2011 IBR - The Inside View

[RideToEat]

The sum of Carson City and Sacramento only needs to equal 4800 points to nullify Alaska. I see that as quite in range for what might be on the bonus listing for point values.

Granted all rider knew the leg 2 & leg 3 capitol values could go up, but if they went up THAT much I'd be a bit annoyed if I'd gone to Hyder. A competitive rider should be able to use some form of logic to plan leg 1. Massive changes to the bonus structure in later legs tilts the scales more towards a gambling exercise than logical exercise. Doesn't seem as elegant to me. I hope no such mega-change comes up.

It seems to me that the three paths to the podium mentioned in todays report must be among these:

A: 4-corners with Madawaska on Leg 2 and Key West on Leg 3, and maximize your capitol points.

B: Hyder and maximize your capitol points.

C: Hyder and 4-corners, take whatever capitols happen to already be close to your route.

D: 4-corners with Madawaska on Leg 1 and Key West on Leg 2, do the best you can with capitol points.

E: Forget AK and the corners, just maximize capitol points.

If the leg 3 bonus structure remains in line with the first legs I'm betting on C (if it's possible, which I doubt) or more likely D.

But if the CA/NV bonii add up to near 4800, then I'm betting on D, though B might be close.

 

[Twigg]

Ok - since we are in speculation mode - I'm going to double down a on my earlier bet that there will be something huge for getting all 48 capitals.

The guys that passed up Fargo or other northern capitals that were very little points may have to go back and get it them now?

This is riveting. And tragic.

Only Tom and Rosie Sperry in the top 20 scored 16 State Capitols, and they didn't have North Dakota.

So if such a bonus were available (for all 48), it doesn't look like anyone would qualify.

Only two riders in the top 30 scored Bismark, ND ... and they missed others.

 

[Niehart]

Not being familiar with the Key West traffic patterns, would Tuesday be a better day to run south?

Here in the Pacific Northwet, Monday is often a drive home day so traffic is just a bad as the weekend.

 

[mdisher]

Yeah the biggest difference in this rally to previous rallies, is that there is this overall rally scheme and base that stretches all the legs. More recent rallies, each 'leg' was in essence it's own rally for the most part, or at least scored that way. Which made the escalating points make sense and possible.

I can still see a Hyder-Like bonus option, that those who didn't bite off on either Hyder or 4 Corners might be able to exploit, but then again so could anyone (potentially) that did either of the previous.

I'm also in the camp that doesn't see Capitol points changing that much, but maybe more 1000 point capitols based upon distance from the base route but not that they would be worth more.

Just my $.02

 

[SkooterG]

Granted all rider knew the leg 2 & leg 3 capitol values could go up, but if they went up THAT much I'd be a bit annoyed if I'd gone to Hyder. A competitive rider should be able to use some form of logic to plan leg 1. Massive changes to the bonus structure in later legs tilts the scales more towards a gambling exercise than logical exercise. Doesn't seem as elegant to me. I hope no such mega-change comes up.

I would be annoyed if they DIDN'T go up. Traditionally, they always have gone up in an exponential manner. So without some very strong hints prior to the rally, I would expect point values on leg 3 to be significantly higher. And that won't hurt the Hyder Riders. They still a fairly significant points lead, and will have the same opportunity as any other rider on leg 3 to get whatever points are available.

If I am annoyed about anythning, it's that in this rally we have what *may* be a 'knock-out' punch on leg 1 with Hyder. I'm not certain, but fairly confident that that has NEVER occurred before in an IBR. Nor do I like it. Past IBRs have always been about a strong finish when the going really gets tough. Who can excel on days 7-11 when a rider is at their limits? What fun is it to have the final top positions of the rally determined on leg 1?

The IBR is a marathon, not a sprint. A rider should NOT be able to go hard in the beginning and 'cruise' the rest of the rally and be able to do well. IMO, the rally should be run so that it rewards a rider who paces themself and finishes strong. In the past, that has always been the case that I am aware of.

 

[Warchild]

BTW, I didn't see Howard Entman on the call in list. Is he still running?

Howard is still good... he is just west of Jax, he's in good shape for making the checkpoint.

 

[MX727]

BTW, I didn't see Howard Entman on the call in list. Is he still running?

Howard is still good... he is just west of Jax, he's in good shape for making the checkpoint.

Thanks. He coordinated the Memphis SS1000 earlier this month.

