gsteinb

actually, in one of my hill climbs my time would have won the 40+, but because I "turned 50" I took 2nd in the 50+. I was still 49 at the time though.

gsteinb

I don't think we're talking about anything that's too deep here. People are typically going to place 'higher value' in races where the participants are better than them. Sure there are exceptions but they usually involve some sort of outlier achievement that "I" couldn't do. Like the 102 year old guy setting the hour record, or that dude who rode around a track every day and set the yearly mileage record. But most cyclists "look up" to folks they can relate to (I'd rattle off the name a bunch of names of male and female pro cyclists, but I really don't know many). So as a guy who mainly does masters races I think the 1,2 races (especially when they're won by a 50 year old) are a bit higher up the food chain.

Really really important....this has nothing to do with altruistic happiness. I'm happy for all the people who are out there racing. Happy for those who win or do well. Sad for those who are disappointed in their results (ain't it most of them?).

I don't really follow local cat 3 racing. That isn't to say I don't think it should exist or that those who do well shouldn't be happy...but I can only keep so much stuff on my radar.

It's sport. It's hierarchical. CDR had a post many years ago which described the food chain. The best local guys go national and have a rough time. The best national guys go race domestic pro and have a hard time. The domestic pros go race in europe and have a hard time. Those guys go up a level and have a hard time. And so on. Know anyone who could do well in the Tour de France? I don't.

If we're going to say that the lady I know who won the sprint jersey at track nats against 3 other women had as much a challenge as the field who raced Mike McCarthy at track world, I can't say I'd agree. (That isn't to say the woman who won isn't good, or great even [she isn't], but that the field certainly doesn't have the same depth). But does it need to be? If anyone is doing this for anything more than personal reasons the motivation is misguided and doomed for disappointment. Because with a long enough view ultimately almost no one is really any good at this.

No one is (generally) saying those races shouldn't exist. But if we're going to compare a race a 60 year old male win against four other people with a race that Stephen Hall wins it isn't a stretch to ascertain which is simply more difficult.

Now if we want to get into the conversation about promoters and racers responsibility to put on and show up for events that field only a handful of folks the conversation gets more complicated and interesting.

topflightpro

This sort of happened recently: https://www.cxmagazine.com/sven-nys-...-skills-clinic

Sven Nys jumped into a 4/5 cross race in Chicago. He had fun.

gsteinb

A few years ago when Harlem was a ncc race rock racing was in town. They were supposed to race prospect park but got lost on the way. They showed up late. Jumped in any way. Then proceeded to chase down The break. After that they mixed it up ave basically ****ed up a race that was part of a series. While there folks enthralled to be near a pro team for those that the race mattered to it wasn’t particularly cool.

Note: this post has doping content!

Doge

I think many times they are unfair, and I'd try to have them moved, but while they are there, those are the lines.

However arguing that they also make folks want to participate less, is valid.

The #1 reason is it cost too much.

Doge

If you took a fondo of say 1,000 riders and had all those in place 100-150 race together, I think you'd have a mix, that could race together. You could pick from rank 250-300 and also have a competitive race with a mix of ages and genders.

If those same folks could race together all would get the RR pack experience. Maybe I'm missing something here and it is only fun when old guys beat old guys, women beat women etc. But the popularity of fondos and competitive group rides suggests folks like riding fast together and don't care so much that someone is a different gender or generation apart in age.

tetonrider

totally!

i'm not sure how that is relevant, though. Nys is no longer a professional rider -- he's a paid ambassador for the sport.

the example above was whether an actual pro (neben in @Heathpack's example) who is presently at the top of his/her game competing in the event s/he is best in (ITT, again in the neben/heathpack example).

and, yeah, i'd guess that our amateur presence in that is an indicator that just maaaaaaaybe that event isn't so significant to the pro in terms of getting an "important" result.

just my take.

tetonrider

amen.

preach.

agreed. it strikes me that your post may be a more effective attempt than mine to divorce rating objectively an inherently subjective thing from the importance of that thing for growth of a sport.

the only real connection between the two is that:
a) at the amateur level, nothing really matters beyond whatever lessons we take out of it at a personal level -- certainly not results. (regardless of how important a *result* seems at the time, does anyone think they'll put that race win on their tombstone? the effort and attitude may have long-term meaning, but amateur results... not so much.)

