Sandbagger of the world unite!
It seems we’ve had numerous “discussions†and comments about sandbagging and the consequences there of, but the whole hullabaloo begs the question – what exactly is a sandbagger? What are the criteria?
I’ve always contended that category three is the “retirement†category. If you want to race 3/4 races at the age of 38, I think that is fine. I have no problem with that. Others may disagree. What about family/life/work commitments? I think if you work as an ER doctor and pull 18 hour shifts or if you are a cop, fireman or teacher, you should be able to pick whatever damn category you want. If you’re forty and have kids and a mortgage, feel free to be a four, I don’t care.
Bike racing at the amateur lever we are at is basically a bowling league in lycra. We’re not going to get signed or become the next Tour contender, we do it for fun. And if it’s fun for someone to dominate a four race, then so be it. I personally wouldn’t do it, but different strokes I suppose. See the thing is, is that when you call someone a sandbagger you a making a value judgment on them as a racer, and in a very small part as them as a person. That’s why you should pause before throwing out a term like that.
So, lets get a discussion started, give your definition of sandbagger or give your idea of when’s it’s ok or not ok to race a certain category, but this time we’re going to try and have a civilized discussion here (maybe the first ever). So, you don’t get to be anonymous and you don’t get to mention other racers personally. Understand?
But if you’re the type to anonymously call someone out on the internet, I would guess you’re also the type to yell “pull through†from the middle of the pack. I hate it when people scream at my ass like that, so if you’re an ass screamer, feel free to call me a dumbass on my journal page.
And remember this isn’t Roe vs. Wade, hell it isn’t even Taylor vs. Kat!
schmalz
i’m 40 and i have a mortgage and i feel free to be a mediocre 4. thanks for the free therapy!
i’m just looking forward to the day i’m good enough to be considered a sandbagger. sadly, that day will most likely never come
Well put
Hi, Empowerment – my name is Ben and I too am a mediocre CAT4. Don’t worry Empowerment, we’re good enough, smart enough, and doggone it, people like us.
btw, what kind of crappy bowling league is cycling anyway if we can’t drink beer while we do it.
Seriously, this is a hobby for all of us (read ALL). Some people get a big kick out of upgrading and competing at the highest level that they can attain. Others like riding locally and winning and don’t care if they are racing a field of CAT4’s, CAT2’s or WW2 vets. If you are losing to someone that is stronger than you, what does it really matter if they upgrade or not, they are still stronger than you. And isn’t asking that all better riders upgrade just another form of sandbagging? Like the others, I only wish for the day to come when I’m considered a sandbagger – currently, I’m more of an ass-dragger.
The issue of sandbagging is less a concern in road racing than in cyclocross, right.
While sandbagging seems totally inconsiderate to me, in road racing (at least circuit races) lapped riders are not forced to end their race once lapped correct?
While not yet a racer, I witnessed my first example of sandbagging at the cyclocross natz last December.
In my opinion it is completely wrong for a racer of higher category to drop down just to win a race – assumably to stoke his/her own ego – at the cost of others participation.
I might be wrong, but the category system is intended to imply that competitors in a race are likely all of similar ability, right?
Since this is amateur athletics I am sure there is nothing to be done and it will always be an issue.
You’re a Cat 3 – you can hang with the 123’s in the Park Races…just. You get the odd place in the Cat 3/4’s but are hardly setting hte world alight – if you fancy it go for it in the 3/4’s.
You’re a Cat 3 – and EVERY week you win or place top 3 in the lower categories – get yourself up to the 123’s
I think most of the problems stem from the Cat 3/4 races. Grant’s tomb, for instance. Harlem too? The top end Cat 3s and the just-finished-10-Cat-5-races do not belong in the same race. There is more than enough demand for Cat 4 only races (Bear sold out in a day? Houstaonic? Jiminy?) so if promoters could have Cat 4 fields at these crits than you’d have a lot less bitchin’ about sandbagging. Why aren’t there more Cat 4 only fields incidentally? Do you really need 3/4 races and master’s races? Seems like 3s got lots o’ options. 4s to race with their own, not so much.
Ben H, you’re not a mediocre 4, you were a favorite at Bear Mountain and damn near won…I got dropped (well at least I finished) anyway, bike racing is the only thing in my life that i do because I want to and not because i have to…so it’s all good.
i don’t think the racers who get called sandbaggers on this site even read it. they’re too busy training and kicking our asses.
First off let me start by stating that I don’t even think i would be a sanbager in the 5’s. I don’t understand all this sandbagging stuff. This is my first year cycling and it seems like everyone spends so much time bitching about this topic. what ever happened to playing "UP" to your competion? I for one wouldn’t like anyone to be pressured to move up. I want a chance to race with the best that are in the fireld for as long as possible. It makes everyone that much better. If ken gets moved up before Harlem I will be dissapointed. I’de love tha chance to work with him or play the one or two cards that I have with him. I had the same feeling when Kim got moved so quickly out of the B’s for the CRCA Park racing. He won 2 races, 1 in a bunch sprint, and he’s gone? What is that? The peleton/other teams didn’t even have an opportunity to try and stop him/Adler. I guess I just think this is silly.
