CycleBetter.Com!

The G-Rant : Grant's Rants on Adventure Racing

“Without adventure, civilization is in full decay.” - Alfred North Whitehead

April 2006 - Posts

  • SPROUTE Re-Route Thoughts

    We held a small invite-only race this past weekend and it was a lot of fun.  We put the event together on short notice and invited our race volunteers from the SPROUTE and the teams on the Short Course.  We felt we asked a lot of the Short Course teams from the Sproute and thought this might be a nice way to give them another taste of racing without such technical map work and orienteering.  11 teams took the challenge and, I'm happy to report, 11 teams finished the full course in times ranging between 3 and 5 hours.  One team had a knee injury sideline a teammate, but they were able to finish the race while she got comfortable with an ice pack.  It was perfect weather for racing, sunny but cool, and everyone seemed to enjoy themselves. 

    We've found "short course" racers to be a much more laid back bunch -- generally more easy going and less competitive than teams at our longer events (although even our "longer" events of 12 and 18 hours are still pretty short in terms of adventure racing).  I'm torn on the subject since I can appreciate why teams approach a race seriously, but as a race organization the personalities and spirit of the "short course" teams really show through in a way we don't frequently see at the longer events. 

    I know teams racing our longer courses are an interesting and fun bunch, but at the gear check-in, starting line, and through the course of an event we often just see the intensity and focus instead of the smiles and laughs.  It's a bit different for me, personally, since I've grown to know many of the racers at our events and we interact on a different level . . . but for many of our volunteers, they comment on how serious and focussed everyone is. It's flattering that teams take a race seriously and compete with passion, but there is a healthy balance to be met.  

    This past weekend rekindled our interest in truly "short" course adventure racing as they are much easier to plan, organize, and operate.  I now completely understand why I see racing groups running 2 or 3 hour races several times through the year -- for a business, it's a much easier dollar to earn.  HRAdventure isn't a business, however, and I personally would prefer to race in longer races so that's why we organize longer races; for us it's not a question of profitablitity but of preference.  Maybe that will change at some point, I don't know.  Anyway, based on this past Saturday we can score one for the sprint course adventure race of about 3 hours in duration.

  • Disappointment . . .

    The cancelling of this race really took the wind out of my sails: http://www.visionsofadventure.com/  Maine is beautiful and I was really looking forward to racing this.

    So, we're officially in the market for a 24+ hour race in June, July, or August in New Endland.  I'm not sure there are any.  We want to do a race as prep for the Utah expedition race in October, but there aren't that many races in the distance and duration that we're looking for.

     

     

  • Red Bull Not A Banned Substance

    Red bull, the little can so frequently seen in gear bins and race transition areas, has become the first company to have a product certified as "OK to consume and not test positive for banned substances"; it's a new program the government has implemented.  From the previous link:
    "Certification Addresses Athletes' Fear of Unknowingly Testing Positive For Banned Substances and Desire for Higher Quality Supplements and Nutritional Products"
    So, drink your Red Bull in good conscience.  There has never been much talk of drug testing in AR (but Recover-Ease and some other supplements might push the envelope, but everyone maintains the stuff is free of banned substances), but I know lots of people swear by a Red Bull every now and then!

  • Bike Test Ride This Saturday, April 22nd

    I mentioned the bike test ride opportunity a few weeks ago but I wanted to highlight it again as it is this Saturday at New Quarter Park in Williamsburg.  I'll list the bike models and sizes they're supposed to have at the bottom of this post, but it's a pretty good variety of Gary Fisher and Trek, both mountain and road, and includes some WSD models.  Check it out if you're in the market for a new bike (or just curious) and be sure to pick the brains of the Trek and BikeBeat representatives out there about bike fit and any other questions -- this is a really cool and free opportunity!
    Directions To New Quarter:
    From Interstate 64, take exit 242A (Route 199 West/Jamestown Exit.).  Take the Route 143 exit off of Route 199 (the first exit), turn right onto Route 143 and follow it until you come to the first stoplight, which is the Penniman Road intersection. Turn right onto Penniman Road (Magruder Elementary School is on the left) and take the first left turn onto Hubbard Lane. Stay on Hubbard Land for about a mile an until you go under an overpass just past Cobble Creek subdivision. After the overpass, make an immediate right turn onto Lakeshead Drive. Follow this road until you reach the park entrance.

