no comprende.

WarrenG wrote:And once again, we have come come full circle to the same discussion we have every year, or every month that Jess is not the master of his domain.
...................................:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:.........................................

?!?!?!?????

:shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:-------------------------->>>>>:( :( :( :( :( :( :(

GFMeilahn wrote:We should definitely consider making the masters races at Hellyer be 40+....

They've been that way on Friday nights for the last two or three years. I think the only masters event in that period that wasn't 40+ was the AVC in July, and that was 35+ because the elites included full-time pros like Josiah Ng, Travis Smith, Adam Duvendeck, BJM, etc.

GFMeilahn wrote:...We should definitely consider making the masters races at Hellyer be 40+, and I propose the same for many road events as well.

How about people start masters races at 40+ for the events they promote?

Seems to me there's no need to try and mandate race categories, particularly when proposed changes would decrease eligibility for one of the only fields that consistently sells out (35+ 4/5.)

One of those master cat 1/2 who does well at the track is 45+ Don Langley(4th at Elite State points race), as well as 35+ Steve Pelaez (1st Elite Kilo and team pursuit). In the team pursuit, 2nd place went to a team made up of a 35+, 40+, 45+, and a 50+. We should definitely consider making the masters races at Hellyer be 40+, and I propose the same for many road events as well.

BikeDude, et al, the length of the pro 1,2 road race events becomes prohibitive for most masters age riders with normal masters lives. When the cat 1 masters decide to skip the masters criteriums and ride with the 1,2's instead they do more than just finish.

And I know some masters cat 1,2's on the track who do pretty well against the non-pro kids.

Casey's "suggestion" is only that, not a rule. Except for championship events it is the promoters that decide what age groups will be offered.

And once again, we have come come full circle to the same discussion we have every year, or every month that Jess is not the master of his domain.
:P

I second Casey's suggestion. USAC, do we have a motion? :?:

Works for me.

Kevin Klein who is leading the 1/2 BAR rankings is 40

Michael Ma who placed 5th at Benicia Crit is 43

Paul Penn who placed 8th at Benicia is 45

Maybe we should go back to having masters racing stating at 40 instead of at 30

CPhipps wrote:45 is the new 25.

At least I have few years left to find a better lawyer than I had at 25. :oops:

bikedude0 wrote:
The fact remains that the guys who are inflicting serious damage in Crits and RR's in their respective age groups (i.e. 35+ or 45+/55+) are not routinely doing the same thing when they drop down to the younger faster age groups.

Nor are a majority of the Cat 1 and 2 riders who are only 25 years old. A lot of under 30 year old riders got shelled at the elite district road race at Fort Ord or at Patterson Pass and a few 45 year olds were there at the end.

I guess my point is that being 45 (or even 46!) doesn't mean you are no longer able to ride as fast as most cat 1 riders. What tends to make us less competitive are the lifestyle changes.

I know that there is some point where age starts limiting your abilities but I'm not convinced that 45 years is it and I KNOW that 35 isn't.

I think that what masters racing really means is: "I've got some sort of 'real life' to deal with and can't put as much time into cycling as when I was younger." The age just happens to coincide with when we finally get our lives together. :-)

True, the masters kicked some ass on the young guys this year at the State TT. How often does this occur in mass start races?

You are also talking about guys who are the exception and not the rule. Every sport has its Nolan Ryans and Barry Bonds. We have our Larry Nolans, John Elgarts, etc.

The fact remains that the guys who are inflicting serious damage in Crits and RR's in their respective age groups (i.e. 35+ or 45+/55+) are not routinely doing the same thing when they drop down to the younger faster age groups.

45 is the new 25.

bikedude0 wrote:Yes Warren, I was not expecting an answer. My point was more about the downgrading issue that Casey is always mentioning. I am not sure how "competitive" is being defined here. Does that mean just finishing, or placing? As we all know, the guys who are winning the 45+/55+ races are NOT going to be doing the same thing in the P/1/2 races, no way, no how. In fact they will be lucky to finish in the field.

