RideLondon-Surrey 100: Surrey County Council withdraws support beyond 2021, despite majority wanting sportive to continue

We could revive the Kinder Trespass spirit....

Why is a longer event contrary to "every day" cycling? I would propose getting everyday people to cycle 100miles makes then understand a smaller distance is well within their grasp. It's far more inspirational.

I suspect their objective to "enable people to cycle for more everyday journeys" goes no deeper than that statement and is devoid of any detailed plans or adequate funding.

Chris Boardman, Olympic & TDF cyclist > Walking & Cycling Commissioner in Manchester and cycle campaigner.

Among those who cycle to the supermarket or to see friends, there's a high percentage who also do leisure rides.

Yeah, but they're already in the choir. Whilst reserving judgement on SCC's committment to general cycling, what we really need is the normalisation of cycling for transport. Sport & leisure is fine, and my leisure is more environmentally responsible since I returned to cycling, but the big environmental gains will come from transport and utility cycling.

I could be wrong but I don't think that understanding that enthusiasts can do 100 miles on closed roads will persuade many couch potatoes that they can do 2 miles to the shops or 5 to work.

TheBillder wrote:

I could be wrong but I don't think that understanding that enthusiasts can do 100 miles on closed roads will persuade many couch potatoes that they can do 2 miles to the shops or 5 to work.

I personally know three "couch potatoes" who were effectively non-cyclists who signed up for PRL in recent years to raise money for their chosen charities (all had strong personal motivations for doing so). They all made riding to work and for shopping part of their training regimen, all completed successfully and all have remained keen riders since.

TheBillder wrote:

I could be wrong but I don't think that understanding that enthusiasts can do 100 miles on closed roads will persuade many couch potatoes that they can do 2 miles to the shops or 5 to work.

And yet, every year thousands of "non-enthusiasts", some of whom were dedicated couch potatoes (I know a few of them) train to run the London Marathon which is a bigger physical challenge than cycling 100 miles. 

And running doesn't have the same utility benefit for most. Those former couch potatoes I know have all continued running after completing the marathon, but it is still a separate activity for them. They don't run to work, for example. 

Training for a long bike ride, for many, involves ditching the car and riding to work, or to the shops, which they continue to do after the event. 

I know there are some, and both Rendel Harris and Jetman's Dad, you have a point. But there are still millions of Mr & Mrs Fat-Gammon who we need to convert, and I'm sure (i.e. I have zero evidence bar my own impressions) that there are a lot more of them than those open to raising money for a good cause.

I think it's down to losing world tour status for the race. Without that, you wouldn't be riding the same route as the pro's. So the marketing was screwed, as that was their whole selling point. 

Secret_squirrel wrote:

Would love to know what's really behind this?  Any Surrey-items have a view? How has the make up of SSC changed over time?  Do you have a new lot in?
 

Maybe we'll get lucky and another London adjacent council will step in.  Bucks would be good, might just be able to hit the edge of the Chilterns.

I was down for my hatrick year this year too

I could say that the chilterns are close enough to pass completely through them, not just hit the edge. But I'm quite happy with london cyclists swarming to the surrey hills instead leaving our roads relatively quiet.

Quite a lot of effort has to go into designing the route to ensure there are enough junction allowing people to get into and out if the enclosed area with suitable junctions. Realtively few of those sorts of junctions in the chilterns. I don't think the want everyone needing to pile onto the m40 orm25 to get from anywhere inside the route to anywhere outside the loop.

Ride london have been able to avoid all this planning work as it was carried out by London 2012, and they could just keep re-using it.  Otherwise it would make a lot of sense for ride London to cycle between Surrey, Bucks/Berks and Herts/Essex so local residents were only inconvenienced once in 3 years. 

but the whole point of the route was to celebrate and keep going the legacy of the 2012 Olympics, which we spent lots&lots of money on trying to inspire people to get into physical activities, so by running as close to that road race route as was still possible was key to its ongoing appeal. If you change the route for one more conveniant to the Surrey Chelsea tractor drivers to clog up their roads instead, well you arent really honouring the legacy of it anymore at all.

the pro race would have gained UCI status back, its just next years calendar is already congested with the rearranged Tokyo Olympics and its easier to drop a race thats not quite established itself as a classic.

the Surrey Hills are a popular place to cycle because they are an easy ride for people based in London to get to,and there are some nice routes out there, and they always will be so getting rid of Ride London wont change that at all people will continue to "train" on those roads sportive or not, Box hill will still be as popular with people riding it, and sure alot of cyclists who live in the area avoid Box Hill, largely because theyve done it a stack of times already and it no longer holds the appeal it did to them, thats not a reason for canning the whole thing.

No matter how you spin it, Ride London isn't a legacy event, no matter how much it says that in its literature. Read the legacy plan and reports, Ride London is a private venture and not a legacy, as overseen by the government.

Legacies include the "bullet" trains, the Olympic Park and the Olympic hockey centre.

If you look at the plan, they set out these

• economic – supporting new jobs and skills, encouraging trade, inward investment and tourism
• sporting – continuing elite success, development of more sports facilities and encouraging participation in schools sports and wider
• social and volunteering – inspiring others to volunteer and encouraging social change
• regeneration – reuse of venues, new homes, improved transportation, in East London and at other sites across the UK.

​None of which Ride London really does, economic, it brings in some money to the local area, but for a short period of time per year, it isn't creating jobs. Sporting, it could be argued it encourages participation, but look at the wider figures, the majority of 100 riders are the same people year on year. Whereas the family city centre ride does encourage. The fact that they also discriminated against disabled riders doesn't help either. I was part of a group trying to have disabled cycling allowed into the 100, which was looked into and then dismissed for no good reason.

Had the organisers wished to keep world tour status for both the mens and womens, there were dates available. It was nothing to do with it being Olympic year.

I have to challenge you.

"Not creating jobs"... prove it with evidence and facts.

"The same people year on year" - once again prove it with facts and evidence.

I notice you didn't mention the value of social and volunteering, this in itself is plenty of justification to hold events like these annually.

Gkam84 wrote:

I know cyclists who live in the Box Hill area who won't even ride locally.

There's a reason for that - it's the shocking state of the roads.  Box Hill used to be like a cheese grater before it was resurfaced for the Olymics.  The road surface north-bound from Box Hill vilage is appalling.  The road from Headley towards Epsom is so bad that someone was killed there a few months ago - Surrey CC patched it a bit, but basically it's still wretched. 

I'm trying to get my wife into cycling - but, as a legitimate user of a public right of way, she's scared - by the condition of the roads and the lack of competence and attitudes of the motorists.  As a self-declared competent cyclist, Surrey CC's efforts to make cycling an attractive form of transport are invisible.

As far as the comments about litter is concerned, the local litter-picking group has collected well over 300 bags of rubbish in the past couple of months.  The proportion that is cycling-related is barely measurable. At elast the local borough council comes and picks up the purple bags full of other people's ***t

I live in Dorking, and the roads around here are terrible. Box Hill itself is one of the few bits of smooth tarmac at the moment, and it seems to be very hit and miss as to what gets repaired. There's a lovely bit between south Dorking and Newdigate for example, but the bit preceding it is rough as anything. Earlier this year the council decided they were going to resurface Punchbowl Lane (completely unnecessary compared to other roads) and then ruined it by putting chip and seal along the whole thing.

My thoughts exactly. The whole country has been sold a lie on a much smaller majority than that.