To my mind I think a big part of it all comes down to boring old Money and what sells, and I don't think XC sells like other forms of cycling....
I think the thing that has helped other forms of cycling in recent years has been getting the commercial aspect 'right'....
Setting aside the sniping between niches I think British success in recent years in DH has to do primarily with the nature of the sport; DH has a strong commercial/sponsorship element and far less involvement/interest from national/governing bodies its much more "Team before Country" to bastardize a footballing cliche....
In a similar way BC's current road/track success is certainly built in good part around having a very beneficial sponsorship/collaboration with Sky that traditional distinction between a riders commercial sponsorship/Team and National body has been broken down to allow riders to work towards whatever goals/program works best for them... And it is working.
While XC lacks either the same Road/track joined up commercial/national model (or worse yet, any young XC prospects are just poached for Road/track) or the same level of commercial interest that DH attracts (because it basically is a 'sexier' more youth oriented sport, and hence more attractive to sponsors than XC) I can't see British XC closing the gap on other nations...
Humour should be funny, in case you didn't know.
And you are? How unintentionally amusing.
it's quite amusing this thread
a few comments from the slightly grubby grass roots
XC racing is different from the road race/ CX scene as road races/CX are run by clubs or regional associations with decent infrastructures, a culture of volunteering time and are not run by professionals earning a living from it.
XC racing is dominated by series run by companies for profit. There are a few notable club run series but there is no strength in depth. The commercial organiser looks at the racing differently and frequently cancels events leaving gaps in an already sparse calendar.
but being commercial brings other issues, everyone wants their cut, volunteer run organisations have the subtle power of getting everyone to muck in because it's the right thing to do.
XC racing needs venues, these are the hardest thing to find and develop, however organistions FC, LA's are finging cash to create trails on the land they own. They love working with the "community" (that will be volunteers again.) so if you have an idea go and talk to them. We were talking to LCC about racing before Lee Quarry opened.
On the whole the mtb orientated media (print and web) have disowned XC racing. The 2012 Welsh XC series dissappeared after 2 cancelled races, no reportage on that anywhere. Nothing on who's who, and race reporting which essentially an organisers own report (if you are lucky enough to get anything published, although the two pages we managed in 2009 in MBUK still stand out)
As for British Cycling, I'm sure they do a lot. But if you want them to make it happen you are living in cloud cuckoo land. The structure is good, there are some very helpful people and plenty who aren't
2012 XC racing finished....
not likely two races left 2nd Sept and 14th Oct
...and no you will not be pushing through the mud
what's it like?
see what Pete from Orange thought about it http://www.orangebikes.co.uk/news/view/Round_2_Brownbacks_Hope_XC
video here (with lots of mincing, shame they don't take up the free coaching offer)
easy racing XC? ask a series winner
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fG5I1QL_brw&feature=related
plenty of videolets here
http://www.youtube.com/user/BrownbacksRacing?feature=watch
depends what category you are racing and which race series. (there isn't really a true "novice level" even in local DH races tho.mrmo - MemberGW serious question, novice level is it reasonable to do well, win without spending money? beyond the obvious helmet, etc.
over the years I've witnessed an Elite, a Junior and a v.fast master rider all manage to come second on a hardtail at national level (SCU/WCA).
Yes. these days the standard is so high it would be very difficult to come anywhare close to a win on a hardtail against top end DH bikes even in local races, that said, if you had the talent you could win on 3 or 4 yr old a S/H DH bike you bought for £500-700.From where i sit i see the entry equipment hurdle being pretty high. i don't see many on cheap hard tails, I know back in the day steve peat was winning on a hard tail but that was then not now, just looking at the coverage etc it suggests Full suspension bikes, lots of pads etc.
The most expensive part of DH racing is the fuel/entry costs, depending on location each race can easily cost you around £200 for the weekend all in.
if Xc racing has a bad image, then it's up to Xc racers to change it, if they want to...
Yep, and as this thread shows, they don't want to. In five years, the XC National Champs will just be three angry people wobbling around Thetford....
xc bridlewaybiking is brown bread. suck it up.
Only read the first two pages, but can't help feeling some of the miserable, bitter, divisive moaning and sniping from some of those who apparently love XC racing might not be the best way to encourage people to get into it. In fact people with those attitudes may well be a big part of the problem.
Pretty sad TBH.
Not sure what you mean by that?
XC is alive and well for those that want to do it.
XC racers I know love XC racing as it is.
Clubs and individuals like myself are doing their best to find venues and encourage more people into it.
The problem is that there is a lot of hostility within the mountain biking fraternity towards XC simply because they don't like it. Their answer is to change it or simply don't do it.
Now just look at that. Here I am, I love XC. And what I understand is that they want me to spend my time changing the sport to suit them and turn it into something I don't want to do. I know how TJ felt now.
So guys those that want to see changes and still contribute to greater success in the future as that's what this thread is about. What are you doing about it, I mean what is you actual contribution apart from moaning and going on and on about what mincers myself and all the XC guys and girls are?
And grum also on that note, If I'm taking out new riders that want to get into XC I never ever in anyway put down any other form of off road riding. In fact if doing other stuff improves their race skills then I'll encourage them to do it. I often point guys towards Tony at Woburn.
XC racing needs venues, these are the hardest thing to find and develop, however organistions FC, LA's are finging cash to create trails on the land they own. They love working with the "community" (that will be volunteers again.) so if you have an idea go and talk to them. We were talking to LCC about racing before Lee Quarry opened.
This is what I'm doing at the moment. We have got a yes on a venue, but it is totally flat. There is woodland on the site and remnants of an old MX course. I need to look at it again. I met there with British Cycling and other club reps and they gave it the go ahead.
However its pretty grass roots - cheap midweek series?
MTB XC is the poor relation everywhere not just here. There's no big money sponsorship in it so the racers aren't paid well so where's the attraction when at the very top level you likely have a chance of making it on the road instead? I'm sure Absalon and a few others make a decent enough living from it but very few do.
