The below is an open letter to the CRCA board from George Suter regarding the exclusion of cat 1-3 masters from the Bear Mountain race
We are writing to request your reconsideration of the Masters Men category structure for the Bear Mountain races. The Masters is currently open only to category 4 and 5 racers. We request an opportunity for categories 1-3 masters to compete. The race is an iconic one for the New York racing community and many long-time racers of excellent ability are being denied the opportunity to race against composition of the same age and experience.
Changing the structure in this manner will provide a more balanced card of races that better reflects the makeup of our cycling community.
Demographics of the of bicycle racing community (according to USAC) is predominantly 40+. Respect the tradition of the race which has fielded a Masters Field in each previous edition. Respect the masters field. The Masters field is comprised of a mix of guys who found the sport later in life but also of guys who have been racing in the club for 20, or even 30 years! These guys have been participating and contributing to racing in the New York area, growing the club and the sport into what it is today.
if you agree with me please post a comment below and sign your real name so you can be counted.
Thank you, George Suter
but unfortunately I will be to fat to race any category on that course
i’m too old to compete against the young 35 year old guys who are also cat 3’s, and i would downgrade to cat 4 but then i wouldn’t be able to tell everyone on my sunday ride that i’m a cat 3, it means too much to me.
I’m confused, it looks like there are fields for every category rider so its not like you have to race against Cat 1 riders, why not just ride in the Cat 3 race if you’re Cat 3? And if you’re not able to keep up with a Cat 3 field why not just downgrade to 4 and race the Cat 4 field?
Sorry Suter but I doubt you’ll get anywhere with this CRCA BOD as most of their judgement and decision-making this year has been questionable at best. That’s what happens when few step up run for positions and the Club ends up with a bunch of inexperienced kids that have only been racing for a few years and just put their own mindless interests first and not those of the majority of the Club like you and most of us.
Not on the CRCA Board and I don’t always agree with their decisions, but do respect the time & effort they put in so we can engage in this hobby. If you’re a member of a racing constituency such as the masters, and feel like your interests are not being considered, why don’t you step up?
Your point has been made time and time again, and obviously I don’t step up, and I never will and that’s my choice so I and the rest of us just put up with the decision-making by whoever is on the CRCA BOD. In other years it hasn’t been as bad as it is this year. In fact, in the past few years it was quite good. This year seems to be the anomaly.
2/3 or 40+ – either way, it’s Fight Club.
Masters races: less stupid. 2/3: less predictable.
come join me in the 2/3, race masters style and don’t let any breaks go so we can sprint it out. It would be like having a whole army of old men as my personal minions!
As a an old 1 I’d love to race Bear, even if I have the legs for 96 miles, I certainly don’t have the ability for a 12:30 start time on mother’s day. There’s an interesting movement away from Master’s races in NYC. No Bear, no Harlem, no Orchard Beach. Yet many of the old guys typically double up the crits and do a cat 3 race and a masters race. Perhaps there’s some really valid reason, but it’s not clear what it is for this change.
I served on the board. I wrote to the board about adding a masters field and they did. I think they Dieter it. They went for the largest group they thought they would get. I’m sure they have a point of view but I don’t think they are serving the community. I would really like to hear their reasoning. CRCA has never put on events for the purpose of making money. I hope that wasn’t their motivation. Problem is by the time they publish the board meeting minutes to read it all be over.
I was told it has something to do with turnout – apparently Masters were the smallest mens field at Grants by a significant margin, and same thing last year at Orchard Beach and at Harlem. I didn’t race any of them since I’m more into TTs in my old age, but thats what i was told
I’m a Cat 3 Master and I don’t see any issue here. The race is likely to break up (unlike a crit) so the alleged safety of the Master field isn’t going to be an issue. If you are a 3, race as a 3. I think the problem is that turnout seems low so far this year. For a massive undertaking like Bear, the BOD needs to maximize attendance. A big thank you to the BOD from me.
Im all for Masters 1-3 event at bear Mtn!! 45+
I thought 5s could not race in a field with more than 50 or something like that? How does that work with the cat 5s over 40 or 50?
The USAC Rule is 1H5, copied and pasted for your reading enjoyment:
1H5. Maximum Field. Entries shall be accepted in order of receipt by the Race Director up to the field limit and subsequent entries shall be returned. The maximum field limit in any youth race shall be 50. The maximum field for a road event that includes category 5 men or cat 4 women, either alone or with other categories, shall be 75. For other road, Criterium and for cyclo-cross events, if no field limit is given in the official race announcement, a field limit of 100 shall be used. For criterium and cyclo-cross events with multiple fields on the course, the field limit is applied to the total number of riders on the course unless stated otherwise in the race flyer.
