# Levi's GranFondo



## patpend2000

Wow! what a ride, difficult hills, deadly downhills, tons of wind.....ready for next year!


----------



## Brian10

No pics?


----------



## lml1x

some photos here:
http://www.rbaction.net/fly.aspx?layout=content&taxid=69&cid=2351


----------



## racermech

Did the 63 mile ride, pretty amazing ride. I hope everyone that did the 103 had a good ride. 

I am sure there was quite a few people that mis-judged the climbs and had to sag wagon back. Did see one crash on the way back, it was coming down what was the first climb on a straight away.


----------



## Dr_John

Bobke was there?


----------



## acuracing

Did the 63-mile Medio Fondo as well and it was great. No complaints about the whole course except for the dirt gravel trail a few miles from the end where my buddy caught a flat. Otherwise, there was perfect weather and good challenges.


----------



## shibaman

I did the 103mi. Grand Fondo. It was a very tough route. It was more than 8000' of climbing by way of peoples Garmens.--- not 6500'.I had a great time once the crowds thinned out on the hills. Kind of cramped at the beginning of the ride down the hills. I loved the climbs. Not easy at all. There were a couple of places on King Ridge, and decending on to the coast where the wind almost knocked be off the bike. I heard that some people walked their bikes across the top of an open spot on King Ridge. I think that I would do it again next year.:thumbsup:


----------



## Gnarly 928

*Details?*

So, how did the "Fondo" part of this work? Was there really any timing? Was the ride any different, essentially, than any other pay for it century ride? Is there any similarity to the European events like the Trans Alp..or did it play out like a regular US century event? They mentioned transponders and timing, but that part of it hasn't been mentioned after the fact.

Just curious, as one of these type rides may happen in my area next year. Usually I find organized centuries unappealing but if there were to be some actual timing and some data posted on how your own ride times compared to others, it would be more interesting.

I've gone over the website and I really don't see any thing Was it totally Social, or did they actually time some and put up 'results' somewhere I never found?

I understand that in Europe this type event is quite competitive for some of the participants. They train as hard as real pros and treat these events just like a real race..thousands of them, all trying to beat the other rider's times. That would be interesting.


----------



## rox

I did the gran 103m route. advertised as 6500ft of climbing but my polar recorded 8400 which is backed up by some other reports. A little unprepared for that amount of climbing but thankfully I took it easy on the early king ridge climb and had enough left for coleman valley later.

the roads were spectacular especially the ocean views coming down meyers grade. the descents were wicked fun and had appropriately placed warning signs to help out.

The results are now posted on the ride blog. I was hoping they would have split times for the climbs but it appears to only be total time.


----------



## orthobiker

*Gran Fondo*

This was the best supported ride, save the Death Ride, I have been on with respect to police at all major intersections, great signage, pot holes marked, and number of volunteers on the course. It was more difficult than expected with my altimeter showing 8,600' and 103 mi. Don't know where they came up with 5,600'. Thought I was done with the climbing when I hit that number.

The mass start had me worried but with the roads closed and a long straight run out of town it was no problem. The first 32 mi were fast paced pace lines then the big climb started. Riders were respectful and I saw no crashes. Biggest problem was the wind which almost knocked me down. Saw a woman have to get off her bike on the ridge due to the wind.

Was not expecting a 14% grade after 75 mi. or an unpaved road near the finish. Recommend new or nearly new tires if doing the Gran route.


----------



## racermech

Yes there was timing, there was a small "chip" on the back of your number plate. So even though it took us 15+min to cross the start line, the timing did not start till then. "Results" where posted based on the ride you did. I also noticed them posted on the site today.

I can see the word Fondo being used for any organized ride to make it sound cool. According to my dad this was very close to a euro fondo, not quite the same but close. 