b) people try really hard to rationalize that what they are doing entertainment (which is totally OK, by the way) is something other than a purely selfish pursuit and is IMPORTANT (in capital letters) on a larger scale. how many people think all their riding around in their sponsor's kit is an altruistic deed? reminds me of @carpediemracing's post (i think it was his--sorry if my memory is hazy there) that on the whole cyclists in team kit HURT a business as much as or more than they help due to the bad behavior of many.

having many fields, many jerseys, many options certainly does increase the # of people likely to come to those national championships, and that is good for the promoters of those events; that necessarily means it helps the sport grow.

but all arguments to assign importance to these events -- beyond where people are getting paid real money for it, and that is a *very* small group in cycling -- fall pretty flat.

tetonrider

that's a great example of some funny anomalies.

IMO when that happens you should have collected the 40+ and 50+ "win".

i DO realize that people choose certain category and are only eligible to win that category because it gets too complex, and in a mass start scenario it is possible that a couple 40+ guys might let a 50+ rider go off the front because they are competing against the other 40+ guy...

which goes back to why i am not a fan of 'raced together, scored separately' from a purist perspective, but that's been beaten to death.

gsteinb

a number of year's back I was in a race with TKP's coach. It was an upstate NY technical crit, and as we stood on the line it started to rain. Four or five of us attacked in the first turn and that was the race. Only this was a race together score separate affair, and there was no discernible way to distinguish who was who. I really was only interested in winning the race. TKP's coach had a teammate, and down the stretch they'd attack and counter...I'd chase. This one dude would just hang on, and I figured he was fried. In the end he knew I was in his age group and was content to just race against me. So in a very real way we were in the same race, but we were doing two totally different races.

Heathpack 

Well @gsteinb, I think people here (not in this thread but in the 33) do argue that non-elite amateur bike racing fields are "not even bike racing" in the way that elite amateur fields are "real racing!". No kidding this exact argument was made here in the past few months.

But effectively in the world of bike racing (or at least TTs) this argument is made all the time. In the TT example I gave in which I raced against Amber Neben, there was only one race category for women but six for men. Yet the men's cat 3 race had only two racers. Somehow it's ok for the men to have race categories with only 2 racers but for women that would make things too easy?

Frequently for women, the only masters who race TTs are people who have been doing it a long time and are pretty damn incredible at it. If we're going to define meaningfulness by winning, you only need to beat one extraordinary person for that to be a pretty meaningful win. Filling up the rest of the field with cannon fodder might mean you get to say you were "1st of 14" say. But it doesn't make it a better win.

It sounds like I'm splitting hairs but this idea that a big field is inevitably better hurts women's racing IMO. For people outside the women's fields who may not think too deeply about it, there can be an assumption that women have it easier and their wins are therefore less significant. It contributes to a mindset in racing in which women frequently have less opportunity, less resources which then becomes a negative feedback loop.

I'm not arguing that promoters should offer race fields that lose money. Just that people should clear their minds of the false assumption that small race fields are easier, especially if you don't follow that slice of racing well enough to really know. In general, it's probably counterproductive to the entire sport to think this way, because it devolves for some people into a lack of respect for what someone else is doing on a bike. Unless you're racing in those fields or coaching someone who is, it might be pretty hard to speak from an informed position on the subject.

And I guess it doesn't make sense to me for someone who has never tried to do so to diss winning a national championship on a tandem. Until you've tried it, you might have no idea how hard it is. Maybe those fields are full of hack jersey chasers out to score an easy national title. Or maybe it's a niche field and really hard to get your bike to Nationals and the only people who bother are the ones who a really really good at it.

TL/DR my big point being: As a community of bike racers, lets be glad & supportive when anyone wants to race a bike these days and not spend too much time worrying whether someone else has it easier or harder racing in a field that's irrelevant to you anyway.

gsteinb

I'm not really sure how you took my post to say anything that contradicts that.

Heathpack 

I didn't, the only part of my post that was specifically directed at you was the first few sentences. You had commented that no one was arguing that races should be eliminated. I took that to mean "race fields" and in my example women's race fields had already been eliminated- just a women's open field as opposed to a W P/1/2 field say and a W 3/4/5 field. Of course for TTs none of this matters from a cost-to-the-promoter perspective, the only reason I can imagine it's organized this way is because of the perception that larger fields are inevitably better. Not entirely logical/consistent though, since a M Cat 3 field with 2 racers in it is fine. Sometimes the underlying presumptions in our brains inform decisions that we make without us even realizing it and it seems to me that this might be the case for the promoter in question.

