After talking to quite a few folks this weekend in the 45 race, it would seem that most folks are fine with the way things are now. The full 45+ fields might be an indicator of this. Robert, take note :?

It should also be pointed out that if the 3/4 thing takes the place of the open or 1/4 race 45, which sans time machine that can make longer days, is what's going to happen, you can throw the 45 BAT out the window. The majority of riders are on teams of more than one, and a lot of us are out there killin it for our 'mates and like to see a measure of our efforts.

The racing at a velodrome is tougher by far. Consider the following:

1) No coasting--wheel sucking--it's either effort or more effort

2) Gearing--you're stuck with the one you selected--to go faster spin faster!

3) Field size--between 10 and 25--position riding is critical.

4) Distance--events are shorter and mistakes more costly

Some roadies cannot make the transition. I remember the pain I felt throughout the entire event the first time I raced. You deal with it.

From a newbie ubber (and happy about it),

George

WarrenG wrote:The best test of fitness and tactics? I'd say it's the points race or match sprint. (Good or bad) luck is rarely a factor, and by comparison, road tactics play out slowly and with less subtlety. But it's all fun!

Totally! I've been applying my criteruim knowledge at the track and have found that although possibly a good starting-point, decisions need to be made much quicker and the tactics are much deeper. And once the decision is made, you've got to have the fitness to back-it-up. I can hardly wait for the track to re-open.

I agree there's not much incentive for a road 3 who is 35+ to upgrade to 2.

I would say that most of the 45+ criteriums in NorCal are not a crapshoot and that fitness has a lot to do with the results. What may seem like a crapshoot now may become less so as you learn the players.

The E3's are like a lottery unless the finale is very fast. Part of the reason I don't do the E3's is because they're mostly boring until the last few k's.

The best test of fitness and tactics? I'd say it's the points race or match sprint. (Good or bad) luck is rarely a factor, and by comparison, road tactics play out slowly and with less subtlety. But it's all fun!

WarrenG wrote:SanJoCycle, it will be interesting to see how many guys get enough upgrade points in 45+ 3/4 races that are the same guys complaining about having to race with the 1,2's.
Actually I'd rather race in a 45+ 3/4 (or 35+ 3/4) road race as I consider crits a bit of a crap-shoot and most RR's a better test of fitness and tactics (strictly a personal opinion).

Also, I was wondering today, why bother upgrading to cat. 2, what would it get me? I really enjoy racing the E'3 and find the pace reasonable and I would no longer be able to race with them. I can race with the 45+ (open) now as a 3. I'm a very recent 3 and really have not given my body a chance to fuly adapt. If I ever manage to even get close to becoming an "uber", I suspect it will be obvious as I'll be able to "dominate" an E3 field (like I was able to in the 4's). Maybe I'll just wait-and-see. Thoughts?

casey wrote:Since riders who are 45+ make up 43% of the total riders who are 35+ 4/5s you would naturally expect to see roughly the same % of 45+ 4/5s in a 35+ 4/5 race. If only 30% of the riders in a 35+ 4/5 race are 45+ then the 45+ riders are underrepresented in that field.

That wouldn't be entirely accurate, since the population of 45+ 4 and 5 riders would be distributed to some degree between four groups; the 45+, the 35+ 4/5, the E4, and E5. Though, considering the fact that the races I looked at were all in 2005, the growth in the sport since then, I was only looking at finishers not starters, and quite a few people race with more than one group per event, make it well beyond my limited mathematical abilities to extract any sort of meaningful data from available race results... :-)

I would think that, considering that 43% of the 35+ license holders are 45 and older, if there were a 35+4/5 group and a 45+4/5 group, the two groups would be almost the same size. Except that the 45+ riders could still race in the 35+ group, and not the other way around... Uh, never mind...

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that having just a 45+ open group does have a direct impact on the 35+4/5 group, helping to make it the largest group at many races, often filling up and going to wait list. Offering a group to the 45+ 4's and 5's that they perceive as being more appropriately competitive would relieve some of the pressure from of the 35+4/5 group.

But then again, maybe not...

Once you mention T-shirts and kisses it really doesn't matter what the categories are.

While we're on the topic of Menlo Park, I want to thank all the masters for registering for our race next weekend! When we chose the categories we did so not only based on demographics, but also discussions that took place on this forum in the past six months.

Masters update:

M 35+ 3/4 -- 92 pre-registrations -- only 8 spots left at the line!

M 45+/55+ -- 32 pre-registrations -- 43 spots left!

M 1/2/3 35+ -- 15 pre-registrations -- lots of spots for you gentlemen, so come on out and race!