The guy who won the elite district TT this year is 46. The five fastest times that day were all over 40 I believe.

bikedude0 wrote:

Who decided on this competitive in category regardless of age theory anyway? I only recall seeing it this year? USA Cycling? NCNCA? God?

bikedude0 - Guess you need to read the USCF rulebook a bit more carefully. From the USCF bylaws

7.5.1.2 Categories indicate cycling abilities relative to riders
of the same sex without regard to age.

This bylaw has been in the USCF rulebook for many, many, many years.

When you talk about a Masters 1/2/3 race you are actually referring to two different things. Masters is an age class. The age classes under the rules are

Juniors
U 23
Elite
Masters

Your age class is completely separate form your category. When a race is a Masters 1/2/3 race it is talking about two different things. The age class ( ie masters) and the eligible categories ( ie 1/2/3s)

Note that this year John Elgart a 55+ master rider finished in 8th place in the Pro/1/2 event at the Modesto RR earlier this year so yes a masters 55+ Cat 2 rider can be competitive in an elite Pro/1/2 event

It does make sense except that as a promoter, one doesn't want to have to pay too much ( be in the red) for the privilege of promoting, one way to be in the black is to provide a chance for more of the 4's and 5's to race.

Having masters races is one way. I really don't care if there are masters races or not but if you look at the demographics, there are a lot more cat 4's and cat 5's out there than anybody else. Another way to provide more racing opportunities and a (instead of having a single race fill up for the 4's and 5's every time) is to have multiple waves (when conditions permit) of cat 4/cat 5 races instead of masters races separate from the cat races , i.e. cat 4 wave 1, cat 4 wave 2, versus cat 4, cat 4/5 35+ or whatever age/category breakdown you want to use.

Yes Warren, I was not expecting an answer. My point was more about the downgrading issue that Casey is always mentioning. I am not sure how "competitive" is being defined here. Does that mean just finishing, or placing? As we all know, the guys who are winning the 45+/55+ races are NOT going to be doing the same thing in the P/1/2 races, no way, no how. In fact they will be lucky to finish in the field. Does this mean they are no longer competitive in their category? I don't think so. Does this mean they should downgrade? Of course not. These guys are Cat 1/2 level MASTERS racers who earned these rankings and should not have to be "competitive" against <30 guys of the same category. Although this may not be a 'lifetime achievement award", it does reflect their ability to compete against their peers?

Who decided on this competitive in category regardless of age theory anyway? I only recall seeing it this year? USA Cycling? NCNCA? God?

BikeDude's idea actually makes a lot of sense, if you think about it.

bikedude0 wrote:If the theory about still being competitive in your category regardless of age holds true, then why bother having Masters races at all?

You were probably just being rhetorical and clever, but the 35+123 and 45+ races are more interesting from a tactical perspective than Elite 3, 4, or 5 races, and generally safer too. And if there are 90 cat 5's who want to race then splitting them up by age seems reasonable.

And Jess, I don't think your new approach will last long enough. :!: :lol: :wink:

:shock: :( ?

:o !!!

:? ... :wink:

(Henceforth all editorial replies will be in Emoticese exclusively.)

Horace Ridler, "The Zebra Man"

Reason one: They hurt less than the Elite races.
Reason two: To avoid racing against Junior riders.
Reason three: Better odds of finishing in the money.
Reason four: There's so many of them!!
Reason five: Masters entry fees mean profit.

While many of the 45+/55+ Cat 1/2 guys are still highly competitive in the 35+ 1/2/3 races, the number of 45+/55+ Cat 1/2 racers that still enter the P/1/2 field is very very small. Based on the for mentioned logic regarding downgrading, they should all downgrade to Cat 3's to maximize their ability to enter Elite 3 or Masters 3/4/5 races when open category Masters 45+/55+ races are not available. Then they could race any race except the P/1/2 and 4/5's, which they don't do anyway. This would in no way compromise the ability to enter the 35+ 1/2/3 or 45+ open races. What it would do is preclude the need for 45+ 3/4/5 races because now it would include the former 1/2's, hence making it an open race.

If the theory about still being competitive in your category regardless of age holds true, then why bother having Masters races at all?

Jess,

Congrats on your 200th post/cat 2 status. I have noticed the reduction in chatter. Feeling the effects of a long posting season?

Paul

the Jesster has been downgraded.

Notice a conspicuous, almost deafening silence from the Zebra den?

:? :? :? :? :? :? :? :? :? :? Zipped. :? :? :? :? :? :? :? :? :? :?

Downgrading won't make them slower, but it will allow them to enter races that don't include cat 1's.

Be careful what you wish for.

If a masters race is an open event, or a 1/2 or 1/2/3 event then there is no reason why Cat 1s shouldn't be in the race is they are old enough. As I said your category is independent of your age. a Cat 1 who is 37 is in theory suppose to still be competitive in any Elite 1/2 race. If this 37 year old rider is no longer competitive in Elite 1/2 level races then in theory he should no longer be a Cat 1 and should be downgraded.

casey wrote:As it has been said on this forum many times in the past. If you are 54 and a Cat 2 and you can no longer keep up with or be competitive in the elite 1/2 races ( or even the 35+ 1/2/3 races) then it is time for you to downgrade. Your category is suppose to be a reflection of your current abilities, not a life time achievement award. Your category is also independent of your age. No matter what your are, if you can no longer keep up with the elite Cat 2s it is time for you to downgrade

Wait a second...are suggesting that there really shouldn't be any Cat 1s in Masters race because if they are really Cat 1s they are competitive in a Pro/1 field?

bikedude0 wrote:... Enough with the 45+ 4/5 or 3/4/5 when there is no open 45+ category offered. I think these are cases of the promoter/masters racer tailoring the categories to give himself the best chances. What options are left for the higher category 45+ guys at these races? Do you think its fair for a 54 year old Cat 2 to have to race the 35+ 1/2/3 race?

First, we have offered 45+ 3/4/5 and had not a single team member racing the event - it was just something for that age group they do not get to experience often. Again, look at the demographics of NCNCA.

Second, can't wait to read the replies to the 54 y/old cat 2 question... seems moot, a cat 2 could (should/would?) also race with P/1/2... seems more 'fair' than the poor 36 y/old cat 3 racing in the 35+1/2/3... maybe your question is really about the lack of cat 2 races in these here parts. Cat 2 = cat 2, regardless of age, if ya can't compete with your cat, downgrade - then the hypothetical racer could race elite 3 if 35+ 1/2/3 was not fair.

As it has been said on this forum many times in the past. If you are 54 and a Cat 2 and you can no longer keep up with or be competitive in the elite 1/2 races ( or even the 35+ 1/2/3 races) then it is time for you to downgrade. Your category is suppose to be a reflection of your current abilities, not a life time achievement award. Your category is also independent of your age. No matter what your are, if you can no longer keep up with the elite Cat 2s it is time for you to downgrade

Probably not a good idea unless you can offer 55+ Cat also. There are some seriously fast 40 to 44 year old guys that could make things pretty rough on the 55+ dudes, no offense meant to the AARP crowd. What would be nice is if the categories offered were consistent for all the races. Enough with the 45+ 4/5 or 3/4/5 when there is no open 45+ category offered. I think these are cases of the promoter/masters racer tailoring the categories to give himself the best chances. What options are left for the higher category 45+ guys at these races? Do you think its fair for a 54 year old Cat 2 to have to race the 35+ 1/2/3 race?

Mad Axeman wrote:I just think it is good to shuffle the deck once in a while.

Amen!

Can I have some new cards please?

The idea works better at a criterium. Here's a format that won't require ADDITIONAL races:

40+1/2/3 and 40+4/5
30+1/2/3 and 30+4/5
Pro/1/2 and Elite 3
Elite 4/5 or just E4
W1/2/3 and W3/4

That's only nine races that could fit in a 8 hour span. Perhaps a weekend series with these categories and an overall omnium prize. :lol:

My 2 cents,
George

personally, i would do 30+ crits if they were offered more often. Good warm-up for the Pro/1/2 crit.

