Bike Forums

Bike Forums (https://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   "The 33"-Road Bike Racing (https://www.bikeforums.net/forumdisplay.php?f=33)
-   -   The Water Cooler, Scuttlebutt, Chit Chat Thread (https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=1105191)

Heathpack 06-13-17 10:55 AM


Originally Posted by globecanvas (Post 19650599)
His point of view doesn't really merit name-calling over.


What name-calling?

globecanvas 06-13-17 11:14 AM

FWIW the education, mentoring, clinic initiatives can come from the bottom up (from clubs) rather than top down (from USAC). I know I've been linking to a lot of CRCA stuff lately but they do a lot of rider/racer education events like this:

https://www.tobedetermined.cc/journa...ssion-at-rapha

A club with enough resources and foresight should recognize that taking the initiative to bring riders into the sport in a safe and educated way will benefit the club directly.

Of course, there aren't many (or maybe any) clubs that have CRCA's resources. But I do think this speaks to the point that @Racer Ex, @Heathpack, etc have been making, which is that small scale initiatives to bring in and retain racers are both more effective and more realistic than waiting for the USAC bureaucratic battleship to decide to steer itself in the right direction.

himespau 06-13-17 11:38 AM


Originally Posted by globecanvas (Post 19650676)
FWIW the education, mentoring, clinic initiatives can come from the bottom up (from clubs) rather than top down (from USAC). I know I've been linking to a lot of CRCA stuff lately but they do a lot of rider/racer education events like this:

https://www.tobedetermined.cc/journa...ssion-at-rapha

A club with enough resources and foresight should recognize that taking the initiative to bring riders into the sport in a safe and educated way will benefit the club directly.

Of course, there aren't many (or maybe any) clubs that have CRCA's resources. But I do think this speaks to the point that @Racer Ex, @Heathpack, etc have been making, which is that small scale initiatives to bring in and retain racers are both more effective and more realistic than waiting for the USAC bureaucratic battleship to decide to steer itself in the right direction.

So is your solution that USAC should do something to encourage the formation/expansion of more clubs?

aaronmcd 06-13-17 12:03 PM


Originally Posted by echappist (Post 19650588)
You disagree with "more barriers" because you think it would reduce participation; regardless if that's just your allegation or if there's more truth to that assertion, fine. Then you trot out the cop out of whatever, it's not important. If you are so nonchalant, why are you opposed to constructive suggestions from others and why do you care that it may dwindle participation? I'd much rather have fewer, more responsible racers than to have people who view the attainment of certain proficiency as "barrier to entry."

here i'm reminded of the argument against philosophers as they are so quick to spot any deficiencies in arguments and proposals of others but end up unable to offer any better suggestions. At least they are actually invested in the issue. You don't want to be altruistic, fine. But you are discouraging others from doing things because you think it may lead to fewer people who compete, and it's the competition per se you are interested in, not the overall environment of bike racing. You've ceded any credibility in your own standing when you declared that you really couldn't care less. What a bunch of cynical, opportunistic drivel.

You quoted my post but it doesn't look like you're talking to me. Unless you believe the false dichotomy that one must either make something their mission in life or they don't care.

Since for some reason it seems the message I was trying to communicate wasn't obvious to you, I present a summary:
I gave my opinion and reasons for my opinion, but clarified that I don't have such an overwhelming desire to fix the issue myself as racerex seems to, but that my less-than-life-consuming desire to improve something is not logical grounds to dismiss my opinion.


Originally Posted by echappist (Post 19650588)
here i'm reminded of the argument against philosophers as they are so quick to spot any deficiencies in arguments and proposals of others but end up unable to offer any better suggestions.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with this. The mere fact that someone may not know the solution is not logical grounds to dismiss their arguments. One easy example: I may not know how to win every bike race, but I sure as hell am qualified to discuss certain things that absolutely won't win a race.


Originally Posted by echappist (Post 19650588)
I'd much rather have fewer, more responsible racers than to have people who view the attainment of certain proficiency as "barrier to entry."

