Battenkill (and road racing generally) dying due to costs

[djg21]

A good editorial:

The iconic Tour of the Battenkill could be on its last legs. And although races come and go, Battenkill´s departure maybe a barometer of something greater in cycling.

Race Director Dieter Drake recently announced that Battenkill would be dropping USA Cycling sanctioning for 2016, which came as no great surprise given Drakeç—´ well publicized conflicts with the national governing body. However, on Sept. 18, Drake raised a few eyebrows when he announce that next year could be the end of the race altogether.

http://www.ridelcc.com/huzzah/battenkilled

Maybe US Cycling should consider going back to the old USCF model of requiring clubs to host events. I also think cash prizes should be limited to the Pro/1/2 fields and entry fees capped, at least for smaller local races. Maybe there can be a carve-out for larger events where entries are uncapped and significantly higher. The article is right about triathlon: My wife paid $700 to enter the Lake Placid Ironman. She got a bag of swag and a participant medal after finishing. I'd hate to see cycling go this route.

[54ny77]

that would be sad to see it go. truly one of the more special events out there. only did it once, but loved it. would enjoy doing it again someday.

even if it goes unsanctioned, perhaps make it a gran fondo with categories?

[45K10]

USA Cycling is a big money suck that is for sure. I have only promoted five races but every one of them lost money. Granted paying police, emt's & timing company was a fair amount of the costs but the costs associated with USA cycling IMO seemed higher than they should have been.

I wasn't in it to make money just doing my duty as a USA Cycling club president putting on a race but IMO USA cycling was more of an obstacle than a resource for hosting a race.

[tv_vt]

Link not working for me...

[bcroslin]

A good editorial:



http://www.ridelcc.com/huzzah/battenkilled

Maybe US Cycling should consider going back to the old USCF model of requiring clubs to host events. I also think cash prizes should be limited to the Pro/1/2 fields and entry fees capped, at least for smaller local races. Maybe there can be a carve-out for larger events where entries are uncapped and significantly higher. The article is right about triathlon: My wife paid $700 to enter the Lake Placid Ironman. She got a bag of swag and a participant medal after finishing. I'd hate to see cycling go this route.

And yet there is a Gran Fondo or grass roots event nearly every weekend in my neck of the woods. I did 6 Gap over the weekend and even with Worlds happening right up the road they still had over 2k cyclists participating.

The Dahlonega crit Sat night was sad to watch. There were 6 guys in the 35+ cat and maybe 25 in the mens Cat 1/2 field. The women's field was so small the promoters combined all the cats and there were only 3 cat 1/2 women. The pro women lapped the field at least once and lapped several 4/5 ladies twice contributing to a crash in the final turn when one of the 4/5 women got in the way.

There's essentially 2 promoters here in FL trying to make a living off USAC events and every year the prices go higher and the fields grow smaller. Fewer racers are seeing any value racing for $30 and a pair of socks if they reach the podium. Grassroots is what will ultimately save road racing but it's going to have to die an ugly death at the hands of the promoters first.

[MattTuck]

For non-profit races, I wonder if they could turn to kickstarter or gofundme or something similar, and use crowdfunding to support these races.

It gets more complicated if you're a promoter trying to make money off an event. Then it is kind of a business problem. You have to deliver a better product.

[djg21]

And yet there is a Gran Fondo or grass roots event nearly every weekend in my neck of the woods. I did 6 Gap over the weekend and even with Worlds happening right up the road they still had over 2k cyclists participating.

The Dahlonega crit Sat night was sad to watch. There were 6 guys in the 35+ cat and maybe 25 in the mens Cat 1/2 field. The women's field was so small the promoters combined all the cats and there were only 3 cat 1/2 women. The pro women lapped the field at least once and lapped several 4/5 ladies twice contributing to a crash in the final turn when one of the 4/5 women got in the way.

