Audax v Sportive

[stevegloster]

Nobody could fail to notice just how popular Cyclo-Sportive rides have become over the last couple of years or so, and although I have yet to ride one, I am wondering why they are so popular.  Is it the challenge of a long hilly ride and if so, why not ride an Audax instead which offer even bigger challenges in terms of distance at least and a lot cheaper too at an average of £5 instead of £25 for a Sportive.

[The Raucous AUK]

I too am equally baffled.

Cycling Weekly seems to be hypnotised by them. At £25 a pop I bet the organisers love them too!

[Fred A-M]

Reckon it's all in the marketing! Which sounds more immediately appealing to the uninformed newcomer to cycling, Cyclo-Sportive or Audax?  

Most won't even know what Audax is, and won't be informed by the name itself either, so Cyclo-Sportif instinctively sounds more exciting, appealing and glamourous (to most!).   By virtue this alone, Cyclo-sportif has the dominant market position, the pricing reflecting to a degree the laziness of participants in discovering cheaper equally viable alternatives.

[john28july]

quote:Originally posted by stevegloster

Nobody could fail to notice just how popular Cyclo-Sportive rides have become over the last couple of years or so, and although I have yet to ride one, I am wondering why they are so popular.  Is it the challenge of a long hilly ride and if so, why not ride an Audax instead which offer even bigger challenges in terms of distance at least and a lot cheaper too at an average of £5 instead of £25 for a Sportive.

I know what the difference is!
A Sportive is for  racers with Colnagos and suchlike, who would not be seen dead with mudguards or a tourer.
Audax is for 'grown ups' with adventure in mind.
John.
www.pbase.com/john28july