Cool, but that's off topic. The original claim was that safety certifications increase participant numbers. Racerex gave some high participation numbers in a few dangerous activities that require certification. But he conveniently ignored the part that would actually back his argument: The numbers before and after implementation of restrictive certifications, and evidence that certifications increase numbers long-term enough to offset fewer participants willing to bother with the bureaucracy.

echappist 06-13-17 12:04 PM

@Heathpack, that's in reference to me characterizing the guy's post as cynical, opportunistic, and not worthy of consideration by the merit of the poster's self-purported nonchalance (despite the poster having written two long posts)

Originally Posted by globecanvas (Post 19650599)
Guys let's not burn @aaronmcd at the stake just yet OK? His point of view doesn't really merit name-calling over.

I would respectfully disagree as I would submit that there's no name calling, only calling a spade a spade. No one has exhorted him to spend his valuable time on cycling outreach by shaming him. No one has denigrated his intelligence or used ad hominem attacks. I do not agree that labeling a position as cynical is a figurative witch-burning.

He cares about racing, his own racing, to be precise. So much so that he's done more than 40 races a years for each of the last three years, more than 60 in each of the last two, and more than 30 to this point of the year alone. That's probably a good two grand in racing related fees and 300 hours in racing-related hours for this year, alone. A committed racer, by any standard. However, from his posts, it appears that his stake in bike racing is centered on his racing per se, and not on that of the broader infrastructure.

And that, too, is perfectly fine. He has paid for his racing fees and is not demanding a hand-out from anyone. Nor is he required to volunteer his time for the benefit of anyone else. He lambasts the good intention of others because it may reduce participation, in particular because he might not have been able to participate in the first place had such a policy been in place. It is also possible that he's against the proposal because it would reduce the number of participants in the higher up categories due to lower initial participation and attrition. One can tell how invested one is in a position when one is vehement against a counterfactual, not to mention that he wrote two posts justifying his position. Yet despite his strong convictions, he goes on to characterize bike racing as only part of his life, to the point of being an afterthought on which he could designate only so much time.

I do not know what is the intention there as one could surmise from the 30 races this year alone that he has designated much of his disposable time to bike racing. Perhaps he's suggesting that others have too much free time on their hands? However, we should note here that no one has urged the poster himself to contribute his precious free time. And here, is where the cynicism shows through.

Oscar Wilde said that a cynic is someone who knows the prices of everything and the value of nothing. We have someone who sees the price as (a moot, counterfactual point of) him not being able to have participated in the sport, a reduction in possible racing (which the poster really cares about), and possible further requirements of mentoring (which requires time he is loath to contribute). He does not value the potential benefits to the bike racing community at large, including better initial support (in a sport that could be isolating), better retention (due to more committed members who were the beneficiary of the initial support), and better safety. Though I disagree with such cynical view, it would be quite a bit more defensible had he not also said the following:


I love racing. But its not the end all be all in life. Making new racers isn't my mission in life cuz there is whole crapload to life. Freedom to live as one wants is the main thing I hope to see in peoples lives. Be it bike racing or choosing their own out of the box lifestyle. Bike racing is just competition and fun. A lot of fun. I've even suggested the early bird crits to the main cycling group in SF and I've suggested racing to several ppl I've met. But ya know what? My peer group doesn't race or ride bikes as you suggested. That's just me. For fun. Feeling like something isnt my mission in life to make new bike racers isn't bad. But I can still comment on how I best think that would happen. And its community, suggestion, motivation. Not clinics.
In other words, someone who doesn't feel he has the time to help grow bike racing (which is perfectly okay) but has a load of time to tell others that they are wrong. Not just a self-serving cynical view, but one that tries to dictate what others should do despite being personally reluctant to do anything.

globecanvas 06-13-17 01:59 PM


Originally Posted by himespau (Post 19650728)
So is your solution that USAC should do something to encourage the formation/expansion of more clubs?

More clubs with more resources and better organization would be a very positive thing for racing and cycling in general.

