Proposed Changes to XC Categories

Wood, Nicholas C

2013-01-22

At the expense of trying NOT to sounds too much like a noob, why doesn't MTB (and I suppose CX) have Cat rules like Road, aka can't move up unless the you earn it? To me that seems to solve both points Ron is touching on below.

N
-----Original Message-----
From: obra-bounces@list.obra.org [mailto:obra-bounces@list.obra.org] On Behalf Of rondot@spiritone.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 11:52 AM
To: kenji@obra.org; anthony.cree@gmail.com
Cc: obra@list.obra.org
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories

The BORG....err USAC probably loves to see this "debate" as OBRA being unorganized and ready for absorption!
They, of course are WRONG!
There have been some very good points made. The two most important in my mind are simple. 1) New racers and racers not at the elite level need some attainable goals to feel engaged. If they feel as if they are being thrown to the lions, they will not continue to race. 2) Elite, Open, whatever you want to call it, needs to have vigorous courses that challenge them and in the end, keep the wannabes in the other cats. Remember. The true cream of the crop racers will make their USAC or UCI dreams come true. They have that focus and desire. It is not all the other racers responsibility to make that happen for them. We can support their dream in various ways, but it would seem they would want to support our more humble dreams. Those of us racing in OBRA know that our local racers who have made it big, for the most part do support all of us regular folk. Of course USAC and UCI do not want to let them race with us and thus inspire in person..................DUH!!!!!!!!
A third, also important issue is what started the whole thread. Categories being shuffled about every few seasons (or ?) and the fact that these OBRA meetings that do this....take place at a time when races are already being promoted or open for registration. It seems these meetings could take place earlier. But I have to assume they were scheduled at this time of year for a good reason. Thing is, nothing stays the same. Maybe earlier would be better. Easy for me to say as those meeting are not in my schedule. I am too preoccupied with "my life" to spend time working on that stuff.
It "is easy" for all of us who have not been involved in the hard work involved with the rules to "provide our insight", be it self serving or not.
I have to respect the people who are stepping up and putting their time into doing this work, appreciate how they do listen to the OBRA community, but in the end I differ to them as they "are doing the work".
I assume any system can be tweaked to make it better. I also am old enough to know that all changes that take place are not always for the better.
This is what we call learning from mistakes. I suggest people who have good ideas become more involved, but be open to compromise.
In the end, the fact that we members "are listened to" by our OBRA representatives shows that we actually have a voice which is heard. That is not saying our system can't be made even better. People need to step up, attend meetings and see if there are ways things can be improved. I do not feel individual voice being heard is the case with USAC or UCI. Here in OBRA we have that FREEDOM. Keep it alive people.
I know everyone will not be happy, but I hope most will.
ron strasser

-----Original Message-----
From: T. Kenji Sugahara
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 11:07 AM
To: anthony.cree@gmail.com
Cc: obra@list.obra.org
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories

They do have some good points- and I've already been in touch with them about it.

Team only voting- in our foundational documents- and there's plenty of MTB team represented.

On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Anthony Cree
wrote:
> Regardless of what's decided, the echo red 2 red promoter makes a very
> good point about OBRA categories changing after sign up has already
> started.
> http://www.echored2red.com/2012_Echo_Red_2_Red_XC_MTB_Race/Letter_To_R
> iders.html
>
> Team only voting for mtb - how very roadie centric.
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Mike Ripley
> wrote:
>>
>> The reason is
>>
>> XC places racers on the course all at once, where in CX or ST you
>> could race multiple races in a given day
>>
>> XC has been 25 categories for 10 years and someone tell me who to
>> axe, and ST could have less and I think does by a few but I could be
>> wrong
>>
>>
>> Plus I like giving people opportunity being kind hearted and
>> expanding on established norms
>>
>> On a side note I agree with candi and I am a purist at heart as my
>> most popular event has 6 categories
>>
>> Open Men and Women
>> Masters 40-49 Men and Women
>> Masters 50+ Men
>> Singlespeed
>>
>> One course for multiple hrs
>>
>>
>> Mark this day as Evan Plews as the voice of reason day.....awesome
>> could be an OBRA holiday LOL
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> How about this for radical
>>
>> Short course
>> Long Course
>> 10 year age groups starting at 19 no ability level with some Junior
>> break outs
>>
>> And SS and Clydes...wait now we are up to 21 cats.......hmmmmm or
>> really mtb xc is in effect like having 2 or 3 separate races going on
>> all in one
>> 1-4 hr time frame over thousands of acres
>>
>> If this is true then in fact we only have 7 to 9 categories per race
>> or race course which would make us the lowest amount of categories of
>> any discipline
>>
>> Pretty amazing
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Candi Murray wrote:
>>>
>>> Evan
>>>
>>> Finally the voice of reason. There are way too many categories and
>>> it seems like more get added all the time. Our initial request was
>>> to change things to Open and Beginner, and then break down ages for
>>> juniors and masters. How it morphed into 25+ categories is beyond
>>> me.
>>>
>>> Candi
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: obra-bounces@list.obra.org [mailto:obra-bounces@list.obra.org]
>>> On Behalf Of Evan Plews
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 9:16 AM
>>> To: Erik Long; useyourdagger@gmail.com; kenji@obra.org
>>> Cc: Obra; rkntoy@yahoo.com; ripleymike1@gmail.com
>>>
>>>
>>> Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks Erik,
>>>
>>> I almost ten years "pro" and so tired of that designation it makes
>>> me sick. Occupation may be a reasonable designation but surely not
>>> profession..
>>>
>>> "Open" would be more appropriate for a racing category then anyone
>>> who wants a piece of the purse can test their metal.
>>>
>>> IMHO there are too many categories. I think there should be beginner
>>> (real first timers or close), open, singlespeed, and everyone else
>>> as age groupers. Getting rid of these subjective "performance/skill"
>>> categories would go along way to making races more fun fair and less
>>> intimidating for those new to the sport.
>>>
>>>
>>> Evan Plews
>>> www.evanplews.com
>>> 503-949-4879
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>
>>> From: Erik Long
>>> Sent: 22 Jan 2013 03:06:06 GMT
>>> To: useyourdagger@gmail.com,kenji@obra.org
>>> Cc: Obra,rkntoy@yahoo.com,ripleymike1@gmail.com
>>> Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories
>>>
>>> First of all, "Pro" is a bit of a misnomer. Sure, a few with the
>>> Pro designation are getting paid, but it pushes a false image of
>>> wealth within the sport that just doesn't exist among the fastest
>>> riders. Most in the "Pro" category aren't professionals. If you
>>> file taxes as a physical therapist or a lawyer or something, you are
>>> not a pro cyclist. This may be one reason that USAC refuses to
>>> recognize many OBRA "Pro's".
>>>
>>> "Open" is a category used in many sports. It's a way of saying
>>> "Welcome All Challengers", regardless of age or perceived ability.
>>> We should have this division in 'Cross and our mountainbike events
>>> as well.
>>>
>>> In fact, much of the time it would make sense to make certain age
>>> groups more Open. For example, Cat 1 19+ instead of 19-39, since
>>> there are riders in their mid 40's who are competitive with the
>>> 20-somethings.
>>>
>>> I can understand age limits to a point, but most of our race
>>> divisions really don't need maximum ages.
>>>
>>> -Erik
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>>
>>> Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 14:13:12 -0800
>>> From: useyourdagger@gmail.com
>>> To: kenji@obra.org
>>> CC: obra@list.obra.org; rkntoy@yahoo.com; ripleymike1@gmail.com
>>> Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories
>>>
>>> I'm having a hard time understanding how a change from numbers to
>>> letters changes anything in regard to making it "easier to
>>> understand."
>>> "Proposal
>>>
>>> Pro/Cat 1= Open/A
>>> Cat 2 = B
>>> Cat 3 = C
>>> Beginner is Beginner"
>>> Where is the part about making it easier to understand for new racers?
>>> This seems more like an attempt to make it very clear that we don't
>>> want to look anything like USAC, but to look more like OBRA 'cross
>>> categories.
>>> That's fine if that's what you're after, but that's not the reason
>>> given for this proposed change.
>>>
>>> I'm also not sure about the Pro upgrade requirement; if I'm reading
>>> it right, basically Mike R. is saying that you can't get upgraded to
>>> Pro if you race OBRA, you have to go find enough USAC Cat 1 races to
>>> get upgraded:
>>>
>>> "Please remember that I have upgraded a number of riders to Pro's
>>> from Cat 1 and I will not be doing that any longer because USAC
>>> does not recognize any of our races or riders racing in the pro
>>> category and currently we do not have a reciprocity agreement with
>>> USAC. If you want to get a Pro Upgrade you will need to race USAC
>>> against the Cat 1 field and earn your upgrade that way. In effect
>>> the top class in OBRA will be if approved an Open category scored
>>> separate for the series and A and A 40+ if approved for men and
>>> women to replace Cat 1 19-39 and Cat 1 40+."
>>> These proposed changes could be good, it's just hard to tell without
>>> more information about what they're meant to accomplish.
>>>
>>> Craig
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 1:53 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> As an aside- the more feedback we get the better. It's really good
>>> to have this discussion.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Mike Ripley
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Hey Steve
>>> >
>>> > In a way you are right and that is why the change is really not
>>> > that huge check out the latest at
>>> > http://oregonxcseries.org/series-categories/
>>> >
>>> > The main point is describing mountain bike racing in road terms is
>>> > not a good way to get new riders into the sport by offering Cat 3
>>> > In fact if we wanted to be real simple we could just add beginner
>>> > and Open at the top and call it good
>>> >
>>> > Also by having Open, A, B, C, Beginner we will in fact have the C
>>> > and B group racing on the same course and break down the perceived
>>> > self imposed limits riders place on themselves when racing or
>>> > considering upgrading.
>>> > SO
>>> > many C riders in CX and if 10-20% buy Mountain bikes to branch out
>>> > it can only = a good thing
>>> >
>>> > We have a strong contingent of riders already and by changing will
>>> > hope to have the dirt of MTB and CX collide in more riders and
>>> > continued success.
>>> >
>>> > In hindsight we( OBRA) should have never went with USAC with the
>>> > move away from Pro, Expert, Sport and beginner some 5 years ago
>>> > and even these terms would not allow for 2 groups based on ability
>>> > racing on a similar course, which Kris Schamp and Myself think
>>> > would be great for the sport
>>> >
>>> > Mike
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:11 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara
>>> >
>>> > wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> I'll defer to Mike on this one.
>>> >>
>>> >> Remember that the clubs have the final say on this at the annual
>>> >> meeting!
>>> >>
>>> >> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Steve Westberg
>>> >>
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >> > Could someone give me a pro/con list for the proposed category
>>> >> > changes?
>>> >> >
>>> >> > After reading through all the explanations I could find it
>>> >> > still feels like a change just to change. 1,2,3 or A,B,C you
>>> >> > are still going to have to explain to new riders what the
>>> >> > system is. And with a change you will have to explain to
>>> >> > people who have been riding OBRA races what the change is.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Am I missing something?
>>> >> > _______________________________________________
>>> >> > OBRA mailing list
>>> >> > obra@list.obra.org
>>> >> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>>> >> > Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> Kenji Sugahara
>>> >> Executive Director
>>> >> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
>>> >> Phone: 503-278-5550
>>> >> http://www.obra.org
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Mike Ripley
>>> > Mudslinger Events
>>> > Oregon Outdoor Recreation
>>> >
>>> > PO BOX 87
>>> > Monroe, OR. 97456
>>> > 541-225-7946
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Kenji Sugahara
>>> Executive Director
>>> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
>>> Phone: 503-278-5550
>>> http://www.obra.org
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OBRA mailing list
>>> obra@list.obra.org
>>> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>>> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________ OBRA mailing list
>>> obra@list.obra.org http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mike Ripley
>> Mudslinger Events
>> Oregon Outdoor Recreation
>>
>> PO BOX 87
>> Monroe, OR. 97456
>> 541-225-7946
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OBRA mailing list
>> obra@list.obra.org
>> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>

--
Kenji Sugahara
Executive Director
Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
Phone: 503-278-5550
http://www.obra.org
_______________________________________________
OBRA mailing list
obra@list.obra.org
http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

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


Steve Westberg

2013-01-22

And one last thing - then I will shut up.

