2005 Provisional Calendar

[ChrisB]

Dear all,

I've just added the provisional calendar (subject to additions and corrections) on the main website. To view this, please follow this link:

http://www.errl.org.uk/calendar.php?year=2005

If anyone knows of any mistakes, please let me know ASAP.

Cheers,

Chris

[Bianchiben]

I'm glad I'm not a first cat....

Let's hope we can get it passed at the agm that more / all events be opened up to firsts.

Otherwise, they'll all have a year of hard training, drop down to 2nds, and give everyone a kicking the year after - better that they go up to elite if they're going to...

- covering old ground here, I know, but it needs to be reminded to the voters for the forthcoming agm...

[ChrisB]

I noticed that your new club is promoting a race for 2/3 category only...

8)

PS The Shaftesbury are promoting a 2-day stage race for 1/2/3's, but I haven't included it on the calendar at the moment because I want to ensure that it'll be an ERRL-counter at the AGM.

[Bianchiben]

Huh? - Eastern region V... - no, no, no - that's not right.....

Oh... :oops: - I'll have to speak to Mr Schils about that....

[ChrisB]

I've just had a chat with BC HQ, and obtained some figures regarding licence holders in the Eastern Division. They break down like this:

18 Elites
43 1st cats
113 2nd cats
207 3rd cats
274 4th cats

With those figures in mind, how would we want the calendar broken down?

I'd have thought that the following groupings are 'competitive' - meaning that you'd expect people from all categorys within a group to score points from a race open to those riders:
E/1/2
1/2/3
2/3
3/4

Adding the corresponding totals together, and doing some dividing, means (roughly) for every 100 races, 13 should be E/1/2, 27 should be 1/2/3, 24 should be 2/3, and 36 should be 3/4.

The interesting thing about this analysis is that it suggests that there should be more 1/2/3 races than 2/3 races...

Thoughts, anyone?

[Bianchiben]

Just a quick thought...

I can understand 4th cats not wanting to ride against 1sts, but as a 2nd cat, I am not deterred at all by the appearance of 1sts - with elites, you know it's going to be harder, so is there any difference between a 2/3 race and a 1/2/3 race - any 3rds care to comment?

These bits just fell out of my head, and aren't too well thought through - brainstorming if you like...

So why not just group:

E/1/2
1/2/3
3/4/J

Or if we allow all races into the errl (including 'prestige' events), have:

A cat race - allow all
B cat race - no elites
C cat race - no firsts or seconds

[ChrisB]

I think you also have to take into account that (for example) not all second cats are created equal. There are those that are barely good enough, and might flip-flop between 2nd and 3rd, and then those who are on their way to higher things. The former probably wouldn't want to race against 1st cats every week, so needs some 2/3 races in order to even try to retain his licence. Repeat this for every category (apart from Elite). I've pretty much ignored 4ths only races, which should definately be promoted, of course.

[Sean Sumner]

Chris what's the provisional date (if there is one) for the Shaftesbury 2-day stage race for 1/2/3's that you have mentioned.

[ChrisB]

Saturday/Sunday 9th/10th July.

Saturday will be a full programme @ Eastway, including races for 4/W/J and E/1/2, along with the 1/2/3/4 stage, Sunday looks like a road stage at Henham.

[Bianchiben]

- also - how do we get rid of the '4th cat' tag below our picture? - I work hard for my status!!!

[ChrisB]

10 more posts will get you up to 3rd. Unless I change it to 40 posts... :twisted:

[Bianchiben]

ahh - I see... so they don't have to be good quality posts, just posts...

[ChrisB]

Yes, but as a moderator, you'll know that posts can be deleted... :lol:

[zeco]

Just a quick thought...

I can understand 4th cats not wanting to ride against 1sts, but as a 2nd cat, I am not deterred at all by the appearance of 1sts - with elites, you know it's going to be harder, so is there any difference between a 2/3 race and a 1/2/3 race - any 3rds care to comment?

These bits just fell out of my head, and aren't too well thought through - brainstorming if you like...