    For More Information:
    Call BikeBeat at 757-229-0096; they can answer any additional questions you may have.
    Bikes Fresh from the Manufacturer's Truck:
    Brand
    Year    
    Model
    Size
    Trek
    2006
    Madone 5.2
    50cm
    Trek
    2006
    Madone 5.2
    54cm
    Trek
    2006
    Madone 5.2
    56cm
    Trek
    2006
    Madone 5.2
    58cm
    Trek
    2006
    Pilot 5.2
    56cm
    Trek
    2006
    Remedy 66
    15.5"
    Trek
    2006
    Remedy 66
    17.5"
    Trek
    2006
    Remedy 66
    19.5"
    Trek
    2006
    Session 77
    17.5" 
    Trek
    2006
    Fuel EX 9
    15.5"
    Trek
    2006
    Fuel EX 9.5
    17.5"
    Trek
    2006
    Fuel EX 9
    17.5"
    Trek
    2006
    Fuel EX 9
    19.5"
    Trek
    2006
    Fuel EX 9
    21.5"
    Trek
    2006
    Fuel EX 9 WSD
    14"
    Trek
    2006
    Fuel EX 9 WSD
    16"
    Fisher
    2006
    Kingfisher
    19"
    Trek
    2006
    Soho
    22.5
    Trek
     
    Madone
    52
    Trek
     
    Madone
    60
    Trek
     
    Madone
    62
    Trek
     
    Madone WSD
    47
    Trek
     
    Madone WSD
    50
    Trek
     
    Pilot  5.2 WSD
    47
    Trek
     
    Pilot 5.2 WSD
    50
    Trek
     
    Pilot 5.2
    52
    Trek
     
    Pilot 5.2
    54
    Trek
     
    Pilot 5.2
    58
    Trek
     
    Pilot 5.2
    63
    Fisher
     
    Fat Possum
    15.5
    Fisher
     
    Fat Possum
    17.5
    Fisher
     
    Fat Possum
    19
    Fisher
     
    Fat Possum
    21
    Fisher
     
    X Caliber
    15.5
    Fisher
     
    X Caliber
    17.5
    Fisher
     
    Paragon
    17.5
    Fisher
     
    X Caliber
    19
    Fisher
     
    X Caliber
    21
    Fisher
     
    Rig
    17.5





















  • Training with too much intensity . . . or not?

    Some racers with Team HRAdventure participated in "advanced fitness testing" with a professional trainer over the weekend; I passed on the opportunity because of my schedule, but it sounds like I missed out on an interesting experience.  They analyzed their heart rates, VO2 Max, power output, training schedules, etc.

    The concencus seems to be that the gang trains at too high an intensity.  The main suggestion from the professional trainer was to "back off and train at less intensity . . . do more Long Slow Distance (LSD) at a moderate heart rate."  An example LSD workout might be 2 hours at a sustained heart rate of 110 (obviously the exact heart rate depends on your condition). 

    I don't know about this.  110 ("level 2" in heart rate zone training) is pretty light.  I'm a huge proponent of long training days (3+ hours at a "moderate" intensity -- but moderate for me means faster than LSD).

    It's tough to hear something like this when you've come from the "Train how you race" school; if you buy into Specific Adaptation to Imposed Demands (SAID), one would think that training at a high intensity will help you to race at a high intensity.  I frequently train at 140 heart rate (zone 3 for me -- I think) for 60 minutes or more.  The expert told my teammates, however, that it's important to back off to avoid injury and work in lots of heart rate Level 2 training (LSD).

    Now [knock on wood], I've stayed injury free with a higher intensity training schedule but I may back off a bit for the next month and focus on building more base endurance through LSD workouts.  Don't get me wrong, now, I'll still be out in full force at the Powhatan Trail Race; got to go hard for The Chief!  I could, however, go a bit easy when I'm in Colorado next week -- it will be tough not to hit the trails hard for some good elevation work, but maybe I'll go easy.  Maybe.  Just maybe.

    OK, who am I kidding?  I don't know that I'll change my training all that much as a result of fitness testing done by others.  It's a classic example of applying specific advice to
    a general situation: since I didn't participate in the fitness testing, I shouldn't read too much into my individual circumstances from the results.  What I really need to do is check it out the fitness testing for myself.

    Long Slow Distance certainly has it's benefits and I'll continue to get my 3+ hour workouts in . . . but I don't think I'll revamp my entire workout schedule based on friends' experience with a professional trainer.
  • To Plot or Not To Plot

    The Trailblazers is an online hub for adventure racing in the Southeast; they have a very active online forum that's worth checking out.  One recent debate is particularly interesting: link to TrailBlazers Forum Conversation.  It asks the question, "Why plot checkpoints 'on the clock' in an adventure race."