RAY ALBA IS A SANDBAGGER
A IV going down to V…..that’s a "tea-bagger";)
Well put Justin!!
uscf rules
Hotdamn Lee3, your not as bland as your Kit makes you look!
To much nonsense talk about this sandbagging. Yes if someone is winning easily every week they should upgrade . But who is winning week after week easily ?. There are just some guys who don
To much nonsense talk about this sandbagging. Yes if someone is winning easily every week they should upgrade . But who is winning week after week easily ?. There are just some guys who don
no comments on the individual guys being talked about–those i know are all good guys, and each has his own reasons for being in whatever field, i’m sure. but i have to agree in general with the anti-sandbag sentiment. obviously, we all have different reasons for doing this sport, but it’s supposed to be hard (and not just hard in the sense of "wow, i worked really hard lapping the field 17 times"). if it stops being hard, you’re not really racing, and there’s better competition for you somewhere.
i don’t understand how the idea of "playing up to your competition" could make someone want much stronger racers to stay in lower fields–wouldn’t you rather move up yourself? if you want to be a great basketball player, you aren’t gonna get better by having michael jordan come and whip the piss out of you once a week (anyway, he’d be in the master’s field).
Even bowling leagues use handicapping. Thank God they don’t wear lycra, though.
Even sandbaggers make mistakes. Pro – example; Boonan isolating himself after Forest of Arenberg – punished, Petacchi going to early and getting nipped by Freddy Rodriguez – punished!
I’m not saying these guys are sandbaggers but when on form they’re pretty much unbeatable "unless" they make a mistake. At our level mistakes are flying left and right. One has to be the racer that spots these mistakes and exploit them. Someone with reasonably good form can beat the 600ibs gorilla. This is why Justin’s email is so poignant.
i think that if race promoters who are always on a budget, focused the funds on just 3 races on each day rather than having 5 or 6 different races and keep all cats separate. it would solve some of the problems of sand bagging.
pro 1, 2, 3, and that is it. Three races, double the prize list for each race and that will get you a draw.
a promoter could do any combination of cats in an event but keep all cats as separate races no 3-4 or 4-5 or pro 1 2 3 the only cats that make sense to combine anymore are pro with 1
Shaw – you can drink beer. Fits well in the pockets on the back of the shirts.
And you can thank me next time you get blown out the back on a climb. I’ll be the fat guy behind you.
Too many people seem to approach bike racing like it’s some kind of video game, where the objective is to advance to the next level by accumulating points. That’s backward. Upgrading is a consequence of racing hard and well, not a goal to strive for and organize your season around. An upgrade is just an administrative detail — it doesn’t make you a better rider, or mean that you’re now superior to riders in lower categories.
If you’re consistently finishing in the top 10 in your field, eventually you’ll find you have enough points to move up. If you’re not consistently in the top 10, then why do you care if some "sandbagger" ahead of you upgrades or not? He’s not your problem. You need to get strong enough to be competitive in your own field before worrying about upgrading.
Winning a race, at any level, is a lot more satisfying than putting some sticker on your license. Focus on racing and let the upgrade stuff take care of itself.
Empowerment – mediocre and CAT4 are meant to be two separate adjectives – I am both mediocre and a CAT4.
we need more handicap races. like the Maltese. that was some fast sh*t
yeah, lee3, maybe you can beat the gorilla if you’re really lucky or clever, but i just think it’s contrary to the spirit of competition for the gorilla to be beating your ass when there’s a category clearly made for gorillas…
…and well done, eugene
MH’s post shoulda been the last word on the topic. nice one.
funny article
what a can of worms ray opened
You can’t race the 3’s @ Sommerville Monday because it has been full for 6 weeks. It’s full of guys that have been to the Olympics won world Championships and National Championships. Yet there are is plenty of space in the 2’s. The 3’s has become the dumping ground for old racers that have the skill to race with the 2’s. Who cares who you race against We just need even distrubution of racers in fields so we can get in races.
I actually disagree with MH (who is that anyway – names please!). Its kinda funny to me to be told "not to worry" about upgrading, when we are ALL there to race hard and COMPETE. Competition by nature requires drive, commitment, and a desire to be the best you can be, whatever level that may be given age and ability. Its totally natural for a competitive person to want to move up, and to strive aggressively for that goal. Honestly, people – what bike racer doesn’t want to be fast enough to race at the next level – or several levels – up. What Cat 5 doesn’t want to race with the 4s? What Cat 2 doesn’t at least idly contemplate a run at the pros in Belgium for a season? Now I would concede that moving up can’t be the ONLY thing to focus on (yeah, I like to have fun with the present group, work as a team for mutual satisfaction, etc.), but it sure as hell is the primary motivater for most, right there with winning at the current level. Shit, the moment I saw I could possibly do well in the 4s, I set my eyes on the 3s.