30+ road races, on the other hand, do nothing for me. shorter distances, smaller prize lists and smaller filelds... limited attraction there. I suppose they give the 32-year old Cat 2 that can't train 15 hours a week a bit more of a chance of survival.

fyi we've traditionally offered a 30+ race at the Tower Crit, at one time (like 3 or 4 years ago) that race fit the demographic of our club better than a 35+.

We offered both fields in 2007 (35+ was stage race only), and will probably do so in 2008.

~ jonathan

Artisans race:

30+ unshaven
40+ 1st flight A-L
40+ 2nd flight M-Z
50+ Less than 50% gray...never used Grecian
50+ Must be a grandpa/grandma/grandkids photo's required/proof of AARP membership
60+ Still working and can never retire. Counting on SS 'cause I ain't got no pension.
60+ Gave up running this year. Bad knees.

:wink:

casey wrote:...If any promoter feels their race will benefit from offering a 30+ or 40+ ( or even a 37-43) category then they are more than welcome to offer such categories.

I can see it at the EMC crit next year:
P12
Cat 3
Cat 4/5
30-39 1/2/3
40+ Cat 3
41+ 1/2/3

:wink:

Seriously, run it how you want at your races and encourage other promoters to do the same.

Unlike many other racers, 40+ cat 3's usually can pick between at least 2 races, even at RR's. And they shouldn't expect to go from winning 35+ 4/5 races to immediately winning 35+ 1/2/3 races - as a 3 in those races, you're at the bottom of the totem pole, just like a Cat 2 in P/1/2 races. Gotta suffer and work your way up.

-Peter
(lots of suffering, little upward movement... yet :lol: )

Velo Promo has offered a 30+ category at Dunnigan Hills and before that at Winters. This field has traditionally been very small, well under 20 riders and a lot of years under 10 riders. The last year the Winters course was run the 30+ field had a good turnout, mostly from riders who couldn't get into other fields who choose to opt for the 30+ field instead of going home.

Patterson Pass RR is another race that typically offers a 30+ category and again historically this race has very small fields.

Leesville Gap another race that offers a 30-34 field that again has historically seen small fields, but the 40-44 field draws significantly better than the 30-34 field.

Tour de Nez has had 30+ races that have drawn well

The 30+ fields at the Cloterium this year did have very good turnouts

So we seem to have a mixed bag for how well at least the 30+ races draw. I think one of the strengths of our region is we don't try to encourage promoters to run the same fields all the time. In some regions if you don't run all or most of the races from the list of categories in the BAR series your race doesn't count in the BAR series, which often can hurt rider turnout. Naturally if a promoters runs a 30+ or 40+ race those specific events will not count in the BAR but that doesn't exclude your whole race from the BAR/BAT. If any promoter feels their race will benefit from offering a 30+ or 40+ ( or even a 37-43) category then they are more than welcome to offer such categories.

I just think it is good to shuffle the deck once in a while.

We have added some new cards (riders aging up), but the main characters are all pretty much the same weekend after weekend. Do that for 4 or 5 years and it gets stale.
I think it also creates more stability for the sport long term. We have a lot of up and coming 40+ riders that once they upgrade out of the 4/5s don't really have reasonable next step.
Talented 40+ riders are likely to race down making the 40+ race just a little easier than a 35+ 1/2/3 field. They might stick around longer, but if we continue to blow them out of the water by making them race against some of the Ubers in the 35+ 1/2/3 field, they are more likely to bag racing all together.
If Pop bags racing, son bags racing too.

I also think you would have some 30 to 34 Cat 2s that would race in a 30+ 1/2/3 Masters race. Maybe not so much the Cat 1s, but the 2s who are pack fodder in the P1/2 race might enjoy an opportunity to win a race now and then.