In this country we'd need BC to take it seriously and fund it properly to start developing the depth of talent needed and they have enough proven cycling disciplines already to invest the cash they have. Funding XC would be a 5-10 year project before they got serious payback and even then you're talking 2 gold medals at most (and national funding is all about medal payback).
oldgit - Member
So you don't like XC kimbers.
I assume that's Danny hart, haven't a clue who the girl is?
Each to their own, I;ve never seen a downhill race, I have seen snippets.
You have to get into the head of some racers. To me rolling downhill has no value whilst hurting myself going uphill gives me a buzz.
granted i dont think watching xcraces is very exciting and i much prefer racing, dh,enduro, mega type stuff to xc racing (im equally bad at all of them )
but xc riding is the most accessible to most people and i love a good xc blast
my point was that DH is more expensive for the bike, kit and uplift, harder to get to venues- fuel is crazy
and yet the uk has been churning out world class dhers for pretty much since the golden era of xc racers mentioned at the start
dh has sustained that level while xc has dwindled
perhaps xc needs to emulate dh more, i suppose that needs mag coverage, sponsors and youd want to do something to get youngsters hooked- work with schools, youth groups, scouts etc, unis seem to have good xc clubs? and maybe just maybe ............ban lycra (runs and hides behind wall)
Kimbers, i understand what your saying but this is the crucial point.
If we are trying to get good world class XC racers then what is the point in trying to create something that no other country recognises as XC?
Would a good Enduro/DH racer win an XC olympic medal?
Yes play with the XC format, but at the end of the day XC is what it is and if you want to get world class riders you have to have them used to racing on XC courses.
and maybe just maybe ............ban lycra (runs and hides behind wall)
lycra is fine, just ban technical and feed zones, that will get rid of the skinsuits
allowing outside support is if us completely against the ethos of xc mtbing, it should be no outside help, no cashing of bottles, no spare wheels etc
all the "we'll get dehydrated" bluff is simply answered by pointing out that you can get 3 litres in a hydration system
it's also a barrier to some as it assists those with deep pockets and family/ friends against the lone privateer
This is what I'm doing at the moment. We have got a yes on a venue, but it is totally flat. There is woodland on the site and remnants of an old MX course.
sounds like it will be a great place for a small local series focusing getting people racing
I need to look at it again. I met there with British Cycling and other club reps and [b]they gave it the go ahead[/b].
However its pretty grass roots - cheap midweek series?
why do you need their permission? BC have no say-so as long as you run to their rules if being insured by them. Regional committees should be coordinating/ advising not giving the "go-ahead"
walleater - Memberand as this thread shows, they don't want to. In five years, the XC National Champs will just be three angry people wobbling around Thetford....
we'll still be running then 😉
Not sure what you mean by that?
What I mean is, that it's probably counter productive to be moaning on about how XC racing is the only form of 'proper' mountain biking, and if you're not into it it's because you're a lazy, pathetic follower of marketing hype.
The kind of 'you stupid kids with all your freeride rubbish, and you fat losers with your 6 inch travel bikes, what's wrong with you' attitude espoused by some in this thread isn't likely to endear people to XC racing.
What are you doing about it, I mean what is you actual contribution apart from moaning and going on and on about what mincers myself and all the XC guys and girls are?
I'm doing nothing, because it's not really my thing - I have done a few enduro type races but XC racing doesn't really appeal. And yes it's partly because I'm not fit enough (and I don't particularly like riding skinny tired bikes with the saddle right up my arse) - I don't see why I should be vilified for that. Although lots of the comments seem to be from people who I'm assuming have never ridden DH given their ignorance about how physically demanding it can be.
I also don't think I've ever called XC guys mincers - I've ridden with a few people who've competed in XC at a decent level and they all had superb technical skills. I do think it's massively lame to see people n XC races walking technical sections though.
walleater - Member
and as this thread shows, they don't want to. In five years, the XC National Champs will just be three angry people wobbling around Thetford....
we'll still be going then 😉
so that's 130 people racing on big berms, table tops, doubles, drops, down great singletrack and up tough climbs then, and no angry people (we ask angry people to lighten up or not to come back)
anyone who thinks you needa ton of money to buy a bike to race xc and be competitive is so wrong...
My current bike, which I race, and can get into the top ten of the local series in vets... is a 96 kona hei hei, ok in 96 it was a £1000 frame but the bike cost me less than £600 to put together (incl frame, sid world cups, m952 xtr groupset) it weighs less than some of the bikes being raced at hadleigh, and is fun to ride too... If I hadnt of wanted the frame so much I could prob have knocked another £100 £150 off the cost.
Its very apparent that watching the crowds over the weekend that xc racing is considerably more popular in europe and the US than the UK - you only had to see the 2 trainloads of Gunn Rita Dahl fans to realise that.. If the Olympics were in france I doubt many of us would have actually bothered to go see annie and liam race at all...
Ive been xc racing since the mid 90s, its heyday I guessm foot and mouth put a stop to is around 2000 and after that it never really recovered. A lot of places dont actually exist anymore, venues like Rats closed down I think due to costs and some places dont get used due to the local clubs not existing anymore...
Whereas I used to be able to race virtually every weekend with an hour or sos driving, Ive now got to drive for anyithng up to 4 hours and am lucky if I can find 2 races a month...
I always struggle to understand XC as a sport, and I mainly ride XC. But I ride it the way I did as a child - I'm pretending I've got a dirt bike, but lacking an engine I'll use gravity. If up-then-down speed was the aim then a CX bike is going to be faster, but I endure the climbs in order to rag the descents. Designing a race *lap* where a mountain bike will be a faster option than a CX bike must be tricky.
(Gravity?) Enduro (as I've heard it explained) probably best represents the pass-time of "climbing to descend", and really makes the "mountain bike" distinct from a "CX bike with 90mm travel in the fork" - possibly it's the way to go to represent non-DH mountain biking as a sport?
