2009 Colorado State Cyclocross Championships

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vv8z08y0rA

While I've read the comments - good and bad - about the course, the venue, and the promoter, I think that there are two good points to raise.

First, all the "negative" comments and criticisms are good things to hear and take in for next year. Whether it's the same promoter or someone else, it's good information for anyone hosting a race. Someone said "you can't please everyone - someone will always be unhappy" and that's pretty much true. However, trying to accommodate as many as possible will keep more coming back!

Second, if you have something to add or contribute - positive or negative - GET IN THE GAME! Volunteer at an event here and there and have your voice be heard at the ACA meetings. Sending an email is not enough to cut it! If you feel strongly about wanting a change in time of day, venues, or even course layouts, get involved! Meet the sponsors, help them out and give your input. Change will come with your involvement and every race could use a few more people to marshall the course.

The rewards are there for those who help out and get involved!

The course I thought was alright kinda fun an a skinny wheel bike, dangerous sections are you kidding me? Were? The off camber stuff was fun always passing there and jumped/rode the log on the straight every lap. Though I do not consider myself a CX'r, I coach many CX'rs but race DH and Super D oh yeah State Champ 30+ this year. The plan was to keep it fun and play in the snow before I go in for shoulder surgery next week. So decided 4 weeks ago to go cross after hunting season. Starting in the last row of the 45+ with 3 other that had no points for a call up on the grid finished 4th on a borrowed bike 2 sizes too big for me. My only real grip is that the females should not race on the same course while the men or the other way around are racing sorry gals luv to see you all out there racing and wish there were more like in Portland were there 160+ gals out there every weekend. You all should have your own race as the 45+ should have as well being 48-50 45+ starters. I was making a last charge up to 2nd place on the run up and DH off camber section when 2 gals were running DH the section another went down in front of me another decided to dismount or ride the top tube down, I went down as my rear brakes was undone and I didn't want to mow any of you over. Dropped from solid 3rd to 4th but that's racing. All in all good times. Maybe see you all next year.

From the ACA Forum:
"So I don't understand how during the entire CX season, SM 55+ has start times of 1:45-1:50 (with one or two exceptions) and for the State Championships, they put in a non recognized category (Clydesdales) that start closer to the time we would normally have and push our start back to 3:40 - It's almost going to be dark by the time we finish. Considering this is the State Championships...1) why have a non recognized category racing in it? and 2) why move start times for legitimate categories to insert this non recognized category? Either start the Clydesdales last after everything or have them race at 8:00 in the morning.
I think this was really a poorly made decision to allow this. Any other race during the year and I would not have an issue with it. But not at the State Championships"

Reply:
Being the promoter of the race, we flat out had to look at the numbers for the race. The 55+ along with the 35+ Womens and Cat 4 Women was the smallest race, and that is one of the reasons why it was put last on the day. It is much easier to clean up when there are less people at the end of the day, than to wait and try to clear people and then clean up. As it was, we were cleaning up for a couple hours in the dark. Secondly, and being selfish, I am a singlespeeder and wanted some time to recover after the race before going and doing the clean up. I guess that comes with the "priveledge" of promoting the race. Whatever category gets put at the tail end of the race is never going to be happy.
And why the hate on the Clydes? Seems to me these are they guys that are having the most fun out on the course now days. With the lower numbers in the category 4 races, which I would think may be due to the afternoon time slot they have been getting, running a Clydesdale category with them makes sense. Seems like it is working in other parts of the country.

Reply to above:
That doesn't jibe when you look at the results (ignoring juniors). Several groups were smaller than the M55/W35/W4, including Men 4 and Men open. This is true not only for yesterday's race but also for other races this year.

SM35+4: 76
SM3/SS: 63
M45+/SW open: 57
M35+: 41
M55+/W35+/SW4: 36
SM4: 33
SM open: 32

Well, I'll chime in, since everyone else is, and say that I thought the course was awesome. It is always good to see bike handling skills (in addition to a big motor) rewarded once in a while.

I would pick a challenging course like that, in those conditions, any day, over the Harlow Platts/South Boulder grass course.

And people complaining about the number of dismounts... REALLY?! You do realize that this is cyclocross... right?

I guess it is always easy to rant under the veil of anonymity.

And my constructive criticism (as others have said) would be to get the ACA vehicle out of the start straight, and to delineate the pit a little more.

I actually liked the course - thought it would have been boring without snow - basically a parking lot race. That being said, the preparation was less than expected for a BCR/BCT race, and definitely less than should be required for State Championships.