Details here -- https://www.sportsbaseonline.com/Item.aspx?item_id=1541

JQuist wrote:If, as Warren pointed out, it is nearly impossible for cat 3s to earn upgrade points in the 45+ races, wouldn't it be even more difficult for 4s to earn upgrade points as well, since they are competing for the same slots? Could be why the 35+ 4/5 groups have so many racers who are 45 and older. Sometimes as much as 30 to 40% of the entrants in the 35+4/5 races

Since riders who are 45+ make up 43% of the total riders who are 35+ 4/5s you would naturally expect to see roughly the same % of 45+ 4/5s in a 35+ 4/5 race. If only 30% of the riders in a 35+ 4/5 race are 45+ then the 45+ riders are underrepresented in that field.

The average 45+ criterium field is about 30-45 riders, not counting the 55's.. If the 4's are picked separately then they only get upgrade points based on the number of 4's (and others they beat) which might be 10-20 guys, so not many points.

The reason it's near impossible for a 3 to get points in the 45+ is because they often have to beat 1,2's to get them, and because the fields are relatively small there aren't that many points to begin with. So, get 4th in a 45+ race and you might get 3 or 4 points. The same guy could win the 35+ 3,4 race and get 7 or 10 points. Mark Patten scored a bunch of points in the 35+ 4,5 races last year and was a little slow in upgrading to 3 and joining us in the 45's, but once he did race with us he was in the hunt right away, i.e. a cat 3 who can place in the 45+. I've seen him at the track too.

And once you're a 3 in the 45's there isn't very much incentive to upgrade unless you'd like to ride with the E 1/2's occasionally.

If, as Warren pointed out, it is nearly impossible for cat 3s to earn upgrade points in the 45+ races, wouldn't it be even more difficult for 4s to earn upgrade points as well, since they are competing for the same slots? Could be why the 35+ 4/5 groups have so many racers who are 45 and older. Sometimes as much as 30 to 40% of the entrants in the 35+4/5 races could race in the 45+ group, but choose not to. Seems to me that those racers are quite clearly voting with their money, so to speak...

Is there any reason that the 45+1/2/3's and the 45+4/5s couldn't race together, but be picked separately, to balance the competition a bit, and maybe allow the 4s to earn some upgrade points? Just wondering...

JQ

At WOT they've had the 55's start ahead of the 45's so the 55's can win a few of the primes before getting caught.

And as the Hellyer people know, we often have handicap races at the track. It's very hard for those on the scratch line because the handicaps tend to be... significant.

Handicaps are very big in Tasmania around Christmas time.

One nice thing about being a race promoter is that you can hold what ever categories you want. As a promoter if you feel the 45+ 3/4s are getting shafted and will support a 45+ 3/4 race then you can hold 1 or more 45+ 3/4 races at your race. If you feel the 45+ 1/2s don't have enough racing opportunities then you could have a 45+ race and a 45+ 1/2 or a 45+ 1/2/3 race.

Interesting that the one angle that no one has brought up in this whole discussion is doing a handicap race. My first year as a Junior racer the only Crit I finished in the main pack was a handicap race promoted by San Jose BC. As I lower Cat junior I got to start in the handicap group that got a head start over the higher Cat juniors. The Higher Cat juniors had to chase for most of the race to catch my group. By the time they had caught my group the scratch group of juniors was worn down enough so that I could hang with the top juniors for the first time ever.

Th Lake Merritt Columbus Day race is the last handicap race I can remember in the region. For those of you who don't remember the Columbus Day race featured a single race for men and women in all categories. Since the race course was about 3 miles long there was plenty of room to put six different starting groups on the course at once. The first group got almost a full lap on the scratch group of Cat 1/2 riders. The 1/2 riders had to work hard together to catch all the groups that had started in front of them. Most years the final riders who get the early head start were caught on or near the start of the last lap and most of the riders finished in the main group ( at least those riders who did't crash out of the race).

While it might only be a true option on some of the longer crit courses, or any road race, having a 45+ handicap race might help balance the scales of competition. The 45+ 1/2 riders would get a harder race since they will probably have to chase hard right from the gun to catch the 4/5 riders, especially if the 4/5 riders would work together and work hard to stay away from the 1/2 riders. The 45+ 4/5 riders would get a chance to ride in their own group for at least a portion of the race and might have a better chance of placing against the 45+ 1/2 riders who have had to expend more energy to catch the 4/5 group. Maybe the Cat 3 45+ riders could have their own starting group ( or stronger 3s could opt to start in the scratch group if they wanted). Note that the handicapping will not always work out. Some times the scratch group isn't going to catch the 4/5 group ( and I'm sure in those cases the complaints will fly from the riders in the scratch group). Other times the scratch group will catch to quickly. Still having a handicap race would be a way to still have an open 45+ race but help balance the competition between the 45+ 3/4/5s and the 45+ 1/2s.