    I refrained from weighing in on the TrailBlazer forum, mostly because it degenerated after about the first day or two of comments, but I want to consider the question now and base it on my experience with adventure racing.

    First adventure race I ever did was the 18-hour "Howl at the Moon" in Florida, maybe in year 2000 (I forget exactly).  Like I've said before, Florida races always have whacky maps and instructions and the Howl was no exception.  We had points to plot but not on a UTM grid -- they used a variety of Lat/Long, azimuths, literal directions like "Bushwhack east until you cross a railroad track and then head up to Simon's Swamp."  Don't ask me which direction "up" was and, of course, Simon's Swamp was not on the maps.  Anyway, the race started at 3 PM and they gave out the maps and CP instructions at 2:15 PM.  Most teams had a good handle on where they were going by the 3 PM start.

    The next few races I did were 12-hour races by RacingAhead (great races, by the way, but now under new management so I can't speak to their quality).  At the time, the owners of RacingAhead had gone all over the world to race (Elf, Eco, etc).  These were much better run affairs than the "Howl" and these were all "Plot on the Clock" races where the race started and all the teams rush back to their cars, folding tables, and rulers to start working with maps.  These initial Racing Ahead events really shaped what defined "a good adventure racing experience" for me and when we formed HRAdventure we worked to emulate the great quality of RacingAhead. 

    I did a race with a group from Ohio, Ambush -- man, that was lowsy and the race fees were the most expensive I had paid.  They gave out 8x11 photo copies of maps the race director had taken from his atlas and desktop topo program; all points pre-plotted (and a couple mis-plotted at that!).  I won't dwell on the pitfalls of that event, but suffice it to say I was unimpressed and didn't think highly of pre-plotted maps.  I've never done one of their events since.

    A few months later I raced another event in Vermont that was all "plot on the clock" and had a great time.

    I think I'll stop the history lesson there, before I get into my more recent experiences with 24+ hour events.  You should see the pattern forming by now, anyway.  Out of my first half a dozen races, all the "plot on the clock" races were really fun and I had somewhat less than stellar experiences with the alternatives. 

    To date, all HRAdventure events have had 100% "plot on the clock."  It's worked out fairly well.  In hindsight, we should've given the maps and CPs for the Storm the Eastern Shore race ahead of time -- the stakes are too high that a team mis-plots a CP and ends up in either private property (they like their guns on the Shore) or on some long lost island in the Atlantic.  Too risky.  We've got lots of changes in store for that race, but that's a topic for another time.

    Our "short" courses have also always had plotting on the clock, which makes for an intimidating first encounter with an adventure race.  I think, on the whole, our short course teams rise to the occasion and appreciate that they're getting a more realistic taste of a longer race, but I also think we could make plotting points optional for a Short course.  Maybe grid the maps for them? 

    So what?  Do I have a conclusion, you're asking?  Yes.  We're going to make some changes to the distribution schedule of maps etc but NOT because a few people on the TrailBlazers forum asked for it, but because we want to maximize racers' time on the course for the Tidewater Traverse; this year, like last year, the TT course is long and teams will need every minute to beat cut-off times and alternate course redirections.  Some teams will be trying to out run darkness even though we have long days in June. 

    Personally, I still really like plotting "on the clock" as it's engrained from my early positive experiences with AR.  I don't see us going away from it entirely, but I do see us considering each event and making our intentions known on the web page for each race.  We haven't updated the Tidewater Traverse page, yet, but let me give you the scoop:
    • Topo maps will be distributed at the team address the night before (to allow teams to grid their maps and any other treatment they want to give them -- maybe sleep with them under your pillow for some navigation by osmosis?)
    • Race booklet containing the CPs will be given out 30 or 45 minutes before the race start.  Our hope is that teams will actually read the booklet so that they don't end up DQd for a silly oversight; 30-45 mins should also be enough time for teams to get a good start on plotting points (I'm betting many will have them all done in 30 mins).
    • Race will start with distribution of the race passport
    • Teams still might need to plot points in the course of the race, but I'm not saying anything more about that.
    This is a significant change from our previous events where teams must grid and plot and read the race booklet (at least theoretically) after the race begins.  Hopefully, this will be a good compromise and regardless, it will ensure teams have an opportunity to ask questions about routes etc before the race begins.  We'll see how it goes . . .
  • Why do you race?

