At the committee meeting last month we had another discussion about paid rounds. We agreed to come up with some statement about these and this is now on the club website - http://www.bobgrahamclub.org.uk/index.php?page=paid
Printable View
At the committee meeting last month we had another discussion about paid rounds. We agreed to come up with some statement about these and this is now on the club website - http://www.bobgrahamclub.org.uk/index.php?page=paid
Thanks for highlighting this Bob
has there been much uptake on the paid rounds?
I am glad to see The club take a stance here. I am sure this has been discussed previously and also along with pre marking the route etc. It seems a shame hen it becomes no more than an exec tick list for some. As Ba Ba asks though, I wonder how many people actually pay for guidance/support?
Memory might be quite hazy, but didn't one of the people/companies behind the paid rounds come on here and state his case...?
https://forum.fellrunner.org.uk/show...highlight=paid
The post above relates to it... i'm sure the owner of the site (or a similar site) posted on here and stated their point of view... if I remember correctly they made quite a robust and well-written case for it (whilst not necessarily being one I went along with)
Or maybe I just dreamt the whole thing up...
I may be wrong but I suspect the number of people who pay for a guide to do the BGR is very small indeed in the grand scheme of things. if a small number of people people want to do that, who really cares. it won't make a material difference to the footfall on those hills.
That said, I agree with the club's stance. it has to be true to its ethos and values.
So far there have been two successful paid for rounds, each with a different company. I don't know, since I don't ask, how many paid round attempts there are. It's only if they succeed that I ask and find out.
I'm not privy as to how many ask the companies about it and either don't go ahead or don't succeed. Obviously from the companies' perspective it's in their interests to only take on those likely to succeed.
It's important to note that we aren't stating no paid Rounds, just considering that such Rounds are ineligible for Club membership.
Are sponsored athletes also ineligible? ;)
Back to the lunacy of shamateurs in athletics? Not a direct comparison, but this poses all the same impossible level playing field issues.
Take racing. So is someone paying to enter a fell race disqualified from championships, on the grounds it's a paid race? Or is it only races that use paid results who are clearly employing professionals so " tainted" by " professional help" so not eligible. Should we ban races that use professionals?
Then there are sponsored athletes doing BG : are they professional , if they have an equipment companies resources behind them? Why not exclude them. Kiliam for starters if you use that thinking. Those who are self employed don't get paid to train for it. So they are pure. Those who do it in paid holidays are paid whilst there. Some lucky enough to get entire summers paid holiday. Much easier for them.
It is all total utter nonsense Bob. Meaningless.
There is mo such thing as a level playing field.
Those who live in lakes have big advantage both in access and contacts. Those who live hundreds of miles away at a massive disadvantage on both. So if I bung £50 to supporters to travel is that a problem? If I pay for a taxi to meet me at checkpoints is that a problem too? It's paid support.
Either they get round under their own steam. Or they don't.
Nothing else matters, or can matter. Because the day you question level playing field issues you will enter an impossible maze.
Who is with them is their business. Nobody else, so long as witnessed.
Fell running is so good partly because it is uncommercial compared to almost any other sport. Paying someone for the petrol they have spent is quite different from paying a company to guide you round a BGR. The club seem to be quite rightly keeping the BGR as uncommercial as is possible and realistic. if people want to pay to be guided round something let them stick to other sports/types of running etc.
I live a fair way from the lakes and I was more than willing to do the BGR in the spirit of it. The whole experience was great, people paying to be guided round the BGR have missed the point and aren't doing a real BGR.
It is not as simple as that is it?
Take Kilian who is sponsored (ie full time professional), he spends his life either training or racing. And whether or not he did, he certainly could have spent weeks receiing without any of the constraints of normal people.
Is that really compatible with the Ethos you claim? He is a member and record holder.
The ethos requires those who have their bags carried to carry bags for others. But that is not simple either for those who live far away or abroad. I will wager Killian never does his share, or perhaps not even any.
Some have a group of massively experienced supporters who do it every week and are local. Others have the only ones they know, who are pretty much as oblivious as they are.
Big advantage to former group. Route knowledge in clag does matter. And if they only way you can get it is buy it, why not: if it helps to level the playing field.
Ive seen rounds destroyed beyond redemption even before great calva because of inadequate supporters.