WarrenG wrote:Seems appropriate for this discussion. YerMama will love this one...

http://davefoley.com/bikeracing/negacoach/index.html

HAH!!! That's the best thing I've seen so far in this entire thread!!! Gotta love it........

Seems appropriate for this discussion. YerMama will love this one...

http://davefoley.com/bikeracing/negacoach/index.html

I signed up for the 35+ 3/4 race for upgrade points and as a warmup before the 45's race, and I didn't register (yet) for the 45+ race in case it rains and I decide to forgo the 4.5 hours of driving and stay home. I'm not risking as much money and registering the day of for the 45's won't be a problem.

RacerX, it has already been suggested to eliminate just the 1's from the 45's, and we also know that more than one race is going to eliminate the 1,2's from the 45's-it's not about just one or two races a year doing this.

Golf is handicapped by ability, just like the category system in cycling. The thousands and thousands of 5k and 10k running races and triathlons are by age, not by ability categories, and certainly not by ability categories within age groups.

SanJoCycle, it will be interesting to see how many guys get enough upgrade points in 45+ 3/4 races that are the same guys complaining about having to race with the 1,2's. I suspect that if they're good enough to get those points to upgrade then they're good enough to enjoy racing with the 1/2's.

WarrenG wrote:...Then I guess there is even less reason to make the 45+ races cat 2,3,4 since the 1's could downgrade and the 2's won't become 1's.
...Then is makes all the sence to have 45+ 3/4 (or 35+ 3/4), then as there really is something on the line, upgrade points!

Leave it to the Axeman to breath new life into this, and YerMama and NorCal Junior had some fine insights. Not sure what I'm even doing here but I couldn't think of a new & improved thread, so here goes:

I don't recall anyone seriously suggesting 45+ 2/3/4/5 and that would assist few and even seems a bit targeted. So Warren, don't get excited & forecast how everyone will adapt to this new paradigm (with downgrades no less!) when it was never a front runner in suggested classes and surely would never become the 'required' class for 45+. I think the most endorsed option has been to make the split around cat 3 or 4, much like we 35-44 'enjoy'. And although anyone above 35 and below cat 3 could race with us in our 4/5 groupings, you gotta get your entries in VERY early or else you'll miss the field cut. I think this demographic swell is also what Jessie & others are trying to accomodate with alternative race classes. Not to mention making the front of a race a bit more familiar to more of us, even if by handicapping as done in golf or any race by category.

I'm still not sure why Warren seems to be fighting this so much (or am I misreading the thread?). I mean, it's only Jessie suggesting it - not like some consortium of promoters has deemed 'no more 45+ open races.' As an almost 45 year-old cat 4, I get to race with like-aged & ability racers often; and I take a second race with the E4 or 35+ open when I can. My schedule is to cat up after 20+ years of racing so I'll be a cat3 45+ relatively soon. I guess then I'll race E3 when I want to see more of the front of the race.

Warren has mentioned challenging oneself... every so often, Larry et al. forced to race either Pro/1/2 or 35+1/2/3; and they often do anyway as second races at crits. I see nothing wrong with letting the 45+ sport racers spend a race or two a year with like-aged & ability racers much we do. Just don't cut the women, or the Juniors, or the recumbant unicycles.

Now, to Jessie and Warren respectively : To despair a) the consistent winners (or 'non-winners') in 45+ open races or b) the removal of even one 45+ race on the calendar ignores the fact that that the 45+ can ALWAYS race with the 35+ or elite category of choice. Challenge yourself against the ubers and get another chance for some glory with the elite 3/4/5 offerings. Heck, we'd be easy prey after facing the typical 45+ open field.

By the way - Warren, I see you signed up for the 35+ 3/4 race at Menlo Park, definitely an 'alternative' race class in the vein of what Jessie seems to be suggesting. I won't take a crack at why you're not in the 45+ event, registration involves freedom of choice to the extent there is a choice. BTW, I hope none of the 'more dangerous cat 3s' cause a crash as I'll be there too :wink:
Happy racing, X

...Then I guess there is even less reason to make the 45+ races cat 2,3,4 since the 1's could downgrade and the 2's won't become 1's.

Quote:Ron, I agree that are a few 45's who are cat 1 or 2 who are closer in ability (without regard to age) to the next lower category. Larry and a few other guys can win enough 45+ races to get a mandatory upgrade to cat 1 every season, but that alone does not mean they are capable of being competitive with 1's. IOW, winning 45+ age group races doesn't actually mean you can be competitve with 1's, but what else will you do with the guys who earn enough points in the 45's to get a mandatory upgrade? And what good would it do to make some of those guys take a downgrade because they're not competitive with E2's and E1's? They'd still be just as fast in the 45's.

