E-Bike racing is pointless - Discuss

[flecc]

The competitive mentality does nothing (that I can think of) to promote better understanding or wellbeing.

Stuart.

Quite the opposite indeed!

One of my favourite comments is that "sportsman" is a contradiction in terms. Many are anything but sporting in the wider meaning of the word.

Having have my skull split open with a housebrick when a kid by one of these competitive "sportsmen" in my own team for not being perceived as making enough effort in a casual match, my views are somewhat biased. I've never seen much to show that view is generally wrong though, far too many competitive types at all levels being little better than savages when anything doesn't go their way.
.

 

[Tiberius]

Oh coops, flecc,

You aren't being cynical are you? This is dangerously close to arguing that all sport is evil.

I'm certainly not in favour of competition getting so fierce that it rivals warfare, but I am saying that if you stick the label "competition" on something, then you should at least ensure it is a fair and proper competition.

Nick

 

[flecc]

I agree Nick, and of course I'm not cynical about all sport and sports people, many very fine people by any judgment. It's just that I'm not inclined to be over the top with the support and hero worship that goes in association with sport and competition and prefer to make judgment without emotion.

Therefore I always liked Damon Hill's comment on Michael Schumacher:

"Beneath that cold exterior beats a heart of pure stone".
.

 

[Tiberius]

Ah, yes, I was forgetting about the excesses of the fans. Probably not a problem until the e-bike scene grows a little more, though.

Nick

 

[coops]

I would never want to make that argument Nick, and I see self-improvement & striving for excellence aswell as fairness and good humour in the most stressful & difficult circumstances as noteworthy qualities.

My comment was general, but applies in the context of what can be gained in terms of understanding of ebikes or wellbeing of riders from competitive racing: I can't see that any information can be gleaned from the exercise that isn't already available by other, easier means, and for a racer it certainly isn't 'fun'.

So what it comes down to is: an ebike race is competitive, its not 'fun' (as most people undertstand the term) and it doesn't tell you which bike is best.

Its a race & the one who, in conjunction with his bike, was fastest, wins...

I'm trying hard to think of what other point there is to gain from it, but I can't see one yet, unless you follow the 'its not the winning but the taking part' mentality, in which case there is much to be gained in both understanding & wellbeing, both of which are infinitely more constructive & usefully applied than solely having come 'first' in a race...

I've always held that any serious endeavour should have rules and regulations to ensure fair play and that applies especially to sports/games otherwise all the exertion really is for nothing & that surely tests the good temper of the most sporting (in the true sense) individuals!

Stuart.

 

[the_killjoy]

Maybe all the competitors should be over 70 and 15 stone to ensure most of the effort comes from the bike.

 

[coops]

On further consideration & in less cynical mode I think if the objective is to show what can be achieved by an ebike & rider not at someone else's expense, and carried out in a good-humoured & sensible, well-regulated environment, then there is a point to it: I prefer to view it as an event in which each individual rider & bike try to set & achieve their own realistic goals and there just happens to be one who finishes soonest, rather than it being an outright race per se.

I recall Wai Won Ching saying in his original proposal for an Ezee Torq vs Kalkhoff Pro-connect challenge to David Henshaw on the TofB Stage 3, for example, that they agreed a max time limit of 8hrs and...

Each does it the way he thinks best and to show what man and an e-bike could do.

...which seems a no-nonsense, straightforward approach.

As to how to decide on what rules are needed for ebike racing in general, thats a more complicated matter and depends rather on the requirements & objectives e.g. is it on public or private roads, is it to show what a road-legal ebike/rider combo can do? Hopefully a modicum of common sense will be used by all concerned though.

Stuart.

 

[burncycle]

At the end of the day though, we all know.
"ebikes rule"
Apart from a few odd ebikes, all ebike owners are winners.

 

[Tiberius]

On further consideration & in less cynical mode I think if the objective is to show what can be achieved by an ebike & rider not at someone else's expense, and carried out in a good-humoured & sensible, well-regulated environment, then there is a point to it:

Hi Stuart,

I think the "not at someone else's expense" is a good rule for anything.

Maybe there has been some confusion arising from the over-use of the word "fun". It can mean fun as in not serious or fun as in enjoyable, and its important to be clear which meaning is in the viewfinder.

