It's payback time for all the big guys :lol:
I took up Cycling seriously about 10 years ago and finally got rewarded for being a skinny guy with very little muscles. When I was younger I tried lifting weights etc and could never really add any muscle mass, and I sucked at every sport I tried. Now I'm 6" 153 pounds and nothing makes me feel better then beating some big muscle bound guy on a climb. Of course he break in me in 2 pieces after the race :oops:
Jess, you should do some MTB races, most have a Clydesdale class, I'm sure you would kick ass.

The Jesster wrote:It's the only way you're getting my money, so why not try it?

Jess - we tried it for three years at Tam, but just 7/5/6 Clydesdales showed up so we dropped it in 2006.

Keep in mind that it's one of the few timed races so you can race yourself year to year, and see how you do against people in other fields. Also -- getting a time facilitates intra-clydesdale wagers, handicapping, etc. Maybe you can introduce parimutuel betting to the hill climb circuit and spice things up!

-Tad

CRC

Thurman!
Any questions?

BTW:
What hills has big Steve been flying up? Have I missed something?

Yes, and your brilliance is blinding!

C'mon down to the track and you can make orbits. We'll teach you about points racing and going fast in banked turns. You'll have so much fun you'll forget about racing up mountains.

What are you saying, Warren? That my posts - and in fact all of my opinions and proposals - are overtly self-interested?

Yup.

I have only one goal from cycling - more fun for me, my teammates and my friends! (No accident that most of VOS are 100% Beef, 45+, and 3/4's.)

I admit it, Warren. It's all about me/us. In my eyes, you are a big green satellite orbiting around the VOS sun.

Armstrong never won a field sprint in the Tour. He won the sprint from a group of 5 riders who were all there because they could climb very well.

Not every rider gets to be well-suited for every bike race. Asking for a new category for the clydesdales is strangely similar to asking for races in the 45+ that only include the guys who are not real fast, just kinda fast or not very fast, i.e. 45+ cat 3,4. I think I'm sensing deja vu. Et tu Jess? :)

I'm also a big guy by cycling standards. However, I disagree with Jess on this issue. If we open a category for Clydesdales in climbing races, then to be fair we'd also need to open a featherweight category in crits, which would negate my obvious advantages and force me to race against a whole field of behemoths.

While I find the "you're fat so shut up" post pretty inane, I agree with part of its sentiment: cycling rewards and punishes riders of all sizes. So I can't climb? I try to improve that deficiency. But the same thing that keeps me from climbing with the best gives me power to contend in crits and flat road races, so I try to play to my strengths. I try to punish climbers on the flats or catch them on descents, and I blow by them in sprints. Sometimes its works, sometimes it doesn't, but that's life, ain't it?

Overcoming gravity remains a challenge for the big guys. I'm 6'1",
184 lbs. The TDF riders the same height (including Indurain) were considerably lighter. NO ONE would call me fat or chubby, yet I can't keep up with those lighter guys when the pace picks up on the hills. The big guys mentioned by Kevin and Jess don't look chubby either; wide may be a better word. You also don't see them entering many hilly road races.

The other "handicap" bigger riders have is rolling and wind resistance. The skinny guy can sit in behind the Ken Carpenters on a flat circuit and know he'll be saving energy for the surge at the end. He probably won't win the field sprint, but a top ten is quite possible. BUT following the skinny guy up a hill guarantees the bigger guy nothing, for they'll be suffering more than their counterparts.

Even at the velodrome, the skinny guys can do okay when they ride a good position (like behind a bigger rider), for gravity is not an issue there. Rolling and wind resistance matter, and so does fitness. For there is no "sucking wheels" at the track. Rather it is effort and less effort, and the little guys create less resistance. The fast guys mentioned that aren't 200+ lbs aren't very tall. I'm one of the taller guys out there, and folks like to ride behind me. That's part of the game.

To sum up, if you're small of stature, remember that the big guys were your size at some time in their life and can sympathsize with you. Can you now understand more clearly the challenges those of bigger stature must overcome?

Don't you guys get it yet? The Jesster just wants something to talk about to fill in his down time at work.

Kevin -

The reason you didn't see Lance win sprint finishes is because he didn't need to. In fact, he did win a field sprint at the Tour one year -- just for fun.

I think your Eddy Merykx category for TT's is great. I think that promoters should think outside the box.

And yes, there are some Olympic golden boys and former pro football players who can stay with the goats, notwithstanding their size. I'm not one of them. Nearly all of the big guys in the district aren't either.

And there is a distinct differentiator between skinny guys sprinting and big guys climbing: gravity. I'll bet on Metcalf's chances coming around Betonte's wheel in a sprint rather than Betonte trying to pass Metcalfe on a hill. Any day.

The Jesster wrote:Okay, Squire. I get the point. (The one on your skinny head).

I am 6'1" and 198 pounds.
That makes me about the same girth as Bubba Melcher and Steve Gregorios. And I hazard to say that Warren has a bit on all of us.