There's essentially 2 promoters here in FL trying to make a living off USAC events and every year the prices go higher and the fields grow smaller. Fewer racers are seeing any value racing for $30 and a pair of socks if they reach the podium. Grassroots is what will ultimately save road racing but it's going to have to die an ugly death at the hands of the promoters first.

Maybe thought needs to be given to rider fields too? Is there a need to have separate masters fields? Maybe the fields should be grouped solely by category/ability irrespective of age? This could reduce costs a little and increase the size of fields. Some riders undoubtedly will complain about not being able to race twice on a given day, or being less likely to podium in a senior field than a masters field, but that is the very rider culture that the editorial points out as a factor killing racing.

[AngryScientist]

$$700 for the ironman tri ? wow, i know there is a lot that goes into it, but that sure sounds like a lot of money. like a LOT of money.

[chiasticon]

could this be contributing to cyclocross's rise in popularity? for the most part, it's pretty cheap, provided you get free access to the park and people donating their time to setup/tear down the course. generally don't have to get any dedicated police or emt's, don't have to block roads, etc. of course some of the bigger events need these things, but then they have more money too...

[djg21]

$$700 for the ironman tri ? wow, i know there is a lot that goes into it, but that sure sounds like a lot of money. like a LOT of money.

And it closes out every year!

[rzthomas]

could this be contributing to cyclocross's rise in popularity? for the most part, it's pretty cheap, provided you get free access to the park and people donating their time to setup/tear down the course. generally don't have to get any dedicated police or emt's, don't have to block roads, etc. of course some of the bigger events need these things, but then they have more money too...

There's truth in what you're saying. I've helped promote both 'cross and crits as part of a team (Half Acre Cycling in Chicago). We ran a weekday crit series and helped organize and work a cyclocross race in Dekalb, IL. The 'cross race was always so much easier to deal with than the crits, though a part of that was the great team that dealt directly with Dekalb's park department.

Also to note:

Cyclocross is a more forgiving discipline of bike racing, in terms of crashes or in fitness. I've crashed more times than I can count in 'cross and never been really injured. Bad crashes with broken bones in CX are very rare, but in road/crit racing, it's part of the deal. I've seen life-changing and devastating crashes happen in road races, but usually the worst thing that happens in a 'cross race is some broken/cracked ribs from stacking it over the barriers.

'Cross, you can have bad fitness and still have lots of fun and finish your race. If you're in a crit and you get dropped off the back, well, sucks for you. That makes a difference, I am sure, to how the landscape is changing.

[45K10]

could this be contributing to cyclocross's rise in popularity? for the most part, it's pretty cheap, provided you get free access to the park and people donating their time to setup/tear down the course. generally don't have to get any dedicated police or emt's, don't have to block roads, etc. of course some of the bigger events need these things, but then they have more money too...

Yes it is way cheaper to put on a cross race but then you have to worry about re-sodding or some kind of repair costs if it is a public park. When I lived in Vancouver I used to go down to Bellingham, Wa and race a non-sanctioned cyclocross series. They had a dedicated CX course around a BMX track. It was pretty sweet and the registration fees were dirt cheap. Its a good model if you can work it out that way.

[GregL]

IMO USA Cycling prices are a significant part of the problem. USA Cycling fees are one of the reasons I am no longer a race official. I always volunteered my time and travel, never taking money from the race promoter even though it was allowed under USA Cycling rules. The most compensation I ever accepted was a bottle of cider. I liked the idea of giving back to the sport through volunteerism. When USA Cycling kept raising the license fees AND required me to pay for my own criminal background check, I decided enough was enough. Now add all the additional fees that the race promoters have to pay and it gets more ridiculous.

As for Battenkill, it's grown to the point where it is in fact a business venture for the promoter. He now has to manage not only the finances, but the public perception of how his income is spent. I don't envy anyone that problem! The whole concept of amateur cycling providing cash payouts is bizarre...

