Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

1 - 20 of 242 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Are you a Grand Tour rider?

There's another option for racing ACA's Great Divide MTB Route now. With all due respect for the excitement the GDR has brought us, opportunity knocks to race the full 2711mi length of this humongous route.

Tour Divide: Same self-support style, same bare-bones infrastructure. Only the course will be spiced-up as Canada's legal wilderness riding becomes the early test for survival in the longest MTB race on the planet.

June 13th 2008 Banff, AB roll-out. Find yourself there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
320 Posts
carlhutch said:
wow...so now we have 2 divide races?
I would say, sort of. There's really more like 1 race concept that can be attempted whenever a taker sees fit...a Man vs. Divide Route premise. TD simply offers an earlier departure date and unifies the Canadian Rockies segment.

Yes, group racing the divide creates motivation, parity, more spectacle, but so long as one goes for it observing the self-support basics Stamstad ITT'd by in `99 (and the GDR has refined), one has the right to be listed on the tally of finishers...which is up to 20-something now. It's part of the genius of the concept. A challenger needn't roll out with a field of 10+ riders to be pitting their effort against the rest. A focus on a single race date seems to have detracted from this a bit. No, racing against the history books isn't so glam but it requires that internal motivation rewarded in endurance MTB.

The GDR will always be a border to border race. Interest in a single-stage divide race that rolls from Banff has been brewing for a while now. TD is that, and lends courage to those who see unification in the spirit of the divide race concept but are otherwise concerned with the penalty/risk of riding Canada as an "optional" prologue to the GDR.

Though TD's emphasis is on long course times, splits will be recorded for Canada, US such that racers will have an official time to compare to past/future lower 48 performances.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,236 Posts
So now

In boxing style we have now two championships. Next will be the race South to North (2), and of course the winter race, all along the same route.
Just kidding, however I,m afraid it has the potential to finish off a race that could become a classic.
Paris -Roubaix will never change to Paris -Brussels just because its farther away either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
539 Posts
The end of the GDR is near!

such a shame, I was looking forward to doing the race sometime. What happens if the ACA add another section?...are we going to have three different races, maybe four?(someone may just want to do the Canadian section, or maybe a Mexican section?) all going at a similar time? just when things were getting interesting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
303 Posts
longman said:
such a shame, I was looking forward to doing the race sometime. What happens if the ACA add another section?...are we going to have three different races, maybe four?(someone may just want to do the Canadian section, or maybe a Mexican section?) all going at a similar time? just when things were getting interesting.
I don't see the GDR going away. I see it growing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
539 Posts
I see the GDR dying

and the Tour Divide taking over. People can already take up the bigger challenge and did, riding the Canadian section then the GDR, now they are gonna ride the Tour Divide and ignore the GDR... They will pass through Rooseville before the GDR starts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
320 Posts
Hermosa said:
I don't see the GDR going away. I see it growing.
i think hermosa's right. it seems to be growing. and with it, apppetite for extension. one event will only be good for the other...even if controversy manufactured.

mvi alludes to multiple titles, but there's only one belt. the fastest rider down the route holds that belt regardless of start date or which group race it was done within. again, that's the beauty of the concept. the only way TD might affect GDR participation is if the rider that holds the fastest US split began that effort from banff. if that were to happen, the onus will be on conscientious challengers to follow suit, roll from the top.

longman, the south to north idea is an interesting one too. if divide racing participation reaches critical mass, lots of folks like the bidirectional alternating year idea. i think scott morris holds the record on S-N for now.

as for the route changing in the future, there's nowhere north of banff to go and certainly nowhere south of the mexico border to go (without getting killed by drug lords). ACA assures us the route is done. piecemeal intra-route singletrack improvements will hopefully occur in time but those changes are covered by the rule of always racing the most current ACA maps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
539 Posts
I agree that interest in the route will increase but...

I think (and I'm sat at work bored to tears so I'm thinking too much) that the racers will eventually move from doing the GDR to the Tour Divide. Already we have a numer of racers not doing the GDR but doing the Tour Divide instead. I know it doesn't matter when you race the route or with which group you start, your time will still count, but it obviously has some effect or why else did over 20 riders line up at the same time last year? It's a great psychological boost to know that you are in a 'race' rather than a solo time trial.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
longman said:
It's a great psychological boost to know that you are in a 'race' rather than a solo time trial.
Maybe that helps explain the need for TD? There hasn't been a race on the Canadian section until now. Everyone who wanted to do the canadian section & the GDR had to worry about racers being fresh at the US border, having not already done 211 miles. I remember people last year remarking "imagine what would have happened had Matt Lee not done the Canadian section" with regards to the record. I always thought that was kinda lame...

