Home
1-5 grading will allow prospective entrants to see which courses provide enough - or too much - of a challenge

Cyclists entering sportives will next year have a way of judging their relative degrees of difficulty – at least, the ones registered with British Cycling – with the governing body today announcing British Cycling Grading (BCG), which will be based on a 1 to 5 scale of difficulty.

The scale, devised with the help of Marie Curie Etape Series organisers IMG Challenger World will allow prospective entrants to gauge the scale of the challenge facing them and compare events against one another.

It adds that it will also prove beneficial for organisers when planning routes aimed at cyclists of differing abilities, reflecting the fact that many sportives have a tougher, longer course and an easier, shorter one.
According to British Cycling:

BCG calculates the difficulty of the sportive by analysing the distance of the event and the total elevation. Both parameters can be taken from any GPS plot. Events are then graded on a scale of one to five, or against a descriptive scale – e.g. “moderate” or “challenging.”

When two events fall in the same bracket, BCG allows users to compare events more accurately, using a more detailed rating. Calculated using the same combination of total distance and ascent, the BCG score delivers a detailed breakdown of where all Graded events sit relative to one another.

It adds that BCG will be rolled out to all events in the 2014 season, and that icons will appear on the event listings on its website to denote the event’s grading.

More information about the system and how it works is available on the British Cycling website, which also shows how distance and climb combine to produce that grading – yellow denotes 1, up to red which equates to 5.

British Cycling says that the table “shows the relationship between the distance of the sportive and climbing. The five colour bands are represented, along with a more detailed British Cycling Grading score. Sportives are graded from two to 787, calculated on distance and ascent.”

The organisation’s Cycle Sport Events Manager, Jonathan Day, commented: “We are delighted to get this system up and running for 2014.

“We want everybody entering sportives to enjoy the experience and by providing an easy to understand grading system riders will be better informed about the physical demands of the events they enter.

“It will also help organisers to promote and publicise their events to the right audience so we’re very confident that British Cycling Grading can have a very positive and significant impact on the ever-growing sportive scene.”

Cyclosport, the event listings website, has been providing rankings of degree of difficulty of various sportives, including many registered with British Cycling, for several years.

It uses a scale of 1 to 10 based on the organiser’s perception of the difficulty of the course, so unlike the British Cycling system events may not be directly comparable.

Born in Scotland, Simon moved to London aged seven and now lives in the Oxfordshire Cotswolds with his miniature schnauzer, Elodie. He fell in love with cycling one Saturday morning in 1994 while living in Italy when Milan-San Remo went past his front door. A daily cycle commuter in London back before riding to work started to boom, he's been news editor at road.cc since 2009. Handily for work, he speaks French and Italian. He doesn't get to ride his Colnago as often as he'd like, and freely admits he's much more adept at cooking than fettling with bikes.

39 comments

Avatar
dave atkinson [6210 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

I'm gonna put it out there and suggest that a 10km sportive with 3.75km of climbing is gonna be pretty tough  3

Avatar
Cantab [93 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Dave Atkinson wrote:

I'm gonna put it out there and suggest that a 10km sportive with 3.75km of climbing is gonna be pretty tough  3

Rule 5 job, no?  3

Avatar
cavasta [216 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Hope they're going to produce an imperial version of the chart as well. We still use miles in the UK. Good idea though.

Avatar
dreamlx10 [153 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

They'll be awarding points and calling them races next.

Avatar
Simon_MacMichael [2449 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
cavasta wrote:

Hope they're going to produce an imperial version of the chart as well. We still use miles in the UK. Good idea though.

Since someone's already mentioned The Rules, I'm obliged to point out that this one falls under Rule 24  3

Avatar
alexholt3 [53 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
cavasta wrote:

Hope they're going to produce an imperial version of the chart as well. We still use miles in the UK. Good idea though.

We? BC quotes both units for events. And the majority of cyclists use proper units nowadays.

Avatar
pdows47 [101 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

I don't understand how a 10km ride, of which a third is climbing scores so low, that'd be rather tough as Dave Said

Avatar
andylul [410 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

I thought the grading system for Sportives was the Nimby (Surrey Hills and New Forest scoring 5)  1

Avatar
mikeprytherch [223 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

This chart is rubbish, as already stated a 10km ride with 3.75km climbing rates 37 which is the same as 30km with 1.25km climbing, utter nonsense.

Avatar
Neil753 [447 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Perhaps we should have another grading system too...

called the "F factor".