- Greg

[benb]

Even for cyclocross I worry if it's sustainable.. seems like it does a lot of damage to the parks and some areas are going to sour on it. It seems like it could be more of a problem due to being more likely to be run in "nice" parks in more urban areas where people care more, compared to MTB being in more remote areas where the trails are not so buffed and can more easily absorb the impact.

ISTR I dropped my license when USAC raised the fees. I never seemed to feel like I got anything out of USAC membership the years I had a license, and it felt like it was a tainted fee being used to support pros who were ruining the sport with doping. About the only thing they seem(ed) to do was keep track of your points, they don't even provide registration.

IIRC all the road racing/crit racing I did was USAC. None of the hillclimbs or MTB races I did were.. and for the most part the hillclimbs & MTB races were a more fun atmosphere.

Most of my experience was during the "club puts on a race" phase though. Right at the end of it if I understand correctly.

[MattTuck]

Sure, in an ironman (or triathlon in general) you're competing with other participants for the win, but also competing with yourself for the best time.

You pay the money and expect to give it your all.

In a bike race, there are so many things that can go wrong (mechanical, crash, flat) that are not in your control, it is hard to justify a big cost.

[Mikej]

There are just ALOT of races out there now -our MTB series has dwindling numbers due to the amount of choices now days and I think its just how its going to be. A guy can only spend so much money and time on races in a year so the "good" ones with the best amenities and easiest drive are winning.

[benb]

It's really all for bragging rights and feeling like you are part of an "in-group". I don't see what the difference is between an IronMan and a bike race. Maybe the IronMan race has less chance someone's going to take you out due to them trying to avoid drafting (sounds like there is a lot of cheating though) but it's by no means 100% safe compared to road racing.

In road racing the big bragging point seems to be telling other riders, "I'm Cat X what are you?". I'm not really sure what it is in Tri since I've never done a Triathlon but there is still no real difference.

If you're just doing it for yourself you can go out and do a solo Ironman or unorganized Ironman with a few friends just like you can go do a 50/100/200 mile ride with your friends without involving all the extra machinery of a race.

All this Spartan/Mud/Tough guy racing stuff might not be helping although I don't really think a lot of those folks have a huge overlap with real endurance sports.

[djg21]

It's a little OT, but this is pretty good:

Part of being a triathlete is being a cyclist, and part of being a cyclist is making fun of triathletes. This strange relationship is one that I have gotten to carefully observe over the years. Many of my friends are strictly cyclists, and many are strictly triathletes. The only thing they have in common is that they ride bikes.

Triathletes try to be the master of three sports, and I get it, that is annoying. We are like that girl you went to high school with who was the president of the student government, captain of the basketball team, and voted homecoming queen.

Here is a list of 10 things that triathletes do that drive cyclists crazy. . . .

http://aboutboulder.com/blog/10-things-triathletes-do-that-piss-cyclists-off/

My pet peeve:

10. Ironman tattoos

Completing an Ironman is an amazing accomplishment, but if you are only doing it so you can brag to everyone then you better expect that cyclists are going to resent you. You just paid $600 for a race and then another $100 to have a brands logo on you forever.

[EDS]

Battenkill is a great course for amateur road racing. There just are not many other races in the northeast that offer a single loop course with interesting terrain. Given that there are well over 2000 racers last year, I don't think it is the course or entry fees that doom the races future.

Losing Battenkill from the race calendar would be a big loss for Northeast racing.

[EDS]

Sure, in an ironman (or triathlon in general) you're competing with other participants for the win, but also competing with yourself for the best time.

You pay the money and expect to give it your all.

In a bike race, there are so many things that can go wrong (mechanical, crash, flat) that are not in your control, it is hard to justify a big cost.

Mechanicals, crashes and flats happen in triathlons too (not to me in my brief tri career, but I did have one heck of a time getting my wetsuit off once).

