I am one person who applied for this year's Seorak Granfondo but had it canceled due to postponement.
The core of this issue is that the postponed date was a time with very high possibility of rain riding.
A 200km distance with 3,900m elevation gain is a very difficult course even with normal riding. However, I believe that holding a race in rain, if it's not a heavy downpour, is something to be accepted.
So the organizers also received the cancellation after the initial postponement. However, many people were anticipating that the postponed date would be a time with very high possibility of heavy rain or extreme heat.
But why did the organizers set the date for such a day? Moreover, announcing a course reduction one day before the race, after already postponing once and in a situation with high possibility of rain, is something the organizers should be criticized for.
If the organizers had clearly informed participants from the beginning about how to manage the course in rainy conditions, there would not be criticism at this level. Can all the organizers' decisions be exempted just because the terms and conditions included a clause about the possibility of changes due to force majeure?
Given that many events already show poor quality despite increased costs, shouldn't Seorak Granfondo, known as Korea's top cycling event, have shown a different approach?
Seorak Granfondo is a race that prepares for a full year, unlike other events. Many cyclists will apply again next year, but if we cannot even raise voices of criticism about operating at this level, it is the same as voluntarily giving up our rights.
