In my opinion one of the great things about cycling is that there is no shortage of etiquette that has never been written down but is simply passed on through the generations. Some of it explicitly through direction and conversation, often times through observation from watching the guy on the ride that kicks your butt weekly. A, "Man, if he's that fast, I gotta do what he's doing," sort of thing.
I really enjoy all the aspects of cycling that make it a great club once you know how to act, but sort of keeps out the riff raff until they figure it out. Why do cyclist shave their legs? You want to know the truth? Because all the other fast guys do it and I(us) want to emulate that. I have a friend who says when he goes on group rides he tries to follow the fittest looking guy with hairy legs. Why? Because in his opinion that guys not likely to get dropped, because he looks fit, but if he does, he'll have a partner also getting shot out the back. My friend does not shave his legs. Shaving your legs is just one example of the unspoken rules of cycling that if nothing else, lets everyone around you in the group that you've committed to this masochistic sport. I'm leery of guys on rides with hairy legs. I try not to follow them or get stuck close to them when the pace starts to lift. Why? They haven't committed. They're ability to handle their bike at 28+ mph with handlebars 6 inches from mine is questionable. At the same time, I'd expect a pro would have the same concerns about riding next to me. That's just how it works.
Recently, and by recently I mean over the last 4-6 months I've noticed a growing trend that is both comical and really weird amongst people on bikes and that's the use of aerodynamic gear for everyday riding purposes. I can't tell if it's the same guy or multiple guys, but I've seen an aero TT helmet bobbing up and down the Mount Vernon Trail as I commute to and from work a bunch. The guy wearing the aero helmet isn't on a TT bike either, which makes it more odd. Some people probably wouldn't even notice. In fact, most people probably don't notice, but I do, and that guy should really get a regular helmet. But hey, at least he's wearing a helmet.
This morning, it was really windy. Not like coastal Belgium windy (not that I've ever experienced coastal Belgium wind) but none the less, windy, which is exactly why I shouldn't have been surprised to roll up on a guy from one of the local teams on his TT bike with full race wheels, disc in the back, deep section up front. He sort of caught me snickering at his disc wheel as we were stopped at the same light. But, I mean, what do you expect? You're riding at least $3gs worth of carbon wheels around on a Tuesday morning training ride? Of course I'm going to laugh at you. Isn't training supposed to be harder than races? That's why pros train on 32 spoke box section wheels, not Zip 808s.
Your equipment should have a purpose, and all of it shouldn't be for training and racing. If it's going to be, there's a level of equipment that meets that criteria. If you have to ask what it is, you should look around more at the guys that are faster than you on your local ride, you'll start to notice.
Age has almost nothing to do with this learning curve. Guys who got into the sport really young will know way more than guys who suddenly decided their disposable income should buy a $4,000 bike with a 45 degree rise stem. But, there's hope for everyone, that's the great thing about cycling. While you might not get welcomed to your first few group rides with hugs, just stick it out, and eventually, you'll either learn what you need to know, or prove that you already know it, and somebody will say hello, and at that time, you'll know you're in. When I lived in Richmond it took making it to the end of the Tuesday night ride three times before people in the parking lot started saying hello. In California, it took months before I was able to make it over the climb with the fast guys and then eventually win a few uphill sprints before I started getting welcomed into the ride. But I like that aspect. Once I made it in I felt like I'd earned it. The people there trusted me and that felt good. Riding bikes is dangerous. You can't just open your doors to anyone with a pair of lycra shorts. If you do that, you become another sport that happens to use a bike.
The guy with the aero helmet is clearly has a lot to learn and the guy with the disc on a Tuesday morning thinks he's the best in town. Both need to pay a bit more attention, but they'll figure it out. Hopefully I will too.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Monday, August 23, 2010
The "Value" of Team?
I know as American cycling fans we've all been taught by the Johan and Lance era that having the strongest team possible focused on only one rider is the only way to win a stage race. In fact, many of you reading this right now probably argued that the reason you thought Lance could take down Contador at the 2010 Tour de France was because Lance's team was stacked and Contador's was not (well, that's not entirely true, they just weren't people most American's were familiar with). In 2009 I argued that the lack of cooperation from Lance and co. on Astana would do absolutely nothing to hurt Contador's chances at winning that year's TdF. The reason? Because while having a team around you is nice, if you're the best guy there, it doesn't really matter. Ok, so where's my proof? I think we only have to look back to the recently concluded 2010 Tour of Utah.