I saw a few bone head moves along the way, someone stopped in the middle of the group on the first climb. It did not look like a dropped chain, just looked like the person was out of breath. Way too much pointing at objects that did not matter in the road and people calling out everything (I know we are turning right because of the green sign, the sign before that the said there was a turn, and the 10,435,765 people ahead of me that I can see are all turning right. But really thanks for yelling next to me that there is a right turn)

My only "complaints" would be some better sign posting at the start and registration. On Friday we had no idea where to go, so we just followed people. At the start it was a bit of chaos, the little cones with a piece of paper where a bit out of place. I sign on a tall stick and a couple more volunteers pointing people would of been nice. The feed zone at the top of Coleman was weak...chip, pretzels and nuts??? I ended up topping off my bottle and moving onto the next rest stop to grab a quick bite to eat.

Personal suggestions would of been a sheet in the registration package telling people where to put the numbers. I saw the paper number attached to the bike, saw the plastic number in a jersey pocket....etc. I would of like to seen a bit better topo/ride map. I was there but a bit hard to make good sense out of it all. Out on the road a few more signs saying what was coming up (1mi to rest stop, 1mi to Coleman road...etc)

Overall for a first year event I was very impressed, had a great time. Maybe next year I will get off my ass and do some climbing so I can do the Grand ride.....


----------



## cheddarlove

We did the 103 mile route on a tandem. At the end my altimeter said 8,500 feet of climbing. Hard core ride! Bragging rights and serious props to anyone who did it!! 
The roads were not in the greatest condition with lots of patch jobs and pot holes to beware of. Although good road conditions were plentiful.
Next year I'll wear amber lenses for all the shade and darkness in tree cover!
It was like a glorified century really. It was timed but I'll be danged if I can figure out the results!  
I thought it was better than your average organized event for sure! Free Road ID.
The whole town of Santa Rosa got behind the event finally.
Cool Capo jersey for 65 bucks.
A pasta feed for 10 bucks and if you signed up on time, paella!:thumbsup: 
A great sale at Nor Cal bikes!
A chance to ride in a beautiful area.
Any issues? Someone that trained for 6500 feet of climbing must have come over the line wasted! If they finished though, then what's the beef? You're tougher than you thought! Sleep an extra hour on Sunday! Besides, it's not like they didn't constantly tell us it would be hard!
The wind on the coast was brutal! I don't know how I kept the tandem upright!
I was actually pleased to get off Hwy. 1 and hit Coleman Valley rd. Even at 18% with 75 miles in our legs, at least I felt in control! By this time I was fried and my shoulder hurt from the wind VS. tandem fight!
I wish there had been more of a cheering section at the end too.
I think Levi had some difficulty getting this going initially.We started at 8:15 which is late for a ride of this caliber. A 7 starting time would be way better and I think that was the first plan!
At Levi's press conference, I went up and asked if he had actually ridden the course because it was 8500 feet of climbing, not 6500. I was razzing them and Levi passed the buck to another guy who then passed it to Carlos the ride director. He said he'd ridden it with a Garmin and I said Garmin's lose data under tree cover. He looked sheepish but it was all in good fun!
Next year I'll be there again! Thanks to the pro cyclo-cross racer that actually gave us a pull for awhile!


----------



## alunlang

I am a little disappointed with myself for not riding the grand.:mad2: insted i rode the medio, i started and finished my ride in Petaluma which added 30 miles to the total milege. I am now kicking myself for turning left at the Pink Elephant:crazy: and only riding Coleman Valley Rd. which was challageing but not as long as i had prepared for. Oh well ther is always next year and i still had fun.:thumbsup:


----------



## Blue CheeseHead

A couple of friends made the trek out from Wisconsin to do it. I will be with them next year! All reviews were great other than the wind.


----------



## Pokey

I rode the Gran and clocked 102.75 miles and 8800 feet of climbing.