 

[Jeff Earls]

Granted all rider knew the leg 2 & leg 3 capitol values could go up, but if they went up THAT much I'd be a bit annoyed if I'd gone to Hyder. A competitive rider should be able to use some form of logic to plan leg 1. Massive changes to the bonus structure in later legs tilts the scales more towards a gambling exercise than logical exercise. Doesn't seem as elegant to me. I hope no such mega-change comes up.

I would be annoyed if they DIDN'T go up. Traditionally, they always have gone up in an exponential manner. So without some very strong hints prior to the rally, I would expect point values on leg 3 to be significantly higher. And that won't hurt the Hyder Riders. They still a fairly significant points lead, and will have the same opportunity as any other rider on leg 3 to get whatever points are available.

If I am annoyed about anythning, it's that in this rally we have what *may* be a 'knock-out' punch on leg 1 with Hyder. I'm not certain, but fairly confident that that has NEVER occurred before in an IBR. Nor do I like it. Past IBRs have always been about a strong finish when the going really gets tough. Who can excel on days 7-11 when a rider is his limits? What fun is it to have the top positions of the rally determined on leg 1?

The IBR is a marathon, not a sprint. A rider should NOT be able to go hard in the beginning and 'cruise' the rest of the rally and be able to do well. IMO, the rally should be run so that it rewards a rider who paces themself and finishes strong. In the past, that has always been the case that I am aware of.

Well said, Greg.

I'm looking for something to be thrown out that suddenly turns Hyder into a clear sucker move and leaves the leg 3 Key West players gasping. Mr. Austin is a very smart man. Look for a very elegant mind-screw for any rider looking to the podium.

From Tom's report today: "For reasons that will be described in detail in tomorrow’s report, any rider that can document Key West on leg 2 has a huge advantage over the rest of the field."

The key phrase in that is "the rest of the field.", which includes the Hyder players.

 

[Twigg]

Granted all rider knew the leg 2 & leg 3 capitol values could go up, but if they went up THAT much I'd be a bit annoyed if I'd gone to Hyder. A competitive rider should be able to use some form of logic to plan leg 1. Massive changes to the bonus structure in later legs tilts the scales more towards a gambling exercise than logical exercise. Doesn't seem as elegant to me. I hope no such mega-change comes up.

I would be annoyed if they DIDN'T go up. Traditionally, they always have gone up in an exponential manner. So without some very strong hints prior to the rally, I would expect point values on leg 3 to be significantly higher. And that won't hurt the Hyder Riders. They still a fairly significant points lead, and will have the same opportunity as any other rider on leg 3 to get whatever points are available.

If I am annoyed about anythning, it's that in this rally we have what *may* be a 'knock-out' punch on leg 1 with Hyder. I'm not certain, but fairly confident that that has NEVER occurred before in an IBR. Nor do I like it. Past IBRs have always been about a strong finish when the going really gets tough. Who can excel on days 7-11 when a rider is at their limits? What fun is it to have the final top positions of the rally determined on leg 1?

The IBR is a marathon, not a sprint. A rider should NOT be able to go hard in the beginning and 'cruise' the rest of the rally and be able to do well. IMO, the rally should be run so that it rewards a rider who paces themself and finishes strong. In the past, that has always been the case that I am aware of.

Not disagreeing here, but for the purposes of discussion:

There is another way to view this, granted that the previous Rallies have followed the pattern you described.

First off, the Riders were told that this was to be a different kind of Rally, more traditional, less "head work", more endurance.

Going to Hyder wasn't a "knock-out" punch in Leg 1. Certainly not an obvious one, because only three riders chose to take it .... Is that "fortune favoring the brave", or a simple throwing down of the gauntlet?

Those who didn't go to Hyder could regain parity by scoring well on Leg 1 and grabbing Key West on Leg 2. So it could be recouped, but required the kind of effort put in by the "Hyder Three" on Leg 1.

There was also a clear hint that high points would be available on Leg 3, so start it well rested. That could be because so many State Capitols will be at least in the 1000 point range, but it requires big miles to get them all.

So if you went to Alaska you got a head start, and earned it. If you didn't, but realized you needed Key West on Leg 2 then you were back close to parity, and it would all be to play for in Leg 3.

As it turns out, only one guy looks to have picked up the challenge on Leg 2, and we don't know yet if it will work for him.

Leg 2 has been a bit "processional", but the outcome is still not certain, what is certain is that the big mile riders will go into the third leg with an advantage .... It's an 11 day Rally, not a Leg 3 Rally.