There is a solid core of Masters Racers. There ability ranges from category 1 to 4. It is a great way to get old people who are just getting into cycling ( the fours) a chance to learn how to ride properly, by letting them ride with the masters 1,2 and threes. This is the only group you can mix riders of so many different abilities. These guys don’t require a big prize list, and always have a polite rule abiding prescience at the race.
If you are a two or a three and already an adult, this is your future in cycling also. It just makes more sense to have fields open up to the maximum amount of people the rules allow. I personally won’t race Bear Mountain as fodder for you ambitious cyclists. I much prefer to race with people il I have more in common with.
Masters races will attract more cyclists when open to all categories.
As of now I will not be racing bear mountain.
Scott Gregoire
i’m a masters cat 3 rider and i have no problem racing in a M3 field. i’m just thankful that the race is happening after so many years of being cancelled + the fact that there is a M3 option. i really dont see what all of my fellow old guys are complaining about.
I suggest that if you take yourself seriously as a cyclist then you have to at least start Bear Mtn and try to survive the first run up to TIorati.
Yes, all you linebacker-looking sprinter guys who “kick ass at Floyd” will survive the initial descent. But then… “Houston, we’ve lost contact…” The real racing starts.
As a masters 50+ I’m good with whatever as long as there is a pee stop.
It’s a great race. Better than Battenkill IMO. Wish it wasn’t on mothers day. Also wish I could make it up Tiorati with the field more than twice before getting dropped. If I could maybe I’d take the blowback from my family.
As a current USA Cycling member,a cyclist for 27 years and a and racer for 16, I applaud the spirit of George Suter’s letter!
To exclude the Masters 1-3 field is shortsighted, myopic and above all short changing the vast majority of CRCA members and USA Cycling members. CRCA runs a few races a year, less than many other clubs throughout the US, with Bear being the most sought after on the East Coast. Masters racers are safe, wise and respectful of the course and in past years I have raced Masters, Cat 3 and 4, but always enjoyed the Masters level of competitiveness.
The CRCA board needs to re-consider this year’s Bear Mountain Classic fields in the light of all of those Cat 1-3 masters who most likely won’t register. As George Suter aptly points out in the letter above, Masters make up the MAJORITY of USA race license holders and will continue to do so. To exclude the vast majority on the basis of “keeping them in their respective fields” is the height of folly!
Make a Masters field 1-3 or 1-4 and this years Bear Mountain Classic will yield great fruit. Ignore this group and you do so at your peril.
officially won this thread.
i enjoy racing with you guys, in masters fields and non masters fields, but seriously, quit your bitching and come out and race. the world stopped revolving around us back when we turned 25. we all know it will be a good race and we’ll do fine racing in our own category, it just means that we most likely wont win – and thats not the end of the world, at least not for me.
“with Bear being the most sought after on the East Coast” HA. In what dream world do you live?
There are plenty of good races locally that have Master’s fields and exclude the 1/2s. So again, quit complaining. Btw, who won the senior 1/2 race at Rahway?
This year and last year I saw Masters win 1/2/3 races, like Durso winning Lower providence last week.
With separate fields for almost every category I fail to see how the “vast majority” of racers are being “excluded”. What’s more problematic is that masters expect their own field in every race when it’s mostly a luxury. What CRCA and some other noble promoters have been doing in recent years is opening opportunities to growing categories and up and coming racers including women and juniors in an effort to grow the sport. Maybe stop and think for just a few minutes that there are fewer masters fields (in only a handful of races I might add) to pave the way for the future of the sport. Perhaps it is your view that is shortsighted.
Agreed…Masters racing is a luxury, not a bad one, but a luxury nonetheless. If you guys ever want to talk about exclusion, look at women’s racing…
What’s wrong with your numerical category?
ALL 45 and upwards masters races should be open across categories. As GS and I saw at the Worlds last year the talent range in masters racing is staggering and inspirational. The fact that there are 50+ cat 1 s out there who can’ win Cat 1 races is not relevant. Racing against people with the same work/ life balances IS relevant.
TV
In most countries in europe is you don’t get results for over a year, your next license is issued with an automatic downgrade. If you’re a Master and are no longer competitive in your category, it’s easy to downgrade. I know riders in the CRCA who have done that. Just because you were once a Cat 2, doesn’t mean you are a Cat 2 for life.
Quit your bitching when there’s an easy solution.
So a Cat 2 Master like me should downgrade two categories to take part in one race, and then find himself unable to race in the A field the next week? Think again, my friend.
Look at golf – when I hit the links they don’t force me to play from the men’s tees with my younger co-workers, instead I play from the women’s tees. Why should cycling be any different?