I reckon as some have said that the clubs thing is the key. We just don't have a culture of MTB clubs that race and organise races. I think mountain biking in this country has a different ethos that's less about competing (I guess you can see that as negative if you think competing is important). In France the clubs seem to cater for VTT and road and the two are much more closely linked together and organise races in both.
So if you want you could have a moan at road clubs for not doing enough mountain biking. 😉
I think if you want XC to be more popular it needs to move closer to the riding that a lot of MTBers do. Hadleigh Farm is halfway there with the short lap and a lot of the course visible for spectators. The UCI XCE format is close-ish too but the crap courses and single 'lap' didn't quite hit the mark.
How about -
A short (5km) course built a bit like a UK trail centre 'black' or harder - similar to Hadleigh Farm but with more tech sections including proper DH/4X style jumps and drops. Needs to be tough enough to make FS and dropper posts a reasonable weight-to-speed gamble.
Proper multiple lines on the tech sections (of equal difficulty) to allow for 'fun' overtaking.
No tech or feeding areas - riders need to be totally self-sufficient for the duration of the race. A serious mechanical means your ride is over like in the real world (unless you can bodge it with gaffer and zip ties).
Single lap time-trial style qualification for 'grid' places before a more traditional 'endurance' style main race.
Sort of a mash-up of XC, BMX and 4X with the focus more equally on skill and fitness (current XC focuses on the latter?)?
slainte ❓ rob
What I mean is, that it's probably counter productive to be moaning on about how XC racing is the only form of 'proper' mountain biking, and if you're not into it it's because you're a lazy, pathetic follower of marketing hype.
XC racing needs all the marketing hype it can get, the problem is how to do it.
There is no point to dissing other forms of the sport, we should be looking to mutually support each other
The kind of 'you stupid kids with all your freeride rubbish, and you fat losers with your 6 inch travel bikes, what's wrong with you' attitude espoused by some in this thread isn't likely to endear people to XC racing.
we love getting the "stupid kids" and "you fat losers with your 6 inch travel bikes", they generally love racing the downhills in an XC context (ie against others rather than the time trail that is DH) and we constantly get stories about the rider battles for places, swapping on the climbs/ descents
XC racing is about riding your bike as hard as you can for 90 mins and having a laugh doing it. Anyone who thinks differently needs a reality check.
Brownbacks - good to hear and I have been tempted to enter one of your events as I've heard positive things. When I live a bit closer (moving quite near in the next 6 months hopefully) I'd probably be up for some marshalling too.
Designing a race *lap* where a mountain bike will be a faster option than a CX bike must be tricky
errr, no it's not if you have a good venue
A short (5km) course built a bit like a UK trail centre 'black' or harder - similar to Hadleigh Farm but with more tech sections including proper DH/4X style jumps and drops. Needs to be tough enough to make FS and dropper posts a reasonable weight-to-speed gamble.
nothing to stop you doing this now, the rules state the course must be 100% "rideable".
I think your format may be a bit "elite" for most however
as I've heard positive things.
it's all lies and propaganda 😉
I'd probably be up for some marshalling too.
we love our marshals to bits! and you get a free Buff! and other stuff etc etc 😀
Brownbacks - Member
I think your format may be a bit "elite" for most however
For grassroots the courses might need tailoring a bit yes. To be honest I was thinking more about the top end of the sport to get people interested as spectators.
I think though, for most people who might want to race at grassroots level, a pretty much 'Red' graded course would be raceable?
slainte ❓ rob
colournoise - MemberHow about -
A short (5km) course built a bit like a UK trail centre 'black' or harder - similar to Hadleigh Farm but with more tech sections including proper DH/4X style jumps and drops. Needs to be tough enough to make FS and dropper posts a reasonable weight-to-speed gamble.
Proper multiple lines on the tech sections (of equal difficulty) to allow for 'fun' overtaking.
No tech or feeding areas - riders need to be totally self-sufficient for the duration of the race. A serious mechanical means your ride is over like in the real world (unless you can bodge it with gaffer and zip ties).
Sort of a mash-up of XC, BMX and 4X with the focus more equally on skill and fitness (current XC focuses on the latter?)?
slainte rob
i've done a race a bit like that - it was ace!
although we swapped this
for a le-mans start with a bit of good natured pushing and shoving...Single lap time-trial style qualification for 'grid' places before a more traditional 'endurance' style main race.
2k per lap, race for an hour, most laps wins.
(i confess that the lap was more 'easy red', than 'black or harder' - still great fun though)
A short (5km) course built a bit like a UK trail centre 'black' or harder - similar to Hadleigh Farm but with more tech sections including proper DH/4X style jumps and drops. Needs to be tough enough to make FS and dropper posts a reasonable weight-to-speed gamble.
How does that help new-comers to the sport? It might be ok for those who have been riding a while but? Also the point about built, who is going to do the building? and who is paying?
There is no point to dissing other forms of the sport, we should be looking to mutually support each other
Well said, thank God someone has finally come out and said that after 6 pages of different sub niches of a niche within a niche sport slagging each other off!
A short (5km) course built a bit like a UK trail centre 'black' or harder - similar to Hadleigh Farm but with more tech sections including proper DH/4X style jumps and drops. Needs to be tough enough to make FS and dropper posts a reasonable weight-to-speed gamble.
Bloody hell, where are you lot riding?! There's been this pervading sense on this thread and the Olympic MTB one that the Olympic course "isn't hard enough" and "looks boring" (I can guarantee you that it's plenty tough enough!).
But everyone on here seems to be riding in some kind of Escher drawing of constant descents with gap jumps, berms and 4ft drop offs! I'd love to know where it is cos even in my local riding of the Peak District, I have to do gravel tracks and uphills and flat grass trails from time to time!
Bottom line is, if something isn't technical, you're not riding it fast enough!
Seems people just want an enduro event then?? Its like saying the road race should have a cafe stop half way so we can all relate.
I've seen a lot of races and think XC is more exciting to watch than DH.
A few tough spots on the course, race is long enough for you to catch a couple of vantage points. The Dalby world cup was great for this. (i rarely see 6" dropper post bikes doing worry gill or medusas drop.)