Master races don't count towards a Cat 1 upgrade. A Cat 2 master can win as many master races as he/she can/wants and never qualify for a mandatory upgrade to Cat 1. Only placing in the elite races will get you upgraded to Cat 1.

Ron, I agree that are a few 45's who are cat 1 or 2 who are closer in ability (without regard to age) to the next lower category. Larry and a few other guys can win enough 45+ races to get a mandatory upgrade to cat 1 every season, but that alone does not mean they are capable of being competitive with 1's. IOW, winning 45+ age group races doesn't actually mean you can be competitve with 1's, but what else will you do with the guys who earn enough points in the 45's to get a mandatory upgrade? And what good would it do to make some of those guys take a downgrade because they're not competitive with E2's and E1's? They'd still be just as fast in the 45's.

So you could just say that nobody can get to cat 1 unless they get their points with the 1,2's. Okay, so now all those "ubers" are cat 2's, or even cat 3's. They'll still do just as well in the 45+ races. So, it's not really about the categories on the guy's license in the 45's. There are 3's who could upgrade to 2 if they raced more in the E3's, and there's 1's who aren't competitive with the E1's. Change the races to 45+ 2,3,4 and maybe the 1's will downgrade if Casey lets them, but the races will be just as fast.

You could change the points for the 45+ races but it's already near impossible for a good 3 to get to 2 via the 45+ races around here. This is not the case in many other areas of the country. The caliber of the best 45's and 35's around here is really, really good compared to the rest of the US. On the track it's even moreso. In 2004 all 4 individual events at Nat's were won by Larry, Jeff Fillerup, and me, all from Hellyer. NorCal is almost as strong in some other age groups. In the 2005 nat's 45-49 criterium there was a winning break of 5. Two were locals used to the 7000' altitude, and the other 3 riders were from NorCal (Larry, Bubba, and Brian). And the winner of the 40-44 in 2004 was from NorCal (Bubba) as was the 50-54 winner in 2004 and 2005 (Mark Caldwell).

The outstanding ability of our local riders is something that I think some people forget when they complain about only getting 6th place in a 45+ race instead of 1st in a 45+ 3,4 race. It's all relative. Put the placing from each race into it's proper perspective and your ability hasn't changed one bit. But maybe the win sounds better to your non-racing friends at work the next day... If you say you got 5th in a race with 6 recent national champions and one world champion maybe it sounds pretty good too?

So, not being a geezer racing the 45+ category, there is experience to back up my thoughts. I think a real question racers need to ask themselves is, why are there age categories when we have a ranking system built on skill?
As a junior, I see a simple answer: Junior races get junior racers more prepared (in theory) for what they will expect at national championships. Also, our races are good for introducing new racers to a sport relatively safely. With very small pack sizes compared to 5's and 4's racing, new racers probably have less of a chance of crashing themselves or others. Finally, junior races are cheaper and give kids (that probably have less spending money than adults with jobs) a more economical race (or 2nd race) to compete in. I think those are good reasons to have seperate junior races, even if they are not the same reasons junior races were founded on.
Now, moving on to masters races, I see a problem that has not emerged in junior races: bigger fields with the same spread of talent, speed, etc... 45+ races are obviously highly competetive, as are many junior races. This would seem to make them a good training ground for those aspiring to become national champions in the 45+ age group. These races (from what I have seen) can split up nicely, which along with hopefully older and more rational minds makes the races safer.
Some people, however, want a change. I can see their point of view. By limiting 45+ races to Cat 3, 4, and 5 (or just 3 and 4) races would probably become easier. This, however, might make them more dangerous, especially if 5's were included in this group. In the Junior ranks, riders will probably get faster as they get older, and hopefully they will "earn" being competetive. For 45+'s, this is probably not the case. However, I have known riders to become quite competetive even after starting the sport in their mid 50's.
While it is very nice to be able to win races in your age category, I think it is rather hollow (having myself won many junior events last year). If one is not racing against all of his or her peers (even if they are younger, those in the repective categories are still our peers in terms of skill and speed, hopefully) there is no true "win."
With that said, I think that if people really want a 45+ 3/4 category, they should get in contact with organizers of races that have scheduling conflicts and persuade them to offer one category at one race and another category at another race on the same day. Maybe everyone would be happy then. Probably not though :(
Just my thoughts....

good and fair points, mad axeman. the only thing i would say is that the 3 reasons i mentioned are under the rider's control. field sizes are not and an unfortunate circumstance that everyone must deal with.

The "answer" seems obvious to me. Educate the promoters and let them decide. I am one of them (along with the other board members) and we decided before this discussion what fields to offer.

