Originally Posted by
carleton
Glad that you've gotten so far! Congrats!
Why a 200? I'd suggest that the minimum be 250M if you want to host big events. And I'm sure that the prospect of big events (Elite/Masters/JR nationals, maybe a World Cup, etc...) is in your proposal.
The idea of, "Well, a velodrome is a velodrome be it 166, 200, or 250M." is not true. A 250M track is a lot more attractive and I would imagine worth the extra expense. Basically, if you are gonna do it, go for a standard 250m then settle for a 200m.
I agree with you. 250's best, but 200 is the minimum best. Apparently T-Town was built as a 333 to be able to function as a community facility - honestly, getting new riders to brave a 250 is tough.
Two other concerns about ideal size: money, and raceability. Tracks get so much more expensive with size. And, I think that if one builds a velodrome, it's best to not just build a community facility, but also one that can tap into the national scene: a track for
everyone from Cat 5 to 1. While hosting Nats would be nice, I'd say it's more important to just be able to support elite racing - attract people from different tracks to a midsize, regional or national event.
And IMO, the smallest track that elite racing can reasonably be done on is a 200m. That's kind of a "come at me bro" statement but I have issues with the recent crop of 166 tracks, which I think are great tracks for Cat 3s but not for many others.