david baker

You know I kind of disagree with brian also, but damn that is funny stuff, and actually makes some sense.Rewarding marginal improvement by upgrading those who improve a lot! Sprinting for 20th, I know I do that, as dumb as it is. And really, why do they lump time trials in the stage races, because they do it that way in Europe? So what, lets do better. Everyone's points on both sides of this issue are pretty valid.
I think the bottom line is, as long as we ARE racing all is well.
Lets ban flat tires! We could all agree on that!

----- Original Message -----
From: Erik
To: Brian ; obra@list.obra.org
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 2:17 PM
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] A new look at the TT

Brian, please tell us that you had a few beers with lunch and THEN wrote that.

> Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 12:37:37 -0700
> From: brian.a.mack@gmail.com
> To: obra@list.obra.org
> Subject: [OBRA Chat] A new look at the TT
>
>
>
> I think Mr. Hughes made a really good point about the specialization of TTs, and in questioning how they fit in with road racing. It seems that they really don't fit in at all. Time trialing has really evolved into its own discipline, and it's time for the more progressive racing organizations (i.e. not the UCI) to realize and accommodate this fact. Separate TTs from road racing and get rid of categories.
>
>
> With advances in equipment in the last decade, there's really no point in showing up to a TT without the proper equipment. Things have become so specialized, and the riding position so altered from what is used on a road bike, that altogether different muscles now must be developed for time trialing. This is especially hard on newer racers who haven't been around long enough to buy a dedicated TT rig, disc wheels, and darth vader helmet. The point is that it is no longer a question of taking the rider out of the peloton and seeing what he can do on his own. It is now a question of who has focused more energy on specialization.
>
> I think this is especially relevant to what we count as stage racing. While we are including TTs, we might as well throw in some track racing, too. And how about a cyclocross leg? And what's with criteriums? What ever happened to the concept of going from point A to point B, and sectioning off the route into manageable chunks or stages? Stage races have become nothing more than timed omniums, and every organizer wants his to be a mini Tour de France. Save the TTs and crits for omniums. But have omniums include track and cyclocross too.
>
> As far as categories, I say get rid of them. We fool ourselves into believing we have achieved something by beating a score of riders we have selected as being of similar (but dominitable) skill level. The category might as well be, "everyone slower than me". Categories are themselves paradoxical, rewarding marginal improvement but upgrading those who improve too much. Racing yourself has the most worth, followed by racing whoever is next to you at the finish line (yes I advocate sprinting for 20th), and finally maybe there is some value in comparing yourself to everyone who races. But if we are honest with ourselves, I think we would realize there is very little value in a category.
>
>
>
>
> Robert Hughes wrote:
>
>
> I regret that my post came across as "sour grapes", and I never mentioned sandbagging. The person you refer to did nothing wrong, he couldn't compete in a different category because the current upgrade rules prevented him from using his TT results to upgrade. This is as it should be because pack racing requires skills and experience that cannot be obtained by racing in time trials. My observation is this: since TT results have no bearing on road race upgrades (as it should be), why should we use road race categories to describe the competitive level of a time trialist? Road race, track, mountain bike, and 'cross categories are designed to encourage competition and to create races where riders are relatively evenly matched on experience and fitness. Why not have the same for the time trials? Using road categories for the TT is just slightly better than arbitrariness.
>
> Furthermore, why is it that whenever someone examines the status quo, the vast majority of responses are either sarcastic or belittle the post or author. Is there a better way to categorize the TT? Maybe no category is the answer. It such a different form of racing with completely unique equipment, perhaps it should be categorized separately from road racing, like 'cross or track.
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Talk to your Yahoo! Friends via Windows Live Messenger. Find Out How

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
OBRA mailing list
obra@list.obra.org
http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

Erik

Brian, please tell us that you had a few beers with lunch and THEN wrote that.

> Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 12:37:37 -0700
> From: brian.a.mack@gmail.com
> To: obra@list.obra.org
> Subject: [OBRA Chat] A new look at the TT
>
>
>
> I think Mr. Hughes made a really good point about the specialization of TTs, and in questioning how they fit in with road racing. It seems that they really don't fit in at all. Time trialing has really evolved into its own discipline, and it's time for the more progressive racing organizations (i.e. not the UCI) to realize and accommodate this fact. Separate TTs from road racing and get rid of categories.
>
>
> With advances in equipment in the last decade, there's really no point in showing up to a TT without the proper equipment. Things have become so specialized, and the riding position so altered from what is used on a road bike, that altogether different muscles now must be developed for time trialing. This is especially hard on newer racers who haven't been around long enough to buy a dedicated TT rig, disc wheels, and darth vader helmet. The point is that it is no longer a question of taking the rider out of the peloton and seeing what he can do on his own. It is now a question of who has focused more energy on specialization.
>
> I think this is especially relevant to what we count as stage racing. While we are including TTs, we might as well throw in some track racing, too. And how about a cyclocross leg? And what's with criteriums? What ever happened to the concept of going from point A to point B, and sectioning off the route into manageable chunks or stages? Stage races have become nothing more than timed omniums, and every organizer wants his to be a mini Tour de France. Save the TTs and crits for omniums. But have omniums include track and cyclocross too.
>
> As far as categories, I say get rid of them. We fool ourselves into believing we have achieved something by beating a score of riders we have selected as being of similar (but dominitable) skill level. The category might as well be, "everyone slower than me". Categories are themselves paradoxical, rewarding marginal improvement but upgrading those who improve too much. Racing yourself has the most worth, followed by racing whoever is next to you at the finish line (yes I advocate sprinting for 20th), and finally maybe there is some value in comparing yourself to everyone who races. But if we are honest with ourselves, I think we would realize there is very little value in a category.
>
>
>
>
> Robert Hughes wrote:
>
>
> I regret that my post came across as "sour grapes", and I never mentioned sandbagging. The person you refer to did nothing wrong, he couldn't compete in a different category because the current upgrade rules prevented him from using his TT results to upgrade. This is as it should be because pack racing requires skills and experience that cannot be obtained by racing in time trials. My observation is this: since TT results have no bearing on road race upgrades (as it should be), why should we use road race categories to describe the competitive level of a time trialist? Road race, track, mountain bike, and 'cross categories are designed to encourage competition and to create races where riders are relatively evenly matched on experience and fitness. Why not have the same for the time trials? Using road categories for the TT is just slightly better than arbitrariness.
>
> Furthermore, why is it that whenever someone examines the status quo, the vast majority of responses are either sarcastic or belittle the post or author. Is there a better way to categorize the TT? Maybe no category is the answer. It such a different form of racing with completely unique equipment, perhaps it should be categorized separately from road racing, like 'cross or track.
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

_________________________________________________________________
Talk to your Yahoo! Friends via Windows Live Messenger. Find out how.
http://www.windowslive.com/explore/messenger?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_messenger_yahoo_082008

Joe Cipale

My suggestion:

If you dont like how the categories/specialities fit under OBRA/USACycling, then take your ball and go start your own racing organization.

~turning off OBRA for the rest of the year so as not to be flooded with mindless rants~

Joe

Brian wrote:

