View Single Post
Old 02-24-15, 12:46 PM
  #42  
grolby
Senior Member
 
grolby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BOSTON BABY
Posts: 9,787
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 287 Post(s)
Liked 85 Times in 59 Posts
Originally Posted by globecanvas
If you hold the premise that crashes are basically acts of god and can't be avoided regardless of experience, then obviously this conversation is pointless for you.
If you think that's the premise I'm starting from, I must not be communicating my point effectively. I don't think crashes are unavoidable regardless of experience. I disagree specifically with the theory that lower category crashes are fundamentally more likely to become big pileups. If someone goes down in front of you, being able to bunnyhop is great but there's a definite element of, yes, luck as to whether that bunnyhop will save you. Which is why I said, good for your buddy but that doesn't mean much. If there's a wheel or a limb sticking up in the air or something, that bunnyhop might not matter.

My other point was that it's probably wrong to take for granted that the skill level in an open (1-4) Masters race will be much higher than the skill level in any other open field in today's USAC peloton. Which again isn't to say that it isn't true or isn't possible in many or most cases, but the issue isn't the average skill level across all those wizened 1s and 2s. It's the 4s and some 3s that are the wild cards, and for the most part a 4 with gray hair is still a 4. Nothing wrong with being a Cat 4, and they aren't necessarily the ones causing crashes in these races, but if we're talking about the benefits of experience with respect to avoiding crashes, I think field composition is kind of relevant.
grolby is offline