I really don't think there is a need for XC to change just to please Weekend Trail centre warriors.
Seems people just want an enduro event then?? Its like saying the road race should have a cafe stop half way so we can all relate.
How is it like that? You think an enduro is 'easy'? Go win one then. More lame sniping, as is this:
Weekend Trail centre warriors.
and this for that matter:
i rarely see 6" dropper post bikes doing worry gill or medusas drop
If you don't think XC needs to change then that's fine, but do you have to be an arse about it?
I've seen a lot of races and think XC is more exciting to watch than DH.
I don't, sorry.
I really don't think there is a need for XC to change just to please Weekend Trail centre warriors.
maybe not but it needs to change to become accessible, friendly, and the natural starting point for people/ kids with an urge to compete off road on a bike
but do you have to be an arse about it?
Not being an arse about it, just my opinion sorry.
How is it like that? More lame sniping, as is this
Not lame sniping, just picking up on comments like:
A short (5km) course built a bit like a UK trail centre 'black' or harder - similar to Hadleigh Farm but with more tech sections including proper DH/4X style jumps and drops. Needs to be tough enough to make FS and dropper posts a reasonable weight-to-speed gamble.
Which IMHO is an Enduro event. Which would be great to have top level televised events like this, but don't think XC should be changed into this, just push enduro more.
Technical is great is your fresh but even the riders yesterday started to look a bit sketchy by the last lap. And they'd had plenty of time to practise it.
I regularly do the Gorricks. By the last lap I'll have been pushing my self hard for over an hour, I'm knacked and my arms are starting to shake, stuff which I would nt even have noticed on a ride with mates (ie with rest breaks) starts to look technical.
I would nt fancy any proper jumps and drops myself not like the riders were taking yesterday I'd just be too knackered to ride them.
Also although chicken lines were available it would be interesting to see if on the first lap whether people would actually have a choice or whether they've just be forced down which ever due to the mass of the crowd (certainly looked that way yesterday).
Also I tend not to bother with practise laps simply isnt time, ie drive to event 30 mins, prep 15 mins, 1:30 hour race, clean up 15 mins, drive home 30 mins. Thats plenty enough time to spend racing for me.
I've also done one downhill race. They was one proper jump in this race, which was fine, but I'd had all the previous day to practise it and I'd also managed a couple of practise runs in the morning.
A XC race just isnt like that riders will turn up and have no idea what the course is like.
maybe not but it needs to change to become accessible, friendly, and the natural starting point for people/ kids with an urge to compete off road on a bike
Yes I think that's down to event organisation more than the course. A couple of tough sections with Hard, moderate and easy runs, with a risk/reward set-up.
Which IMHO is an Enduro event
nah - 'cause you'd still be racing on the climbs.
Not being an arse about it, just my opinion sorry.
Whilst demeaning other people who have a diffent opinion to you. Again, hardly an attitude likely to endear people to your sport.
What scu98rkr said ^^.
Technical is fine but you start to get into situations where riders bottle it, bail, cause a crash or make mistakes cos they're tired. Also you're effectively cutting out the grass-roots element, the newcomers who may not yet have the Elite bike handling skills that everyone on STW so obviously has. I like technical, it's great but "technical" does not necessarily mean 4ft drop offs and insane descents.
I used to help organise the Beastway MTB Series in London and that used a 3 mile lap (different each week) and we used to get "technical" out of a flattish piece of essentially wasteland. Tight turns, blind corners, short steep ups and downs. All inclusive, anyone could ride it but just at varying speeds.
How is it like that? You think an enduro is 'easy'? Go win one then. More lame sniping, as is this:
No need to change your post grum after I have commented to argue your point.
I have never said enduro is easy nor have I said XC is easy. I'm quite happy say I fit more into the weekend warrior box (sorry if that touches a nerve) I don;t have the skills to race XC or Enduro, I just ride for riding's sake and have my opinions and like to argue them on the tinternet like so many others.
Your saying i'm demeaning but your the one in an arse with my opinion. What about all the others criticising XC??
its not that xc has to change its format - its incredibly popular in most of europe and parts ofhte USA just the way it is and has been - what needs to happen is to get more people involved. Every year I speak to people that want to do it, but - havent got a good enough bike, arent fit enough, theyll do it with a bit more training, cant afford it, oh really wish Id done it now.. etc etc..
The structure of races needs to change too - theres no progress unless you do the NPS and have to have a licence - year after year IM racing against (or behind) the same people who are up to 5 minutes a lap faster than the rest of the the filed, yet cant be moved up to elite as they dont have a licence. It is so disheartening, I even tried to move myself up to Elite (as Im actually quicker than some of those riders) but dont have any points to be able to do it. Until theres a set structure open to everyone we'll get no where...
Not too sure what I can really add here, it's all the usual (good) points being made, interspersed with all the usual (tired and rather pathetic) bitching!
XC is the easiest route into MTB racing, it's the most accessible for those who are new to it. Making it far more technical may be more exciting (to some) but will likely put more people off than it will encourage.
Enduro is good, and I'm sure will develop, but something that straddles DH and XC should be popular for most 'normal' riders for whom neither XC nor DH racing typifies what they do and what they think of as mountain biking (is that matters).
There may be things wrong politically with various areas of cycling and there may be levels of imbalance when it comes to funding but for what it's worth all I will say is that I've loved all aspects of cycling at the Olympic Games. The BMX was incredible, The Road and TT races were inspiring, the Track cycling was edge of the seat exciting and the XC was a joy to watch.
I'm a cyclist first and foremost, I have a cheap road bike when the moods takes me on the hard stuff, I have a trail bike for some explorative off road riding, a have a 4X bike for when the bar to bar racing mood takes hold and I have my downhill bike for when I want an immediate adrenaline fix. I love all aspects of cycling, they have all collectively enriched my life and I wouldn't be without any of them and I would have a very hard time choosing just one if it came to it.