- Ice on the pavement sections for juniors - bring de-icer and salt to melt this stuff down. Just too dangerous. Only for the pavement - ice/snow on the dirt is what it is - nothing to do about that.
- Plowed snow on sidewalk - the only path thru the foot high plowed snow on the sidewalk were tire tracks from driving a truck thru them. Weak - lots of crashes happened here, and it should have been cleared.
- Course definition - prior to 35+ race, there wasn't much help in telling us that our course was different than the juniors. Some guy tried telling us where to go at the start line, but they should have a guy to tell people warming up what the deal is.
- Marshalling - lots of people wandering across the coned sections of the course early on - later put tape up, but was sketchy at first.
- Pit - no real definition on the pit entrance, exit, etc. Not a big deal, but not what you'd see at a "bigger" race.

I agree that more proven promoters should have States. I believe its between CG and Brian next year - I think both are good options.

In my opinion a cyclocross race course consists of 4 different types of sections 1) Transition (getting from point A to point B) 2) endurance / climb 3) technical and 4) running/sand/barriers. A great course will have a good mix of all four types of sections. I actually detail on a spreadsheet the sections in order for each course I race, and then rate the course overall (I am that warped).

As for the spiral of death, I don't think it falls in any of the 4 categories. Maybe it could be considered technical, but not really. I would have preferred switchbacks.

That being said, I applaud the course designers and think they deserve every penny they get. I put my 2 cents in here just because I have an opinion, not the critize or complain. We all owe not only the designers but all the judges, announcer, starters, etc a hefty thanks for putting all these great races on so we have something to obsess over.5

I realize that the course was slippery and difficult, but please do not take it out on the promoter. They laid out a great course that was interesting (and different) had great parking, bathrooms, and free Hot Choc!!! As many have said, the course was the same for everybody in your category, so there was no unfair advantage to be found.

We are extremely lucky to have such a great variety of courses here in CO, and should consider that when the promoters are out putting in the long hours to secure races at new venues. I'd love to do another race at that venue, but can't wait to clip in at another new set of venues next year!

The only safety issue that I noticed was the ACA Ford Exploder parked in the starting straight... I know that we have been striving for consistency with numbers on the left every race this season, but it would have been much more safe to have that vehicle on the other side of the course...

Bottom line: If you had bike handling skills AND a good motor you had a good chance of doing well.

My subject title is not meant to be sarcastic. My question is this:

Why do we collectively care so much and have such incredibly strong opinions on the course just because it's STATE CHAMPIONSHIPS?

I realize the knee-jerk reaction is "DUH, IT'S STATE CHAMPIONSHIPS!"

-or-

"Dude I didn't buy 2 carbon cross bikes and 3 sets of $2000 zipp wheels to get 15th in my Cat 4 race!!"

But unless you're one of the FEW people who are actually battling for a win, why would you care?

This is going to sound even more insensitive to the amateur fields. . .but I would further add that unless you're an elite rider battling for an elite championship (and a pay check) why would you complain about a race course?

I say this and I am a Cat 4 rider. A cat 4 rider who trains very hard and spends a bunch of money on my favorite hobby, cycling (just like many other amateurs out there). Would I like a course that suits my strengths? Yes. But unless I think a course is silly dangerous (like with BMX jumps and an alligator pit) I really don't think it's my place to complain.

Now if a pro wants to approach the ACA about certain aspects of a course that do not fit our current race course criteria, that could potentially alter the outcome of the race, I have no problem with that.

Despite that fact that us amateurs train really hard and like to improve, I think we should remember that we're racing for fun. Promoters and ACA referees really shouldn't care if amateur riders think there were too many dismounts or the barriers were too tall.

While pre riding today's course, my teammate Joe Saperstein and I both agreed that it was a 'bike driver's' course. Good to see a course that doesn't allow the person who can simply pedal the hardest to win. A -real- run up, barriers placed in sections that are not flat-out/straight sections where you roll the dice between speed and safety, the circle of death was quirky but an added challenge nonetheless, the pit was in a great spot with plenty of space on a false flat, and there was a marching band. I love drum lines.

I do feel bad for the people that touched down today and suffered injury (best wishes and heal quickly) however, I also believe it's a rider's responsibility to make an assessment of the course before the race, decide what he/she can and cannot ride and at what speed they can negotiate obstacles. If it's too icy/off camber/(insert difficult section here) then you've got your feet.

Someone mentioned the 2009 CX season and driving back from the venue my teammates and I were discussing how great it's been. Thanks to ICCC for a great event today and for all the promoters for putting together a great CX season in Colorado. BTW - my vote for top course design in 2009 goes to RRV series race 2. Just awesome. Can't wait til CX 2010

1. Was anyone complaining here at the ACA annual meeting last December (at REI) when we voted on who woould host 2009 Cross States? If you guys were there why did you vote for a relatively unproven cross promoter and a brand new course? Grealish was late with his application and there was a vote to allow him onto to the ballet, for some insanse reason the vote was overwhelming no. So he does not get on, after doing a great job in the past, and now I see all the complaints. It is our own fault!