>
>
> I think Mr. Hughes made a really good point about the specialization of TTs, and in questioning how they fit in with road racing. It seems that they really don't fit in at all. Time trialing has really evolved into its own discipline, and it's time for the more progressive racing organizations (i.e. not the UCI) to realize and accommodate this fact. Separate TTs from road racing and get rid of categories.
>
>
> With advances in equipment in the last decade, there's really no point in showing up to a TT without the proper equipment. Things have become so specialized, and the riding position so altered from what is used on a road bike, that altogether different muscles now must be developed for time trialing. This is especially hard on newer racers who haven't been around long enough to buy a dedicated TT rig, disc wheels, and darth vader helmet. The point is that it is no longer a question of taking the rider out of the peloton and seeing what he can do on his own. It is now a question of who has focused more energy on specialization.
>
> I think this is especially relevant to what we count as stage racing. While we are including TTs, we might as well throw in some track racing, too. And how about a cyclocross leg? And what's with criteriums? What ever happened to the concept of going from point A to point B, and sectioning off the route into manageable chunks or stages? Stage races have become nothing more than timed omniums, and every organizer wants his to be a mini Tour de France. Save the TTs and crits for omniums. But have omniums include track and cyclocross too.
>
> As far as categories, I say get rid of them. We fool ourselves into believing we have achieved something by beating a score of riders we have selected as being of similar (but dominitable) skill level. The category might as well be, "everyone slower than me". Categories are themselves paradoxical, rewarding marginal improvement but upgrading those who improve too much. Racing yourself has the most worth, followed by racing whoever is next to you at the finish line (yes I advocate sprinting for 20th), and finally maybe there is some value in comparing yourself to everyone who races. But if we are honest with ourselves, I think we would realize there is very little value in a category.
>
>
>
>
> Robert Hughes wrote:
>
>
> I regret that my post came across as "sour grapes", and I never mentioned sandbagging. The person you refer to did nothing wrong, he couldn't compete in a different category because the current upgrade rules prevented him from using his TT results to upgrade. This is as it should be because pack racing requires skills and experience that cannot be obtained by racing in time trials. My observation is this: since TT results have no bearing on road race upgrades (as it should be), why should we use road race categories to describe the competitive level of a time trialist? Road race, track, mountain bike, and 'cross categories are designed to encourage competition and to create races where riders are relatively evenly matched on experience and fitness. Why not have the same for the time trials? Using road categories for the TT is just slightly better than arbitrariness.
>
> Furthermore, why is it that whenever someone examines the status quo, the vast majority of responses are either sarcastic or belittle the post or author. Is there a better way to categorize the TT? Maybe no category is the answer. It such a different form of racing with completely unique equipment, perhaps it should be categorized separately from road racing, like 'cross or track.
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

Brian

I think Mr. Hughes made a really good point about the specialization of TTs, and in questioning how they fit in with road racing. It seems that they really don't fit in at all. Time trialing has really evolved into its own discipline, and it's time for the more progressive racing organizations (i.e. not the UCI) to realize and accommodate this fact. Separate TTs from road racing and get rid of categories.

With advances in equipment in the last decade, there's really no point in showing up to a TT without the proper equipment. Things have become so specialized, and the riding position so altered from what is used on a road bike, that altogether different muscles now must be developed for time trialing. This is especially hard on newer racers who haven't been around long enough to buy a dedicated TT rig, disc wheels, and darth vader helmet. The point is that it is no longer a question of taking the rider out of the peloton and seeing what he can do on his own. It is now a question of who has focused more energy on specialization.

I think this is especially relevant to what we count as stage racing. While we are including TTs, we might as well throw in some track racing, too. And how about a cyclocross leg? And what's with criteriums? What ever happened to the concept of going from point A to point B, and sectioning off the route into manageable chunks or stages? Stage races have become nothing more than timed omniums, and every organizer wants his to be a mini Tour de France. Save the TTs and crits for omniums. But have omniums include track and cyclocross too.

As far as categories, I say get rid of them. We fool ourselves into believing we have achieved something by beating a score of riders we have selected as being of similar (but dominitable) skill level. The category might as well be, "everyone slower than me". Categories are themselves paradoxical, rewarding marginal improvement but upgrading those who improve too much. Racing yourself has the most worth, followed by racing whoever is next to you at the finish line (yes I advocate sprinting for 20th), and finally maybe there is some value in comparing yourself to everyone who races. But if we are honest with ourselves, I think we would realize there is very little value in a category.

Robert Hughes wrote:

I regret that my post came across as "sour grapes", and I never mentioned sandbagging. The person you refer to did nothing wrong, he couldn't compete in a different category because the current upgrade rules prevented him from using his TT results to upgrade. This is as it should be because pack racing requires skills and experience that cannot be obtained by racing in time trials. My observation is this: since TT results have no bearing on road race upgrades (as it should be), why should we use road race categories to describe the competitive level of a time trialist? Road race, track, mountain bike, and 'cross categories are designed to encourage competition and to create races where riders are relatively evenly matched on experience and fitness. Why not have the same for the time trials? Using road categories for the TT is just slightly better than arbitrariness.

Furthermore, why is it that whenever someone examines the status quo, the vast majority of responses are either sarcastic or belittle the post or author. Is there a better way to categorize the TT? Maybe no category is the answer. It such a different form of racing with completely unique equipment, perhaps it should be categorized separately from road racing, like 'cross or track.