View previous topic :: View next topic |
Should track events be awarded points for BC road licence |
ALL track events should be awarded points |
|
23% |
[ 10 ] |
Only track ENDURANCE events should be awarded points |
|
16% |
[ 7 ] |
NO track events should be awarded points |
|
60% |
[ 26 ] |
|
Total Votes : 43 |
|
Author |
Message |
Roy Gardiner T de F Winner
Joined: 14 Jul 2003 Posts: 21249 Location: London and Essex
|
Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 12:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
John McC wrote: |
George Gilbert wrote: |
So, it seems the only reason for having points for track races is to ensure there are enough entries to make events viable. A really poor (but necessary until someone comes up with a better plan) reason for having them. A shame really. |
Nonsense. I refer you to my post above. |
Eh? What?
Do you mean this one John?
John McC wrote: |
Hans Datdodishes wrote: |
Back in the early 1990 somethings the points for track were done away with for a season and there wasn't a noticable drop in numbers of the 'hardcore' track riders - the same core of faces were at most meetings. |
But what happened was entries at open track meetings plummeted. |
Looks to me like you're arguing both sides. _________________ "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." H. L. Mencken
"Everything in war is simple, but the simplest thing is difficult." Carl Von Clausewitz |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John McC Moderator
Joined: 14 Jul 2003 Posts: 24510 Location: Leafy Barnet
|
Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 12:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No, the one above that, you clown
What is needed is a system where good endurance track riders will get enough points from their track racing to prevent them, when racing in the odd road event, from being allowed to race in the "easier" (say 2nd/3rd cats) events, which would be most unfair for the other competitors.
Those who advocate separate points for road and track, or even no points for track consistently fail to recognise in their argument that most good endurace trackies, generally ride a few road events. We must have a category/points system that addresses this fact. _________________ John McClelland's victory in the motor paced event with Derek Marloe on the derny was a thing of beauty (Oldmanof) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
George Gilbert Div 3 Pro
Joined: 20 Jul 2005 Posts: 4159 Location: Somewhere, over the rainbow
|
Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 12:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In which case I refer you to my earlier post
George Gilbert wrote: |
Off the top of my head, I'd suggest that if road and track points were split then there would be some kind of transferrable system so that ability in one would be (partially) reflected in the status of another. For example, the track category would be no less than 2 below the road category (and vice versa so an elite track rider would automatically gain 2nd cat road status).
I'm sure there are probably problems with that at the fringes too, but at least that way you wouldn't get very good track riders lumped in with 4th cats in road races etc. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
John McC Moderator
Joined: 14 Jul 2003 Posts: 24510 Location: Leafy Barnet
|
Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 1:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And _________________ John McClelland's victory in the motor paced event with Derek Marloe on the derny was a thing of beauty (Oldmanof) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Roy Gardiner T de F Winner
Joined: 14 Jul 2003 Posts: 21249 Location: London and Essex
|
Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 1:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
John McC wrote: |
No, the one above that, you clown
|
I'm the clown because you're arguing both sides? Ah, it's OK because they're not in the same posts, or something?
Come along John you can't say on points abolition But what happened was entries at open track meetings plummeted. then rubbish George for saying it seems the only reason for having points for track races is to ensure there are enough entries to make events viable
A bit of logic, please. _________________ "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." H. L. Mencken
"Everything in war is simple, but the simplest thing is difficult." Carl Von Clausewitz |
|
Back to top |
|
|
George Gilbert Div 3 Pro
Joined: 20 Jul 2005 Posts: 4159 Location: Somewhere, over the rainbow
|
Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 1:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
John McC wrote: |
And |
...and that would prevent good track riders riding in low status road events, which is what your query was directly about!
However, as I said above, I don't think that's a major issue. There's already a system of dispensation whereby people can apply to BC to have a different license to the one which they would be entitled to given only their points total. If there was a duel road / track points system then someone who was an elite trackie could apply to BC for a non 3rd cat road licence and would get one (or would automatically get one as per my suggestion above).
The more serious problem, as you've already identified, is with entries. If you split road and track points then those principally road riders who are simply entering track events to artificially boost their road status would no longer be able to do so.