Usually a 40+ field is much harder than a 3 only race. It wouldn’t surprise me if a 40+ rider wins Bear in the 3 field, or maybe the 2/3 field as well. I don’t see what the problem is.
I agree with George about the absence of a Cat 1-4 Masters Field at Bear, but the same applies to Orchard Beach, and in fact to Harlem, and even to the regular Club races.
The CRCA experimented with M45+ fields for Club races last year; in retrospect, it was the wrong field — it should have been M40+ for a better-attended, more competitive field. But abolishing all and any Masters fields was not the answer.
I’m not going to race at Bear, Orchard or Harlem this year because I don’t want to get crashed out of an overcrowded, sketchy 2/3 field or just make up numbers in a fast 1/2/3 field. Looking at George’s demographic charts, gotta believe there are a lot of people making the same calculation.
And what’s the logic of having a Masters 40+ (Cat 4/5) field but NOT a Masters 40+ (Cat 1-4)? Just makes no sense — least of all for the CRCA’s revenues.
actually masters races aren’t a luxury, they are pretty standard all over the country
Honestly the bigger issue here is that the board is doing whats best for themselves aka Cat 2/3’s that are too scared to do the big boy race.
P123 is unnecessary
2/3 is unnecessary
If the limit is 9 fields in 3 waves then categories should be as follows
P1/2
Cat3
Cat4a
Cat4b
Cat5a
Cat5b
Womens P123
Womens 3/4
Masters 35+/45+ Cat1-4(scored separately, this is done all the time)
Can we just adopt either an ability based category system or an age based category system? Having both just makes racing look like Strava…. what’s next, weight based category systems? i.e. Master 40+ Cat 1,2,3, 200lbs + for all you old fat asses
Even if you win the masters field, you are too big of a pussy to try the open field
I am excited by the prospect of so many experiences Masters racers vying to be on the board of the CRCA next year. Clearly there is interest.
Excitable masters
Gabe Von Helmut is a hero and visionary. He should be CRCA King for life!
when did that become a thing? With the exception of a few crits in eastern PA and 1x at Harlem, I never knew of such a category existed.
What was the compelling need for that? Did the demographics support that or did people ask for it on the CRCA questionnaire? Who thought that category was a good idea?
duuhhh cat 2/3 was invented by SixCycle so they could get their upgrades
well first all, its just Great that there is finally a return of the Bear mtn race to Us after missing seeing it the last few seasons.. But i can state i personally would have already entered in it for this spring if there was a masters field offered .. Since there isnt im still mulling it over even now if i will even go at all.. So in a nutshell Yes i much prefer when there is a masters race up there.. i guess because like others that have posted Yes im a fat old blah blah ba de blah and cant keep up with the young kids anymore .. and believe me after 50 yr old it gets even tougher to do every season.. Also i say there should also be a Jr. age group race included too.. i did it when i was that age and i still remember that rainy cold race like it was yesterday.. fun times !
Also a side note , i recall now the last yr i did a spring Bear mtn race there was a masters /cat 3 mixed field race . It was a full field and offered separate prizes for masters and cat 3 riders… So At this point i would even say lets just ask for something like that again? since the current feilds limits are not even 1/2 full as yet.?
It’s amazing to me that they decided to keep the tradition of having this race on Mother’s Day. Why do you hate your wives and mothers?
depends chamois for masters podium.
I’m not hating the idea of weight based categories. Or at least weight-handicapped, especially for things like uphill TTs and hilly road races. Imagine this: rider and bike show up to be weighed before the start and they start piling lead weights on the lightest guy in the field to get him up to the weight of the heaviest bike/rider combination…goodbye carbon arms race.
Can’t be bothered to make a comment. because they don’t give a shit about what anyone says.
There seems to be a lot of bleeding going on here.
GH’s suggestions may be a good one.
I don’t see why there needs to be a 2/3 field? So that the 2 can earn upgrade points to become a 1?
It’s the worst idea, but I think there are wider racing community that CRCA should consider serving.
I think the race will serve the cycling community better by including a masters field for sure – if CRCA is concerned about attendance, then why bother having 2 separate women’s fields? There are many good reasons to have women’s racing and multiple fields for them, despite the relative lower turn out.
I think a similar thing should be considered for the Masters.
I would even add a 50+ or 55+ masters field combined with the 45+ masters.
I have to say, based on what’s been said/done so far, I am not sure if this year’s CRCA board considered looking at wider scope of agendas. Yes, what happened to the masters club races?
I believe many of the dinosaurs and those behind supporting CRCA are in the masters group.
The board should take that into consideration.
I am grateful for the volunteers who have stepped up to take various positions on the board.
However, if you are going to do the task, as $ paying member, I expect the board to reflect the desires of the club members.