All of the above is simply discussion. Not a plan, or an opinion, just point and counterpoint. As I said before ... They all deserve to win, dammit!

 

[MX727]

Ok - since we are in speculation mode - I'm going to double down a on my earlier bet that there will be something huge for getting all 48 capitals.

The guys that passed up Fargo or other northern capitals that were very little points may have to go back and get it them now?

This is riveting. And tragic.

Only Tom and Rosie Sperry in the top 20 scored 16 State Capitols, and they didn't have North Dakota.

So if such a bonus were available (for all 48), it doesn't look like anyone would qualify.

Only two riders in the top 30 scored Bismark, ND ... and they missed others.

From what I can piece together, there were 19 capitals available on leg one. The Sperrys also missed ND and PA. If you only get credit for the capitals on the legs that they are offered, then no one is in the running for a 48-state capital bonus.

Re-reading this , https://www.ironbuttrally.com/IBR/2011/3.pdf , I see this statement (emphasis added): The rider packet also explains that all riders who visit all 48 states and complete the Four Corners Tour will be Gold Medal finishers.

Combined with this statement, from https://www.ironbuttrally.com/IBR/2011/10.pdf : Most didn’t read the material they received at the pre-rally banquet carefully enough and assumed that the most obvious path to a Gold Medal finish would also be the basis for a podium finish. They were wrong.

The way I read that then is while 4-corners will get you a Gold, not getting 4-corners is probably the ticket to podium. 4-corners is clearly the red herring. Alaska was the not the red herring that most believed it to be.

 

[rickcorwn]

Granted all rider knew the leg 2 & leg 3 capitol values could go up, but if they went up THAT much I'd be a bit annoyed if I'd gone to Hyder. A competitive rider should be able to use some form of logic to plan leg 1. Massive changes to the bonus structure in later legs tilts the scales more towards a gambling exercise than logical exercise. Doesn't seem as elegant to me. I hope no such mega-change comes up.

I would be annoyed if they DIDN'T go up. Traditionally, they always have gone up in an exponential manner. So without some very strong hints prior to the rally, I would expect point values on leg 3 to be significantly higher. And that won't hurt the Hyder Riders. They still a fairly significant points lead, and will have the same opportunity as any other rider on leg 3 to get whatever points are available.

If I am annoyed about anythning, it's that in this rally we have what *may* be a 'knock-out' punch on leg 1 with Hyder. I'm not certain, but fairly confident that that has NEVER occurred before in an IBR. Nor do I like it. Past IBRs have always been about a strong finish when the going really gets tough. Who can excel on days 7-11 when a rider is his limits? What fun is it to have the top positions of the rally determined on leg 1?

The IBR is a marathon, not a sprint. A rider should NOT be able to go hard in the beginning and 'cruise' the rest of the rally and be able to do well. IMO, the rally should be run so that it rewards a rider who paces themself and finishes strong. In the past, that has always been the case that I am aware of.

Well said, Greg.

I'm looking for something to be thrown out that suddenly turns Hyder into a clear sucker move and leaves the leg 3 Key West players gasping. Mr. Austin is a very smart man. Look for a very elegant mind-screw for any rider looking to the podium.

From Tom's report today: "For reasons that will be described in detail in tomorrow’s report, any rider that can document Key West on leg 2 has a huge advantage over the rest of the field."

The key phrase in that is "the rest of the field.", which includes the Hyder players.

I too agree with SkooterG and would be very disappointed in a leg three that didn't offer a way to counter an early big points bonus. One of the basic tenants of bonus location valuing is the harder it is to get the more points it is worth. Bonuses bagged on days 7-11 are much more difficult than those bagged on days 1-3.

 

[SinNYC]

Granted all rider knew the leg 2 & leg 3 capitol values could go up, but if they went up THAT much I'd be a bit annoyed if I'd gone to Hyder. A competitive rider should be able to use some form of logic to plan leg 1. Massive changes to the bonus structure in later legs tilts the scales more towards a gambling exercise than logical exercise. Doesn't seem as elegant to me. I hope no such mega-change comes up.

I would be annoyed if they DIDN'T go up. Traditionally, they always have gone up in an exponential manner. So without some very strong hints prior to the rally, I would expect point values on leg 3 to be significantly higher. And that won't hurt the Hyder Riders. They still a fairly significant points lead, and will have the same opportunity as any other rider on leg 3 to get whatever points are available.

