[Closed] XC numbers down?

[quote="fifeandy"]I disagreeI agree, with one small addition, I think he is a tiny bit in denial about how fit the average [i]racing[/i] cyclist is.

It's not uncommon.

Fifeandy- but locally we have Fun and Open to cater for them. Or CX.

Why are there no Cat5 type relaxed road races though???

Ghostlymachine- exactly. The guys keen enough to race are generally keen enough to train and generally get out almost every week. I see a lot of the same people at the local circuit of XC and CX races and racing makes you quicker at racing 😉

Weeksy- why don't you just organise a group ride and have a raffle to see who's the winner this week, then you can not train and still be in with a chance of winning 😉 😀

Why are there no Cat5 type relaxed road races though???

But this then comes back to the categories and having the right people in the right group. In my opinion, sport should be that group - you're quicker than those in the fun category but you're not training 10+ hours a week. The barrier to this working is that you need to be top 15 in the country to get promoted to expert. Which is nuts!

CX has it nailed in many respects.

Short, sharp, fun with extra silliness thrown into the mix from time to time.

How does XC incorporate those elements?...

Agreed. And thinking back to when I used to race XC late 80s to early 90s, on a rigid bike at Eastway or in the Midlands it was a lot like CX now, only the Northern courses like Bosley were more MTB-like. Even our local series near Chester at the windsurf lakes was pretty much CX grade now.

The only MTB XC that's appealed to me in recent years (ie 10+ years now) has been the Welsh 100s, Kona / Merida events. There's your XC sportive, they were great events for riders of all levels and there were shorter routes available. Hard to plan a series on a longer route like that, but then if CX events don't appeal there's not a lot in the middle ground that's popular enough (with non-regular 'racers') to sustain itself.

Also, none of your riding is anywhere near race intensity. Without at least one ride a week that is simulating a race effort- why do you expect to turn up and race and not get trounced??

I said this yesterday so I'll say it again; I'm by no means the fastest rider around these parts but I do race, and although one of my old "social" crew kept up with me on an 8min flying piece of flat singletrack the other day, after he was able to talk again he was quite open about the fact he couldnt have done that for much longer, let alone an 1h 20mins.

Fifeandy- but locally we have Fun and Open to cater for them

As i've said, we dont actually have those categories, since they are at the whims of the organiser, not an official BC category with license points - if they were, the problem would be much smaller.

As it is, the option for me is a 2 lap 'novice' race, and lets face it, at ~3.8W/kg and performing quite well in 7-10hr races then novice isn't the place for me.

I'm quite happy to accept i'm not good enough for Sport (in my region at least), but at least give me a point scoring category that is at my level.

@Ghost has made quite a telling point - the gulf between the average cyclist and the average racing cyclist is huge, and unfortunately I seem to find myself in some sort of gap in the middle.

The barrier to this working is that you need to be top 15 in the country to get promoted to expert. Which is nuts!

Especially in geographic locations where not that many races are available - you could win 3 races from 3 entries and still not get promoted.

Why do some people here seem to think they should be able to rock up to a sport race and come mid field without training?

That's what Fun/open are for.

Who's said that ? Quite clearly the guys in here discussing the finishing positions do train.... they're clearly far from unfit...

Fun/Open are often just as quick as Sport.

As it is, the option for me is a 2 lap 'novice' race, and lets face it, at ~3.8W/kg and performing quite well in 7-10hr races then novice isn't the place for me.

On a decent day i'm closer to 2.4W/KG.... which tells me either i need to be 50% more powerful, or start cutting some limbs off 🙂

On a decent day i'm closer to 2.4W/KG.... which tells me either i need to be 50% more powerful, or start cutting some limbs off

Cutting limbs off certainly helps.
Lets say my W/Kg is far more impressive than my raw FTP.
Although being an out and out climber isn't particularly useful in the UK, and the lack of raw power really hurts when muddy or very rough.

Fun/Open are often just as quick as Sport.

I should hope so, they're doing at least one lap less than everyone else!

I think I remember you racing the earlier MSG's? Did you used to wear a Brooklyn racing top? Or have I made that up?

Who's said that ? Quite clearly the guys in here discussing the finishing positions do train.... they're clearly far from unfit...

Fun/Open are often just as quick as Sport.

How about here?

I disagree, I think he seems to have a very good idea how fit the average cyclist is (not very), and the entire problem is stemming from the fact that neither Cat4 road or Sport XC are accessible in the slightest to them.

Complaining that sport isn't accessible ignores the fact that there are at least one and possibly two categories below this. I don't know the relative speeds of Sport and Open but I'd be very surprised if the median speeds are the same.

Especially in geographic locations where not that many races are available - you could win 3 races from 3 entries and still not get promoted.

Still didn't get promoted. So 10 or 12 high point scoring finishes (many podiums i'd guess) still might not get you bumped up.

Sounds mad.

Complaining that sport isn't accessible ignores the fact that there are at least one and possibly two categories below this.