Another point though – this sport has become FAR more competitive than years past, and I believe the upgrade system is essentially broken for USCF. Simply put, its too hard to upgrade now (Im thinking 4 to 3 and 3 to 2 – Im less sure about the levels above that…). With too few open races, and enough blazing fast riders showing up to each one, the "normal fast" riders at the level have a much harder time getting the requisite points, and can languish for a long time needlessly. The winners of the 4 races are guys who are generally fast enough at that point to place in the top quartile or even top 10 in the 3 races they go on to race in. Liuzzi for example. My friend from CA who I raced with at GMSR (he was 4th place overall) is already a Cat 2! The winners of the 3 races are fast enough to beat perhaps the majority of the Cat 2s in the average race. K Harris, for example. Get the point here? If you have to be better (or even markedly better) than the average guy in the next field up, how is that a fair bar to set to be upgraded? Solution: I believe the points need to reach down a bit further now to reflect much deeper fields – top 10 perhaps get points. Will we 4s miss these fast riders when they move up? Hell No. Every year a new crop of fast guys and gals are showing up, fresh from Tri training, running track, or olympic rowing for that matter. So far, in observing CRCA for 3 years now and racing for 2, Ive seen the 4s get faster, not slower, even though Im not forced to compete with Liuzzi, Harris, Auth, and even the young whipper-snapper fast kids like Madera – all who have moved up.
Each season, the Riseths and Maderas and Riffelmachers show up to beat us "regular fast" guys to a pulp, and sadly relegating this desk-jockey 35 year old wanna-be to the 4s for an indefinite period, unless I sacrifice my entire free time and race every race in the region all season to get top 10 finishes (read 6th-10th place) to meet that rule. Fat chance. The girlfriend simply wont allow it.
Insert big sigh here.
Shouldn’t Judy Miller be taking care of sand bagging instead of blockiong fast guys from catting up. Then again the average age of a US racer is 36..thats old enough to ride the 3/4 race at FBF…sweet!
ebiv
jonathan p.
(sorry, hit the spacebar)
I agree with Chris M – this is only my second year and the whole NYC racing scene seems way more competitive and organized this year. Partly it’s down to the mild winter we had, everyone was already fit by the time March rolled around.
Also, knowledge is power and anyone who reads this site (which has expanded greatly) knows who everyone else is, and what their abilities are. Personally I feel like i’m way stronger and smarter than I was last year, when I started but my results aren’t any better because everyone else is that much better. All you can do is train to the best of your available time, try to ride a smart race and ride hard on race day, & have fun, and not worry so much about how many upgrade points the other guy should have.
Honestly, who gives a fuck? just race your bike and lets not make excuses.
So what are you doing here Rob. Go race your own bike.
I still have some excuses left.
It’s probably true that upgrading from 3 to 2 is harder than back in the day, but it’s always been the case that to do it you have to pick and choose your events carefully, and go to a lot of them unless you are some physical freak who places at will. That is, you have find races that suit your abilities and fit the rules for upgrading. That means a focussed campaign of travel for many months or even a whole season. That’s what it was like for me (and I missed upgrading by 1 point in one 12-month period and didn’t make it till 4 years later!).
Here’s a good article on tactics relating to placing consistently:
http://spokepost.com/news/?articleID=1216&catViewAll=4
Point 4 is essential and few people understand this, especially at lower categories.
Also, there is not much difference in horespower between the good cat 3s and "average" or sucky cat 2s around here. In fact, there are bunch of local 3s are who are crazy strong — some of the guys who have been dominating the 3-4 races in prospect park, for example. But there is a big difference in skill insofar as many 2s have ridden big, hard races at stupid-fast speeds. If you do some of the exceptional local p-1-2-3 events (I think the Tour of Maplewood is an example) you can get a taste of that as a 3. But really you shouldn’t go to a race like that if the goal is to to upgrade — you should find the cat 3 only event the same day and focus on it.
the USCF upgrade system promotes INDIVIDUAL accomplishment in what is supposed to be a TEAM sport. All sandbaggers can be beaten with a well thought out, practiced and commited tactical TEAM approach. (by commited I mean the squad has to come to the table with a good bit of fitness). I’ve always been frustrated by 60 guys racing individualy for top 20 spots. Round and round we go, chase, re-group,chase re-group.. not a lot of fun. The races that I’ve enjoyed most are not the ones where I’ve finished top 10 but are the ones where several clubs show up and race as TEAMS, even if I ride myself out of the race half way through.
Responding to Chris M(ecray), your first paragraph seems on-target to me.
But for the rest, I’ve heard the same story since I started racing: "The races have gotten harder since…", or "The riders are better now than…", etc. I don’t agree. There have always been exceptionally strong riders in every field, and it’s always been difficult to upgrade.