My suggestion to those who sit-on-the-sidelines and "object"... get involved, try new things! I happen to be (just to name a few) a road racer, trackie, club board member, licensed official, mechanic and certified wheel builder. This is a great and wonderful sport and community with a lot of diversity when it comes to age, talent, etc. There is lots to do and plenty of opportunity to step-up.

I still see signs of life, let's keep wailing on it!

Who cares if the thread keeps going, like the radio has a knob to change the channel, a forum (unlike email) gives you the opportunity to choose not read or even look at it.

If people want to discuss something until they are blue in the face or their finger tips fall off, let them.

If you really want this topic pushed down, post something of interest and get a new topic going.

YerMama, as Casey has previously stated, category should not be seen as a trophy or status that one holds on to. It should be seen as a measure of current ability (despite age). Meaning a 45 year old Cat 1 should be able to race competitively in the Pro 1/2 field (like Nolan).

There is a 4th reason to add to the 3 that you mention. There are field size issues that come into play and while a rider might place well, even beating several higher category riders (sometimes consistently) there are no points awarded if the field size does not meet the requirements.
As Sasser has mentioned in the past, it is equally as hard for aging Cat 2s to get points as well, despite talent.

Maybe the issue is that the system needs a bit of an overhaul.

Ron (Professional Cat 3)

well yermama is going to go ahead and say this...

in any category, the more experienced population of riders should determine the categories, not the less experienced.

if you are 45+ years old and still a 3 or 4, one of the following is true.

1. you have raced for many years but still are not good enough to move up. tough, but that's life.

2. you are new to the sport, and have not had enough race experience to gain the skills and/or fitness to move up. you're a grown adult, figure it out.

3. you have raced for many years but 'don't have the time' to train and earn podium placing. in this case, you don't deserve it.

who cares that the large number of 45+ 3/4's supports a change in the categories? 45+ cat 1's and 2's have put their time in and earned their keep. who are you to waltz into this sport and say that the very system that those riders advanced through is somehow flawed?

however, every man is entitled to his own opinion. here's a proposal. start a master's only association. this way you can determine everything according to the skill/fitness or lack thereof and organize races accordingly. if the demographic is as strong as you say, this could be a successful endeavor.

the horse is actually not dead despite the beating. it is just aged and not as fast anymore...

ENOUGH!!! :shock: This horse has been beaten past the point of death, the glue factory, and a deep sea burial. It's probably even to the point of influencing global warming........

Let's move on ..........

casey wrote:To get the number of 45-54 Cat 4 riders you have to subtract the number of 55+ riders from the 45+ total to get 212 Cat 4 men who are 45-54
Holy crap Casey! Thanks for pointing that out. I was reading the table incorrectly as well :oops: !

Jesster writes:

"Most of the pro/1/2 racers at Cherry Pie were not from this district. "

Are you sure about that?

Jesster wrote: "It's a simple question, Warren: Why argue against diversity? You seem to be the one arguing vociferously against even offering an alternative that many people support. I don't get it. Why should promoters always have to offer an Open 45+ cat? Isn't it great if sometimes it's one and sometimes the other, as Larry (and I) suggest?"

First, you are mischaracterizing what Larry said.

The simple fact, and one that you agree with, is that offering the 3,4 only race for 45+ riders means that on that day there will be no 45+ race for the 1,2's and it's also less appealing for all the 45+ 3's who would rather race WITH the 1,2's. The other fact is that there aren't that many races now for 45+, so by offering the 3,4 race you have reduced the number of 45+ races for 1,2's and the 3's who prefer to race with the 1,2's from a relatively low number to an even lower number.

I think that a better solution is the one offered by the Velogirls at Menlo Park. They have a 35+ 1,2,3 race, AND a 35+ 3,4 race AND a 45+/55+ open race. So, are you 45+ cat 3's going to complain about having to race with 35-44 year old 3's and 4's? If so, you should be a 5.

I guess we could ask you a similar question. Why would a 45+ cat 3 want to race against 3's and 4's when they have already finished in the top places of 45+ open races and placed ahead of the "ubers" just as you have? Ask your coach about setting goals, achieving them, and then aiming at higher goals, not lower goals.

Mad Axeman wrote:What were we talking about?

Gerrymandering race categories so good (but not really good) geezers have a better chance of winning.

Oops, did I say that out loud? :wink:

What were we talking about?

Jester

You said

Cat 4 men 45+ 262 & 55+ 52
Cat 3 men 45+ 155 & 55+ 40

262+52+155+40 = 512

Just like in racing when it says 45+ that number included the 55+ riders a well. IN the demographics table when it says 262 riders in the 45+ group for Cat 4 men that means the number of 55+ riders is already included in that 262 number. To get the number of 45-54 Cat 4 riders you have to subtract the number of 55+ riders from the 45+ total to get 212 Cat 4 men who are 45-54. IN your last post you over stated the number of 45+ cat 3 and 4 men. The true number is 417 ( 262+155) instead of 512.