F* me but I swear some people cant read!
[u][b]OPEN IS NOT A MANDATORY BC POINT SCORING CATEGORY[/b][/u]

I think I remember you racing the earlier MSG's? Did you used to wear a Brooklyn racing top? Or have I made that up?

Not me buddy...

Its apparently worse than that, a guy i work with used to race sport in the late 90s and managed to finish 4th or 5th overall in the NPS and won the regional series one year and a similar set of results the year before.
Still didn't get promoted. So 10 or 12 high point scoring finishes (many podiums i'd guess) still might not get you bumped up.

That's absolutely not the case now in the UK. Only your top 7 results count, so you don't get people doing 20 races getting promoted over people who've only done 10. You may get someone who only races in Scotland who wins every race they do, plus one regional champs, which is the same value as a national race.

IIRC when I got my expert licence I was 1st in the BC sport rankings (may have been 2nd, lets pretend not), my Southern results were pretty poor, I got one 2nd, plus a 2nd in a Midlands XC and a 2nd in a Welsh XC and then 7th, 5th, 3rd, 2nd and 1st in the nationals. Can't remember if the regional 2nd was worth more than a national 7th.

I hardly dominated, I know plenty of people who made it to elite without ever winning a race, so two complete seasons racing with promotions at the end.

Good, he didn't sound very impressed with it.

That was in 2007, so it's been that way for a good while to be fair.

I wonder if they should run a points system similar to road racing where you have to attain a certain number rather than be 'Top #'.

Or maybe I should quit my whinging and pedal a bit harder.

I do remember a certain Mr Bouttell turning up to the nationals and destroying everyone in Sport. He was promptly moved up a category (or two)...

No idea, i've not been in the uk for 15 years other than the occasional holiday/business trip (and a handful of races) and i think he left about 10 or 11 years ago and hasn't raced competitively for at least that long.

So the fine details of BCs current (or 10 year old) promotion criteria are certainly lost on me. And probably him.

I do remember a certain Mr Bouttell turning up to the nationals and destroying everyone in Sport. He was promptly moved up a category (or two

Actually he wasn't, he raced the entire year in sport, and smashed everyone. They did move him straight to elite though IIRC. Dave Henderson moved straight from sport to elite without dominating sport too. It's basically on the whim of BC!

Having points thresholds for categories, as with road, would certainly help. Once you hit a points threshold you move up. Simples.

One thing to note is that not all MTB XC races are run under BC regs. Gorrick races are not, and they don't have any BC points attached. This means they can set the categories whichever way they want. It does allow fast youth and juniors to ride up (e.g. National standard juniors will often ride in Expert for the extra workout).

Seems to me there are two separate issues: can more people be encouraged to race xc? If yes rankings and categories are probably fine. If no, second issue: is the current system best for the numbers racing?

I think finding ways to encourage more people to race is better, and I'm not convinced the category system is preventing that many entrants. More positive publicity and more grass root events would do that best IMO.

If we aren't getting bigger numbers I think only one non ranking cat and a bigger difference between that race and the lowest ranking event in terms of distance would force the faster people in fun to man up and race in sport, making the sport cat bigger and more representative of the general population. Bigger fields would also mean coming nearer the end would still be fun if you were having a race.

I don't think comparing cx and xc is helpful. They are complimentary and xc should have a significant difference to cx or you may as well race one of the summer cx series

That he did. And the Thetford Winter series. By a lap if I remember correctly.

Having points thresholds for categories, as with road, would certainly help. Once you hit a points threshold you move up. Simples.

I agree on principal, but with so few races it doesn't work in practice. It's ok on the road because most serious roadies will do 30+ races a year. If you're only racing on the MTB 10 times, and that's two series of 5 races, if you move up halfway through it screws your whole season. If you carry points up you could potentially usurp someone who's been racing the whole season in the tougher category.

Southern XC are run to BC regs but still allow a bit of category swapping, it's not all that rigid.

It is possible to just ring up BC and ask for a different licence, they'll most likely give it to you so long as you don't try and go from zero points in Sport up to Elite.

I hadn't done any XC for a while so had a Sport licence when I started again, and finished second in three races on the bounce (behind Mr Boutell as it happens) so rang up and got an Expert licence instead.
They wouldn't do it when I was given a 4th cat licence by mistake though, I had to get the points!

fifeandy - Member

I disagree, I think he seems to have a very good idea how fit the average cyclist is (not very), and the entire problem is stemming from the fact that neither Cat4 road or Sport XC are accessible in the slightest to them.

THIS. People seem to be saying over and over "that's just how hard it is" "you need to put in more effort" and variations without really acknowledging the impact that has on participation. Again, this isn't a problem exactly- if you're happy for your sport to be small and performance oriented, that's reasonable. But it means you can't complain about low entries and lack of events. (I don't know if it's sustainable)

fifeandy - Member

@Northwind, i think the main thing that puts me off the Perth and Falkirk muckmedden events is they are so short. ~90 mins riding even on a trail bike rather than a fast bike, and i've got to be honest and say being a moderately anti-social git i'm all about the riding and not so much the atmosphere etc afterwards.

