KevinMetcalfe wrote:

Okay, first of all when did 164 lbs become "big"? :-)

Second of all, the "climbers" need be make it over ALL the climbs on ALL the laps to contest for the win. :o (Did I say that out loud? :-) )

Finally, I think that the normal head wind up the big climb would nullify some of the advantage a pure climber might have in an uphill finish. Even at those low speeds drafting would come into play.

Our group (35+ 1/2/3) had a strange race tactically due to the long break away that started more by chance than anything else. In that regard it probably favored the bigger guys because the race ended up demanding a TTT like effort for about 50 miles. Hills or no hills, that's not the kind of thing that more of a pure climber like you or Harlan will find working to your advantage.

Kevin "big guy" Metcalfe

Dude, you're huge! :)

Ouch! All I can say is, man was I feelin' tired on that final lap! :shock:

CPhipps wrote:peterpen wrote:
Because of its finish, Patterson doesn't favor a pure climber.

Anyway, cycling is for pencil necks, didn't you get the memo? :lol:

Tell me about it. In my race last year there were 6 of us in a breakaway and us skinny climbers were not able to shake the bigger guys who finished 1-2-3.
I vote for moving the finish to the top of the main climb. :D

Okay, first of all when did 164 lbs become "big"? :-)

Second of all, the "climbers" need be make it over ALL the climbs on ALL the laps to contest for the win. :o (Did I say that out loud? :-) )

Finally, I think that the normal head wind up the big climb would nullify some of the advantage a pure climber might have in an uphill finish. Even at those low speeds drafting would come into play.

Our group (35+ 1/2/3) had a strange race tactically due to the long break away that started more by chance than anything else. In that regard it probably favored the bigger guys because the race ended up demanding a TTT like effort for about 50 miles. Hills or no hills, that's not the kind of thing that more of a pure climber like you or Harlan will find working to your advantage.

Kevin "big guy" Metcalfe

We need a phreak bike category for sure.

peterpen wrote:The Jesster wrote:Good guess.
But according to a GPS report on the 2005 35+1/2/3 race, archived on MotionBased.com, the numbers are as follows:

Total Time (h:m:s) 4:07:39 3:42 pace
Moving Time (h:m:s) 4:00:04 3:35 pace
Distance (mi ) 66.71
Moving Speed (mph) 16.7 avg. 45.8 max.
Elevation Gain (ft) +7,229 / -7,320

http://trail.motionbased.com/trail/activity/237733

Got to love the Garmin & MotionBased!!!

Zebraman

Those #'s are definitely on the slow side - last year, I was working for a teammate and finished middle of the field in the E3's and it only took me 3:10. The E4 winning time was certainly faster.

Peterpen, you speak the truth. That's my MB track and that's a lame time. Basically an off the couch TT (not TTT). And I'd been mugged the night before while trying to protect a 96 year old and had lost 6 pints of blood. And my brake was dragging. Anything else? That should do it.

diskzero, you also speak the truth about the wind, that 45.8 max was on the back straight tailwind section spun out in a 12. Next time I'll take my 11x28 phreak bike so I can chase at 46.4 mph instead of just 45.8.

I guess when there's a 10MW wind farm surrounding the course you can maybe count on a little wind.

Jesster, I think I was at a buck sixty-eight and gaining daily. The guy who won was some cirque du soleil waif riding a 43 cm balsa bike with 650 wheels (at least, in my imagination, that's who won). That course suffers 150+ fools lightly...see MB for evidence. :oops: Hardest on the NCNCA calendar? Discuss...

-Tad

peterpen wrote:
My teammate ~ 175lbs at the time. He got 2nd. The guy who won was probably heavier, at defnitely 6' + Andres is a big dude.

Because of its finish, Patterson doesn't favor a pure climber.

Anyway, cycling is for pencil necks, didn't you get the memo? :lol:

I'm sorry, man, but outside of Golden Gate Fields, chess clubs, and France, 175 is still NOT a big guy.
I have recurrent dreams about being 175. I'd have to cut off limbs, remove organs, and starve for a couple of weeks to get there.
Patterson sounds like a Pyrrhic effort to me.

When I see Steve Gregorios and Bubba Melcher on the line, I'm totally in.

Hear the fat guys laughing? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

peterpen wrote:
Because of its finish, Patterson doesn't favor a pure climber.

Anyway, cycling is for pencil necks, didn't you get the memo? :lol:

Tell me about it. In my race last year there were 6 of us in a breakaway and us skinny climbers were not able to shake the bigger guys who finished 1-2-3.
I vote for moving the finish to the top of the main climb. :D

The Jesster wrote:Is there anyone in this discussion who is larger than 150 pounds wet?

