CHI to SJC

[PaulM]

I would like to do an AGR reward from CHI to SJC leaving Jan 4. Amtrak.com's only option not requiring a bus or overnight stay is

CZ CHI - EMY arriving 5:10PM Jan 6

Capitol #547 departing EMY 7:20PM Jan 6

giving a scheduled layover of 2 hours and 10 minutes.

I wondered about the layover time in SAC, instead of EMY. Also I reasoned that if by chance the CZ missed the connection in SAC, there is always some chance it could make it by EMY (547 could hit a suicide). Conversely, it could be possible for the CZ to catch #547 in SAC, but something go wrong between SAC and EMY (CZ hit the suicide) . But if you chose to connect at EMY and miss it, it's all over.

So I tried the multi-city option and got, in addition to a bunch trains and buses leaving SAC long before the CZ arrives,

CHI - SAC arriving 3:13 PM Jan 6

Capitol #547 departing SAC 4:40PM Jan 6

giving a scheduled layover of 2 hours 27 minutes, 17 minutes longer than the recommended connection.

It gets weirder. If you try CHI - MTZ or CHI-DAV (the two CZ stops between SAC and EMY), you get as one of the options changing to the same Capitol #547, even though you would arrive about 2 hours later than if you were to stay on the CZ. So, Amtrak.com lets you change in SAC if you aren't going as far as EMY, but not if you are going to EMY or beyond.

I guess my real question, because I would like to do this as an AGR reward, is the AGR agent's computer any smarter than Amtrak.com?

 

[Shanghai]

I always thought they both used the same computer.

If Amtrak.com shows the route, AGR would have the same route.

 

[the_traveler]

They do both use the same system. Only AGR can not book award travel using a multi-city booking for the same amount of points.

 

[PaulM]

I always thought they both used the same computer.If Amtrak.com shows the route, AGR would have the same route.

They do both use the same system. Only AGR can not book award travel using a multi-city booking for the same amount of points.

I would hope that Amtrak.com com, telephone agents, AGR agents, station agents, customer service agents, etc. all interact with the same DATA BASE. But I seriously doubt that what the various players can do with the data base (what used to be called "user views' of the data base by techies) are the same. At least that is the impression I've gotten from the many posts on the subject.

For one thing, it has been pretty much established that the internet version's results can be random, i.e., if you want to travel from A to B on day C, and you enter the same specs at different times, the results may vary. Various unconvincing explanations have been given. Are AGR's results also random?

When you say "AGR can not book award travel using a multi-city booking for the same amount of points", I'm sure you really mean they can't book just ANY multi-city itinerary. After all, I doubt that the multi-city function, after coming up with its possibilities then checks the "regular" possibilities and then suppress these from the list of multi-city results.

Of course, there is the possibility that it is only the MANUAL system that is different. By this I mean that although the computer would let them book a reward, they CHOOSE not to because of some AGR rule. In my example, the computer could book CHI-SAC and then SAC-SJC as one reward, the agent but won't because if some rule.

the_traveler, you are the acknowledged expert here; but I bet that from your vast experience, you have INDUCED certain rules. I am curious as to what rule (other than it didn't show up as a routing by a system that can be stupid at times) am I violating? Are these rules published somewhere? I haven't seen any links to them. Whenever I've asked this question before, the thread always dies a sudden dead.

 

[the_traveler]

When you say "AGR can not book award travel using a multi-city booking for the same amount of points", I'm sure you really mean they can't book just ANY multi-city itinerary. After all, I doubt that the multi-city function, after coming up with its possibilities then checks the "regular" possibilities and then suppress these from the list of multi-city results.
..................

the_traveler, you are the acknowledged expert here; but I bet that from your vast experience, you have INDUCED certain rules. I am curious as to what rule (other than it didn't show up as a routing by a system that can be stupid at times) am I violating? Are these rules published somewhere? I haven't seen any links to them. Whenever I've asked this question before, the thread always dies a sudden dead.

Thank you, but AFAIK I haven't induced any restrictions.

What I'm saying is if you can put in "From A" and "To C" and get a routing, it can be had for (say) 15,000 points. But if you use the multi city tool, and put in "From A To B" and "From B To C", it will cost 30,000 points (15K + 15K). This I have been specifically told.

