I am going to have to agree with Jess.

Age of a Cat 5 is not a relevant point, all beginning racers need to develop the pack skills necessary to ride safely.
It can take up to 3 years for an individual to develop the neural pathways to respond to situations with "automatic processing" verses "controlled processing".

Experienced riders have learned behaviors that have developed over many years of racing and practice which allows them to make appropriate moves and maneuvers without thinking. (Automatic Processing)

New racers (age 15, 25, 35, 45, 55...whatever) have yet to develop those learned behaviors and the same moves and maneuvers are done through "Control Processing" and tend to be slow and effortful. This is a contributing factor to the lack of safety when put with riders that are more experienced and practiced.

Putting these riders in with accomplished racers who have more development is a danger in the very essence of how each athlete responds to their surroundings. They need to be with athletes of similar development and response time.

You have all heard the mentors use the "school of fish" term when explaining how a field of riders moves. That doesn't work if you take fish that move in a different manners and put them together.
In essence, this is what is being done and Jess and many other are after to resolve.

This very fundamental and basic development stuff folks. There is no reasonable argument that changes human physiology and the development.

Ron

TomS wrote:The ban on prizes in races exclusively for cat.5 men is to reduce the incentive for riders to stay in cat.5 - there are no "cherries" to pick. The smaller field size is for the sake of safety, and to make the first racing experiences less intimidating. It is absolutely false that cat.5 riders cannot compete for prizes - they just can't do it in 5-only events.

Similarly, we have occasional 55+ and 60+ riders who are relatively new to the sport. I would hate to exclude them from racing with their peers by restricting them to a much younger elite or 35+ cat.5 event.

In our times there is a loud cry from 45+ riders to restrict lower category riders from their race. I say, do it at a few races, but also at some races have the only 45+ race be for cat.3/4/5 riders - the cat.1/2 45+ masters can ride the 35+ race.

As to your points, Tom:

While the ban on prizes for Cat.5 only races was designed for one particular purpose, it has accidentally served a greater philosophical one: The Cat.5 category should be for training only. People should have 10 races worth of training before they attempt such a hazardous sport and endanger the peloton.

If, as you say, the reduced field size was to increase safety in races with 5's, why should the safety of the 45+ and 55+ racers be forfeit? I still have not heard a single logical reason why cat 1's and 2's should be racing with 5's -- because there is none.

You want to make the first race experience less intimidating? Have all 5's races be mentored. How in the world does throwing a 50 year old novice into a crit with Bubba and Caldwell and Betonte and ME make it less intimidating?? I have been mentoring 5's all year and mentoring the EB's for the past 4 years ... Cat 5 races with mixed ages are not nearly as intimidating as a 35+4/5 or a 45+ open race!

Quote:I would hate to exclude them from racing with their peers by restricting them to a much younger elite or 35+ cat.5 event.
You're kidding, right? Their "peers?" Cat 1's and 2's are not their peers simply because they're also old, just as a novice cat 5 collegian isn't the "peer" of Farrar or Holloway.

I'm sure that all my fellow mentors will confirm that the majority of the 5's we train in this region in those Elite 5 races are masters: i.e. their "peers."

As far as dividing the masters' categories into 1/2/3 or 3/4 or whatever, so be it. Viva la difference. But how would a 45+ 1/2/5 race seem? Stupid, right? How about an Elite Pro/1/2/3/4/5 race?

I am still waiting for that single logical reason that just because a cat 1/2 racer is 45+, he should have to race with 5's....

ZebraMan wrote:As for the 5's, their "problem" of 50-limit fields is solved by attending the early bird series, where there are no field limits, and where the best training is received.

Casey, there are a plethora of 5's out there because many of them race occasionally. You cannot compare the gross numbers of 3's and 4's with the 5's in any meaningful way.

The bottom line that has still not been adequately explained is this:

If cat 5's are not supposed to be competing for prizes, how are they included in masters (and juniors) races held for prizes?

The practice should be discontinued, and then if there is an apparent paucity of opportunities for 5's, it can be addressed by the various means discussed herein. But first we have to end this ridiculous albeit convenient pratice and declare once and for all:

The Category 5 is for training, not for competition. Period.

Let me clarify: cat.5 is intended to be an entry-level class - not just another racing category. The intention is for people who get integrated into bike racing to upgrade to cat.4 when they have accumulated racing experience and/or results.