I agree with Matt S and Scott G, 2 of the best local masters riders btw. I’d bet that many of the “dinosaur” and “donor” club members are longtime CRCA racers, and masters by now. The masters races that do happen– here, and in Killington, GMSR, Battenkill, etc, are packed with high-level, albeit aged, talent.
make it a no pts race so all the maniacs can make like Jens and try hopeless heroic shit
There are masters who are capable, and do, win open races. Some were named a couple weeks back in the last masters fire storm that erupted here. Doubtful many of them, besides Loehner are going 96 miles, and unlikely any are winning an open race that long. Plus the race is at 12:30, so realistically any master 1,2 with any balance in their life has something else to do by late afternoon on mother’s day.
I keep reading about Balance of Life. As a full-time Cat 4 I don’t know what that is so can someone please explain? I’d ask my wife but she left me, don’t understand why when I’m so important in my cycling world.
I think they are talking about the proper balance of PSI on your race wheels. Gotta make sure the tires are deflecting the proper amount
CRCA BoD should use crowdsourcing in order to determine the field structure for races since everyone who posts on NYVelocity is so knowledgable and has so much experience with planning and promoting bike races.
CRCA BoD should use crowdsourcing in order to determine the field structure for races since everyone who posts on NYVelocity is so knowledgable and has so much experience with planning and promoting bike races.
I agree with George. I’m disappointed with no masters field.
i would sincerely appreciate the establishment of a clydesdale category at bear mountain. it’s unbelieveable that the CRCA board doesn’t understand my lifestyle and expects me to ride up tiorati with a bunch of skinny cat 4’s who weigh 30 lbs less than me.
https://www.bikereg.com/Confirmed/22497
M123: 68 riders
M23: 73 riders
M34: 68 riders
M4: 77 riders
M5: 71 riders
Masters…. 38 riders
My problem with the CRCA board this year is that they don’t post full results as they did so many years in the past. I wrote to them, but they said they don’t have the budget. Definitely not the same board that ran the club the previous few years.
Is that they took on this thankless volunteer role in running the club and getting yelled at by a bunch of internet trolls and they don’t even have the courtesy to say thank you as we emotionally berate them for their every decision. WHAT AN OUTRAGE.
a long time ago there were either good races or shit races. the good races were all pro12, the shit races were all 2/3. so, there was little point to get a cat 1 upgrade if you were a 2.
I believe the club’s and the sport’s interests would be better served if the master’s field at Bear were category 1-3 (or 4) and category 4/5 masters rode with their category rather than their age group.
Half the people in the sport are over 40 (and I suspect the proportion is at least that high in the club.) A lot of those people have been doing it for ten or more years – they race much differently than a cat 4 or 5 of any age.
I was membership director for CRCA in 2002 and have been part of the debates over what fields to have.
My 29 years of cat 2 status is little more than an ego-boosting ceremonial ribbon, and I doubt downgrading to 3 would help me be competitive at Bear, nor would an age-graded category, but I believe it would make a difference to quite a few 40+ racers.
Leon Moser
I am not sure that the field selection at Bear Mountain moves the dial of the sport’s interests.
“We’re pleased to announce that Kelly Benefit Strategies/LSV Men’s Elite Cycling Team”
so yeah, in my late 40s I want to line up for 96 miles with those guys…
It’s unreasonable to hold Grant’s up as a indicative of the interest in masters racing. There was a ton of other races that weekend, including three races that were part of ongoing points series. The prize list for the masters field was small enough to discourage guys from doing that masters races, given something like a $45 entry. In this case there aren’t very many race options on Mother’s day weekend, and a morning masters race, especially a RR (which are in very high demand), would be a big draw.
I agree with Georg S – we need a good master’s field at Bear Mt. That’s always been a great race with a very competetive field.
M123 – 69 riders
M3 – 51 riders
M4 – 75 riders
M45 – 75 riders
M5 – sold out at 50 riders
Masters…34 riders
For the Masters that are so tremendously outraged about Bear Mountain, here’s an idea – go race Hunter Mountain instead so we can quit listening to your irrational bitching and go back to more interesting conversation.
The thread is about this subject, Einstein.
11 masters have already voted with their feet! I guess that means a Masters 1-4 cat at Bear would only get like 23 racers.
did the masters vote with their feet or the tennis balls on the bottom of their walkers? waka waka!
Is a master troll who gets you going also a master baiter?
As the organizer/promoter of the Bear Mtn. race for 5 years, I wanted to provide a great race experience for all riders but viewed the Pro/1/2, Women’s 1/2/3 and the Master’s 1/2/3 as very special regional championship level races. That is why I included these 3 fields in the list of race champions that I created on crca.net ,
http://www.crca.net/results/past-champions/bear-mtn-champions/
The list of champions in these fields is indeed impressive and includes current Pro Tour rider David Veilleux of Europcar. The list of Master’s Champions including Roger Aspholm, John Funk and Ramon Benitez is representative of the top Master’s riders in the country and the world.