Also: just because I address you in a post doesn't necessarily mean I'm arguing with you. I might just be attempting to have a conversation or even reinforcing something that you have said, adding my own perspective. Just like I might do if we were having a coffee together after a ride.

gsteinb

I pretty much saw @gsteinb and tldr

Doge

Ride Clean is too expensive to do well for a hobby. With costs (see how I'm on topic again) ride clean, security, permits, payout expectations, equipment*, make the racing just too costly for the fun being had.

It is truly ridiculous that rules and disciplines require so many setups to compete at the top *hobby* level. And I think it matters at that level.

I can see how each discipline robs the other in time and cost. Many masters can afford this, but those entering the sport are not so ready to dump the cash to be competitive in so many areas.


So...making fields bigger based on skill is an approach.

Some juniors, women, masters men are at the same level. Those are 3 race expenses that could be made into one for the sunk costs.

Heathpack 

Lol next time I will be more succinct.

And as interesting as all this is, we're pretty far off topic of doping.

Doge

Don't know. the decrease in racing and the Ride Clean efforts correlate. I'm not saying it is the cause.

I think the whole Ride Clean thing is pretty much going nowhere based on the last few pages I read.
When the racers see this as a hobby/feel good thing on this forum, I see the general racer caring even less.

There will be periodic testing and a few dopers busted, but I don't see anything really stopping doping in the hobby levels.

USAC traditional RR and Crits - esp SoCal are in a bad way, and if racers dropping off due to doping is not the primary reason they are not racing, it is likely the least of their concerns.

Dope free hobby racing is a dream.

gsteinb

rogue mod 1

Ygduf

this thread is pushing me towards drugs

Ttoc6

Back to drugs..

My Antibiotic prescription (that I have had forever) has finally run out. I was looking at how to go about getting some more Amoxicillin (500 mg, not a banned substance btw). Apparently you can get it through some back channel ways in the US, but I'm worried that going one of those routes I'd be introducing an unknown variable of possible contamination.

I was originally prescribed the antibiotic for acne when I was a teenager. That problem more or less went away as I got older but I still had the antibiotics. I now get sinus infections pretty regularly and after having to go to the doctor too many times over the course of my life to just get a prescription for the exact same antibiotics I already had, I started self medicating and lo and behold, a 7 days cycle of the same stuff when I first show signs does a better job than the official prescription + pseudoephedrine that comes 2 weeks too late after I can get into see a doctor. (I only use Sudafed when it gets really bad, I know this is a banned substance in competition.)

revchuck 

It's only banned when you use more of it than stated on the box. I looked it up a couple of years ago because I use it too.

Heathpack 

@tt0c6,

I have the same issues with sinus infections. Doctors typically want you to give it 5-7 days but if I do, I usually wind up so sick that I miss work and significant time on the bike. Vs taking the abx and I'm better in 3 days and work right through. My regular doc will give me a prescription right away but I need to miss half a day of work to even get the prescription, it's a hassle.

My guess would be that black market Amoxicillin is probably just legit Amoxi that has been stolen or ordered in bulk on the cheap and then sold on the black market for a profit. I know (from drug reps telling me) that veterinarians do this with some expensive veterinary drugs that are sold at a discount at Costco. The drug companies don't like this & they'll refuse to sell to that vet in the future. But obviously despite the individual suppliers being shut down repeatedly, Costco has a steady supply of this stuff so I'm assuming it's not too hard to find sources of meds at wholesale prices.

So I'd speculate that Amoxi being cheap & adundant in supply it would be easier to buy it on the black market than to make it yourself. Who knows though? If you race your bike seriously I personally think the risk isn't worth it. You're probably only getting sick once a year?

Doge

A mom's Facebook post:
"You know you've made it big time when USADA (United States Anti-Doping Agency) drops by out of the blue!"

TheKillerPenguin

I have really awful sinuses and have been dealing with a chronic thing since the spring that has really finally truly OMG gone away. I am finding that a daily super hot steamy shower and flonase are serious lifesavers. Have you tried this sort of preemptive care? Antibiotics screw up your gut pretty badly and impact your ability to absorb nutrition. Generally the less often you have to be on them the better, no?

Ygduf

self medicating with antibiotics seems like a great way to get an antibiotic resistant strain of whatever you have...