I have flatted at Battenkill a few times and it does suck, particularly when you know you are now in for a long day chasing. That said, for that particular race and that course, I still came away with a positive overall experience because it has a great combination of local support and enthusiasm, non-prohibitive drive from major NE urban areas, and a scenic and interesting course.

[FastforaSlowGuy]

Sure, in an ironman (or triathlon in general) you're competing with other participants for the win, but also competing with yourself for the best time.

You pay the money and expect to give it your all.

In a bike race, there are so many things that can go wrong (mechanical, crash, flat) that are not in your control, it is hard to justify a big cost.

Um, I've had all of these things happen to me in a triathlon, and I've had plenty of uncontrollable things happen that just wouldn't in a bike race (near concussion in the swim, hit by a cyclist on the run...). And I know plenty of people who do Battenkill (the race, not the new GF they've been running) as an "experience" rather than a "I wanna beat these guys" race.

That said, I agree that the hard thing about bike racing is that for most (not all) races, you can't just go out and "do your best" like you can in a marathon or triathlon. That approach is what Gran Fondos are for, but in a bike race most people would just get pulled 6 miles in. It's happened to me, and the first time was humiliating. Then I realized it was just part of racing. Honestly, I think that's a big reason that CX is so popular - race your heart out at the back and it's still fun.

[pff]

Strava is killing racing because it provides a competitive outlet as well as social exposure. I know riders who have quit racing but still go after KOMs with abandon. In the past it would have seemed somewhat pointless to smash yourself on a 6 hour ride (if a tree falls in the forest...) but now there's the dangling allure of the kudos and a segment leaderboard.

[djg21]

Battenkill is a great course for amateur road racing. There just are not many other races in the northeast that offer a single loop course with interesting terrain. Given that there are well over 2000 racers last year, I don't think it is the course or entry fees that doom the races future.

Losing Battenkill from the race calendar would be a big loss for Northeast racing.

It's not the course or fees per se. The issue is the ability of the promoter to profit given the costs of promoting the race, the arguably unecessary costs imposed by US Cycling, and the arguably unrealistic expectations of race participants. The fact is that hosting large events is a costly and time consuming endeavor and promoters lose any incentive to promote races when they can not earn money. So the relevant questions really become: (1) how can the costs of putting on races lessened; (2) how much more will racers pay to participate; and (3) what (or how much less) may racers reasonably expect to get in exchange for their (increased) entry fees?

It may be that races like Battenkill will have to cost $200-300 or more in order to pay for road closures, police, insurance, etc., and still allow promoters to earn a reasonable return? But as entry fees increase, participation will necessecarily decrease.

[CunegoFan]

$$700 for the ironman tri ? wow, i know there is a lot that goes into it, but that sure sounds like a lot of money. like a LOT of money.

That is just the start. You cannot check in the day of the race or the day before. It is Friday check-in, Sunday race. You are stuck there for at least three days. The hotels jack up their rates and have minimum stays, so you are likely paying for more than three days anyway. Then there is the travel cost, including bike transport. Bringing family, it is typical to spend thousands to do an IM. That does not include the equipment or a coach, which every triathlete seems to think is necessary.

Have an Ironman on your bucket list? Figure on $10k+ by the time you are done. This might be why half the fields are newcomers and not many last more than a few years in the sport.

[BumbleBeeDave]

Battenkill is a great course for amateur road racing. There just are not many other races in the northeast that offer a single loop course with interesting terrain. Given that there are well over 2000 racers last year, I don't think it is the course or entry fees that doom the races future.

Losing Battenkill from the race calendar would be a big loss for Northeast racing.

. . . and have gone to the race every year for the past ten years to shoot photos.

The fees he has to pay and the conditions he has to meet to get USCF sanction are ridiculous. Last year for his first gran fondo day on Sunday he had about 60 riders. This year he had over 400. You do the math. He's going with the times. He will have more next year.

What's he going to lose by not paying the outrageous USCF fees and meeting all the conditions? Perhaps some domestic teams in search of national points may not attend. But he will still have hundreds and hundreds of racers from NYC and Boston who come up to do something different.