It is important to recognize high level masters competition as elite level racing. In this regard there are national championships for Masters but not for Cat 2’s or Cat 3’s or Cat 4’s.
My goal was to bring the best riders from throughout the northeast US and Canada to race in these fields. The Cat 3 and more so the Cat 4 races were mainly for local area riders. A less competitive Master’s race for older riders including Cat 4’s was also held to provide a better experience for experienced riders who did not want to mess with the newer and younger 4’s but were not at the level of the elite Master’s field which was primarily made up of Cat 1’s and 2’s.
Both Master’s fields always sold out as did all other fields except the women which however had some excellent competitive regional fields.
I saw Bear as serving the CRCA membership but also saw it as part of CRCA’s obligation to serve the wider racing community. It was one of the best platforms for regional riders to earn pro contracts and was one of the most competitive Masters races, one of the very few to limit the field to Cat 1/2/3.
We had established a great tradition of being among the most competitive Master’s races in the country. It would have been nice to see this continue.
I think Mike Green’s response shows that the people behind the scenes are thoughtful and passionate about creating this racing experience.
It’s one thing to ask for a special field for your demographic; it’s quite another to criticize them for neglecting to recognize your particular peer group.
Is the pie baked at this stage? … Why not, as Matt Seaton suggests, combo masters with existing fields?
Ageist trollers please sharpen your act. Tennis balls on walkers? Master baiters? Depends Chamois? Really?
What’s wrong with racing your numerical category?
A 45+ Category 1 racer who has raced 30 years doesn’t have a competitive field to race in Bear Mtn at the moment. Although does in the majority of other races around the country – so why not here also?
A 45+ Category 1 racer currently has the choice of racing with young full time bike racers, but doesn’t have the time with real life work and family commitments to do the training required to be competitive with the current younger professionals and mid-20yrs old kids who train full time. So the options is to sign up for a field and not be competitive of downgrade to Cat 4 and “sandbag” their way through the race.
As Gabriel put it earlier, the simplest is to make the fields as is standard all over the country as
P1/2
Cat3
Cat4a
Cat4b
Cat5a
Cat5b
Womens P123
Womens 3/4
Masters 35+/45+ Cat1-4(scored separately, this is done all the time)
“I think they Dieter it.”
I am not a verb.
Thank you.
Dieter
When the results are in, and we see how well some masters riders place in the p-1-2 race, I hope we can go back to review these comments.
Now Masters from California are chiming in! Unless Craig moved back to NYC?
Hey Dieter since you’re here and hava little experince putting on bike races have you any comments?
Even more “hey DIeter”
One of the suggestions for the old guys was to do Hunter instead…is that happening? Bike reg is a bit thin on actual details.
When a Cat 1 racer isn’t competitive in a Cat 1 field, then they are no longer a Cat 1.
Do both! Hunter will have a 40/50+ as always, though. I’ve always paced that field and it’s always been a great race…
Lots of details here – https://www.bikereg.com/hunter-mountain-spring-classic
In any case, I am sure there are more forces at play than people realize with Bear Mtn (and with any race): time, officials and motos, volunteers, the park mgt., etc. I bet it wasn’t an easy decision.
Dieter
Do both! Hunter will have a 40/50+ as always, though. I’ve always paced that field and it’s always been a great race…
Lots of details here – https://www.bikereg.com/hunter-mountain-spring-classic
In any case, I am sure there are more forces at play than people realize with Bear Mtn (and with any race): time, officials and motos, volunteers, the park mgt., etc. I bet it wasn’t an easy decision.
Dieter
Careful there young wolves. “We’ll have music, such sweet music, and wine, heh, the red will run, and we’ll put some wrongs aright.”
I sign up for many races I know I won’t be competitive at. What’s wrong with that? I can’t sprint and can’t climb so I pretty muched effed. Some of the most fun races I have done have been when I’ve been completely outclassed and dropped. “They all can’t be winners, now can they kid”
3/4 races are much better than 3 races.
a 35+ cat1 – 4 field is silly, ridiculous, and dangerous. 35 isn’t too old to be racing 20 somethings. 45 might be.
Yes to racing one’s category
We will all complain no matter what.
3/4 races are much better than 3 races.
a 35+ cat1 – 4 field is silly, ridiculous, and dangerous. 35 isn’t too old to be racing 20 somethings. 45 might be.
Yes to racing one’s category
We will all complain no matter what.