So why not just group:

E/1/2
1/2/3
3/4/J

Or if we allow all races into the errl (including 'prestige' events), have:

A cat race - allow all
B cat race - no elites
C cat race - no firsts or seconds

Bianchiben,

I am pleased to see that you have 'endorsed' the graded races system. I would go a stage further to include a fourth race for the 'enthusiast'. The ultimate should be to ignore the present categories completely and allow the riders to select their own race, ie:

Grade 'D' (16+ years of age) 40/60 kms
Grade 'C' (16+ years of age) 60/80 kms
Grade 'B' (17+ years of age) 80/100 kms
Grade 'A' (18+ years of age) 80/130 kms

Juniors are thereby catered for by this system until such time as sufficient entries justify separate races.

The prizes (or points) should double as you move up in race severity, thereby increasing the incentive for riders to enter the longer and harder events. Additional points for 1st Junior, 1st Under 23, 1st Female, 1st Master, 1st Veteran, etc. can be awarded if required.

Until the number of events can be increased considerably, I would concentrate on just two events, the Grade 'D' race, with a just a token prize list or minimum points. This race is purely for riders who enjoy the atmosphere but have neither the time nor ambition to devote to regular training. Some of them will progress and others will be quite contend to enjoy racing at their own level. This is presently the largest group of riders you have, keep them happy and you will attract a lot more. Grade 'D' race could possibly be started 5 minutes after the main event.

Everybody else goes into the Grade 'B' race of about 100-120kms, Belgian style, with a decent prize list or points (1-20/1-25).

Depending upon the circuit/course, it might be possible to run off four races on the one day, two in the morning and two in the afternoon.

What say you?

[ChrisB]

Zeco,

I think the fundamental problem with your scheme is that there will always be riders who would rather win races than win money or points. At the moment, it's hard enough to protect 3rd and 4th category riders from 'ringers' who either scrupulously watch their points or take regular seasons out of racing - with your system, there would be nothing to stop the glory hunters riding the lower categories week in, week out.

How many of us are motivated by prize lists? In the UK, you'd have to be mad to be. For me, it's all about getting a top finish. Luckily, I have the ability to win races against good fields sometimes, but for average Joe third-cat, what chance will he have against riders I've described above?

I don't see what the problem with the current category system is. The real problem is the lack of juniors in the sport, surely, and that problem is nothing to do with how races are categorised.

[zeco]

I've just had a chat with BC HQ, and obtained some figures regarding licence holders in the Eastern Division. They break down like this:

18 Elites
43 1st cats
113 2nd cats
207 3rd cats
274 4th cats

With those figures in mind, how would we want the calendar broken down?

I'd have thought that the following groupings are 'competitive' - meaning that you'd expect people from all categorys within a group to score points from a race open to those riders:
E/1/2
1/2/3
2/3
3/4

Adding the corresponding totals together, and doing some dividing, means (roughly) for every 100 races, 13 should be E/1/2, 27 should be 1/2/3, 24 should be 2/3, and 36 should be 3/4.

The interesting thing about this analysis is that it suggests that there should be more 1/2/3 races than 2/3 races...

Thoughts, anyone?

Chris,

I was interested to note your breakdown figures from BC HQ as to the respective categories in Eastern region:-

18 Elites
43 1st cats
113 2nd cats
207 3rd cats
274 4th cats

My calculations indicate that you have a total of 655 riders, excluding Juniors. Your 'thoughts' and those of BianchiBen do not allow for Juniors. Surrey League permit Juniors to compete in senior events up to certain distances, what about Essex?

Apparantly Eastern's total membership is circa: 1667 with 880 licence holders (52.4%) so I presume that the difference of 225 could be accounted for by Juniors and Juveniles?

I believe that you need to look at the total number of Eastern riders to determine how many races should be promoted to accommodate them all rather than apportion the existing events. Eastway undoubtably attracts some of Eastern's licence holders at weekends but there must still be a large number of riders who regularly travel outside the region to compete. If anyone has to travel, then that should be the E1s, since they probably receive most support from their clubs or teams?

Where do all of the other riders go or do they just ride TTs? That's why the Kent League was started - to provide an opportunity for road racing in the county.