I love watching competitive cycling and I love taking part myself and I love the freedom that all forms of cycling ultimately give me and I couldn't bring myself to argue about which is superior, which is more difficult, which is physically harder, technically harder because I'm just grateful I've got cycling in my life and nothing makes me feel better than riding a bike.
Sorry, that was a bit 'mushy' but I think it's worth taking a step back and remembering just how great all this bike malarky stuff is.
The structure of races needs to change too - theres no progress unless you do the NPS and have to have a licence
Totally agree with this !
Been doing the gorricks in the open category for about 4 years. I managed to get a bit quicker one year but still the best I managed was 6th on the first lap 13th by the end.
Admittedly when the field can be over 100 riders this is a massive improvement from finishing 50th.
But what is the point of Master/Super Master/Veteran/Super Veteran ?
There should be no age categories above 16ish just ability categories.
Ie Begineer,Fun,Open,Advanced,Sport,Expert,Elite and not merge Expert/Elite into one race.
There would still be time for this as you would cut out Master/Super Master/Veteran/Super Veteran/Grand Veteran and Senior Veteran.
This way more people would actually come close to winning races and make them compete against similar abilities, might help keep them interested.
Also the Gorrick do occasionally get popular ie new season and the sun is out. But entering a race with 125 people isnt much fun if you get trapped behind ALOT of slower riders.
More ability category might help with that. No one wants to enter Fun cos you just get 2 laps ie so could be 40 mins cycling.
So every one pours into open to get a decent race but then people who have been racing for 5,6,7 years will also be in this category.
So thats another change I'd make. Except for the very "Beginners race" make sure everyone get at least 1 hours racing time.
For the gorricks I'd suggest this and more info on the website
Beginner 2 laps - Ie been riding bike offroad less than a year
Fun 3 laps - Unfit Weekend Warrior
Open 3 laps - Fit Weekend Warrior
Advanced 3 laps - Been racing for at least a year or just generally pretty fit
Sport 4 laps - Previously been near the top of the Advanced category
Expert 4 laps - Previously been near the top of the Sport category
Elite 5 laps - Similar to now
Obviously there would be the worry their would nt be enough riders for all the categories but if you moved all the veteran/masters it would be fine. And beginners doesnt really need to be a proper race.
This way more people would actually come close to winning races and make them compete against similar abilities, might help keep them interested.
No it wouldn't, getting rid of categories would mean fewer folk won, that's very basic maths.
To be honest its also what put me off triathlons, unless you were really really good you didn't win. There's no sense of achievement in finishing (an Olympic distance) one for me, that's a given, I want to compete! I know some do age groups, but it's essentially a secondary criteria.
However... masters is daft. There's no physical degradation in performance at 30, it's now full of former elites who've dropped down for an easier race (why not!?). The BC rule book says the top 3 masters get promoted to expert - that would be a significant demotion!
Admittedly many have gone back to Elite, but now you get folk yo-yoing between the 2, which is daft.
Super Master was just a Gorrick thing to give the fast masters a longer race, IIRC one other series has cottoned on as well.
Trouble is... if you get rid of masters and merge them you'll annoy a lot of people:
- the winning masters, who are forced into elite where they'll never win against full time athletes on a national stage
- the experts who are inundated by faster masters who don't want to go into elite
- the elites who are demoted because they're suddenly outside the top 50, the goalposts having been somewhat moved by the influx of masters
etc etc
The US have gone to a road style 5/4/3/2/1/E cat system, and we were meant to be doing the same, but it's all gone very quiet, so I'm not sure.
I don't think the categories are a huge issue though.
I think there's a bit of an issue with popularity of regional races. Southern XCs are a good step between Gorricks to NPS (for example). Courses are tougher, the standard is higher. The problem is that they have fewer competitors than either, and I don't know why frankly, but that 'transitional' stage from local to national does exist.
Beginner 2 laps - Ie been riding bike offroad less than a year
Fun 3 laps - Unfit Weekend Warrior
Open 3 laps - Fit Weekend Warrior
Advanced 3 laps - Been racing for at least a year or just generally pretty fit
Sport 4 laps - Previously been near the top of the Advanced category
Expert 4 laps - Previously been near the top of the Sport category
Elite 5 laps - Similar to now
WTF is advanced? That's unnecessary. And why have Sport and Expert as the same distance?
Gorrick have always promoted Beginner as being for folk doing their very first race and wanting to try it out in a non-threatening mass-start environment. For some people, that's exactly what they want. If they don't, there are plenty of other options.
The US have gone to a road style 5/4/3/2/1/E cat system, and we were meant to be doing the same, but it's all gone very quiet, so I'm not sure.
is a great idea..
The US have gone to a road style 5/4/3/2/1/E cat system, and we were meant to be doing the same, but it's all gone very quiet, so I'm not sure.
Genuine question to the XC racers out there:
Do you want that? Or do you want categories defined by age AND ability (as now)? Which is simpler (for racers and organisers)? Which is more open to newcomers?
One of the problems with early XC racing in the NW of England was the lack of sensible categories. You had fun classes with maybe 100 riders, then sport with loads more, then an expert/elite class with about 15 riders in.
Plus people would deliberately not enter the harder categories so it was easy to win, we had words with one or two riders who were basically national level but who rode in the sport class for the prizes.
I always enetered the expert/elite class and had a much better race as a result, despite getting hammered.
the road licence system would work great, as you wouldnt have the same people winning the same races year in year out, theyd be 'nowhere to hide' unless you stopped racing or stopped accumulating points
the categories as they are now, and as shown above, are open to abuse and different series have their own different categories...
The trouble is in the first year of a new licence everyone would have a 'starter' licence (cat 4?!)
No it wouldn't, getting rid of categories would mean fewer folk won, that's very basic maths
njee you normally have some very good stuff to say especially about racing, but you seem to have totally missed my point.
The point would not to have less categories but get rid of Master/Veteran and replace them with more ability categories, do you not get what Im saying ?
As you say Masters/Veteran are almost as fast as sport/Expert.