The ban on prizes in races exclusively for cat.5 men is to reduce the incentive for riders to stay in cat.5 - there are no "cherries" to pick. The smaller field size is for the sake of safety, and to make the first racing experiences less intimidating. It is absolutely false that cat.5 riders cannot compete for prizes - they just can't do it in 5-only events. One problem with rules for cycling is that they have to work in different areas and age groups - with large populations and small populations. The idea of not having prizes for any races that include cat.5 riders really doesn't work if you consider older master or younger junior races. I would think that a large portion of 10-12 and 13-14 juniors are cat.5 - many of them are new to the sport. While highly valuable prizes may not be appropriate, I see nothing wrong with small prizes for these people. Similarly, we have occasional 55+ and 60+ riders who are relatively new to the sport. I would hate to exclude them from racing with their peers by restricting them to a much younger elite or 35+ cat.5 event. Don't forget also that there are other regions where the entire turnout for the racing day may be 120 riders. It is obvious that some combining of classes will take place.

There was a long thread which asked the question "why do we have 4/5 races". There was a disturbing trend of not having any cat.5 events, and having 4/5 events with large (90-125) field limits instead. Most races have a limited number or events that they can put on - for crits it is the length of the racing day. For RR's it is the number of groups that can be on a course at the same time. The charitable explanation is that organizers wanted to offer opportunities to the most people that they could. The cynical explanation is that it is all about entry fee income. I suspect that the answer is somewhere in between. Casey and I wrote the current rule restricting combined fields with cat.5 riders to 75 in order to reduce the incentives to only run combined fields.

Personally I think that it is important in bike racing to have diversity. While I would like to see more 4 only and 5 only events in our area (because of our high rider population), I think that it is good to have some combined events as well. It permits riders to test the waters before moving up.

This diversity can go further - long ago at Berkeley Hills one year we ran a 1/2 race and a 2/3 race (with a much smaller prize list). This allowed the cat.2 riders who were not really strong to be in a race that they could survive - and it exposed the cat.3 riders to other riders (this is before everybody became a master). In our times there is a loud cry from 45+ riders to restrict lower category riders from their race. I say, do it at a few races, but also at some races have the only 45+ race be for cat.3/4/5 riders - the cat.1/2 45+ masters can ride the 35+ race.

Diversity - not every race has to be the same.

If you read the upgrade FAQ at http://www.ncnca.org/docs/upgrade/ you see that I do allow club races to count for 1/2 of the credit for a 5 to 4 upgrade. The provision this year is that the club races have to be USAC sanctioned in order to count per the new USAC upgrade rules re unsanctioned events not counting for upgrading. Since regular weekend races are different creatures than club races I don't think club races should be used for all the credit for a 5 to 4 upgrade.

Sorry Jess but I think your opinion that Cat 5 is for training and not racing isn't supported by the USAC rules. The reason for the rule that states that no prizes of a monetary value may be awarded in a Cat 5 only race is to discourage sandbagging in the Cat 5s. Since Cat 5s is suppose to be about getting experience there are no upgrade points to get out of the 5s. Since there are no upgrade points to get out of Cat 5 there can't be any criteria doing a mandatory upgrade out of Cat 5. To discourage someone from sandbagging in the Cat 5s no prizes of a monetary value are given in Cat 5 only races. The rules do allow for prizes such as medals, trophies and awards which are based on rider's placing in the Cat 5 race. If Cat 5 was meant to be just about training and not racing as you say then the rules shouldn't allow for any kind of award based on placing in a Cat 5 only event.

There are field limits at the Early Birds just like any other Cat 5 only event. The advantage of the Early birds is that multi groups of cat 5s can be run to accommodate more riders than the typical race. Also not every Cat 5 who will be racing during the year is ready for racing in January. I'm sure a lot people who are Cat 5s in a given year don't even know they will be racing in January so they can't attend the Early Birds.

I really think this need to be a club level initiative. Sure we can put on sanctioned training races with mentors a few times a year but if clubs can put in the effort to organize practice crits and other events then we will have much safer fields. Here in Chico we are lucky enough to have Rodney Cox who sometimes runs 4 events a week for the area cyclists. We have mentored teus night crits down by the airport every week during the season. There is a large contingent of juniors and new cat5 racers who did their first sanctioned race at the Chico crit and already had over a dozen mass start events under their legs before they even pinned on a number. Does the district even allow for club races to count towards 5-4 upgrades anymore?

As for the 5's, their "problem" of 50-limit fields is solved by attending the early bird series, where there are no field limits, and where the best training is received.

Casey, there are a plethora of 5's out there because many of them race occasionally. You cannot compare the gross numbers of 3's and 4's with the 5's in any meaningful way.

The bottom line that has still not been adequately explained is this:

If cat 5's are not supposed to be competing for prizes, how are they included in masters (and juniors) races held for prizes?

The practice should be discontinued, and then if there is an apparent paucity of opportunities for 5's, it can be addressed by the various means discussed herein. But first we have to end this ridiculous albeit convenient pratice and declare once and for all:

The Category 5 is for training, not for competition. Period.