I guess for you, you want a more "entry level" race in terms of deadliness but not effort, which is fair enough- most of the entry level enduro races tend to be pitched low for both but you're coming at it from a different angle which means that doesn't work so well. Tricky one.

<snip>
For me i'd be more interested in a couple of fairly decent big riding days EWS style, just with more mellow timed sections.

Tour de Ben Nevis? I think you're right, races like this'd be a good addition to the year. And the perfect antithesis to what I call the enduro arms race

Has it given you any ideas ? I seem to see a LOT less XC stuff in the summer... Whilst it's fun sometimes in the mud, i'd much rather find myself riding on a nice summer morning than a wet and horrible foggy morning.

Yes it really has. It's interesting to read all of the comments about the 'beginner, open, fun' categories as we have been reviewing this over the closed season and think we may have come up with a decent idea; we are thinking of running A race that wil combine and of these non British Cycling categories, it'll be an 'up to' 3 lap race and as long as you complete 1 lap you will get a result, not a DNF as you would in a regular lap based race, this will hopefully give us 3 races (1 lap, 2 laps and 3 laps) within one, hopefully this will mean that those who only fancy 1 lap will be in a race the same as those who are completing 3, what do you think?

Weeksy, to answer your question about the length of the season, the SouthernXC in 2017 will run 5 rounds from March to July and stop before the summer holidays because it has proven historically that the number die off significantly after this. The resurgence of CX has meant that there is the same problem in September, It seems to go like this; XC racers train in the winter/spring for a good spring and early summer season the quite understandably go on their family holiday for a rest and come back to either take part in and train for their local CX league or enjoy riding away from racing.

At the SouthernXC we are trying hard to put Mountain Bike (not necessarily XC) races on that cater as wide a range of people as possible. We really don't care what you wear, what you ride or how fast you are/aren't but what we do care about is that your enjoying it and want to come back for more. You'll find that all members of the organising team have got time to talk, at the end of your race you'll always see someone in a high viz (usually me) milling around the arena listening and chatting, come and talk to us, we'll always listen to your feedback but we also just want to hear how your race went, the bits you loved and the bits you loathed...

Complaining that sport isn't accessible ignores the fact that there are at least one and possibly two categories below this.
F* me but I swear some people cant read!
OPEN IS NOT A MANDATORY BC POINT SCORING CATEGORY

So what you really mean is that you want to have a license and points for Open/Fun?

So what you really mean is that you want to have a license and points for Open/Fun?

I think fun/novice would be better left alone and up to the organisers discretion, but yes, as I said about 5 times before, there should ideally be another two point scoring steps on the ladder.

So something like:

[b]Fun/Novice[/b] (no license required - for raw beginners and maybe parents that are only really there cos their kids are.)
[b]Intro[/b] (For folk that enjoy racing, but for whatever reason aren't very good at it)
[b]Sport[/b] (Similar to intro, but at a higher level, maybe riders that train 6-8 hrs a week)
[b]Enthusiast[/b] (Riders that take their racing seriously, but have not yet, or are not able to reach higher level)
[b]Expert[/b] (As current)
[b]Elite[/b] (As current)

Obviously needs to come hand in hand with a slightly more robust promotion/relegation system, and a major media campaign to drum up fresh blood

So what you really mean is that you want to have a license and points for Open/Fun?

I'd question why, I must say.

THIS. People seem to be saying over and over "that's just how hard it is" "you need to put in more effort" and variations without really acknowledging the impact that has on participation. Again, this isn't a problem exactly- if you're happy for your sport to be small and performance oriented, that's reasonable. But it means you can't complain about low entries and lack of events. (I don't know if it's sustainable)

To counter this, you're not expected to be a fully paid up member of the PFA to pay Sunday league 5-a-side football. Why do people want a national ranking position, to have to buy a race licence and so on for a bit of fun? Why not just ride the non-ranked races, of which there are a number, and would appear to offer what a lot of people want?

fifeandy - Member
So what you really mean is that you want to have a license and points for Open/Fun?
I think fun/novice would be better left alone and up to the organisers discretion, but yes, as I said about 5 times before, there should ideally be another two point scoring steps on the ladder.

So something like:

Fun/Novice (no license required - for raw beginners and maybe parents that are only really there cos their kids are.)
Intro (For folk that enjoy racing, but for whatever reason aren't very good at it)
Sport (Similar to intro, but at a higher level, maybe riders that train 6-8 hrs a week)
Enthusiast (Riders that take their racing seriously, but have not yet, or are not able to reach higher level)
Expert (As current)
Elite (As current)

Too complicated. If anything I'd go the other way and just have novice (non ranking), senior and elite cats. It's not like we have too many people racing to make the fields too big. With your suggestion every male that went to the last Welsh xc could have had a podium.

Njee, those races don't really exist outside the SE, mores the pity.