On the X axis - no. of residents adversely affected.
On the Y axis - no. of businesses adversely affected.

Avatar
Lungsofa74yearold [281 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

If I've understood climbing elevation bit correctly, they may need to recalibrate for some of the more bonkers events out there such as the Dave Lloyd mega challenge - http://www.cyclosport.org/06-May-2008/news/dave-lloyd-mega-challenge-upd... - 5400+ meters of climbing last year...;-)

Avatar
Cyclist [295 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Not basing any of it on the individuals level of fitness then? It's about as good as the BMI chart, which! It looks surprisingly like even down to the colouring.

I am British and use miles when riding in the UK... I use Km when riding in Europe. The Velo rules...... What a load of absolute f-ing hogwash. I don't know who are/is the biggest idiot, the people that follow them or the idiot who wrote them?
Ride using km or mph YOUR choice.
To find out how hard a ride is, learn to read a 1-50000 map, it will take you 60 secs to find out.
Wear mixed team kit if you want
Use a bike satchel if you want
Put your f-ing glasses arms under your helmet strap if you want.
Wear a world champion jersey if you want.

Do what you want.
Enjoy your bike however you want and just have fun.

The opinions are my own, no cyclists were hurt during the typing of this post.
I accept all of the keyboard warrior comments that will follow on an individual basis and will respond within 24hrs.

To Everyone else who has an independent and logical mind, please accept my apologies.

Avatar
Neil753 [447 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

The flaw to this whole chart thing is that a fat bloke like me might see a 200k with 250 metres of climbing very differently to a 50k with 1000 metres of climbing. And yet this table equates these two examples equally.

The degree of difficulty must also surely depend, to a certain extent, on the actual gradient to be climbed.

For instance, I find the hills on the London to Brighton ride a real killer, and it's only 58 miles. And yet I did a gently undulating 150 mile ride this year, with roughly the same amount of total climbing, and it was a breeze.

Obviously, creating some sort of mechanism that leads to "league table" participation can be a good marketing ploy, but this particular algorithm is bonkers.

Avatar
Cyclist [295 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

^^^^^^ What Neil said. Agreed with 100%. A bit more than bonkers though!

Avatar
Joeinpoole [439 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Cyclist wrote:

To find out how hard a ride is, learn to read a 1-50000 map, it will take you 60 secs to find out.

Do what you want.
Enjoy your bike however you want and just have fun.

Exactly. Why do people feel the need to have their bike rides 'organised' for them anyway let alone have them 'graded' too?

When I was 15 in the 70's we'd jump on our steel-framed bikes and ride 100 miles to a Youth Hostel without a second thought. We'd be armed with an OS map, a yellow plastic cape in case it rained and some chocolate digestives for nutrition. What more do you need?

It's as easy as riding a bike.

Avatar
nortonpdj [132 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

So where's the axis representing wind speed and direction?

Avatar
Leviathan [1890 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Agreed, the Rules aren't rules, but some of them are right. Why would I measure in miles? Your 1:50,000 map isn't in miles. 0.5km is 500m, what is 0.5miles? The length of the emperor's parade ground? 'We' don't use miles Cavasta, last time I checked bike components, builders plans, and my Topman jumper are in mm/cm.

Having said that, who would wear their sunglasses OVER their helmet straps? So that you have to take your sunglasses off to take your helmet off? And feel the straps pressed into the side of you head all day? The Rules are more of a style guide.

Avatar
Northernbike [229 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
nortonpdj wrote:

So where's the axis representing wind speed and direction?

and how much you had to drink the night before and what time you got to bed

Avatar
jug_23 [62 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Cyclist wrote:

Not basing any of it on the individuals level of fitness then? It's about as good as the BMI chart, which! It looks surprisingly like even down to the colouring.

I am British and use miles when riding in the UK... I use Km when riding in Europe. The Velo rules...... What a load of absolute f-ing hogwash. I don't know who are/is the biggest idiot, the people that follow them or the idiot who wrote them?
Ride using km or mph YOUR choice.
To find out how hard a ride is, learn to read a 1-50000 map, it will take you 60 secs to find out.
Wear mixed team kit if you want
Use a bike satchel if you want
Put your f-ing glasses arms under your helmet strap if you want.
Wear a world champion jersey if you want.

Do what you want.
Enjoy your bike however you want and just have fun.

The opinions are my own, no cyclists were hurt during the typing of this post.
I accept all of the keyboard warrior comments that will follow on an individual basis and will respond within 24hrs.