YEARS AGO (1980's), it seems to me that certain twilight races that were sactioned or insured through the USCF and which had USCF officials at them were counted toward the then Cat 4 to Cat 3 experience requirement. I'm specifically thinking of the Reno Wheelmen weeknight series. I'm not positive about this but perhaps Casey can chime in.

My point is that perhaps it's possible that some the twilight races we have in the district can be used to help both mentor Cat 5's and count toward their experience requirements. Obviously there would need to be some standards set regarding field size, etc. I know the Reno and Alta Alpina folks still have their twilight races going on and perhaps some in Santa Rosa? Just a thought.

Tony

I am totally for this type of event associated with a race or two or even three during the season. I am willing to supply two to four official NCNCA Mentors to help. I would also urge each club to have a main 'skills contact' person who is a Cat 3 or higher who will be called to duty during their club event also. These skills instructors can follow the NCNCA Mentor lead in helping teach the beginning racer.
I also believe that we can count on Laurie Fenech, the NCNCA Women's Mentor Coordinator to come aboard for this with the women's side!

Alan Atha
NCNCA Men's Category 5 Mentor Coordinator

I'm going to make two posts: this one is about the clinic thread. Another one will be about the issue that spawned this whole thread - cat 5-only events.

In 1975 there was a one-day event at the Sunnyvale twilight course called the competency clinic for cat.4 riders (4 was then the entry category). Bill Fallis and I attended. The format had three parts:

1) a brief session that included a short test (not turned in) and subsequent discussion of the answers that covered the formal structure of bike races - how to enter, categories, what is and isn't done in a race etc. This is base fundamentals;

2) riding around the course in groups of 6-10 for some number of laps with a very experienced rider - simple paceline riding and obvious issues of bike handling and cornering and noting glaring bike setup problems;

3) a brief "race" with no prizes, observed by our mentoring riders (from the ground - they were not riding).

This was my inspiration for creating the mentoring program in the first place. I do think that there is a place for something like this now, run every month or two, entitled "introduction to bike racing". It does not take the place of skills clinics. The idea is to have a resource available for people who decide that they are interested in bike racing and need help entering the pool. Potential racers could be referred by bike shops, the web etc. Likewise, local touring clubs could be made aware of it, so that they can refer people.

A strongly related concept is to establish a list of clubs, with contact people who are specifically charged with fielding inquires from newbies - clubs are the other mechanism for supporting and teaching new riders. Yes, we can also list coaches and coaching programs, but I think that making a club connection is more important.

This club list can be done whether or not the into program is set up. Note that the key to success will be the effort that the club contact-people make. They have to be enthusiastic, and welcoming.

velogirl wrote:I'm committed to offering a CAT5 clinic in conjunction with Menlo Park this year. ...Menlo Park is the perfect venue for this since we have adjacent space where we could teach skills and then could provide a mentored race experience for the CAT5s. Maybe other promoters will be encouraged to follow suit.

Lorri

That was more like what I meant. I didn't express it well. I was thinking of the individual EB days as being a series of racing groups, plus the mentored class and beginner races.

Jonathan, as a full-time coach (ie I make all of my income coaching, it's not a part-time job or hobby for me), I have to question why we should de-value our services? If an athlete is paying $100 (or $85 in the case of my clinics) for a four-hour clinic, they're receiving expert instruction. I held nearly 40 public skills clinics for men + women this season and almost all of them sold out (800 athletes), so the market is clearly there (at that price point). Honestly, I see first-year racers on $5,000 bikes with $2,000 wheelsets. I find it hard to believe they can't afford $100 for a skills clinic.

Rather, I think we (the NCNCA and the clubs) could better market the coaching programs in the district and support the fact that these clinics provide the finest, professional instruction and will help shorten the learning curve. We need to reach out to the CAT5s and help them understand the importance of LEARNING to race, not just DOING it. I won't get all gender-psychish on you, but there is definitely a difference in how men and women approach sport, and many men (the topic of this conversation) feel that they will learn more by just doing it -- and the end result is often traumatic -- hence the title CRASH FIVES.

I would certainly consider providing clinics specifically for the NCNCA, and the NCNCA (or clubs) could choose to subsidize those clinics, but I honestly don't think that is the answer.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Tim, we've chatted in past years about offering a second series of EB-type clinics + races later in the season. Unfortunately, with such a full race calendar, I think it would be challenging to fit it into the schedule. That doesn't mean it's impossible, but I think the draw for many racers would be the "real" races, not a clinic series. Another possibility would be a twilight clinic + racing series. If a club or promoter stepped up to promote such a series, I'm certain there are coaches (like me and Ron) who would be interested in coaching it.

I'm committed to offering a CAT5 clinic in conjunction with Menlo Park this year. Of course, as race director I won't be coaching that clinic, but I would be happy to contract another coach or group of coaches to provide the instruction. Menlo Park is the perfect venue for this since we have adjacent space where we could teach skills and then could provide a mentored race experience for the CAT5s. Maybe other promoters will be encouraged to follow suit.

