Seriously? Low Budget

[DirtyWorks]

I was going to hijack the Seriously? thread but thought it would be better to start another.

I have a crackpot scheme that might increase competitive cycling participation.

My idea is to set weight restrictions on wheels, tires (separately from wheels), and bike without wheels and tires for lower categories and younger age groups.
-Masters and Pro/1/2 would be UCI compliant.
-Under 30 3/4 would be somewhere in the 22lbs total for road. Some higher number for mountain.
-18 and under would be maybe 24lbs. total for road. Something higher for mountain.

This way the industry can go through its fads and people with more money than brains aren't discouraged from spending their money. It might keep participation costs down.

Here's the kicker: Claiming clause.
A claiming clause allows the organizer to buy any rider's bike ($500?) or wheels($200?) for some crazy low price for each. People that like to game the rules are therefore discouraged from doing so because their "innovation" to the rules will not only not get used in an event, but they blow an investment.

Finally, I think kid's races should be individual time trials for the most part with no times shared. The kid gets to see if they can beat their best time on any given day. It's not that I want to discourage competition because some kids really flourish with it. It's more to promote the inner discipline. There's plenty of time to experience the win/lose stuff.

 

[ridingtorowfaster]

why would junior racing be limited to only the most miserable format? shouldnt it be fun?

 

[Dettol]

Your idea has merit for under 18s (it would be good if it was subsidised some way as well) but over the age of 18 it should be a free for all.

 

[ttrider]

Money talks who cares

 

[krebs303]

Well somebody has to say it,
"It Ain't About The Bike"

 

[TERMINATOR]

I was going to hijack the Seriously? thread but thought it would be better to start another.

I have a crackpot scheme that might increase competitive cycling participation.

My idea is to set weight restrictions on wheels, tires (separately from wheels), and bike without wheels and tires for lower categories and younger age groups.
-Masters and Pro/1/2 would be UCI compliant.
-Under 30 3/4 would be somewhere in the 22lbs total for road. Some higher number for mountain.
-18 and under would be maybe 24lbs. total for road. Something higher for mountain.

This way the industry can go through its fads and people with more money than brains aren't discouraged from spending their money. It might keep participation costs down.

Here's the kicker: Claiming clause.
A claiming clause allows the organizer to buy any rider's bike ($500?) or wheels($200?) for some crazy low price for each. People that like to game the rules are therefore discouraged from doing so because their "innovation" to the rules will not only not get used in an event, but they blow an investment.

Finally, I think kid's races should be individual time trials for the most part with no times shared. The kid gets to see if they can beat their best time on any given day. It's not that I want to discourage competition because some kids really flourish with it. It's more to promote the inner discipline. There's plenty of time to experience the win/lose stuff.

This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard of. First of all, you can't force people to buy junk equipment and most Masters and lower cat riders already own equipment that costs thousands of dollars. How are you going to force them to buy junk equipment - what, just to race a few races?

Do you really think people will want to train on cheap equipment just because some promoter feels it widens the sport's horizon?

There's nothing currently stopping people who don't have money to ride inexpensive bikes.

Forcing people to buy expensive equipment is a way to weed out riders who just don't care and are not serious. If they care, they'll find a way to get the equipment.

 

[DirtyWorks]

what, just to race a few races?.

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner! Turkey dinner! The point is to figure out how to attract the next most likely bike racers. The ones into the arms race are already onto their "crack without the felony" cycling habit.

Do you really think people will want to train on cheap equipment just because some promoter feels it widens the sport's horizon?

A little sanity check here: how many bikes are sold at $800 versus bikes sold for 2000? As a former shop monkey, selling $800 bikes was comparatively easy. *Lots* more riders sort of interested at $800. Those people spending $800 believe they are 'getting into' the sport. If a federation would give them an event where they fit in with their $800 bike and hairy legs, then how would that harm competitive cycling? Exactly how? No "dogs and cats living together!" hyperbole.

There's nothing currently stopping people who don't have money to ride inexpensive bikes.

Haha! You are pretending equipment doesn't matter. It does. Don't pretend it doesn't. It's like saying shaving legs doesn't matter and we all know it does.

How many runners out there are discouraged by the enormous cost to getting a competition-worthy bike and do a triathlon? I know I'm not the only one who has had the conversation about bikes with a runner.

Very interesting responses. Thanks. I used to blame Weisel for this mess, but it's now obvious the sports participants restrain its growth.

 

[DirtyWorks]

what, just to race a few races?.

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner! Turkey dinner! The point is to figure out how to attract the next most likely bike racers. The ones into the arms race are already onto their crack-like habit.

Do you really think people will want to train on cheap equipment just because some promoter feels it widens the sport's horizon?

A little sanity check here: how many bikes are sold at $500 versus bikes sold for 2000? As a former shop monkey, selling $500 bikes was comparatively easy. *Lots* more riders sort of interested at $500. Those people spending $500 believe they are 'getting into' the sport.

There's nothing currently stopping people who don't have money to ride inexpensive bikes.

Haha! You are pretending equipment doesn't matter. It does. Don't pretend it doesn't.

How many runners out there are discouraged by the enormous cost to getting a competition-worthy bike and do a triathlon? I know I'm not the only one who has had the conversation about bikes with a runner.

Very interesting responses. Thanks. I used to blame Weisel for this mess, but it's now obvious the sports participants restrain its growth. Abuse included.. Thanks for keeping it classy

 

[fatandfast]

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner! Turkey dinner! The point is to figure out how to attract the next most likely bike racers. The ones into the arms race are already onto their "crack without the felony" cycling habit.



A little sanity check here: how many bikes are sold at $800 versus bikes sold for 2000? As a former shop monkey, selling $800 bikes was comparatively easy. *Lots* more riders sort of interested at $800. Those people spending $800 believe they are 'getting into' the sport. If a federation would give them an event where they fit in with their $800 bike and hairy legs, then how would that harm competitive cycling? Exactly how? No "dogs and cats living together!" hyperbole.




Haha! You are pretending equipment doesn't matter. It does. Don't pretend it doesn't. It's like saying shaving legs doesn't matter and we all know it does.

How many runners out there are discouraged by the enormous cost to getting a competition-worthy bike and do a triathlon? I know I'm not the only one who has had the conversation about bikes with a runner.

Very interesting responses. Thanks. I used to blame Weisel for this mess, but it's now obvious the sports participants restrain its growth.

this is a testament to inexperience. I have seen guys on absolute crap machines light people up. 800 dollars will get you a bike you can be competitive on.For most lower cat racers,genetics and the inability to train are the main problem almost never the equipment. Yes equipment matters but it plays a very small part.yes you can win on 32 spoke clinchers. yes you can win on an alum bike w tiarga..training..this mentality is ruining the Jr ranks when kids think they got smoked because of the equipment they didn't have..as you get older guys think they can buy speed..sorry..go watch a 40k time trial..it's nothing but truth..guys on fitted 10k bikes with personal trainers and a custom helmet and they still suck..anybody that has ever done Fiesta Island or Flyod Bennet knows it's the hardest and the fastest not the guy with the lightest ride. I have seen guys take 5 minutes out of the field in a rough water swim..they could win the bike leg on a paperboy bike if you are that fit. Yes equipment matters but it's the last piece of the puzzle not the first

 

[trailrunner]

dumb idea

The amount of money you spend on a bike has some bearing on your speed, but not that much. If a kid is a good rider, he will rise up even if he starts with a K-mart bike. Some juniors are good enough to race with the adults, and forcing them to put weights on their bikes just to meet an arbitrary lower weight limit doesn't makes sense. And according to your plan, before each race do all racers have to take their bikes apart and weight wheels, tires, and frame separately? And somebody has the unilateral right to buy my stuff on demand? NFW. Maybe you should just have everyone race on a fleet of rental beach cruisers.

I did my first triathlon on a low-end Cannondale road bike with RSX shifting that cost me about $700. Even without aerobars I blew by people on full aero tri bikes that cost $3k. I also got passed by a guy on a commuter bike with a back rack and a squeaky chain.

There is no such thing as a totally fair race. There are already single speed races and Merckx categories. Hey, it's not fair that I have a full time job that makes me travel a lot, and a family, but you don't hear me whining for a "over 40, married with kids, and full-time, demanding job" category at races. Yeah, I could probably be 30 percent faster if I were a single guy with an easy job, but sux to be me I guess.

 

[usedtobefast]

a low end Cannondale and a Kmart bike are not even close to the same thing.
the Cannondale will give you a heavy, reliable bike. the other, not so much.

 

[tubularglue]

t I have seen guys on absolute crap machines light people up.

thanks,

everyone should have a crap bike, so as to keep everyone in perspective. jmo

 

[The Mayor of BBQ]

Complicating the rules never increased participation in shiz


A strong rider who trains well can win any p,1,2 crit in the USA on a 1997 Trek with Ultegra 9spd and 32spoke 3x wheels

Adding an arbitrary dollar amount is dumb and counterproductive. It sends the message that equipment makes you faster, which is simply not true.

Biggest motor wins, not the most expensive bike

 

[Fester]

Finland is famous for having huge depth and quality in motor racing. And the reason is no obvious. It passes byaccessibility. They have a lot of races in finland with very easy access and a simple rule that all the cars are worth 1000€ and any person racing can buy any of his competitors cars... Hence all the cars run about the same level and the best drivers stood out.
Accessibility increases competition. Which of course scares people that like to invest 5000€ in a bike.

For some parents paying 300€ for a bike is too much. Capping price for amateurs is an excellent idea.... As someone said, "it's not about the bike" nor it should be. And bikes do make a difference, especially when a tire or a chain is worth a days work.

 

[Fester]

Complicating the rules never increased participation in shiz


A strong rider who trains well can win any p,1,2 crit in the USA on a 1997 Trek with Ultegra 9spd and 32spoke 3x wheels

Adding an arbitrary dollar amount is dumb and counterproductive. It sends the message that equipment makes you faster, which is simply not true.

Biggest motor wins, not the most expensive bike

What's the percentage difference of 5 in 50? A lot right? Well that's the percentage difference kid "A" will have to over come on his entry level bike versus the spoilt brat on some carbon.

It does make a difference. What doesn't make a difference so much is my Ultegra for your Dura Ace, or your aluminium for my carbon... There's differences and there's differences.

 

[riobonito92]

Equipment makes more of a difference in a hilly 150 km road race on bad road surfaces than in a flat short time trial - but it does make a difference.

For those who claim it doesn't - ask yourself what is the lowest quality bike I could be competitive on and can it be bought for less than $1000.