Levi rolls up to the race solo with no teammates and wins. I guess it could be argued that the Trek/Livestrong team would certainly be there to help out if needed, but in the stages that ended on mountains, none of those kids were around long enough to really be considered helpful teammates. Especially not in the Floyd with Lance in 2003 or Novarro with Contador in 2010.
In every interview Levi insisted that he wasn't there to win the race, that he only came for training, and hopefully a stage win. I don't know about anybody else, but I found this to be almost insulting to everyone else there. It's one thing to be humble, but everybody pinning on a number knew who the best guy was. All you had to do was look around and see how many other guys starting that race had return flights from Paris back at the end of July. (Sure, Hincapie and Bookwalter both raced the TdF, but neither were an overall threat there, nor in Utah.) Levi continued to say that he had no teammates and it'd be hard to control the race, but again, when you're the best guy there, especially by the leaps and bounds that he was (or Contador has been in his other 2 TdF victories), having teammates is simply a luxury. My biggest concern would be who's going to go fetch me a bottle?
The racing went pretty predictably as I thought it would. Levi doesn't lose much time in the prologue but the guys that beat him aren't threats. He wins an early big mountain day and gets a cushion. He rides a solid TT which he retains his lead. Marks the guys that are threats throughout the following stages and if he feels good on the queen stage, attack and see what happens, if you don't feel good, follow wheels and collect another domestic stage race overall win. And, that's exactly how it happened. The one scenario that throws my prediction and feeling about the supremacy of teamwork off, he flats and is forced to wait on a neutral wheel instead of having a teammate hand you theirs.
More than confirming, at least for me, my thoughts on how teamwork is sort of overrated, or at least grossly under utilized, especially in these scenarios where one guy is clearly better, is that the Tour of Utah made it really obvious just how wide the gap is between top domestic talent and the guys racing in Europe. Levi seemed to win this race by opposing is will on everyone else. At the Tour de France, he to took a beating daily. He was never close to finishing in the lead group in the big mountains and his time trial was just ok. But, when Levi comes to the Gila or to Utah all the domestic guys must be at least a little pissed. Prize money, which is arguably a lot more valuable to them than to him, is literally going up the road in a Mellow Johnny's kit. Chris Horner at the 2009 Gila remarked that "You're a pro, I'm a pro, this is a pro race," when he was asked if they should feel bad for coming and beating up on these guys. While I certainly see where he's coming from, I also sort of feel like it's the same as when my high school Varsity baseball team had to scrimmage the JV and our coach told us with absolute seriousness, "If they score, you guys lose." If Levi doesn't win when he goes to Utah, teammates or not, it'd throw up some kind of red flag to me. I don't know exactly what kind of red flag, but the final outcome just seemed so obvious as soon as he announced he was racing. The level in Europe is just so much faster than most of our top domestic pros and the level between them to your local 1,2 hero, also great. Cycling's funny that way.
Basically, I have one simple point to make that I think the Tour of Utah helped solidify, at least to me. The overall value of teammates, when it comes to racing strategy, ie., pulling back breaks, chasing down attacks, etc., has been over hyped to most of us. Whether it's Levi pulling that guy back or his teammate, his legs still have to do the work to make up that distance. Sure there's the aid of the draft, but when you're climbing, even at their speeds, the draft is so minimal that it's not the same aid as it is cruising at 30mph through some valley. If you're that much better than everybody else at the race, you're going to win, and I think that's what people should keep in mind. Nobody's bringing a squad to the Tour de France made of local cat 2s because they like the way the guys look in the kit. Everybody, except maybe some of the French squads, are bringing the best guys they have available, and in most cases, a mediocre climber (Remember, Levi wasn't even the best guy on Radio Shack in Paris. He consistently finished in a group behind Horner.) in that group would be finishing in the front group at Utah. So even if your TdF squad isn't stacked with previous podium winners, they're still a solid bunch and it's still going to come down to which team leader is better. And, in my opinion, that's what makes bike racing great. Most of the time, the best guy wins.
Levi rolls up to the race solo with no teammates and wins. I guess it could be argued that the Trek/Livestrong team would certainly be there to help out if needed, but in the stages that ended on mountains, none of those kids were around long enough to really be considered helpful teammates. Especially not in the Floyd with Lance in 2003 or Novarro with Contador in 2010.
In every interview Levi insisted that he wasn't there to win the race, that he only came for training, and hopefully a stage win. I don't know about anybody else, but I found this to be almost insulting to everyone else there. It's one thing to be humble, but everybody pinning on a number knew who the best guy was. All you had to do was look around and see how many other guys starting that race had return flights from Paris back at the end of July. (Sure, Hincapie and Bookwalter both raced the TdF, but neither were an overall threat there, nor in Utah.) Levi continued to say that he had no teammates and it'd be hard to control the race, but again, when you're the best guy there, especially by the leaps and bounds that he was (or Contador has been in his other 2 TdF victories), having teammates is simply a luxury. My biggest concern would be who's going to go fetch me a bottle?