When a rider is ready for the next level, it’s obvious. Those who are struggling for points here-and-there are missing some key component(s) in their ability (strength and/or skill).
But as for the sandbaggers, yeah, it’s annoying.
Mecray – – MH is Matt Howard (aka – the "Evil One"). I tend to agree with him. Upgrades come to those who put in the training time and develop good race instincts. Also to the "raw talent elites" like the Olympic rowers of the world. Better to train hard and race hard than worry about upgrading. It’ll just happen. And if doesn’t, then you’ve got bigger things to worry about: like why you’re not regularly finishing in the top 10. If you’re not, you’re not going to have success in the next field up.
On your second point, I agree that the 4s seems to have become more competitive as people have become smarter with their training and the sport has taken in a lot of crossover athletes from other endurance sports. But I’m not sure upgrading has actually become more difficult – there were always fast movers. You just have to race smart and get to lots of races. Consider doing some masters races too. They won’t get you upgrade points, but they will make you faster/smarter. Don’t underestimate the "smart" factor. You don’t have to be the fastest guy in the field (although I suspect that helps, I wouldn’t know because I’m not), you just have to be the first (or 6th) across the line. Frequently all that takes is some brains (on top of good fitness). You will also find that later in the season it gets a little easier because not only is your fitness better, but the guys winning the races now will have already upgraded (this last factor seems to kick in just after Fitchburg every year).
As for sandbaggers – – let’s face it, we know who they are (were). It’s a lot easier to beat them if you stop worrying about them and use smart tactics to neutralize them.
You guys are pathetic. I couldn’t resist reading some of the whining above. It’s the same delusional group of yahoos yippin and yappin about this and that. Racing in a park all the tme against the same old same olds must do something to a man/woman that hasn’t been defined by modern medicine.
CAN-Am U19 Saturday Time Trial and Crit. Sunday Route
Christopher Thornton 5 overall 15-16 years. cuevas
Lewis Almonte 6 overall 15-16 years. crca Won (route)sunday after crash.Then breakway and win with a beatiful sprint.
Ryan Storn 10 overall 15-16 years.crca
Juan Pimentel 9 overall 10-12 years. cuevas (after crash in crit.sprint for 7)
Samanta Barlow 1 overall 15-16 yaers. cuevas (won in solo breakaway .sunday route)
Nina Santiago 2 overall 15-16 years. cuevas
Our future in cycling. LOOK GOOOOOOD.
ex-NYer – – thanks for your enlightened thoughts. You were and continue to be a fat coward. Glad to see some things never change.
On the question of whether the 4’s are faster – I truely believe that they have gotten faster – especially this year. I would bet that there will be a significant number of 4’s who will fill out the top-20 at the upcoming TT at FBF, and while TT results do not translate directly into road racing results, they do give a pretty unbiased view of a rider’s overall fitness. There are also several CAT4 riders that I think would have equal or even better results in the 3’s, where they could put their good overall fitness to work in breaks that actually stay away. Take a look at Kim Riseth, Dmitri Wilkins and Tom Auth – none of them are close to upgrading and they all are exceptionally strong riders.
The major problem that I see with the 4 to 3 upgrade system is: that by only going 6 deep, it really favors the bunch sprinters. Give points to 10 spots, the fields are easily big enough for it. Also I think that not giving points for GC results at stage races is silly – they give points for GC placings in all other catagories. If memory serves, Mike Sherry’s steller ride at Owasco last year, had it been ridden as a 4, he would not have netted a single upgrade point.
To place well in CAT4 races you have to be able to bunch-sprint well, end of story. I can’t think of the last open CAT4 race that I was in that didn’t end in a bunch sprint. Sprinting well is definitely one of the most important cycling skills, but it’s not the only skill, and there should be a way for strong allrounders who are sprint-challenged to get points and upgrade. I think that the current points system was developed when the 4 fields were smaller and less competitive and so were set up to limit the available CAT4 upgrade points, but the 4 fields are now huge, have tons of strong riders and sell out faster than any other field, so why not change it?
Why so much focus on upgrading ? Some guys are good , but they just don
On the question of whether the 4’s are faster – I truely believe that they have gotten faster – especially this year. I would bet that there will be a significant number of 4’s who will fill out the top-20 at the upcoming TT at FBF, and while TT results do not translate directly into road racing results, they do give a pretty unbiased view of a rider’s overall fitness. There are also several CAT4 riders that I think would have equal or even better results in the 3’s, where they could put their good overall fitness to work in breaks that actually stay away. Take a look at Kim Riseth, Dmitri Wilkins and Tom Auth – none of them are close to upgrading and they all are exceptionally strong riders.
The major problem that I see with the 4 to 3 upgrade system is: that by only going 6 deep, it really favors the bunch sprinters. Give points to 10 spots, the fields are easily big enough for it. Also I think that not giving points for GC results at stage races is silly – they give points for GC placings in all other catagories. If memory serves, Mike Sherry’s steller ride at Owasco last year, had it been ridden as a 4, he would not have netted a single upgrade point.