Once again from the new racer perspective, if the age group is the only breakdown after you get a couple races under your belt, what length course is she/he going to ride.  Quite a few of the courses had three lengths.  Let's use Bear Springs as an example.  Is the newly-formed, age-based category going to race the 8.5 mile course, the 20ish mile course, or the 30+ mile course?  People new-ish to racing probably would think twice about showing up and racing for 30+ miles.  So do we make the whole group race the 20ish mile course?  Some people out of the group would probably want to race the longer course.  So if you do, are you now out of your age group and forced to sign up in an Open category in order to race the longer course?

Steve Westberg, CPA CHC MBA
________________________________
From: Steve Westberg
To: "obra@list.obra.org"
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 10:24 AM
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories

I would recommend really thinking through simplifying things too much if one of the goals is to increase racer engagement.  Increasing engagement is generally improved if there are attainable goals built in to the system.

Think about the system where a beginner races a couple events and then gets kicked in to an age-based category from the perspective of the beginner racer.  He/she is now in a pool that has a lot wider range of skill/speed (range would be riders all the way from A's to C's) with results to change accordingly.  I am OK with consistently placing toward the bottom of my class, but a majority of people want to see their results improve over time.  Are just starting racers going to see improving results as attainable if they are going against A racers or are they going to get discouraged and stop racing? 

I encourage the fast people to think about us slow people and seek their input.  I believe that getting new racers/riders competing and then retaining them is ultimately the most important thing.  Which brings me to this:  if teams are voting on the change is the new rider/racer (who is not generally on a team) perspective going to receive the consideration it warrants.

Personally, I think it would be nice to have the MTB and CX classes to be the same.  Especially if we are seeking crossover between the two.  Having the same classes would make it more seamless.

Steve Westberg, CPA MBA CHC

________________________________
From: Candi Murray
To: 'Evan Plews' ; 'Erik Long' ; useyourdagger@gmail.com; kenji@obra.org
Cc: 'Obra' ; rkntoy@yahoo.com; ripleymike1@gmail.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 9:40 AM
Subject: RE: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories

Evan
Finally the voice of reason. There are way too many categories and it seems like more get added all the time. Our initial request was to change things to Open and Beginner, and then break down ages for juniors and masters. How it morphed into 25+ categories is beyond me.
Candi
 
From:obra-bounces@list.obra.org [mailto:obra-bounces@list.obra.org] On Behalf Of Evan Plews
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 9:16 AM
To: Erik Long; useyourdagger@gmail.com; kenji@obra.org
Cc: Obra; rkntoy@yahoo.com; ripleymike1@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories
 
Thanks Erik,

I almost ten years "pro" and so tired of that designation it makes me sick. Occupation may be a reasonable designation but
surely not profession..

"Open" would be more appropriate for a racing category then anyone who wants a piece of the purse can test their metal.

IMHO there are too many categories. I think there should be beginner (real first timers or close), open, singlespeed, and everyone else as age groupers. Getting rid of these subjective "performance/skill" categories would go along way to making races more fun fair and less intimidating for those new to the sport.

Evan Plews
www.evanplews.com
503-949-4879

-----Original Message-----

From: Erik Long
Sent: 22 Jan 2013 03:06:06 GMT
To: useyourdagger@gmail.com,kenji@obra.org
Cc: Obra,rkntoy@yahoo.com,ripleymike1@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories
First of all, "Pro" is a bit of a misnomer.  Sure, a few with the Pro designation are getting paid, but it pushes a false image of wealth within the sport that just doesn't exist among the fastest riders.  Most in the "Pro" category aren't professionals.  If you file taxes as a physical therapist or a lawyer or something, you are not a pro cyclist.  This may be one reason that USAC refuses to recognize many OBRA "Pro's".

"Open" is a category used in many sports.  It's a way of saying "Welcome All Challengers", regardless of age or perceived ability.  We should have this division in 'Cross and our mountainbike events as well. 

In fact, much of the time it would make sense to make certain age groups more Open.  For example, Cat 1 19+ instead of 19-39, since there are riders in their mid 40's who are competitive with the 20-somethings. 

I can understand age limits to a point, but most of our race divisions
really don't need maximum ages.

-Erik

________________________________

Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 14:13:12 -0800
From: useyourdagger@gmail.com
To: kenji@obra.org
CC: obra@list.obra.org; rkntoy@yahoo.com; ripleymike1@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories

I'm having a hard time understanding how a change from numbers to letters changes anything in regard to making it "easier to understand."
"Proposal

Pro/Cat 1= Open/A
Cat 2 = B
Cat 3 = C
Beginner is Beginner"
Where is the part about making it easier to understand for new racers? This seems more like an attempt to make it very clear that we don't want to look anything like USAC, but to look more
like OBRA 'cross categories. That's fine if that's what you're after, but that's not the reason given for this proposed change.

I'm also not sure about the Pro upgrade requirement; if I'm reading it right, basically Mike R. is saying that you can't get upgraded to Pro if you race OBRA, you have to go find enough USAC Cat 1 races to get upgraded:

"Please remember that I have upgraded a number of riders to Pro’s from Cat 1 and  I will not be doing that any longer because USAC does not recognize any of our races or riders racing in the pro category and currently we do not have a reciprocity agreement with USAC. If you want to get a Pro Upgrade you will need to race USAC against the Cat 1 field and earn your upgrade that way. In effect the top class in OBRA will be if approved an Open category scored separate for the series and A and A 40+ if approved for men and women to replace Cat 1 19-39 and Cat 1 40+."
These proposed changes
could be good, it's just hard to tell without more information about what they're meant to accomplish.

Craig
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 1:53 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara wrote:
As an aside- the more feedback we get the better.  It's really good to
have this discussion.

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Mike Ripley wrote:
> Hey Steve
>
> In a way you are right and that is why the change is really not that huge
> check out the latest at http://oregonxcseries.org/series-categories/
>
> The main point is describing mountain bike racing in road terms is not a
> good way to get new riders into the sport by offering Cat 3
> In fact if we wanted to be real simple we could just add beginner and Open
> at the top and call it good
>
> Also by having Open, A, B, C, Beginner we will in fact have the C and B
> group racing on the same course and break down the perceived self imposed
> limits riders place on themselves when racing or considering upgrading. SO
> many C riders in CX and if 10-20% buy Mountain bikes to branch out it can
> only = a good thing
>
> We have a strong contingent of riders already and by changing will hope to
> have the dirt of MTB and CX collide in more riders and continued success.
>
> In hindsight we( OBRA) should have
never went with USAC with the move away
> from Pro, Expert, Sport and beginner some 5 years ago and even these terms
> would not allow for 2 groups based on ability racing on a similar course,
> which Kris Schamp and Myself think would be great for the sport
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:11 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara wrote:
>>
>> I'll defer to Mike on this one.
>>
>> Remember that the clubs have the final say on this at the annual meeting!
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Steve Westberg wrote:
>> > Could someone give me a pro/con list for the proposed category
changes?
>> >
>> > After reading through all the explanations I could find it still feels
>> > like a change just to change.  1,2,3 or A,B,C you are still going to have to
>> > explain to new riders what the system is.  And with a change you will have
>> > to explain to people who have been riding OBRA races what the change is.
>> >
>> > Am I missing something?
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > OBRA mailing list
>> > obra@list.obra.org
>> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>> > Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Kenji Sugahara
>> Executive Director
>> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
>> Phone:  503-278-5550
>> http://www.obra.org
>
>
>
>
> --
> Mike Ripley
> Mudslinger Events
> Oregon Outdoor Recreation
>
> PO BOX 87
> Monroe, OR. 97456
> 541-225-7946

--
Kenji Sugahara
Executive Director
Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
Phone:  503-278-5550
http://www.obra.org
_______________________________________________
OBRA mailing list
obra@list.obra.org
http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

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


Candi Murray

2013-01-22

An easy way to fix that would be that if the categories changed the change
could be in effect for 2014. I agree that doing it after the flyers are out
is not a good idea.

We have multiple mtb and ccx only teams. ;-)

Candi

From: obra-bounces@list.obra.org [mailto:obra-bounces@list.obra.org] On
Behalf Of Anthony Cree
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 10:13 AM
To: obra@list.obra.org
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories

Regardless of what's decided, the echo red 2 red promoter makes a very good
point about OBRA categories changing after sign up has already started.
http://www.echored2red.com/2012_Echo_Red_2_Red_XC_MTB_Race/Letter_To_Riders.
html

Team only voting for mtb - how very roadie centric.

On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Mike Ripley wrote:

The reason is

XC places racers on the course all at once, where in CX or ST you could race
multiple races in a given day

XC has been 25 categories for 10 years and someone tell me who to axe, and
ST could have less and I think does by a few but I could be wrong

Plus I like giving people opportunity being kind hearted and expanding on
established norms

On a side note I agree with candi and I am a purist at heart as my most
popular event has 6 categories

Open Men and Women

Masters 40-49 Men and Women

Masters 50+ Men

Singlespeed

One course for multiple hrs

Mark this day as Evan Plews as the voice of reason day.....awesome could be
an OBRA holiday LOL

How about this for radical

Short course

Long Course

10 year age groups starting at 19 no ability level with some Junior break
outs

And SS and Clydes...wait now we are up to 21 cats.......hmmmmm or really mtb
xc is in effect like having 2 or 3 separate races going on all in one 1-4 hr
time frame over thousands of acres

If this is true then in fact we only have 7 to 9 categories per race or race
course which would make us the lowest amount of categories of any discipline

Pretty amazing

Mike

On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Candi Murray wrote:

Evan

Finally the voice of reason. There are way too many categories and it seems
like more get added all the time. Our initial request was to change things
to Open and Beginner, and then break down ages for juniors and masters. How
it morphed into 25+ categories is beyond me.