The racing went pretty predictably as I thought it would. Levi doesn't lose much time in the prologue but the guys that beat him aren't threats. He wins an early big mountain day and gets a cushion. He rides a solid TT which he retains his lead. Marks the guys that are threats throughout the following stages and if he feels good on the queen stage, attack and see what happens, if you don't feel good, follow wheels and collect another domestic stage race overall win. And, that's exactly how it happened. The one scenario that throws my prediction and feeling about the supremacy of teamwork off, he flats and is forced to wait on a neutral wheel instead of having a teammate hand you theirs.
More than confirming, at least for me, my thoughts on how teamwork is sort of overrated, or at least grossly under utilized, especially in these scenarios where one guy is clearly better, is that the Tour of Utah made it really obvious just how wide the gap is between top domestic talent and the guys racing in Europe. Levi seemed to win this race by opposing is will on everyone else. At the Tour de France, he to took a beating daily. He was never close to finishing in the lead group in the big mountains and his time trial was just ok. But, when Levi comes to the Gila or to Utah all the domestic guys must be at least a little pissed. Prize money, which is arguably a lot more valuable to them than to him, is literally going up the road in a Mellow Johnny's kit. Chris Horner at the 2009 Gila remarked that "You're a pro, I'm a pro, this is a pro race," when he was asked if they should feel bad for coming and beating up on these guys. While I certainly see where he's coming from, I also sort of feel like it's the same as when my high school Varsity baseball team had to scrimmage the JV and our coach told us with absolute seriousness, "If they score, you guys lose." If Levi doesn't win when he goes to Utah, teammates or not, it'd throw up some kind of red flag to me. I don't know exactly what kind of red flag, but the final outcome just seemed so obvious as soon as he announced he was racing. The level in Europe is just so much faster than most of our top domestic pros and the level between them to your local 1,2 hero, also great. Cycling's funny that way.
Basically, I have one simple point to make that I think the Tour of Utah helped solidify, at least to me. The overall value of teammates, when it comes to racing strategy, ie., pulling back breaks, chasing down attacks, etc., has been over hyped to most of us. Whether it's Levi pulling that guy back or his teammate, his legs still have to do the work to make up that distance. Sure there's the aid of the draft, but when you're climbing, even at their speeds, the draft is so minimal that it's not the same aid as it is cruising at 30mph through some valley. If you're that much better than everybody else at the race, you're going to win, and I think that's what people should keep in mind. Nobody's bringing a squad to the Tour de France made of local cat 2s because they like the way the guys look in the kit. Everybody, except maybe some of the French squads, are bringing the best guys they have available, and in most cases, a mediocre climber (Remember, Levi wasn't even the best guy on Radio Shack in Paris. He consistently finished in a group behind Horner.) in that group would be finishing in the front group at Utah. So even if your TdF squad isn't stacked with previous podium winners, they're still a solid bunch and it's still going to come down to which team leader is better. And, in my opinion, that's what makes bike racing great. Most of the time, the best guy wins.
Friday, August 13, 2010
Bike Dreams
I have dreams about bikes almost constantly. You'd think for someone so obsessed with bike racing that in my dreams I'd primarily be winning races. But in reality most of my bike dreams have nothing to do with racing. The other day I dreamed up this weird solution for bikes with only one set of bottle cage mounts on the frame. It was a cage that would somehow stick to the frame. I dreamed up some sort of adhesive that was as secure as normal mounts but could easily be removed when you no longer wanted the cage there. Seemed like an awesome solution for cross bikes if you don't want the screws in the frame while you're racing. I obviously have no background in adhesive chemistry technology so if someone else out there has some ideas on this, let me know. We could makes 10s of dollars.
I also have a recurring dream that I own a custom bike building company. I'm never the primary builder but people in these dreams are always asking me what they should do on the frames their building. I always give them answers but know that I generally just make it up on the spot. My bike building company is a sham. I don't know anything, I don't build anything, but apparently I'm successful. That's kind of weird. I like my dress code in those dreams though. Always jeans, a t-shirt and a shop apron. I guess you have to look the part.
Sometimes I have dreams where I'm a pro-ass bike racer but I'm never racing my bike. I'm always dealing with the other stuff like sponsor obligations, r&d, that sort of thing. When it comes time to race, I wake up.