It’s great to see younger people joining on the board but it makes no sense to cater the club’s fields for the benefit of twenty-something cat 2s and 3s, most of whom will be out of the sport in a few years. Guys like Leon, George and some of the other commenters here like Mike Green have been mainstays for years. It would be worth it for the newer members to listen to people who have been around and have a connection to the club’s past. Not every member is getting their racing information on Facebook, not every member is obsessed with upgrade points, not every race has to be organized to fill the most spots (unlike Dieter, the club doesn’t need to make a profit on the race). The CRCA community is made up of more than just the latest crop of eager beavers, and if you start telling longtime members that they are unimportant whiners who should suck it up or downgrade, you’re going to find a big hole when you need their support.
“My 29 years of cat 2 status is little more than an ego-boosting ceremonial ribbon, and I doubt downgrading to 3 would help me be competitive at Bear”
While we’re at it let’s also throw in a women’s masters field. Sure there are fields for cat 1-4, cat 3 and cat 4 women, and (a) each woman has earned the category she is in and (b) it is likely that none of those fields will sell out, but to really allow these women to have the best experience possible we need to not deny them the opportunity to race against competition of the same experience AND age.
We need a Masters Bear Mtn field ! Respect the Masters ! Come on NOW !
To the “race your category folks”:
I can’t sandbag my age. People sandbag their category all the time. It’s an artificial system put in place so people don’t have to pick on people their own age. It’s vague and amorphous, pliable according to what a racer or an official might want. Running doesn’t use it. Tri doesn’t use it. Swimming doesn’t use it.
At 50+ I’m really not interested in racing air headed kids every weekend. If you want to lump me in with the 3’s, see ya, even though I’d win and then you could all complain that I should upgrade (again).
If I have to race P1/2 distances I’m going to pull the plug on all but a few races. My body simply won’t hold up to my current sixty races a year.
To the point about Master’s 1-3 folks and the financial reality:
A few years ago one of the biggest local associations in the country put their toe in this same water (go away yee 1/2 old folks). No one did any actual analysis of who was keeping the lights on. I did. I turned out the 1/2 40+ and above folks while only 15% of the total 40+ masters, generated 37% of the revenue.
They raced a lot. More than any other group as a matter of fact. In some cases they were the profit margin on some of the smaller venues.
Given the demographics above, it might not be the best business case to alienate your best customers, the people that underpin the financial success of some of these events, the people who are the primary demographic for support and promotion.
boycott bear and race hunter
Put Matlock on the case!
I’m interested to know how masters racers feel about the appropriation of funds for juniors racing and women’s racing. Looking at data it is very clear that males 35-55 make up the bulk of the sport. In your opinion do you feel the money is well spent targeting some the least represented demographics.
No.
IMO,
Categories are for the purpose of development and fair competition. Lines must be drawn somewhere, so determining skill levels (numerically) is a very nice system.
It can also be accomplished with age categories, but that creates fields with widely varying ability levels.
Since CRCA has decided to go with numerical categories, adding an additional age category is superfluous. It’s not bad or anything, just extra. And that’s where the luxury exists– some riders have a selection, while others don’t.
Lines have to be drawn somewhere.
to be clear,
If room exists on the course, and in the schedule, I have no objection to masters fields if they have the registration numbers. But if conditions are tight, i think that the first priority is to allow all riders an opportunity to race.
Dan,
Why don’t you take over and make it a pre-Dubuque Granfondue event?
Mass start. KOM on every lap. Winner gets to keep to swap his/her bike with any bikes among the participants.
Open it up to NYCC and tri groups. There you go. More $ and satisfying more riders in the tri-state area.
CRCA B/D, what do you say?
You won’t find masters racers complaining about juniors and women’s fields, because everybody understands that the sport needs to encourage juniors and women and provide opportunities for them to race. It does not need to go out of its way to encourage young male cat 2s and 3s, who have three fields to choose from at Bear. Those guys will race no matter what.
If there was no 4/5 40+ field, then those guys would just do the 4 or 5 fields, which are the same distance or shorter. But since there is no masters option for 1s and 2s, those guys will have to race twice the distance.
Being on the board is a thankless job but these kinds of decisions don’t help.
Glad to see there are some reasonable folks debating this in a civil fashion. George saw something he would like to see changed and put his letter out. BUT, why did he post it here instead of sending it directly to the CRCA board. If he can post here, he can go to crca.net and get the email addresses of the board and send them a quick email. That’s the proper way to do things.
For those of you whining while peeing in your depends, STFU until you serve on the board. This past election only a couple of the positions were contested. I like many of you was too lazy to run for the board, but I’m not going to complain on a public forum about any of their decisions. If I really don’t like something, I will speak to them directly.
