CX Hurts....

[velogirl]

I look forward to hearing about your races, Renee. Yes, results will totally depend on who shows up. That's why goals based on personal achievement, rather than results, are always good.

I'm in an interesting situation in one of our local series. I decided to race masters even though all the women in that category kick my butt (many masters national champions in our races). However, I'm able to compare my times with the other categories and the women's start list as a whole, so I can see progress. In the first race, I finished 41st of 53 total women (A,B,C, and masters). This race I finished 36th of 52. Progress, right? Of course, my real benchmark is where I'd finish wth the Cs since I raced Cs the last three seasons. For the past two races, I'd finish 6th in the Cs which makes me happy.

My goals, however, have very little to do with placing, and more to do with things I can control -- how I handle different technical areas of the course, barriers, mounts, etc.

[madisongrrl]

I look forward to hearing about your races, Renee. Yes, results will totally depend on who shows up. That's why goals based on personal achievement, rather than results, are always good.

Definitely....the fields seem to be much smaller than mt. biking. I was a little bent out of shape after the first two races about my results...but now I'm over it. I have to look at this differently than mountain bike racing.

On saturday the Cat 1/2 and 3 women raced together. I think there were only 12 of us and not too many slow women showed up. While I didn't finish dead last, it was pretty close. I was lapped by 4 women. Getting lapped sucks, but these particular individuals were very, very fast. So I don't feel too terrible about it. The conditions were awful, the absolute worst possible situation. The mud was thick, slow, deep, grinding, awful. The course was not very technical and they mowed the grass the day before. I unhooked my front and back breaks (as did just about everyone) just to be able to pedal my bike. It was cold, rainy...so it was just about survival. It didn't kill me, so hopefully it made me tougher....cause everything after that experience should be easy. My legs hurt so bad that night that I had to pop a few ibprofin.

Sunday's race was much more technical, but very muddy because it snowed the night before then melted. While the mud was really bad, it wasn't deep like Saturday's race. I decided to just go out as hard as I could and I did. I actually led the race for the 1st 1/2 lap or so. I seriously thought I took a wrong turn off the course and had to look behind me because I wasn't sure why there weren't any women passing me. As my teammate came up behind me she told me to quit looking backward and to start pushing (LOL)! My legs gave out on me 1.5 laps in and my quad started to cramp so I pulled out of the race. Too much standing and grinding from the day before. I just wanted to see what was possible. It is now Monday and my legs are so sore....they are burning and weak. So it will be a little bit of rest and back to the trainer tomorrow.

I'm in an interesting situation in one of our local series. I decided to race masters even though all the women in that category kick my butt (many masters national champions in our races). However, I'm able to compare my times with the other categories and the women's start list as a whole, so I can see progress. In the first race, I finished 41st of 53 total women (A,B,C, and masters). This race I finished 36th of 52. Progress, right? Of course, my real benchmark is where I'd finish wth the Cs since I raced Cs the last three seasons. For the past two races, I'd finish 6th in the Cs which makes me happy.
.

You live in California, correct? I'll bet you get some pretty tough competition at CX races...since California seems to be such a hotbed for cycling.

[velogirl]

You live in California, correct? I'll be you get some pretty tough competition at CX races...since California seems to be such a hotbed for cycling.

First, congrats on your races. Be patient and I bet you'll be kicking butt sometime soon. Isn't it a cool feeling to give it everything? Since you raced hard the day before, you weren't able to hold it, but try it again when you're frest and I bet you'll see a different result.

Yes, I'm in CA. They race all the women together here, although they stagger starts. We almost always get lapped by the A women. We have so many national-level racers and world's team members here -- Barb Howe, Sarah Kerlin (national masters champ), Melodie Metzger (national collegiate champ), Josie Beggs, Linda Elgart (national masters champ), Stella Carey (world single speed champ), Rachel Lloyd (world team member), etc. They're really in a league of their own.

I think that's why we've got so many women racing Bs who really belong in the As -- they don't want to compete with these women. It's too bad, because you end up with lots of sandbagging in the Bs, which also trickles down to the Cs. I think if USAC ever really institutes the category/upgrade system, it might change. But the local promoters are still basically ignoring that system.

It's actually frustrating for the As (racing with the beginners) and the Cs (racing with the elites), but at least they give the women a race of their own.

[madisongrrl]

Yes, I'm in CA. They race all the women together here, although they stagger starts. We almost always get lapped by the A women. We have so many national-level racers and world's team members here -- Barb Howe, Sarah Kerlin (national masters champ), Melodie Metzger (national collegiate champ), Josie Beggs, Linda Elgart (national masters champ), Stella Carey (world single speed champ), Rachel Lloyd (world team member), etc. They're really in a league of their own.

