Ygduf

But cat 5 ego dollars are the richest, so we're back where we started.

shovelhd

Who made you king?

aaronmcd

Holy smokes, Grolby. From what I read, the whole point was that some posts - and I noticed it as well - were basically giving off the impression that the goal of a race is not to win, if you're a cat 5. Thus insinuating cat 5 races are just "meh, cat 5 isn't really a race".

Caloso, I haven't won a race since cat 5 either. But I guess that was only a few months ago haha

shovelhd

It's amazing how stuff can be twisted around to suit ones opinions. I've been vocal on this topic because I've had a stake in improving Cat5 for others. Let me see if I can spell it out clearly.

A Cat5 race is a race. Of course you should race to win.
The win doesn't count for much of anything from the USAC perspective. You could finish last and get the same treatment.
Cat5 is under served and poorly supported by USAC due to a lack of institutional formal learning programs.
Cat5 is a free pass category. It is the only racing category where a rider can discover their strengths and weaknesses under race conditions without paying a penalty for it. Too many riders focus on the win and learn nothing about themselves.
Riding away from the field to win a Cat5 race only proves you are stronger than everyone else.
Upgrading stronger Cat5 racers early is a mistake. The chances are high that they will become a hazard in the upper categories.

gsteinb

le sigh

globecanvas

I strongly agree with all of this... except for the sentence in bold. Unless you are an exceptional racer (or unless you are extremely selective about which races you do), there will always be races that you just don't have a chance of winning, either because the course doesn't suit you or because the competition is too strong. In those situations you can, I think, be more creative about finding out what you're capable of, without any real penalty, other than not not winning in a different way from how you would have not won if you had raced by the book.

I've mentioned this before, but the current NYC area upgrade coordinator is a stickler for not upgrading anybody early at any level. He gets a massive amount of grief for this but it is the right thing to do from from a racer safety, and mental health perspective too.

shovelhd

We are saying the same thing. Of course there are races that one may not be capable of winning. I'd put most of my races in that category and I am an experienced racer. The penalty I am referring to in Cat5 is that if you try a kilo attack or try to start a late break or you save it all for the sprint, and fail, you don't pay a penalty as long as you finish. There are no upgrade points involved, so it is the one place you can try stuff like that under race conditions without paying a price. Given that there are so few learning opportunities in road racing, Cat5's should value the opportunity to experiment at least as much as trying to win.

Wylde06

As a 5 I was just happy to not get pulled.

As a 4 I'm just happy to not get pulled.

grolby

Holy smokes, indeed. I'm amazed at how sensitive this subject apparently is. Here is the last thing I have to say about this: even if the goal of a cat 5 race is not to win, that in no way insinuates, suggests or implies that Cat 5 isn't really a race. Anyone who is getting defensive about being told they weren't really racing in Cat 5 is reading things between the lines that just aren't there. I get it, cause there is a problem with people being dismissive of beginner racers generally, but that's not what's happening here.

Moyene Corniche

The discussion is once again steering back to " Winning ". For the sake of repeating myself, it is not the emphasis of Cat 5 racing. Nor should it be.
A triathlete crossing over to road racing does not result in a rider that anyone wants to be near. Simply because the required skills of pack riding are absent. That triathlete is capable of riding away from the field but it's not a drag race.
Cat 5's are similar, some are quite strong and can easily ride away, but the skill set is also absent.

As I understood the implementation of Cat 5 years ago, it was to provide an educationally based Category for new riders/racers. The Cat 4 fields was subject to a high percentage of crashes due to novice riders being thrown in at the deep end and unable to ride amidst a field of 60 to 100.
Many Cat 4's average well over 200+ miles a week in addition to racing full on. That means a peloton that moves and reacts at a level far above the Noobie Cat 5's comfort zone. A rider out of their comfort zone, into a panic mode, unable to or I should say unequipped to confront the challenge is a rider that is dangerous to themselves and everyone around them... It's not personal it's just part of lacking experience in a sport where the missing elements can and will be chaotic. Thus due to a large amount of complaints and mishaps, USAC introduced the Cat 5 group.
Thereby creating an intro Category, with a much lower entry fee scale, a much reduced race distance, max field limit at a reasonable limit.
That means a new racer can enter and race and decide wether this is for them or not. there is a much lower pressure and if the emphasis is taken off winning then the learning aspects and developmental process can be implemented.

The rate of attrition in Cat 5's is high so many don't pursue racing after an initial race. Should USAC have more implementation of programs ?
To me this is really more of a responsibility of the clubs, not the governing body. Cat-5, Cat-4 and to some degree Cat-3 are really about local regional racing rather than National preparation and the subsequent International exposure. In France, Belgium, Italy, the local clubs organize the regional system. They're overseen by the governing body but the support, mentoring, rider programs are handled by the local clubs. In addition, they all network with each other, which results in a system that is geared towards promoting the sport as a whole rather than individual clubs or teams.

TMonk

go on....

TMonk

Trying to win a race is usually an educational experience. Except, of course, for said example of supa-strong triathlete riding away from the field. Like others here have suggested, I support new racers experimenting with race winning tactics, especially when it involves optimizing bike handling and pack skills, which it does in most cases.

Also the fitness difference between competitive 5's and 4's (and even cat3's IME) is negligible.

hack

I think these are fine ideas, but I don't see this happening without a major effort from USAC. From this thread alone, it is clear that the implimentation of Cat 5 is quite variable across the country with many (maybe most??) race coordinators being content to let Cat 5's be an early morning nuissance and nothing more. Also, with the lack of existing organization and race entry requirements, I think it would be a difficult sell to get the triathletes or first time racers to buy into the notion that while they're strong enough to ride away from the field that they shouldn't as that isn't the point of Cat 5. I could see the triathletes or new racers confused or frustrated by the notion that they're effectively paying for a group ride. Perhaps there could be additional incentive like having a couple of "mentors" ride with the pack and effectively grading the performance (rather safety) of each rider during the race and requiring the racers to have some number (5??) of mentor approvals before moving up to Cat 4.

