sarals 

It's a different topic, and perhaps I should start another thread. However, I'm the only masters woman who seems to be posting here, which is sort of like the racing demographic I'm in. Yeah, a little unusual to be doing this at "my age". Anyway. Looking over the Nat's schedule, and I wonder why I'd want to go. If I was to do only the events I currently focus on, my first race, the 500M TT, would be Thursday. The last race would be on Sunday, the TS. I have no intention of doing any mass starts, so that gives me four days of racing. What, competing on the track for maybe an hour total in four days? Then, the match sprints are W 55+, nothing broken down for the women any further. Granted, I don't know if the USAC awards medals in five year age categories above 55 for the women in that event, but in reading the schedule, it's impossible to discern that. Would I be seeded with and then have to race riders who could be as much as eleven years younger than me? That doesn't seem equitable.

The expense of going to an event like this, with the questionable return, makes me wonder if it would be worth it.

southernfox

HEY NOW...I may be 'baby masters' but I'm still >35 (But yes, I won't be at US Nationals...but only because I'm racing elsewhere: Canadians can race in US Masters...we just can't win titles)

carleton

carleton

Also, @sarals, it's possible for you to do something like:

Day 1: 500M
Day 3: Flying 200M for time only and decline to ride the sprint tournament.
Day 5: Team Sprint


It's good to have official times even if it's just for your own benefit. Or you can race the tournament and gain experience.

At the end of the day, you are a bike racer, right? Race your bike

Baby Puke

I wish they would schedule this way. It would be far less costly to do nationals if they condensed by type of race people are likely to do. Waiting around with no racing to do for days while eating out and paying for hotels is tough for some of us (teacher salary).

carleton

Well, think about it, it's 2 extra days. So, if hotels are $100/day with tax, that's $200 extra for the biggest race event of the year for most racers.

I'll gladly pay that in order to be able to perform my best.

The day after a all-have-to-give kilo is pure trash for me. And the day after a full sprint tournament is the same.

Sprint tournaments at nationals can be A LOT of rides. A guy from DLV rode his F200 plus TEN rides (had to fight through the repechage once or twice plus some went 3 rides) in order to finish with Silver at nationals last year. That's a loooong day in the office. I think he DNF'd his mass start race the next day.

topflightpro

rensho3

It could be worse. I do my 500 on Wednesday, and then have to wait until Sunday to do the Team Sprint. I don't do the sprint tournament any more after my crash in Rock Hill in 2015. That's racing.

sarals 

The 60+ women went through the same thing with the UCI prior to Worlds last year. I don't recall the number of riders we had signed up who were 60+, but it was more than a dozen. Still, the UCI had their rules, and they stopped the age grading at 60. Several of us missed chances at the podium, chances the men did get, because of the the way things were scored. It's a bit disconcerting to see that USAC has done the same thing. In my district, the NCNCA, five year age grades are offered above 60. Fair is fair, you know?

I've been told that the USAC does break out the age groups during the event, or that they have in the past. I'm not sure I want to spend a whole lot of money without an assurance that I have a chance at something. If the race was closer to where I live, and not all the way across the country, I'd do it, but now? I'm looking at six days there, the flight to and from, the food, the rental car, getting my bike and gear there, and incidentals. What, three grand for a maybe? That's not a good return.

Then again, being positive for a change, I COULD just ride the 200 for the time. As for the TS, that's a maybe, because I don't have a partner, yet. It shakes out like this: Thursday 500M, Friday 2K IP, Saturday 200, Sunday maybe.

Long way to go for ten minutes on the track.

carleton

I'm probably gonna ruffle some feathers here. But bear in mind that I started my racing at age 35 and have always considered myself a masters racer that would dabble in elite races that suit me. As much as I'd love to win a national jersey, I have not.

The purpose of the age groups is to keep the racing competitive.

Juniors 10 - 18 are grouped every 2 years because youths will grow a lot in 2 years and simply out perform younger riders. Imagine an 18 year old competing with 13 year olds.

Seniors/Elites are, what 17+. That's about the time people's ability starts to level off and plateau.

Masters start at 35 or 40 (depending on your league) and are grouped in 5 year groups. The thought here is that the decay in ability will happen, but not as swiftly as the gains happen with juniors. A 50 and 54 your old with similar backgrounds and body types would be comparable. There was a time when Masters started at age 30...and many of the 30-34 year old masters were still kicking ass in the elite ranks.

It seems that after a certain point (age), the competition levels off and maybe larger age groups are appropriate to keep the spirit of competitiveness. What fun is it to win a championship but not have raced anyone?