Candi

From: obra-bounces@list.obra.org [mailto:obra-bounces@list.obra.org] On
Behalf Of Evan Plews
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 9:16 AM
To: Erik Long; useyourdagger@gmail.com; kenji@obra.org
Cc: Obra; rkntoy@yahoo.com; ripleymike1@gmail.com

Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories

Thanks Erik,

I almost ten years "pro" and so tired of that designation it makes me sick.
Occupation may be a reasonable designation but surely not profession..

"Open" would be more appropriate for a racing category then anyone who wants
a piece of the purse can test their metal.

IMHO there are too many categories. I think there should be beginner (real
first timers or close), open, singlespeed, and everyone else as age
groupers. Getting rid of these subjective "performance/skill" categories
would go along way to making races more fun fair and less intimidating for
those new to the sport.

Evan Plews
www.evanplews.com
503-949-4879

-----Original Message-----

From: Erik Long
Sent: 22 Jan 2013 03:06:06 GMT
To: useyourdagger@gmail.com,kenji@obra.org
Cc: Obra,rkntoy@yahoo.com,ripleymike1@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories

First of all, "Pro" is a bit of a misnomer. Sure, a few with the Pro
designation are getting paid, but it pushes a false image of wealth within
the sport that just doesn't exist among the fastest riders. Most in the
"Pro" category aren't professionals. If you file taxes as a physical
therapist or a lawyer or something, you are not a pro cyclist. This may be
one reason that USAC refuses to recognize many OBRA "Pro's".

"Open" is a category used in many sports. It's a way of saying "Welcome All
Challengers", regardless of age or perceived ability. We should have this
division in 'Cross and our mountainbike events as well.

In fact, much of the time it would make sense to make certain age groups
more Open. For example, Cat 1 19+ instead of 19-39, since there are riders
in their mid 40's who are competitive with the 20-somethings.

I can understand age limits to a point, but most of our race divisions
really don't need maximum ages.

-Erik

_____

Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 14:13:12 -0800
From: useyourdagger@gmail.com
To: kenji@obra.org
CC: obra@list.obra.org; rkntoy@yahoo.com; ripleymike1@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories

I'm having a hard time understanding how a change from numbers to letters
changes anything in regard to making it "easier to understand."
"Proposal

Pro/Cat 1= Open/A
Cat 2 = B
Cat 3 = C
Beginner is Beginner"
Where is the part about making it easier to understand for new racers? This
seems more like an attempt to make it very clear that we don't want to look
anything like USAC, but to look more like OBRA 'cross categories. That's
fine if that's what you're after, but that's not the reason given for this
proposed change.

I'm also not sure about the Pro upgrade requirement; if I'm reading it
right, basically Mike R. is saying that you can't get upgraded to Pro if you
race OBRA, you have to go find enough USAC Cat 1 races to get upgraded:

"Please remember that I have upgraded a number of riders to Pro's from Cat 1
and I will not be doing that any longer because USAC does not recognize any
of our races or riders racing in the pro category and currently we do not
have a reciprocity agreement with USAC. If you want to get a Pro Upgrade you
will need to race USAC against the Cat 1 field and earn your upgrade that
way. In effect the top class in OBRA will be if approved an Open category
scored separate for the series and A and A 40+ if approved for men and women
to replace Cat 1 19-39 and Cat 1 40+."
These proposed changes could be good, it's just hard to tell without more
information about what they're meant to accomplish.

Craig

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 1:53 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara wrote:

As an aside- the more feedback we get the better. It's really good to
have this discussion.

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Mike Ripley wrote:
> Hey Steve
>
> In a way you are right and that is why the change is really not that huge
> check out the latest at http://oregonxcseries.org/series-categories/
>
> The main point is describing mountain bike racing in road terms is not a
> good way to get new riders into the sport by offering Cat 3
> In fact if we wanted to be real simple we could just add beginner and Open
> at the top and call it good
>
> Also by having Open, A, B, C, Beginner we will in fact have the C and B
> group racing on the same course and break down the perceived self imposed
> limits riders place on themselves when racing or considering upgrading. SO
> many C riders in CX and if 10-20% buy Mountain bikes to branch out it can
> only = a good thing
>
> We have a strong contingent of riders already and by changing will hope to
> have the dirt of MTB and CX collide in more riders and continued success.
>
> In hindsight we( OBRA) should have never went with USAC with the move away
> from Pro, Expert, Sport and beginner some 5 years ago and even these terms
> would not allow for 2 groups based on ability racing on a similar course,
> which Kris Schamp and Myself think would be great for the sport
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:11 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara
wrote:
>>
>> I'll defer to Mike on this one.
>>
>> Remember that the clubs have the final say on this at the annual meeting!
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Steve Westberg wrote:
>> > Could someone give me a pro/con list for the proposed category changes?
>> >
>> > After reading through all the explanations I could find it still feels
>> > like a change just to change. 1,2,3 or A,B,C you are still going to
have to
>> > explain to new riders what the system is. And with a change you will
have
>> > to explain to people who have been riding OBRA races what the change
is.
>> >
>> > Am I missing something?
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > OBRA mailing list
>> > obra@list.obra.org
>> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>> > Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Kenji Sugahara
>> Executive Director
>> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
>> Phone: 503-278-5550
>> http://www.obra.org
>
>
>
>
> --
> Mike Ripley
> Mudslinger Events
> Oregon Outdoor Recreation
>
> PO BOX 87
> Monroe, OR. 97456
> 541-225-7946

--
Kenji Sugahara
Executive Director
Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
Phone: 503-278-5550
http://www.obra.org
_______________________________________________
OBRA mailing list
obra@list.obra.org
http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

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

--
Mike Ripley
Mudslinger Events
Oregon Outdoor Recreation

PO BOX 87
Monroe, OR. 97456
541-225-7946

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


Steve Westberg

2013-01-22

I would recommend really thinking through simplifying things too much if one of the goals is to increase racer engagement.  Increasing engagement is generally improved if there are attainable goals built in to the system.

Think about the system where a beginner races a couple events and then gets kicked in to an age-based category from the perspective of the beginner racer.  He/she is now in a pool that has a lot wider range of skill/speed (range would be riders all the way from A's to C's) with results to change accordingly.  I am OK with consistently placing toward the bottom of my class, but a majority of people want to see their results improve over time.  Are just starting racers going to see improving results as attainable if they are going against A racers or are they going to get discouraged and stop racing? 

I encourage the fast people to think about us slow people and seek their input.  I believe that getting new racers/riders competing and then retaining them is ultimately the most important thing.  Which brings me to this:  if teams are voting on the change is the new rider/racer (who is not generally on a team) perspective going to receive the consideration it warrants.

Personally, I think it would be nice to have the MTB and CX classes to be the same.  Especially if we are seeking crossover between the two.  Having the same classes would make it more seamless.

Steve Westberg, CPA MBA CHC

________________________________
From: Candi Murray
To: 'Evan Plews' ; 'Erik Long' ; useyourdagger@gmail.com; kenji@obra.org
Cc: 'Obra' ; rkntoy@yahoo.com; ripleymike1@gmail.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 9:40 AM
Subject: RE: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories

Evan
Finally the voice of reason. There are way too many categories and it seems like more get added all the time. Our initial request was to change things to Open and Beginner, and then break down ages for juniors and masters. How it morphed into 25+ categories is beyond me.
Candi
 
From:obra-bounces@list.obra.org [mailto:obra-bounces@list.obra.org] On Behalf Of Evan Plews
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 9:16 AM
To: Erik Long; useyourdagger@gmail.com; kenji@obra.org
Cc: Obra; rkntoy@yahoo.com; ripleymike1@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories
 
Thanks Erik,

I almost ten years "pro" and so tired of that designation it makes me sick. Occupation may be a reasonable designation but surely not profession..

"Open" would be more appropriate for a racing category then anyone who wants a piece of the purse can test their metal.

IMHO there are too many categories. I think there should be beginner (real first timers or close), open, singlespeed, and everyone else as age groupers. Getting rid of these subjective "performance/skill" categories would go along way to making races more fun fair and less intimidating for those new to the sport.

Evan Plews
www.evanplews.com
503-949-4879

-----Original Message-----

From: Erik Long
Sent: 22 Jan 2013 03:06:06 GMT
To: useyourdagger@gmail.com,kenji@obra.org
Cc: Obra,rkntoy@yahoo.com,ripleymike1@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories
First of all, "Pro" is a bit of a misnomer.  Sure, a few with the Pro designation are getting paid, but it pushes a false image of wealth within the sport that just doesn't exist among the fastest riders.  Most in the "Pro" category aren't professionals.  If you file taxes as a physical therapist or a lawyer or something, you are not a pro cyclist.  This may be one reason that USAC refuses to recognize many OBRA "Pro's".

"Open" is a category used in many sports.  It's a way of saying "Welcome All Challengers", regardless of age or perceived ability.  We should have this division in 'Cross and our mountainbike events as well. 

In fact, much of the time it would make sense to make certain age groups more Open.  For example, Cat 1 19+ instead of 19-39, since there are riders in their mid 40's who are competitive with the 20-somethings. 

I can understand age limits to a point, but most of our race divisions really don't need maximum ages.

-Erik

________________________________

Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 14:13:12 -0800
From: useyourdagger@gmail.com
To: kenji@obra.org
CC: obra@list.obra.org; rkntoy@yahoo.com; ripleymike1@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories

I'm having a hard time understanding how a change from numbers to letters changes anything in regard to making it "easier to understand."
"Proposal

Pro/Cat 1= Open/A
Cat 2 = B
Cat 3 = C
Beginner is Beginner"
Where is the part about making it easier to understand for new racers? This seems more like an attempt to make it very clear that we don't want to look anything like USAC, but to look more like OBRA 'cross categories. That's fine if that's what you're after, but that's not the reason given for this proposed change.

I'm also not sure about the Pro upgrade requirement; if I'm reading it right, basically Mike R. is saying that you can't get upgraded to Pro if you race OBRA, you have to go find enough USAC Cat 1 races to get upgraded:

"Please remember that I have upgraded a number of riders to Pro’s from Cat 1 and  I will not be doing that any longer because USAC does not recognize any of our races or riders racing in the pro category and currently we do not have a reciprocity agreement with USAC. If you want to get a Pro Upgrade you will need to race USAC against the Cat 1 field and earn your upgrade that way. In effect the top class in OBRA will be if approved an Open category scored separate for the series and A and A 40+ if approved for men and women to replace Cat 1 19-39 and Cat 1 40+."
These proposed changes could be good, it's just hard to tell without more information about what they're meant to accomplish.

Craig
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 1:53 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara wrote:
As an aside- the more feedback we get the better.  It's really good to
have this discussion.