Even though these are just dreams I feel like they sort of mimic my current life. I love bike racing. I want to race my bike all the time but I never seem to be able to. Something gets in the way. I only raced twice on the road this year. Another commitment just got in the way. At this rate, I'll never upgrade. I'm destined to be a 4 for life. Cross season is right around the corner and I really want to race. I want to race every weekend, but that's neither feasible or fair. Not feasible because I can't afford to race every weekend. Not fair because Jill shouldn't be subjected to standing on the sidelines of a cross race every weekend. Racing my bike is what keeps me motivated to ride, even if there are no races on my calender. It's weird. That doesn't even make sense to me and I just wrote it. Jill says sometimes when I'm sleeping and I have my hand on her that I move my fingers like I'm shifting gears. She says she knows I'm dreaming about riding my bike. I don't doubt it, but it's odd that I don't remember those dreams. Hopefully I'm winning.
I also have a recurring dream that I own a custom bike building company. I'm never the primary builder but people in these dreams are always asking me what they should do on the frames their building. I always give them answers but know that I generally just make it up on the spot. My bike building company is a sham. I don't know anything, I don't build anything, but apparently I'm successful. That's kind of weird. I like my dress code in those dreams though. Always jeans, a t-shirt and a shop apron. I guess you have to look the part.
Sometimes I have dreams where I'm a pro-ass bike racer but I'm never racing my bike. I'm always dealing with the other stuff like sponsor obligations, r&d, that sort of thing. When it comes time to race, I wake up.
Even though these are just dreams I feel like they sort of mimic my current life. I love bike racing. I want to race my bike all the time but I never seem to be able to. Something gets in the way. I only raced twice on the road this year. Another commitment just got in the way. At this rate, I'll never upgrade. I'm destined to be a 4 for life. Cross season is right around the corner and I really want to race. I want to race every weekend, but that's neither feasible or fair. Not feasible because I can't afford to race every weekend. Not fair because Jill shouldn't be subjected to standing on the sidelines of a cross race every weekend. Racing my bike is what keeps me motivated to ride, even if there are no races on my calender. It's weird. That doesn't even make sense to me and I just wrote it. Jill says sometimes when I'm sleeping and I have my hand on her that I move my fingers like I'm shifting gears. She says she knows I'm dreaming about riding my bike. I don't doubt it, but it's odd that I don't remember those dreams. Hopefully I'm winning.
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Outliving Your Competition
I know I'll probably catch some flack for this but I just read an article reporting that Julie Lockhart, the current women's 65+ cyclocross national champion, just won three more national titles in the 65+ road, tt and criterium events. Far be it for me to take anything away from Ms. Lockhart's national champion status but the road race, along with her cyclocross race from 2009 was, well, uncontested. She did apparently beat a field of 3 in the TT and no field sizes were reported in the crit, and quite frankly, I'm too lazy to google. it.
So what does this actually mean? Well, it certainly doesn't prove that Ms. Lockhart is fast, even in relative terms, what it proves, at least to me, is that Ms. Lockhart really enjoys the bicycle and continues to plunk down the coin to travel to national events where she's outlived her competition to claim another title.
Back when I used to race triathlon, before my Favre-esk running retirement, it was sort of a long standing joke that if you wanted to qualify for Kona you just had to wait until you're 80. For a lot of people that's the only way they'd ever qualify for that race because they can't come close to sniffing a finish time that would do it. Does this take away from an old person's accomplishment? In my opinion, it sort of does.
There are people who want to race and those that want to race. The italicized racers show up because they want to test themselves to see if they're better than the other people who also showed up. If you qualify for some event because you benefited from a slow field, that, to me, still means more than being the only 70 year old who's managed to fend of osteoporosis.
I think it's cool when old people show up to races and still have a lifestyle where they stay active and participate in races. Let's face it, the age categories in triathlons were made up to be able to recognize middle of the pack finishers for giving it a go.
When I think of cyclocross national champion I think of Tim Johnson who beat a top field of pro racers. I don't think of 65+ year old ladies who were the only ones in their category to show up. When the call up is only for 1 person, why bother running the race? Make her do a lap and hand over the jersey.
One day, when 65+ and win my first national title, I will re-write this entry proclaiming myself the greatest champion to have ever lived.
So what does this actually mean? Well, it certainly doesn't prove that Ms. Lockhart is fast, even in relative terms, what it proves, at least to me, is that Ms. Lockhart really enjoys the bicycle and continues to plunk down the coin to travel to national events where she's outlived her competition to claim another title.