As proven by Lance and (most recently) Levi, small guys can excel in all of those disciplines. But we, the more muscular (not "fatter," as my scrawny critic implies), are challenged by that most unfair and unforgiving variable of the sport: the dreaded power/weight ratio.

First of all, I haven't seen Levi or Lance figure in too many real field sprints where pure power, not power to weight ratio rule...

Big guys who have been successful in cycling:

1. Eric Heiden - US Pro champ, made it up the Manyunk Wall. Only DNF'd in the Tour de effing France because he crashed out on the last mountain stage. When I raced against him at the Giro di SF one year AFTER he had slimmed down from speed skating he was still HUGE. He looked like a model for a statue of a Greek God. Hell, his hips seems as wide as my handlebars. All muscle.

2. Miguel Indurain - 'nuff said

3. Hell, Bubba Melcher. He was attacking all the skinny climber types at masters road nationals on the last lap when they were too scared to go to the front!

4. Big Steve Gregorios. Not gonna win any hill climbs, but then Chris Phipps isn't going to win any field sprints either (nor am I for that matter), but you don't see us whining for a skinny guys class in crits.

5. Skip Foley. Multiple masters national champion in the crit and I believe TT. Former pro football player for the Bengals. He also left a lot of skinny guys behind at masters road nationals this year.

6. "Clydesdale" Larry Nolan has won both the Copperopolis RR and Nevada City in his age group.

I would venture to guess that a lot of "big guys and gals" aren't particularly thrilled with climbing and a Clydesdale category wouldn't bring them out in droves. Just like a lot of skinny climber types don't like crits and don't go to them.

If you want to bring people to a race that wouldn't normally show up I would suggest putting an "Eddy Merckx" category in all time trials. Give the riders who can't afford to or don't want to spend the bucks for a trick TT rig a chance to compete.

Just keep in mind that my first year racing, 1985, at the district TT, Ron Miller rode a 52:40 on a bike less aero than the one I used at the District RR last weekend. His bike had 18 spoke, box section rims, new fangled "aero" brake levers, no TT helmet, no shoe covers, no aero bars (not invented yet), no power meter, no HRM, probably no cyclometer at all, and certainly no disk wheel.

Kevin

In the past two years Steve Gregorios has been flying. Ask him what he gave up to drop the former pro linebacker weight to get lean and mean. You'll only see him sipping Diet Coke's and ice water at dinner or after a race. See what goes into his body and you'll know why he flies up the climbs when he just use to crawl.

Okay, Squire. I get the point. (The one on your skinny head).

I am 6'1" and 198 pounds.
That makes me about the same girth as Bubba Melcher and Steve Gregorios. And I hazard to say that Warren has a bit on all of us.

As proven by Lance and (most recently) Levi, small guys can excel in all of those disciplines. But we, the more muscular (not "fatter," as my scrawny critic implies), are challenged by that most unfair and unforgiving variable of the sport: the dreaded power/weight ratio.

It's not a Denny's issue, my carrot-eating friend. I don't think it's even a beer issue. I haven't lifted any iron for ten months and I just can't get rid of these damned muscles. :roll:

So let us big crit boys compete against each other in the hills. How in the world could you possible be offended by that, Master Squire? They do it routinely in the mountain bike racing arena, so why not on the road?

And no, we don't need 5k increments and blah-blah-blah. Just choose a number so the big guys know that we're not going to be racing against some little Cooper. Then let us know about it ahead of time. I think it will be a profitable venture for your race ... and fun for us.

As the king of tactless communication and all time points winner I think you may have just scored maximum points for that one.

Bawahahahaha!

In regards to Clydesdale, it is not exactly fair. Someone over 6' can hit 200 pretty easily, but us midgets would have to camp out at the donut shop. I would be as round as I am tall.
I was chubby at 150 lbs.
How about making it by body fat percentage rather than actual weight?

or fat people could just lose weight. I just think that is you are fat, that is your fault. dont complain. lose weight and be competitive. after all the "feather weights" just didn't get fat. they want results so they make it possible. if you are complaining about being fat. LOSE WEIGHT!

CPhipps wrote:They used to have a Clydesdale division at Mt. Tam just a couple years ago. Maybe if there's enough interest they'd bring it back.

While we're on the subject of weight, I have been interested in trying track, but at under 140 (and all slow twitch) I was wondering if I would just get blown away in every event. Do any smaller guys ever do track and do any do well?

At the least I'd like to learn more about it and do enough to upgrade to a 4 and get that "5" off my license. :D

Thanks,

Chris

Chris,

Like we women keep saying, size doesn't matter (mostly). Michael just won the Masters Districts in the Match Sprint. (He won it in the points race too, but that was more to be expected). He does weigh about 10 pounds more than you though!

And gangly (I mean that as a compliment of course) Hutch has been out there and is pretty fearsome in the team pursuit.

Almost all the elite *endurance* male and female riders on the track in Europe also race the pro road circuit.