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Mike Ripley wrote:
> Hey Steve
>
> In a way you are right and that is why the change is really not that huge
> check out the latest at http://oregonxcseries.org/series-categories/
>
> The main point is describing mountain bike racing in road terms is not a
> good way to get new riders into the sport by offering Cat 3
> In fact if we wanted to be real simple we could just add beginner and Open
> at the top and call it good
>
> Also by having Open, A, B, C, Beginner we will in fact have the C and B
> group racing on the same course and break down the perceived self imposed
> limits riders place on themselves when racing or considering upgrading. SO
> many C riders in CX and if 10-20% buy Mountain bikes to branch out it can
> only = a good thing
>
> We have a strong contingent of riders already and by changing will hope to
> have the dirt of MTB and CX collide in more riders and continued success.
>
> In hindsight we( OBRA) should have never went with USAC with the move away
> from Pro, Expert, Sport and beginner some 5 years ago and even these terms
> would not allow for 2 groups based on ability racing on a similar course,
> which Kris Schamp and Myself think would be great for the sport
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:11 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara wrote:
>>
>> I'll defer to Mike on this one.
>>
>> Remember that the clubs have the final say on this at the annual meeting!
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Steve Westberg wrote:
>> > Could someone give me a pro/con list for the proposed category changes?
>> >
>> > After reading through all the explanations I could find it still feels
>> > like a change just to change.  1,2,3 or A,B,C you are still going to have to
>> > explain to new riders what the system is.  And with a change you will have
>> > to explain to people who have been riding OBRA races what the change is.
>> >
>> > Am I missing something?
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > OBRA mailing list
>> > obra@list.obra.org
>> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>> > Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Kenji Sugahara
>> Executive Director
>> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
>> Phone:  503-278-5550
>> http://www.obra.org
>
>
>
>
> --
> Mike Ripley
> Mudslinger Events
> Oregon Outdoor Recreation
>
> PO BOX 87
> Monroe, OR. 97456
> 541-225-7946

--
Kenji Sugahara
Executive Director
Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
Phone:  503-278-5550
http://www.obra.org
_______________________________________________
OBRA mailing list
obra@list.obra.org
http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

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


Anthony Cree

2013-01-22

Regardless of what's decided, the echo red 2 red promoter makes a very good
point about OBRA categories changing after sign up has already started.
http://www.echored2red.com/2012_Echo_Red_2_Red_XC_MTB_Race/Letter_To_Riders.html

Team only voting for mtb - how very roadie centric.

On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Mike Ripley wrote:

> The reason is
>
> XC places racers on the course all at once, where in CX or ST you could
> race multiple races in a given day
>
> XC has been 25 categories for 10 years and someone tell me who to axe, and
> ST could have less and I think does by a few but I could be wrong
>
>
> Plus I like giving people opportunity being kind hearted and expanding on
> established norms
>
> On a side note I agree with candi and I am a purist at heart as my most
> popular event has 6 categories
>
> Open Men and Women
> Masters 40-49 Men and Women
> Masters 50+ Men
> Singlespeed
>
> One course for multiple hrs
>
>
> Mark this day as Evan Plews as the voice of reason day.....awesome could
> be an OBRA holiday LOL
>
>
>
>
> How about this for radical
>
> Short course
> Long Course
> 10 year age groups starting at 19 no ability level with some Junior break
> outs
>
> And SS and Clydes...wait now we are up to 21 cats.......hmmmmm or really
> mtb xc is in effect like having 2 or 3 separate races going on all in one
> 1-4 hr time frame over thousands of acres
>
> If this is true then in fact we only have 7 to 9 categories per race or
> race course which would make us the lowest amount of categories of any
> discipline
>
> Pretty amazing
>
> Mike
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Candi Murray wrote:
>
>> Evan****
>>
>> Finally the voice of reason. There are way too many categories and it
>> seems like more get added all the time. Our initial request was to change
>> things to Open and Beginner, and then break down ages for juniors and
>> masters. How it morphed into 25+ categories is beyond me.****
>>
>> Candi****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> *From:* obra-bounces@list.obra.org [mailto:obra-bounces@list.obra.org] *On
>> Behalf Of *Evan Plews
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 22, 2013 9:16 AM
>> *To:* Erik Long; useyourdagger@gmail.com; kenji@obra.org
>> *Cc:* Obra; rkntoy@yahoo.com; ripleymike1@gmail.com
>>
>> *Subject:* Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Thanks Erik,
>>
>> I almost ten years "pro" and so tired of that designation it makes me
>> sick. Occupation may be a reasonable designation but surely not profession..
>>
>> "Open" would be more appropriate for a racing category then anyone who
>> wants a piece of the purse can test their metal.
>>
>> IMHO there are too many categories. I think there should be beginner
>> (real first timers or close), open, singlespeed, and everyone else as age
>> groupers. Getting rid of these subjective "performance/skill" categories
>> would go along way to making races more fun fair and less intimidating for
>> those new to the sport.
>>
>>
>> Evan Plews
>> www.evanplews.com
>> 503-949-4879
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>
>> From: Erik Long
>> Sent: 22 Jan 2013 03:06:06 GMT
>> To: useyourdagger@gmail.com,kenji@obra.org
>> Cc: Obra,rkntoy@yahoo.com,ripleymike1@gmail.com
>> Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories****
>>
>> First of all, "Pro" is a bit of a misnomer. Sure, a few with the Pro
>> designation are getting paid, but it pushes a false image of wealth within
>> the sport that just doesn't exist among the fastest riders. Most in the
>> "Pro" category aren't professionals. If you file taxes as a physical
>> therapist or a lawyer or something, you are not a pro cyclist. This may be
>> one reason that USAC refuses to recognize many OBRA "Pro's".
>>
>> "Open" is a category used in many sports. It's a way of saying "Welcome
>> All Challengers", regardless of age or perceived ability. We should have
>> this division in 'Cross and our mountainbike events as well.
>>
>> In fact, much of the time it would make sense to make certain age groups
>> more Open. For example, Cat 1 19+ instead of 19-39, since there are riders
>> in their mid 40's who are competitive with the 20-somethings.
>>
>> I can understand age limits to a point, but most of our race divisions
>> really don't need maximum ages.
>>
>> -Erik
>>
>> ****
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 14:13:12 -0800
>> From: useyourdagger@gmail.com
>> To: kenji@obra.org
>> CC: obra@list.obra.org; rkntoy@yahoo.com; ripleymike1@gmail.com
>> Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories
>>
>> I'm having a hard time understanding how a change from numbers to letters
>> changes anything in regard to making it "easier to understand."
>> *"Proposal**
>> *
>> Pro/Cat 1= Open/A
>> Cat 2 = B
>> Cat 3 = C
>> Beginner is Beginner"
>> Where is the part about making it easier to understand for new racers?
>> This seems more like an attempt to make it very clear that we don't want to
>> look anything like USAC, but to look more like OBRA 'cross categories.
>> That's fine if that's what you're after, but that's not the reason given
>> for this proposed change.
>>
>> I'm also not sure about the Pro upgrade requirement; if I'm reading it
>> right, basically Mike R. is saying that you can't get upgraded to Pro if
>> you race OBRA, you have to go find enough USAC Cat 1 races to get upgraded:
>>
>> "Please remember that I have upgraded a number of riders to Pro’s from
>> Cat 1 and I will not be doing that any longer because USAC does not
>> recognize any of our races or riders racing in the pro category and
>> currently we do not have a reciprocity agreement with USAC. If you want to
>> get a Pro Upgrade you will need to race USAC against the Cat 1 field and
>> earn your upgrade that way. In effect the top class in OBRA will be if
>> approved an Open category scored separate for the series and A and A 40+ if
>> approved for men and women to replace Cat 1 19-39 and Cat 1 40+."
>> These proposed changes could be good, it's just hard to tell without more
>> information about what they're meant to accomplish.
>>
>> Craig****
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 1:53 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara
>> wrote:****
>>
>> As an aside- the more feedback we get the better. It's really good to
>> have this discussion.****
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Mike Ripley
>> wrote:
>> > Hey Steve
>> >
>> > In a way you are right and that is why the change is really not that
>> huge
>> > check out the latest at http://oregonxcseries.org/series-categories/
>> >
>> > The main point is describing mountain bike racing in road terms is not a
>> > good way to get new riders into the sport by offering Cat 3
>> > In fact if we wanted to be real simple we could just add beginner and
>> Open
>> > at the top and call it good
>> >
>> > Also by having Open, A, B, C, Beginner we will in fact have the C and B
>> > group racing on the same course and break down the perceived self
>> imposed
>> > limits riders place on themselves when racing or considering upgrading.
>> SO
>> > many C riders in CX and if 10-20% buy Mountain bikes to branch out it
>> can
>> > only = a good thing
>> >
>> > We have a strong contingent of riders already and by changing will hope
>> to
>> > have the dirt of MTB and CX collide in more riders and continued
>> success.
>> >
>> > In hindsight we( OBRA) should have never went with USAC with the move
>> away
>> > from Pro, Expert, Sport and beginner some 5 years ago and even these
>> terms
>> > would not allow for 2 groups based on ability racing on a similar
>> course,
>> > which Kris Schamp and Myself think would be great for the sport
>> >
>> > Mike
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:11 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I'll defer to Mike on this one.
>> >>
>> >> Remember that the clubs have the final say on this at the annual
>> meeting!
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Steve Westberg
>> wrote:
>> >> > Could someone give me a pro/con list for the proposed category
>> changes?
>> >> >
>> >> > After reading through all the explanations I could find it still
>> feels
>> >> > like a change just to change. 1,2,3 or A,B,C you are still going to
>> have to
>> >> > explain to new riders what the system is. And with a change you
>> will have
>> >> > to explain to people who have been riding OBRA races what the change
>> is.
>> >> >
>> >> > Am I missing something?
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > OBRA mailing list
>> >> > obra@list.obra.org
>> >> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>> >> > Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Kenji Sugahara
>> >> Executive Director
>> >> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
>> >> Phone: 503-278-5550
>> >> http://www.obra.org
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Mike Ripley
>> > Mudslinger Events
>> > Oregon Outdoor Recreation
>> >
>> > PO BOX 87
>> > Monroe, OR. 97456
>> > 541-225-7946
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Kenji Sugahara
>> Executive Director
>> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
>> Phone: 503-278-5550
>> http://www.obra.org
>> _______________________________________________
>> OBRA mailing list
>> obra@list.obra.org
>> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org****
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ OBRA mailing list
>> obra@list.obra.org http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obraUnsubscribe:
>> obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org****
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Mike Ripley
> Mudslinger Events
> Oregon Outdoor Recreation
>
> PO BOX 87
> Monroe, OR. 97456
> 541-225-7946
>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>
>


Mike Ripley

2013-01-22

The reason is

XC places racers on the course all at once, where in CX or ST you could
race multiple races in a given day

XC has been 25 categories for 10 years and someone tell me who to axe, and
ST could have less and I think does by a few but I could be wrong

Plus I like giving people opportunity being kind hearted and expanding on
established norms

On a side note I agree with candi and I am a purist at heart as my most
popular event has 6 categories

Open Men and Women
Masters 40-49 Men and Women
Masters 50+ Men
Singlespeed

One course for multiple hrs

Mark this day as Evan Plews as the voice of reason day.....awesome could be
an OBRA holiday LOL

How about this for radical

Short course
Long Course
10 year age groups starting at 19 no ability level with some Junior break
outs

And SS and Clydes...wait now we are up to 21 cats.......hmmmmm or really
mtb xc is in effect like having 2 or 3 separate races going on all in one
1-4 hr time frame over thousands of acres