To place well in CAT4 races you have to be able to bunch-sprint well, end of story. I can’t think of the last open CAT4 race that I was in that didn’t end in a bunch sprint. Sprinting well is definitely one of the most important cycling skills, but it’s not the only skill, and there should be a way for strong allrounders who are sprint-challenged to get points and upgrade. I think that the current points system was developed when the 4 fields were smaller and less competitive and so were set up to limit the available CAT4 upgrade points, but the 4 fields are now huge, have tons of strong riders and sell out faster than any other field, so why not change it?
On the question of whether the 4’s are faster – I truely believe that they have gotten faster – especially this year. I would bet that there will be a significant number of 4’s who will fill out the top-20 at the upcoming TT at FBF, and while TT results do not translate directly into road racing results, they do give a pretty unbiased view of a rider’s overall fitness. There are also several CAT4 riders that I think would have equal or even better results in the 3’s, where they could put their good overall fitness to work in breaks that actually stay away. Take a look at Kim Riseth, Dmitri Wilkins and Tom Auth – none of them are close to upgrading and they all are exceptionally strong riders.
The major problem that I see with the 4 to 3 upgrade system is: that by only going 6 deep, it really favors the bunch sprinters. Give points to 10 spots, the fields are easily big enough for it. Also I think that not giving points for GC results at stage races is silly – they give points for GC placings in all other catagories. If memory serves, Mike Sherry’s steller ride at Owasco last year, had it been ridden as a 4, he would not have netted a single upgrade point.
To place well in CAT4 races you have to be able to bunch-sprint well, end of story. I can’t think of the last open CAT4 race that I was in that didn’t end in a bunch sprint. Sprinting well is definitely one of the most important cycling skills, but it’s not the only skill, and there should be a way for strong allrounders who are sprint-challenged to get points and upgrade. I think that the current points system was developed when the 4 fields were smaller and less competitive and so were set up to limit the available CAT4 upgrade points, but the 4 fields are now huge, have tons of strong riders and sell out faster than any other field, so why not change it?
Ben, stop hitting the refresh
Unless you’re a pro and being paid, cycling IS an individual sport. While we all have fun copying the big boys and forming sub-teams with nice kits, amateur cycling shouldn’t be about teamwork.
I’ve had it with racing against doped up amateurs and pros in big regional Pro-1-2 races. If you dont think doping is as widespread, you are a lunatic. I’m talking steroids, speed, coke, epo, etc. (yes, I mean Alvaro Taranguilla, Pineda, and unconfirmed MH). Unfortunately I dont have 25hours per week to train and free weekends from Feb to Sep to race in order to beat these guys. How do you like that excuse?
Maybe faster but not any smarter. If there are 4’s capable of top 20 TT’s and they can’t sprint, then they should be making life miserable for the sprinters the other 99% of the race.
A good example for all the 4’s out there is Scot Willingham. He is a solid 3 that is not a sprinter. But anyone that has raced with Scot at PP, CP and Floyd (sprinters type of courses) knows he is constantly attacking, counterattacking and trying to get make things difficult from the start.
My point is that I would bet that a ride like Scott would have a heck of a time upgrading to a 3 in today’s 4 field. He’s a great example of where he is better suited to 3 racing than 4 racing.
Ben – – for the 4-3 upgrade, they may not give points for places 7-10, but you can also upgrade on the basis of getting 10 top 10s in qualifying races in any 12 month period. Not sure if you knew that and wanted to pass it along.
ADM –
I’m aware of the 10 top-10 upgrade, and at the end of the day its really not that hard to upgrade if you really focus on it as a goal. I think the real question is where do the categories crossover? I think for the 4 fields and 3 fields have tons of crossover. If you are a top 4 today, I bet you would be a very competitive 3, instead of at the bottom of the 3’s.
But sometimes all it takes is 1 committed strong rider to get the other guys that lack confidence to do their thing. Thats what happened with Kim. And last year when Auth did that B race. Keep in mind it was the "sprinter" Loudon that got away with Auth and finished second by himself.
Why in the world would anyone buy trick tubular wheels? How useful are that if you can’t even pimp them on CP evening rides because you’re afraid to flat? Those wheels sure don’t make you look "pro" while sitting in your closet.
is it 10 top 10s in 12 months, or lifetime?
an observation…even as a pretty average to mediocre 4, I seem to do better in 3/4 fields than just 4’s. It is not uncommon for 4’s to win 3/4 races at Floyd or PP. I think the biggest difference comes at the out of town races…the 3’s are much faster in those.