Njee, those races don't really exist outside the SE, mores the pity.

Does virtually every race not have at least an open/fun category though? Why must stuff be ranked for those who, by their very nature, are being put off by it all being a bit serious?

Years ago Novice was renamed Open because people didn't like the insinuation that you were a Novice, do we need to rename fun too? Make it "enthusiast" or something?

If anything we're seeing consolidation of categories, I'm not sure you can go adding new ones without the numbers to support, although I fully accept it's chicken and egg.

I'm not sure why ranking points matter. In sport and expert, their main function is to try to control promotions. Are you suggesting that you shouldn't be able to directly enter sport?

Not having a license doesn't stop there being series standings to work towards. I know MSG publish a ranking for their open category. Is that not a standard thing?

I'd question why, I must say.

Why must stuff be ranked for those who, by their very nature, are being put off by it all being a bit serious?

Does virtually every race not have at least an open/fun category though?

[u]NO[/u], i'm clearly failing at explaining.
I don't have access to [u]ANY[/u] open/fun category races

I know MSG publish a ranking for their open category. Is that not a standard thing?

Again, getting somewhat tired of explaining, but open category isn't even a standard thing, let alone series rankings for it.

Does virtually every race not have at least an open/fun category though? Why must stuff be ranked for those who, by their very nature, are being put off by it all being a bit serious?

Years ago Novice was renamed Open because people didn't like the insinuation that you were a Novice, do we need to rename fun too? Make it "enthusiast" or something?

If anything we're seeing consolidation of categories, I'm not sure you can go adding new ones without the numbers to support, although I fully accept it's chicken and egg.

Do we not think that the timing of these races can be a factor though. Take the Gorrick series for example...the novice/fun races tend to be held at the very end of the day when everyone else has packed up and gone. This was exactly the reason why the Vets races at National level were moved on Sundays and the Elite race made the last race of the day. It's bad enough when the Elites finish and most trade stands and spectators have gone home to a nice Sunday roast, when the novices guys finish to a deserted arena, it has to be demoralising...I know I felt a bit like a hindrance when I was that novice (its bad enough finishing your race when the podiums for it are taking place, never mind when everyone has gone home)

Gorrick fun class is just after the u12s and the first 'main' class out.

Last out is the open male 4 hours later

Been there too Gaz, coming in to watch the winner walking off the podium!

njee20 - Member
Njee, those races don't really exist outside the SE, mores the pity.
Does virtually every race not have at least an open/fun category though? Why must stuff be ranked for those who, by their very nature, are being put off by it all being a bit serious?

Years ago Novice was renamed Open because people didn't like the insinuation that you were a Novice, do we need to rename fun too? Make it "enthusiast" or something?

If anything we're seeing consolidation of categories, I'm not sure you can go adding new ones without the numbers to support, although I fully accept it's chicken and egg.

Think we actually agree on that one.

What I meant by my comment is the more races like Gorrick that aren't bc sanctioned, aren't technical like Newnham etc, but just consist of good racing on fun flowing singletrack and a burger afterwards the better chance we have of re-invigorating the sport which will hopefully filter through to regional/ national levels. Sadly at the moment, as I understand it, these races aren't viable for an individual to do outside of the s.e. for financial reasons relating to numbers.

My local CX league (Wessex) trialled a 'novice' category lasts eason, and for this season has made it mandatory for organisers at every round. The aim is to encourage those that want to try CX but are either worried about the speed in their category, or want to just have a go and see if they like it.

It follows some pretty simple rules:

* It is run as part of the youth race (U14/U16)
* Novices set off 2 mins after the youths, so they experience having lots of other riders on the course
* The youth race is approx 30mins long, so less than seniors or vets. That way its an easier intro.
* Men and women race together
* You are expected to do a max of 3 novices in a season. After that if you are keen and want to continue you are expected to race in your respective category. That isn't really policed, its more of a guidance and to stop people from sticking in the novice
* No podium, though there is a separate results sheet
* You will get your backside kicked by the fast youths. That is fine 🙂

I wonder if a novice cat could work for local/regional racing. Its sort of like the fun cat, but set off with the youth cats so there are more riders on the course and you are not riding solo.

[i]Southern XC are run to BC regs but still allow a bit of category swapping, it's not all that rigid.[/i]

Not in the youths you can't as BC have become VERY strict. In BC races youths have to ride in their category unless they have dispensation only really happens on road). Adults is different I guess...

Gorrick fun class is just after the u12s and the first 'main' class out.

Last out is the open male 4 hours later

Been there too Gaz, coming in to watch the winner walking off the podium!

I thought I might be wrong there but the same principle applies

Gorrick fun class is just after the u12s and the first 'main' class out.

Last out is the open male 4 hours later

Been there too Gaz, coming in to watch the winner walking off the podium!