It seems to me it is another of these oversimplistic "feel good" rules in what is inevitably a murky world. There is no such thing as a level playing field. So why pretend there is? If supporter use a taxi they are using professional paid support. There are only shades of grey. If you have a paid physio patch you up either before or during. Ditto.
Surely all that really matters is whether they got round witnessed under their own steam. That is the challenge. Some have one supporter. Some have a dozen.
Amateur athletics got itself into a major mess when it started arguing the boundaries of what was professional or professional support. It was a mess that blighted Liz Mcolgans career, and destroyed the career of her coach.
For a short while I had thought the Kilian attempt was not relative to the BGR, until I understood how it had come about through Martin Stone trying to replicate how Billy had done his round. It only happened when Rob and Carl dropped their own plans and provided the basis of support, specifically with no sponsor involvement. A bunch of fell runners supporting another exceptional athlete, but that's just my opinion.
Wow Oracle, I agree 100% with everything you said, but did not want to put it down as I expected to get my head bitten off. I wonder what is the difference between a paid round and something like the "Dark Peak Machine" that heads around each year. One could even argue that reliance on experienced navigators, either paid or, though a club etc. would reduce the footfall on the round, due to less reccing.
I do agree with some of what you say, I just think there is enough commercialism creeping into fell running and if it can be held off then it should be. Kilian didn't pay anyone, he was helped out by a team of fell runners who gave up their time.
I also don't see why it should always be a level playing field- my attempt nearly foundered on leg 1 when my support crew cost me an hour (funnily enough from great calva to the end of leg one) but I managed to pull the time back. If I hadn't been able to though I would have been fine to accept it and just tried again albeit with a different leg 1 crew! I guess it comes down to how you see things- to me if people are paying to be dragged round the route it just becomes the same as everything else- currently the the lack of commercialism is part of the beauty of a BGR.
I'm very conflicted.
I agree with the stance taken by the club, as I respect the ethos of the club 100%. But I also agree with almost everything Oracle said. My own gut instinct is that a true round is one where you are capable of nav'ing your own way round, and having people to guide in a paid or unpaid capacity is somewhat contrary to the spirit of the whole thing. I also happen to think having someone to help you with food/bags etc is ok. SO in that respect I am also partly 'anti' to the approach of something like the DP Machine which churns out successes as long as you can cover the ground in time. But a club effort is also a beautiful thing in many instances. You can't possibly legislate for all this and please everyone, i'm not sure I could even satisfy my own conflicted criteria!!!
I respect the club for its principled clarification of its own rules of admission.
I don’t see how "what-iffery" helps anyone. I’m sure Killian won’t be pacing anyone any time soon. He’s an exceptional case, and you can’t make rules for the majority of everyday cases which also account for every exception.
If the club chooses to promote an overall ethos of community over commercialism, it isn’t required to prohibit the smallest financial transactions between Round participants. If it wasn’t a club ran by volunteers, I’m sure it could publish a long list of exactly what forms of cash transactions are and aren’t acceptable for membership, but it is, so it doesn’t.
But then those who use - or are forced to use - (semi) professional support are also exceptional cases. Just not exceptional runners. Why one exception the professional runner, not professional support?
If kiliam ( as a professional ) now shows up to support Rob, is he barred as a professional supporter? It is all a complete nonsense.
If any of the supporters are sponsored, they are to a degree professional.
And even that is a misnomer. I wager none of the " professional supporters" do this as more than a small sideline and they do it for comparative pin money. Just like race result teams.
I dislike the fact that fell racing is going same way, but it is what it is.. With paid ( so professional) race entry platforms and paid results: should those who charge for photographs be banished too?
The discrimination against support is arbitrary. And will lead to more problems than solutions.
Fell running went through this nonsense once with guide running. Doesn't need to go there again.
When I think of the amount of money I spend on BG reccies and my two (failed) attempts in retrospect would it have been cheaper to hire a preofessional guide?
It’s not clear what this sentence means.
If Rob paid Killian money for his support, then the Club may refuse to ratify this round in the future. If Rob does not pay Killian, then the Club would have no problem
This is a true fact, but one tangential to candiates paying strangers for support.
Perhaps just me, but I find these tangents confusing. My brain works a bit better when a conversation stays focused on one topic!