Definitely spectacular descent down to hwy 1. The 40 MPH side-wind gusts along 1 had me white-knuckling and afraid to take my hands off the bars to grab a drink. I was so glad I dod not have deep-section aero wheels. I have the shallow box-section Roval Roubaix wheels that came with my bike and was glad I had them.

I saw you guys on the tandem - didn't someone push you up part of a hill? Not that you guys needed it - you were moving. I was impressed!

I managed a 14.9MPH average speed but it still took me 6h 52 min riding time.

Seemed WAY harder that the Marin century. I clocked 7400 feet of climbing at Marin. This was better supported than the Marin as well.

How in the he11 do the fast guys get down to ~5 hours on these rides? 

I wanna be fast :cryin:

My wife is a beginner and she did the Pico and had fun too...

Anyone have a Men's Med Gran Fondo jersey they want to get rid of? Small miscommunication between my wife and I and i did not get one.


----------



## thenoodleator

I usually just lurk in the forums finding answers to questions, but just wanted to pop up to say that I had a great time doing this event and would highly recommend it to anyone. I did the Medio (though next year will definitely do the Fondo). It was one of the most fun rides I've ever done, and a nice change in scenery from riding over here on the East Coast. 

If anyone's interested, I made a video from the day which I hope captures the spirit of the event. Just watching Coleman Valley climb again makes me smile (and grimace). 
http://vimeo.com/6946988

Such an excellent, well-organized event, and a great vibe throughout. The support from the local community was amazing, and I was talking to one of the Santa Rosa cycle club guys and he said it was great to see more locals than usual out on the course cheering people on. 

Ride on!


----------



## alunlang

If anyone's interested, I made a video from the day which I hope captures the spirit of the event. Just watching Coleman Valley climb again makes me smile (and grimace). 
http://vimeo.com/6946988


----------



## Guest

Sounds like that was a great ride from all that I've read. I really hope the Gran Fondo concept catches on in the US, and in my area, it seems to be doing ok in Cali but that's a little far for me.


----------



## cheddarlove

Pokey said:


> I rode the Gran and clocked 102.75 miles and 8800 feet of climbing.
> 
> Definitely spectacular descent down to hwy 1. The 40 MPH side-wind gusts along 1 had me white-knuckling and afraid to take my hands off the bars to grab a drink. I was so glad I dod not have deep-section aero wheels. I have the shallow box-section Roval Roubaix wheels that came with my bike and was glad I had them.
> 
> I saw you guys on the tandem - didn't someone push you up part of a hill? Not that you guys needed it - you were moving. I was impressed!
> 
> I managed a 14.9MPH average speed but it still took me 6h 52 min riding time.
> 
> Seemed WAY harder that the Marin century. I clocked 7400 feet of climbing at Marin. This was better supported than the Marin as well.
> 
> How in the he11 do the fast guys get down to ~5 hours on these rides?
> 
> I wanna be fast :cryin:
> 
> My wife is a beginner and she did the Pico and had fun too...
> 
> Anyone have a Men's Med Gran Fondo jersey they want to get rid of? Small miscommunication between my wife and I and i did not get one.


Yes Pokey, some guy did push us up for a bit! It was great! A total surprise! 
It took us over 8 hours and I think we may have been one of only two tandems on the Gran route. Not sure about that but I've been investigating and I think that was the count for the 103. This was tough but would have been better if not for the wind at the coast! That was a real downer! Hurt my shoulder on that. We did good on the climbs thanks to Granny Goodness!

This is a ride report I did on a site I usually go to. Hope you like it! There are two sets of photo's so scroll down after the first batch! 

http://www.socaltrailriders.org/for...-i-got-screwed-levi-what-i-plan-do-about.html

Hey Noodle. That was a good video. That downhill in the beginning rocked!! :thumbsup:


----------



## shibaman

Great write up and good pics. It was a great tough ride even on a road bike. If you want a real challenge do the Santa Cruz Challenge next year. 100 mi and 10000' of hard climbing. Beautiful mountains and roads. Hardest day for me on a bike! China Grade is a @!#@%% 

http://www.santacruzcycling.org/scmc/index.shtml I did the Shasta century the following weekend with similar mi. and climbing, but it was much easier. More gradual climbs, but longer.


