJgreyhead #12705
May 11, 2021 at 5:14 am
Hey mate, great post. Just as a hindsight, it might be worth going back and editing the ‘wuhan virus” to coronavirus, as the proliferation of hate crimes against asian americans has demonstrated, linking a virus, which of course has no nationality or ethnicity, to a region breeds distrust, hate, and violence against innocent people.
Cheers!
-e
May 11, 2021 at 7:09 am
Hi Erik,
Thanks for your response. I understand that your perspective is the currently fashionable viewpoint, but since I am not a very “woke” individual I don’t tend to follow current trends. When the post was written “Wuhan Virus” was the common terminology in use to describe the disease. The news media used the label on a daily basis to describe this awful pandemic and it has been the custom in science to label occurences like this with some local reference to the first know occurence without concern for political correctness. I tend not to worry about issues like this very much but I do realize that others may be more sensitive about them.
You might find the following information helpful as it may increase your awareness on this issue. Link to the full article is below.
“Results from two preregistered studies [N(Study 1) = 504; N(Study 2) = 412], conducted across three countries with the first study during the early outbreak (April 2020) and the second study at a later stage of the pandemic (August 2020), found no evidence of any adverse effects of naming on sinophobia and strong support for the null hypothesis using Bayesian analyses. Moreover, analyses found no impact of naming on anxiety, risk aversion, beliefs about contagiousness of the virus, or beliefs about mortality rate, with mild to strong support for the null hypothesis across outcomes. Exploratory analyses also found no evidence for the effect of naming being moderated by political affiliation. In conclusion, results provide no evidence that virus naming impacted individual’s attitudes toward Chinese individuals or perceptions of the virus, with the majority of analyses finding strong support for the null hypothesis. Therefore, based on the current evidence, it appears that the importance given to naming infectious diseases might be inflated.”
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.561270/full
My personal viewpoint is that history should stand as written and not be adjusted at some later date to accomodate changing views on an issue. With regards to your concerns on the stigamatization of Asians, well, I prefer to follow the science.
Cheers!
December 4, 2020 at 12:20 pm
Some great insight into the current state of Randoneuring, I recently joined RUSA but with the pandemic situation its just me riding solo long rides this year .
May 24, 2020 at 11:17 pm
Thanks so much for sharing your perspective and your thoughts. I must say that it is good to hear from one who has achieved more than I ever will that the current emphasis on “super” and “Ultra” awards is misplaced. The R-12 is great, because if give us something to encourage an outing in the winter months when otherwise it is all too easy to stay at home. Do we really need an awards to encourage 10 Grand Randonnees in a year?
The tradition of the Brevet card is a good one, if only because it forces us to talk to store clerks and passers by about what we are doing. “What, you came all that way on your bike!?”, “Yes, and now I’m heading back …” I believe that these little conversations can change the way that people think. But what if there is no store? Is a time-and-GPS-stamped photograph so much worse than mailing a postcard — which was the old way?
May 24, 2020 at 9:51 pm
Well said. I hope to get back to riding brevets once things open up again.
May 24, 2020 at 11:10 pm
I have backed off quite a bit Bob, but if you are ever up this way give me a holler! We are just outside of Oregon City these days.
Remember this one? I can’t believe that it has been 7 years!
May 24, 2020 at 2:27 pm
This is a really thoughtfully written piece that only a long-time veteran could bring light to. I am absolutely not a seasoned Randonneur thus have no skin in this game but I can appreciate your nod toward simplicity and tradition along with small adjustments for modernization.
I also believe your piece should be shared to a larger audience, such as some of the vintage cycling forums. Others should be considering, and talking, about all of these topics as the sport evolves.
May 24, 2020 at 11:05 pm
Always good to hear from you Josh, thanks for your comments! Spoiler alert, next post up is a 1973 Lygie “Condorina” build!
May 24, 2020 at 11:09 pm
Wooo! Can’t wait!