So, in principle I think there should be separate road and track points. In practice though I can see that it's not that simple. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John McC Moderator
Joined: 14 Jul 2003 Posts: 24510 Location: Leafy Barnet
|
Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 1:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Roy Gardiner wrote: |
I'm the clown because you're arguing both sides? Ah, it's OK because they're not in the same posts, or something?
Come along John you can't say on points abolition But what happened was entries at open track meetings plummeted. then rubbish George for saying it seems the only reason for having points for track races is to ensure there are enough entries to make events viable
A bit of logic, please. |
What are you going on about, Roy? I am not arguing both sides (can't see how anyone could think I was). George said that the only reason for retaining track points is to protect track meeting entries. Although I pointed out that in 1993 entries were much lower without track points on offer, I have at no point indicated that, that is the only reason for retaining them, and indeed have made a totally separate case in this thread for maintaining points in endurance track events. _________________ John McClelland's victory in the motor paced event with Derek Marloe on the derny was a thing of beauty (Oldmanof)
Last edited by John McC on Fri Dec 29, 2006 1:38 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John McC Moderator
Joined: 14 Jul 2003 Posts: 24510 Location: Leafy Barnet
|
Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 1:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
George Gilbert wrote: |
However, as I said above, I don't think that's a major issue. There's already a system of dispensation whereby people can apply to BC to have a different license to the one which they would be entitled to given only their points total. If there was a duel road / track points system then someone who was an elite trackie could apply to BC for a non 3rd cat road licence and would get one (or would automatically get one as per my suggestion above).. |
A system that relies on dispensation is fundamentally flawed.
George Gilbert wrote: |
The more serious problem, as you've already identified, is with entries. If you split road and track points then those principally road riders who are simply entering track events to artificially boost their road status would no longer be able to do so.. |
You seem to over-estimate how easy it is for one to accrue points at open track meetings, especially for what you call principally road riders. I totally regect the assumptions you have made in this statement. _________________ John McClelland's victory in the motor paced event with Derek Marloe on the derny was a thing of beauty (Oldmanof) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Bally Div 2 Pro
Joined: 11 Aug 2004 Posts: 5664
|
Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 1:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
George Gilbert wrote: |
John McC wrote: |
And |
There's already a system of dispensation whereby people can apply to BC to have a different license to the one which they would be entitled to given only their points total. |
You may apply - but that doesn't mean you're going to get it
When they brought in the new points system this year, I asked to be dropped from Elite to either 3rd or 2nd cat. If we'd been using the new points system for the last couple of years then I would only have been a 3rd cat. Paul West however wouldn't hear of it so I could only drop to a 1st which I'm entitled to do as a Vet _________________ Bally: Putting the @rse into Grass.
www.easterleycycling.org.uk/CycleStatsLite.exe for Gears, Revs, Speed, BBAR calc, Pursuit Scheduling etc.
"your power is truly awesome" - John McC
"real class" - George Gilbert" |
|
Back to top |
|
|
George Gilbert Div 3 Pro
Joined: 20 Jul 2005 Posts: 4159 Location: Somewhere, over the rainbow
|
Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 1:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
John McC wrote: |
George Gilbert wrote: |
However, as I said above, I don't think that's a major issue. There's already a system of dispensation whereby people can apply to BC to have a different license to the one which they would be entitled to given only their points total. If there was a duel road / track points system then someone who was an elite trackie could apply to BC for a non 3rd cat road licence and would get one (or would automatically get one as per my suggestion above).. |
A system that relies on dispensation is fundamentally flawed. |
A system that relies on dispensation is indeed fundamentally flawed. A system that uses dispensation to solve a handful of cases rather than requiring reams of rules covering every possible scenario is fundamentally sound.
I put forward that what I was suggesting falls into the latter camp.
John McC wrote: |
George Gilbert wrote: |
The more serious problem, as you've already identified, is with entries. If you split road and track points then those principally road riders who are simply entering track events to artificially boost their road status would no longer be able to do so.. |
You seem to over-estimate how easy it is for one to accrue points at open track meetings, especially for what you call principally road riders. I totally reget the many assumptions you have made in this statement. |
Not really. It's relatively easy to pick up points in the B races in open track meetings (even I got a few - it can't be that hard ). In the A races though, I agree it's alot harder.
