Positive Racing

[GrantF]

Have to agree there's no point ruining Mick's Belgium thread, so I won't
Instead, here is a new thread for the discussion point as put forward by Murphs – how to make the racing more aggressive / positive.

Now for the he said/she said bits and a response;)
Just a reminder that my post was a reponse to a question asked (about how to make more aggresive/positive racing) so it was appropriate content where it was as far as that goes...

- Stoked to stay upright so was happy with 170km race km in the legs after 3 days of pain just to walk.

Isn't it great how positive/attacking the racing is over there!
Sure a big change from the mostly negative racing one sees here in nsw - hate to tell you, but it's gunna be a downer racing here again

I agree Grant, which is why I think adopting some race formats could be good for the club, get riders thinking aggressively?
What do you think?

Just to clarify, I was not (necessarily) talking about club racing.
I think your "get riders thinking aggressively" is getting towards the point - it's not so much the course or type of race that gets things interesting as what the competitors do.
(generalization coming;)) Certainly current attitudes of various (usually "been here 5 minutes type") rider groups are interesting to say the least (eg. club C grade who seem fixated on doing 50km races at Calga - 25km is deemed too short to bother, yet fully participating in a 75km handicap is too much!)
I'm sure I could give some other (possibly interesting) feedback, but ultimately it's all useless if people aren't willing to give it decent go - seems there's already plenty of expert advice available.

I'm sure the negative racing will fit in quite nicely with the negative comments.

Certainly current attitudes of various (usually "been here 5 minutes type") rider groups are interesting to say the least

Grant, I agree with you on this point & include myself in this. Does that give me, or any 5 minute type as you put it, any less of a say or discredit our opinion or suggestions because we are new to this club? It does appear to me that you have a axe to grind with the way this club is managed, an opinion formed by purely reading the  content of some of your posts. From my perspective, I have found some of the "5 minute types" plus some of the longer standing members contribution invaluable in the way things are managed, and some of the suggestions put forward for the future of this club.
Murphs you are right, this isn't the right forum, & apologies to you MC, but unfortunately the same has to be said about some of your content too Grant. Probably better for all of us to discuss some of this in a club meeting forum.

Mr Pe?
I was asked a question (about racing) wasn't I?
And I replied (however briefly) to that – and I even gave an example of how it's not currently happening.
Perhaps you can explain WTF that has to do with discredited opinions?  because you've lost me...  At least your bagging response has confirmed to me that it would have been a waste of time to expand any further in my one

As for an axe to grind – again WTF?
Maybe some examples of what you're on about rather than an attempted (excommunication?) sales job like the recent election ads could help my limited grasp?
Are you referring to the recent CD shirts thing where we finally got confirmation that it's OK to wear a plain shirt if you don't have a club one?
Can you not see that I was concerned and didn't want anyone to miss a ride / be disappointed if they didn't turn up with a shirt (it has happened before).
Thought you would have appreciated this (weren't you the one who had an issue with a sleeveless shirt?  Did I bag you for mentioning that?)
Anyway, to me that was a good outcome (though would have been better before the race).  And I don't really care if anyone who offered hopes but no substance at the time got a bit teary-eyed about it.  Keep it to the facts please.

As for the “5 minutes” quote – of course I am talking about tempering input with experience, not excluding it.  Who in their right mind would want to take over a job without sufficient handover/mentoring/SME access???  Usual “thanks to al the volunteers” discalimer here.

And now Mr. Pe.
Since you don't want to hear from me & obviously know so much yourself, perhaps you could help with the real discussion point as put forward by Murphs – how to make the racing more aggressive / positive.

[Matt]

Dunno about all the other stuff but me, I'd prefer D Grade to be slightly LESS aggressive!  Greg Scott took off like a scalded cat at the start on Saturday and it was all Stuart and I could do to hang on.  Eventually we let him go but he didn't come back to us and I had looooooong solo chase.  Caught him at the bottom of Blood the final time but he still had enough chutzpah and energy to attack up the hill!

Second to Greg again  - if Greg learns to relax (says me) then look out C Grade! 

