-
That gives a 404 now--perhaps it worked when you posted it? I tried to look for it on the LCS site, but it seems to be programmed quite strangely at the moment. Clicking on Results > Cyclo X seems to take you back to the News page every time. Or is that just me and my browser?
-
Hone your skills! Its just a one-off, so try to make it along.
[www.hernehillvelodrome.com/cross
-
Day before the ROFTL ?
Wonder if I can get a X bike together by then...?
-
If I can manage to resolve my shit rear brake tomorrow I'm going to take my bike up to Bedale on Sunday for the Yorkshire League. If the course isn't too hilly then I'll give it a fair go.
I've always avoided racing because I want to support my gf from the pits to make sure she has the best race she can (HABs are typically shit at supporting women riders to our shame). But now the league is big enough that the Seniors are seperated out from the Women and Vets so I should give it at least one go. Besides, old legend Phil Thackery has been giving me grief about not having a go.
Forgot to add, anyone else racing this weekend?
-
Just read this off the BC website.
New Venue for the Charge Cyclo Cross incorporating the 3rd round of the Yorkshire Point Series
The Event will be held at Aerial Extreme one of the world's most awesome High Rope Adventure Courses. Which is situated in the grounds of The Camp Hill Estate near Bedale.I'm fucked.
-
A cyclo-cross on a High Rope Adventure Course? That's mighty novel.
-
That was rough. No high rope access but a lot of hairpins in the woods, large slidey roots and rutted field. I set off at the back of the pack and dropped one guy early on. The first three laps were spent chasing down the next guy and then the next two holding him off. Alas he took me back for the final lap and owing to a comination of factors (mini stack in the woods, knackered saddle and knackered muscles I ended up losing time and becoming the last man on the course.
Proud that I didn't come last and managed to last the distance. There was a lot of cheering for riding on singlespeed, not that it did much for me. There were a couple of hard track sections where I was able to hammer it but all the roots and hairpins (with roots on) meant that this wasn't a singlespeeders course.
-
video from cross at HH on sunday.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQtBDUyG05w
courtesy of Phil Jones -
One of my old club members from Swindon had this to say about the HH race.
Organisation was first class but too many riders, 149 starts and no split races plus lots of narrow twisty bits on the course. Racing proper stopped after 20 mins and became a game to see who could pull the most inconsiderate passes on back markers.
Does beg the question, WTF was anyone thinking putting 149 riders onto a cyclocross course?
-
WTF are the organisers meant to do, turn people away? It was a nice sunny day on a course that is accessible to most.
I thought the field spread surprisingly quickly, once the first lap was out of the way then I had no problems with bottlenecks. Most backmarkers were considerate in moving to allow faster riders to pass.
There was a motion at the London Cross League AGM at the end of last season to have a separate vets and womens race, hopefully next season they'll do this which should see more manageable fields.
-
Couldn't disagree more with that guy, I thought the increase in riders made it more enjoyable as there was always riders close by to have your race with wherever you were. The first lap had a few bottlenecks but I was fairly far back and never had to actually stop, in fact after about a lap and a half I thought my lungs were going to give up as I was pushing it and not getting any rest.
-
There was a motion at the London Cross League AGM at the end of last season to have a separate vets and womens race, hopefully next season they'll do this which should see more manageable fields.
Why didn't they do it for this season? This sort of issue only comes up when it's already getting busy, if it's worth tabling, it's worth doing it straight away.
I agree that you shouldn't turn people away, but it's not unknown to introduce splits on the day. Eastern Region did this a while back when the entry list was already getting full, long before the race started. A couple of the seniors made a bit of a fuss about missing out on a bit more sleep but it was understood to have been a good idea.
-
Apparently it was the busiest London League EVER yesterday. The organizers were putting on the race as a service to riders and to "do their bit" for the sport. Turning people away is the last thing they want to do. Its not their fault it was a nice day and a popular course.
Since this race was part of the league, where some people place an importance on the points they score there's no fair way to split the field on the day, without all league races being done in the same way. The notion to have separate senior and vets/juniors/women races doesn't makes sense. Yesterdays race was won by a junior, which isn't particularly unusual, and there are plenty of top 10 finishing vets who'd balk at the ageist suggestions that they race a "lesser" race.
The other option is to split into A and B fields. Maybe based on license catagory (E.1.2.3 & 3.4), or maybe just down to rider choice. The B race could be a little shorter (40mins), a little cheaper, and give no league points. For those who are just interested in having a bit of fun rather than hard racing, this would be a great option, and would leave the course clearer for those who are racing more seriously.
The problem I see with the above is that firstly, this is an extra 40min+1 lap + 15 min warm up time, plus extra set of numbers, plus extra database of rider names to run on the laptop for the organisers to deal with. Its a tough day as it is without adding all this. The other problem is that adding this extra race will rip the course up even more. On a wet day that could make it hard for the last race of the day, but worse, could mean that public parks, schools, woodland would be less likely to want the race back.
The way I see it, its it just needs splitting into separate London/SE leagues. Have some round on the same day to discourage people from regularly doing both. Both leagues could financially cope with having half the income. Novices would be less put off by fewer leading riders shouting at them, and more people would try to ride more of each league if they were more local, so it would end up being more than half numbers for both leagues.