From a promoters standpoint, especially a crit, it would open up more possibilities of multiple races. There are a lot of racers my age, and with a 30+ and 40+ format, we would be able to do 3 races instead of 2. Or do 2 masters races.

You have some 45ers that feel like they are not being challenged but they don't want to race 35. You have some 35ers that are not being challenged. This would seem to provide a solution to both of those issues.

Run the numbers if you want, but it seems to make sense.

Ron

In Utah we do not have a 30+ Category it is 35/45/55 for all races and ranking Dirk

thesupervisor wrote:southern ca runs more 30+ then 35+races, and same with utah.

Not according to the results posted at http://www.scnca.org/results2007.asp The majority of non-championship events that had a race for riders in the 30-39 age range had 35+ races vs 30+ races. A number of races had no races for masters in the 30-39 age group but did have races for either 40+ or 45+ and older master groups.

In Utah they run a series rankings ( like our BAR/BAT) that features 35+/45+ and 55+. go to http://cycleutah.com/default.aspx and click on the series leader menu to see the categories offered. Seems strange to have a 35+ category in their season rankings if the majority of races are for 30+.

southern ca runs more 30+ then 35+races, and same with utah.

Is it a decision for the region or promoter? Ron, maybe you could test it out at your team/club race next year.

Masters teams are currently built on the 35+/45+ model not 30+ or 40+, so it would also change how you build your team and thinking longer term - same advantage or disadvantage for all teams.

From a team perspective, the first year it changed would isolate the 35-39 guys a bit unless the 40+ guys raced down, which might happen in a crit and probably less likely for a RR. Then are you going to draw 30-34 guys from the P12 ranks and Cat 3 to race on a masters team? Maybe 3s would migrate, but not sure about 1's & 2s. 30 also does not really seem like "masters" to me anyway - maybe because I'm now 40!

I also don't like the idea of mixing 4s with 123s - maybe personal opinion, however if you are really a 3 then you can be competitive or at least have fun in the master 123s. The few 3/4 races I tried were really pretty boring tactically (no offense to anyone just not as exciting as 123 races).

JD

Age is not a good indication of ability. Riders don't peak physically until mid-30s. Average age of racers is over 35. It's probably moving up closer to 40 in the next few years.
Are Pro-1-2 & 3s groups filling up on a regular basis?
Where would you add the 30+ group on an average crit day?

In doing a quick review of other states it looks like the majority of states are running 35/45/55 races for masters. To save time I looked at the BAR categories offered in states that have one.

S Cal
WA
New England
Nor and S Carolina
FL
MI
CO (ACA)
all listed 35/45 master age groups, some states had a 50 age group some had 55 and 60 age groups

WI was the only state i saw with 30/40/50 age groups.

AZ listed 5 year age groups for their BAR

OR didn't have a BAR but it looked like some races have 35+ masters while other races had masters starting at 40+ (ie no masters races in the 30-39 age range)

At least from my quick survey the majority of regions run 35/45 races for masters.

Those categories make more sense as the baby boomers age. If listed as "open" fields, the 30+ 4/5 and 40 4/5 categories should be offered if time permits or even make it 30+ 3/4/5 and 40+ 3/4/5. Keep in mind that cat 3s MAY not be able to count those races towards a cat 2 upgrade if the field is mostly cat 4s.

I just spent CalCup racing 35+ 1/2/3 consistently for the first time and I didn't find any lack of talent. Nor did it seem stale, but then I'm a relatively new Cat 3 and spent most of the year racing Elite, not Masters.

But if splitting the age groups this way would make the fields a bit bigger, I'd be down. I seem to have more luck cracking the top 6 in Masters races but the fields are often too small for upgrade points. Then again, Parks Tool and Phippstar are each worth at least a half dozen of your average Cat 3 racers in terms of how much suffering they can inflict- maybe Casey will pro-rate? :lol:

If you wanna start gerrymandering race cats, split the 35+ races into 1/2 and 3/4 fields- oh no! I'm starting to sound like Jess! :oops:

Great idea, but let's wait until 2009 to start it. :D