[WHITE]

Dunno about all the other stuff but me, I'd prefer D Grade to be slightly LESS aggressive!  Greg Scott took off like a scalded cat at the start on Saturday and it was all Stuart and I could do to hang on.  Eventually we let him go but he didn't come back to us and I had looooooong solo chase.  Caught him at the bottom of Blood the final time but he still had enough chutzpah and energy to attack up the hill!

Second to Greg again  - if Greg learns to relax (says me) then look out C Grade! 

Matt it is the 22kg Greg didn't have to haul up Blood that u did. That equals a lot more Watts. There is always revenge at Lucca Rd. Don't give up!

[Murphs]

Vitriol aside, I think we need to look at what racing aggressively and positively actually means.

If we run selective Lucca Rd crits in a format that promotes positive racing tactics, will that mindset translate to more aggressive racing in the normal 'xx minutes plus a lap' racing?

We have a fairly good reputation for racing aggressively at other clubs, particularly Beaumont Rd, but it isn't always the same when we race our own club races.

Matt, I think that's the kind of racing that should be encouraged at Calga, too often it becomes a 'sit in and wait for blood hill' race there.

[Stu Eddy]

Dunno about all the other stuff but me, I'd prefer D Grade to be slightly LESS aggressive!  Greg Scott took off like a scalded cat at the start on Saturday and it was all Stuart and I could do to hang on.  Eventually we let him go but he didn't come back to us and I had looooooong solo chase.  Caught him at the bottom of Blood the final time but he still had enough chutzpah and energy to attack up the hill!

Second to Greg again  - if Greg learns to relax (says me) then look out C Grade! 

A good example of a rider training well, feeling like he has the goods to win and backing himself in. Sometimes we are a little quick to want to go up a grade, (or send the attacking riders up a grade) in order to even out the field.

Good strong positive riding comes from a belief that you have the ability to win if you attack at the right moment, which is almost impossible if everyone around you is almost exactly the same calibre.
Our attacking records at away club racing could be put down to cooperation that has the weaker CCCC riders working for a stronger rider (armidale and tamworth last weekend as prime examples) or we are being graded kindly at away clubs.

Just a though... now what was I meant to be doing?

[PeZulu]

Have to agree there's no point ruining Mick's Belgium thread, so I won't
Instead, here is a new thread for the discussion point as put forward by Murphs – how to make the racing more aggressive / positive.

Now for the he said/she said bits and a response;)
Just a reminder that my post was a reponse to a question asked (about how to make more aggresive/positive racing) so it was appropriate content where it was as far as that goes...

- Stoked to stay upright so was happy with 170km race km in the legs after 3 days of pain just to walk.

Isn't it great how positive/attacking the racing is over there!
Sure a big change from the mostly negative racing one sees here in nsw - hate to tell you, but it's gunna be a downer racing here again

I agree Grant, which is why I think adopting some race formats could be good for the club, get riders thinking aggressively?
What do you think?

Just to clarify, I was not (necessarily) talking about club racing.
I think your "get riders thinking aggressively" is getting towards the point - it's not so much the course or type of race that gets things interesting as what the competitors do.
(generalization coming;)) Certainly current attitudes of various (usually "been here 5 minutes type") rider groups are interesting to say the least (eg. club C grade who seem fixated on doing 50km races at Calga - 25km is deemed too short to bother, yet fully participating in a 75km handicap is too much!)
I'm sure I could give some other (possibly interesting) feedback, but ultimately it's all useless if people aren't willing to give it decent go - seems there's already plenty of expert advice available.

I'm sure the negative racing will fit in quite nicely with the negative comments.

Certainly current attitudes of various (usually "been here 5 minutes type") rider groups are interesting to say the least

Grant, I agree with you on this point & include myself in this. Does that give me, or any 5 minute type as you put it, any less of a say or discredit our opinion or suggestions because we are new to this club? It does appear to me that you have a axe to grind with the way this club is managed, an opinion formed by purely reading the  content of some of your posts. From my perspective, I have found some of the "5 minute types" plus some of the longer standing members contribution invaluable in the way things are managed, and some of the suggestions put forward for the future of this club.
Murphs you are right, this isn't the right forum, & apologies to you MC, but unfortunately the same has to be said about some of your content too Grant. Probably better for all of us to discuss some of this in a club meeting forum.