----------



## thenoodleator

cheddarlove said:


> Yes Pokey, some guy did push us up for a bit! It was great! A total surprise!
> It took us over 8 hours and I think we may have been one of only two tandems on the Gran route. Not sure about that but I've been investigating and I think that was the count for the 103. This was tough but would have been better if not for the wind at the coast! That was a real downer! Hurt my shoulder on that. We did good on the climbs thanks to Granny Goodness!
> 
> This is a ride report I did on a site I usually go to. Hope you like it! There are two sets of photo's so scroll down after the first batch!
> 
> http://www.socaltrailriders.org/for...-i-got-screwed-levi-what-i-plan-do-about.html
> 
> Hey Noodle. That was a good video. That downhill in the beginning rocked!! :thumbsup:


Thanks, you got some great pics there - wish I'd done the Fondo. Tandem is hard core! 
I too did a ride report, which I hope in some way helps to demonstrate the highs and lows and highs again of the ride. http://shnoos.com/?p=529


----------



## cheddarlove

thenoodleator said:


> Thanks, you got some great pics there - wish I'd done the Fondo. Tandem is hard core!
> I too did a ride report, which I hope in some way helps to demonstrate the highs and lows and highs again of the ride. http://shnoos.com/?p=529


Great report! I want to go back next year! It was a kick doing it on the tandem! We were pulling a bunch of singles on a flat for awhile. When we came to the Medio/Gran split, this guy came up and thanked us for the pull and said "you girls have fun, I'm doing the Gran" and I was like 'Oh ok dude! See ya on the downhills' and we headed off in his direction which I think surprised him. 
Like I said earlier, I'm looking for any photo's of us on the tandem if anyone see's one,please drop me a PM.


----------



## mr_132

thenoodleator said:


> ]
> 
> If anyone's interested, I made a video from the day which I hope captures the spirit of the event. Just watching Coleman Valley climb again makes me smile (and grimace).
> http://vimeo.com/6946988


Loved the video.... You have one badass bike as well


----------



## smt42

For everyone with a garmin. They do not measure altitude very will and you can not trust them to be even close to accurate, garmin will even tell you that they can be well over 100' off. So to get accurate data you need to map the route to a program that will figure the elevation. I was on a 2600' pass according to the USGS and the Garmin said 2800. I'll Go with the USGS. GPS is good for latitude and longitude but not so much for elevation. Surveyers use it but their base stations cost thousands and they let it sit for hours to get accurate data. At any rate my GPS said 8 thousand something feet but the Map My Ride map said around 6600 which is probably more accurate. Hate to burst you bubbles about the total elevation. I thought I was a hero too.


----------



## cheddarlove

smt42 said:


> For everyone with a garmin. They do not measure altitude very will and you can not trust them to be even close to accurate, garmin will even tell you that they can be well over 100' off. So to get accurate data you need to map the route to a program that will figure the elevation. I was on a 2600' pass according to the USGS and the Garmin said 2800. I'll Go with the USGS. GPS is good for latitude and longitude but not so much for elevation. Surveyers use it but their base stations cost thousands and they let it sit for hours to get accurate data. At any rate my GPS said 8 thousand something feet but the Map My Ride map said around 6600 which is probably more accurate. Hate to burst you bubbles about the total elevation. I thought I was a hero too.


I don't use a Garmin. I have a fairly accurate cyclocomputer. 
I got rid of my Garmin a few years ago because they do tend to lose quite a bit in tree cover. You may be correct but I don't think so.
My computer is pretty accurate to within about 200 ft. 
It wasn't just the Garmins coming up with 8000 plus feet.