So if I may now proceed to beat the word "fun" to death (in a wholely non-competitive and compassionate fashion).... From the point of view of a fun-runner, an event is possibly not enjoyable if it is taken too seriously. But I was also arguing that from the point of view if a serious entrant, then the event is only enjoyable if it is well run. The racer therefore, when he hears the word "fun", will ironically conclude that the event may not be enjoyable. This does not necessarily make him a sourpuss or a cynic, or uber-competitive, just someone who has been let down before. It is one of the tasks of an organiser to balance the needs of these two types of participant in an event.

Nick

(No words were harmed in the making of this post)

 

[coops]

LOL Beating 'fun' to death?! You killjoy, Nick!

Fun-running is a good comparison I think - look at organised running/distance events for example, competitors free to race, or just 'fun-run', but the event carefully planned & carried out and even those running for 'fun' or sponsored for charities are at least being serious on some level, albeit not necessarily in a mutually competitive sense.

I think thats the key point of confusion, 'fun' running implying 'I'm doing it for myself & possibly such-and-such cause', while people who say "its only a bit of fun..." are usually hiding their competitivity & covering their behinds in the event they don't come first...

Perhaps we should adopt the term 'fun-biking' as an umbrella term, then plan events similaly to fun-runs so that either type of 'fun' is catered for in the same way, as you say, Nick?

PS The worst case scenario for fun-biking is an event where the organiser's objective is said to be to 'have a bit of fun' and serious racing isn't really allowed for when, in reality, there is a hidden agenda to race - I've not attended Presteigne but it sounds like the rally is becoming more like that now.

Stuart.

 

[essexman]

This is a nice debate

I reckon any event like this is a good thing. It does three things:
-Publicises ebikes
-Tests ebikes under pressure (good for ebike)
-Increases competition and innovation

All three of those are good for us a ebike users.

Of course these events are a bit silly and are just a bit of fun, but they have their serious side as well.

 

[Haku]

Perhaps we should adopt the term 'fun-biking' as an umbrella term, then plan events similaly to fun-runs so that either type of 'fun' is catered for in the same way, as you say, Nick?

PS The worst case scenario for fun-biking is an event where the organiser's objective is said to be to 'have a bit of fun' and serious racing isn't really allowed for when, in reality, there is a hidden agenda to race - I've not attended Presteigne but it sounds like the rally is becoming more like that now.

As we're using ebikes the term would be "fun-ebiking" which would lead to some interesting discussions when say you're going to enter a "funny biking" event

I didn't think there would be so much competitiveness in the Presteigne rally, quite a few of the faster (than me) riders had obviously been in bike races before as they were shouting to riders ahead of them which side they were about to overtake them on - something my brother said "oh yeah, that's usual for racing" as he's a downhill mountain biker.

I wish I'd ridden with the throttle restriction off in the rally, I'd have had a decent chance against the faster riders.

 

[JohnInStockie]

You've got me thinking on this Tibs. Yes I can see how the 'terms and conditions' need to be defined, but we also do not want to stifle innovation. So for the ebike 'race' perhaps a rule like....'standard production model, but all but the motor can be modified by the rider as they see fit'?

That way if anyone wants to derestrict, or alter cogs, change wheels for lighter, remove everything but the bare minimum they can, but the motor must be the motor on the standard production model, and no other motor is allowed, and only 1 standard battery.

Is that reasonable? Just thinking that that would still leave quite a lot to the rider, and after all, these are power assisted arent they.

John

 

[Tiberius]

Thanks for the comments and the contributions, everyone - I think we are having a good productive debate here.

I will post some further ideas tomorrow; its Friday night and I'm going out.

Take care,

Nick

 

[Wisper Bikes]

I need also to respond to something that David from Wisper wrote in another thread:

What we really need is a team of unbiased riders with exactly the same weight, strength, stamina and intelligence..... but until such a bike riding robot is invented I think we are stuck with bulging mussels and lots of lycra.

Surely it wouldn't be that difficult with the aid of a running machine with incline capabilities and a motor to turn the crank to simulate a riders effort to make an ebike test rig?​

David, you are absolutely right in what you say. But surely that is something that should be going on in the R & D department of a manufacturer.

Nick

Hi Nick

Of course you are correct and we all test our bikes to give accurate specs on range, however manufacturers test results may just be just a tiny bit biased?

I was simply suggesting that if anyone wanted to run a more scientific independent test it would not be very expensive or difficult to set up.

Best regards David

 

[Tiberius]

We've talked about what I call the consumer comparison test angle, and the fun and enjoyment issue. What I want to do now is to look at the question of whether it is the rider or the machine that is being tested in the white heat of competition.