Case in point: If you enter "From ATL" and "To KIN" on certain days of the week (I'll use my specific case from last Saturday), it will give #20 connecting to #194 at NYP ONLY! I asked if I could connect at WAS (because I would rather spend a few hours in WAS than in NYP). I was SPECIFICALLY told that if I did that connection, I would need to use 2 awards! (One ATL-WAS and one WAS-KIN.)

#20 runs ATL-WAS-NYP and #194 runs WAS-NYP-KIN. So as I said, I would connect from the same first train to the same second train in both cases.

 

[PaulM]

Thank you, but AFAIK I haven't induced any restrictions.

But you do draw conclusions from your experiences and state them in ways that sound like rules.

Case in point: If you enter "From ATL" and "To KIN" on certain days of the week (I'll use my specific case from last Saturday), it will give #20 connecting to #194 at NYP ONLY! I asked if I could connect at WAS (because I would rather spend a few hours in WAS than in NYP). I was SPECIFICALLY told that if I did that connection, I would need to use 2 awards! (One ATL-WAS and one WAS-KIN.)

You are only confirming my contention that the results can be stupid, not to mention AGR's reliance on stupid results. Another case in point. let's say that on my return trip, I want to go from SAN to CHI. My choices are:

Surfliner departing at 3:00PM to SWC

Bus, San Juaquin, bus, CZ

Surfliner, bus, CZ

Only a professional traveler (not the_traveler of course), would go for the bus options; but a normal person might want the more sensible earlier surfliners to connect with the SWC?

Just for kicks I tried SAN to LMY because I might want to stop off in Santa Fe. All I got was the

Surfliner departing at 3:00PM connecting to the SWC. But not any of the earlier surfliers that I might want. At least it did not try to sell me tickets for Bus, San Juaquin, bus, CZ, bus (to Raton), and SWC.

Contrast this with Google Maps which can sort through the gazillions of possibilities to come up with the shortest or fastest routing between Key West, FL and Anacortes, WA.

 

[Ispolkom]

You are only confirming my contention that the results can be stupid, not to mention AGR's reliance on stupid results.

You're certainly correct.

I doubt that the "rules" you look for are anything more than rules of thumb:

1) You can book any trip that amtrak.com produces, except occasionally you can't, as someone (GML?) found recently booking Omaha-Columbus, Wisc.

2) You can't book an award trip that includes an overnight stopover, except that I think AlanB booked a 3-zone trip New York-New Orleans-Los Angeles which requires a stopover, and someone recently booked a one-zone trip from Flagstaff? to Spokane with a layover in LA.

3) Loophole trips from border cities that loop into another zone are allowed (Atlanta-Chicago is one zone, for instance), except when I was told twice by AGR that was a 2-zone trip.

My guess is that outside of the NEC there are some vague sorts of ideas of what's allowable, based on what the ARROW system produces, but it's not particularly systematized.

I find this ambiguity amusing, and fun to play with, and it certainly allows for some creative traveling. Given that, and the lack of capacity controls on awards, I certainly would not be in favor of AGR improving its act.

Though I was upset about the 20,000 points they lost earlier this month, I'll admit.

 

[AlanB]

2) You can't book an award trip that includes an overnight stopover, except that I think AlanB booked a 3-zone trip New York-New Orleans-Los Angeles which requires a stopover, and someone recently booked a one-zone trip from Flagstaff? to Spokane with a layover in LA.

You can't book an overnight stopover if there is another viable. more logical option. Like for example the Coast Starlight to the Empire Builder, via Seattle.

But in the case of the Crescent/Sunset, there is no better, more viable alternative technically. Yes, one could do the Capitol/LSL to the Chief, but going the other way like I did doesn't cost Amtrak/AGR anymore that going the Capitol/LSL/Chief route, so they allow it. I'm sure that the same applied with Flagstaff to Spokane, there is no other alterantive, so it was allowed.

 

[Ispolkom]

2) You can't book an award trip that includes an overnight stopover, except that I think AlanB booked a 3-zone trip New York-New Orleans-Los Angeles which requires a stopover, and someone recently booked a one-zone trip from Flagstaff? to Spokane with a layover in LA.

You can't book an overnight stopover if there is another viable. more logical option. Like for example the Coast Starlight to the Empire Builder, via Seattle.