Im near the top of the open category but not quite. I dont think i'll ever win a race except maybe Fun which is a bit pointless at 2 laps long.
The point of advanced etc would be to make more full length races ie 3+ laps but with differing abilities.
you say american is 5/4/3/2/1/E
Does this help ?
Begineer(not a full race) then
5 = Fun
4 = Open
3 = Advanced
2 = Sport
1 = Expert
E = Elite
Not far off what I'm saying
So, the general consensus is that the XC racing scene in the UK is dead, or near death. Meanwhile DH racing is in good health and Enduro is exploding (not just in the UK but worldwide).
Whilst XC might be bigger and more popular in other countries the same is true of all cycling disciplines, at the end of the day marketing and media is rapidly moving away from the sport.
But according to all the ultra fit, ultra talented elite level world class XC athletes of STW, anyone who doesn't understand or appreciate XC racing is a fat i.t consultant knacker on a 6" bike and it's peoples perceptions that need to change, not XC. Oh no, if you don't get it there is something wrong with you.
Whatever could the matter be.
I don't think the categories are a huge issue though.
Yes but it would be nice to win a race or at least compete to win one once in a while.
At my best I come about 15th in the open category.
People are keen to enter open as it has 3 laps which is a good compromise on laps.
There are two 3 laps races open and Masters/Veteran.
Why not have two 3 lap races open and open advanced and then mix the 2 groups.
That way I and others might have a chance of winning open while the best riders from both groups battle it out in open advanced.
Now good riders under 30 who want to do 3 laps do open and the Masters/Veteran are pretty much all good riders (who really should be joined by the best from the open category).
The US have gone to a road style 5/4/3/2/1/E cat system, and we were meant to be doing the same, but it's all gone very quiet, so I'm not sure.
Genuine question to the XC racers out there:
Do you want that? Or do you want categories defined by age AND ability (as now)? Which is simpler (for racers and organisers)? Which is more open to newcomers?
Do you want that?
Yes
Which is more open to newcomers?
I would guess the american one as your more likely to be with riders of your ability. You might mistakenly enter Veteran/Masters thining the racing will be a bit slower and be totally blown away these races are pretty dam quick. Quicker than open anyhow.
I'm quite happy say I fit more into the weekend warrior box (sorry if that touches a nerve)
we have an entire category just for you
Yes I think that's down to event organisation more than the course. A couple of tough sections with Hard, moderate and easy runs, with a risk/reward set-up.
it's a lot harder than that, you need to find the options, risk assess, balance risk/ reward, and be able to mark it out sensibly
its not that xc has to change its format - its incredibly popular in most of europe and parts ofhte USA just the way it is and has been - what needs to happen is to get more people involved. Every year I speak to people that want to do it, but - havent got a good enough bike, arent fit enough, theyll do it with a bit more training, cant afford it, oh really wish Id done it now.. etc etc..
that's all about getting accessible local series of the ground, skills coaching as part of the package and making sure all feel welcome on a clunker or on bling
The structure of races needs to change too - theres no progress unless you do the NPS and have to have a licence - year after year IM racing against (or behind) the same people who are up to 5 minutes a lap faster than the rest of the the filed, yet cant be moved up to elite as they dont have a licence. It is so disheartening, I even tried to move myself up to Elite (as Im actually quicker than some of those riders) but dont have any points to be able to do it. Until theres a set structure open to everyone we'll get no where...
a road category system has been bouncing around. My understanding is that it has been binned/ room 101 due to the commercial race organisers not wanting to upset the cosy masters/ vets racing setup
my view is that age categories <40 are a cancer that are retarding the sport, once at 40 the choice should still their to race by ability
the advantage for organisers is then can start grading courses to match the riders which makes it easier for novices to get going
The trouble is in the first year of a new licence everyone would have a 'starter' licence (cat 4?!)
if you win you get moved up, lots of people can be "self" graded if they are currently racing for points
I think there's a bit of an issue with popularity of regional races. Southern XCs are a good step between Gorricks to NPS (for example). Courses are tougher, the standard is higher. The problem is that they have fewer competitors than either, and I don't know why frankly, but that 'transitional' stage from local to national does exist.
A reason I dont do Southern XC - Seeing as Im yet to come right near the top of the field in a Gorrick open there seems little point in me moving on to a "harder" event, as I will just finish further down the field.
Best I should save my money and train a bit harder. If there were more categories and I actually felt like after a few years training I was getting close to winning a race I would be more involved.
Assuming Fun doesnt count as at 2 laps its a bit pointless.
The public Profile of XC in this country certainly has suffered, I agree about the above, if the UK want to win an Olympic XC gold there's no point trying to change the format locally/nationally to encourage entry, as anyone competing in these races won't recognise the sport they are faced with once they get to international level competition.
Unfortunately I don't think the fact that its a stand-alone event in the Olympics helps it either, the likes of Hoy and Pendlton were able to win multiple medals in multiple events due to the bredth of track cycling events on offer so as a proposition for BC funding they were very good [I]'Value for money'[/I]...
That opportunity isn't really there for XC as a single race olympic event, while the WC/world Champs between Olympic cycles (Where alot of the real work in developing a rider for international competition would need to be done) isn't visible or promoted on anything like the same level, lack of exposure = lack of interest = lack of funding to even get riders there in the first place, Even within cycling/cycling media itself TBH...
I think the point is if you can't rely on BC to support, grow and promote the sport when its profile is so low, then sadly you need to develop a commercial proposition for funding, but I'm not sure how that really works for XC in the UK.
The current bias in MTBing (in the UK) is either towards non-competitive enjoyable riding at trail centres (nothing wrong with that really, its people out and about having fun on bikes is a good thing) or the more 'exciting' disiplines (DH/Gravity enduro) which again are a bit niche and removed from XC now, these hold some commercial appeal as they have a younger more "brand aware" audience, they are the accessible and/or exciting offshoots of MTBing.