Your estimate seems high. I usually budget around $1,000 - $1,500 for a week at Nationals, including travel.

Also, ain't no return in track racing.

We spend THOUSANDS of dollars per year and there is no return. No money. No fame. No glory. Even at the highest levels of the sport. Yes, some do get paid a living wage. But, most do not.

Recall that when the Kilo and 500M were Olympic events, they were 1 ride only, no heats. So, they were literally the shortest events for men and women respectively in all of the games (summer or winter). 4 years of training for 1 minute or 30 seconds. Oh, and at one point, there were no retries after false starts. The AUS guy at the 96 Olympics in the kilo pulled out of his pedal. That's it. Hit the shower. 4 years down the drain.

@sarals, you've only been racing track for a year. Give it time. You can't jump in and expect to win. Remember, the age groups are simply to keep things competitive, not to make everyone a winner. It could be worse...they could define "Masters" as 40+...period.

carleton

I know of guys who live in countries with little or no track racing who only get to get on a track a couple of times per year ("couple" meaning two)...including Worlds. The means that they would pack up and go to another country for a few weeks just to get TRACK TIME. The only event they compete in is Masters Worlds.

I'm not sure I could do that, but I've seen it done and it'll probably happen again this year.

sarals 

@carleton, I had an idea I would ruffle feathers with my post! It's not the first time I've done that, and I'm known for sticking up for the masters women. I spearheaded the Masters Women 55+ Series in the NCNCA (road) for two seasons. It was the only way they could get me to shut up!

I'm not going poke holes in your POV, it's entirely legit. However, there are caveats. Performance starts to wane, change, drop off, what have you as one gets into their 60's. It's doesn't seem to be across the board, but it does change. The other thing is that women and men are different. I've got too many examples to go into about that here, and I'm sure most people are aware of at least some of them. I don't care to soapbox, anyway.

I don't like gimmies, either. I race to compete. That there are but a few racers in my age range is not something I think is ideal, but I can't control it. There is the adage, "to win you have to first show up".

I know this is my second season on the track. I was completely surprised by my performance at Worlds. The only one who wasn't was my coach. That said, I don't race because I expect to win. I'm NOT that good. I've been blown out of the back of too many races to make that claim, and if there's one thing I don't have, it's an ego. However, I am competitive as a sprinter, and I feel I have at least a chance at SOMETHING at Nats and Worlds. I won't know until I do. If I recover from all of these broken ribs, that is

I know I'm estimating high on the cost of going to Nats, but I don't think I'm that far off. I'm budgeting $3K, and if it's less, yay.

Finally, it sounded like I was giving track time short shrift. I wasn't. I know we sprinters don't get to spend a lot of time on the track in competition. I know there are people who travel great distances to get a little time. I ran into two (very nice, by the way) fellas who drove all the way to VSC from Houston last summer to get certified and get a little time, and then they drove back home. Under the glare of reality, traveling from Monterey, California to Allentown, Pennsylvania and back to ride my bike in three or four events that amount to less than an hour on the track doesn't make much sense. To people who aren't trackies. Sometimes I have to look at things that way!

brawlo

I don't see any problem with this at all. This has been the scheduling for state and national masters champs for almost the whole time I've been involved in the sport. Everyone else is in the same boat. What we often see is that if scratch/points are scheduled after the sprint comps, then particularly at nats, you will see a number of them make an attempt at those also seeing as they are already at the event.

Over here, when competitor numbers are low, particularly in older age categories and in timed events, riders ride off for medals based on a percentage of the national best time. So while you get to ride in your age category you may still walk away with nothing. For sprints, if say only 2 people turn up, then only a gold medal will be presented. That seems like a fair way to do things. We have a sprint guy who is 82yo in my town (but is a life member of another club). He doesn't bother with states any more because there is no competition. He is also hesitant about racing at nationals because it is all about the number of people that turn up. He could be lumped in with people that are 10+ years younger than him. When you are in that age bracket, 10 years is a completely different level of ability and speed. So your argument is very valid, but the only way to improve your situation unfortunately is to be encouraging of people to attend in order to boost the age bracket participation. Sitting there and not attending because of the possibility of low numbers only adds to the problem. If there are 3-4 other people thinking the exact same way, then a potential competition them becomes no competition. It's an unfortunate catch 22. For us, entries are open to all, no age brackets are finalised until all the entries are in. It is noted at point of entry that if there are low numbers then you may be lumped in with other age categories. I think this would be more detrimental to the older bunch race categories. A M2 clubmate entered the points race last year at states. Low numbers meant he was combined in with M1 (I don't think you US guys do any M1 racing by the sounds of things). He struggled but was watching the other M2 riders in the race looking for an M2 medal. At the end he got nothing and was very pissed because it wasn't made aware to him that medals would be assigned overall, not individually for each category.