No idea how to get there from here.

dz_nuzz 06-13-17 02:30 PM

I have wondered for a long time if USAC putting together some sort of sponsorship packet or survey would be helpful to individual clubs. Speaking as someone who both runs a club and as such needs to find funds and sponsors there have been times it has felt like I have been extremely close to getting a big name sponsor only to run into the barrier of having some sort of statistic to point to that suggests we could be a viable marketing opportunity for them.

Money isn't everything but when it comes down to putting on a race or subsidizing the sport for younger riders it would be a huge help to be able to approach investors (for the lack of a better word) with some kind of statistics.

mattm 06-13-17 02:56 PM


Originally Posted by echappist (Post 19650774)
@Heathpack, that's in reference to me characterizing the guy's post as cynical, opportunistic, and not worthy of consideration by the merit of the poster's self-purported nonchalance (despite the poster having written two long posts)


I would respectfully disagree as I would submit that there's no name calling, only calling a spade a spade. No one has exhorted him to spend his valuable time on cycling outreach by shaming him. No one has denigrated his intelligence or used ad hominem attacks. I do not agree that labeling a position as cynical is a figurative witch-burning.

He cares about racing, his own racing, to be precise. So much so that he's done more than 40 races a years for each of the last three years, more than 60 in each of the last two, and more than 30 to this point of the year alone. That's probably a good two grand in racing related fees and 300 hours in racing-related hours for this year, alone. A committed racer, by any standard. However, from his posts, it appears that his stake in bike racing is centered on his racing per se, and not on that of the broader infrastructure.

And that, too, is perfectly fine. He has paid for his racing fees and is not demanding a hand-out from anyone. Nor is he required to volunteer his time for the benefit of anyone else. He lambasts the good intention of others because it may reduce participation, in particular because he might not have been able to participate in the first place had such a policy been in place. It is also possible that he's against the proposal because it would reduce the number of participants in the higher up categories due to lower initial participation and attrition. One can tell how invested one is in a position when one is vehement against a counterfactual, not to mention that he wrote two posts justifying his position. Yet despite his strong convictions, he goes on to characterize bike racing as only part of his life, to the point of being an afterthought on which he could designate only so much time.

I do not know what is the intention there as one could surmise from the 30 races this year alone that he has designated much of his disposable time to bike racing. Perhaps he's suggesting that others have too much free time on their hands? However, we should note here that no one has urged the poster himself to contribute his precious free time. And here, is where the cynicism shows through.

Oscar Wilde said that a cynic is someone who knows the prices of everything and the value of nothing. We have someone who sees the price as (a moot, counterfactual point of) him not being able to have participated in the sport, a reduction in possible racing (which the poster really cares about), and possible further requirements of mentoring (which requires time he is loath to contribute). He does not value the potential benefits to the bike racing community at large, including better initial support (in a sport that could be isolating), better retention (due to more committed members who were the beneficiary of the initial support), and better safety. Though I disagree with such cynical view, it would be quite a bit more defensible had he not also said the following:

In other words, someone who doesn't feel he has the time to help grow bike racing (which is perfectly okay) but has a load of time to tell others that they are wrong. Not just a self-serving cynical view, but one that tries to dictate what others should do despite being personally reluctant to do anything.

lol - do you talk like a lawyer in real life too?

Heathpack 06-13-17 03:02 PM


Originally Posted by globecanvas (Post 19651053)
More clubs with more resources and better organization would be a very positive thing for racing and cycling in general.

No idea how to get there from here.


More clubs and more resources are great, because fundamentally everyone enters the sport and participates because of local influences. But clubs with resources is inadequate for success; you need those clubs to be given a mandate, you need a governing organization that has vision and shows leadership.


Fifteen years ago, while I was still in academia, a colleague and I put together a two-week long biannual course in veterinary neuroscience that turned out to be quite profitable. We ran the first two iterations and then passed the torch. Its only become more successful (and profitable) over time.