Maybe, maybe not, but I don’t understand how this is relevant to BGR club candidates paying strangers for support.
It’s not the broad sport of "fell running", it’s membership of the Bob Graham 24-hour club, a private club with a long-standing and published ethos.
I do not like mixed ethics: in this case allowing professional runners who ignore the ethos of support, but not allowing professional supporters is nothing short of bonkers.
It is arbitrary. Unnecessary. Vindictive. And achieves absolutely nothing for anyone. Other than making a committee "feel good" Situation normal in athletics committees generally. Does that make my position clear?
It also stops a few potential completers from doing so who do not have the connections. So who is the winner from this?
Athletics has been this way before, declaring some things professional others not to promote a warm fuzzy feeling in totally arbitrary fashion. Chariots of fire highlights the stupidity of banning professional support. Athletics got even worse from there before it got better. It never ends well.
The problem we had competing with the USSR in the seventies they were paid full time by the state, but not paid prize money. So they were deemed OK as amateurs. So were the full time coaches.
Just because they were not paid by event did not alter the fact they were paid.
Our athletes who relied on payment of prizes, or coaches paid direct by athletes were deemed professional. And barred. Or restriced. It is all the same in another guise. It is possible to define the world so clarify what is paid support. It does not make it any more sensible.
In the end all that matters did the person get round in the time, under own steam,witnessed or not?
They are just as deserving as anyone else who did the same. WHoever was with them.
If there was a problem to solve (take the pictures of the everest ridge with queueing because of commercialism) destroying the round because of paid supporters, that would need consideration on whether it is getting out of hand, although it would be hard to distinguish the pack from the same that dark peak send round! But these paid rounds are few and far between. So there is no problem to solve.
Let somebody else have a view.
Didn't Groucho Marx say something along the lines of 'I don't want to belong to any club that will have as a member'?
Therefore; if you want to do a BGR and pay people to help you to accomplish this, or (in my case - soonish) do a round solo without any fuss or fanfare (or witnesses), then so be it: well done you've done a BGR! If you want to join 'The Club' (which can and does dictate how they join and who its members are), then abide by the rules of admission by doing a witnessed, volunteer-supported round.
I'll be happy knowing how I achieved my own accomplishments, yes I'm not a member of 'The Club', but I'm a bit anti-establishment anyway and that's ok with me.
Simple.
That is the purest way to do it solo / self supported just you and your surroundings and the knowledge that your achievement has had minimal impact on the environment good luck with it and remember when you have done it you won`t be able to avoid becoming a member of the virtual BGR club that never dictates rules never meets or has dinners in fact all members just carry on with there lives happy in the knowledge that they have achieved their aim in there way and mostly never have cause to justify themselves to anybody.
Back on thread no money changes hands:cool:
There's a lot of deflection (non)arguments there @Oracle.
Whether someone is partly or wholly a sponsored athlete has nothing to do with paying someone to take you around the BGR. When I climbed the North Face of the Eiger many years ago I was on the dole. Are you suggesting that my ascent was state sponsored? After all they were paying my "wages".
Kilian Jornet knew about the BGR from several years ago (at least) when Ben Abdelnoor of this parish had a chat with him and gave him a copy of the 42 Peaks booklet. There was a thread on here wondering when he'd attempt the Round and if his sponsors would even "allow" him to attempt it since it wasn't a race and didn't have the associated hullabaloo that is a feature of events like the TdMB that he was dominant in at the time. In subsequent communication between KJ and the club it was obvious that he had respect for the ethos of the club and traditions of the Round and that he only wanted to attempt the Round with those in mind. He arrived here with one of his running friends and only got the full local help when Rob Jebb decided it was too hot for his attempt at the record (RJ is already a club member - #2035) and offered his help. He wasn't simply "muled around" either, since he carried his own kit and food for the whole Round.
As for KJ not helping others with their Round, who's to say he won't? It's an aspiration, not a requirement. I know Club Members who support lots of attempts and others who only ever did their Round with a group of mates and don't figure in any other attempt.
