Southern California - Ucla rr/tt

Hey.
Anyone going to do those races and planning on staying in nearby motel? I wouldn't mind splitting the cost. :)

UD

Got a link?

There is super 8 motel nearby. If you go on their website you can search, or just do it through google maps. That is how I found it.

UD

The only thing I see for UCLA is their Triathlon Club hosting a triathlon event. Their web site says the course is 4 loops around their campus, using their campus roads. the circuit is like 3.3 miles and you do that 4 times plus some to make 13.5 miles.

The only challenge is riding up to the dorms, up that hilly part. You do that 4 times. The rest of the ride is going thru the campus roads. Is this much fun? UCLA isn't like UC Irvine as far as campus footprint. You can fit several UCLA's in UCI's property.

The only thing I see for UCLA is their Triathlon Club hosting a triathlon event. Their web site says the course is 4 loops around their campus, using their campus roads. the circuit is like 3.3 miles and you do that 4 times plus some to make 13.5 miles.

The only challenge is riding up to the dorms, up that hilly part. You do that 4 times. The rest of the ride is going thru the campus roads. Is this much fun? UCLA isn't like UC Irvine as far as campus footprint. You can fit several UCLA's in UCI's property.

Ha? Road schedule for socal: http://www.socalcycling.com/Schedule/2005/racesched05.asp
More specifically: http://www.socalcycling.com/RaceAnn/2009/2009_UCLA_Race_Weekend.pdf

UD

Likely not since I have two races the prior 2 weekends.

I had thought about doing this race but now having seen the flyer will opt not to. As a Masters Cat 4 in SoCal I just can't fathom why promoters fail to offer a M35+ 4/5 or M45+ 4/5 race. Heck, as a 50 year old, I'd do it if they offered a separate 45+ or even a 50+ race.

But when you lump the 35+/45+ field together and offer nothing for older non-genetic mutants you're basically saying to a large portion of the cycling demographic "you don't matter". In NoCal the M35+ 4/5 and M45+ 4/5 fields sell out faster than any other field, in many cases forcing promoters like Velo Promo to open up a B field. Why SoCal promoters haven't figured this out is beyond me.

So it will be the Simi Ride or my local Santa Barbara slugfest for me. A shame because I'm guessing it a nice course based on where it is.

Last, when you go to the SCNCA calendar it still shows this race as TBD, so I'm not even sure the race is getting the publicity it deserves. Someone may want to change that.

Breath LT breath. :) This is a primarily Collegiate race, at least it used to be. I believe this is the first time they are offering none-collegiate categories, so I don't think they know what to offer. At least the categories you mentioned don't start in un-godly early hours of the morning like collegiate ones. Is the sun even out by then?

UD

Sorry if I came across a bit angry UD. It's a general frustration I have with SoCal promoters, not directed at the good folk at UCLA who are giving up their weekend to promote the race. I've been a promoter on a few occasions and know how much hard work goes into putting on an event.

I really think promoters could learn a lot from Velo Promo's experience however, and the sooner they do, the bigger the turnout for their races, which translates into more money for their club. One of my Chicken Ranch teammates did the M30+ 3/4 race in Long Beach today and he said there were roughly 100 riders. Wow! I remember riding the Devil's Punchbowl RR last year and the M35+ 3/5 field had at least 50+ riders, which I'm guessing was bigger than most other fields.

In net the demand is out there, and the more aware promoters are of that demand, the better off for all.

Signed -

A now calm, LT.

I'm no longer at UCLA (graduated), but I was involved with the scheduling making process, so maybe I can shed a little light on things. While I can definitely understand the sentiment, it just wasn't possible for this event. We tried to offer what we could in the limited time frame we had.

#1. Collegiate races are first priority. This race has been going on for many years as a collegiate only event and USAC categories are an add-on this year for the first time.

#2. We felt that due to the relatively short length of the laps that we could have a maximum of 4 races on course at the same time. The collegiate races took up the majority of the morning leaving room for ~2 more waves of races.

#3. We wanted to have 2 woman's races. They normally have a small turnout, but we felt it was important.

#4. We needed to have mens pro, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 races

#5. To meet minimum distance requirements for upgrades some races had to be longer time wise than would have been optimal for scheduling. We also had to do some finagling otherwise some groups wouldn't participate at all. For example, no Cat 3 in his right mind would come out for a 6 lap 1/2/3 race on this course. We considered doing a 3 lap 3/4 race and a dedicated 5's race but it would have been to short for the 3-2 upgrade requirement. We decided that by doing a 3/4 race and a 4/5 race we could make more people happy.

#6. As was mentioned, this was the first year for the race. Is this the best possible schedule? Probably not. We'll see what happens this year and I'm sure the event will be that much better next season.

I realize that a lot of masters racers probably aren't to happy, but we did what we could with what we had. Would we have liked to have had more opportunities for masters? Absolutely. We just didn't have room and unfortunately some sacrifices had to be made.

I'm no longer at UCLA (graduated), but I was involved with the scheduling making process, so maybe I can shed a little light on things. While I can definitely understand the sentiment, it just wasn't possible for this event. We tried to offer what we could in the limited time frame we had.

#1. Collegiate races are first priority. This race has been going on for many years as a collegiate only event and USAC categories are an add-on this year for the first time.

#2. We felt that due to the relatively short length of the laps that we could have a maximum of 4 races on course at the same time. The collegiate races took up the majority of the morning leaving room for ~2 more waves of races.

#3. We wanted to have 2 woman's races. They normally have a small turnout, but we felt it was important.

#4. We needed to have mens pro, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 races

#5. To meet minimum distance requirements for upgrades some races had to be longer time wise than would have been optimal for scheduling. We also had to do some finagling otherwise some groups wouldn't participate at all. For example, no Cat 3 in his right mind would come out for a 6 lap 1/2/3 race on this course. We considered doing a 3 lap 3/4 race and a dedicated 5's race but it would have been to short for the 3-2 upgrade requirement. We decided that by doing a 3/4 race and a 4/5 race we could make more people happy.

#6. As was mentioned, this was the first year for the race. Is this the best possible schedule? Probably not. We'll see what happens this year and I'm sure the event will be that much better next season.

I realize that a lot of masters racers probably aren't to happy, but we did what we could with what we had. Would we have liked to have had more opportunities for masters? Absolutely. We just didn't have room and unfortunately some sacrifices had to be made.

Thanks very much for the insight. Again my apologies if it seems like my ire was directed against this race and the promoters of this race specifically. In the case of a collegiate race it certainly makes sense to give the collegiate racers priority, and I think its admirable that the promoters added a second field for the women, given that the lower categorized women never get a break and have to race against the best most of the time.

To be honest I liked the old one better. Mainly because start time for RR wsa 9 am, and not 7 am! I probably will be doing 4/3 because of it, or just might skip it entirely. :(