Cat's Hill
Well, here I was yammering away about babies and work, when there was a much more interesting conversation going on elsewhere about the demise of yet aNOTHer lower-category women's race in favour of some Master's race.
In the words of my late grandfather: Let me say Three Things.
1. I appreciate the fact that Master's racing is the "bread and butter" for promoters and the cycling industry as a whole. They generally buy all their stuff, they like and afford the nice stuff, and a lot of them seem to race multiple times a day since they are eligible for multiple events. So to a certain extent, creating extra master's categories will be profitable for a promoter.
2. But this seems to be a case of viewing the short-term rather than the long-term, because adding masters' fields usually comes at the expense of a women's or junior's field, both of which tend to be smaller than the regular men's fields. How is limiting development-category racing good for the future of our sport? From a woman's perspective: as it is, we basically go from being a beginner to being a circus lion's plaything once we accumulate enough points to go from Cat. 4 to Cat. 3. Pitting juniors against adults calls up a similar image. Getting thrown in WAY over your head usually makes you feel like you suck and then makes you want to quit. Yeah, that's really great for development...
And 3. Regarding the Master's 45+ 2/3/4 so-that-the-cat-1's-can't-win-like-they-always-do... it's retarded. A win is definitely cheapened if you stipulate-out and qualify-out all your competitors. If you don't like losing, go do a charity ride or race against yourself. Or go ask a little kid if they want to play 52-pick-up.
In the words of my late grandfather: Let me say Three Things.
1. I appreciate the fact that Master's racing is the "bread and butter" for promoters and the cycling industry as a whole. They generally buy all their stuff, they like and afford the nice stuff, and a lot of them seem to race multiple times a day since they are eligible for multiple events. So to a certain extent, creating extra master's categories will be profitable for a promoter.
2. But this seems to be a case of viewing the short-term rather than the long-term, because adding masters' fields usually comes at the expense of a women's or junior's field, both of which tend to be smaller than the regular men's fields. How is limiting development-category racing good for the future of our sport? From a woman's perspective: as it is, we basically go from being a beginner to being a circus lion's plaything once we accumulate enough points to go from Cat. 4 to Cat. 3. Pitting juniors against adults calls up a similar image. Getting thrown in WAY over your head usually makes you feel like you suck and then makes you want to quit. Yeah, that's really great for development...
And 3. Regarding the Master's 45+ 2/3/4 so-that-the-cat-1's-can't-win-like-they-always-do... it's retarded. A win is definitely cheapened if you stipulate-out and qualify-out all your competitors. If you don't like losing, go do a charity ride or race against yourself. Or go ask a little kid if they want to play 52-pick-up.
Labels: enjoy the blog, in my opinion, racing
posted by Courtenay at 3/08/2007
5 Comments:
Excellent. I'm glad that there are non cat-4 women getting mad about this, too, and spreading the word.
Amen to that!
word.
A sad, but true commentary on our greed-based society. What can I do to help you?
i should stop agreeing to play 52 card pick up.
I tend to lose everytime.
Post a Comment
<< Home