But in the case of the Crescent/Sunset, there is no better, more viable alternative technically. Yes, one could do the Capitol/LSL to the Chief, but going the other way like I did doesn't cost Amtrak/AGR anymore that going the Capitol/LSL/Chief route, so they allow it. I'm sure that the same applied with Flagstaff to Spokane, there is no other alterantive, so it was allowed.

Oh, I misremembered. It was a Spokane-Flagstaff booking, not the other way around. I remember noting it, because you can make the connection without a layover, using the San Joaquin/bus route through the Central Valley. Flagstaff-Spokane is no problem (which I should have remembered, my apologies), since the SWC-CS connection is guaranteed.

I'll grant you the logic of your Crescent/Sunset route argument, but logic doesn't always work with AGR. I had a long discussion with an agent when I tried to book ATL-WAS-CHI-MOT as a one-zone award. He insisted that I had to go west on the Cardinal, changing at Charlottesville, rather than the Capitol Limited, changing at Washington. The fact that a bedroom on the CL is generally cheaper and always easier to get didn't work, nor did the fact that, as he admitted, if we moved our travel one day forward we'd *have* to take the Capitol Limited. I thanked the agent for her help, and said I have to think about it. When I called back 2 days later I got a different agent, who booked the trip using my preferred itinerary.

The vast majority of AGR awards are straightforward, enough so that you can book them online. It's when booking the more complicated sleeper trips that inconsistencies crop up. I'm not sure if this is because the agents don't consistently apply the rules, or because the rules aren't consistent in these cases, and I'd argue it really doesn't matter.

For the OP's question, I'd guess that you probably could book the trip transferring to the Capitol train where you wanted. But you might well get an agent like The Traveler's, who is more rigid. You pays your AGR points, you takes your chances. You can ask here and people will give their opinions based on their own experiences, but until you make that call, you can't be sure what the agent will say. Or what another agent might say if you call back in a couple of days. Or what either of those agents would say to The Traveler when he uses his secret AGR-fu.

And I'm just fine with that. YMMV, of course.

 

[IHC]

To the OP,

#5 has been usually getting into EMY early, about 4:30pm - 4:45pm.

There is another Capitol Corridor train #543/743 which departs EMY at 5:15pm. Just take that one if you do get into EMY early. Although you'll be traveling in January, in Winter. Anything can happen to the CZ then and all bets are off. LOL. :lol:

 

[PaulM]

... and someone recently booked a one-zone trip from Flagstaff? to Spokane with a layover in LA.

I trust that whoever you are referring to knows his geography and actually went FLG to SPK. However, when I tried FLG to SPK, I got

"Problem Finding Service: Sorry, we cannot find train service matching your request. Please try alternate stations/cities."

So I tried FLG to SAC and got SWC to CS (although it was in 3rd place after two bus options). So I thought ah ah. The CS-EB connection in PDX is no longer valid. But sure enough, SAC to SPK gave me SC to EB. As I said above, results may vary.

Another stupid result: I tried JAX to CHI and got SM to either CL OR LSL. But if I tried JAX to TOL (AGR zone boundary), I got SM to only CL.

And another: CHI to PRB (Paso Robles) gives me the connection I want: EB to CS, although in 4th place. But CHI to SLO (the next stop on the CS after PRB), does not.

Like shooting fish in a barrel.

Although you'll be traveling in January, in Winter. Anything can happen to the CZ then and all bets are off. LOL. :lol:

I suspect that if the CZ suffered because of winter weather conditions, it would be east of SAC; and the connections would be missed at both SAC and EMY. Thus my original question would be moot.

I find this ambiguity amusing, and fun to play with, and it certainly allows for some creative traveling. Given that, and the lack of capacity controls on awards, I certainly would not be in favor of AGR improving its act.

I disagree. Given Amtrak's thin route structure, there are many trips which require ingenuity that is beyond the capability of amtrak.com, as well as AGR's system if the above statements that the two are identical are true (I'm skeptical). I would rather be able to plan my own routing as long as it did not violate rules that can be clearly stated and put in writing. In other words, do away with the rule that it has to show up on Amtrak.com (if it really is a rule).