Quote:As of February 23 there were about 400 45+ 3,4'3 , not 500, and 90 of those 400 are over 55.

Warren, really. If we can't agree on principles of logic, perhaps at least we can agree on simple mathematics. Not everything I say is wrong or deceptive.

Cat 4 men 45+ 262 & 55+ 52
Cat 3 men 45+ 155 & 55+ 40

262+52+155+40 = 512

Quote:At Cherry Pie only 15% of those 3,4's showed up to race in the 45+/55+ without 1,2's race, (63 riders out of 400 licensees). That is a low percentage for a race that is put on for all those 3,4's that Jess tells us about that supposedly don't want to race with the 1,2's in their age group.

In the pro 1,2 race at least 85 of the riders were under 35 years old and there are only 110 licensed in this District. So, approximately 75% of the 1,2's raced (some were out of district, or pros) compared to only 15% of the cat 3,4 45+/55+ guys who already had their license by 2/23/07.

Not that this makes any difference to my original premise regarding having some masters races on level playing fields, but ...
The statistics you cite in your argument are flawed. Most of the pro/1/2 racers at Cherry Pie were not from this district. We had full teams of BMC and Colavita/Sutter Home. We had Volkswagon-Trek and a lot of riders from assorted teams. Even Fast Freddie. This lends nothing to your argument. It's also one of the first races of the year. It's also a category people aren't accustomed to seeing.

But I'll tell you this, Warren: The podium winners were Cat. 3/4 racers. And that made it damned special for them, and damned unique for a crit in this district.

It's a simple question, Warren: Why argue against diversity? You seem to be the one arguing vociferously against even offering an alternative that many people support. I don't get it. Why should promoters always have to offer an Open 45+ cat? Isn't it great if sometimes it's one and sometimes the other, as Larry (and I) suggest?

Black and white stripes, baby.

Zebraman

Jess wrote:
"There are 79 under 35 male cat 2's in the NCNCA. There are more than 500 male 45+ 3/4's! "

As of February 23 there were about 400 45+ 3,4'3 , not 500, and 90 of those 400 are over 55.

When trying to discern the appeal, demand, or need for the various groupings of riders at races one should remember that the members of some of those groups race far more often/consistently than the members of other groups.

At Cherry Pie only 15% of those 3,4's showed up to race in the 45+/55+ without 1,2's race, (63 riders out of 400 licensees). That is a low percentage for a race that is put on for all those 3,4's that Jess tells us about that supposedly don't want to race with the 1,2's in their age group.

In the pro 1,2 race at least 85 of the riders were under 35 years old and there are only 110 licensed in this District. So, approximately 75% of the 1,2's raced (some were out of district, or pros) compared to only 15% of the cat 3,4 45+/55+ guys who already had their license by 2/23/07.

Leroi -
Let me be the first to tell you, my friend ... you ARE an uber.
To be a Cat 2 you had to win or place numerous times in a single year against full fields of 3's or better. You are a stud!! And you're young! Don't you have all that vim and vigor to climb every mountain, out-box the world, become the best and brightest?

Sorry, Leroi. This is a thread reserved for crotchety old guys, nay-sayers and ustabeawannabe's.

But as long as you spoke up ... There are 79 under 35 male cat 2's in the NCNCA. There are more than 500 male 45+ 3/4's! While everyone wants a focused field, the offering should be according to the need.

I hate to be the one to add a seventh! page onto this thread, but I think the CAT2s under the age of 35 have less shots at winning races than the 45+ 3s. We train as hard as anyone (I put my 20hrs/week through the cold an rain and still work 40+), but we race against guys that are truly Uber's doing 35 hrs/week with no jobs. AND, we hardly ever get more than one race on a given day. I know, there are 3-4 CAT2 only races a year so we do get our chances to race without the Ubers.

Play with the words all you like. The fact is that there has been a 45+ at CP for 1,2's for as long as I can remember (10+ years?) and this year you deleted that category from the program, left it off, replaced it, blah-blah-blah. So now there is one less race from what was a very limited number to begin with.

WarrenG wrote:Your actions are contrary to your words. At the race you promoted you did in fact delete a category. There was no 45+ race for 1,2's.

How about if you keep track of how many races offer BOTH 45+ 1,2,3 AND a 45+ 3,4.... race, and also how many races delete the 45+ 1,2 categories in favor of 45+ 3,4,... like you did?

In fact, my actions are consistent, Warren. I am not suggesting that promoters add categories and delete none - they have replace them. There are not unlimited time slots. I am simply suggesting that sometimes they run a 45+ open, and sometimes they run a 45+ 3/4. Now that I've said it six times in this thread, I hope my position is finally understood.