I've no figures how how common existing members helping others on the Round is, it's actually very difficult to work out - as an example members #1580 and #1581 are both called Peter Murphy. This is not an accidental duplication, two different runners of the same name completed their Round on the same day though one went clockwise and the other anti-clockwise. If a "Peter Murphy" appears as a supporter on a ratification form which one do I mark it against? What happens if the Peter Murphy is a different one who isn't a member or becomes a member several years down the line? There are currently over 2200 members (some of whom are deceased) do I trawl back through all the records updating each one for every new applicant?
Solo Rounds: neither I nor anyone in the committee has a problem with these, the Round is on public land after all. Since the inception of the Club it's been a requirement that your attempt be witnessed. Some people have a problem with that, others don't. I've received ratification forms with accompanying emails saying that they realise that being solo means no Club membership but it's just for the completeness of records and other similar forms with what amounts to "trust me I did it" attached.
The "I don't know anyone", lack of connections, excuse doesn't hold water either. When I made my first attempt on the Round in 2004 these forums didn't exist, Facebook had only just started up in the States so that wasn't available either. I didn't know anyone in my running club who was interested so I asked for help on the UKClimbing forums and a couple of total strangers stepped forward to help. Goodness knows how people managed before the internet. Although I'm originally from the Lakes, I'm now a couple of hours' drive away so the logistics and costs of my reccying and attempts weren't dissimilar to those living in Manchester, West Yorkshire and the like.
I'm not on Facebook but when the same posting as at the start of this thread was made on the BGR group page there was near unanimous support - there were only two (as of Easter) dissenting voices, both of whom are employed/associated with commercial concerns offering paid Rounds.
The Round itself has very few "rules", basically start and finish at the Moot Hall and traverse the 42 tops on foot within a contiguous 24 hours. The Club currently just adds the requirement for that effort to be witnessed. The proposal is whether to limit that to voluntary support/witnessing.
As a Club the Round has our name on it, any problems tend to land at our door whether they are associated with us or not, and we have to deal with it: a couple of years ago there was a Sunday Times journalist looking at problems with erosion in the Lakes and making a big deal about it - interest waned when it was pointed out that annual footfall on the Round was under 1000 when compared to 14 million day visits to the Lakes. We don't want to have a big problem to solve in the future when we are able to sort it out now. We can't stop commercial activity about the Round (maps, books, etc.) but we have a duty* to protect it for those to come.
* "Duty" sounds a bit grand but I can't think of a better word.
Just for you Graham, just for you ;)
Out of interest to mention of erosion we're now at 19 million day visits per annum, I have posed the question to the NPA, 'At what point do you say the park is full?' In 1979/80 it was between 9 and 11 million..
It will never be full, they can just flag the entire BG route with those lovely (but unfortunately necessary) flag stones we have all over the pennines. It can sustain any number of people then.
It will never be full. The increase in footfall cannot be exponential, and limitations of geography; the road infrastructure will naturally curb the rise; and most people will still only visit a very small number of the towns and hills in the lakes rather - the obvious tourist spots .
''It will never be full'' - twice! Now that did make me laugh! I think you just need to witness a Bank Holiday weekend on the roads or try parking (legally) in Keswick on most fair weather weekends, or witness the rubbish left in remote locations. It is overfull already, I don't think there is a single SSSI in the Lake District that is classed better than 'fair, deteriorating'. Anyway the BG is small change in the great scheme of things, though the anti-clockwise route was a lot less obvious when I did mine in 1985...seems like yesterday...ish.
sounds like a few prime tourist spots and towns are full (or very busy) on a few occasions a year.
i would think that the businesses and communities welcome the business from an economic perspective. especially when so many towns and high streets across the UK are on their knees and dying. shame some (a minority of) people leave litter and behave anti-socially, but that will always be the case.
in the view of many people it's a good thing that more people are able to and do enjoy leisure time in nature and places of natural beauty rather than stuck in towns, shopping centres and indoors.
To me this fails the tests of any decision.
1/ What is the problem you are trying to solve?
2/ Does it need solving at all?
3/ How does this proposal solve it? Is it the best way?
It seems to be an action devoid of purpose. Removing paid support is not solving any obvious problem.
As for detail: I answered most of those points along the way. I was supporting rounds a decade before you seemingly, when there was even less media infrastructure.
The quality of who you get on Ukclimbing is variable. I have seen other peoples rounds hopelesslty destroyed by supporters with inadequate knowledge.