Mr Pe?
I was asked a question (about racing) wasn't I?
And I replied (however briefly) to that – and I even gave an example of how it's not currently happening.
Perhaps you can explain WTF that has to do with discredited opinions?  because you've lost me...  At least your bagging response has confirmed to me that it would have been a waste of time to expand any further in my one

As for an axe to grind – again WTF?
Maybe some examples of what you're on about rather than an attempted (excommunication?) sales job like the recent election ads could help my limited grasp?
Are you referring to the recent CD shirts thing where we finally got confirmation that it's OK to wear a plain shirt if you don't have a club one?
Can you not see that I was concerned and didn't want anyone to miss a ride / be disappointed if they didn't turn up with a shirt (it has happened before).
Thought you would have appreciated this (weren't you the one who had an issue with a sleeveless shirt?  Did I bag you for mentioning that?)
Anyway, to me that was a good outcome (though would have been better before the race).  And I don't really care if anyone who offered hopes but no substance at the time got a bit teary-eyed about it.  Keep it to the facts please.

As for the “5 minutes” quote – of course I am talking about tempering input with experience, not excluding it.  Who in their right mind would want to take over a job without sufficient handover/mentoring/SME access???  Usual “thanks to al the volunteers” discalimer here.

And now Mr. Pe.
Since you don't want to hear from me & obviously know so much yourself, perhaps you could help with the real discussion point as put forward by Murphs – how to make the racing more aggressive / positive.

GrantF, It's Colin by the way.

Do you feel better now? Did it take you the entire weekend to compose this?

As usual you seem to have missed the point.

Suffice to say, there is always a common denominator regarding negative input on this forum.

Ease up on the WTF's too mate, there are juniors on this forum.

[GrantF]

GrantF, It's Colin by the way.
Do you feel better now? Did it take you the entire weekend to compose this?
As usual you seem to have missed the point.
Suffice to say, there is always a common denominator regarding negative input on this forum.
Ease up on the WTF's too mate, there are juniors on this forum.

Hi Colin
With 2.5yo twins & a 6 week old baby, the answer is no.
I think your post on magpies (http://www.impactcycling.com.au/index.php/topic,2082.msg22483.html#msg22483) is longer - did that take you a while?
I'm asking for actual examples etc, so please help me see the point - make a deal with you, I'll back off the WTF's when you back off the BS and give some useful facts rather than personally directed drivel.

[GrantF]

Dunno about all the other stuff but me, I'd prefer D Grade to be slightly LESS aggressive!  Greg Scott took off like a scalded cat at the start on Saturday and it was all Stuart and I could do to hang on.  Eventually we let him go but he didn't come back to us and I had looooooong solo chase.  Caught him at the bottom of Blood the final time but he still had enough chutzpah and energy to attack up the hill!

Second to Greg again   - if Greg learns to relax (says me) then look out C Grade!  

A good example of a rider training well, feeling like he has the goods to win and backing himself in. Sometimes we are a little quick to want to go up a grade, (or send the attacking riders up a grade) in order to even out the field.

Good strong positive riding comes from a belief that you have the ability to win if you attack at the right moment, which is almost impossible if everyone around you is almost exactly the same calibre.
Our attacking records at away club racing could be put down to cooperation that has the weaker CCCC riders working for a stronger rider (armidale and tamworth last weekend as prime examples) or we are being graded kindly at away clubs.

Just a though... now what was I meant to be doing?

Hi Stuart
Your points are interesting to note and if this is the way everyone approaches things the answer Murphs is after may be pretty close.
I'll put another possibility forward for you and (at the possibility of embarrassing him) give an example of someone who has come a long way in a short time by following this approach (as well as doing some good training along the way).
The "he" I speak of is no other than SHA and the general approach to racing is to always give yourself a chance/opportunity to achieve a result.
What this means is "having a go" and "making a difference" to the race, even if in doing so you spend all your bikkies & end up nowhere.
If you watch the high-quality races, there are a LOT of quite evenly matched people in there and many attacks that "fail".  Does this mean that all of those people were stupid & would have been better off sitting back until they were "sure" they could win, or was it a good thing to put themselves out there & see if their gambit payed off???
Cheers,
   Grant