I did not "delete" the 45+ 1/2 category, Warren, I just didn't offer a specific 45+ age group for those cat's. Those comparatively few 45+ 1/2 racers who wished to race CPie still had the option of the 35+ 1/2/3 race and/or the Pro/1/2 race.

I suspect that keeping track of the crits that offer two 45+ categories will be very easy -- there will be none. Which is why I'm advocating having some of each type as a fair concession to all.

Zebraman

In a 3/4/5 field I would probably exclude the Cat 5s from counting in the field size in order to calculate 3 to 2 upgrade points. For a 3/4 field I normally just take the stated field size. This is what I do in 4/5 races for 4 to 3 upgrade points. For women 3/4 fields sometimes I have looked at the number of just the Cat 3 riders if the information is available but there have been plenty of cases where I just used the stated field size when determining the points for a 3 to 2 upgrade.

Also remember that in a 3/4 race the Cat 4 riders can't get upgrade points based only on how they did against the other Cat 4 riders in the race unless the 4s are placed separately. If the 3s and 4s are placed separately in a 3/4 race then the 3 upgrade points would be based on the number of 3s in the race and placing against other 3s and the 4 points would be based on the number of 4s an place against other 4s. If the results are not split then only he overall placings are worth upgrade points based on the field size.

The Jesster wrote:Thanks, Larry. I'm glad you appreciated the fact that I'm only trying to promote the addition, not the deletion, of a category.

Your actions are contrary to your words. At the race you promoted you did in fact delete a category. There was no 45+ race for 1,2's.

How about if you keep track of how many races offer BOTH 45+ 1,2,3 AND a 45+ 3,4.... race, and also how many races delete the 45+ 1,2 categories in favor of 45+ 3,4,... like you did?

Casey, in a field containing 3/4's don't you only count the number of 3's in the field for the 3 to 2 upgrade points?

Thanks, Larry. I'm glad you appreciated the fact that I'm only trying to promote the addition, not the deletion, of a category. As I've said 4-5 times in this thread, I love racing with and against you and the ubers -- especially you. I have ridden your wheel just to watch your pedal stroke and learn. There's no way I'd want to give that up.

And just as you, the 290 of us in the 45+ 3's (and the however-many hundreds in the 45+ 4's) would like a shot at the win sometimes. It doesn't mean we have to retire and ride 25 hours a week; that's why there are talent categories. "Better to rule in hell than serve in heaven," right?

As for Michael's reminder about the joy of racing multiple categories, I do love it. It's tough to sit on the curb, even during a juniors' race. Even during a tricycle race!! But my coach has emphatically nix'd that if I ever want to win again. So again I have to choose between being competitive for the win and just enjoying participation. Best scenario -- both. I'd like to focus on a single category for the win sometimes, and race three cat's at Land Park when I just want to have a day of pack fun.

Diversity is the key.

(As for the juniors, I hope that everyone read my thread after Cherry Pie. If I am Race Director next year, I will try to address the obvious problems we had with the length of the juniors race and the absence of a second womens' cat. It's difficult in a February race to expand the daylight to accomodate more fields or longer running times, but with the tolerance of the officials and our volunteers, we'll try.)

Zebraman

There is no difference between a masters race or an elite race in terms of upgrade points, except for a Cat 1 upgrade where only elite races count for upgrade points. Winning a 35+ 3/4 race with 50 riders would get a Cat 3 rider 7 points for a Crit or 10 points for a road race. A 45+ 3/4 race with 80 riders would get a Cat 3 winner 9 upgrade points for a Crit or 10 points for a road race.

"Sandbagging" is a term applied to those who stay far too long at the lower category. As I've experienced, there aren't very many points available to cat 3's in a 45+ race, so a rider could be a pretty good 3 and still not get enough points to upgrade unless they get points in E3 races.

Casey, how many upgrade points for cat 3 to 2 will you award for the top 6 places in a 35+ 3,4 race with 50 riders? 80 riders? How about in a 45+ 3,4 race?

(I think I already know the answer but some people may be surprised how many of these races a cat 3 can win in a 12-month period and still not be qualified to upgrade to cat 2, and even more race wins before they would be required to upgrade)

Larry - Hopefully sandbagging would not be that much of a problem. When ever I get new race results I add the names of Cat 3 and 4 riders who earn upgrade points into a database. After entering all the points earners for a given race I go back and check each name to see how many current upgrade points they have. If they have enough to qualify for an upgrade I email the rider to let them know thy have qualified for an upgrade. I also let the riders know if they aren't ready to upgrade yet it is OK but if they get X amount of points they will get an automatic upgrade. Also when a rider qualifies for an upgrade they stop earning BAR/BAT points as another incentive against sandbagging.

