Interesting to note that the Monterey Circuit Race on March 12th will have 45+ 4/5, 35+ 4/5 and Elite 4/5 races according to the race ad I reviewed today, in addition to a few other categories.

The other way to combat this is to break up the 4/5s by age group. Offerring a 45+ 4/5 and a 35+ 4/5 allows a promoter to improve safety and increase the sellable spots at the race.
Many of the 35+ 4/5 riders were over 45 last year, this year will bring even more reaching that age group.

The key thing to remember here is that for the most part, this is only a 35+ 4/5 issue. Rarely do we see this problem in other categories. It is looking like we are over weighted in the beginner masters categories. This may also be due in part to the many career 4s that have been racing for years without moving up.

Someone who doesn't mind proposing unpopular views (not me) might suggest that 4s that have been around for quite a while either commit to the sport and upgrade, or step aside for some of the new riders that want to give it a go.

As a 3 who races primarely in the 1/2/3s, I don't really care for the idea of a 35+ 3/4 race. There is an unspoken threshold between the 3s and 4s, and I think many of the 3s may feel tha same way.

Ron

Anonymous wrote:The fact is that the new 75 limit rule was not very well thought out. Was there that many problems with running a 100 rider 35+ 4/5 field? Elliminating 25 paying riders will hurt the promoters bottomline and discourage those 25 riders since they bought a license and can't race. 25 x $25 = $625 == Could hurt the break even point of some races!

PLEASE GET USCF B.O.D. to repeal this rule ASAP!!!

The larger the 4/5 fields the more accidents you will tend to have. IN the long run we probably keep more people out of the sport due to accidents ( or the fear of accidents) than we will because someone doesn't pre-enter early enough and can't race due to a full field. While there will always be accidents in bicycle racing we can certainly minimize the number of accidents by having more reasonable field limits.

As for reduced revenue for promoters remember that at every race there are a certain number of pre-entered rides who don't show up on race day. This means that the promoter can sell the sports of people who don't show up to people on the wait list. By double selling the sports of riders who pre-enter but don't show up the revenue hit to a promoter isn't that much. Also remember that of a $25 entry the promoter only keeps $22 after insurance and NCNCA surcharges.

The fact is that the new 75 limit rule was not very well thought out. Was there that many problems with running a 100 rider 35+ 4/5 field? Elliminating 25 paying riders will hurt the promoters bottomline and discourage those 25 riders since they bought a license and can't race. 25 x $25 = $625 == Could hurt the break even point of some races!

PLEASE GET USCF B.O.D. to repeal this rule ASAP!!!

WarrenG wrote:I was not suggesting a race with 4's and 5's together, but rather, a race for 4's and a separate race for 5's. Last year the most you could get from these two groups would be 100 total. With two separate races that total could well be more than 150.

Perhaps a promoter could do Elite 4's, Elite 5's, 35+ 3/4's, and 35+ 5's along with 35+1/2/3's, 45+ 1/2/3/4's, Elite 3's etc.

-Warren Geissert
The only problem there is I see no Junior category. Its not fair to force younger kids to race with the Elite groups, and even the older Juniors should have their own category.

It sounds like we are simply reaching the maximum capacity of a single race course on any given day, and shuffling around groups and catagories isn't really going to solve the problem. A course can only handle a certain number of racers, no matter how you devide them up. So that leaves, what, adding more races per day, or more courses per race? Any other options to solving the problem? How do other districts handle a similar problem?

I was not suggesting a race with 4's and 5's together, but rather, a race for 4's and a separate race for 5's. Last year the most you could get from these two groups would be 100 total. With two separate races that total could well be more than 150.

Perhaps a promoter could do Elite 4's, Elite 5's, 35+ 3/4's, and 35+ 5's along with 35+1/2/3's, 45+ 1/2/3/4's, Elite 3's etc.

-Warren Geissert

Anonymous wrote:For promoters, the idea of offering races for Cat 4's and 5's is financially lucrative because of the relatively large fields with relatively small prize expense.

-Warren

I think the mistake some promoters are making is that last year they had a race with 100 35+ 4/5 riders. They feel that their budget will take a hit if they are limited to only 75 35+ 4/5 riders next year. Of course the problem is these promoters are overlooking the fact that probably more than 1/2 of their 100 rider field this year was probably Cat 5 riders. It is doubtful that their race will pick up over 50 35+ cat 4 riders next year so they will have a 100 rider field again just with a 35+ Cat 4 event.

For promoters, the idea of offering races for Cat 4's and 5's is financially lucrative because of the relatively large fields with relatively small prize expense.

-Warren

Most race days will not support just simply adding a separate race for 35+ Cat 5 riders. There are only so many hours in a day and most races already use up as much of the daylight hours as possible just to fit in the existing categories. What we really need are new races that concentrate on races for Cat 4 and 5 riders of all ages.

Breaking out 35+ 4/5 into two separate races 35+ cat4 and 35+ cat5 would seem to make sense to me especially given the the number of full 35+ 4/5 road races last season.

Rick M

With so many Category 5 riders in the district now, wouldn't it make more sense just to have separate fields? With over 1,100 Category 5 riders in our district, and another 860+ riders as Cat. 4s, it seems like it would be worthwhile to split the fields.