 

[BeckysBarn]

I would like to do an AGR reward from CHI to SJC leaving Jan 4. Amtrak.com's only option not requiring a bus or overnight stay is
CZ CHI - EMY arriving 5:10PM Jan 6

Capitol #547 departing EMY 7:20PM Jan 6

I have an AGR roomette award for CHI to SJC leaving Nov 20th. It puts me on the #27 EB & the #11 CS. The only layover is at PDX for a scheduled 4 hours. So the 2 hours in EMY is not so bad.

Apparently the EB & CS option is not available everyday.

 

[the_traveler]

Apparently the EB & CS option is not available everyday.

It should be - and is!

 

[Ispolkom]

I would rather be able to plan my own routing as long as it did not violate rules that can be clearly stated and put in writing. In other words, do away with the rule that it has to show up on Amtrak.com (if it really is a rule).

That's perfectly understandable. Tastes differ. I'm perfectly satisfied calling up and wrestling (figuratively speaking, of course) with an agent. I'm just vaguely concerned that if they clear up some of the issues you mention, they'll eliminate some of the loopholes I enjoy.

 

[AlanB]

In other words, do away with the rule that it has to show up on Amtrak.com (if it really is a rule).

It's not really a rule; rather a guideline for those looking to figure out what trips might be possible.

There are trips that Amtrak.com will show, that are not bookable through AGR. And there are plenty of trips that AGR can book, than cannot be seen at Amtrak.com.

In the case of that later statement, when you request a routing from Amtrak.com it goes to ARROW and requests the data. Sometimes ARROW only has 2 or 3 possible choices and therefore what you see via Amtrak.com is indeed the only choices. Other times there may be 2 or 3 pages worth of train choices returned by ARROW. However, Amtrak.com can only show the first page of choices. Any additional pages are simply discarded and you'll never know about them. However the choices on those additional pages are visible to the AGR agent and may or may not be bookable with points.

When you use the Multi-city (MC) choice at Amtrak.com you force ARROW to provide a plan that meets your specs and therefore often eliminate those extra pages of choices. However, MC does bring in the ability to stop over at a city which invalidates many routings when booking with AGR. Therefore we never recommend that you go looking for an AGR trip using MC.

By the way, that only displaying one page of results on Amtrak.com is why you often find train combinations available on one day, but not the next. This is especially true if you don't specify times and could be using a train that only runs 3 days a week. People trying to book long connecting trips will often find one combination of the Capitol Limited visible or not visible depending on whether the date chosen offers the Cardinal as a potential choice.

 

[PaulM]

Another example of randomness. Yesterday I complained that JAX to TOL only gave me the

SM to CL option. Today, the SM to LSL option appeared.

However, Amtrak.com can only show the first page of choices. Any additional pages are simply discarded and you'll never know about them.

Although JAX to TOL via the LSL appears, today anyway, DC to TOL gives me only the CL. In this case, it can't be page truncation because only one option appeared, which certainly doesn't constitute a full page. So the programming logic must be: if you are traveling a very long distance (e.g., JAX to TOL), then display extra long itineraries (e.g., via the LSL); otherwise only show the shortest itinerary (CL).

With to respect page truncation, the concept of a web page "page" doesn't exist because the size of a web page is dependent on font settings at various levels (you can, however, force page breaks when the web page is printed). What you seem to be saying is that the internet program does not access the reservation data base directly, but some how or another emulates the mainframe system which creates an output data table with a page number field based on some criterion (e.g., only x options per page or only y lines per page). The online program then reads only those records with page#=1. I used to call that the "bull of the woods" style of computer programming.

However the choices on those additional pages are visible to the AGR agent and may or may not be bookable with points.

First people claimed it was bookable if it appears on amtrak.com. Then it was bookable if visible to the AGR agent. Now it may or may not be bookable even if visible to AGR agent.

I think you can see where I am going with this. If an itinerary is rejected by an AGR agent, how do I know whether the refusal is based in incompetence, laziness, or just a bad day, all concepts that have been discussed frequently here? How do I know whether to question the decision and what arguments to use?

When you use the Multi-city (MC) choice at Amtrak.com you force ARROW to provide a plan that meets your specs and therefore often eliminate those extra pages of choices. However, MC does bring in the ability to stop over at a city which invalidates many routings when booking with AGR.

Again, this begs the question: What makes a routing invalid?

By the way, that only displaying one page of results on Amtrak.com is why you often find train combinations available on one day, but not the next. This is especially true if you don't specify times and could be using a train that only runs 3 days a week.

Sadly, not specifying times could only be an issue on the NEC, or possibly California. In any event the time only refers to the departure time of the first segment. So this wouldn't explain the CHI to SJC via PDX issue because the competitors, EB, CZ and SWC, all leave about the same time.
Speaking of which, I found that EB - CS connection between CHI and Callifornia is valid for SNS (Salinas), SJC, and PRB; but not SLO, SBA (Santa Barbara), OKJ, EMY, SAC. So the computer logic must be it's a valid connection only south of OKJ and North of SLO.

 

[Bob Dylan]

:blink: :blink: :blink:

Another example of randomness. Yesterday I complained that JAX to TOL only gave me the SM to CL option. Today, the SM to LSL option appeared.

However, Amtrak.com can only show the first page of choices. Any additional pages are simply discarded and you'll never know about them.

Although JAX to TOL via the LSL appears, today anyway, DC to TOL gives me only the CL. In this case, it can't be page truncation because only one option appeared, which certainly doesn't constitute a full page. So the programming logic must be: if you are traveling a very long distance (e.g., JAX to TOL), then display extra long itineraries (e.g., via the LSL); otherwise only show the shortest itinerary (CL).

With to respect page truncation, the concept of a web page "page" doesn't exist because the size of a web page is dependent on font settings at various levels (you can, however, force page breaks when the web page is printed). What you seem to be saying is that the internet program does not access the reservation data base directly, but some how or another emulates the mainframe system which creates an output data table with a page number field based on some criterion (e.g., only x options per page or only y lines per page). The online program then reads only those records with page#=1. I used to call that the "bull of the woods" style of computer programming.

However the choices on those additional pages are visible to the AGR agent and may or may not be bookable with points.

First people claimed it was bookable if it appears on amtrak.com. Then it was bookable if visible to the AGR agent. Now it may or may not be bookable even if visible to AGR agent.

I think you can see where I am going with this. If an itinerary is rejected by an AGR agent, how do I know whether the refusal is based in incompetence, laziness, or just a bad day, all concepts that have been discussed frequently here? How do I know whether to question the decision and what arguments to use?

When you use the Multi-city (MC) choice at Amtrak.com you force ARROW to provide a plan that meets your specs and therefore often eliminate those extra pages of choices. However, MC does bring in the ability to stop over at a city which invalidates many routings when booking with AGR.

Again, this begs the question: What makes a routing invalid?

By the way, that only displaying one page of results on Amtrak.com is why you often find train combinations available on one day, but not the next. This is especially true if you don't specify times and could be using a train that only runs 3 days a week.

Sadly, not specifying times could only be an issue on the NEC, or possibly California. In any event the time only refers to the departure time of the first segment. So this wouldn't explain the CHI to SJC via PDX issue because the competitors, EB, CZ and SWC, all leave about the same time.
Speaking of which, I found that EB - CS connection between CHI and Callifornia is valid for SNS (Salinas), SJC, and PRB; but not SLO, SBA (Santa Barbara), OKJ, EMY, SAC. So the computer logic must be it's a valid connection only south of OKJ and North of SLO.

:blink: :blink: :blink: Like most folks have said,its nuts but try,try,try again,sometimes you get lucky,sometimes you gotta ride a different route to get there,in my experience theyll usually tell you "No custom made routes"(unless you are the traveler!!) :lol: It is frustrating at times but youll get there if you keep on keeping on as someone said!

 

[Neil_M]

All very over complicated....

I am almost glad I am not eligible for AGR points!

 

[PaulM]

All very over complicated....

No, booking CHI to PDX and PDX to SLO is not complicated - Two trains, one valid connection. Or even CHI to NY and NY to JAX - again two trains, one valid connection. What is complicated is trying to predict what routings Amtraki.com and AGR will give you.

I am almost glad I am not eligible for AGR points!

Despite my rant about the black box nature of routings, AGR or otherwise, I wouldn't go to that extreme. I can't complain since I'm about to book a free roomette DEN to JAX, even if I don't get my preferred routing via the LSL.