The problem with races like Gorrick though (and this is totally my opinion) is that they don't play to everyones strengths. Don't get me wrong, they are brilliant races and really down to earth events, but they don't really appeal to someone who struggles to ride single track for example. Take the last race...it literally was 100% singletrack. Now this is fantastic and can only serve to improve peoples skills over roots etc but imagine a beginner turning up, riding it for 2 or 3 laps, falling off countless times, getting dehydtrated because they can't physically drink etc...I can see why many would be put off

That said, I guess you have the other side of the spectrum where you have those races that are almost a road race (Thetford for example). Enjoyable for other reasons but again, I wouldn't say it would be a stepping stone to going onto enjoy what the sport can actually offer.

Gutted I missed that, I'm very much not a fire road kind of guy.

I think you/we have to accept riders must be of a certain level before entering though. You wouldn't enter if you'd not ridden for 20 years, you'd do wiggle rides etc first. Catering for less quick people is one thing, catering for people new to cycling is something else

It surprises me a little to read a lot of the opinions on this subject.

When I did my first xc race, I was in awe of the speed of the top guys, and from that moment on dreamed of being as fast as them. 6 years on, after an absolute shitload of regular training, I'm able to fight against my heroes for 'Sunday Glory'.
So now I've moved the bar up and am looking at National races and dreaming...

Isn't it the point to start at the bottom and dream of working up through the ranks? On the way there will be plenty of mini-battles with other riders. A good finish position just means you were among the best there that day, it doesn't count for anything really. But a shoulder to shoulder last lap, whether it's for 1st or 50th, is a memorable and thrilling thing.

It surprises me a little to read a lot of the opinions on this subject.

Isn't it the point to start at the bottom and dream of working up through the ranks? On the way there will be plenty of mini-battles with other riders. A good finish position just means you were among the best there that day, it doesn't count for anything really. But a shoulder to shoulder last lap, whether it's for 1st or 50th, is a memorable and thrilling thing.

absolutely.

but as many people are pointing out, they're entering fun/novice/sport/whatever races, and they're not getting 'shoulder to shoulder racing', they're getting lapped in the first lap by [s]people[/s] sandbaggers in their category.

for 'reasons' people, even cyclists, aren't entering xc races in the numbers they used to. and probably not in the numbers needed to keep the events funded.

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned anything about the Hadleigh International Race!!!

Oh hang on, that could because hardly anyone was there and the advertising of it was almost non existent

And there, to be honest, is the problem!

@rollindoughnut.
The way you've done it shows a real determination and strength of character, and huge thumbs up from me for that.

But the overwhelming majority don't have that, they probably last 1-3 races of being destroyed and then give up. It's not a sustainable way to run anything when newcomers are driven away demoralised.

It surprises me a little to read a lot of the opinions on this subject.

When I did my first xc race, I was in awe of the speed of the top guys, and from that moment on dreamed of being as fast as them. 6 years on, after an absolute shitload of regular training, I'm able to fight against my heroes for 'Sunday Glory'.
So now I've moved the bar up and am looking at National races and dreaming...

Isn't it the point to start at the bottom and dream of working up through the ranks? On the way there will be plenty of mini-battles with other riders. A good finish position just means you were among the best there that day, it doesn't count for anything really. But a shoulder to shoulder last lap, whether it's for 1st or 50th, is a memorable and thrilling thing.

Amen! Not so long ago I was riddled with Angst about turning up and just bgeing "crap". Now I've seen the light - good summary thanks.

On the way there will be plenty of mini-battles with other riders

I think this is the key point, and the crux of the issue. I reckon too many people turn up to a race, enter in the easiest category, watch as the entire pack disappear off into the distance after 5mins, slog around for another hour in solitary no mans land then go home never to return.

Without enough other beginners/casual racers, they never get the taste of the actual racing. Its chicken and egg and I think there needs to be a real marketing push to these kind of riders. A big thing needs to be made to make first time racers feel warmly welcomed and have a good time.

I have noticed over the last few years that xc racing has become very unattractive to beginners and less-serious riders. I believe there are two main reasons for this:

The courses.

I first started racing in 2007, taking part in Gorrick, Soggy Bottom, Black Park and Southern XC races. The courses were generlly fun to ride. They had some sections that would be considered technical (roots, bomb holes, small drop offs, tricky hills), but they were all rideable for a majority of the riders and for the others it was a case of either going a bit slower, using a b-line or getting off the bike. On a section I couldn't do I could go away and train and then next time have another go at it and if I managed to do it then it was a massively rewarding experience! After a couple of years I gained the confidence to start racing the national series, which had courses that tended to be a bit more technical, but not much that couldn't be overcome with training (and a bit of bravery).

In the last 4 or 5 years there seems to have been a shift in world cup xc races, making them more shorter and more technical, mainly for the benefit of the cameras/spectators I would say. I think everyone can agree that this approach to course design has also filtered down to our national and regional races. This has resulted in races becoming more and more dangerous, with even experienced racers having bad offs and getting injured (the big drop off at Wasing being an example...). Most riders are unlucky enough to have day jobs, many even self-employed, so the xc race has developed into a very risky proposition. The flow of the courses also seems to have deteriorated, either due to riders being held up in slow technical parts or a "new section" being added, which is hideously bumpy and not well bedded in. Is there anything more enjoyable in life than absolutely nailing some twisty singletrack??