    The TrailBlazers forum turned me on to this interview with Marshall Ulrich in the Raleigh newspaper; who has competed in all 9 eco-challenges and is known for his passion for ultra running.  His full website lists all his accomplishments -- makes me feel pretty puny by comparison!

    I thought this exchange from the interview was interesting:

    Q: Would you recommend adventure racing to anyone else?

    A: I've never been asked that, that's tough. No, I wouldn't.
    You'll have to read the interview to get his full explanation, but I think (fortunately for me) my motivations with AR are very different than his.  Adventure racing combines a lot of the things I really enjoy doing and, with the right team, it's the best way to spend a day or two (and I'll let you know how I feel about 3+ days after the October race we're doing); you learn more about yourself through AR than in any other sport.

    Why do you race?

  • Orienteering Maps for Adventure Races

    Last week I asked "how much nav is too much nav" and the response from racers has generally been, "we know it's an adventure race, keep it challenging and tough!"

    That's great news to me, as it means my impression of the AR community is generally spot on.  Teams want a genuine challenge.  Brace for some more tough nav at the Tidewater Traverse!

    There have been some interesting comments to the "too much nav?" question and I encourage you to read them yourself.  One comment I want to highlight comes from Greg Lennon, the head of the Quantico Orienteering Club (aka the QOC); he asks:
    I'm curious about two things:

    1) Did anyone carry (or even consider carrying) the orienteering map of Pocahontas that we (Quantico Orienteering) use at our events there?

    2) Do you think that for future races a more detailed map, such as the Pocahontas orienteering map, should have the checkpoints (and other race relevant features) added to it and be used as the race map?
    Let me speak to #2 first.  It's particularly interesting since we spoke with Greg and the QOC over the winter about using the very detailed and accurate orienteering map for the SPROUTE adventure race.  After course testing, however, we decided to keep things really challenging and not provide the orienteering map to teams.  If you don't know, an orienteering map is very precise and shows considerable detail missing from the USGS quad maps.  I'm sure those new to adventure racing would find navigation with the orienteering map to be easier; I'm also sure that most experienced adventure racers would be shocked to see such a detailed map as part of an adventure race.  With true orienteering maps, we're talking 1:10,000 scale or better! 

    Part of the fun and challenge of adventure race navigation is the decision making and improvisation necessary when working with less-than-perfect information.  If you only do small, sprint style races where there is either no real navigation or the nav is handed to you on a silver platter, you might think the maps we used at SPROUTE were terrible.  If, however, you're a seasoned racer you know better.  The maps we used at SPROUTE (and for all our races) are among the best you can find in races with "real" navigation because they are:
    • 1:24,000 scale (better than many races out there -- try working with UTMs on 1:100,000 scale maps)
    • color (nearly unheard of since the cost of 4 or 5 color topo quad maps per team can really add up -- but we're not a business so we don't worry about it)
    • relatively current (1980s or newer with color corrections more recent)
    Are they better than most races?  Yes.  Are they perfect?  Hardly!  But that's part of the challenge.

    As for question #1, asking if any racers used the orienteering map for the park, we at HRAdventure have never had problems with teams bringing "outside" maps to events; if a team is prepared and goes the extra mile of getting their own maps, good for them.  Some races don't permit "outside maps," but we do.
  • Course Testing

    Pre-running an adventure race course is a lot of fun and it always helps us work out the rough edges of the race instructions, maps, time estimates, etc.  The catch is finding some victims who meet the course testing criteria:
    • They shouldn't don't know much (ideally anything!) about the area of the race
    • They should be in pretty good shape to turn in accurate times and gauge the difficulty of the course
    • They mustn't have plans to actually do the real race, so they'll either be out of town, committed to other things, or volunteering on race day
    It can be a hard set of requirements to satisfy.  For the SPROUTE, we convinced the guys from Encompass-Adventure to be our guinea pigs and we tested the course, as luck would have it, when a winter storm had just hit the Richmond area.  Now that the race is over, I can share some photos of the Encompass guys in action (click the thumbnails below to see the larger pictures):




    Things look a bit different under a layer of snow!  So, they tested the course in 30 degree snowy weather and the real event went off in near 80 degree temps on a beautiful day!

    You might be shocked to learn that I think the most important characteristic in a good course tester is honesty (and not navigation ability, fitness, etc); being able to say "this doesn't work well . . . " or "this could be better if . . ." is exactly the sort of feedback we look for from those who pre-run our courses. 
  • How to win a race like the SPROUTE

    Team GOALS ARA, the winners of the SPROUTE, have posted a good write-up on their race and on their approach to the event.  Adventure racers should take advantage of this inside look at how a good team won a challenging event.