Road and track now looks Slick and Big and has plenty of public exposure it's the sort of thing people would love to be part of. DH/Gravity Enduro sells danger, bravery and excitement I just don't see how XC gets itself into that mix, there's nothing wrong with the sport it's just it's competing with other shinier baubles for public attention and its going to loose at that game.
I speak as part of the problem really, when I grew up and got into it MTB basically was XC (Late 80s early 90s), there wasn't really any major sub-division of the sport that I can remember, people raced XC and not much else...
And when DH first came along, it was initially a sort of bolt on; XC racers took the same bike down a basic DH course (in the same kit mostly) and it was a bit of a fun side show.
Like many I got more into DH and non-racey trail faffing and less into XC and as it pulled itself away from XC it took plenty of riders interest with it...
So now the focus of most new entrants to the sport and many of those who've been at it a while is [I]"The Fun Bits" [/I] (Downhill and trails) and the uphill slogs required for XC racing fitness just doesn't appeal in the same way, even when you try to frame the dual rewards of better fitness and access to more fun bits once you've pedaled up...
The general culture and concept of what MTBing actually is has changed over the last 15-20 years and now doesn't really match the needs of creating a Competitive British XC team... How do you address that?
categories, how do you make sure that riders take licences? I don't know many roadies who pot hunt in the same way mtbers seem to have been guilty of, being a 1st cat is the target rather than winning a camelbak.
As for where we are and where we go? There does need to be more in the way of races particularly at grassroots level. I know it goes against the STW make it harder thing, but look at Cross. Farms, Parks, etc near where people live, a bit of woodland, some rocks. The course doesn't need to be that hard. Riding will do that. A flat course can be harder than a hilly course if done right. As long as riders feel that they can achieve something i believe you are half way there.
njee you normally have some very good stuff to say especially about racing, but you seem to have totally missed my point.The point would not to have less categories but get rid of Master/Veteran and replace them with more ability categories, do you not get what Im saying ?
Apologies if I misunderstood. I think your issue is largely one of semantics, but if you get rid of master/super master/vet/grand vet/super vet and replace with 1 new ability category (advanced - as per your suggestion) then surely you [b]are [/b]reducing the numbers?
I think you'll get more grand vets (for example) being annoyed that they have to race against 20-somethings in Sport, rather than having a race of their own. I could be wrong on that though, suspect opinion will be divided.
Yes but it would be nice to win a race or at least compete to win one once in a while.At my best I come about 15th in the open category.
People are keen to enter open as it has 3 laps which is a good compromise on laps.
There are two 3 laps races open and Masters/Veteran.
Why not have two 3 lap races open and open advanced and then mix the 2 groups.
But why would you? At the moment it's fairly clear cut: if you want to race for 3 laps you do open. If you are over 40 you do vets. Under a revised system if you want to do 3 laps (or are we having compulsory licenses to avoid pot-hunting?) you have a choice of 2, with a variation in name alone, how do you know where you fit? It's like Sport and Open at Mayhem, bar a subtle difference re licenses which affects the top 5%, they are the same.
Open always used to be called Novice. People didn't like the 'beginner' connotations so they changed it to Open. Rob Lee turned up at a Gorrick (whilst still doing more endurance racing) and raced Master/Open/Expert all on the same day. He won Open and people complained because he was clearly 'too good' for Open. People are fickle - they don't want to be classed as beginners, but don't like being beaten by folk they see should be racing in other categories.
The course doesn't need to be that hard. Riding will do that. A flat course can be harder than a hilly course if done right. As long as riders feel that they can achieve something i believe you are half way there.
That's what events like Beastway and the (newer) Manchester Midweek Madness are about. Entry level, grass roots, FUN, social events on what are basically inner city parks. The course does not have to be some rock infested tech fest, [b]anything[/b] can be a racecourse and can be hard if you do it right.
As mentioned above, there's been this attitude shift in MTBing in the past 15 years where you HAVE to now go and ride a trail centre on your 6" travel full sus because nothing else is gnarl core enough. XC has been the unfortunate victim of that.
categories, how do you make sure that riders take licences? I don't know many roadies who pot hunt in the same way mtbers seem to have been guilty of, being a 1st cat is the target rather than winning a camelbak.
You can't. Plenty of people 'try' mountain bike racing, or even do 1-2 a year for a bit of a laugh. Few do that with road racing. They commit to it (helped by the fact there are races every night of the week in most counties) and thus a license is a reasonable expense. Unless you want to travel a long way the same isn't true for mountain biking, you may have 10 races a year within an hours drive, if you're lucky. I reckon 90% of people at a Gorrick (and at c700 riders per event they get more than most) would not be remotely interested in a compulsory license.
mrmoI know it goes against the STW make it harder thing, but look at Cross. Farms, Parks, etc near where people live, a bit of woodland, some rocks. The course doesn't need to be that hard. Riding will do that. A flat course can be harder than a hilly course if done right. As long as riders feel that they can achieve something i believe you are half way there.
Believe it or not, some people, even some XC racers enjoy a technical challenge and race so they can excel on tougher parts, not necessarily win . If races had a better balance of climbing/flat/technical sections people might be more interested. I'd do more XC races if I thought there would be a decent amount of fun parts to balance out the hard work. The last thing it needs, imo is more tracks where a cyclocross bike would be faster. Not many riders (xc racers) I know want to pay/drive/race an event where it's already a foregone conclusion that the guy who spends most time on his roadbike will win.
As mentioned above, there's been this attitude shift in MTBing in the past 15 years where you HAVE to now go and ride a trail centre on your 6" travel full sus because nothing else is gnarl core enough. XC has been the unfortunate victim of that.People doing what people want to do and having fun. Shame on them.
Changing the categories in XC comes up from time to time. Seems a bit like re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, frankly. You would be better off fixing that big hole in the boat, or not steaming blindly towards it in the first place.
Everyone has a view on what would be best for categories, generally based on their own personal circumstances.
Mind you I guess it would give the illusion of progress being made to fix things, some obvious signs of activity.
