Originally Posted by
CharlyAlfaRomeo
I never said there wasn't any running involved, simply that I wouldn't be interested if there is too much of it. I think most people who race CX would agree otherwise they'd just run.
Cyclocross is a cycling race with obstacles. Obstacles that you may or may not have to run over depending on the nature of the obstacle, your ability on the bike and the conditions on a given day.
It's not a meant to be duathlon.
For sure! I didn't imply any ratios. Just that there's running. Should be some. More than just slogging up a steep climb. That's not running. I like 100-150 yds total. I like to see the combo of legging it and re/dismounting making a difference. One set of barriers per lap ain't enough for me.
***
Even the hot dudes seem to modulate their hopping. Even the best often screw up ... and smash hard. Sure, there are worse wrecks, and smashing flat into boards doesn't really send you to the hospital. It's a race-changer, tho, to make that mistake.
I don't mind risks. I'm just kind of against this one.
Maybe it's like if courses started including 4-foot huck-drops that most everyone scrambled down over but some started slam-dropping with frequent nasty side effects but if you could clean it you'd gain time. ...Then put a little board sticking up just past the drop to catch chins on. Just seems a little off.
I like the idea of difficult techniques, stuff to aspire to, that only a few can do. I'm inclined to work at them and reap the gains. But that darn board-smashing... And to have to replace the cool stuff. Well, I'm just not convinced.