# Language please!



## Passion For Pedalling (13 Feb 2012)

What is the difference between a sportive and an audax?

I have done many 100km sportives...am worried about the word 'audax'

Are they faster, these audaxes??


----------



## TheDoctor (13 Feb 2012)

Not really.
Sportives have signposting, feed stations, mechanical support and a broom wagon. That's why they cost £20 or more
Audaxes have none of these things. You get a route sheet, and there's a time limit and a few control points where you have to sign in. That's about it. Your bike breaks - you fix it, or you get yourself home. There's a much greater emphasis on self-reliance, and that's why they're cheap.


----------



## Scilly Suffolk (13 Feb 2012)

The other difference (in my experience) is that Sportives are frequented by middle-aged "lycra-louts" on "what's the most expensive one" bikes and little road sense, chucking their rubbish in the hedge (because Banana skins rot, so that's ok), living out their road race fantasies; whereas the Audax rider is an altogether more earnest and responsible type.


----------



## TheDoctor (13 Feb 2012)

It's rare to see Brooks and Carradice on a Sportive, certainly...


----------



## Scoosh (13 Feb 2012)

Sportives  are usually charity, commercial or a mixture of the two.

Audax 




 are run by volunteer organisers, come under the auspices of AudaxUK, and are aimed at encouraging people to get into 'long distance' cycling ('long distance' starts at 200km).

There is a good guide to all things audax here.

HTH


----------



## G-Zero (14 Feb 2012)

Scoosh said:


> There is a good guide to all things audax here.HTH


 
Thanks for that link Scoosh, I found it very informative and answered most of the questions I was asking on this subject earlier http://www.cyclechat.net/threads/bike-suitability-for-challenges.95241/


----------



## Banjo (14 Feb 2012)

Audax is pretty much what you make of it. If you want fast there will be someone up the front to ride with if you want slow then team up with me at the back.

On 200km rides the minimum average speed is about 15 kph maximum usually 30 kmph the clock keeps running during food /rest stops etc so you need to ride a good bit faster than those speeds to keep up the average.

In my experience Audax is much more of a social activity than Sportives. Audaxers are more likely to have lunch in a pub chatting with other riders than to suck lunch out of a gel wrapper on the move.

Audax times arent published anywhere.You get a list of the successful finishers in alphabetical order.I am sure there is a bit of informal racing goes on at the front of the field but at my level its all about completing the ride and enjoying the day.


----------



## Beaker39 (14 Feb 2012)

Jimmy The Whiskers said:


> The other difference (in my experience) is that Sportives are frequented by middle-aged "lycra-louts" on "what's the most expensive one" bikes and little road sense, chucking their rubbish in the hedge (because Banana skins rot, so that's ok), living out their road race fantasies; whereas the Audax rider is an altogether more earnest and responsible type.


 
Spot on!


----------



## PpPete (14 Feb 2012)

Banjo said:


> Audax is pretty much what you make of it. If you want fast there will be someone up the front to ride with if you want slow then team up with me at the back.
> 
> On 200km rides the minimum average speed is about 15 kph maximum usually 30 kmph the clock keeps running during food /rest stops etc so you need to ride a good bit faster than those speeds to keep up the average.
> 
> ...


 
^^^^
this

But beware, it is horribly addictive. No sooner have you done a few at 200km than you start wondering what 300km will be like... and so on, and then you want to seriously mad things like the Bryan Chapman Memorial (Chepstow to Menai and back, 600 km with a 40 hour time limit) or the LEL


----------



## DiddlyDodds (15 Feb 2012)

Sportive riders have shiny new whistles and bells 
Audax Riders have beards and a pipe


----------



## e-rider (15 Feb 2012)

Jimmy The Whiskers said:


> The other difference (in my experience) is that Sportives are frequented by middle-aged "lycra-louts" on "what's the most expensive one" bikes and little road sense, chucking their rubbish in the hedge (because Banana skins rot, so that's ok), living out their road race fantasies; whereas the Audax rider is an altogether more earnest and responsible type.


 
there is perhaps some (a lot) of truth in this statement, however, I ride sportives and don't fall into any of the above. I would certainly NOT recommend 'group' riding on sportives due to the lack of riding skills that exist amongst many of these middle aged 'lycra louts'. However, I plod along for the 100 miles or so on my own and really enjoy the signed routes etc. Annoys me when some random gets on my wheel though - excuse me, do you like looking at a stangers arse or what?

For some reason, a newbie on a very expensive bike seems to annoy most people. I personally don't care at all as long as they stay away from me - especially on descents. After 25 years as a serious cyclist I was more offended when my new bike was descibed as 'entry level' especially after spending over £1K on it!


----------



## Baggy (15 Feb 2012)

DiddlyDodds said:


> Sportive riders have shiny new whistles and bells
> Audax Riders have beards and a pipe


Am very disappointed that in several years of Audaxing I've yet to see anyone smoking a pipe.


----------



## Scilly Suffolk (16 Feb 2012)

tundragumski said:


> there is perhaps some (a lot) of truth in this statement, however, I ride sportives and don't fall into any of the above...


I was generalising for (hopefully) comedic effect.

I like the idea of a Sportive: a good long ride with a bit of back-up and all the organsation done by someone else. However, they attract too many "weekend warriors" who treat them as races/closed road events and show little consideration for other road users, both two and four wheeled.

I also found the charity ones (I'm thinking particularly of Action Medical Research) heavily commercialised with the full cost not obvious and really very expensive.