The rest of you with great ideas on what fields should be should put on your own race at Bear to see just how much work it is to put on a race there. Not to mention the large risk you take, money wise. The club has to put out a lot of cash before the first race starts. If the weather keeps the race from going off, anyone remember the fog canceled race, they lose all the money they put out in advance.
I also find it hilarious that high category masters would admit in public they are afraid to race with younger racers in their category because they think they would not be competitive. If that is really the case, you need to consider downgrading to a category where you will be competitive.
I have to ask why Girgio Saddlesore thinks a masters cat 1-4 race would be dangerous? First time up Tiorati will split the race up so that only the stronger more experienced racers will be at the front. The same thing happens in all the fields, though in some it takes more than one trip up Tiorati to really split the pack.
nattering nabobs of negativism
1. You don’t know whether George wrote to the CRCA BOD or not.
2. Being, or having been, a board member isn’t a prerequisite for expressing an opinion, or complaining.
Someone listened. Masters race added. Thanks Crca.
Looks like you can register for the race, after the race.
That’s really great! And it’s phenomenal to see that bike reg hasn’t crashed yet from the onslaught of masters signing up! Oh…
George Suter we await your registration. Fees go up this weekend.
I’d like to know who came up with that one, now thats a joke of a field…..
Let’s see: http://www.usacycling.org/road-category-upgrade-guidelines.htm
Qualifying Distances Per Category
To qualify for upgrading points, races must meet distance standards.
2 – 1 Men 80 mi
If you’re a 2 and you want to be a 1, and you can’t score points in P/1/2 races, an 84-mile 2/3 race is good for you.
So race in an easier 2/3 field only to get your ass handed to you when you start racing against Cat1s?
Why? Just so that you can tell your friends you are cat1?
This is how you do it.
https://www.bikereg.com/8121
Since inertia is a pretty powerful force, it was more of an effort for CRCA to make the changes they did than to just redo what was a very successful race. “To dieter” is a good and fair expression of what happened.
to a race with just eight fields and SRAM neutral support for just the elites? because that would be better than this year’s race with eleven different fields and SRAM support for just about every field? Seriously, what are you still complaining about?
The transformation of cycling into a rich boys sport has been so complete that the difference between $35 and $60 entry fees isn’t even noticed. Onwards Dieterization
@Cece
Back in 2009 the first race went off at 9:00am and the last race ended before 3:00pm
This year, the races will run from 7:30am til 5:00pm. That’s a long day of work for the race-day staff.
Don’t forget to say thank you to all the officials, pace car drivers, marshals, etc.
More fields are great if you can fill them. Fields of 20-30 riders don’t serve anyone well.
Current sign up is abysmal so all the extra fields and extra time of racing is a waste of money .
Great that Crca brought back this race but it would be nice if they at least promoted it with a link and story on the front page of their website and a listing on nyvelocity would also help among other things
escalating race fees be damned, guys aren’t reregistering for races until the week they happen > unless it’s going to close out
5th place in the Cat 4s in PP – 65 years old! Nice.
You know what, Guillaume Polished? If you want some crappy industrial park crit, go pay your $30 and have a blast. You just overpaid. If you want police, course marshals, officials, a nice finish, an interesting and challenging course, photo timing, a race expo, your bottles and trash picked up after you’ve tossed them, and a paid staff to manage all that, then guess what? It costs me money for everything above + my full attention for at least a year in advance. I don’t work for free, though there is a certain crowd that expects race organizers to subsidize your weekend hobby. Not me.
It’s because of people like you that Battenkill’s days are numbered. Maybe someone else will come along, but I’m done with it soon and I sincerely doubt anyone else has the time, competence, and skill set to pull it off.
Congrats and good luck.
Dieter
Well said, Dieter. Anyone who’s ever run a race knows that most bike racers are jerks, nowhere more so than in New York. Organizing races is like volunteering for a charity where the cause isn’t homeless kids or endangered species but a group of narcissistic, overprivileged, entitled, self-deluded people.
In a few years Dieter has made a nice race in the middle of nowhere into a major life goal for thousands of people, and because he does such a great job people constantly gripe about it, like they elected him governor. He’s not the reason your race fees are going up. He’s raising the bar for promoters and that is a good thing.
To Dieter:
I don’t do your races. The distance to the races, relatively high costs (for the crits you’ve run even if they ain’t in industrial parks) and now your attitude is all part of why I don’t want to do your races. You post on here to promote your events. Sure some of these guys are whiney but they are also your customer base. Don’t stick your hand out the bus window if you don’t want it cut off.
If Battenkill goes away, I won’t care. That’s fine by me. I did Cherry Blossom that day and had a blast.
Article in Times critical of MOMA. Will they throw a silly fit and close their doors. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/21/arts/momas-expansion-and-director-draw-critics.html?hp
BLP…is that a parking lot crit?