The categories.

As long as I have been racing xc, the categories have been a mess. You have people who are racing open with lap times that would be competitive in expert (giving the excuse that they have to get home early) and people racing the vets that would do well in an elite race. I don't blame them at all. They are racers and as such, are always keen to maximise their chances of a good result. As a result the 40yo+ categories have had their lap numbers increased to cater for these faster riders, making them a very unattractive proposition to many. After progressing my ability during the first copuple of years of racing in the Open category, I wanted to "go up a category", so entered into the Masters (as this was my age category on my license). However, it turned out to be a massive jump, both in terms of the the the quality of the field and the number of laps. The following year I requested that BC allow me to go into the Sport category, which was much more suitable. A few others did the same thing and eventually BC got rid of the Masters category! I would say that most riders turn up to a race to get the change to mix it with others and feel like they have actually raced, rather than getting dropped off the back and spending 2 hours on their own, wishing they went to a trail center instead.

So, what can be done?

The obvious thing to me is something that has already works well elsewhere. Ability categories for all seniors. Elite and cats 1/2/3/4. Everyone is on a level playing field. I realise this will get a bit of push back from the guys currently dominating their current age categories, but the way it is at the moment is killing the sport. It should be about the many not the few. I remember turning up at nationals, watching Nick Craig racing in the Elite in his 40s and thinking the guy was an absolute legend, before he had even got off the start line. If this is a step to far then there is a compromise. Get rid of the Open category and fill the void with the current age categories, by lowering the amount of laps and therefore making them appealing to the masses. Give the current age category "dominators" the option of either racing a shorter age category or a longer race, with people their own ability, in expert or elite. I also do see any reason why BC races can't feature non-ranking races, like hot-lap, pairs, singlespeed, plus bike, etc... The good thing about doing it this way is that it can be all done by race organisers, rather than hoping/waiting for BC to do something.

The second thing is to make the courses fun again. For the regional series then take cues from Gorrick and make the courses fast, fun and rewarding. For example, the cork scew at Crowthorne is tricky for the more novice but its not going to kill them by trying to master it. For the national series then take cues from courses like Big Dog and 24/12. Harder and more technical than a regional, but not dangerous and still fun! My first time at Dalby I found it hard but could do laps without putting a foot down (just about), but I had to take the b line on worry gill and other places. I still loved it and I was determined to master the a lines in the future. This is how it should be, in my opinion.

Catering to less experienced riders is vital. Not only does it allow us to develop better riders but it makes the events financially viable.

Next year I am planning on doing some BC races, but its events like Big Dog with their awesome course and brilliant atmosphere that I am looking forward to. I might give Enduro and CX a go too...

Richard Lang - UK-Biking

making them more shorter and more technical, mainly for the benefit of the cameras/spectators I would say. I think everyone can agree that this approach to course design has also filtered down to our national and regional races. This has resulted in races becoming more and more dangerous, with even experienced racers having bad offs and getting injured (the big drop off at Wasing being an example...).

Personally I feel that the course technicality is a solved issue with A/B/C lines. A lines can be crazy technical as long as there is an alternative.

I also do see any reason why BC races can't feature non-ranking races, like hot-lap, pairs, singlespeed, plus bike, etc..

Pairs or team relay would be great!

Time is the big kicker for "other" events. There's a certain number of classes you have to cater for. Any non point scoring classes need to be shoehorned in. And Marshalled. Ams administered. And so on.

just a thought, maybe run an xc event 'a bit' like a BMX event?

you're entered at random into a race with 40 others, 1 lap, top half go through to stream A, second half go through to stream B.

repeat until you get an A final, and a B final. The 'A' final is 2 or 3 laps, B final is one less..?

(posting this idea definitely feels like one of those 'did i really just say that out loud?' moments)

Sounds fun ahwiles, I'd have a go at that.

Would be a good way for people to find their true level as well, if that's as much an issue as some are claiming here.

just a thought, maybe run an xc event 'a bit' like a BMX event?

you're entered at random into a race with 40 others, 1 lap, top half go through to stream A, second half go through to stream B.

repeat until you get an A final, and a B final. The 'A' final is 2 or 3 laps, B final is one less..?

(posting this idea definitely feels like one of those 'did i really just say that out loud?' moments)

The format exists now, it is called the XC Eliminator, no reason you can't run it as a track league type event with everyone gets few rides

you're entered at random into a race [b]with 40 others[/b], 1 lap, top half go through to stream A, second half go through to stream B.