All that needs doing is a few people to find and negotiate a few more venues, which as long as there are willing people, shouldn't be too hard.
-
Apparently it was the busiest London League EVER yesterday. The organizers were putting on the race as a service to riders and to "do their bit" for the sport. Turning people away is the last thing they want to do. Its not their fault it was a nice day and a popular course.
Yup, luxury problem. Long may the 'problems' become more luxurious. Cycling needs the demand. HH does, too. It's great to hear that so many turned out for it!
-
Bollocks. The Yorkshire league first round attracted a women/vets field of 88 and a seniors/juniors field of 47, which adds up to 135, just 14 short of the 149 put on the HH course. This split is standard for all events and no one complains about it at all. The vets don't consider their race to be a lesser race, mostly I suspect because they know it isn't.
Later on in the season there is a high likelihood that the combined field will be greater.
As for damage to the location caused by an extra race, take a look at Peel Park after the National Trophy weekend, it can make Muddy Hell look no worse than a dusty footprint on a grey carpet. They welcome the event back every year with open arms.
-
I've got a long way to go until I'm vet, but if I was competitive with hr best riders around I wouldn't like being told I had to ride a seperste race just because I was over 40. People are staying fitter for longer than they were a couple of decades ago. I think the only fair split would be an optional A-B split (though pride may still mean many people sign onto the A event) or E123, 34 category split. Either way it has to be agreed by the committee so that all races are run to the same rules.
That said, a split into seperate London/SE leagues would be (IMHO) a preferable solution as it would mean ally less travelling commitment for everyone.
As for ripping up courses, venue managers attitudes differ, but the less destruction caused to a course the better surely?
-
Sunday was fine, busy but not dangerously busy and certainly not time to start calling for old men (which I nearly qualify as) and the ladies to do a shorter lesser race. Herne Hill is narrow so passing will always be tough. The key to overtaking is of course a good shout of whichever side you want to pass on clear and early so the rider ahead can adjust their line and give you the room you would like. Just shouting rider with no indication of where you want the poor bugger in front to go and gives them only a 50/50 chance of getting out of your way with an equal chance of being blamed for causing a crash.
I will never win at cross without serious mechanical failures in the top half of the field so for some I am one of the back markers to be got past, but for others I am one of the people coming past. I know how important it is for me to get out of the way when a racing group is approaching and how grateful I am when a backmarker gives me some space to pass. But I still want to test myself against the best in the league and see how far behind them I really am (a long way to be honest).
Splitting by geography is always the most preferable as it retains the open format that is the spirit of local cross leagues, next is a voluntary split by means of a go-race at each venue.
Splitting by age is unjustifiable when vets routinely win up and down the country, splitting by gender is as sexist as making the women start from the rear (Rd 1) and splitting by road Cat fails as 'cross is a cross discipline event bringing in all forms of cyclist where not everyone competes in events that get categorised in the same way as road racing does.
-
Splitting by age is unjustifiable when vets routinely win up and down the country, splitting by gender is as sexist as making the women start from the rear (Rd 1)
If this is the case, why do they split along these lines for the National Trophy and National Championships?
-
Splitting by geography is always the most preferable as it retains the open format that is the spirit of local cross leagues,
Do you think then that Eastern, Yorkshire, West Midlands, Welsh and Wessex leagues have gone wrong in satisfying their rider's interest in having more space for racing? Given the riders are happy with the splits, regardless of age or gender, isn't it more important to support that.
-
Yes I do,
Notts/Derby have not split, Eastern have a hybrid split for vets, North East have not split. For each league that has introduced a split there are others that have not so I will agree that it is an argument that may be worth having after splitting out for geography then voluntary splits using a go-race category if numbers are still too high.
Sometimes the splits do work well logistically in that couples can pit crew for each other and dads for son's but my preference is a fully open race where backmarkers are as much part of the course as the mud, sand and hurdles. -
I can assure you that when I raced, the backmarkers were still about in the race. Afterall, I was one of them and was lapped at least three times, as was the person I was having race against. Then again, I wouldn't get to race if there weren't splits as I would be in the pits for my girlfriend (to be fair she has been racing since she was 14, does try for points, and I think has far greater claim to the sport).
Out of interest, what would you suggest for me if, for the sake of argument, I took it up properly? Should I a) abandon pit duties and risk my girlfriend loosing points due to being unsupported, b) tool around in Go-rides and disadvantage newcomers to the sport, c) drive long distances to other parts of the country to compete elsewhere and likely achieve (a) as well when adjacent leagues don't have the decency to run on different days, or d) some other solution?
-
For the sake of argument I would say
a) unsupported for local league events, but support her in area champs and on really muddy days when a clean bike every lap is a key advantage rather than a nice to have.To be honest, the logistical argument put forward by couples and dads is a strong one but since neither apply to me I would rather be in the main race than a shorter one.
andyp
Oliver Schick
daccordi
](
dommyracer
The_Seldom_Killer
Cooky
Ramsaye-
Post a reply
About
Cyclo Cross Season 2010-11
Posted by
Yes and crashed into the fence on the way down!
Great circuit, well done! Thoroughly enjoyed myself.