    They share 5 main lessons they applied to this race:
    1. Everybody works in TA
    2. Get to ropes early
    3. Don't paddle around horseshoe bends
    4. Read the CP descriptions
    5. Use all your maps and any other maps you find at the park or trail


  • Around the HRAdventure water cooler on April 5th

    The dust is settling from race #1 in our 2006 series, the Spring Route Adventure Race.   I still have some final sweaty wrist bands and passports to sift through on the Long Course and we need to process the Short Course final results, but this will be done in the next day or so and we can focus our energy on other things.

    Over the next week I plan to post about lessons we, as an adventure race organization, have learned from this April 1st event and how we're shaping the next race as a result.  Race #2, the Tidewater Traverse (TT), is on June 3 and while the course is finished and ready to go, I think we'll make some minor changes over the next several weeks. 

    If HRAdventure had a real office with real employees and a real watercooler, the talk around the watercooler right now would sound like this:
    Grant (that's me) would be saying: "I think we're a bit torn between holding races with very tough navigation and making events accessible to less experienced racers; we're walking a very fine line and I'd hate to lose our appeal for the beginners.  It's not an identity crisis, but it does go to the heart of what HRAdventure is about; originally, we wanted to foster AR in the local area and I think that mission is accomplished.  I'm afraid the current design of the TT may put a hurtin' on some teams.  There were some somber faces at the SPROUTE prize raffle and meal and I'd much rather see smiles -- it's tough to tell when people are pleasantly exhausted versus just beaten down."

    Jill (does a lot of the TA operations and logistics) would be saying: "Simplify.  It shouldn't take a Phd to decipher passports, check-in sheets, support, and organize the events.  A smaller race is better for everyone involved.  How many teams are signed up for the TT already?"

    Morgan (does a little of everything) would be saying: "Dude.  The nav check during SPROUTE gear check-in was not the time for teams to be learning what a 'UTM' is.  Compared with past races, I think the level of navigation experience demonstrated by the teams was the lowest . . . combine that with our toughest race nav yet and we have a recipe for some lost teams.  Maybe more clinics are the answer?"

    Scott (typically staffs the "crux" CPs for us and helps with logistics and sponsor relations) would be saying: "Are you going to eat those pretzels?  Do we have any left over Clif Bars?  All those maps sure make me hungry."
    I'm not sure where these conversations are leading us but I can tell you that your feedback counts and what I'm hearing from most teams is that the SPROUTE was tougher than they thought it would be and teams were pushed to their limits, but it was still a great race and they want to bring it on at the TT or another future race.  In the words of the Terminator: "I'll be back."  All in all, that's the reaction we at HRAdventure are shooting for. 

    My concern is that we're not hearing from teams that felt overwhelmed or beaten down or really struggled on the course.  Are they out there?  The only way we know is if we hear from you. 

    Either way, come hang out at the water cooler and help shape things to come.
  • Nice write-up about the SPROUTE

    Race photographers with www.WARamos.com have compiled a nice summary of the race.  There are many, many photos to come so stay tuned . . . we'll also have a change to the 3rd place overall team (we'll have final results finished tonight, but it's not Pura Vida as we hastily caculated after the race).  This sort of thing happens a lot at races and isn't a big deal, so long as we correct it promptly.

    I particularly enjoyed this quote from the photographer's race write-up:
    Teammate #1: “One of the teams is training for Primal Quest…” (He then went on to explain about PQ)

    Teammate #2: “Well, we’re training to kick their ass!”
    Now that's the spirit!  In the end, however, Team GOALS ARA earned our respect with their fast racing and pleasant disposition (two things that don't always go together in AR!).

    Team GOALS ARA at the finish line
  • How much nav is too much nav?

    Not much time to post here but I wanted to say a bit about Saturday's SPROUTE race.  Feedback is starting to come in and the concensus was that the race was great and the navigation was really challenging.  The race winners, GOALS ARA from PA, really enjoyed all the tough navigation and commented that "we love the challenging navigation, but it's brutal to many of the other teams out there."  

    GOALS qualified for the 2006 AR world championships in Sweden so if they feel the nav was tough, then you know the nav was tough.

    I'll have a lot more to share later, but for now let me just thank all the volunteers for their committment and support on race day; we couldn't do it without them!


More Posts
Sign in | Join | Help

in Search

Google