That said I don't think we're really talking about the A riders here. Although I don't know for certain, I would imagine that the people who didn't enter when points were removed in 93 were the B riders. As pointed out above, the hard-core trackies still entered - it's "the rest" that are swayed by whether or not points are on offer. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John McC Moderator
Joined: 14 Jul 2003 Posts: 24510 Location: Leafy Barnet
|
Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 1:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No it affected the As just as much. _________________ John McClelland's victory in the motor paced event with Derek Marloe on the derny was a thing of beauty (Oldmanof) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Thomo Div 1 Pro
Joined: 20 Dec 2002 Posts: 6964 Location: Milton Keynes (home) Hemel Hempstead (work)
|
Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 2:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Bally wrote: |
George Gilbert wrote: |
John McC wrote: |
And |
There's already a system of dispensation whereby people can apply to BC to have a different license to the one which they would be entitled to given only their points total. |
You may apply - but that doesn't mean you're going to get it
When they brought in the new points system this year, I asked to be dropped from Elite to either 3rd or 2nd cat. If we'd been using the new points system for the last couple of years then I would only have been a 3rd cat. Paul West however wouldn't hear of it so I could only drop to a 1st which I'm entitled to do as a Vet |
The dispensation only allows for you to apply for a higher category, not a lower one, so Paul West was correct in refusing it.
Paul _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
George Gilbert Div 3 Pro
Joined: 20 Jul 2005 Posts: 4159 Location: Somewhere, over the rainbow
|
Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 2:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thomo wrote: |
The dispensation only allows for you to apply for a higher category, not a lower one, so Paul West was correct in refusing it.
|
The current regs allow BC (at their discretion) to give any junior / senior any licence whether that be above or below what their points total would suggest if the rider applies for it.
Last edited by George Gilbert on Fri Dec 29, 2006 2:12 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John McC Moderator
Joined: 14 Jul 2003 Posts: 24510 Location: Leafy Barnet
|
Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 2:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thomo wrote: |
The dispensation only allows for you to apply for a higher category, not a lower one, so Paul West was correct in refusing it.
|
But he didn't refuse it, as he lowered Bally's category from Elite to first, although this wasn't as far as Bally would have liked! _________________ John McClelland's victory in the motor paced event with Derek Marloe on the derny was a thing of beauty (Oldmanof) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Thomo Div 1 Pro
Joined: 20 Dec 2002 Posts: 6964 Location: Milton Keynes (home) Hemel Hempstead (work)
|
Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 2:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
George Gilbert wrote: |
Thomo wrote: |
The dispensation only allows for you to apply for a higher category, not a lower one, so Paul West was correct in refusing it.
|
The current regs allow BC (at their discretion) to give any junior / senior any licence whether that be above or below what their points total would suggest if the rider applies for it. |
Yes you are correct. I had been told that it was for a higher cat, but TR 6.2.7.2 says it can be for any category.
Paul _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Thomo Div 1 Pro
Joined: 20 Dec 2002 Posts: 6964 Location: Milton Keynes (home) Hemel Hempstead (work)
|
Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 2:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
John McC wrote: |
Thomo wrote: |
The dispensation only allows for you to apply for a higher category, not a lower one, so Paul West was correct in refusing it. |
But he didn't refuse it, as he lowered Bally's category from Elite to first, although this wasn't as far as Bally would have liked! |
Actually, this is a different dispensation - Any Elite cat Master can apply for thier Licence to be downgraded to 1st (TR6.2.7.1 applies).
Paul _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
BryanTaylor E, Bronze
Joined: 29 Mar 2003 Posts: 415
|
Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 2:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's not ideal at the moment, but the difficulty is finding a solution that will actually improve it rather than create new problems.
Ideal solution would be to scrap categories altogether & have age related racing along with a novice adult category, & the grading for senior events based on the standing of the event. But this will never happen in Britain because there aren't enough riders in youth\junior categories to have a calendar that avoids the need for the better ones to ride with seniors, & because most riders are coming into it from non-cycling or leisure riding as adults, not through racing as youths, so the mentality is not to want to improve as high as possible, but to race for pleasure at a level that doesn’t involve having to train hard & make any sacrifices to reach a high level. That’s apparent by the field sizes in events – if an organiser runs 2 events, the 3rd cat race will generally be full up & the E12 struggle for entries despite a higher prize list & status, whereas when I started, we'd always make a point of riding a higher level race every 3-4 events so we'd have an idea what to expect when we moved up a cat.