----------



## ukbloke

smt42 said:


> For everyone with a garmin. They do not measure altitude very will and you can not trust them to be even close to accurate, garmin will even tell you that they can be well over 100' off.


That's not really fair.

Admittedly, the cheapest Garmin GPS (eg. 205) have just GPS altitude which is not very accurate and I would not trust that data. But the more common ones (eg. 305 and up) have a barometric altimeter too. Now it is true that the altitude can be off in absolute terms due to inaccurate calibration and changes in barometric pressure, such as a low or high pressure weather zone. I believe that these devices the GPS altitude (which isn't all that accurate), and maybe temperature, to correct but this but still the absolute altitude can be off by a 100' or more either way. It would be nice if they had a manual calibration for altitude (e.g. I know the altitude of my house and it doesn't change!) but they don't.

However, on any route one is more interested in altitude gain/loss, and it does not matter what the absolute altitude is. It is just changes in altitude that matter. Changing barometric pressure due to the weather can introduce drift but that's relatively small compared to altitude changes from climbing hills. In my experience the Garmin 305 altitude change measurements are very dependable and repeatable when climbing and descending hills. They deduce grade from this too, and that's also pretty good though slightly delayed compared to the actual grade.

But there is one additional factor that affects all attempts at extracting an altitude gain for a route. Noise in the altitude measurement (e.g. from sensor noise) can accumulate throughout the ride and contribute to a significant error. But this is also true when sampling altitude from elevation data on a map too (e.g. quantization error where the map reports in units of say 25 feet). To combat this heuristics are used to smooth the data before calculating the accumulation. There is no "right answer" here too. Do you count going over a traffic control hump as 6" of climb? What about a 1" undulation in the tarmac?

Given all this, the Garmin devices (305 and up) give pretty good numbers. I trust them more than some web sites (e.g bikely). In this case I think the 8000' number is a pretty credible measurement.

Much more on this subject can be found over here.


----------



## ukbloke

While on the subject of data, I thought the timing aspect of Levi's Gran Fondo was pretty lame. The results  appear to just aggregate everyone into one enormous spreadsheet regardless of which ride they were on. Separating the results by the different distance events should be obvious! It would also have been nice to split them by female/male or by age group too. I would have thought that there would have been a timed hill for added interest.

Frankly, other than the mass start (which has its pro's and con's), I don't really see much difference between this Gran Fondo and a well-organized century ride.


----------



## moschika

the video was great. you made easy work of Coleman Valley Rd. nice! 

whether it was 6 or 8k feet of climbing, it was plenty work for me. i got up King Ridge only to have my shifter break and not shift any more leaving me in 1 gear. was enough to get me down meyer's grade to goat rock. gives me a reason to move up to 10 speed now and a 27t.


----------



## thenoodleator

mr_132 said:


> Loved the video.... You have one badass bike as well


Well, that was the other cool thing about the day. Rather than ship my bike over from Brooklyn, I rented the most bad ass bike I could from NorCal Bikes from the Specialized test fleet. It was way above my pay grade, but holy hannah, it was the most awesome bike I have ever ridden. That's how they suck you in... I WANT very badly.

EDIT: It was the S-Works Amira.


----------



## cheddarlove

It is definitely a work in progress. They 'tweeted' in the newsletter they sent out that many people switched rides while they were on it. 
So if Noodle signed up for the Medio but at the split decided to do the Gran instead, I think it made it too difficult for them to separate everyone at this time. 
Perhaps just way too time consuming. I also believe they were supposed to time people to the top of Kings Ridge but I guess that didn't pan out either.
Levi also said he'd go to the top and then come back and ride with different groups but I guess he just went in. It would have been nice to see him out there so I wish he would have hooked up with some of us.
Yeah, it was a high end century! Very, very nice though. I still have no clue how many tandems did the Gran so that is a bit frustrating. Separating that would have been nice.
Thanks for the lesson on GPS and garmins and all! I still don't get it!  





ukbloke said:


> While on the subject of data, I thought the timing aspect of Levi's Gran Fondo was pretty lame. The results  appear to just aggregate everyone into one enormous spreadsheet regardless of which ride they were on. Separating the results by the different distance events should be obvious! It would also have been nice to split them by female/male or by age group too. I would have thought that there would have been a timed hill for added interest.
> 
> Frankly, other than the mass start (which has its pro's and con's), I don't really see much difference between this Gran Fondo and a well-organized century ride.