To Everyone else who has an independent and logical mind, please accept my apologies.

Sounds about right. Only one rule that people should actually adhere to:

Rule #77 // Respect the earth; don’t litter.
Cycling is not an excuse to litter. Do not throw your empty gel packets, energy bar wrappers or punctured tubes on the road or in the bush. Stuff em in your jersey pockets, and repair that tube when you get home.

Avatar
james-o [234 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Oh great, now we can have grading debates just like climbers.
Dave's point is spot on. Daft grid.

Avatar
Al__S [1008 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Rule 43 is pretty key as well. Though I'd translate it into British English thus:
"Don't be a dick"

anyway.

So that 10km, 3750m ascent, sportive. Given most start where they finish, that's a 133% average climb (45° is 100%, 90° is ∞%).

Somehow mange that, how many stops for new brake pads, rims are you going to need coming down?

Avatar
William Black [193 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
james-o wrote:

Oh great, now we can have grading debates just like climbers.
Dave's point is spot on. Daft grid.

Eg. some bellends from yorkshire hammering on about how it's not a real hill if 'it in't in t'dales'

bikeboy76 wrote:

The Rules are more of a style guide.

The rules are a piss take made up on the internet that middle aged portly types have somehow been suckered into following in hopeless belief that there are actually 'rules to the sport'  1

Avatar
Argos74 [390 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Al__S wrote:

So that 10km, 3750m ascent, sportive. Given most start where they finish, that's a 133% average climb (45° is 100%, 90° is ∞%).

Somehow mange that, how many stops for new brake pads, rims are you going to need coming down?

Parachutes. And rockets. This might not be UCI compliant, but what the hell.

Avatar
jug_23 [62 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Al__S wrote:

Rule 43 is pretty key as well. Though I'd translate it into British English thus:
"Don't be a dick"

anyway.

So that 10km, 3750m ascent, sportive. Given most start where they finish, that's a 133% average climb (45° is 100%, 90° is ∞%).

Somehow mange that, how many stops for new brake pads, rims are you going to need coming down?

I'll agree to that  1

I think they've tried to do something that's simple for sportive organisers to assess themselves against, but clearly at the extremes it hasn't worked - that scenario is ludicrous, and I'd argue that a pan-flat 210km is more than "moderate"!

As people have said, difficulty is more about gradient than total ascent, but that's tougher to assess, whereas this just needs 2 figures.

It would be nice to see the maths behind the chart - fundamentally it just doesn't seem right to me.

Avatar
Jimbonic [136 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Quote:

It would be nice to see the maths behind the chart - fundamentally it just doesn't seem right to me.

Really?! It's Grade = Distance x Ascent!

Or were you, rather, asking to hear the thought that went into it, ie "Hmmm, how can we grade sportives? Ah, I know, let's just multiply the distance by how high you climb. Easy, done it. Do I get a sweet?"

Avatar
crazy-legs [736 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
Quote:

I think they've tried to do something that's simple for sportive organisers to assess themselves against, but clearly at the extremes it hasn't worked

Statistics never works at the extreme ends - that's the whole point of statistics and why statisticians use things like 95th percentile, bell curves and best fit lines.
Look at Body Mass Index as well - that often shows athletes as being "morbidly obese" because it can't take into account the super-fit/muscled people.

The point is that to a relative novice, new to the sport it gives a consistent formula rather than relying on what the organiser thinks it is. For the majority of events the majority of the time it'll work quite well. Which is basically what statistics does - model most things well most of the time.

Avatar
antonio [1119 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Fitness dictates whether an event is tough, be it flat or hilly.

Avatar
dave atkinson [6210 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
bikeboy76 wrote:

last time I checked bike components, builders plans, and my Topman jumper are in mm/cm.

good luck getting those metric pedal threads into your cranks  3

Avatar
stuartp [67 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Exactly and most metric parts on bikes are imperial sizes converted anyway.
Cyclists are like runners the use km's as it sounds faster/longer  36

Avatar
FluffyKittenofT... [1179 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
alexholt3 wrote:
cavasta wrote:

Hope they're going to produce an imperial version of the chart as well. We still use miles in the UK. Good idea though.

We? BC quotes both units for events. And the majority of cyclists use proper units nowadays.

I still think in miles, I'm afraid. And don't most signs still give distances and speed limits in miles as well?
Though, I can never remember how many yards in a mile. And don't give me temperatures in Fahrenheit - means nothing to me!

(Not that I have any interest in "sportives" - not even sure what they are).

Pages