Those who are connected in the lakes have a big advantage. Those who get long holidays an even bigger one. If someone wants to ensure support quality, or arrange at short notice to get such locals, why shouldnt they? The passage of a few pounds: why is it even the clubs business? Let alone of concern? They are hardly creaming big profits, or making everest type queues
The bottom line: You just allowed a professional runner to bypass the ethos and gave him membership. (which I dont have a problem with) But now to object to professional supporters once you have allowed professional contenders is to me ridiculous!!
You will never create a level playing field. The idea that "paid support" somehow unlevels the playing field is false, nor are there so many they distort numbers, In which case the only argument against paid supporters seems to be arbitrary: an attack on the individuals providing the support? Or socialist hatred of paid anything?.
Arbitrary is the only word that fits. Since it fails to solve any apparent problem. It is what committees love, or as Humphrey in yes minister would put it "means without ends"
Removing paid support might not be solving any current problem but is dealing with potential future problems laid out in my previous post. I can't foresee the future any better than anyone else but I (and the committee) can try and ensure that behaviour by the Club and contenders doesn't lead to future conflict.
The first mention of a "level playing field" on this thread was by yourself (I checked), again a deflection argument.
You seem obsessed with Kilian Jornet's round. He certainly didn't "bypass the ethos", in fact he tried his hardest to keep his attempt under the radar, much more so than many contenders. A far bigger concern to me was whether he'd solo the Round in a record time - under the Club rules it would be inadmissible for Club membership. The numbers of people at each road crossing during his round were small until Honister when there was a sudden increase which happened because someone unconnected with his attempt posted on social media that KJ was attempting the record. Thus the large number in Keswick to see him finish.
I suspect he asked his sponsors not to announce the fact he was attempting the BGR, he may not even have told them. I don't know. I do know it's in contrast to some other athletes and their sponsors - we've been told of attempts and asked to keep quiet about it (I don't pass on details of any intended attempt BTW) only to find that the sponsor announces it on their website!
Edit: Other than a couple of the usual post-round emails I've not had any contact with Kilian. I do know that he and Morgan Williams (the previous Club secretary) had an extended dialog over at least two or three years prior to him coming over here. From Morgan's summary of those it was clear that he had a respect for the Round and the ethos around it. If Morgan reads this he may care to elaborate.
It does not even solve a potential problem, e.g. Excessive wear to the route,
And even if it did, you could wait for symptoms before unnecessary rules.
As parting comment.
You probably wonder my reason for interest: I spent my 20s , 30s and early 40s buried establishing businesses: hours that would make junior doctors feel lazy. Burned out before I got to 45.
It didn't stop me running, but much of it was antisocial . And any form of racing was heavily constrained by schedule. I never did race when at my fittest. Nor did it stop me recceing BG ( you can do any time, it is one of the attractions) , or helping a dozen others succeed, and some , probably rather less fail.
But in all that time there were only two or three days in almost a decade when I was both fit enough and could commit to a date for a round, and sadly on those few days, the supporters I knew were committed elsewhere. I was cash rich time poor, Had paid rounds been available I might have looked at that as an option, it might just have got me round. We will never know.
It has nothing to do with ethos Bob, letting professionals run proves that. Another is asking for supporters right now, Nor creeping commerciality, or are you going to stop Harvey's or Pete blands from selling maps? Certainly nothing to do with use, the paid supporters are rarely used. And all those supporters love and respect the route , they would not do it otherwise. The rate of pay is only beer money. Not enough to make a business.
In my view , It is just another meaningless , purposeless , small minded decision, that athletics committees love.
isn't there a pub somewhere you can go and bore peple in?
A bit of a thread resurrection.
In line with members' wishes we've now decided that paid/guided Rounds will no longer be acceptable for Club membership. The Club website has now been updated with the following:
Over the last few years some companies have been advertising guided rounds to which there has been growing disquiet and opposition from the vast majority of members of the Club. The Club has existed since 1971: learning the round, helping on attempts and then doing your own Round takes effort, which is what gives membership of the Club value and makes the Club unique. It is the wishes of the Club’s members that this ethos and tradition continue.
As of 1st January 2020, the Bob Graham Club will no longer ratify paid/guided rounds and those who choose to use professional services of companies offering guided rounds will no longer be eligible to join the Bob Graham Club.