Reckon XCE would be fun as a summer evening type event. Plus points for organisers is less area needed, less marshalls etc. Could probably be set up in many parks as a cx length course I guess. Might actually work to boost xc participation at a grass roots level, especially if could be done as go-ride type event so cheap (£3 for go cx race), and if actual xc races are pushed by organisers at the same time.

orangespyderman - Member
You get the picture, I assume.

yes, a good and valid point!

i was expecting more abuse and vitriol...

the thing about it that appeals to me is that the fast people at the front, would know that they don't need to bury themselves to win their heat, they just need to beat number 21, so there might be more of a 'group' in the heats, with the fast people holding back just a bit...

i was expecting more abuse and vitriol...

I agree, interesting idea, and agree it should encourage holding back until you're in the final. RC cars race in a similar setup, with A finals and B finals, IIRC.

Eliminator at Big Bike Bash was far more fun than a normal XC race - didn't take long either, but then the course was only about 400m!

big_n_daft - Member

The format exists now, it is called the XC Eliminator,

although it seems xce is based on 4 (four) riders per heat. i think a bigger pack would be much more fun/chaotic.

(a bit/lot like the qualifier heats for teh MegAvalanche - which is even more fun than the main event)

(i've been doing some reading) In Xc eliminator, the 'B' stream is eliminated, i'm not talking about eliminating anyone. Just diverting them to a more suitable final.

[i]The obvious thing to me is something that has already works well elsewhere. Ability categories for all seniors. Elite and cats 1/2/3/4.[/i]

To replace age cats, I would then give an age related time adjustment based on year of birth (not date), of x% per year above 40, and then include the results in the main ability category.

Proving year of birth is pretty straightforward at entry / registration.

Categories doesn't have to mean races.

Just have everyone race in ability categories then give out points/prizes/positions based on those but also age.

I entered some of the local XC series (Midweek Madness) this year. As a moderately fit (but definitely not a racing snake) bloke of almost veteran vintage I loved it. Entry fields were quite variable in number, not helped by the often terrible traffic at rush hour around the Manchester area.

Some of the courses were easier than others, but there was a wide range of ability. I entered the "Racer" category, due to peer pressure and ended up racing people of similar ability. I lapped a few people and was lapped by the (VERY FAST) podium finishers.

I also did a few evening club TT 10s this year, which I also enjoyed, in a different way.

For me, as a husband and father of young children, midweek evenings are preferable to weekend afternoons. Local races are also infinitely preferable to distant ones.

I have done some weekend day MTB 'marathons' this year, but again local and early starts are better for me, allowing me to get back home to do thigns with my family.

I've not actually done any CX races (although I would like to, and would probably like it) mostly because they are mid afternoon on a weekend day ...and partly because I would need to re-configure my commuter for the purpose.

although it seems xce is based on 4 (four) riders per heat. i think a bigger pack would be much more fun/chaotic.

(a bit/lot like the qualifier heats for teh MegAvalanche - which is even more fun than the main event)

(i've been doing some reading) In Xc eliminator, the 'B' stream is eliminated, i'm not talking about eliminating anyone. Just diverting them to a more suitable final.

The organiser can adjust the format and keep BC happy to keep his insurance

If it is run like grass track racing the organiser refines the groups through the day and everyone gets plenty of races against similar riders

Agree with all that's been said so far. The challenge XC seems to have is keeping the racing element whilst also being fun for those at the back.

My own personal experience is that the Gorrick Brass Monkeys seem to balance this better than "pure" XC. Mass starts and fewer categories means it's more about the Singletrack than trying to podium. (Adam, I hope you make the change you suggested to the non-BC cats.)

The other thing I would like to see is more B-lines. Then by all means put in technical features on the A-lines. This would give the variety for experienced and novice riders that seems to be being requested in the posts. In fact, why not run the "easier" course for the easy races and the "hard" course for the E/E. Might shift a few sandbaggers up a level.

The other thing I would like to see is more B-lines. Then by all means put in technical features on the A-lines. This would give the variety for experienced and novice riders that seems to be being requested in the posts. In fact, why not run the "easier" course for the easy races and the "hard" course for the E/E. Might shift a few sandbaggers up a level.

I'm with you on the first bit, 2 lines, 1 harder but quicker, 1 easier but slower.

But the second part, i as a slower rider don't necessarily want / need an easier course in a technical context.

That takes much more effort though - and we need more races which means they need to be easier and cheaper to stage.

Agreed molgrips.

Interesting thread.

Ive been TTing quite seriously for a few years and just riding the MTB for fun when I get bored of training (before I used to ride MTB mainly but never competed). After going to Meribel to watch my nephew do some XC racing it looked so much fun I wondered why I had never tried it so will give it a go next season.

Ive rebuilt my old Whyte 905 at what seems like a reasonable weight and was going to have a go at a Gorrick race as looking at those courses on youtube I would be happy going round them flat out (for me). I would shit myself on a HT on the courses my nephew races on 🙂

The thing I cant work out is what category to enter - and after reading 9 pages of this I still can't 😕

Im 50 next year so am a Grand Vet, but I expect that involves getting owned by a load of former elites?