carleton

Who's trying to keep anything from masters women? I don't think anybody is. I think we all love women in track cycling. Women have led the USA's international success on the track in recent years. On a related note, DLV is hosting a pro race this weekend with a sprint tournament on Friday and Keirin tournament on Saturday with men's and women's fields in both and equal pay for both.

It's my opinion that Masters cycling and masters nationals in particular are a significant revenue source for USAC.

Let's look at the numbers for sprint events for women aged 60+ at last years nationals:
60-64 Sprints: 2 participants
70-74 Sprints: 2 participants
75+ Sprints: 2 participants

Actually, none of the women's fields in any age group for Sprints had more than 5 riders. Most had 2 or 3 and I think two groups had 5 racers (ages 45-49 and 55-59). Even the youngest age group (35-39) where you might expect to see larger numbers only had 3 participants.

It doesn't seem like USAC is holding the ladies back.

+1

I like the idea of riding against a percentage of the national best time. That seems worth discussing. I'd like to hear more about that system.

southernfox

It's track. This is how it is when we do VERY short races, especially as sprinters.

Hell, crit nationals is a lot of travel for a ~1hr race. Same for ITT. It's not like other forms of bike racing are all that different.

southernfox

Welcome to my freaking life. I recently did a trip to TTown just for a *training camp* so I could get experience on the track ahead of UCI races in June. When I was an elite roady, I was *driving* all over North America for races. There aren't really any decent races shorter than a 3hr drive, and I was on the road for 6 weeks at a time in the summer. This is just what bike racing is like. If you want to compete at higher levels than 'local,' this is literally what it takes. Period.

topflightpro

This is a fact. Masters racing and Masters nationals fund much of USAC and supplement the Pro and Elite races - for all disciplines.

sarals 

I should keep my mouth shut. Usually I do.

When I talk about Masters Women, I am talking about giving them their own fields. And, I'm talking about road, not the track. To do that, you have to get them to show up, or it's just too expensive for the promoter to add another field. What we did in the NCNCA was to create a women's series, and then we added a masters 55+ series to it. The 55+ group were (usually) given their own fields/starts and the numbers increased. They got to race their peers, not people twenty years junior to them. That made quite a difference.

@southernfox, out here, it's completely common to drive two or more hours to race on the road. It doesn't matter what, crits, ITT's road races, you name it. I'm okay with that, and apparently a lot of other people are, too. I see grousing from time to time about "the length of the drive", but if people are serious about it, they'll do it. Sure, it's for a forty minute crit (maybe two), or a 35 minute TT, or a two hour road race. On the surface, there seems to be a bit more return for the time and money than ten minutes in a day on a track. Now, you guys missed what I said - "To people who aren't trackies". I'm fine with it. I'm gasping when I look at spending a couple of grand to go across the country to race, but hey - I'm gonna do it. No way I'm not. Do I have to tell you why? Okay, ask me when you see me at T-Town in July. I'll tell you.

@brawlo, I like that system, too. It makes sense.

sarals 

And one last thing. I go to VSC as often as I can. It's 6 1/2 to 7 hours south of where I live, so I get a hotel and will stay for a couple of days to maximize track time. It's expensive, but I get bang for my buck, and sometimes even broken ribs to add to it. What more could a girl want?

southernfox

Well POOP. Looks like I'm driving to Atlanta tomorrow. Thanks for posting!!

southernfox

No, I saw it. It was kinda normal for me to drive 7hrs or so for a single race. It's just the cost of doing business if you want to compete at a level higher than local/regional.

I drove 16hrs to Canada for road nationals, flatted 45km in...race over. Just the cost of it all.

topflightpro

Might want to put a call in before driving up there. I believe part, or all, of that event is by invitation.

southernfox

I know. I got a spot this morning.

carleton

Oh snap!

brawlo

It's a great system whereby if numbers are low, you don't really turn up for nothing. You're not guaranteed a jersey or medal just because you showed up. You still have to earn what you might win. I can't remember the actual percentages, and I can't find them anywhere, but there are percentage margins to gain a gold/silver/bronze based on how you perform against Australia's best time. You may turn up and walk away with nothing!