Expedition Racing vs Adventure Racing
Expedition Racing vs Adventure Racing
Karin Pohl and Andy Telfer
8/24/2001
We would be wrong to look for a comparison between expedition and adventure racing, because there isn't a clear one, but we should recognise a continuum along which they both occur.
The continuum has, at one end, the sports of orienteering and on-road triathlons. At the other end is the genuine 'Scott of the Antarctic'-type expedition. Anywhere inbetween are the races which we are talking about. Their relative position along the continuum depends upon factors such as:
1. Seconding: permitted or not; how much support can they give etc.
2. Transitions: the degree of support available to participants in transition areas.
3. Duration: how long participants reasonably expect to remain in the field unsupported. Distance isn't the factor here as, for example, kilometres on a bike don't relate to kilometres on foot in bamboo.
4. Feeding: whether they carry food for the whole event from the start or are permitted to resupply. At 6000 calories per day and about 400 calories per 100 grams, that amounts to 1.5 kgs per day - a big factor in a 10-12 day event.
5. Terrain, weather conditions and other factors creating a low- or high-impact environment.
6. Navigational difficulty.
There are as many different views as to what adventure racing is as there are opinion writers, as stated on the www.kimm.com web site:
* Some say it must have multi-activity.
* Some say it must have sleep deprivation.
* Some say that there must be a serious risk element.
* Others say it must have overnight camping.
* Many say it must be self supporting ie no support team.
* A broad view believes it must be more than one day and be located in the mountains.
* Many would say that there is a consensus that navigation must be included.
* Many would agree that an adventure race has elements of uncertainty and variability that make the outcome uncertain regardless of levels of fitness and skill.
Internationally, there is scope for races which are closer to true expeditions. Mark Burnett obviously knows this and is consciously positioning his product at that end of the scale. He has, in fact, registered the term Expedition Racing as a trademark.
Adventure racing in its broadest term was born in New Zealand some two decades ago. But Burnett, the same guy responsible for Survivor, popularized the multi-sport spectacle in 1995 when he organized the first annual Eco-Challenge in Utah. Every year, the location has gotten more exotic, sponsors have gotten more enthusiastic and the list of race applicants has gotten longer. Today, getting into the Eco-Challenge is proving as hard as the race itself.
In addition to providing a resume of athletic feats and gripping essay about why they deserve to participate, the 76 teams that made the cut this year shelled out a $12,500 entry fee — not including airfare and iodine tablets. Other than prestige, a sense of accomplishment and better sponsorship opportunities, the payoff is not great. The winning team’s cash purse of $55,000 is dinky compared to the $1 million nudist Rich took home for winning Survivor.
Participating in other races, including Raid Gauloises, Southern Traverse, Elf Authentic Adventure, Iditarod, the XTERRA series, the KIMM series, is equally coveted by the growing class of hyper-fit, highly skilled, super-ballsy elite adventure racers. For most weekend warriors, however, competing in these events is as likely as anchoring the 1600-meter relay in Sydney this September.
As an alternative to the Eco-Challenge, you might consider signing up for one of the easier versions like the Game Adventure Sprint series or the Hi-Tec Dirty Weekend series. Far easier for starters, you'll get a taste of what adventure racing is all about and -- who knows -- maybe expedition racing is next?
ver original
Karin Pohl and Andy Telfer
8/24/2001
We would be wrong to look for a comparison between expedition and adventure racing, because there isn't a clear one, but we should recognise a continuum along which they both occur.
The continuum has, at one end, the sports of orienteering and on-road triathlons. At the other end is the genuine 'Scott of the Antarctic'-type expedition. Anywhere inbetween are the races which we are talking about. Their relative position along the continuum depends upon factors such as:
1. Seconding: permitted or not; how much support can they give etc.
2. Transitions: the degree of support available to participants in transition areas.
3. Duration: how long participants reasonably expect to remain in the field unsupported. Distance isn't the factor here as, for example, kilometres on a bike don't relate to kilometres on foot in bamboo.
4. Feeding: whether they carry food for the whole event from the start or are permitted to resupply. At 6000 calories per day and about 400 calories per 100 grams, that amounts to 1.5 kgs per day - a big factor in a 10-12 day event.
5. Terrain, weather conditions and other factors creating a low- or high-impact environment.
6. Navigational difficulty.
There are as many different views as to what adventure racing is as there are opinion writers, as stated on the www.kimm.com web site:
* Some say it must have multi-activity.
* Some say it must have sleep deprivation.
* Some say that there must be a serious risk element.
* Others say it must have overnight camping.
* Many say it must be self supporting ie no support team.
* A broad view believes it must be more than one day and be located in the mountains.
* Many would say that there is a consensus that navigation must be included.
* Many would agree that an adventure race has elements of uncertainty and variability that make the outcome uncertain regardless of levels of fitness and skill.
Internationally, there is scope for races which are closer to true expeditions. Mark Burnett obviously knows this and is consciously positioning his product at that end of the scale. He has, in fact, registered the term Expedition Racing as a trademark.
Adventure racing in its broadest term was born in New Zealand some two decades ago. But Burnett, the same guy responsible for Survivor, popularized the multi-sport spectacle in 1995 when he organized the first annual Eco-Challenge in Utah. Every year, the location has gotten more exotic, sponsors have gotten more enthusiastic and the list of race applicants has gotten longer. Today, getting into the Eco-Challenge is proving as hard as the race itself.
In addition to providing a resume of athletic feats and gripping essay about why they deserve to participate, the 76 teams that made the cut this year shelled out a $12,500 entry fee — not including airfare and iodine tablets. Other than prestige, a sense of accomplishment and better sponsorship opportunities, the payoff is not great. The winning team’s cash purse of $55,000 is dinky compared to the $1 million nudist Rich took home for winning Survivor.
Participating in other races, including Raid Gauloises, Southern Traverse, Elf Authentic Adventure, Iditarod, the XTERRA series, the KIMM series, is equally coveted by the growing class of hyper-fit, highly skilled, super-ballsy elite adventure racers. For most weekend warriors, however, competing in these events is as likely as anchoring the 1600-meter relay in Sydney this September.
As an alternative to the Eco-Challenge, you might consider signing up for one of the easier versions like the Game Adventure Sprint series or the Hi-Tec Dirty Weekend series. Far easier for starters, you'll get a taste of what adventure racing is all about and -- who knows -- maybe expedition racing is next?
ver original
