Those of you with good memories (and who actually read these entries) may recall that I did two Climate Rides last year -- one in California in May, the other in the Midwest in September. I wanted to do California again this year, but it conflicted with the college graduation from Macalester of my older son, Ben. Let it never be said that my priorities aren't straight -- I of course asked Ben to move his graduation date.
OK, I didn't do that -- but it meant I needed a West Coast ride a bit later, say in June. So, one day, while perusing Adventure Cycling magazine, there it was: Cycle the Sierra -- a 5-day supported ride -- no fundraising required -- in the beautiful Sierra Nevada. Now, as a corporate lawyer, I'm used to reading the fine print and carefully assessing the pros and cons of various courses of action. But somehow, in the excitement of considering and planning a new bike trip, my usual due diligence gene didn't kick in fully. First, I know the Sierra Nevada is a mountain range, but the idea of riding in and around it -- at high elevations and with huge climbs -- didn't really register as an issue. Second, the ride's web site had careful maps, showing each day's ride, including their length and total elevation. OK, so the total ride had over 25,000 feet of cumulative ascent, including one day with over 9,000 feet of climbing -- but that couldn't really be right, could it? I mean, they wouldn't set up a ride for fun, with 80+ participants, that difficult? Right?
Well, by now you can anticipate the answer. This was a hard ride. And it attracted really good riders. I was one of only two people from East of the Mississippi, and the only one from New York. And did I mention that, like, the riders were good...as in fast?
Now the good news is I skipped all the shuttle options and did the entire ride. And it definitely was good training and I got stronger as a rider and climber. And I'm proud that I was able to do it. But it wasn't a whole lot of fun. With the exception of Day 4 (which only had about 3100 feet of cumulative ascent), I generally was in a small, straggling, last group of riders, if not entirely bringing up up the rear. It wasn't that I was entirely the slowest, but I like to stop, check out the scenery, take pictures, eat snacks, stretch, etc. To me, enjoying the journey is key. By contrast, a lot of these riders were on Strava, recording and comparing the time of their segments, racing to be KOM (king of the mountain), getting over 50 mph on descents, etc. Meanwhile, I'd be arriving at rest stops with most of the food gone and the staffers waiting to shut down. So I felt hurried the whole time.
Now having said that, the other riders were really nice, the food throughout was terrific, the scenery was mighty fine and, dare I say it, the camping was pleasant and fun. And, in conjunction with all the climbing there were some fantastic descents (I topped out at 42 mph, though). But it's not a group ride I would do again.
The other silver lining -- and a key reason for wanting to do a West Coast ride each year -- was flying into and out of San Francisco so I could visit my niece, Emily, her wife, Christina, and their adorable two-year old, Elliott. I stayed with them both before and after the ride and, in truth, it was the highlight of my trip (OK, maybe using the services of their massage therapist, Rich, was up there too).
So, without further ado, a few photos and, of course, the various routes each day:
Day One photos and route:
 |
| Yeah, we descended from that trestle -- and then had to climb back up even higher.... |
 |
| A useful warning at our campsite that night |
Day Two photos and route:
 |
| The "stragglers" |
 |
| The final climbing tally (9390 feet) |