Also if you're a P12 you can get upgraded to 3 pretty quickly.
Read the attached document to this message:
http://groups.google.com/group/ncva/browse_thread/thread/1d21e9585046e055/#

They used to have a Clydesdale division at Mt. Tam just a couple years ago. Maybe if there's enough interest they'd bring it back.

While we're on the subject of weight, I have been interested in trying track, but at under 140 (and all slow twitch) I was wondering if I would just get blown away in every event. Do any smaller guys ever do track and do any do well?

At the least I'd like to learn more about it and do enough to upgrade to a 4 and get that "5" off my license. :D

Thanks,

Chris

GFMeilahn wrote:A person's weight class isn't the promoter's concern. Jesster is saying maybe it should be.

I agree -- championships should be awarded in 5 kg increments, let's say from 60 kg to 100 kg and beyond. Commute with 5 year increments of age from 30 to 65, and, just counting males, excluding juniors, we'll have 90 champions per event. Awesome! Share the joy.

Dan

But Jess has so much enthusiasm for the sport that he wants to do it all!

It seems folks are seeing featherweight and lightweight as the same thing. That wouldn't be the case in boxing, where categories are determined by your weight. A person's weight class isn't the promoter's concern. Jesster is saying maybe it should be. My attempt to compare the "heavy" rider's handicap in the mountains to the "light" rider's disadvantage at the track obviously failed, so here's another one. Let's have the Great Kali at 425 lbs defend his wrestling title against a healthy Rey Mysterio at 170 lbs and call it an even match. That's Jesster's point. It's not a fair contest.

My point was to focus on where you're competitive and use the other venues to enhance your skills, stamina, speed, or strength. That will allow you to be even more competitive in your primary venue and enjoy it even more.

my point exactley

At Hellyer, Steve Palaez went under 12.0 and he looks like he might weigh less than 200 pounds. Plenty of other fast guys who are well under 200 pounds, like Hernando (even with his flower soaking wet he's still a "lightweight" on the scale) , J/A-Donca, BJM, Langley, etc. Actually, at Hellyer there are probably only a half dozen or so guys over 200 pounds who are also fast.

In the Kilo "sprint" the fast time at Mastes States of 1:10 (in the wind) went to Brian Peterson-near 160(?) pounds.

Al Whaley is 47 years old, weighs about 160, and holds the sea level WRs for both the 40-44 and 45-49 years old in the 200 and 750mTT. His 200 is 11.2, and his 750 is near 50 seconds-his opening 500m was 33 seconds.

Roberto Chiappa and Josiah Ng are two fast pros I can think of who weigh under 200. And there a some speedy women who weigh under 170.

But yes, Zebra's physiology would work better for him in some track events than in road races.

GFMeilahn wrote:The featherweights would look out of place at the velodrome.

umm...
oh never mind.

being 200+ is unacceptable in the road race discipline. track is momentum and that only, the heaviest boulder rolls the fattest and fastest.

The featherweights would look out of place at the velodrome. Let's see how many can post a sub 12.0 second 200m time or beat the 200+ rider in a one kilometer sprint! No one would expect it. Nor would anyone expect the 200+ rider to win/place in a mountainous road race like Challenge, Pescadero, or Pine Flat.

Variety of race venues is what is beautiful about our sport! Hillclimbs, time trials, road races, criteriums, stage races, circuit races, cyclocross and track (sprints, time trials, team events, keirin, madison, points races, etc.) Focus on the events you do well in, and consider the others as preparation and/or to work on the holes in your armor.

Dear jesster,
I see your point, but I also feel that when one is to take up bike racing, being 200+ pounds is not an option. if you are contenct being pack fill, your local dennys is is calling.

however if ever plan on finishing your races in a respectable position, its time to run some laps, and drop the chicken wing.

A few problems with a "heavyweight" category:
1) There is no such allowance in the rulebook (yet the women can legally race with men)
2) The extra work at registration would include a weigh-in to determine eligibility.
3) A small group isn't making much money for the race promoter.

Yeah, but let's see those uber-panthers pull a beer wagon up BoFax road.

185 is dream-weight for me, boys. That's 13 pounds under my usual race weight.

But if there were a Clydesdale division, I might actually (seriously) diet this off-season to expand my racing menu in time for San Bruno and the Early Bird RR.

Come on Robert!! Give us a chance!

Oh, fateful day when Scott Saifer, my Wenzel coach, sat me down for a heart-to-heart.
"Zebra," he said, "If you were somehow able to lose 25 pounds and keep your power, you still wouldn't be able to win the climbing races against those 140-160 pound uber-panthers in the 45's."
Thus a fine career of crit/TT/beer racing was begun.

Save us Robert!! Give us a few clydesdale races! We'll bring you extra MONEYYYYYY!!!

185 is still light if you are tall. I would suggest at least 195. This is closer to a real clydesdale. I would also be in. (I would have to cut 30lbs to reach the 185lb level)

If the weight requirement is 185 lbs, I'd make race weight. But anything "bigger" narrows the field even more. The pure climbers seem to be considerably under 165 lbs.