If this is true then in fact we only have 7 to 9 categories per race or
race course which would make us the lowest amount of categories of any
discipline

Pretty amazing

Mike

On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Candi Murray wrote:

> Evan****
>
> Finally the voice of reason. There are way too many categories and it
> seems like more get added all the time. Our initial request was to change
> things to Open and Beginner, and then break down ages for juniors and
> masters. How it morphed into 25+ categories is beyond me.****
>
> Candi****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* obra-bounces@list.obra.org [mailto:obra-bounces@list.obra.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Evan Plews
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 22, 2013 9:16 AM
> *To:* Erik Long; useyourdagger@gmail.com; kenji@obra.org
> *Cc:* Obra; rkntoy@yahoo.com; ripleymike1@gmail.com
>
> *Subject:* Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories****
>
> ** **
>
> Thanks Erik,
>
> I almost ten years "pro" and so tired of that designation it makes me
> sick. Occupation may be a reasonable designation but surely not profession..
>
> "Open" would be more appropriate for a racing category then anyone who
> wants a piece of the purse can test their metal.
>
> IMHO there are too many categories. I think there should be beginner (real
> first timers or close), open, singlespeed, and everyone else as age
> groupers. Getting rid of these subjective "performance/skill" categories
> would go along way to making races more fun fair and less intimidating for
> those new to the sport.
>
>
> Evan Plews
> www.evanplews.com
> 503-949-4879
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: Erik Long
> Sent: 22 Jan 2013 03:06:06 GMT
> To: useyourdagger@gmail.com,kenji@obra.org
> Cc: Obra,rkntoy@yahoo.com,ripleymike1@gmail.com
> Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories****
>
> First of all, "Pro" is a bit of a misnomer. Sure, a few with the Pro
> designation are getting paid, but it pushes a false image of wealth within
> the sport that just doesn't exist among the fastest riders. Most in the
> "Pro" category aren't professionals. If you file taxes as a physical
> therapist or a lawyer or something, you are not a pro cyclist. This may be
> one reason that USAC refuses to recognize many OBRA "Pro's".
>
> "Open" is a category used in many sports. It's a way of saying "Welcome
> All Challengers", regardless of age or perceived ability. We should have
> this division in 'Cross and our mountainbike events as well.
>
> In fact, much of the time it would make sense to make certain age groups
> more Open. For example, Cat 1 19+ instead of 19-39, since there are riders
> in their mid 40's who are competitive with the 20-somethings.
>
> I can understand age limits to a point, but most of our race divisions
> really don't need maximum ages.
>
> -Erik
>
> ****
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 14:13:12 -0800
> From: useyourdagger@gmail.com
> To: kenji@obra.org
> CC: obra@list.obra.org; rkntoy@yahoo.com; ripleymike1@gmail.com
> Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories
>
> I'm having a hard time understanding how a change from numbers to letters
> changes anything in regard to making it "easier to understand."
> *"Proposal**
> *
> Pro/Cat 1= Open/A
> Cat 2 = B
> Cat 3 = C
> Beginner is Beginner"
> Where is the part about making it easier to understand for new racers?
> This seems more like an attempt to make it very clear that we don't want to
> look anything like USAC, but to look more like OBRA 'cross categories.
> That's fine if that's what you're after, but that's not the reason given
> for this proposed change.
>
> I'm also not sure about the Pro upgrade requirement; if I'm reading it
> right, basically Mike R. is saying that you can't get upgraded to Pro if
> you race OBRA, you have to go find enough USAC Cat 1 races to get upgraded:
>
> "Please remember that I have upgraded a number of riders to Pro’s from Cat
> 1 and I will not be doing that any longer because USAC does not recognize
> any of our races or riders racing in the pro category and currently we do
> not have a reciprocity agreement with USAC. If you want to get a Pro
> Upgrade you will need to race USAC against the Cat 1 field and earn your
> upgrade that way. In effect the top class in OBRA will be if approved an
> Open category scored separate for the series and A and A 40+ if approved
> for men and women to replace Cat 1 19-39 and Cat 1 40+."
> These proposed changes could be good, it's just hard to tell without more
> information about what they're meant to accomplish.
>
> Craig****
>
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 1:53 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara wrote:
> ****
>
> As an aside- the more feedback we get the better. It's really good to
> have this discussion.****
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Mike Ripley
> wrote:
> > Hey Steve
> >
> > In a way you are right and that is why the change is really not that huge
> > check out the latest at http://oregonxcseries.org/series-categories/
> >
> > The main point is describing mountain bike racing in road terms is not a
> > good way to get new riders into the sport by offering Cat 3
> > In fact if we wanted to be real simple we could just add beginner and
> Open
> > at the top and call it good
> >
> > Also by having Open, A, B, C, Beginner we will in fact have the C and B
> > group racing on the same course and break down the perceived self imposed
> > limits riders place on themselves when racing or considering upgrading.
> SO
> > many C riders in CX and if 10-20% buy Mountain bikes to branch out it can
> > only = a good thing
> >
> > We have a strong contingent of riders already and by changing will hope
> to
> > have the dirt of MTB and CX collide in more riders and continued success.
> >
> > In hindsight we( OBRA) should have never went with USAC with the move
> away
> > from Pro, Expert, Sport and beginner some 5 years ago and even these
> terms
> > would not allow for 2 groups based on ability racing on a similar course,
> > which Kris Schamp and Myself think would be great for the sport
> >
> > Mike
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:11 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara
> wrote:
> >>
> >> I'll defer to Mike on this one.
> >>
> >> Remember that the clubs have the final say on this at the annual
> meeting!
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Steve Westberg
> wrote:
> >> > Could someone give me a pro/con list for the proposed category
> changes?
> >> >
> >> > After reading through all the explanations I could find it still feels
> >> > like a change just to change. 1,2,3 or A,B,C you are still going to
> have to
> >> > explain to new riders what the system is. And with a change you will
> have
> >> > to explain to people who have been riding OBRA races what the change
> is.
> >> >
> >> > Am I missing something?
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > OBRA mailing list
> >> > obra@list.obra.org
> >> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> >> > Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Kenji Sugahara
> >> Executive Director
> >> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
> >> Phone: 503-278-5550
> >> http://www.obra.org
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Mike Ripley
> > Mudslinger Events
> > Oregon Outdoor Recreation
> >
> > PO BOX 87
> > Monroe, OR. 97456
> > 541-225-7946
>
>
>
> --
> Kenji Sugahara
> Executive Director
> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
> Phone: 503-278-5550
> http://www.obra.org
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org****
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________ OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obraUnsubscribe:
> obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org****
>

--
Mike Ripley
Mudslinger Events
Oregon Outdoor Recreation

PO BOX 87
Monroe, OR. 97456
541-225-7946


Brian Baumann

2013-01-22

The benefit of having age groups is that more people get to battle for podium spots, the positive reinforcer of our sport.  That hopefully keeps more people interested in attending more races.  It's either that or we have Cat 1-16, with no age limits.

________________________________
From: Erik Long
To: useyourdagger@gmail.com; kenji@obra.org
Cc: Obra ; rkntoy@yahoo.com; ripleymike1@gmail.com
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 7:04 PM
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories


First of all, "Pro" is a bit of a misnomer.  Sure, a few with the Pro designation are getting paid, but it pushes a false image of wealth within the sport that just doesn't exist among the fastest riders.  Most in the "Pro" category aren't professionals.  If you file taxes as a physical therapist or a lawyer or something, you are not a pro cyclist.  This may be one reason that USAC refuses to recognize many OBRA "Pro's".

"Open" is a category used in many sports.  It's a way of saying "Welcome All Challengers", regardless of age or perceived ability.  We should have this division in 'Cross and our mountainbike events as well. 

In fact, much of the time it would make sense to make certain age groups more Open.  For example, Cat 1 19+ instead of 19-39, since there are riders in their mid 40's who are competitive with the 20-somethings. 

I can understand age limits to a point, but most of our race divisions really don't need maximum ages.

-Erik

________________________________
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 14:13:12 -0800
From: useyourdagger@gmail.com
To: kenji@obra.org
CC: obra@list.obra.org; rkntoy@yahoo.com; ripleymike1@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories

I'm having a hard time understanding how a change from numbers to letters changes anything in regard to making it "easier to understand."
"Proposal

Pro/Cat 1= Open/A
Cat 2 = B
Cat 3 = C
Beginner is Beginner"
Where is the part about making it easier to understand for new racers? This seems more like an attempt to make it very clear that we don't want to look anything like USAC, but to look more like OBRA 'cross categories. That's fine if that's what you're after, but that's not the reason given for this proposed change.

I'm also not sure about the Pro upgrade requirement; if I'm reading it right, basically Mike R. is saying that you can't get upgraded to Pro if you race OBRA, you have to go find enough USAC Cat 1 races to get upgraded:

"Please remember that I have upgraded a
number of riders to Pro’s from Cat 1 and  I will not be doing that any
longer because USAC does not recognize any of our races or riders racing
in the pro category and currently we do not have a reciprocity
agreement with USAC.
If you want to get a Pro Upgrade you will
need to race USAC against the Cat 1 field and earn your upgrade that
way. In effect the top class in OBRA will be if approved an Open
category scored separate for the series and A and A 40+ if approved for
men and women to replace Cat 1 19-39 and Cat 1 40+."
These proposed changes could be good, it's just hard to tell without more information about what they're meant to accomplish.

Craig

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 1:53 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara wrote:

As an aside- the more feedback we get the better.  It's really good to
>have this discussion.
>
>
>On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Mike Ripley wrote:
>> Hey Steve
>>
>> In a way you are right and that is why the change is really not that huge
>> check out the latest at http://oregonxcseries.org/series-categories/
>>
>> The main point is describing mountain bike racing in road terms is not a
>> good way to get new riders into the sport by offering Cat 3
>> In fact if we wanted to be real simple we could just add beginner and Open
>> at the top and call it good
>>
>> Also by having Open, A, B, C, Beginner we will in fact have the C and B
>> group racing on the same course and break down the perceived self imposed
>> limits riders place on themselves when racing or considering upgrading. SO
>> many C riders in CX and if 10-20% buy Mountain bikes to branch out it can
>> only = a good thing
>>
>> We have a strong contingent of riders already and by changing will hope to
>> have the dirt of MTB and CX collide in more riders and continued success.
>>
>> In hindsight we( OBRA) should have never went with USAC with the move away
>> from Pro, Expert, Sport and beginner some 5 years ago and even these terms
>> would not allow for 2 groups based on ability racing on a similar course,
>> which Kris Schamp and Myself think would be great for the sport
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:11 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara wrote:
>>>
>>> I'll defer to Mike on this one.
>>>
>>> Remember that the clubs have the final say on this at the annual meeting!
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Steve Westberg wrote:
>>> > Could someone give me a pro/con list for the proposed category changes?
>>> >
>>> > After reading through all the explanations I could find it still feels
>>> > like a change just to change.  1,2,3 or A,B,C you are still going to have to
>>> > explain to new riders what the system is.  And with a change you will have
>>> > to explain to people who have been riding OBRA races what the change is.
>>> >
>>> > Am I missing something?
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > OBRA mailing list
>>> > obra@list.obra.org
>>> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>>> > Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Kenji Sugahara
>>> Executive Director
>>> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
>>> Phone:  503-278-5550
>>> http://www.obra.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mike Ripley
>> Mudslinger Events
>> Oregon Outdoor Recreation
>>
>> PO BOX 87
>> Monroe, OR. 97456
>> 541-225-7946
>
>
>
>--
>Kenji Sugahara
>Executive Director
>Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
>Phone:  503-278-5550
>http://www.obra.org
>_______________________________________________
>OBRA mailing list
>obra@list.obra.org
>http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>

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


Candi Murray

2013-01-22

Evan

Finally the voice of reason. There are way too many categories and it seems like more get added all the time. Our initial request was to change things to Open and Beginner, and then break down ages for juniors and masters. How it morphed into 25+ categories is beyond me.