It was a huge undertaking but we did it as volunteers anyway. Why? Because we were both faculty at a university that had clear guidelines for tenure and one of the things you needed to accomplish was bringing international prominence to the university. Someone clearly identified what the big picture goal was and put us in the position of needing to accomplish that goal if we wanted to be able to do all the other things that we wanted to do professionally. No one specifically told us what to do, we were just shown some leadership, given a mandate and we took it from there.


Of course your average Joe bike racer isn't going to take on some huge project like this, nor should they have to. But could it really help bike racing if USAC got some big ideas and an inclusive clue about where the sport should go, then set up an incentivized system for achieving those goals? Yes, IMO it could.

aaronmcd 06-13-17 03:08 PM


Originally Posted by mattm (Post 19651185)
lol - do you talk like a lawyer in real life too?

I was gonna say politician. But then I decided to ignore it and get back to work for a while. And politicians can't afford to talk that much anyway.

miyata man 06-13-17 03:20 PM

I've probably hit on every menial labor and high minded way to contribute to just cycling, let alone other sports. Tomorrow I get to throw fence and do everything but have the time to casually enjoy two separate pro race event locations in high heat and humidity again this year. I'm honestly going to be glad of the chance to not see this place even accidentally. Not because someone got their blood up over psychologically astute cross examination or how many numbers are in my license. Nor that after a lifetime selflessly putting all they have into the sport, someone else doesn't have the answers for tomorrow. Certainly not because some single person with a full time job doesn't tank their training and racing to make time for an ineffectual effort towards furthering the sport on their own.

For sure all day the reason why that is will be rattling in the back of my mind. Probably because for greater part of my time I've been out doing the things that should keep cycling, one of very few great sports still possible in the modern world, alive. Instead of spending valuable time here doing whatever this is.

Once the heat induced swelling in my brain recedes I may have a more glowing perspective.

rubiksoval 06-13-17 03:25 PM

Is this the incident @carpediemracing was talking about with the bleeding on the brain?

https://vimeo.com/221195646

Causing a bit of a storm, it seems.

https://pvcycling.wordpress.com/2017...elony-battery/

rubiksoval 06-13-17 03:34 PM


Originally Posted by TMonk (Post 19650260)
I wonder what crashing rates are in Europe. Is there reason to believe that they crash less often over there for some reason???

From my very limited anecdotal experience, the races I did seemed way more dangerous (I was genuinely scared multiple times by the speed at which we were whipping in and out and around obstacles and corners and crazy road surfaces) but I saw far fewer (none?) crashes when I raced there for a few months.

When you grow up riding around on cobbles and city streets with lots of wind and road surfaces and a myriad of other people around, maybe you just get used to it?

I attribute most things in cycling to simply being used to it. Wind? Used to it. Mountains? Used to it. Huge fields, tight corners, random obstacles in the road you don't see until the last possible second? All things you simply get used to.

Of course, then you have the really big races like on TV where people just seemingly fall over at random. So maybe in all it's a wash.

topflightpro 06-13-17 06:29 PM


Originally Posted by rubiksoval (Post 19651253)
Is this the incident @carpediemracing was talking about with the bleeding on the brain?

https://vimeo.com/221195646

Causing a bit of a storm, it seems.

https://pvcycling.wordpress.com/2017...elony-battery/

Yes.

merlinextraligh 06-14-17 01:29 PM

That video is really nasty. I'm wondering what the heck led up to that. Tons of room to go around to the other side,and he just intentionally crashes the guy.

mattm 06-14-17 02:21 PM

I feel like he didn't necessarily mean to crash the other guy out, but didn't care if he did or not.. which doesn't make much of a difference, of course.

himespau 06-14-17 02:36 PM

Yeah, I couldn't tell why he went the way he did if there really was no wind needing shelter from. It almost looked like he went on that side to initiate contact or prove he could when the earlier passing attempt got shut down.

topflightpro 06-14-17 02:45 PM

It definitely looks to me like he intended to bump him. Whether he was trying to cause him to crash, I cannot say.