Keep in mind, I'm on the same page in that Cat 5 should be where you learn, but that is on'y something I've become aware of now that I'm out of Cat 5. When I was a 5 I was hellbent on winning the race because in my mind that is what I was there to do, race. While my Cat 5 racers were mentored and had a post-race debrief, our pre-race instructions were limited to something along the lines of "be safe, go at the whistle". There was minimal discussion regarding "you're here to learn", "work as a group", and so on. One on occasion, I think I mentioned it in here earlier, I watched a race official gather up all the dropped Cat 5's, re-group them, and gave them stern instruction that they were to stay together and work together as they had already lost the "race" and they were there to learn. I haven't seen a similar approach from other officials before or after that incident though.

Lastly, regarding the notion that clubs should be more in control, do you mean local race associations (e.g., Northern California and Nevada Cycling Association [NCNCA]) or actual clubs like Bob's Club and Race Team? I could see some conflict if it was left in the hands of the club/race teams as each team may have different approaches to racing and while we're all adults, I don't foresee people always getting on the same page.

hack

I've been pulled twice (once 15 minutes into a 50 minute race), it's quite humbling.

TMonk

let's not get ahead of ourselves here.

Wylde06

Ive been dropped/pulled in more races than ive finished with the main group. Ive done ~50 races since I started. I think ive finished maybe 10 without getting dropped.

hack

I guess I meant that in the legal age sense more so than level of maturity Then again, I may have reconsider after a recent incident on one of our local rides where one rider shoved another into a ditch while climbing a hill and then both asking a neutral third party to be a witness to each one of their lawsuits.

TMonk

Damn! Some people...

TMonk

Train harder!

or, alternatively,

Race smarter!

CDR has won races with like, 200w average? Something your average Joe, non-competitive, everyday cyclist is probably capable of. While that may have been a special circumstance, you can probably stand to save more energy during a race, and subsequently improve your results.

furiousferret

My feelings aren't hurt but thanks for the apology. Like I've posted before, this is the third time you've tossed out some minor insult. Maybe your motives are to add to the argument, but it comes off in a way that you're trying to impress certain people on this forum.

I think there needs to be more support and clinics, and there are many ways it can be done without interrupting the race. Forcing them to read one of CDR's bike handling posts would be 10x more effective than what is done now. If its done in a manner where the race is secondary, it becomes a barrier to entry in addition to the many other barriers. Ten races for someone living out in rural areas can take them years.

I'm not sure what the objective of the 5 Category is, because while a few get it right with great support most just treat it like a race. I can chop people for 10 races an go on to the 4's. I can go ten races without even knowing the concepts of protecting the front wheel. Like someone told me before, a Cat 5 race is the equivalent of teaching children firearm safety by locking them in a room with a loaded firearm. The only thing the category is doing is parsing out the newbies; which doesn't make them better racers after 10 races.



First off, I do think instruction is needed, but the problem is you'll have a difference in philosophies. The clinic I attended in January went more over how to win a race than bike handling. I don't even recall them mentioning to protect the front wheel. If USAC had a better mandated instructional program you could Cat people up sooner and they would be better bike handlers. As far as race support goes, the 5's races I've done have always been the first to go. One of last crits we had 2 guys lying on deck in pain the whole race, no one even stopped to check on them. Being new to the sport, maybe that's how it is in all races. Largely things aren't set up, support in at minimal staff and its early the race is more of a test run than anything else. I suppose someone has to be the first, and its typically Cat 5, Juniors...

Around here, racing seems to be on decline. One of the big issues seems to be that a lot of cyclists just don't want to bother with doing 10 Cat 5 races. Why race when you can do the Saturday, Tuesday, or Thursday rides and brag that you raced a bunch of higher Category racers and a handful of pros. The payback for racing in a Cat 5 race is minimal since people tend to downplay that category. I'm fine with a bunch of Cat 2 and 3's saying 'but that's just a Cat 5 race' but now you hear it from guys that have never raced. This is more a local frustration than a forum one, although many seem to hold that view as well.

So I guess what I mean by the Category being marginalized is by making it a quasi beginners group with no real directive it doesn't achieve a clear goal outside of singling out racers as beginners. For the most part, Category 5 has great bike handlers save 2 or 3 guys.

Out here the real instruction is done by the club rides but not everyone in the US has access to those.

MDcatV

that's nothing, hell, I've been pulled from a road race before.

hack

I haven't been racing for too long, so I have plenty of time get pulled plenty more.

shovelhd

That's some good stuff there, ferret. I don't agree with all of your points but I certainly give you props for sharing your experiences and forming your opinions based on them.

Lets see see what the new boss has to say about all this.

hack

That's surprising. I did a couple of December races down in Compton last year and we had pretty full fields (50+ in each). I assumed that was a reflection of all of LA's cycling scene (fyi, I pretty lump anything south of Ventura, north of Oceanside, and maybe west of Palm Springs as "LA").

shovelhd

The Northeast is a pretty active area. I'd say road fields in the categories I race in are down about 10-15% since 2011. Racers are ore registering later and later in the week before the race. One promoter has a sliding preregistration fee scale that rewards registering more than two weeks in advance. There are exceptions like Somerville and Exeter and Boston but for the bread and butter races field sizes are down. Race fees are up, payouts are down.