Points and top 10 finishes are for 12 month periods but 20 pack finishes in 25 qualifying races also gets you from 4 to 3. So if you get a couple top 10s in the out of town races, finish with the pack in a crit or two and bulk it up pack finishes all spring or summer in prospect park/branch brook you shouldn’t have much of a problem. I hate to agree with JT but if you pick a good variety of races and focus on those which suit your strengths its not that hard. Racing in central park all summer and blowing up in a few out of town races won’t get you there.
Great just what we need in the 123 race guys who cant win but can sit in.
If you want to upgrade with 20 pack finishes that is a bit lame to me. I think you should really earn it. Win a race or 2, even if it is local. I also think it will make you a better racer if you know how to win or you at least really contest a few finishes. There is a big difference from winning and getting 2nd. However if your happy with getting pack finishes than fine, but it sounds like crappy way to upgrade.
I’m gonna upgrade. Yaaaaaaaaay! Now you go.
If guys want to become Cat 3’s who can’t hack it, why should anyone bitch about that? They’re only hurting themselves. In any case, how many people do you think can really win a race, at any level? Certainly not the whole pack!
What’s the difference between "sandbaggers" and "cherrypickers"? I used to be a cherrypicker a few times a year.
Also, here’s a quiz — what’s a "fish-and-chipper"?
What about a hot-luncher?
What about a hot-luncher?
But it feels so much cooler to yell "pull through" from the middle of a 1/2/3 pack than from a 4/5 pack!!!
…that virtually ALL of the CRCA A riders were "winners" or Top 6’s on a regular basis when they were 4’s?! Doubtful based on the quality of many of the 3’s I have seen!
Cherry pickers pick the right break all the time. Sandbaggers are likley to create those breaks
Fish and Chippers race down (3/4 instead of 1/2/3) and crash while doing so.
Send a sticker to the anonomous masses
Most of the 3’s might of had their hayday a few years back so after jobs, wife, and kids they might have slowed down from the once powerful 3 they used to be.
I’ve never heard of a smart racer being called a cherry picker.
Over the past 3 years most of the guys moving up to the 3’s or A’s have had their fair share of success as 4s whether its winning locally or placing well in the largest regional races. For the guys who’ve been racing longer I’m sure most of them had equally successful seasons way back when. New Yorkers don’t exactly age like a fine wines.
Sandbagging and upgrading are two different issues. Related, perhaps, but different. If you know with a fair amount of certainty that you can dust 95-99% of the field just by showing up, and you show up anyway, that is sandbagging. It belittles the efforts of those who are competing in that field at the top of their game, however weak that game is, and that is why sandbagging sucks.
Compete at at your own highest level, run with the biggest dogs you can. To do otherwise is cowardly.
Sandbagging? Since I’ve been back at this I haven’t seen it.
You want to say some 3’s do 3/4 instead of 1,2,3 thats true but it’s their choice and it’s better for the 4’s anyway. You may not be able to brag to the wife about that top 10 as easily but you’ll be better racer in the long run.
My feeling is also that you should be able to race UP into any category you want as long as you have the requisite handling skills. Except for 5. This goes for club races also.
this is NOT a complaint (even though it may sound like one):
as a woman cyclist, i race against "sandbaggers" whether THEY want to be sandbagging or not. an easy case-in-point is the lovely pairing of women with masters in CP or PP, as that is such an even playing field there. although i’ve come to understand that the women tend to enjoy it, that is, once they can stay in for more than 2 laps. how many women’s races do you hear of that are Open, rather than seperated into pro/1/2 and 3/4? just about every race that counts for something (meaning upgrade points) has an open field, even if the categories are placed seperately. this is obviously due to lack of riders. gee. fortunately, women’s cycling has been growing rapidly despite the lack of support, not to say support is non-existant, but it certainly would motivate some ladies to know that they’ll have a chance to race -and win- against others on their same level. unfortunately, we’ll all get to race against each other again and again, even if we upgrade, even if we travel out-of-city/state/country.
i know, i know
womens issues are like the zombie that just doesn’t stay dead when you shoot it.
i guess i’m bringing this up, because well, at least you (the all-encompassing you of men) have more of an opportunity to race in different and very defined "fields", and yes, i’m aware that women are allowed to race in up to 2 cats higher (if F is a 3, she can choose to race with the mens 3, 4, or masters) giving the impression of a different field. if someone knows, please tell me if she’ll get upgrading points no matter which field she’s in… that’s something i can’t seem to find out.
i have no problem racing against these women repeatedly. they’re pretty damned good, albeit annoyingly analytical with over-strategizing (which is, in my opinion, what makes womens’ races slower than mens’), but absolutely bomber nonetheless.
ok
i just wanted to add the message to the mess, that’s all.
I agree with K King, Being a new rider I like riding with the 3’s. there definately something to learn from racing with more experienced riders and like some others have said, It’s not really that big of a difference fitness wise. It seems like the advantage is given tactically
Anybody going to Lancaster this wkend for the Millport Road Race? Love to hitch a ride to race this.