This is getting down to the meaning and validity of the exercise, the point, if you like.

Let's be perfectly clear that an e-bike race where the outcome depends largely on the riders' physical input is pointless. As a race in itself it may be a valid test of the riders, but to run it as an e-bike race is pointless. It would make as much sense to make them carry battery shaped ballast and cardboard motors. But we are trying here to look beyond this simple observation, and I for one, firmly believe an e-bike race can be set up so as to have meaning and validity, a point, in fact.

It was suggested earlier that a competition with identical machines and that therefore tested the riders' skill would have a place. Obviously testing the riders' physical prowess brings us full circle to the original objection, but could a race or trial be set up to test their skill? Suppose there was no pedalling allowed and riders had to use their skill in husbanding the power to finish the course.

There is the germ of an idea here, but I think it needs to wait until we have standard batteries or more technology in place for monitoring them. What I'm interested in is the more traditional form of racing - balls out and wide open throttle.

Nick

 

[the_killjoy]

Maybe that's the answer, each rider has to compete on a provided selection of bikes ~ this should make it possible to compare the bikes and the riders. Assuming that the riders will to win exceeds their loyalty to a particular make.

 

[Tiberius]

So how does one set up an e-bike race so that it tests the bike rather than the rider? Or, rather, so that the machine's contribution is more important than the rider's physical power.

Phrased like that, the answer becomes clearer. It may never be possible to fully discount the rider, but making him a minor component is possible.

An e-bike operates over a range of conditions - different speeds, above and below cut off (if there is one), hill climbing, etc. There are some regimes where the motor power dominates, and some where the rider power dominates. All that is required is to configure the race so that it emphasises the right parts of the envelope and avoids the wrong ones. It really is that simple.

For instance, at 20 mph on the flat on a UK road legal bike, it is all rider power. But the same bike climbing a steep hill might put out a peak power of 500 W, compared to the rider at 100 W.

So the very worst thing is a simple course on the flat, with no slowing down and accelerating. Restricted bikes are pedalled above their 15 mph cut off speed and de-restricted ones are pedalled up above the voltage cut off speed.

But consider another type of course; alternating hill climbs and descents. If the climbs are anything other than trivial, then the motor contribution dominates on the way up, even over professional muscle. Going down the other side, we are probably above the speed that even a de-restricted motor can contribute. The motor power will be nil, but then the rider's input is negligible too. Gravity is doing all the work.

An uphill and downhill course works for both restricted and de-restricted bikes, there is meaning and validity to the exercise. The important things are now the bike performance and the rider skill. Suddenly most of the questions are answered - there is a point.

It looks like it really is that simple. And that was only one idea for a race - we must be able to dream up others.

Nick

PS. The uphill and downhill course is not just a theoretical exercise, it is not so far removed from what a few of us are doing next month on the Tour of Britain course. This was the challenge laid down by Mr Ching; initially he got a cynical reception, but when I started thinking in detail about how best to get round the course, I suddenly caught on and signed up. Mr Ching was unfairly criticised for what we should now be viewing as an inspired suggestion.

 

[JohnInStockie]

Hmm not sure it is that simple Nick. What you suggest sounds like all that is needed is a motorised scooter.

Why have pedals on it at all if the rider is completely discounted? It would be a completely pointless exercise as it wouldnt say anything about the bike-type-thing that was powering up hills and free-rolling down them.

John

 

[Tiberius]

Hmm not sure it is that simple Nick. What you suggest sounds like all that is needed is a motorised scooter.

Why have pedals on it at all if the rider is completely discounted? It would be a completely pointless exercise as it wouldnt say anything about the bike-type-thing that was powering up hills and free-rolling down them.

John

Hi John,

Isn't that first point a bit like saying that a faster machine will go round the course faster? Motorised scooters, or rocket powered tea trays, for that matter, would either be banned or run in a separate class.

The point about pedals is interesting. For throttle controlled e-bikes at least, one option for a race would be to insist on no pedalling. Then it is mainly a test of the machine.

But if you want a pure test of the machine, you should have robots doing it in a lab, while we all stand around in white coats.

The uphill and downhill race works as a meaningful sport, rather than pure research. Like all such sport it is a test of machine and rider, but it stops the rider dominating. I think it strikes the right combination between machine and rider - somewhere around 80/20 maybe.

Nick