I hear that entries at Eastway are nowhere near as numerous as they once were but even allowing for a 100 riders (seniors and juniors), you still need (as a region) to provide racing for another 600/700 licence holders. Otherwise BC are taking money under false pretences.

You need to attract more clubs with each promoting a minimum of two road races. Circuit races at Eastway should be left to individual clubs to promote as open events but not as part of the league programme. Eastway is an excellent venue for evening races, juveniles and beginners at weekends - it should be packed every week of the year. The circuit also provides an ideal training base for both riders and organisers too. However, there is still a place on the public roads for cycle racing and always should be.

The agreement with Essex police to finish races by midday is severely restrictive and should be re-negotiated as a priority in my opinion. Do they allow two events to be run concurrently? Although, even if ERRL were to promote two races on the same circuit with a gap between, at best you are only accommodating 160/200 riders. That's always assuming that Essex police are accommodating on numbers. I seem to remember the GP of Essex being limited to 80 riders, even with a police escort team, when I was working on the event.

In complete contrast, excellent liaison between Surrey League and their police enable courses to be varied on the day - or even switched completely (within reason) - in the event of an emergency situation affecting the racing.

When I was negotiating with Kent police, I submitted a large number of courses to the police for approval and then allocated them to events. Clubs either picked the date or the circuit. A bit arbitary but it worked fairly well. The circuits ranged from about 3 miles to 16 miles in size. The availability of more circuits helped to avoid upsetting the locals by over-use.

Ideally, we should all now be approaching parish councils and 'offering' to promote races as a part of their annual activities - creating circuits to suit the locals. Nothing new, it has been done before but unfortunately, rarely continued from year to year. A well run league, sharing the costs and the work, can overcome many of those problems. 8)

[ChrisB]

Zeco,

as I said in my reply to your other message, we need

a) to get more clubs on board, and

b) to change the league from a loose cooperative to a centrally managed organisation

before we can start organising races centrally.

Regarding your questions on youths and juniors. Youths, I beleive, are well-catered for in the region. Given that the ERRLs main thrust (to date) has been racing on the open road, they've been below the league's radar to date. I can only imagine that we're working from different figures, as I was told there were only 38 juniors and 67 youth category licence holders. Juniors are essentially 2nd and 3rd category riders, and with such a small number in the region, it doesn't make sense to have junior-only races except for Buckleys and the Divs, does it?

[Andy B]

These bits just fell out of my head, and aren't too well thought through - brainstorming if you like...


Not allowed to say Brainstorming any more - not PC to epileptics :!: :roll:

[zeco]

Zeco,

I can only imagine that we're working from different figures, as I was told there were only 38 juniors and 67 youth category licence holders.

Keith Butler emailed me the comparative membership details for both Eastern and South East Regions. Eastern's total membership was quoted as 1667 with 880 licence holders (52.4%).

SE Region can boast a total membership of 1902 members but with a higher ratio of licence holders, 1233 (64.8%). Only Scotland has more BC members than SE Region and no other region has more licence holders.

SE Region promote something in excess of 200 races per year of which Surrey League run 140, Kent League 20-25 races and SE clubs, another 30 open races. That figure does not include Crystal Palace evening events and there may well be more.

The region promotes far more races than any other area in the country and yet they could still host more. The Kent League used to run twice as many races as they do now.

Juniors are essentially 2nd and 3rd category riders, and with such a small number in the region, it doesn't make sense to have junior-only races except for Buckleys and the Divs, does it?

Agreed.

[ChrisB]

I got my figures from a nice lady at the BC, who read them from the October licence report.

[zeco]

Zeco,

I don't see what the problem with the current category system is.

Like topsy, it grew and grew and grew.

IMHO it is an admistrative waste of time and money which the BC membership pay for.

Even the BC Rankings Leader Bryan Taylor agrees.

The real problem is the lack of juniors in the sport, surely, and that problem is nothing to do with how races are categorised.

Agreed - and I didn't say that.

To attract more young riders, the sport needs to be promoted in the public eye at grass routes level and less hype given to expensive equipment so as not to deter would be riders. Not easy, I agree since every one wants to be seen on the latest bikes but definately not necessary.

I remember Rogger Hobby racing on a bike that Oxfam wouldn't even accept today but he won the CRE international 6 day in Ireland (1965) against a lot of top guys including the Mersey mafias.

[zeco]

I got my figures from a nice lady at the BC, who read them from the October licence report.

Keith's alright but I wouldn't say he was that nice! :mrgreen:

[notsoracy rich]

So whats wrong with all these 1st cats that they need to ride against 3rd and 4th?Is winning so important even against riders of a lower ability?
Not many people start as 1st cats, usually its as a 4th. How many of these will you scare off by giving them Gary Baker to 'race' against.
I thought ERRL was grass roots racing. If you are good enough to be a 1st cat you should be prepared to travel to race against people of your ability.
There, I've said it.

[zeco]

So whats wrong with all these 1st cats that they need to ride against 3rd and 4th?Is winning so important even against riders of a lower ability?
Not many people start as 1st cats, usually its as a 4th. How many of these will you scare off by giving them Gary Baker to 'race' against.
I thought ERRL was grass roots racing. If you are good enough to be a 1st cat you should be prepared to travel to race against people of your ability.
There, I've said it.

Agreed - but if you've read my posts you know that already. :wink:

[ChrisB]

So whats wrong with all these 1st cats that they need to ride against 3rd and 4th?Is winning so important even against riders of a lower ability?
Not many people start as 1st cats, usually its as a 4th. How many of these will you scare off by giving them Gary Baker to 'race' against.
I thought ERRL was grass roots racing. If you are good enough to be a 1st cat you should be prepared to travel to race against people of your ability.
There, I've said it.

Excuse me? Where on earth have you got that idea from?

Nowhere has anyone advocated making all ERRL races open to 1st cats.

The rule changes are aimed at two things:

a) giving local 1st cats more races to enter. NOT at the expense of lower categories. Currently, there are far too few events for 1st cats in general, and if a rider is unfortunate enough not to belong to an ERRL club (their choice, I know), then they are automatically excluded from all ERRL events open to first cats.

b) making the league less restrictive to member clubs as far as race promotions goes, therefore encouraging membership, and getting more league races for ALL RIDERS.

Anyway, 1st category is the new 2nd category, ever since the introduction of Elite status and the restructuring of the points system - and the ERRL rules pre-date that.

It's all very well saying that ERRL is about 'grass roots'. But Zeco has already said that it has essentially meant the death of non-ERRL events for most member clubs. So to address that, what's wrong with making the ERRL about racing for all?

And Gary Baker is an Elite. :roll:

[ChrisB]

I've split off the discussion of Elites-vs-1sts to keep this topic on-track.

Chris

[speedyshaun]

:cry: just got round to looking at the 2005 events list, hope things get changed at the AGM or i'll be getting 39 points and then preparing for the cross season where i can race locally about once a fortnight, we did have quite a good road scene in east anglia but i guess alot of riders got first cat licences then no races so packed in cycling.
why are there still races clashing with others when ther are blank weekends????

[ChrisB]

Shaun,

I've tabled a motion to allow the league to request clubs change dates to avoid clashes. I'll also be lobbying for more 1st cat races. It would be useful to have some support - how about coming to the AGM?

Also, note that your new club isn't promoting for 1st cats!

Chris

[speedyshaun]

Sorry Chris can't make the AGM as i work shifts, had a word with Patrick Schills and he might open his race up to E.R.R.L 1st cats but he gets an over subscribed race every year, perhaps people won't enter if they know the interbike squadra are riding. Good luck at the AGM surely the high command can see there needs to be more than just 5 races a year, I see the lower catergory riders view, and i don't want a 1234 race every week, 2 races within a 150 mile radius a month would be better than we had this year and potentially next.
cheers for your support for 1st cats, im sure you will be moving up the catergory system pretty quick next season. Shaun

[ChrisB]

Update to say I've changed the VC Baracchi counting event, and added the Shaftesbury CC 2-day to the provisional calendar.