If I am annoyed about anythning, it's that in this rally we have what *may* be a 'knock-out' punch on leg 1 with Hyder. I'm not certain, but fairly confident that that has NEVER occurred before in an IBR. Nor do I like it. Past IBRs have always been about a strong finish when the going really gets tough. Who can excel on days 7-11 when a rider is at their limits? What fun is it to have the final top positions of the rally determined on leg 1?

The IBR is a marathon, not a sprint. A rider should NOT be able to go hard in the beginning and 'cruise' the rest of the rally and be able to do well. IMO, the rally should be run so that it rewards a rider who paces themself and finishes strong. In the past, that has always been the case that I am aware of.

^This

I agree that a strong finish should be more important than a strong start and I'm hoping that the hints about a curveball in Leg 3 are legit. As it stands now I see Meese and Peek and anyone who got the Maine corner on Leg 1 and KW on Leg 2 as the podium finishers.

- Tim

 

[LD Hack]

From Tom's Day 7 report: "There were actually three separate paths to a podium finish that will become clear.... Several riders identified at least one ... Most didn’t read the material they received at the pre-rally banquet carefully enough and assumed that the most obvious path to a Gold Medal finish would also be the basis for a podium finish. They were wrong. This is a rally within a rally..."

Three paths; #1 Hyder, #2 Four Corners with KW on leg 2 (or something else), and #3 is ???? (As an edit, reading previous posts, maybe #3 is 48 capitals) Upcoming choices in leg 3??? From Tom, "Four corners is not an obvious path to the podium..." Wonder what that material is that he refers to in the leg 1 packet. (Edit: Again, what was in that packet that Tom refers to?) As any multi-day rally vet knows, one definitely needs to be rested before the start of leg 3. It is also stated that this rally allows for big long-distance miles. Leg 3 will give us the details and the paths.

Thanks Dale for keeping us posted, and allowing us to speculate with lots of missing details.

MikeS

 

[McRide]

Do I have this right?

 

1. The 48 states are mandatory for a finish.

2. Only Peek has Hyder and Oregon going into Leg #3.

3. Only Frens has 3/4 corners and Oregon going into Leg #3.

 

[discochris]

Something is sticking in my mind here. At the beginning of the Butt Lite 4, the late Eddie James said in his rallymaster speech at the beginning, something to the effect of "This is not the IBR, this is not the Minnesota 1000, this is not the Spank, this is not the Butt Lite III. This is not any other rally you have done - this is THIS rally." In essence, he was making the point that despite what you may have seen in other rallies, those experiences may or may not hold true for the rally in question.

The same could be said here. Just because previous IBR's have held to some kind of pattern doesn't mean this one will. Now I THINK there will be some big points on the last leg, but many of us thought there would be something to that effect on leg two, and it didn't come to pass. It will be interesting to say the least.

Here's a theory. What if EVERY capitol is in play on the third leg?

 

[mdisher]

"For reasons that will be described in detail in tomorrow’s report, any rider that can document Key West on leg 2 has a huge advantage over the rest of the field."

This could be as simple as:

"Hey, I know you all heard the rumor that we were discussing allowing you to maybe use the 4 corners marker as proof you visited those states. Well, we discussed it, and the answer is no. In fact the capitols of those 4 states are mandatory."

Thus if you planned on getting the 4 corners and don't have KeyWest in your pocket now, you are out of luck.

Can't wait to find out though.

 

[twistedcricket]

I thought the red-herring was Juneau, AK. It was 4,800 points in addition to a ride to Hyder and the 4-Corners.

 

[Chaz Fisher]

Looking forward to Tom's report tomorrow, when we MAY learn what the RM hits the riders with. But here's a thought.....

In rallies past, sometimes part of the incentive to go for one of the mammoth rides was that the rider could skip a checkpoint without being DNF'd. What if there is a new bonus for leg 3 that requires a long punishing ride, but if that bonus is successfully claimed the requirement to touch all 48 states is waived? Now a rider who has 3/4 corners in hand can go for that one long ride, and claim that PLUS the 4C (since San Ysidro is so close to Ontario). And the Hyder riders have to choose whether to go after a second long, long ride - because their AK points are offset by the 4C, and the points for this long ride will offset the relatively small values of the capitals.

 

[Matt B]

I think Meese has Hyder and Oregon as well.

Only Peek has Hyder and Oregon going into Leg #3

 

[Warchild]

less than 3 hours before Penalty points... some of these folks need to move....