Candi

From: obra-bounces@list.obra.org [mailto:obra-bounces@list.obra.org] On Behalf Of Evan Plews
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 9:16 AM
To: Erik Long; useyourdagger@gmail.com; kenji@obra.org
Cc: Obra; rkntoy@yahoo.com; ripleymike1@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories

Thanks Erik,

I almost ten years "pro" and so tired of that designation it makes me sick. Occupation may be a reasonable designation but surely not profession..

"Open" would be more appropriate for a racing category then anyone who wants a piece of the purse can test their metal.

IMHO there are too many categories. I think there should be beginner (real first timers or close), open, singlespeed, and everyone else as age groupers. Getting rid of these subjective "performance/skill" categories would go along way to making races more fun fair and less intimidating for those new to the sport.

Evan Plews
www.evanplews.com
503-949-4879

-----Original Message-----

From: Erik Long
Sent: 22 Jan 2013 03:06:06 GMT
To: useyourdagger@gmail.com,kenji@obra.org
Cc: Obra,rkntoy@yahoo.com,ripleymike1@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories

First of all, "Pro" is a bit of a misnomer. Sure, a few with the Pro designation are getting paid, but it pushes a false image of wealth within the sport that just doesn't exist among the fastest riders. Most in the "Pro" category aren't professionals. If you file taxes as a physical therapist or a lawyer or something, you are not a pro cyclist. This may be one reason that USAC refuses to recognize many OBRA "Pro's".

"Open" is a category used in many sports. It's a way of saying "Welcome All Challengers", regardless of age or perceived ability. We should have this division in 'Cross and our mountainbike events as well.

In fact, much of the time it would make sense to make certain age groups more Open. For example, Cat 1 19+ instead of 19-39, since there are riders in their mid 40's who are competitive with the 20-somethings.

I can understand age limits to a point, but most of our race divisions really don't need maximum ages.

-Erik

_____

Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 14:13:12 -0800
From: useyourdagger@gmail.com
To: kenji@obra.org
CC: obra@list.obra.org; rkntoy@yahoo.com; ripleymike1@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories

I'm having a hard time understanding how a change from numbers to letters changes anything in regard to making it "easier to understand."
"Proposal

Pro/Cat 1= Open/A
Cat 2 = B
Cat 3 = C
Beginner is Beginner"
Where is the part about making it easier to understand for new racers? This seems more like an attempt to make it very clear that we don't want to look anything like USAC, but to look more like OBRA 'cross categories. That's fine if that's what you're after, but that's not the reason given for this proposed change.

I'm also not sure about the Pro upgrade requirement; if I'm reading it right, basically Mike R. is saying that you can't get upgraded to Pro if you race OBRA, you have to go find enough USAC Cat 1 races to get upgraded:

"Please remember that I have upgraded a number of riders to Pro’s from Cat 1 and I will not be doing that any longer because USAC does not recognize any of our races or riders racing in the pro category and currently we do not have a reciprocity agreement with USAC. If you want to get a Pro Upgrade you will need to race USAC against the Cat 1 field and earn your upgrade that way. In effect the top class in OBRA will be if approved an Open category scored separate for the series and A and A 40+ if approved for men and women to replace Cat 1 19-39 and Cat 1 40+."
These proposed changes could be good, it's just hard to tell without more information about what they're meant to accomplish.

Craig

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 1:53 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara wrote:

As an aside- the more feedback we get the better. It's really good to
have this discussion.

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Mike Ripley wrote:
> Hey Steve
>
> In a way you are right and that is why the change is really not that huge
> check out the latest at http://oregonxcseries.org/series-categories/
>
> The main point is describing mountain bike racing in road terms is not a
> good way to get new riders into the sport by offering Cat 3
> In fact if we wanted to be real simple we could just add beginner and Open
> at the top and call it good
>
> Also by having Open, A, B, C, Beginner we will in fact have the C and B
> group racing on the same course and break down the perceived self imposed
> limits riders place on themselves when racing or considering upgrading. SO
> many C riders in CX and if 10-20% buy Mountain bikes to branch out it can
> only = a good thing
>
> We have a strong contingent of riders already and by changing will hope to
> have the dirt of MTB and CX collide in more riders and continued success.
>
> In hindsight we( OBRA) should have never went with USAC with the move away
> from Pro, Expert, Sport and beginner some 5 years ago and even these terms
> would not allow for 2 groups based on ability racing on a similar course,
> which Kris Schamp and Myself think would be great for the sport
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:11 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara wrote:
>>
>> I'll defer to Mike on this one.
>>
>> Remember that the clubs have the final say on this at the annual meeting!
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Steve Westberg wrote:
>> > Could someone give me a pro/con list for the proposed category changes?
>> >
>> > After reading through all the explanations I could find it still feels
>> > like a change just to change. 1,2,3 or A,B,C you are still going to have to
>> > explain to new riders what the system is. And with a change you will have
>> > to explain to people who have been riding OBRA races what the change is.
>> >
>> > Am I missing something?
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > OBRA mailing list
>> > obra@list.obra.org
>> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>> > Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Kenji Sugahara
>> Executive Director
>> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
>> Phone: 503-278-5550
>> http://www.obra.org
>
>
>
>
> --
> Mike Ripley
> Mudslinger Events
> Oregon Outdoor Recreation
>
> PO BOX 87
> Monroe, OR. 97456
> 541-225-7946

--
Kenji Sugahara
Executive Director
Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
Phone: 503-278-5550
http://www.obra.org
_______________________________________________
OBRA mailing list
obra@list.obra.org
http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

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


Mike Ripley

2013-01-22

Thanks Erik

I agree with the "Pro" thoughts
Having a melting pot at the top is a necessary category for XC

The reason behind age ranges is to help keep results correct. So many times
when an age range was not defined many years ago this would happen

You stage Cat 1 19+ and your next wave was 40+, but somehow the 42 year old
registered for 19+ and did not leave with the 19+ riders and is now pissed
off.
Or a 40+ guy see's his friend in line and leaves with the 19+ group and now
has a 2 minute gap

If we had more time to do multiple races like ST or CX then open age ranges
make sense to some degree

In mtb the 46 year olds rule the world and we pay overall with current Pro
and All Cat 1's on the same course so the age ranges are purely to do
awards and to have peer group racing. Riders do like to know who they are
racing against.

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 7:04 PM, Erik Long wrote:

> First of all, "Pro" is a bit of a misnomer. Sure, a few with the Pro
> designation are getting paid, but it pushes a false image of wealth within
> the sport that just doesn't exist among the fastest riders. Most in the
> "Pro" category aren't professionals. If you file taxes as a physical
> therapist or a lawyer or something, you are not a pro cyclist. This may be
> one reason that USAC refuses to recognize many OBRA "Pro's".
>
> "Open" is a category used in many sports. It's a way of saying "Welcome
> All Challengers", regardless of age or perceived ability. We should have
> this division in 'Cross and our mountainbike events as well.
>
> In fact, much of the time it would make sense to make certain age groups
> more Open. For example, Cat 1 19+ instead of 19-39, since there are riders
> in their mid 40's who are competitive with the 20-somethings.
>
> I can understand age limits to a point, but most of our race divisions
> really don't need maximum ages.
>
> -Erik
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 14:13:12 -0800
> From: useyourdagger@gmail.com
> To: kenji@obra.org
> CC: obra@list.obra.org; rkntoy@yahoo.com; ripleymike1@gmail.com
>
> Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories
>
> I'm having a hard time understanding how a change from numbers to letters
> changes anything in regard to making it "easier to understand."
> *"Proposal
> *
> Pro/Cat 1= Open/A
> Cat 2 = B
> Cat 3 = C
> Beginner is Beginner"
> Where is the part about making it easier to understand for new racers?
> This seems more like an attempt to make it very clear that we don't want to
> look anything like USAC, but to look more like OBRA 'cross categories.
> That's fine if that's what you're after, but that's not the reason given
> for this proposed change.
>
> I'm also not sure about the Pro upgrade requirement; if I'm reading it
> right, basically Mike R. is saying that you can't get upgraded to Pro if
> you race OBRA, you have to go find enough USAC Cat 1 races to get upgraded:
>
> "Please remember that I have upgraded a number of riders to Pro’s from Cat
> 1 and I will not be doing that any longer because USAC does not recognize
> any of our races or riders racing in the pro category and currently we do
> not have a reciprocity agreement with USAC. If you want to get a Pro
> Upgrade you will need to race USAC against the Cat 1 field and earn your
> upgrade that way. In effect the top class in OBRA will be if approved an
> Open category scored separate for the series and A and A 40+ if approved
> for men and women to replace Cat 1 19-39 and Cat 1 40+."
> These proposed changes could be good, it's just hard to tell without more
> information about what they're meant to accomplish.
>
> Craig
>
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 1:53 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara wrote:
>
> As an aside- the more feedback we get the better. It's really good to
> have this discussion.
>
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Mike Ripley
> wrote:
> > Hey Steve
> >
> > In a way you are right and that is why the change is really not that huge
> > check out the latest at http://oregonxcseries.org/series-categories/
> >
> > The main point is describing mountain bike racing in road terms is not a
> > good way to get new riders into the sport by offering Cat 3
> > In fact if we wanted to be real simple we could just add beginner and
> Open
> > at the top and call it good
> >
> > Also by having Open, A, B, C, Beginner we will in fact have the C and B
> > group racing on the same course and break down the perceived self imposed
> > limits riders place on themselves when racing or considering upgrading.
> SO
> > many C riders in CX and if 10-20% buy Mountain bikes to branch out it can
> > only = a good thing
> >
> > We have a strong contingent of riders already and by changing will hope
> to
> > have the dirt of MTB and CX collide in more riders and continued success.
> >
> > In hindsight we( OBRA) should have never went with USAC with the move
> away
> > from Pro, Expert, Sport and beginner some 5 years ago and even these
> terms
> > would not allow for 2 groups based on ability racing on a similar course,
> > which Kris Schamp and Myself think would be great for the sport
> >
> > Mike
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:11 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara
> wrote:
> >>
> >> I'll defer to Mike on this one.
> >>
> >> Remember that the clubs have the final say on this at the annual
> meeting!
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Steve Westberg
> wrote:
> >> > Could someone give me a pro/con list for the proposed category
> changes?
> >> >
> >> > After reading through all the explanations I could find it still feels
> >> > like a change just to change. 1,2,3 or A,B,C you are still going to
> have to
> >> > explain to new riders what the system is. And with a change you will
> have
> >> > to explain to people who have been riding OBRA races what the change
> is.
> >> >
> >> > Am I missing something?
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > OBRA mailing list
> >> > obra@list.obra.org
> >> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> >> > Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Kenji Sugahara
> >> Executive Director
> >> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
> >> Phone: 503-278-5550
> >> http://www.obra.org
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Mike Ripley
> > Mudslinger Events
> > Oregon Outdoor Recreation
> >
> > PO BOX 87
> > Monroe, OR. 97456
> > 541-225-7946
>
>
>
> --
> Kenji Sugahara
> Executive Director
> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
> Phone: 503-278-5550
> http://www.obra.org
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________ OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obraUnsubscribe:
> obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>

--
Mike Ripley
Mudslinger Events
Oregon Outdoor Recreation

PO BOX 87
Monroe, OR. 97456
541-225-7946


Evan Plews

2013-01-22

Thanks Erik,

I almost ten years "pro" and so tired of that designation it makes me sick. Occupation may be a reasonable designation but surely not profession..

