# Route anomilies



## steveindenmark (3 Mar 2019)

I am new to audax and have just been looking at a route that has just been published for an upcoming 200.

I have noticed that there are some anomilies in the mapping. Is this a regular audax thing, or should I let the organiser know? 

Here is an example


----------



## Ian H (3 Mar 2019)

It's the kind of thing that happens when a ridden, live-recorded track is used. I always plot mine on the screen. But it shouldn't cause too many problems for the riders. You can always edit out the extraneous bits. I find it useful to check any 3rd-party files and edit as necessary.


----------



## Aravis (4 Mar 2019)

On the few Audaxes I've entered, I've also been surprised to see things like this. It's all too easy to create unwanted spurs when plotting routes in RideWithGPS, and before loading onto my GPS I always scrutinize the result very carefully to remove them. Bizarrely, on the last Audax I entered (I didn't start in the end due to the extreme heat) the supplied route was largely accurate, but reversed.

Personally I would always create my own version of a route, mirroring (and correcting as necessary) what has been supplied. I'm then confident it will work with my equipment, something I couldn't know if I were to use someone else's file created by methods unknown. If this is what people typically do, then it doesn't really matter if the organiser's version contains anomalies, provided the intention is clear.


----------



## steveindenmark (4 Mar 2019)

Aravis. I am currently planning my Transcontinental Race with RWGPS and you are right. It behaves itself most of the time but does kick off these little spurs for no reason. Sometimes it will add a large spur. It means going over a 4000km route again and again with a very fine eye. Im sure I will still get caught out. You get to see mistakes very quickly.


----------



## Aravis (4 Mar 2019)

@steveindenmark I don't think it's for no reason - I think it's usually when you click slightly off your intended road on what may be no more than a dead-end track; if it regards that as a valid place to go it will assume you want to go up and down it. Instead of snapping back to the main road it creates a spur which is often obscured by the circular control point when in edit mode. It's only when you finish editing and scrutinize the route in view mode that they become apparent. You then have to go back to edit to correct it, then ideally start checking again from the beginning in case you accidentally changed something else...

It's possible to get a bit obsessive about it!


----------



## steveindenmark (4 Mar 2019)

You may be right. I am doing so a big distance in 300km sections, I just want to crack on. I have certainly got obsessive. But am enjoying it.

I also double check with Street View, Strava, Strava heat maps and Komoot. I will recognise a lot of the route when I ride it.

I like RWGPS as I can modify the directions for my Wahoo Bolt and for the paper cue sheets which I will also carry.


----------



## Ajax Bay (4 Mar 2019)

steveindenmark said:


> but does kick off these little spurs for no reason. Sometimes it will add a large spur. It means going over a 4000km route again and again with a very fine eye. Im sure I will still get caught out.


Don't think it would be a good use of your time or that of the audax organiser to point these little aberrations out. In fact I rather like them on supplied gpxs. Can confuse riders who are over-reliant on their little electronic devices (a good thing).


Aravis said:


> it's usually when you click slightly off your intended road on what may be no more than a dead-end track; if it regards that as a valid place to go it will assume you want to go up and down it. Instead of snapping back to the main road it creates a spur which is often obscured by the circular control point when in edit mode.


Exactly this. On one's own plotted route, it's a sound idea to minimise the number of 'route control' clicks, and as part of the polishing process, go to edit, and run along the route at a large scale (so the spur is not obscured), checking each 'route control point' (ie where one's clicked), to check that the point is on the correct road (and not slightly off on a turning) and even on the correct side of a main road. RwGPS is my weapon of choice.
Here's this year's Bryan Chapman Memorial 600 route (my construction): https://ridewithgps.com/routes/20922029?beta=false 
Perhaps there are spurs I haven't spotted on that.


Aravis said:


> It's possible to get a bit obsessive about it!


I'll join your club, but let's describe it as the 'accuracy' club.


----------



## steverob (4 Mar 2019)

I think if there were a lot of these "spurs" on the route and it was causing it to be significantly over sized - e.g. this is meant to be a 200km Audax and once you removed them all, it turned out the distance was actually 198.5km - then I'd probably report it to the creator. But if it only meant a few hundred meters extra (and still came in above the planned distance), then I'd just correct it for your own purposes and leave it there.

But yes, I would also be a member of the accuracy club - whenever I get a route from anyone else, I always go over it with a fine toothcomb just to make sure it's correct (especially those from Garmin Connect that always send you the shortest way round roundabouts, regardless of whether it's legal or not!)


----------



## Ming the Merciless (4 Mar 2019)

There might even be some services there and it might be where they went for something to eat. So before dismissing a spur check if a control is meant to be there or a food place exists.


----------



## ColinJ (4 Mar 2019)

I have seen a few routes with those strange detours and the GPX files often have timing information in which show that the rider actually went along and then u-turned. I think they are saving their tracklogs, including any wrong turns!

I check each route on my digital OS map and further check anything odd-looking on Streetview.


----------



## Ajax Bay (4 Mar 2019)

How many 'anomiles in a millimile? A million? thread title


----------