It’s $35. No discount for a second race.
That parking lot crit costs $20, used to be $15.
Don’t try to raise the cost to $30 to prove your point..
Dieter’s pointed proven below. I like Cherry Blossom, but it is no Battenkill.
That’s crazy! He threw a silly hissy fit,probably a few beers in, and said he was taking his ball and going home. And it isn’t charity. He himself said he makes money. which part am i supposed to be sympathetic to?
When did it become wrong to put on an event and make money? Do you all work for free?
When did CRCA get into the business of putting on races to make money?
CRCA has to fund itself, some of its activities are net cost and consequently it must make up the shortfall.
CRCA did not function like this in the past. What changed?
Probably the cost of permits and securing support personnel like police officers/ambulances/etc. among other things…
Everything costs more nowadays…it’s ridiculously entitled of people in these parts to plunk down thousands of dollars on equipment only to complain about increases in registration costs that may be due to factors outside of the event promoter’s control (anyone ever taken the time to ask a promoter why the fee is going up before simply resorting to flaming them?).
Keep in mind folks that this is a hobby. If you want to do something to try to make it better, step up. I’m sure the CRCA board would love your help or at least some competition at the next election. Dieter too might enjoy seeing other people trying to put on large scale events.
My 2 cents…though maybe I should save them and put the funds towards my next park race…
I never said it was wrong. au contraire. it is great, that way you will keep doing it. what is wrong is to profit and pretend that you shouldn’t have to listen to your paying customers at all. THAT is the entitled one.
he has to do some paperwork to make a little money and then hear a few people complain. life is damn hard.
So is working for free. Go Dieter and pay them no mind.
Right, the CRCA did not have to previously fund itself – it used to run on unicorn farts and fairy dust
It is a nonprofit organization.
http://990finder.foundationcenter.org/990results.aspx?fn=century+road+club+association
since 2011 when the yuppies took over the CRCA bank account has about doubled to $120,000.
Hearing about that CRCA bank account is making something here double…
But seriously, when did we start taking this so seriously? Remember racing the local kids around the block on your single speed Huffy? Oh, I forgot, as a Midwesterner that may be an experience I don’t have in common with many New Yorkers…
I just want to say that escalating fees are a problem in all races, crits and RRs alike. I don’t mind paying a lot when I feel that I am getting my money’s worth. But for p/1/2 crits I am so sick of paying anything about $40 for something that is considered a small local event. Why did Cherry Blossom cost anymore than a normal Branchbrook race? The cost should have been the same.
Before you say it was fro Sram neutral support know this. Because of the course and lack of a free lap, if you flatted you were given a wheel and told to chase without being allowed to draft off the back of the support vehicle. That is not the way a circuit race works.
i understand that it’s expensive to put on races, and promoters aren’t volunteers, but it does seem like entry fees have gotten much higher across the board. i rarely win my money back and generally don’t care but i’m starting to question the price/value calculation of some races. for example, i voted with my wheels not to pay $40 to ride up and back the same stretch of runway at FBF yesterday. That just seems ridiculous.
The fees absolutely have gone up much faster than inflation and I have to wonder about the long term impact on the local scene will be. One of the cool things about NYC cycling has always been the fact that it’s not all affluent white guys (which is the case in 99% of the rest of US scene). Every few years, there’s always the scrappy young West Indian or Dominican kid from the Bronx who shows up and crushes it in local races. I hope those days aren’t over.
NCC races tend to be around $45, which I don’t mind because you tend to get a lot of bang for your buck (pre race goody bag, announcers, neutral support, cool venue, large timing clocks, big/deep payout etc). But when a municipal park race costs about the same with a fraction of the perks you feel cheated out of your payment. That’s why I don’t mind industrial prk crits anymore. It may be missing a lot of the hype, but the entry fees tend to be a lot less, so I still get to have fun. That why Rockliegh TRAINING races are great, cheap entry fee, fun times.
For the record Rockliegh should not be taken as a serious race, just an fyi for some of you out there. It has a rolling start for pete’s sake.
Relieved to know that if I break my clavicle at Rockleigh it is less serious than at an NCC
AT an NCC race EMS is already standing by, so yes, it is better.
Maybe “Dieterization” should mean:
The act of promoting a top-notch race event, charging the participants for the expenses that come with the high quality, for people who expect things for themselves that they would never give to others.
i got my car Dieterized the other day. It looks fabulous.
I paid for the full Dieter experience from a New Jersey hooker last weekend.
Worth every nickel.
Who pays hookers in nickels?
I’m not going to put her on my credit card.
What you put her on, is your own business. It just seems to me that quarters would be more prudent.
man rants about masters not having their own fields and other issues all mentioned on this site
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0y7tkVKVRk