Personally I dont give a crap about what every one else is doing.If there’s one or two guys consistently wipping everyone asses then those are the guys you watch,obvious enough.If the field really worked together so that those guys are winning dont getaway then they wouldn’t win as much races.I mean dont you feel dumber when you get beat by some guy you never saw before?Wouldnt you rather get beat by the guy thats winning?O f course we dont want to get beat at all but it will happen.So if a guy is always winning in a certain field then let him,for me that gives me more motivation as well as time to observe that person and figure out how I can bust him upside the head.Plus if you do beat him it will be super sweet.As far as the age is concerned I thin k that bike racing is so hard that at a certain age the body says "no more" or "slow down I cant sustain this",Intuitivly people understand this so they stay in the field they are aready in and win as apposed to moving up and placing.my two cents.Rich
word
do you consider yourself a sandbagger? last year at FBF you raced 1,2,3 and i seem to remember a pic on this site of you getting top 5. yet this year you’re racing with the 4’s and 35+ 3’s and doing much better. seems a little sandbaggy to me. whereas you teamate john did the opposite and moved up.
I think you have to win to be a sandbagger, don’t you? Last year was my first year in the 3/4’s at FBF. I will use my standard "wife and 2 kids with a mortgage and a company to run" excuse for being a perma-three.
Schmalz is a very solid 3.
But anyone that is complaining that he or racers like him are sandbagging by doing a 3/4 might consider finding a new hobby. Or switching to NYCC.
I don’t consider Ken a sandbagger, he will have his points soon enough and then there will be a lot more field sprints in the 3 races. James Joseph use to be a sandbagger, but now at 50 or 60 years of age, he has shown his mortal side. When he was winning every field sprint in sight (dozens a year for wins in cat 3 races) they did not force him to upgrade because he was a master. I don’t know the rules and won’t look them up, but I believe that promoters should send the results to the USCF and when a rider has enough points they move up, if they have say 50 % more points then minimum, they get bumped up regardless of age or life’s responsibilities.
mihael
Old time sandbagging days like those of Pro Cat 4 rider Mihael are pretty much over. As people have been writing 3’s and 4’s are in it for the fun, very competitve fun. Prize money offered for races should reflect this. No one should be racing for money except Pro/1/2. Giving even a little money for winning CRCA races is ridiculous. While I would want to see prize money for Pro/1/2 races increased, as we’ve seen that can lead to bad behavior.
Without the prize money, race at the level that you feel competitive. Unfortunately some promoters still give ridiculous money to Cat 3 and 4 riders. Besides the prize money the idea of Cat 3 and 4 riders being sponsored and getting free clothing and other goodies is also ridiculous.
USCF system of upgrading is an obstacle to rider development. European system forces riders to race Elite races once they reach 18, and gives riders an option to compete in Veteran races, once they reach 30. For those who didn’t race in Europe, amateur races go off from the gun and weak riders get shelled within 1st hour (mostly because they don’t understand drafting, riding in echelons, being efficient and not wasting energy). You either make the cut or go back to the drawing board and train harder and understand drafting. If you like sitting in, sign up for Touring club. That’s right, tourists!
Cycling demographics in Europe and US differ.
Rider development for a sport which is entered by 14 year olds is very different than a sport which is first entered by 28 – 35+ year olds. In CRCA there will be 20 elite riders (under 30) and everyone else a Veteran. Pretty ridiculous
Weak riders deserve to be shelled.
I propose next CRCA race is labeled "European Elite" everyone together. Anyone who can’t hack it that gets shelled meet at 9am boathouse with the tourists heading up 9w.
You have 120 cat 4 riders registering for a race paying $25+ and filling up races quickly. That
Mike, I agree, and what really gets me is all those bowlers with their embroidered names above the pocket and their sponsor’s name on the back. Now that’s ridiculous. Bowling must be freed from the corrupting influence of sponsorship!! And softball leagues, too!!!
I agree with Mike Green, the sandbagging days are over. When I was racing cat 4 in the late 80s early 90’s , if you were willing drive you can find $1000 crit. about every two weeks, the funny thing was cat 3s also had the same prize money. You rarely see that now a days, but they still exist, like yesterday and this weekend in Jersey. Binghamton use to have $3,000 for the 3/4 and Harlem $3,500. $800 for the win.
Europe is totally different, racing is virtually free due to the popularity of the sport on outside sponsors ,and to place you must be a good cat 1. Here promoters have a hard time finishing sponsors so they make their money though high entry fees. It’s only fair that they provide prize money. But, I agree most of the money should goto the p1,2 field. That said, winning a bit of money adds a bit legitimacy to the placing. Trophies or medals at every race is ridiculous as many riders would need a separate room for them.
I want us to rename CRCA A races the "NYC Pro Tour" Then we can call the B races "A Races" and we can call the C races "B Races.
Call the A Field "The Premiereship."
The B’s become "The Championship"
and the C’s "League 1"
Maybe Justin Reid can explain why this will work.