Lorri

Cherry Pie and Menlo Park only had one race open to Cat 5s and those two races had full Cat 5 fields. A number of other Crits had field in the low to mid 40s for the Cat 5 race 9 and those races also had a 35+ 4/5 field ). Madera stage race had 45 Cat 5s as well as other races Cat 5s could take part in. As also notes some Cat 5 only fields have small fields but I'm sure if Cat 5s are restricted to Cat 5 only races then we will be seeing a lot more full Cat 5 fields.

it's the initial shock to having to pay $90 at once. If the price was $50 it could be something I could promote and maybe reimburse club members for. A thought is since you are charging less, the number of upgrade points is less, which require more race experience.

Casey, made sure that riders looking to upgrade did a combination of Road and Criteriums. The more practice the Elite 5s get, the better Elite 4 racers they will become.

Casey said in that other thread: Quote:Currently we have 1065 Cat 5s, that is after almost 400 Cat 5 to 4 upgrades this year already.

So if 400 generated the 10 mass starts (or clinic/EB equivalents), they are racing (and learning at clinics). Sure RRs seem more attractive to beginners, at least they are to former Century riders like I was.

By the way, thanks to you Ron and to the other Mentors who come out and mentor those newer folks. You guys put in a ton of miles for at most a few words of thanks. I really appreciate those guys who helped me get started.

OK, here is a reply more relevant to the topic.

I served as a mentor in a few crits and road races over the last two years. My experience has been full fields at the road races, but less than full at the crits.
Lodi only had roughly 20 or so 5s.

At Snelling this year I do believe there was a second Cat 5 field.
Typically the road races are more popular to 5s than the crits. I can confirm this through the activity of my own club. We had a massive influx of new racers this year, they flocked to the RRs and were nowhere to be seen on crit day.
Many of them are still 5s not because they lacked opportunity to race, but because they chose to race only a few RRs.

Ron

Windblocker may be on the right track. The Early Birds are a wonderful tool for training newer racers, but by being so early in the season their utility is limited to those who are just getting into racing or who dabbled a little the previous season. I know that is true since it is what happened after I decided to try racing a few times in '05 and then got hornswoggled into joining a team for the following season. So I hit all of the '06 EB clinics and most of the races, earning my upgrade to Cat 4 pretty soon thereafter.

Maybe a solution is to hold a second, smaller round of clinics in May-June, or as others have suggested adding mentoring sessions to some of those Cat 5 only races along with a short skills clinic held in a nearby parking lot or whatever. Or give leaflets to those Cat 5s who show up to 4/5 races promoting skills clinics and/or mentoring sessions, etc. No harm in helping our local coaches promote their services as well as encouraging upgrading skills.

And while we're talking about the Early Birds, there were a few things missing that could help our newer racers. First is that the EBs are run in a clockwise direction, so racers are taught how to turn to the right. But my first two post-EB Crits ran counter-clockwise, so most if not all turns were to the left. And, then all the EB turns are broad turns, but we've got U-turns and chicanes for racers to get through. I know there’s a limit to how much can be gone over in those sessions (and many new racers only go to a few of the EBs, not all of them).

Actually the clinics are a value when you consider that they are equal to 5 race starts.

5 races at $25.00 a race is $125.
1 clinic = to 5 races at $100 is a $25 savings, not mention travel time and cost for each of the 5 races attended.
The other savings can be of one's own skin. Let's not forget saving thousands in crash replacement parts and God forbid frames.
Going to a clinic and gaining skills and knowledge that it might otherwise take years to learn is a worthy investment.

You have to look at the big picture.

BTW: My clinic for beginners on December 6th is only $90.00, making it an additional savings of $35.00

Ron

Perhaps the cost of a clinic that offers upgrade points is too steep. Other than the Early Birds, why does it cost almost a $100 for clinic?

Someone new gets into racing, purchases the necessary items only to be hit with an expensive clinic or have to race 10 times at $25-30 per race fee.

I would suggest that the NCNCA offer a series of clinics throughout the year for Cat 5s/W4 only, at a intro rate.

Ok I have no way to figure out how many times riders have ridden as Cat 5s. I can figure out how many various racing opportunities Cat 5s had this year.

Note I didn't count TTs or short hill climb races that don't count towards upgrading in the following. I also didn't count when some races offered A, B, c divisions of the same category.

Elite Cat 5 races 50
35+ 4/5 races 42
45+ 4/5 races 12
35+ races 5
45+ races 33
55+ races 23
35+ Cat 5 races 8
45+ Cat 5 races 3
Elite 4/5 races 21
55+ 4/5 1