"Open" would be more appropriate for a racing category then anyone who wants a piece of the purse can test their metal.

IMHO there are too many categories. I think there should be beginner (real first timers or close), open, singlespeed, and everyone else as age groupers. Getting rid of these subjective "performance/skill" categories would go along way to making races more fun fair and less intimidating for those new to the sport.

Evan Plews
www.evanplews.com
503-949-4879

-----Original Message-----

From: Erik Long
Sent: 22 Jan 2013 03:06:06 GMT
To: useyourdagger@gmail.com,kenji@obra.org
Cc: Obra,rkntoy@yahoo.com,ripleymike1@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories

First of all, "Pro" is a bit of a misnomer. Sure, a few with the Pro designation are getting paid, but it pushes a false image of wealth within the sport that just doesn't exist among the fastest riders. Most in the "Pro" category aren't professionals. If you file taxes as a physical therapist or a lawyer or something, you are not a pro cyclist. This may be one reason that USAC refuses to recognize many OBRA "Pro's".

"Open" is a category used in many sports. It's a way of saying "Welcome All Challengers", regardless of age or perceived ability. We should have this division in 'Cross and our mountainbike events as well.

In fact, much of the time it would make sense to make certain age groups more Open. For example, Cat 1 19+ instead of 19-39, since there are riders in their mid 40's who are competitive with the 20-somethings.

I can understand age limits to a point, but most of our race divisions really don't need maximum ages.

-Erik

Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 14:13:12 -0800
From: useyourdagger@gmail.com
To: kenji@obra.org
CC: obra@list.obra.org; rkntoy@yahoo.com; ripleymike1@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories

I'm having a hard time understanding how a change from numbers to letters changes anything in regard to making it "easier to understand."
"Proposal

Pro/Cat 1= Open/A
Cat 2 = B
Cat 3 = C
Beginner is Beginner"Where is the part about making it easier to understand for new racers? This seems more like an attempt to make it very clear that we don't want to look anything like USAC, but to look more like OBRA 'cross categories. That's fine if that's what you're after, but that's not the reason given for this proposed change.

I'm also not sure about the Pro upgrade requirement; if I'm reading it right, basically Mike R. is saying that you can't get upgraded to Pro if you race OBRA, you have to go find enough USAC Cat 1 races to get upgraded:

"Please remember that I have upgraded a
number of riders to Pro’s from Cat 1 and I will not be doing that any
longer because USAC does not recognize any of our races or riders racing
in the pro category and currently we do not have a reciprocity
agreement with USAC.
If you want to get a Pro Upgrade you will
need to race USAC against the Cat 1 field and earn your upgrade that
way. In effect the top class in OBRA will be if approved an Open
category scored separate for the series and A and A 40+ if approved for
men and women to replace Cat 1 19-39 and Cat 1 40+." These proposed changes could be good, it's just hard to tell without more information about what they're meant to accomplish.

Craig

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 1:53 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara wrote:

As an aside- the more feedback we get the better. It's really good to

have this discussion.

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Mike Ripley wrote:

> Hey Steve

>

> In a way you are right and that is why the change is really not that huge

> check out the latest at http://oregonxcseries.org/series-categories/

>

> The main point is describing mountain bike racing in road terms is not a

> good way to get new riders into the sport by offering Cat 3

> In fact if we wanted to be real simple we could just add beginner and Open

> at the top and call it good

>

> Also by having Open, A, B, C, Beginner we will in fact have the C and B

> group racing on the same course and break down the perceived self imposed

> limits riders place on themselves when racing or considering upgrading. SO

> many C riders in CX and if 10-20% buy Mountain bikes to branch out it can

> only = a good thing

>

> We have a strong contingent of riders already and by changing will hope to

> have the dirt of MTB and CX collide in more riders and continued success.

>

> In hindsight we( OBRA) should have never went with USAC with the move away

> from Pro, Expert, Sport and beginner some 5 years ago and even these terms

> would not allow for 2 groups based on ability racing on a similar course,

> which Kris Schamp and Myself think would be great for the sport

>

> Mike

>

>

>

>

> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:11 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara wrote:

>>

>> I'll defer to Mike on this one.

>>

>> Remember that the clubs have the final say on this at the annual meeting!

>>

>> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Steve Westberg wrote:

>> > Could someone give me a pro/con list for the proposed category changes?

>> >

>> > After reading through all the explanations I could find it still feels

>> > like a change just to change. 1,2,3 or A,B,C you are still going to have to

>> > explain to new riders what the system is. And with a change you will have

>> > to explain to people who have been riding OBRA races what the change is.

>> >

>> > Am I missing something?

>> > _______________________________________________

>> > OBRA mailing list

>> > obra@list.obra.org

>> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra

>> > Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

>> >

>>

>>

>>

>> --

>> Kenji Sugahara

>> Executive Director

>> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association

>> Phone: 503-278-5550

>> http://www.obra.org

>

>

>

>

> --

> Mike Ripley

> Mudslinger Events

> Oregon Outdoor Recreation

>

> PO BOX 87

> Monroe, OR. 97456

> 541-225-7946

--

Kenji Sugahara

Executive Director

Oregon Bicycle Racing Association

Phone: 503-278-5550

http://www.obra.org

_______________________________________________

OBRA mailing list

obra@list.obra.org

http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra

Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

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


Erik Long

2013-01-22

First of all, "Pro" is a bit of a misnomer. Sure, a few with the Pro designation are getting paid, but it pushes a false image of wealth within the sport that just doesn't exist among the fastest riders. Most in the "Pro" category aren't professionals. If you file taxes as a physical therapist or a lawyer or something, you are not a pro cyclist. This may be one reason that USAC refuses to recognize many OBRA "Pro's".

"Open" is a category used in many sports. It's a way of saying "Welcome All Challengers", regardless of age or perceived ability. We should have this division in 'Cross and our mountainbike events as well.

In fact, much of the time it would make sense to make certain age groups more Open. For example, Cat 1 19+ instead of 19-39, since there are riders in their mid 40's who are competitive with the 20-somethings.

I can understand age limits to a point, but most of our race divisions really don't need maximum ages.

-Erik

Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 14:13:12 -0800
From: useyourdagger@gmail.com
To: kenji@obra.org
CC: obra@list.obra.org; rkntoy@yahoo.com; ripleymike1@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories

I'm having a hard time understanding how a change from numbers to letters changes anything in regard to making it "easier to understand."
"Proposal

Pro/Cat 1= Open/A
Cat 2 = B
Cat 3 = C
Beginner is Beginner"Where is the part about making it easier to understand for new racers? This seems more like an attempt to make it very clear that we don't want to look anything like USAC, but to look more like OBRA 'cross categories. That's fine if that's what you're after, but that's not the reason given for this proposed change.

I'm also not sure about the Pro upgrade requirement; if I'm reading it right, basically Mike R. is saying that you can't get upgraded to Pro if you race OBRA, you have to go find enough USAC Cat 1 races to get upgraded:

"Please remember that I have upgraded a
number of riders to Pro’s from Cat 1 and I will not be doing that any
longer because USAC does not recognize any of our races or riders racing
in the pro category and currently we do not have a reciprocity
agreement with USAC.
If you want to get a Pro Upgrade you will
need to race USAC against the Cat 1 field and earn your upgrade that
way. In effect the top class in OBRA will be if approved an Open
category scored separate for the series and A and A 40+ if approved for
men and women to replace Cat 1 19-39 and Cat 1 40+." These proposed changes could be good, it's just hard to tell without more information about what they're meant to accomplish.

Craig

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 1:53 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara wrote:

As an aside- the more feedback we get the better. It's really good to

have this discussion.

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Mike Ripley wrote:

> Hey Steve

>

> In a way you are right and that is why the change is really not that huge

> check out the latest at http://oregonxcseries.org/series-categories/

>

> The main point is describing mountain bike racing in road terms is not a

> good way to get new riders into the sport by offering Cat 3

> In fact if we wanted to be real simple we could just add beginner and Open

> at the top and call it good

>

> Also by having Open, A, B, C, Beginner we will in fact have the C and B

> group racing on the same course and break down the perceived self imposed

> limits riders place on themselves when racing or considering upgrading. SO

> many C riders in CX and if 10-20% buy Mountain bikes to branch out it can

> only = a good thing

>

> We have a strong contingent of riders already and by changing will hope to

> have the dirt of MTB and CX collide in more riders and continued success.

>

> In hindsight we( OBRA) should have never went with USAC with the move away

> from Pro, Expert, Sport and beginner some 5 years ago and even these terms

> would not allow for 2 groups based on ability racing on a similar course,

> which Kris Schamp and Myself think would be great for the sport

>

> Mike

>

>

>

>

> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:11 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara wrote:

>>

>> I'll defer to Mike on this one.

>>

>> Remember that the clubs have the final say on this at the annual meeting!

>>

>> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Steve Westberg wrote:

>> > Could someone give me a pro/con list for the proposed category changes?

>> >

>> > After reading through all the explanations I could find it still feels

>> > like a change just to change. 1,2,3 or A,B,C you are still going to have to

>> > explain to new riders what the system is. And with a change you will have

>> > to explain to people who have been riding OBRA races what the change is.

>> >

>> > Am I missing something?

>> > _______________________________________________

>> > OBRA mailing list

>> > obra@list.obra.org

>> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra

>> > Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

>> >

>>

>>

>>

>> --

>> Kenji Sugahara

>> Executive Director

>> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association

>> Phone: 503-278-5550

>> http://www.obra.org

>

>

>

>

> --

> Mike Ripley

> Mudslinger Events

> Oregon Outdoor Recreation

>

> PO BOX 87

> Monroe, OR. 97456

> 541-225-7946

--

Kenji Sugahara

Executive Director

Oregon Bicycle Racing Association

Phone: 503-278-5550

http://www.obra.org

_______________________________________________

OBRA mailing list

obra@list.obra.org

http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra

Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org

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


craig austin

2013-01-21

I'm having a hard time understanding how a change from numbers to letters
changes anything in regard to making it "easier to understand."