A second point, about splitting the race... it's not a secret that ACA is making a mountain bike route along the Pacific Crest Trail. I know of some people that intend on time trialing that route the first year it is established... should we ask ACA to not develop the route because it will split the field between the GDMBR and the PCT too much? ...I find the answer rather obvious...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
539 Posts
sizlinseagulsoup said:
Maybe that helps explain the need for TD? There hasn't been a race on the Canadian section until now. Everyone who wanted to do the canadian section & the GDR had to worry about racers being fresh at the US border, having not already done 211 miles. I remember people last year remarking "imagine what would have happened had Matt Lee not done the Canadian section" with regards to the record. I always thought that was kinda lame...

A second point, about splitting the race... it's not a secret that ACA is making a mountain bike route along the Pacific Crest Trail. I know of some people that intend on time trialing that route the first year it is established... should we ask ACA to not develop the route because it will split the field between the GDMBR and the PCT too much? ...I find the answer rather obvious...
very lame, Matt new the deal before he started, as did everybody else.

the PCT and GDMBR are two entirely different courses, that's like saying there should be no Vuelta because there's the Tour De France!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
longman said:
the PCT and GDMBR are two entirely different courses, that's like saying there should be no Vuelta because there's the Tour De France!!!
I completely agree with you. But should there be no Canadian Section because of the GDR? I guess that is the ultimate choice. I think the extra 211 miles is important, some may disagree... we all have the freedom to choose
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
539 Posts
sizlinseagulsoup said:
I completely agree with you. But should there be no Canadian Section because of the GDR? I guess that is the ultimate choice. I think the extra 211 miles is important, some may disagree... we all have the freedom to choose
I've never said that there should be no Canadian section, I just think this new race will ultimately lead to the death of the GDR. I don't care whether or not the Canadian section is included in the GDR, someone else did and created a new race to get their own way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18 Posts
So ... the real question is (I mean, once we all stop pretending that these events aren't races) ... which one is the legitimate race?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
539 Posts
My vote...

The GDR is THE legitimate race. The Tour Divide is the ugly ginger stepchild that took his ball home because he kept getting beat.:thumbsup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
179 Posts
longman said:
The GDR is THE legitimate race. The Tour Divide is the ugly ginger stepchild that took his ball home because he kept getting beat.:thumbsup:
I would caution bringing this down to one person. When decisions were made in regards to the GDR (rules and such) a lot of folks blamed one person. Now there's the TD and there's a tendency to vilify one person. From what I know of both situations it was far from it. Perhaps as the faces of the two races that's to be expected. But just as one person didn't dictatorially mandate the GDR rules on person isn't pulling the TD out of his ass.

Debate the merits of the two. Make decisions. Do what you must for yourself. Good people are involved all around. It was inevitable that the Canadian section would be raced. FWIW, there are many races that have split options, should these ever merge.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
320 Posts
longman said:
The GDR is THE legitimate race. The Tour Divide is the ugly ginger stepchild that took his ball home because he kept getting beat.:thumbsup:
longman, with all due respect, the only real way for you to vote is to line up to race. bring your game (and your ball) to roosville when the GDR starts and you can vote twice if you like. IMO no single divide race can be more legit than another...or more legit than a solo ITT. i think you might be making it more complicated than it is.

...and you won't ever hear me cite having ridden canada as a prologue to the GDR the past three years as a handicap. no sour grapes there. i've proudly logged solid performances in the GDR all three times i rode canada. its the best thing i ever did to enhance my divide racing experiences. i've done it willingly for myself (to see that country) and to lead by example w/rspct to a vision of racing the whole divide trail, end-to-end.

evolution is in the spirit of endurance mtb. no one can argue that. i've endeavored to help evolve the GDR to banff but it's not necessarily what's good for the GDR and it's not my race to change. that's fine. no hard feelings. there's room for folks to race two or three abreast on the divide route and room for two events. you'll find controversy where you want to see it but its best not to create division where there isn't any. TD is pro divide racing. GDR is pro divide racing. TD is pro GDR and vice versa. no one is trying to be more legit than the other.

pbasinger, TD's lower 48 route rules are identical to GDRs for the sake of even comparisons. cuba to grants dirt is still optional.
 
1 - 20 of 242 Posts
Top