At least all incentives are to advance to the Premiereship, no one sandbags to stay in the Championship and the most intense contests are the ones where the match is directly for an upgrade. Of course if you consistently get dropped you have to face the threat and humiliation of relegation.
"Call the A Field "The Premiereship.""
If we all seek psychotherapy to improve inner security….
Not bad – so if you are a Sunderland (Dan Bernard) or a West Brom (Rob Stern) you get relegated back to the Championship Division. I like it when you get a West Ham (Armand) or a Middlesborough (Francisco) who were solid but unspectacular in the B’s but then get promoted to the Premiership and raise their game to make the final of the FA Cup (top 5 at Bear Mountain) or UEFA Cup (placing in Team Cup races).
before anyone asks I liken myself to Wimbledon – the footie club not the Tennis tournament – look that one up.
MK Don, no less
i was waiting for sombody to mention James Joseph or pat gellinaue, they won so many 3 races when i was comming up it was stupid.
I 1986 ot 87 I needed to finish in the top six of the last race of the year, a very technical crit in Rhode Island to upgrade. I’m not a real crit daddy, but was doing everything I could to stay about top five though the last corners (it was a very short sprint to the line) and then Gellineau came under me in the last turn and got the last place. Boo hoo I was bummed.
they think it’s all over
well it is now
Woo..you guys want some cheese to go with this whine?
for a change of topic…(I don’t mind a sandbagger who works for a win..so thats how I stand on that) How many of you would sit on a wheel and steal a win??
Or would you take the high road and do what Jens Viogt did today in the Giro?
"It seems the German marauder – who rode more than 150km in the break and then followed Garate up the final climb on San Pellegrino – has manners to go along with his attacking temperament.
Class Act: After following Garate’s wheel for 5km, Voigt declined to contest the sprint.
"I always like to win, but if I don’t work, I don’t win. If I win, it’s because I am good and I worked for it," Voigt told VeloNews. "To win like this, it wouldn’t be a win. That’s just not me. I cannot win like that."
Justin, are you dissing me? Not that it matters. I am just curious.
DB
Justin, are you dissing me? Not that it matters. I am just curious.
DB
What I meant to say is, I have already been relegated…to Canada!
"Woulda, Shoulda,Coulda if only so and so wouldn’t have just beat my ass, what a sandbagger…"
Sound familiar, first racing is as much about tactics as it is strength. Winning is more smarts than power and those are skills you need to learn, and not by getting your ass dragged around the park by guys who often compete in Pro 12 events.
Remember you should always ride your own race, not happy with the outcome of those Cat 4 races where "Big Bad Bob Sandbagger" beats the pants of you? Change your tactics organize your team and beat him. That will make you a better rider and less of a bellyacher….
re: Elite and Veteran versus Cat12345 and Masters
you are correct. and and in europe there’s no shame in being a strong "cyclo touist". racers are racers and club riders are club riders. in europe, unless you’re a real 17-24 year old up and comer, your a tourst. eddie b said to me once, the same guys who race masters in the US are marshling corners and intersections in in europe. and happy doing it bcause they’ve had their chance.. the reality is that we’re all "cyclo tourists
some people can’t be coached
you can’t beat an organized team
and all they need is one good rider
not excellent – just good…
too get a group of riders to work
as a team and not just put on jerseys,
that is only up to the riders themselves
some will never get it…
there are just too many categories
especially when your are putting cat 5’s
on sponsored teams already,
let them work it out first…
you should never – never upgrade without
proving to the category you are in that you
are the man …. you can lead a sprint,
and do it all in the same time race –
you can demonstrate you can drop your
group cold sand baggers and cling on’s included…
there is nothing ‘ fair ‘ in this sport so get over it,
if you want fair play marbles…
persistance, and strength, will always win over unfair parctices – plots or schemes.
Like Carrol Gale say’s, "wipe your tears and try again another day"
does anyone really know or care who won anything last
year? Lance Who?
Dan – not at all – Sunderland are one of my favourite teams – just misunderstood at times 😉
Wow, missed alot of work for this. I can’t imagine a racer having not read NYV this last year-it has changed alot. One of the finest races I’ve enjoyed as a 4 has been the GMSR. Lots of 4s? Come along. Split into under 32 years or 32+ (depending on the mean age) gets them in, and into a rough age section, leaving the M35+ ex P123s to duke it out. So what about the Sandbaggers of the cat 35+? No mention so far. I started at 35, and by 40 had hoped to be competitive in that field of 40+. A lot of that 35+ and 40+ field should have stayed in the p123s and let the many late starters get a shot…but its all good. Keep those fields. I do get a bit PO’ed at a couple of the local guys who Sandbag the masters though. While I am at it, for those who came late to this discussion: What about the TT specialists in the 4s who need to be matched in the 3s or higher? Some day I hope the USCF will seperate TT events and ratings from the rest, but not including stage racing, where the ‘whole package’ needs to bring forth a winner. (whew)