OK, I know the event isn't supposed to be a competition, but having never done one before, I would like to know how my time compared to everyone else's. Problem is the results online have all the distances lumped together, making it difficult to compare times.

Does anyone know which race numbers were doing the 100km, or alternatively where some 'sorted' results can be found?

3 fig. numbers = 100km, 1000's = 75km, 2000's = 50km, 3000's = 25km. Impossible to sort them out though as you don't know who did the full distance (ie I think about 20 folk on the 100 came in before Nick Craig which is unlikely…)

Rats, should just have asked when i finished then, was a little bit startled by the camera being shoved in my face though!

The organisers apologise on their site for not being able to provide the results in a more user friendly format. There are 2 names in CAPS possibly highlighting fastest and slowest (one is Nick Craig….)

If it helps
6 Hours for the 85k would have put you about 75th
7 Hours would have put you about 150th
7 1/2 Hours would have put you about 200th

I came in in just over 6 hours (6h5min I think) The guy said I came in 87th but I don't know if that includes the people who cut it short.

Number 18 if it helps benchmark the rest of the list.

jonb, they had no way of telling who cut it short as it wasn't a race so marshalls were not taking notes on numbers.

That guy in blue was a star and yes he was counting the 100km riders.

Down the last climb he said I was 113th and I dropped 2 places after seeing him, so the 115th came home in 6hours 38mins.

He counted me in at 63rd on the top of the 2nd climb, but a split tyre and bodge dropped me down the field, but hell it wasn't a race.

4h55mins was 15th across the line in the full distance. Since the 85 differed from the other routes you can work out who did the full distance based upon the photos available online, not foolproof though and also could be seriously time consuming!

They painted your number if you turned off early so they would know who had entered but not done the full 85km.

painted numbers were only for 75k route as it doubled back

Well, I'm well chuffed because it seems I was first girly in the 50k by about 15 mins (Sub 4hours) so……………..YAY for me!!!!!! 😀

Does anyone know the 'legal' reason they state on the site as why the results are published like that? Is it possibly something to do with insurance being higher if you call it a 'race'?

I think it is something to do with racing 2 wheeled vehicles on bridleways……..I think.

To gain access to bridleways in England they have to say it is not a race. As you are not legally allowed to race on them. But Scotland doesn't have bridleways, we found this out after talking to the organisors. Anyway, it's not a race as the first home doesn't get a trophey, money or a prize.

Also, I suspect that if you have it as a 'race' then it needs to be licensed with British Cycling, which would cost more – e.g. each rider would need to be licensed.

I am surprised that they didnt note who turned off early. Top Dog – I think you are wrong, the blue dot was painted on if you shortened to the 45 km route, red dot if you shortened to the 75 km route. Wouldnt have been hard to note down which route you actually did when you crossed the finish line.

Painted numbers are for folk who bailed on the full distance they entered. No need to paint any from the start as the numbering clearly states the category entered – see my post above.

Agreed, i think British Cycling would charge a higher rider 'levy' if it was classed as a race rather than an off-road 'sportive'. I entered the 70km and rode the 70km after deciding not to turn left at the split and do the 85k. Got red-dotted there still.

Stu – yeah – thats what I thought. I bailed (the shame!) and I got painted.

Ah well – who cares – its just supposed to be a fun day out – I was never going to win anyway!

Cheers guys, shall have to settle for being happy with my time regardless.

Brilliant event, looking forward to entering similar in the near future!

I have been told Nick Craig was the fastest in the longest distance, followed by an Aussie pro and Adrian Lawerence was fourth fastest if that helps anyone ❓