What's the point?

Of long distance rides that is. Reading this article in the Guardian the other day goes some way to explaining why I wouldn't really submit myself for another long distcnce charitry bike ride. BAsically though it would still be a challenge and good way of raising funds, i couldn't quite justify what some people may think of as a bike riding joly for me. I think that things like London to Brighton and other organised events are very worthwhile, and even though there may be some charity fatigue, these events still help raise huge amounts of money for very worthwhile charities.

From the comments in that article though I was lead to the website for "This is not for charity". Another interesting trip which looks like great fun, and though teh fella has a manifesto which is admirable, I can't help thinking he's a bit too angry and idealistic. Essentially it's a self involved anc chosen kind of act to ride solo round the world or any kind of long distance, and as lonely and hard as it could be (and i've not even ventured to other cultures) it is a "lifestyle choice" and a bit much to expect the rest of the world to change because your eyes have been opened more!

Not really sure what my point is, but all these rides look like fun. The one thing i don't get with this and other world traversing rides as to why they go through EnZed. Obviously i can understand why you'd want to cycle round NZ, it's fucking brilliant.



But it's completly outr of the way of everywhere, and not really cycleable to or from from any other land mas, you're obviously going to have to cross a mass or water at some point, but over to a tiny island in the middle of the South Pacific seems a bit uneccessary no? and also a real shame if you're just going to cane through 100miles + a day insetad of actually enjoying it!

Anyway, each to thier own.