----------



## ukbloke

cheddarlove said:


> They 'tweeted' in the newsletter they sent out that many people switched rides while they were on it.


That's always going to happen. Riders will change their mind on the day. Also, since there was a limited field size for the 100 mile ride, some riders are inevitably going to sign up for the shorter ride and switch. The Death Ride registration, for example, doesn't differentiate between riders intending to ride 1 pass or those aiming for 5 - same price for all.



cheddarlove said:


> I also believe they were supposed to time people to the top of Kings Ridge but I guess that didn't pan out either.


Yeah, that requires more timing check-points and the equipment isn't cheap (even to rent), and requires people to set it up and run it. It sounds like they aimed pretty high but delivered the minimum for a timed ride (starting gun to rider finish). I can completely understand why because of the logistics involved. The dilemma from a participant's point of view is that if you ride for your best overall time, you don't get to enjoy the rest stops ...


----------



## Gnarly 928

*So, so far just a paid century ride that wants to be a Cyclo-sportif?*



ukbloke said:


> While on the subject of data, I thought the timing aspect of Levi's Gran Fondo was pretty lame.
> 
> Separating the results by the different distance events should be obvious! It would also have been nice to split them by female/male or by age group too. I would have thought that there would have been a timed hill for added interest.
> 
> Frankly, other than the mass start (which has its pro's and con's), I don't really see much difference between this Gran Fondo and a well-organized century ride.


 Interesting thread. I've looked at the "results" page too and it's not very well done. Looking at these type events and how they are done in Europe might have helped the organizers of this one do a little better job. 

It's my understanding that those Euro-events are very competitive. Seriously ridden by competitive riders who train for them all year. Timed with precision. 

Love to see more of that kind of event in the US. Maybe next season someone will step up and offer some. The Levi GF was billed as such, but it looks like they didn't come even close. I've heard the Tour de Tucson may be closer to the Euro-events..

.When cyclists contemplate putting out a maximum effort (~race-pace) in the expectation of seeing their results compared with others, it'd be nice to know the organizers have it together enough to deliver a valid event with accurate timing. With a little homework, in this age of digital marvels, it's do-able. 

Organized Centuries and Charity Rides are a dime a dozen now-a-days in the States. There is an "event-gap" between wheel to wheel USA Cycling sanctioned races and these paid Centuries..It's be great to have opportunities to compete on another level besides wheel to wheel categorized races..Events where everyone could plop down the fee and ride the course...see how they do compared to everyone else..


----------



## thenoodleator

cheddarlove said:


> It is definitely a work in progress. They 'tweeted' in the newsletter they sent out that many people switched rides while they were on it.
> So if Noodle signed up for the Medio but at the split decided to do the Gran instead, I think it made it too difficult for them to separate everyone at this time.


Hey, why you calling me out? I signed up for the Medio and did the Medio. It never even occurred to me to switch, I'm such a rube and rule follower.


----------



## Thing Two

It was a fun ride, but I am a bit disappointed in the timing results. They should have anticipated the problems of people jumping divisions or just gone ahead and broken them out as best they could by the three groups. I rode the thing hard, minimized my time at the rest stops and don't really have any idea how well I did overall. Maybe I should have stayed at Tin Barn long enough to finish that ham and cheese sandwich, which tasted awesome at the time by the way.
Regardless, I will do it again next year in a heartbeat.