*"Proposal
*

Pro/Cat 1= Open/A

Cat 2 = B

Cat 3 = C

Beginner is Beginner"
Where is the part about making it easier to understand for new racers? This
seems more like an attempt to make it very clear that we don't want to look
anything like USAC, but to look more like OBRA 'cross categories. That's
fine if that's what you're after, but that's not the reason given for this
proposed change.

I'm also not sure about the Pro upgrade requirement; if I'm reading it
right, basically Mike R. is saying that you can't get upgraded to Pro if
you race OBRA, you have to go find enough USAC Cat 1 races to get upgraded:

"Please remember that I have upgraded a number of riders to Pro’s from Cat
1 and I will not be doing that any longer because USAC does not recognize
any of our races or riders racing in the pro category and currently we do
not have a reciprocity agreement with USAC.

If you want to get a Pro Upgrade you will need to race USAC against the Cat
1 field and earn your upgrade that way. In effect the top class in OBRA
will be if approved an Open category scored separate for the series and A
and A 40+ if approved for men and women to replace Cat 1 19-39 and Cat 1
40+."
These proposed changes could be good, it's just hard to tell without more
information about what they're meant to accomplish.

Craig

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 1:53 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara wrote:

> As an aside- the more feedback we get the better. It's really good to
> have this discussion.
>
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Mike Ripley
> wrote:
> > Hey Steve
> >
> > In a way you are right and that is why the change is really not that huge
> > check out the latest at http://oregonxcseries.org/series-categories/
> >
> > The main point is describing mountain bike racing in road terms is not a
> > good way to get new riders into the sport by offering Cat 3
> > In fact if we wanted to be real simple we could just add beginner and
> Open
> > at the top and call it good
> >
> > Also by having Open, A, B, C, Beginner we will in fact have the C and B
> > group racing on the same course and break down the perceived self imposed
> > limits riders place on themselves when racing or considering upgrading.
> SO
> > many C riders in CX and if 10-20% buy Mountain bikes to branch out it can
> > only = a good thing
> >
> > We have a strong contingent of riders already and by changing will hope
> to
> > have the dirt of MTB and CX collide in more riders and continued success.
> >
> > In hindsight we( OBRA) should have never went with USAC with the move
> away
> > from Pro, Expert, Sport and beginner some 5 years ago and even these
> terms
> > would not allow for 2 groups based on ability racing on a similar course,
> > which Kris Schamp and Myself think would be great for the sport
> >
> > Mike
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:11 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara
> wrote:
> >>
> >> I'll defer to Mike on this one.
> >>
> >> Remember that the clubs have the final say on this at the annual
> meeting!
> >>
> >> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Steve Westberg
> wrote:
> >> > Could someone give me a pro/con list for the proposed category
> changes?
> >> >
> >> > After reading through all the explanations I could find it still feels
> >> > like a change just to change. 1,2,3 or A,B,C you are still going to
> have to
> >> > explain to new riders what the system is. And with a change you will
> have
> >> > to explain to people who have been riding OBRA races what the change
> is.
> >> >
> >> > Am I missing something?
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > OBRA mailing list
> >> > obra@list.obra.org
> >> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> >> > Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Kenji Sugahara
> >> Executive Director
> >> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
> >> Phone: 503-278-5550
> >> http://www.obra.org
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Mike Ripley
> > Mudslinger Events
> > Oregon Outdoor Recreation
> >
> > PO BOX 87
> > Monroe, OR. 97456
> > 541-225-7946
>
>
>
> --
> Kenji Sugahara
> Executive Director
> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
> Phone: 503-278-5550
> http://www.obra.org
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>


Candi Murray

2013-01-21

A more important note is that these changes cannot occur until the clubs vote on the change.
Candi

-----Original Message-----
From: "T. Kenji Sugahara" [kenji@obra.org]
Date: 01/21/2013 04:46 PM
To: "Mike Ripley"
CC: "obra" , "Steve Westberg"
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Proposed Changes to XC Categories

As an aside- the more feedback we get the better. It's really good to
have this discussion.

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Mike Ripley wrote:
> Hey Steve
>
> In a way you are right and that is why the change is really not that huge
> check out the latest at http://oregonxcseries.org/series-categories/
>
> The main point is describing mountain bike racing in road terms is not a
> good way to get new riders into the sport by offering Cat 3
> In fact if we wanted to be real simple we could just add beginner and Open
> at the top and call it good
>
> Also by having Open, A, B, C, Beginner we will in fact have the C and B
> group racing on the same course and break down the perceived self imposed
> limits riders place on themselves when racing or considering upgrading. SO
> many C riders in CX and if 10-20% buy Mountain bikes to branch out it can
> only = a good thing
>
> We have a strong contingent of riders already and by changing will hope to
> have the dirt of MTB and CX collide in more riders and continued success.
>
> In hindsight we( OBRA) should have never went with USAC with the move away
> from Pro, Expert, Sport and beginner some 5 years ago and even these terms
> would not allow for 2 groups based on ability racing on a similar course,
> which Kris Schamp and Myself think would be great for the sport
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:11 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara wrote:
>>
>> I'll defer to Mike on this one.
>>
>> Remember that the clubs have the final say on this at the annual meeting!
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Steve Westberg wrote:
>> > Could someone give me a pro/con list for the proposed category changes?
>> >
>> > After reading through all the explanations I could find it still feels
>> > like a change just to change. 1,2,3 or A,B,C you are still going to have to
>> > explain to new riders what the system is. And with a change you will have
>> > to explain to people who have been riding OBRA races what the change is.
>> >
>> > Am I missing something?
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > OBRA mailing list
>> > obra@list.obra.org
>> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>> > Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Kenji Sugahara
>> Executive Director
>> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
>> Phone: 503-278-5550
>> http://www.obra.org
>
>
>
>
> --
> Mike Ripley
> Mudslinger Events
> Oregon Outdoor Recreation
>
> PO BOX 87
> Monroe, OR. 97456
> 541-225-7946

--
Kenji Sugahara
Executive Director
Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
Phone: 503-278-5550
http://www.obra.org
_______________________________________________
OBRA mailing list
obra@list.obra.org
http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org


T. Kenji Sugahara

2013-01-21

As an aside- the more feedback we get the better. It's really good to
have this discussion.

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Mike Ripley wrote:
> Hey Steve
>
> In a way you are right and that is why the change is really not that huge
> check out the latest at http://oregonxcseries.org/series-categories/
>
> The main point is describing mountain bike racing in road terms is not a
> good way to get new riders into the sport by offering Cat 3
> In fact if we wanted to be real simple we could just add beginner and Open
> at the top and call it good
>
> Also by having Open, A, B, C, Beginner we will in fact have the C and B
> group racing on the same course and break down the perceived self imposed
> limits riders place on themselves when racing or considering upgrading. SO
> many C riders in CX and if 10-20% buy Mountain bikes to branch out it can
> only = a good thing
>
> We have a strong contingent of riders already and by changing will hope to
> have the dirt of MTB and CX collide in more riders and continued success.
>
> In hindsight we( OBRA) should have never went with USAC with the move away
> from Pro, Expert, Sport and beginner some 5 years ago and even these terms
> would not allow for 2 groups based on ability racing on a similar course,
> which Kris Schamp and Myself think would be great for the sport
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:11 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara wrote:
>>
>> I'll defer to Mike on this one.
>>
>> Remember that the clubs have the final say on this at the annual meeting!
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Steve Westberg wrote:
>> > Could someone give me a pro/con list for the proposed category changes?
>> >
>> > After reading through all the explanations I could find it still feels
>> > like a change just to change. 1,2,3 or A,B,C you are still going to have to
>> > explain to new riders what the system is. And with a change you will have
>> > to explain to people who have been riding OBRA races what the change is.
>> >
>> > Am I missing something?
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > OBRA mailing list
>> > obra@list.obra.org
>> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>> > Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Kenji Sugahara
>> Executive Director
>> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
>> Phone: 503-278-5550
>> http://www.obra.org
>
>
>
>
> --
> Mike Ripley
> Mudslinger Events
> Oregon Outdoor Recreation
>
> PO BOX 87
> Monroe, OR. 97456
> 541-225-7946

--
Kenji Sugahara
Executive Director
Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
Phone: 503-278-5550
http://www.obra.org


Mike Ripley

2013-01-21

Hey Steve

In a way you are right and that is why the change is really not that huge
check out the latest at http://oregonxcseries.org/series-categories/

The main point is describing mountain bike racing in road terms is not a
good way to get new riders into the sport by offering Cat 3
In fact if we wanted to be real simple we could just add beginner and Open
at the top and call it good

Also by having Open, A, B, C, Beginner we will in fact have the C and B
group racing on the same course and break down the perceived self imposed
limits riders place on themselves when racing or considering upgrading. SO
many C riders in CX and if 10-20% buy Mountain bikes to branch out it can
only = a good thing

We have a strong contingent of riders already and by changing will hope to
have the dirt of MTB and CX collide in more riders and continued success.

In hindsight we( OBRA) should have never went with USAC with the move away
from Pro, Expert, Sport and beginner some 5 years ago and even these terms
would not allow for 2 groups based on ability racing on a similar course,
which Kris Schamp and Myself think would be great for the sport

Mike

On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:11 PM, T. Kenji Sugahara wrote:

> I'll defer to Mike on this one.
>
> Remember that the clubs have the final say on this at the annual meeting!
>
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Steve Westberg wrote:
> > Could someone give me a pro/con list for the proposed category changes?
> >
> > After reading through all the explanations I could find it still feels
> like a change just to change. 1,2,3 or A,B,C you are still going to have
> to explain to new riders what the system is. And with a change you will
> have to explain to people who have been riding OBRA races what the change
> is.
> >
> > Am I missing something?
> > _______________________________________________
> > OBRA mailing list
> > obra@list.obra.org
> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> > Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Kenji Sugahara
> Executive Director
> Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
> Phone: 503-278-5550
> http://www.obra.org
>

--
Mike Ripley
Mudslinger Events
Oregon Outdoor Recreation

PO BOX 87
Monroe, OR. 97456
541-225-7946


T. Kenji Sugahara

2013-01-21

I'll defer to Mike on this one.

Remember that the clubs have the final say on this at the annual meeting!

On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Steve Westberg wrote:
> Could someone give me a pro/con list for the proposed category changes?
>
> After reading through all the explanations I could find it still feels like a change just to change. 1,2,3 or A,B,C you are still going to have to explain to new riders what the system is. And with a change you will have to explain to people who have been riding OBRA races what the change is.
>
> Am I missing something?
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>

--
Kenji Sugahara
Executive Director
Oregon Bicycle Racing Association
Phone: 503-278-5550
http://www.obra.org


Steve Westberg

2013-01-21

Could someone give me a pro/con list for the proposed category changes?

After reading through all the explanations I could find it still feels like a change just to change. 1,2,3 or A,B,C you are still going to have to explain to new riders what the system is. And with a change you will have to explain to people who have been riding OBRA races what the change is.

Am I missing something?