Where is the Clysedale category?!?

C'mon, hilly race promoters! There's a whole population of Brobdingnagians (http://www.worldwidewords.org/weirdwords/ww-bro1.htm) out there who want to challenge each other to see who's carrying the biggest hill-hammer.

Zebraman
My teammate ~ 175lbs at the time. He got 2nd. The guy who won was probably heavier, at defnitely 6' + Andres is a big dude.

Because of its finish, Patterson doesn't favor a pure climber.

Anyway, cycling is for pencil necks, didn't you get the memo? :lol:

Is there anyone in this discussion who is larger than 150 pounds wet?

Where is the Clysedale category?!?

C'mon, hilly race promoters! There's a whole population of Brobdingnagians (http://www.worldwidewords.org/weirdwords/ww-bro1.htm) out there who want to challenge each other to see who's carrying the biggest hill-hammer.

Zebraman

I'll second the 11x26. I just ordered one with that race in mind.

2005 was an absolute slug fest and we were lucky to be doing 9 miles and hour on the flatter sections of Patterson Pass.
I was on chase duty for the Thermanator.

One thing I know for sure, I will really be welcoming the 11 x 26 cassette that SRAM came out with. Nasty headwinds on Patterson equal 50 MPH + return on Altamont. There were a lot of reports of people spun out in there 12.

Ron

It may be slower, I don't really know. I can say that there was almost no wind in 2006 compared to wind tunnel like conditions like in 2005. It made a big difference.

The Jesster wrote:Good guess.
But according to a GPS report on the 2005 35+1/2/3 race, archived on MotionBased.com, the numbers are as follows:

Total Time (h:m:s) 4:07:39 3:42 pace
Moving Time (h:m:s) 4:00:04 3:35 pace
Distance (mi ) 66.71
Moving Speed (mph) 16.7 avg. 45.8 max.
Elevation Gain (ft) +7,229 / -7,320

http://trail.motionbased.com/trail/activity/237733

Got to love the Garmin & MotionBased!!!

Zebraman

Those #'s are definitely on the slow side - last year, I was working for a teammate and finished middle of the field in the E3's and it only took me 3:10. The E4 winning time was certainly faster.

Good guess.
But according to a GPS report on the 2005 35+1/2/3 race, archived on MotionBased.com, the numbers are as follows:

Total Time (h:m:s) 4:07:39 3:42 pace
Moving Time (h:m:s) 4:00:04 3:35 pace
Distance (mi ) 66.71
Moving Speed (mph) 16.7 avg. 45.8 max.
Elevation Gain (ft) +7,229 / -7,320

http://trail.motionbased.com/trail/activity/237733

Got to love the Garmin & MotionBased!!!

Zebraman

nm

SJimenez wrote:It's not just the overall elevation gain - it's the steepness of the grade, the 90 mph wind in your face while the windmills mock, the small children throwing rocks and the buzzards circling.

:wink:

Ok, I'll bring candy for the kids & dead mice for the buzzards!

To the poster who said 6000-6500 feet, thanks. That's kinda what I was anticipating.

CPhipps wrote:peterpen wrote:

Fun course - will be interesting to see how the TofCA racers go up that climb.

I didn't know they went that way, I'll have to check that out.

By the way, it looks like Hwy. 1 will still be closed for the race next month. Is there an alternate route for Stage 1? Maybe over Mt. Tam. :D

You got it - up Shoreline, and then instead of dropping down to Muir they go up to Pantoll, then over that way to Stinson. My teammate rode it with Slipstream when they were out for a recon a few weeks ago - they were very happy!

peterpen wrote:

Fun course - will be interesting to see how the TofCA racers go up that climb.

I didn't know they went that way, I'll have to check that out.

By the way, it looks like Hwy. 1 will still be closed for the race next month. Is there an alternate route for Stage 1? Maybe over Mt. Tam. :D

In answer to your question, I think it's between 6000 - 6500 feet.
For future reference, gmaps pedometer does a decent job of estimating total elevation gain though it doesn't really give you an idea of individual pitches.

Fun course - will be interesting to see how the TofCA racers go up that climb.

...and the guys from LLNL standing in the feedzone pointing and laughing!

It's not just the overall elevation gain - it's the steepness of the grade, the 90 mph wind in your face while the windmills mock, the small children throwing rocks and the buzzards circling.

:wink: