Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 69

Thread: Chelmer Road Race, 07 April 2013

  1. #41
    Stagiaire
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Mile End
    Posts
    2,890

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RogerM View Post
    BC has two priorities, revenue and prestige
    This is a clear structural failing then if the governing body is disinterested in cycle sport at the sake of raising money - for what? perhaps the Sky sponsorship/track team/road team stuff / governing body is getting too blurred. Without knowing the state of the accounts, we should at least expect that revnue generated through levvies is reinvested into grassroots racing. Youth development has other income streams (including the reginal aspect of the levy, but many other grants too). And if the levy money is secretly being squirelled away to the secret squirells then that is also disgraceful.

    Roger is right to point out the other organisations promoting racing, however having personally been involved in a variety of sports we should be ashamed that cycling is so disparate, poorly coordinated and unsatisfied with the state of prgres that this multiplicity even exists... by my experience it doesn't anywhere else...

  2. #42
    2nd Cat
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Hornchurch
    Posts
    203

    Default

    Changing the subject slightly ... is it not possible for accredited marshals to direct other road users around the circuit in the direction on the race? This may annoy the drivers however the race will virtually have no contract with any vehicles!

  3. #43
    3rd Cat
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Chelmsford
    Posts
    36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by willmcf View Post
    And if the levy money is secretly being squirreled away to the secret squirrels then that is also disgraceful.
    I don't think BC is squirreling away our membership fees, license money etc. as such. After all each region has its full/part-time paid BC representatives who are there to help if we ask them. To me it's more about the fact that all the millions of £s that BC has collected over the last decade or two has been allocated squarely to its few top contenders. Not much has been handed out to grass roots. They have made their raison d'etre to breastfeed, cuddle and bring up track talent. To my mind, BC is an organisation created by and for road racers more than anything else but BC have been spending more and more time on BMX, mountain biking, track etc and I can't help feeling left out as a road racer. Road racing outnumber the other disciplines but has been sidetracked by BCs extracurricular activities. Now that numbers are swelling, particularly in road racing, they have no answer to it. As as consequence road safety suffers more than ever with so many keen and new cyclist on the road. Many motorist are still still unused to the sight a person on bicycle so they choose to ignore them. If BC really had been keen on protecting its members, it would have been much more vocal early on in the public debate about promoting cycling safety. There have been plenty of deaths of people using a cycle to hang their hat on but they have studiously avoided confrontation with law makers. Money is one thing, lives is another.
    Last edited by RostRider; 25-04-2013 at 02:26 AM.

  4. #44
    3rd Cat
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Chelmsford
    Posts
    36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by willmcf View Post
    Roger is right to point out the other organisations promoting racing, however having personally been involved in a variety of sports we should be ashamed that cycling is so disparate, poorly coordinated and unsatisfied with the state of progress that this multiplicity even exists... by my experience it doesn't anywhere else...
    One could debate if each cycling discipline should have its own organisation. That we all use a bike, does not make all bikes the same and nor are the multitudes of disciplines that exist within the sport of cycling. Cycling has got more disciplines than most other sports and it is not immediately logical that BMX and MTB should share an organisation with road racing. Nor is it immediately logical why TLI and LVRC cannot be part of the same organisation as BC. I am aware that both organisations had good reasons to form but since BC, TLI and LVRC (there may be more I don't know about?) all cater for road racing why can they not be one? It makes more sense to fracture the sport by discipline than to fracture it within a discipline.
    Last edited by RostRider; 25-04-2013 at 02:28 AM.

  5. #45
    3rd Cat
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Chelmsford
    Posts
    36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yappay96 View Post
    This was the conclusion I come to last weekend talking this through with someone along with the following changes:
    1) forcing all the UCI continental registered riders to be registered as "elite"
    2) Allowing more racing for 1/2 categories and drawing a clear line between that and E/1/2 racing.

    Some of the above could already be supported with the differentiation between national A and national B races, but unfortunately there are only a handful of National A races a year leaving the true elites high and dry when it comes to getting into actual races and the whole idea starting to unravel...
    I like your idea. We could have a Nat. A+ race for 1/2 added in between the Nat B and Nat A races.

    I am perhaps less concerned about the elites. When organising a race involving elite riders, one is also setting up a stage on which sponsors/businesses can put their trade names etc. I.e. the volunteer organiser who works for free makes it possible for businesses to promote their services or wares though his efforts. Perhaps these businesses could be asked to do more of the organising themselves. Keeping elites separate from the other categories might go against UCI who many years ago broke down the barrier between amateurism and professionalism. Did the disappearance of that barrier do cycling a lot of good? I honestly don't know.

  6. #46
    Stagiaire
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Mile End
    Posts
    2,890

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stevegriffiths View Post
    Changing the subject slightly ... is it not possible for accredited marshals to direct other road users around the circuit in the direction on the race? This may annoy the drivers however the race will virtually have no contract with any vehicles!
    they do this at the redgrave road race, so it must be possible... admittedly a very short lap (5 miles?)

  7. #47
    2nd Cat
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    north of the river
    Posts
    390

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RostRider View Post
    I like your idea. We could have a Nat. A+ race for 1/2 added in between the Nat B and Nat A races.

    I think there used to be a National C category that did just this but I think it was done away with to ensure Elite level riders (which is the level BC is really concerned about, along with juniors) were given more opportunities to race. I agree with Michael's points about sponsored teams not doing enough to support road racing. Rather unfortunately BC's insistence that we open up our Nat B races on a fully open basis has I suspect contributed to that. As an example, before that change Orbea were a member of the ERRL and put on a road race. Interestingly, and apologies if I'm wrong in making the connection, but as soon as the rule changed they left the league and stopped promoting. It's also striking how teams like IG Sigma Sport have stepped up a level this year, which is great in one sense, bringing in new talented riders, but they then turn up in force at races like the Autostrasse Porsche and yet do nothing to help put on races in the Eastern Region. Do they promote one elsewhere? I'm not aware of anything. The bottom line is that BC* and the sponsored teams give very little support to amateur level road racing. We should be pushing for a better deal.

    * by BC I mean BC HQ through the rules they set and the money they distribute - I count BC Eastern Region as an extension of the volunteers within clubs who keep the show going on the road and who do a great job

  8. #48
    Stagiaire
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    East London
    Posts
    2,800

    Default

    I agree with all of that Gray except for BC being concerned about Elite riders. If you mean the domestic Elites then I don't think they are that concerned.

    You echo the point RostRider made about Elite team sponsors doing more. Perhaps we have two options:

    a) promote cat 1/2 races but accept that they will be at a lower points band; this would give cat 2 riders a chance to step up without getting smashed; cat 1 riders a chance to dictate the racing for once and maybe go for the win
    b) try to encourage the Elite teams (and the supporting sponsors) to put on there own races so that there are more opportunities for everyone to race and the Elites are spread a bit more thinly across the Nat B races

    Even if we just threaten a) it might help achieve b).

    Promoting cat 1/2 races may also give us the chance to prioritise ERRL riders in all ERRL events, though I don't necessarily agree this would be the right thing to do as to some extent we still need talented riders coming into the region to make the racing, we just don't need every Elite team from a 200 mile radius. It's a difficult balance to be struck.

  9. #49
    2nd Cat
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    north of the river
    Posts
    390

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RogerM View Post
    I agree with all of that Gray except for BC being concerned about Elite riders. If you mean the domestic Elites then I don't think they are that concerned.

    You echo the point RostRider made about Elite team sponsors doing more. Perhaps we have two options:

    a) promote cat 1/2 races but accept that they will be at a lower points band; this would give cat 2 riders a chance to step up without getting smashed; cat 1 riders a chance to dictate the racing for once and maybe go for the win
    b) try to encourage the Elite teams (and the supporting sponsors) to put on there own races so that there are more opportunities for everyone to race and the Elites are spread a bit more thinly across the Nat B races

    Even if we just threaten a) it might help achieve b).

    Promoting cat 1/2 races may also give us the chance to prioritise ERRL riders in all ERRL events, though I don't necessarily agree this would be the right thing to do as to some extent we still need talented riders coming into the region to make the racing, we just don't need every Elite team from a 200 mile radius. It's a difficult balance to be struck.
    The problem with option a) at the moment is that BC have taken the decision to downgrade any Nat B road races which exclude Elites by two points bands. This would mean that running a 123 would only get band 4 points - ie less points than even a Regional A. Clearly it's a ridiculous situation and one which is designed to put off any organiser from seriously considering doing this. By the way you won't find this in the technical regs - it was decided apparently at a National Council meeting. I think if as a league/region we wanted to do this we would have to put it to the Regional board and if they agreed they would have to raise it at national level and seek to change that decision.

  10. #50
    Elite
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    East London. . .
    Posts
    1,910

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray View Post
    The problem with option a) at the moment is that BC have taken the decision to downgrade any Nat B road races which exclude Elites by two points bands. This would mean that running a 123 would only get band 4 points - ie less points than even a Regional A. Clearly it's a ridiculous situation and one which is designed to put off any organiser from seriously considering doing this. By the way you won't find this in the technical regs - it was decided apparently at a National Council meeting. I think if as a league/region we wanted to do this we would have to put it to the Regional board and if they agreed they would have to raise it at national level and seek to change that decision.
    Interesting - is this published anywhere? It does certainly look as if SE Region have given up their long-standing practice of offering 1,2,3 races that exclude Elites. It seems unlikely that we would now get a permit from BC Eastern competition officer for a NatB that excluded Elites, even if we wanted to accept the points penalty.

    One perhaps more practical option is deliberately to schedule our NatBs against other regions' NatAs that will be a bigger draw for Elite riders (again subject to getting the permit from Derek, of course).

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 27-02-2013, 04:18 PM
  2. Start Sheet Chelmer Road Race
    By pottsie in forum Event News
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 30-03-2012, 11:28 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •