Bike Forums

Bike Forums (https://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   Professional Cycling For the Fans (https://www.bikeforums.net/professional-cycling-fans/)
-   -   what kind of rinky-dink bike races to they run in the USA? (https://www.bikeforums.net/professional-cycling-fans/584106-what-kind-rinky-dink-bike-races-they-run-usa.html)

tinrobot 09-15-09 01:29 AM

Are there any mountains to speak of in Missouri? The highest point is only 1700 feet, can't be much climbing.

240GL 09-15-09 01:37 AM

Accidents happen in races all over the world. Some "accidents" are harder to swallow than others though. It broke my heart (and I broke my TV set) when Saronni's team manager ran down Knut Knudsen in the 1979 Giro, when Knut was in position for the overall victory. Which Saronni took that year.

Glenn1234 09-15-09 05:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tinrobot (Post 9677281)
Are there any mountains to speak of in Missouri? The highest point is only 1700 feet, can't be much climbing.

Elevation really has nothing to do with total climbing on a particular course. Missouri is a perfect example of that. While there are few sustained climbs for any distance, Missouri mainly features repetitive short & steep (10-20% grade) hills (no real "mountains"). The hills get steeper the farther south you go. While most maps and mapping software (and people for that matter) will wash it out to "flat" (again elevation measure alone or measuring ascent/descent), the total amount climbed will sneak up quickly. To use an example, I had the time to map out stage 2 of the 2009 Tour of Missouri out to Pocahontas. 81 miles, about 2402 ft of climbing, total. I notice a couple of good sustained (for MO) climbs they put in there.

So in essence, while you can find what genuinely qualifies as "flats" in Missouri, it is equally as easy to find the shorter climbs. While this is obviously not a concern to the riders of the Tour of Missouri when it comes to conditioning, what would present a challenge to them in gaining a fast time is the short repetitiveness of these hills to be able to adjust from climbing to descending. But keep in mind, too, that they are finding enough "challenge" (climbs, flats, whatever) to make these pro riders believe that it's worthy of their time.

I don't know if that answers the question, but hopefully it does.

Laggard 09-15-09 07:03 AM

But are there mountain top finishes???

kbabin 09-15-09 07:12 AM

[QUOTE=MGtrack;9665996]+1

They should have a race to escape from missouri. Unfortuntately,the states that surround it are not much of an improvement.

Have you been to Missouri or the TOM?

Kev

adam 09-15-09 07:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith99 (Post 9672528)
Thanks, I remembered Beloki but was drawing a blank on his name.

One I can add, in the years I 've been watching the TDF they also had an incident where the Peleton was ahead of the fastest expected pace. A breakaway made it thtough a train crossing before the gates were down, the chase did not.

One of the classics has 2 winners, due to misdirection the lead group and the chase group took different routes. No rider error involved. The chase group finished first but never passed the lead group.

I vaguely recall a wrong way car incident, I think in the TDF. Just because there was no damage does not make the screwup less.

Paris-Roubaix as well.

kbabin 09-15-09 07:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by abstractform20 (Post 9665351)
why would you tour missouri

You, might ask the ACA that question.

http://www.adventurecycling.org/routes/transamerica.cfm

or you could ask the state why they built one of the longest rails to trails parks in the US.

http://www.bikekatytrail.com/

Could it be nice place to ride a bike? No that couldn't be...not Missouri....

Kev

cofgrn 09-15-09 12:17 PM

I noticed how the finish of the 1st sprint stage won by Cavendish was not caught on camera. The best shot they had was kind of indirect from back in the crowd nowhere near the finish line.

I agree Missouri would seem an unusual place for a bike tour, for various reasons. Qatar seems almost as natural a location.

Glenn1234 09-15-09 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kbabin (Post 9678127)
Could it be nice place to ride a bike? No that couldn't be...not Missouri....

Quote:

Originally Posted by cofgrn (Post 9679943)
I agree Missouri would seem an unusual place for a bike tour, for various reasons. Qatar seems almost as natural a location.

Missouri is like any other state, city or country when it comes to regular tourism. There are great places to go if you know where to look. Same goes for car tourism. If you drive through any state, not knowing where to look, chances are you aren't going to find much to see.

But let us not confuse regular tourism with a bike race. I doubt any of the riders are doing it "just to see the sights". Besides, there are requirements, I'm sure for a bike race layout to fit a competition level. Whoever runs the Tour of Missouri satisfied those requirements and wanted to put on a race, so here they are.

USAZorro 09-15-09 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tinrobot (Post 9677281)
Are there any mountains to speak of in Missouri? The highest point is only 1700 feet, can't be much climbing.

There are gazillions of short, steep climbs in the Ozarks. That sort of riding is crazy hard on the legs.

formerbrit 09-15-09 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by USAZorro (Post 9680310)
There are gazillions of short, steep climbs in the Ozarks. That sort of riding is crazy hard on the legs.


In other words, no, no mountains, just hills.

Glenn1234 09-15-09 10:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by formerbrit (Post 9681665)
In other words, no, no mountains, just hills.