----------



## ukbloke

Thing Two said:


> It was a fun ride, but I am a bit disappointed in the timing results. They should have anticipated the problems of people jumping divisions or just gone ahead and broken them out as best they could by the three groups. I rode the thing hard, minimized my time at the rest stops and don't really have any idea how well I did overall. Maybe I should have stayed at Tin Barn long enough to finish that ham and cheese sandwich, which tasted awesome at the time by the way.
> Regardless, I will do it again next year in a heartbeat.


They could do a better job even with the limited data they have. Firstly, they should have rider's age, sex and standard bike versus tandem on file and they can easily create divisions to add interest to the results. Secondly, they can attempt to account for riders who ride a different route to the one that they were registered for:

1. If you rode a longer route than you registered for, they should simply categorize you in the original registered route (ie. the obvious thing to do). You will get a much slower time than if you rode the right route. This seems like a completely fair way to treat the situation. You poached a more expensive ride, you get a bad time in the results for the route you should have ridden!

2. If you rode a shorter route than you registered for (which is reasonable, anyone should be allowed to bail on a longer route on the day), they should just filter out people with unreasonable times. For example, if you registered for the Gran but actually rode the Medio, and then had a faster time than say Scott Nydam, obviously you didn't ride the Gran and should get thrown out of the Gran results! To fix this for the future they really need a timing point that is just on the Gran Fondo route.

If they are serious about making this a "Gran Fondo" event in the style of the storied European events they do really need to make an effort. If they take the timing/ranking seriously then so will the riders and it will become more competitive each year. If they don't make an effort the competitive riders will lose confidence, and it will turn into another century ride. 

On the other hand, they do need to take some care not to turn it into an all-out race because they're running it on open roads ...


----------



## cheddarlove

ukbloke said:


> They could do a better job even with the limited data they have. Firstly, they should have rider's age, sex and standard bike versus tandem on file and they can easily create divisions to add interest to the results. Secondly, they can attempt to account for riders who ride a different route to the one that they were registered for:
> 
> 1. If you rode a longer route than you registered for, they should simply categorize you in the original registered route (ie. the obvious thing to do). You will get a much slower time than if you rode the right route. This seems like a completely fair way to treat the situation. You poached a more expensive ride, you get a bad time in the results for the route you should have ridden!
> 
> 2. If you rode a shorter route than you registered for (which is reasonable, anyone should be allowed to bail on a longer route on the day), they should just filter out people with unreasonable times. For example, if you registered for the Gran but actually rode the Medio, and then had a faster time than say Scott Nydam, obviously you didn't ride the Gran and should get thrown out of the Gran results! To fix this for the future they really need a timing point that is just on the Gran Fondo route.
> 
> If they are serious about making this a "Gran Fondo" event in the style of the storied European events they do really need to make an effort. If they take the timing/ranking seriously then so will the riders and it will become more competitive each year. If they don't make an effort the competitive riders will lose confidence, and it will turn into another century ride.
> 
> On the other hand, they do need to take some care not to turn it into an all-out race because they're running it on open roads ...


Hear Hear! Great suggestions. I think I'll send this page to Bike Monkey.
Noodle, I was using your name merely as an example as opposed to using joe blow or so & so!


----------



## .steve

ukbloke said:


> ... You poached a more expensive ride, you get a bad time in the results for the route you should have ridden! ...



I thought registration for all rides were the same price, increases in registration pricing occurred as the date of the ride got closer.


----------



## ukbloke

.steve said:


> I thought registration for all rides were the same price, increases in registration pricing occurred as the date of the ride got closer.


OK, thanks for the info, I didn't know that. The main point still stands - if you registered for the Picolo or Medio but switched to the Gran on the day, that was entirely your choice and against the rules of the event. You shouldn't be surprised that your overall time is attributed to the ride that you registered for.


----------



## Pokey

I agree - at least split the time out by Picollo, Medio or Gran.


----------