I’ve been top of the elite rankings a few times from mostly track & crits, I stopped doing much road because of the travelling involved to find a race open to elite – easier & more enjoyable to go to Belgium instead for a w\end to do road. Top of the rankings means little in any category, as well as the split between road & track, often it depends who lives in a part of the country that runs a lot of BC events. This is partly why one of the new 2007 BC rules for youth riders is a complete joke, where again they’ve managed to lump road & track together into one solution without thinking the two separate issues through, so all it will do as it stands is prevent people from riding (I’ve already emailed Paul to politely complain about it).
Track is difficult in that it’s closely linked to road, there aren’t many MTB riders who also race road every week, but many track endurance riders do. There's no real need for track to have points, other than to try & put a rider in the right category for road – Nat Champs should in theory tell who the best road\track\crit riders are, & it’s not hard for organiser to work out who is an A & who is a B rider in track leagues, & in an open meet there’s nothing stopping a rider being moved up or down. So scrapping track points completely might initially mean a few riders are ranked lower than their ability for road, but this shouldn’t last very long & there’s no reason why they couldn’t ask for a higher category licence. But if points are scrapped completely & track entries drop, then organisers won’t risk losing money promoting again, & we’ll be left with no track events other than midweek leagues which then means the facilities become underused & we start losing tracks again.
So, unless we can get away with the mindset of riding track to get points, then best to leave it as it is, scrapping points for events under 3km was probably the best solution to avoid sprinters who can’t make it up the first hill in a road race, not end up as 1st cats & to cut down a little on track points that can be won. But are there really many riders these days who do track to get points rather than because they enjoy it? Most road riders seem to want to be 2nd cats, so they don’t have to travel miles to find a race, & I don’t see many B riders desperate to move up to A in TL's or Opens. Another possible tweak could be to split road & track points so rankings are more meaningful, but just 2 cats on track, not the 5 we have on road (which is at least 1 too many), then maybe the riders who are swayed by points, might still do track to try & be ranked high there.
Would you do less track if there were no points John (or anyone)?. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
John McC Moderator
Joined: 14 Jul 2003 Posts: 24510 Location: Leafy Barnet
|
Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 2:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No, I wouldn't do less track, but I'd end up with so few points, I could enter a few local easy chipper road races and earn some easy cash _________________ John McClelland's victory in the motor paced event with Derek Marloe on the derny was a thing of beauty (Oldmanof) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Bally Div 2 Pro
Joined: 11 Aug 2004 Posts: 5664
|
Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 2:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think the situation is different now than 1993 because more riders want to do track - which is probably a side effect of a) having the indoor velodromes available for racing and training and b) our top riders are now amongst the best in the world (which in itself is a by product of a) amongst other things). We could therefore probably scrap points for track altogether and it won't have too much of a detrimental affect on entries (at least I hope not).
Or keep the track points but have separate rankings so organisers can plan their events more easily if they have riders entered they are unfamiliar with.
But then you've still got the problem of cross overs riders so as has been suggested before, maybe have some sort of system that where a riders road license partially reflects their track perfomances (and vice versa)? _________________ Bally: Putting the @rse into Grass.
www.easterleycycling.org.uk/CycleStatsLite.exe for Gears, Revs, Speed, BBAR calc, Pursuit Scheduling etc.
"your power is truly awesome" - John McC
"real class" - George Gilbert" |
|
Back to top |
|
|
xixang Elite Poster
Joined: 18 Nov 2006 Posts: 237 Location: Preston, Lancs
|
Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 6:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
BryanTaylor wrote: |
Ideal solution would be to scrap categories altogether & have age related racing along with a novice adult category |
this is far from ideal. I (and numerous others no doubt) can quote of many people in the same cat (based on TLI bandings) who are far better/worse than me. As a TLI 'M2' (35-39) cat I still cannot race competively with many 40+ and even some 50+ riders. Novice cats would help but what defines a novice? First year racing, until top 5 placing received or what? Contrary to TLI dogma, age related racing is not a panacea for all, in fact it places people into categories based on nothing other than accident of birth-year(obviously). Ability racing is the correct way - practically ever sport has in in some form or another. Would you condone football being played on any basis other than ability i.e. leagues? having clubs with the oldest net ages playing one another (a bit ludicrous, but you get the idea). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|