[Stu Eddy]

All fair points Grant.
I should clarify, all the same calibre and more than one willing to chase you down.
warning.....unqualified personal opinions ahead 
My understanding of high quality racing is people with sponsors to keep happy, or people looking for sponsors to be able to pay for their groceries 
Whatever the reason, I thought many breaks were in order to get TV coverage or be up the road to help out the team mate that had the eyes of the peloton on them, if you're lucky the hail mary pays off.
In any of these cases, the big breakaway generally only succeeds because the peloton lets it (many riders go a lot faster than a few).
With that in mind, maybe our races are too short and too predictable (knowing your oponents and the terrain ahead too well). Longer races with more time to wear the competition down, or maybe a bigger gamble margin to let a break go saving your own strength.
25km races are exciting because you are fresh, capable of backing up multiple attacks with a dash to the finish. The attacks are definitely more ferocious and more frequent in the shorter race.

In short.... mixing it up is probably the answer, 50k one week, 25k the next, 75 or 100 who knows what would happen from week to week.  All I know is that I wish there were more hills in the course.


Now, what was I meant to be doing?
Stu

[rosko]

This comes up every season, every year. There is always comment passed on "I wish there was more positive, more aggressive racing". I don't think you ever hear the same thing said when the crits are on, or track, aggressive racing is encouraged and welcomed due to the shorter format. The most fun I've had at Calga has been a few 'team' races, one of which was a CD. Racing within a team seems to encourage attacks, and a little 'holding back' of others in the race. If a few members of different teams are 'allowed' to ride away in an attack, the racing is great fun. There are the guys at the front working their tails off, then the teams chasing trying to figure if they should put the effort in just to see the fresh legs of the team mates of the front runners blow them away. Maybe a way to encourage more aggressive riding would be to have riders form their own teams, have a monthly team race with a prize overall for the season. Riders/friends would be able to source their own sponsors (if they wanted to) or even just buy their own kits. The options are there, racing with a team mate is always more fun! I've had great fun refusing to chase down a team mate!

[csfive]

Its like comparing chalk and cheese (i think thats it) when you talk of Lucca Rd and other higher quality road races but that does not take away from the issue at hand. I just wanted to make note of why I think the racing has been so positive/aggressive here.

1. A bunch of 180-200 riders does not go into a 2 meter wide path. If you are not in the top 30% of the bunch your race can be over in the first 20km (whether it be out the back completely or caught in the 3rd or 4th echelon) Because of this it turns onto a 'race in a race' just to get up the front. This causes attack, after attack in the first few km's even when the races were 180km in length.  

2. We do not have the cross winds in Australia that make it a necessity to get to the front.

3. There isn't 100's of Euro on Intermediate Sprint Primes   . A good % of the Crits had Primes on Lap 1,2 & 3! Now thats one way to make the racing fast in the first few laps. But is that what we want? This might make ppl think the races are too hard and not turn up.

Anyway, food for thought and something to discuss. How exciting.

[GrantF]

An idea re race format, targeted at the aggression side (mainly for the lower c/d grades) - what if handicap racing were the norm, not the exception?
It ticks many of the boxes put forward...

[Matt]

Do we make enough of winning to make people want it more?  More prizemoney, more kudos, more sponsor's prizes, etc etc

Just a thought.

[Simon]

lets not forget that the majority of us (including some A graders) race our bikes for some fun or as a hobby. We are limited to the time we have to train and race. I know that every time I race at Calga its a struggle to stay with the bunch up blood so attacking anywhere is really not an option for people in similar situations.
I will also never criticise anyone who is actually turning up to support the club races regardless of how they ride/race or their opinions.

[GrantF]

lets not forget that the majority of us (including some A graders) race our bikes for some fun or as a hobby. We are limited to the time we have to train and race. I know that every time I race at Calga its a struggle to stay with the bunch up blood so attacking anywhere is really not an option for people in similar situations.

Are you agreeing with me again Simon? (handicap racing allowing "weaker" riders an advantage as they will either be ahead of the chasers at the start of the climb or the chasers will be weakened by then).
If it wasn't a fun hobby, why would anyone do it at this club level?