Fun seems a bit crap and like I might be sandbagging (~4W/kg FTP, and good 1-5min power) so is it Open or Sport if I want to ignore age cats?

I'm thinking I should enter Grand Vet and sprint like **** at the start and see how long I can hang on, as a TTer I am well used to the idea of entering races with no chance of winning so not bothered by where I come - but any advice welcome.

Just do Grand Vet. The age categories have some quick people at the top, but they tail off quickly. Winning sport will almost certainly be quicker than winning grand vet.

Entered myself in fun and my boy in under 11s.

I'm not sure if I'm more nervous for me or for him.

A really interesting thread on an important subject. Richard Lang (UK Biking) made some really good points (a few posts above) and it was good to hear Adam's post about combining the fun and open categories in the Southern XC. Simplification for beginners would be helpful. I started racing 4.5 years ago, aged 40 and totally unfit at the time. XC is so much fun, a chance to use all those skills learned earlier in life, now with a purpose in a competitive and fun environment. It's great to be stronger and not have a bad back any more. My kids, aged 8 and 10, love it too.

Unfortunately it has been very hard to convince any friends to give it a go although I'm sure some of them would like it if they tried. When I started, the number of categories was confusing and I really appreciated any advice for beginners I could find on websites. I like Adam's "up to 3 laps" in Open idea. One less category in the list and Open would be for beginners up to intermediate level.

I just want to comment on Veterans, inspired by Richard's post, where he suggests reducing the number of laps. In 2014 as my ability was increasing I moved up into Vets as it seemed more meaningful. At that time it was increased to 5 laps from 4. My aim was to work my way up to the top half of finishers. Over time I got close to it but it seems the field has been getting smaller, the standard at the top has increased to a very high level and last year I got lapped for the first time. I dropped back to Open for Crow Hill as the 5 laps were a bit too much of a slog, as if I was doing an endurance race while the top guys seemed to be sprinting it! Great respect to those amazing super fast racers but it seemed better to race with more people near my own ability in the Open category, even though Open is disappointingly short at 3 laps. If you look at the entrants, for example at Crow Hill http://my1.raceresult.com/49200/participants?lang=en#0_10BC33 you can see that around half the Open category are actually Veteran aged. After 4 years of racing, Open now seems kind of meaningless, an uncomfortable choice. I wonder how many of them would move to the Vets race if it was one lap shorter? As Richard suggested, if there will be age categories, the top Vets could either just do the shorter race or enter expert or elite if they want a longer race. Quoting Richard, it should be about the many not the few. So I just wonder how many Vets really want to do the 5 laps, how many would be happy with 4, and how many open racers would move into Vets it it was reduced to 4?

Agree with ^. When I race it's in regional open, but local vets (eg Gorricks). Both get me a mid-pack finish, so I get a decent day out racing the folk around me. But I appreciate that the top vets, of which there are a lot, need a decent expert and upwards standard race. Something that gave a 4 lap vet race would be great, but is that another category ( slower vets?). Not sure of the answer as I don't want to detract from the top level of the vets racing, so currently accepting that regional open is where I'm at right now.

I think the MSG / BC system of using the time cut off for the leaders is better. Its not about the number of laps, its about how fast you can go over a specified number of laps.

I'm assuming thats why Gorrick now have Vets & Vets +

Vets and vets + works well, but Gorrick are free to do what they want. Maybe the same at regional level, especially if the open and under may get condensed into one race?

Regional races are BC, so can't do what they want.

That's the current situation. It was more of a suggestion for the future and whether the slower vets need/or could get a different race.

The other way to look at it is that I should really do some proper training and get out of open and into vets.

Found the BC regulations, race times are on page 126:

BRITISHCYCLING.ORG.UK "https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/zuvvi/media/bc_files/rulebook/2016/C8_-_Mountain_Bike_Specific_Regulations.pdf"

It states the leader of Vets should finish between 1:15 and 1:45. Looking at results, this is the case at Southern XC.

So yes, maybe we just have to train harder and ride faster! Can't help thinking that it's a bit sad having vets drop back to Open though.

One thing confuses me, I hardly ever hear a mountain biker saying good things about BC. It seems BC doesn't show many signs of caring much about mountain biking. So it's a pity that their regulations must be followed, though I understand why they are. I hope they don't kill the sport! Dreaming of a time when there could be a separate authority for the off road disciplines...

I don't think anything is going to kill the sport, nor do i think anything is going to be a miracle save for it either.

In simple terms we've got about 15 different 'wants' in this thread now, from cat changes, to increases, to drops, to course changes to suit some, more techy to suit others.

There's not a single fit for anyone and as we can see here, the only thing that will make it better for many, is more riders... But i don't think we're a lot closer to finding the way to get more riders in there.

It's got to be tough for organisers to come up with ways to attract riders that's for sure.

I did see a sign over at Swinley for the recent Enduro events on Sat.. Can't say i've ever seen one for Gorrick.... maybe some strategically placed signs around Swinley / QECP etc would be a plan ?