Usually there's three classes of people when it comes to Missouri riding from the things I've cataloged that people have said.:
1) This one that is quoted, who belittle it as "nothing special" because it doesn't have "real mountains", unless they try it and find different (and most haven't that do say that). Most I've encountered in bikeforums.net are this way.
2) People that whine about it being "too hard" after they find out things are different from what the folks in #1 say.
3) People who are used to "real flats" whining because they actually got to work to get around.

Again if UCI pro riders are thinking that it's worthy of their competition time, that should be telling you about how difficult it can be to get around.

therhodeo 09-16-09 09:20 AM

Having lived in Branson I can tell you that the climbing is plenty hard there.

johnny99 09-16-09 10:26 AM

If there are real climbs in Missouri, why didn't the race go there? That would have been much more fun to watch.

kbabin 09-16-09 01:27 PM

The time trial was in Branson for the last 2 years. I watched from the road side on biggest hill and they were suffering.

I can't find the offical map of the 2008 course, but here is a route on mapmyride.com. You can see elevation if you have Google Earth installed....

http://www.mapmyride.com/ride/united...n/728426481191

Kev

formerbrit 09-16-09 02:50 PM

"Climbing" as it were in Missouri can not be compared to climbing in a place with proper mountains such as coast California, the Sierras or say, Austria or France.

The former has hills and hillocks, the other are actual mountains. I am certain there is nothing in Missouri that can compare to even a small climb in Italy like the Monte Corno let alone The Falkert See in Austria or even The Kootenay Pass in Canada. And those are are not that hard in the scheme of things.

BiggerAL 09-16-09 08:15 PM

True there were and are probably no mountain top finishes possible in Missouri, but lets look at the final day 7 circuit. 7 laps at a little over 10 miles and right at about 1000ft of climbing per lap. Thats 7000+ feet. Thats riding in the Ozarks. Not so easy to ride the rollers around here.

johnny99 09-16-09 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BiggerAL (Post 9689137)
True there were and are probably no mountain top finishes possible in Missouri, but lets look at the final day 7 circuit. 7 laps at a little over 10 miles and right at about 1000ft of climbing per lap. Thats 7000+ feet. Thats riding in the Ozarks. Not so easy to ride the rollers around here.

If the hills aren't tough enough to let the pure climbers break away from the pure sprinters, then the hills are not significant. They may be more work, but the same work for everyone.

hopsing08 09-18-09 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by formerbrit (Post 9661328)
That's what they get for going to Missouri.

agreed. the Ozarks are hardly the challenge of say the Rockies, or the Sierra Nevada's, Cascade, or Appalachians. Geesh San Diego has more climbs and harder ones than Missouri. they need to have a UCI one in Colorado and/or Utah.

hopsing08 09-18-09 12:54 PM

Dont get me wrong. Shell Knob at Table Rock Lake and Beaver Lake are beautiful and hilly, but no challenge at all for a pro.

hos13 09-18-09 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kbabin (Post 9686683)
The time trial was in Branson for the last 2 years. I watched from the road side on biggest hill and they were suffering.

I can't find the offical map of the 2008 course, but here is a route on mapmyride.com. You can see elevation if you have Google Earth installed....

http://www.mapmyride.com/ride/united...n/728426481191

Kev


The High Road Route is a tough ride, much pain and suffering. Too bad the TT wasn't in Branson again.

hopsing08 09-18-09 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnny99 (Post 9667689)
You've got to be kidding. The last 3 days of the Vuelta have been epic.

Epic is not the word i would use to describe the Vuelta. i would say that it is far better than the tour of Missouri, by leaps and bounds, but not epic. actually the Vuelta has been very anticlimactic

hopsing08 09-18-09 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kbabin (Post 9686683)
The time trial was in Branson for the last 2 years. I watched from the road side on biggest hill and they were suffering.

I can't find the offical map of the 2008 course, but here is a route on mapmyride.com. You can see elevation if you have Google Earth installed....

http://www.mapmyride.com/ride/united...n/728426481191

Kev

yes they were probably suffering as a time trial is an all out effort for the entire distance. they suffer on the flats too in a time trail.
they would not have suffered at all if it was a normal stage because they would have been conserving energy the whole time and blown right past the climb like it was nothing. and yes i do know what I'm talking about. my family has a cabin on table rock lake.

LouD-Reno 09-18-09 04:50 PM

hehehe..... my 4th grader had a classmate that was moving there.... he and his other classmates all got alot of chuckles by saying he was moving to Misery........

johnny99 09-19-09 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hopsing08 (Post 9701004)
Epic is not the word i would use to describe the Vuelta. i would say that it is far better than the tour of Missouri, by leaps and bounds, but not epic. actually the Vuelta has been very anticlimactic

I was talking about the 3 mountain top finishes in a row last weekend that were epic. Unfortunately, lots of bad luck in this race has made the week after that less competitive. Two pre-race favorites (Gesink and Mosquera) crashed hard and are now non-factors. Another favorite (Evans) lost so much time after a flat tire that he's no longer a factor to win, but maybe he can creep back up to a podium position in today's time trial. Sánchez and Basso are 2nd and 3rd in the race (as of yesterday), more because of bad luck to the competitors rather than great riding of their own.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:56 AM.