----------



## e-rider (16 Feb 2012)

Jimmy The Whiskers said:


> I was generalising for (hopefully) comedic effect.
> 
> I like the idea of a Sportive: a good long ride with a bit of back-up and all the organsation done by someone else. However, they attract too many "weekend warriors" who treat them as races/closed road events and show little consideration for other road users, both two and four wheeled.
> 
> I also found the charity ones (I'm thinking particularly of Action Medical Research) heavily commercialised with the full cost not obvious and really very expensive.


 
AMR rides always get critisized for being expensive. However, you can't expect the organisers of these events to pay themselves National Minimum Wage of £6.08 per hour. How many of the people calling these events expensive actually earn minimum wage themselves, or would be prepared to work for minimum wage? Probably close to none! The same people complain that bike shops charge too much for repairs, but expect fully trained mechanics to work for £6 per hour.
All of these people are entitled to earn a decent salary; which means the goods/services offered will cost more than peanuts.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (16 Feb 2012)

tundragumski said:


> AMR rides always get critisized for being expensive. However, you can't expect the organisers of these events to pay themselves National Minimum Wage of £6.08 per hour. How many of the people calling these events expensive actually earn minimum wage themselves, or would be prepared to work for minimum wage? Probably close to none! The same people complain that bike shops charge too much for repairs, but expect fully trained mechanics to work for £6 per hour.
> All of these people are entitled to earn a decent salary; which means the goods/services offered will cost more than peanuts.


Yes true but... AMR use loads of unpaid volunteers to staff their rides. (I used to be one)


----------



## ColinJ (16 Feb 2012)

tundragumski said:


> there is perhaps some (a lot) of truth in this statement, however, I ride sportives and don't fall into any of the above. I would certainly NOT recommend 'group' riding on sportives due to the lack of riding skills that exist amongst many of these middle aged 'lycra louts'. However, I plod along for the 100 miles or so on my own and really enjoy the signed routes etc. Annoys me when some random gets on my wheel though - excuse me, do you like looking at a stangers arse or what?
> 
> For some reason, a newbie on a very expensive bike seems to annoy most people. I personally don't care at all as long as they stay away from me - especially on descents. After 25 years as a serious cyclist I was more offended when my new bike was descibed as 'entry level' especially after spending over £1K on it!


If you don't want to ride in a group and just plod along anyway, why bother with sportives in the first place? Use the money saved by not entering 3 or 4 sportives to buy a GPS, and then you wouldn't have to bother about route signage either!


----------



## e-rider (16 Feb 2012)

ColinJ said:


> If you don't want to ride in a group and just plod along anyway, why bother with sportives in the first place? Use the money saved by not entering 3 or 4 sportives to buy a GPS, and then you wouldn't have to bother about route signage either!


 
I like the sense of occasion and having a specific event to motivate me to train, otherwise I just sit on my arse a lot. I don't go in for the group riding thing though, although it's nice to see the other cyclists out on the road. I plod 100 miles at an average speed of 17-18mph - so perhaps not everyones idea of a plod!


----------



## Fab Foodie (16 Feb 2012)

tundragumski said:


> - excuse me, do you like looking at a stangers arse or what?


 Errr, sometimes ....


----------



## ColinJ (16 Feb 2012)

tundragumski said:


> I like the sense of occasion and having a specific event to motivate me to train, otherwise I just sit on my arse a lot. I don't go in for the group riding thing though, although it's nice to see the other cyclists out on the road.


I understand those feelings, but decided that forum rides and audaxes were much cheaper ways to achieve a similar result.


tundragumski said:


> I plod 100 miles at an average speed of 17-18mph - so perhaps not everyones idea of a plod!


That's about the speed I used to average on the Manchester 100. Plodding compared to the fit riders, maybe, but fast compared to the slower ones!


----------



## 172traindriver (16 Feb 2012)

User13710 said:


> I've just started Audaxing, and I have neither beard nor pipe - women are allowed to join in you know


 
Good for you. Hopefully many more women to join in.


----------



## e-rider (16 Feb 2012)

ColinJ said:


> I understand those feelings, but decided that forum rides and audaxes were much cheaper ways to achieve a similar result.
> 
> That's about the speed I used to average on the Manchester 100. Plodding compared to the fit riders, maybe, but fast compared to the slower ones!


 
Exactly, speed is relative. I have ridden many audaxes myself many years ago - they have quite a different feel to sportives. The audaxes I used to ride felt more like club runs. Anyway, the good news is that as the sport of cycling has grown massively over the last decade, there is now a wide range of events to choose from, so something for everyone and every occasion.


----------



## e-rider (16 Feb 2012)

Fab Foodie said:


> Errr, sometimes ....


 I forgot to include the word 'hairy'


----------



## Fab Foodie (16 Feb 2012)

tundragumski said:


> I forgot to include the word 'hairy'


 I'll get back to you on that one ....


----------



## 172traindriver (16 Feb 2012)

tundragumski said:


> Exactly, speed is relative. I have ridden many audaxes myself many years ago - they have quite a different feel to sportives. The audaxes I used to ride felt more like club runs. Anyway, the good news is that as the sport of cycling has grown massively over the last decade, there is now a wide range of events to choose from, so something for everyone and every occasion.


 
I too have done both, and agree with what you say, the sportive crowd tend to be a lot more bling and weekend warriors, whereas the audaxers are a more sociable club run orientated crowd.
Don't get me wrong groups can form and the audax can get competitive. I like the audaxes earlier on in the year, such as the Beacon Snowdrop this saturday in Worcestershire, I use the heavier winter bike so quite enjoy going along at a steadier pace.
When I have done the sportive rides it can be good to get in with a quicker group and get round quicker, but as others have said whilst some people may have the newest top of the range bikes, some of them have minimal riding skills and you have to sometimes choose your group carefully.


----------



## Falwheeler (16 Feb 2012)

> What is the difference between a sportive and an audax?


Usually about £20


----------