These people are certainly in a league of their own. So they compete in your state's local series...maybe they should have a category of their own. In our mountain bike series, we get local and regional pros that drop in time to time to poach races that have decent payouts. They race in the same category as our Elites and totally smack everyone down. But, there aren't enough Pros to have a "Pro" category.

I think that's why we've got so many women racing Bs who really belong in the As -- they don't want to compete with these women. It's too bad, because you end up with lots of sandbagging in the Bs, which also trickles down to the Cs. I think if USAC ever really institutes the category/upgrade system, it might change. But the local promoters are still basically ignoring that system.

While sandbagging happens everywhere, your situation seems to be an extreme example of it. This is the kind of stuff that kills cycling for women and will hurt the future of women in cycling and CX. Do they have a beginner category for new racers, or is it just A,B and C? The USAC should really come down on promoters and make them conform to regulation. We pay for our cycling liscenses for a reason...don't we?

[velogirl]

Actually, I think it pushes you to race harder and faster. And many of the elite racers lead clinics so they're very accessible. I'd say they do have a league of their own -- the As -- but it discourages other A-level women from racing with them. The leader of the Bs is a pro mtn biker (and former national champion). She should be racing As rather than smacking the Bs around. Alas.....

I don't necessarily think the local system is bad. At this point, promoters are giving you the leverage to race in the category you want to race. I think in future years USAC will get a bit stricter about it.

Cs are beginners in CA. I've found the way to get women into the sport and retain them is to give them a lot of support. Velo Girls and Velo Bella do this very well for cross. Other teams don't seem to have the same level of commitment to the beginners.

Oh, the other bizarre thing in this series is that they have big bucks prizes for the winners in the lower categories. For example, the winner of the C women gets a complete felt cyclocross bike. That discourages her from upgrading to Bs even though she'd do well there. Of course, she's only ever done two cross races in her life, so she really is a beginner.

[eteamer]

Ok, after years lurking this topic has gotten my attention. I have been racing the A women in Norcal for quite a while and what you say definitely resonates with me. For sure racing with fast women makes you faster. I actually don't think the races are as fast as they are when Carmen, Gina and Rachel were out there piling on the hurt, but they are still at a very high level and that is good. But I have to agree that it makes the categories weird. I could race 35+ and win, but I usually beat the winner of that category by minutes, so I race A's. That means I have people to race in the middle of the pack, but don't have a prayer of seeing the front of the race. So my questions is why can't the promoters go to a 1-4 format and score the categories separately? I think it would help. What do you think VeloGirl?

[velogirl]

Ooh! Now you've got me all curious -- who are you? Andi? Email me off-line if you don't want the world to know.

Not sure why they didn't categorize the races. I think the old-school promoters wanted to keep the spirit of self-selection alive. Since there are no mandatory upgrades at this point, I guess it doesn't really matter. The local promoters gave category guidelines (ie C = 4, B = 2-4, A = 1-3) but nothing more. Once they really start awarding points for upgrades and there are mandatories, I think it might make the sport a bit fairer, especially wrt the sandbaggers.

My sense is there will be stricter guidelines for masters nationals in future years (ie must be CAT3 to participate), so we'll see some folks upgrading out of CAT4 so they can go to natz). The proposal on the table right now for 2007 is that women must be CAT3 to go to natz unless they're 45+ -- same as the restrictions for road and crits.

[madisongrrl]

ICs are beginners in CA. I've found the way to get women into the sport and retain them is to give them a lot of support. Velo Girls and Velo Bella do this very well for cross. Other teams don't seem to have the same level of commitment to the beginners.

Cat 4 is beginner here also (formerly known as C's), but some promoters have been running a special beginner category.

http://www.wicycling.org/CycloCross/...ash%202006.pdf

Beginner and Cat 4 are run at the same time, but the results must get separated.

Oh, the other bizarre thing in this series is that they have big bucks prizes for the winners in the lower categories. For example, the winner of the C women gets a complete felt cyclocross bike. That discourages her from upgrading to Bs even though she'd do well there. Of course, she's only ever done two cross races in her life, so she really is a beginner

Indeed very strange. WI cycling gives the most money out for the Cat1/2, gives a little less money out for the Cat 3 and only gives merchandise out to Cat 4. This is done to discourage sandbagging for money.

[velogirl]

I think the promoters (and sponsors) are trying to support the entry-level racers, but yes, this encourages sandbagging, especially since it's a series. There are other series in the area that do a raffle for the big prizes -- that seems like a fairer way to still support the racers but discourage sandbaggers.