Regardless, it was certainly an unnecessarily aggressive move given how open the rest of the road and field was. Given what I've read of the history of the guy, I would not want to race with him, and as a promoter, I would not allow him in my race.

globecanvas 06-14-17 02:49 PM

Seeing the video with no other context, I'd think that as the guy tried to squeeze through he braced for a shoulder bump that never came, so instead his forearm went into the other guy's bars. And it was dumb to go inside anyway. Which would make the move reckless and stupid, rather than psychotic and homicidal.

If he wanted to crash the guy out it would have had less risk of crashing himself out if he'd just passed him and swept his wheel. Though I guess if you're ragey enough to want to crash somebody you're probably not being super analytical about it in the moment.

rubiksoval 06-14-17 03:57 PM

I also don't think it was outright malicious just based on seeing that. Aggressive, yes, but not so much out of the ordinary in most races, especially in closing laps (not sure when this was).

How often do the bars get hooked like that? 99% of the time the guy getting passed will lean into the guy passing and keep the bars away. It looks like what happened here is the guy up front was caught completely off guard.

That's not to try and justify anything, of course, but I imagine the perp has pulled off a similar move numerous times without causing someone else to go down.

Of course, when all the other info. is added in, maybe it was done with malicious intent...

Heathpack 06-14-17 04:02 PM

The agro guy in the video used to live in my town and would ride with my club sometimes. He is very much universally disliked as being hyper aggressive, completely obnoxious and dangerous to ride with. A big sigh of relief when he moved to Long Beach, no one had to deal with banning him from club rides. The local consensus on the video (which made the rounds on FB because a local rider is a teammate of the injured rider) is, knowing the personality of the offender, that the intention was to crash the other guy out.


I've seen the video and it looks intentional to me.

Ygduf 06-14-17 04:13 PM


Originally Posted by Heathpack (Post 19653782)
The agro guy in the video used to live in my town and would ride with my club sometimes. He is very much universally disliked as being hyper aggressive, completely obnoxious and dangerous to ride with. A big sigh of relief when he moved to Long Beach, no one had to deal with banning him from club rides. The local consensus on the video (which made the rounds on FB because a local rider is a teammate of the injured rider) is, knowing the personality of the offender, that the intention was to crash the other guy out.


I've seen the video and it looks intentional to me.

Looked like retaliation for getting blocked a few seconds earlier. If not intentional to put the guy on the deck, he was trying to send a message to intimate in a wholly negligent way.

PepeM 06-14-17 04:24 PM


Originally Posted by rubiksoval (Post 19653771)
Aggressive, yes, but not so much out of the ordinary in most races, especially in closing laps (not sure when this was).

Third lap apparently.


Originally Posted by Ygduf (Post 19653815)
Looked like retaliation for getting blocked a few seconds earlier. If not intentional to put the guy on the deck, he was trying to send a message to intimate in a wholly negligent way.

That's what it looked like to me too.

caloso 06-14-17 04:59 PM

Viewed it a couple of times. At first I thought it was just a dumb move. But the more I see it, the more it looks intentional, particularly how he raises his right elbow into the other rider's bars.

Awful.

Doge 06-14-17 06:27 PM

Having officiated lots and lots of soccer games I see this all the time. Without injury, and some with - none in ICU with brain bleed.
But the read is difficult on this one as to intent. Generally the head/face gives away intent. There is a look confirming the deed was done, or a look before it was done. That did not happen here. It was clearly reckless. But slowmo shows things in a different light than in the moment. I'd like to see him penalized, but not ready to say he intended to take the other rider out. He DID take him out. Just the intent/pre-meditated part, I am not sure of.

To me it looks like he tried a gap, didn't think he could make it, saw a gap again took a run at it and seeing it close, didn't want to error on the side of safety and used his shoulder to throw his momentum the way he wanted. That there was also a curb on his left was more motivation to trow his mass the other direction. Otherwise he might have ended up down. I know that course pretty well, it is local and my kid's 1st Cat 3 crit win. There are lots of tight spots where if you are not lined up for position correctly, you will loose spots. Frankly - he's riding like a junior creating risk for others in his exuberance to win. It would not surprise me if he was jacked up on something - legal or not.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:37 PM.


Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.