2. Why does the ACA even let a new course get used for States? That is nuts. It is a big event and you should be required to run at least 1 prior race on it, to get any issues worked out, and get real race feedback. Same thing should be true on the raod and for cross, if you want to hold states, you must have promoted on the course at least once before, and be an experienced, and well regarded (from the ACA race feedback survey) promoter.

Are there any pros or ex-pros that have raced cross in regions with inclimate weather, maybe Belgium, Portland or New England that would like to chime in on the sketchiness of today's conditions? Was it too sketchy, or was it just a product of regional weather conditions?

Ok, I wasn't going to chime in but I can't take it. The course was sweet(even if not suited to my strengths). Say what you want about the spiral of death, it may be a gimmick, but we were still racing our cross bikes on dirt, so why complain?

As far as the "off-camber dangerous ice" complaints I will say this":

Bike racing is dangerous. I would further add that last week's Alpha cross (which was also freakin' sweet) had a ton of off camber and short steep pitches. If we had a snow storm 1-3 days before that race, a lot of those off camber sections would have been sketchy and a few uphills would have required a dismount. There would have been more crashes, slips, bobbles, injuries etc. That's just the luck of the draw.

It's cross and it's bike racing. It's also Colorado. Not all courses suit each rider, but different courses and variable weather is what makes cyclocross cyclocross. There are a number of courses I truly hate. Probably because they expose my weaknesses. Rather than faulting promoters, let's be thankful that there are enough of them to fill a race schedule.

Which brings me to my next question. . . is there anybody out there that hated today's course that would like to take on the responsibility of promoting a race next year?

have to agree with the state champ, i thought the course was great given the temps and snow, well done to the guys who stepped up and put it on and it's nice to have another new venue. Loved the 180's, dismounts and the spiral. I admit if got more tricky (i raced 3's) as it got colder but if the designers were to take the interesting sections out it would be like a velodrome. Perhaps with some feedback they could have widened the icey descent (on the farside) to the right where the snow gave you some grip and also shoveled snow onto the next left turn which exited that section (again to give more grip). I can remember last yr at the bear creek race in the snow and ice Rus Kappius shoveled snow on some icey stuff and it really helped.

Great site Kris. I appreciate the time and effort you put into local cycling news.
To all the negative comments about States, I ask everyone to think about what kind of person(s) it takes to put on a race, race promoters are a rare breed and tough as nails-definitely tougher than the sniveling racers who posted negative commments. Those comments are embarassing and Kris, I'd consider taking care about what messages your site is enabling towards the CX community, espcially promoters. It's embarrasing to our local scene that is thriving and healthy. Anyone who complains- I challenge you to effin do it better. Or at least educate yourself about the process that takes months, tens of hours of time, (Friday night-it was 15degrees and windy while volunteers set up the course, so WE COULD ALL RACE.)
Just be thankful that Colorado has great races and people willing to put them on.

ACA has a forum to provide professional feedback on race courses. If you did not like a course, take 5 mins and give your feedback where is actually is read by people who can use it.

Personally, I thought the spiral of death was too gimmicky. When I saw the preview photo of another spiral of death, I thought it was a joke. Unfortunately, no. Other than that, the course was fair at least in the morning before things got colder and icier. Cyclocross is to be contested normally in difficult conditions. Part of winning is how you can deal with those conditions. Basically, compared to KC in 2007, today's conditions were a cake walk.

There were four dismounts per lap, 3 man made and one big log, Necessary to have 4 dismounts per lap? Cross is a novel sport to begin do you need to have muddy/icy off camber dh sections, four dismounts, spiral of death, guess when I saw the flyer with the whatever on the motorcycle chopper... I was a little concerned, not sure what that has to do with a state cross championship.

What do others think about the four dismounts per lap? They could have done away with the one in the snow and skipped the sidewalk with the snow drifts in favor of the parking lot..... or the dismount 200 yards before the log.

Yes, I would like to see you start a Thread where people can comment on the course. My .02 several broken bones in AM, per ER doc Pete Watson, Course had no rhthym, run through snow drifts, alot o luck involved and top notch gear for snow and mud. I would like to see the State Championships awarded to the guys who put on the UCI events or alot of races and know how to set up a top notch course. Race was well organized, but the course/venue was real mediocre at best, Good for a mid season race, not the state championships.

There was alot of carnage out there today, don't tell me that is what cross is all about.

Would like to hear what others thought of the State Championships.