I haven't read anything but:
what do you like the most? Riding around a muddy field for one and half hour of doing 7 times the same boring loop? Getting 4-5 hours in the heart of mountains riding with your friends on nice techy singletrack? Or getting 5000 m of altitude loss on a couple of highly adrenaline fueled tracks all day long.
Or on the other hand what do you enjoy the most watching? The olympics XC or Danny Hart run at champery?
Believe it or not, some people, even some XC racers enjoy a technical challenge and race so they can excel on tougher parts, not necessarily win . If races had a better balance of climbing/flat/technical sections people might be more interested. I'd do more XC races if I thought there would be a decent amount of fun parts to balance out the hard work. The last thing it needs, imo is more tracks where a cyclocross bike would be faster.
comes down to course design and what level your pitching the race at. If you want technical go race national level, but if your just starting out is that really the best place to start?
I think something else that could be considered is the way road races are categorised? but rather than the road ability cats for entry E/1, 2/3/4 etc. make it clear what the course is like, have clear guidance on what makes a local race etc.
Obviously you need enough races to make it work though,
I haven't rad anything but:
what do you like the most? Riding around a muddy field for one and half hour of doing 7 times the same boring loop? Getting 4-5 hours in the heart of mountains riding with your friend on nice techy singletrack? Or getting 5000 m of altitude loss on a couple of highly adrenaline fueled tracks with your friends.Or on the other hand what do you enjoy the most watching? The olympics XC or Danny Hart run at champery?
Juan,
Everyone knows your attitude to XC racing. what your describing is fine and can be a nice way of spending a day, but it isn't XC racing. Asfor your last point, DH is to me watching paint dry, too slow, too boring. A lot of this is down to coverage i suspect. But each to their own.
I enjoy Cristalp, what better than spending a day crossing the Swiss Alps, climbs, downhills, etc. It is a race for a few at the front but for most, it is just a dayout and a challenge. It certainly isn't an XC race though.
Believe it or not, some people, even some XC racers enjoy a technical challenge and race so they can excel on tougher parts, not necessarily win . If races had a better balance of climbing/flat/technical sections people might be more interested. I'd do more XC races if I thought there would be a decent amount of fun parts to balance out the hard work. The last thing it needs, imo is more tracks where a cyclocross bike would be faster. Not many riders (xc racers) I know want to pay/drive/race an event where it's already a foregone conclusion that the guy who spends most time on his roadbike will win
Muddyfunster what races are you on about exactly ? I dont have much experience but I'd still say for most races you'd still be better on a MTB as the suspension helps even out mistakes when your tired.
I wonder if some of the issues Muddyfunster mentions are just a side-effect of the way the hierarchy works. Technicality generally goes up as the 'level' does, however the standard does too. So you go to a 'local' level race and they're the least technical (I did do one in Wales once which was just around fields, literally, it was utter toss, completely rubbish), so you get the perception that the fittest rider wins, with little skill, probably justified. Perhaps MF finishes in the top 1/3.
Then you look at a national race, which by and large are more technical, but the standard is higher, so MF (for example) still finishes in the top 1/3, because despite being better on the technical sections, his lower fitness compared to the top guys is more obvious.
Dunno, just saying. I certainly don't think that more technical races at a grass-roots level is what is needed to encourage people in.
Saying that... is it even struggling? Entry numbers seem to be well up, seem to be more people racing than in any time I've been racing since 2000 (I realise this was after the 'hey-day' to an extent, but I don't think it's waning).
Or on the other hand what do you enjoy the most watching? The olympics XC or Danny Hart run at champery?
Can I enjoy watching both?
I mean I don't have to be entirely in one tribe or the other do I?
I do really like DH racing, but I did also enjoy watching the Olympic XC, and the BMX, track, Road and TT events...
It's been nice to have cycling on the TV so much lately, it'll be a shame now the olympics and TDF are over that general cycling coverage will sharply drop off again...
Or on the other hand what do you enjoy the most watching? The olympics XC or Danny Hart run at champery?
XC in Person
DH on TV
Riding around a muddy field for one and half hour of doing 7 times the same boring loop?
Apparently loads of people do this for 24hr
Everyone knows your attitude to XC racing. what your describing is fine and can be a nice way of spending a day, but it isn't XC racing
You probably mean the middle bits, it isn't XC racing indeed. IT's called Enduro or XMB. And it is indeed way less boring than XC. I raced my share while in the UK. And to be honest only one race was actually nice and fun to ride. All the other where boring as hell.
Apparently loads of people do this for 24hr
Indeed, it makes that argument flawed, because 24 hour races get far more entrants than XC (or Enduro or DH or stage) races, despite being more 'boring' from a terrain perspective. Indeed the biggest one (in the world?) really is just a load of fields in the Malverns. Not for everyone, but clearly what a lot of folk enjoy.
yes I wonder if alot of people get their idea of XC racing from Mountain mayhem and Sleepless. Although there are a couple of good sections in Moutain Mayhem its easily the most boring course I've raced.
Although there are a couple of good sections in Moutain Mayhem its easily the most boring course I've raced.
Partly a limiting factor of a venue that can accommodate 5000 people and all the infrastructure, partly the fact that it has to appeal to and be rideable by all levels of riders including at night/when tired.
Very much so, but likewise I think people do that (or see the pictures) and assume that's what XC racing is, perhaps unsurprisingly.
And it is indeed way less boring than XC.
In your opinion, and seeing as you're going to bring absolutely nothing constructive, perhaps you ought to jog on.
on a slightly different note - just been speaking to some (non bike) guys that got tickets for the weekend - told them there was a round ofthe NPS taking place just down the road in two weeks (langdon hills), explained it wont be anywhere near as a spectacle as this weekend, but theyre coming down, in their words - looking forward to getting a bit nearer to the bikes...
As mentioned above, there's been this attitude shift in MTBing in the past 15 years where you HAVE to now go and ride a trail centre on your 6" travel full sus because nothing else is gnarl core enough. XC has been the unfortunate victim of that.
Yet again, does this have to be expressed in such a bitchy and derogatory way? Maybe lots of people just think that kind of riding is more fun.