Most rider tend to be ready to upgrade as soon as they qualify but a few tend to only upgrade after a lot of kicking and screaming or reaching the mandatory upgrade point.

This thread has been interesting to read. Here’s a few points that I wanted to make:

1) Go ahead, exclude the master 45 1’s and 2’s- (I don’t speak for all M45 category 1’s and 2’s but) I like the idea of promoters offering races with all sorts of category, gender and age groupings. Therefore, I like the idea that Jess initiated of having some M45 category 3 and 4 races. My wishes are for promoters to offer junior, women and elite events at their events (note 1), AND to offer relatively longer distances for these groups. As has been stated previously, some riders have the “advantage” of entering two to three events. Unfortunately, the future of our sport (men and women under 30) are typically offered only one event, and short ones at that. Promoters that are conscientious of our future will need to balance the popular masters events with the less lucrative under 30 events. Then again, I have this silly notion that only 1/2/Pro races should have cash payouts!
2) No, please keep the M45+ category- I like to race with the 45’s not only because I like to compete, but mostly because I like to try to win. I dream of winning some big races. If I rode only 1/2/Pro events I know that I would not get much practice at winning. I also think a complete switch to a M45 3/4 event would promote sandbagging at the category 3 level (not yet discussed).
3) I am your peer. I’m married, have a growing family and work way more than full-time. Sound familiar? I’m not complaining. I love this sport so much that I coach, mentor, promote, officiate and help to organize one of the best masters (and now Juniors) teams in the country. I believe I’m a category 1 not because of natural talent, but because of my consistent training over the past 35 years, my willingness to work harder than most, and a little bit of luck to get in the right breaks. I am so motivated to do well that I train in the rain, dark and cold, just like many of you. BUT, I’m writing this NOT to brag, but to encourage all master 45 year olds. One of the first points we stress at the Early Birds is that each of us has our strengths and weaknesses. Sure, I love the feelings I get during the last lap of a track race or crit, but I’m also willing to suffer in a road race cuz I know that in doing so my fitness might pop up to a level that allows me to be fit enough to play the game on the last lap.
4) Warren is trying to help. Warren is a long-time friend, and we haven’t even talked about this topic but I, too was surprised to not see a single mention of training principles, mental approach, or even the challenges we all face with time management. Who’s going to chime in on these topics?

Note 1- ideally, when two events conflict on the same date promoters might offer different categories/ ages/ gender BUT not cut distances or prizes.

See you on the road, Larry Nolan, AMD-Discovery Channel Masters

mhernandez wrote:

disadvantaged ... jayzus f'in christ.

At almost all criteriums in NorCal a 45 year old cat 3 has the opportunity to race twice in any given event. Sometimes 3, like the above.

Look ... if you're concerned about disparity in ability ... there's just no race day schedule that is going to please all.

And, I understand that you'd like to race with a field more in line with your ability & age. But "disadvantaged?"

i have to spit now.

Mikey, Mikey ...

You obviously misunderstood the meaning of my term "disadvantaged." I meant: "placed in a disadvantageous position in any given race for which we qualify," not in the number of races in which we can participate.

While we are rather an amphibious lot, I would far prefer a single crit against my peers than three in the other categories with the specific skill or age disadvantages I enumerated. (So would my coach, by the way.)

So please save your precious bodily fluids. I so enjoy watching you utilize them. (Especially from the sidewalk as I'm warming up for my 45+ 3/4 race).

i'm curious to know if you've ever raced in the pro 1/2. if you have, the answer to the question of 'why no pro 1/2/3' is obvious. every once in awhile this does happen, but most of the 3's are out the back. apple pie 2006... count how many 3's finished or broke the top 30. by the way, those guys are 2's or 1's now.

and the 'we have jobs to go to on monday' statement always makes me laugh. the large majority of every category, pro 1/2 or otherwise, have a job to go to on monday. as for the pro 1 only, well they are risking their necks 'on the job'.

alright, that's it for yermama.

casey wrote: Now if you are 45+ and a Cat 3 and you prefer to ride with people only in your 10 year age group then that is understandable...

Yes, I believe this is the main point of this thread.

WarrenG wrote:Generally, there is a significant difference in skill between 3's and the 1/2's, and the 1,2's understandably prefer not to have to race with the more dangerous 3's.

Why are the E3's so "dangerous" to exclude them from the P/1/2's but cat. 3 masters are not "dangerous" enough to exclude them from the 45+1/2? I've often wondered if it's just a compliment of their "wisdom" in recognizing their "mortality" and playing it safer :wink:. Like a master once said to me, "We have jobs to go to on Monday".

casey hit it right on.