Back when I used to race triathlon, before my Favre-esk running retirement, it was sort of a long standing joke that if you wanted to qualify for Kona you just had to wait until you're 80. For a lot of people that's the only way they'd ever qualify for that race because they can't come close to sniffing a finish time that would do it. Does this take away from an old person's accomplishment? In my opinion, it sort of does.
There are people who want to race and those that want to race. The italicized racers show up because they want to test themselves to see if they're better than the other people who also showed up. If you qualify for some event because you benefited from a slow field, that, to me, still means more than being the only 70 year old who's managed to fend of osteoporosis.
I think it's cool when old people show up to races and still have a lifestyle where they stay active and participate in races. Let's face it, the age categories in triathlons were made up to be able to recognize middle of the pack finishers for giving it a go.
When I think of cyclocross national champion I think of Tim Johnson who beat a top field of pro racers. I don't think of 65+ year old ladies who were the only ones in their category to show up. When the call up is only for 1 person, why bother running the race? Make her do a lap and hand over the jersey.
One day, when 65+ and win my first national title, I will re-write this entry proclaiming myself the greatest champion to have ever lived.
On Hold
This is not going to be terribly interesting, I'll just throw that out there from the start. Nobody is going to be upset if you stop reading now.
I work in education and sometimes it absolutely baffles me that various offices around campus seem to get away with such a low level of productive service. I understand that the bottom line isn't the focus of an institution of higher learning, but when you call an office that services maybe a couple thousand people and you sit on hold for over 20 minutes, you gotta assume someone on their end just decided to either not answer, or take a smoke break.
It's also always the same offices too. You call their general line and the first thing the automated system says is to refer to the website, but shocker, their website is next to useless. When you show the patience of Job and finally get a representative on the phone, the chances your question is answered fall squarely in the "unlikely" category.
Call centers constantly monitor productiveness of their people and if you don't meet the requirements set by some metric, you get canned. I'm not saying everybody that works for these offices at universities should be losing their jobs, but would it be so terrible for these offices to have some level of accountability?
When I call United Airlines and sit on hold with them for 30 minutes it's frustrating but I also realize that they're an international company with millions of clients. In most cases, I'm at least given an answer to my question, whether it's the one I'm hoping for or not.
I think the competitive playing field of higher education is changing as more and more people seem to be perfectly happy with a degree from the university of school online. The university of school online runs their university like a business and the bottom line is key to their success. I've had plenty of interactions with students who tell me just how great their experience was with any of these online colleges. Again, I'm not saying that a degree from one of those should be valued the same as one from an established university, but, in a lot of ways, that's the way the worlds going. University offices need to start treating their customers as if they are actually customers. Treat your office as if it's a business. Develop some sort of measure of productivity so you can actually tell if you're people are doing a good job.
Then again, I guess it doesn't really matter since you have no option but to contact these offices because they are you're only option. They know it as well as you do so there's absolutely no incentive to start doing a better job. Such is life I guess...
I work in education and sometimes it absolutely baffles me that various offices around campus seem to get away with such a low level of productive service. I understand that the bottom line isn't the focus of an institution of higher learning, but when you call an office that services maybe a couple thousand people and you sit on hold for over 20 minutes, you gotta assume someone on their end just decided to either not answer, or take a smoke break.
It's also always the same offices too. You call their general line and the first thing the automated system says is to refer to the website, but shocker, their website is next to useless. When you show the patience of Job and finally get a representative on the phone, the chances your question is answered fall squarely in the "unlikely" category.
Call centers constantly monitor productiveness of their people and if you don't meet the requirements set by some metric, you get canned. I'm not saying everybody that works for these offices at universities should be losing their jobs, but would it be so terrible for these offices to have some level of accountability?
When I call United Airlines and sit on hold with them for 30 minutes it's frustrating but I also realize that they're an international company with millions of clients. In most cases, I'm at least given an answer to my question, whether it's the one I'm hoping for or not.
I think the competitive playing field of higher education is changing as more and more people seem to be perfectly happy with a degree from the university of school online. The university of school online runs their university like a business and the bottom line is key to their success. I've had plenty of interactions with students who tell me just how great their experience was with any of these online colleges. Again, I'm not saying that a degree from one of those should be valued the same as one from an established university, but, in a lot of ways, that's the way the worlds going. University offices need to start treating their customers as if they are actually customers. Treat your office as if it's a business. Develop some sort of measure of productivity so you can actually tell if you're people are doing a good job.
Then again, I guess it doesn't really matter since you have no option but to contact these offices because they are you're only option. They know it as well as you do so there's absolutely no incentive to start doing a better job. Such is life I guess...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)