Battenkill has always been a participant's race rather than a spectator's race and he is just playing to that. The course is not near a major airport, not near major lodging or a huge metro area, and he has always had problems getting headline sponsors because of that. Riders don't come to do Battenkill because of the prize money or the national points. They come to do the race because it is something different and it's an effing hard course that you can be proud you conquered.

I also marvel at the yahoo's ranting on Facebook that he's getting rich off the race fees. They have NO idea what he has to go through every year in order to put the race on. The local politics he has to deal with, the town meetings he has to attend, the approval votes he has to get from every township the course passes through, and the same objections every year from the same locals who never want ANYTHING to happen in their town. He could be proposing to stand on the corner downtown and hand out $100 bills and they would still object. The guy has six kids and a day job. I really don't think he's getting rich off of this depsite charging $75 or whatever he does for entry.

I don't think the race will end. He may gradually transition it to an all fondo setup to maximize profit and minimize logistics. I would think it would certainly be easier to just have a 2500 person gran fondo and fire one starting gun than to try to organize the 25 or so different race fields he has to keep track of for USCF categories. But it would also not surprise me if he just finally says "to hell with this" and goes and rides more himself.

BBD

[rugbysecondrow]

$$700 for the ironman tri ? wow, i know there is a lot that goes into it, but that sure sounds like a lot of money. like a LOT of money.


A lot of support for a long period of time, over various routes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pbarry]

BBD, you almost certainly mean USAC. :beer:

[BumbleBeeDave]

BBD, you almost certainly mean USAC. :beer:

Whatever . . . Two beers and I was on a roll. :rolleyes:

BBD

[carpediemracing]

As a promoter, I'd like to ask this question. What do you think is a reasonable profit for holding a race? What do you think a reasonable budget is for holding such a race?

Weeknight training race?

"Industrial park" weekend crit? (Bethel, etc)

Closing roads crit? (Keith Berger, New London CT)

Downtown (major city) crit? (Boston, Hartford, etc)

Grassroots road race? (Tokeneke, Hilltowns?)

I'm a racer too, but my role as a promoter skews my views on what a racer should expect.

[ldamelio]

Great thread, eight time Battenkiller here (40+, now 50+). While I'm not a big fan of USAC (they take my 60 bucks every year and don't do a damn thing for me), I'm not sure they're the great Satan here. Respectfully, the race has jumped the shark. Buried in the article originally quoted:


"The loss of the larger pro venue led to the opening of a gran fondo, a seemingly good idea that hasn稚 really gained too much traction, resulting in some lost luster for the race as a whole.

However, despite the recent turmoil, Battenkill has been one of the biggest races in the country for 12 years, drawing approximately 3,000 riders annually."

Attendance is up over the years but enthusiasm is down and it's no longer a must or season goal for many. It has gone from a hard, early season American spring classic to an ill-defined event. Fondo folks and racers are different target audiences. Too many fields on the course at one time with too much mixing in. Too many categories that contain widely divergent talent. What the heck is the difference between 55+ cat V (almost all one day licensees) and a fondo? The race also lost some of its luster with the move of the start/finish from downtown Cambridge, necessitated by the hordes. Completely different feel and loss of revenue for local business.

I bet if it were trimmed down to one day, standard categorized fields (P/1/2 then separate 3's, 4's and 5's, equivalent women's races, maybe 5 year masters age divisions between 35 and 55 for cat 1-4) with field limits of 125, most fields would fill. The vastly increased overhead and zoo needed to run 3000 people would disappear.

Make the fondo and what is currently the training ride one and the same and a couple of weeks before.

Again, it's jumped the shark. Anything that wanders from its roots and tries to be too many things to too many people does this.

BTW, great thread. I agree with the comments regarding the popularity of cross and decline of road racing posted above.

[gjc985]

So bummed, but I'm not surprised. This race has lost a lot of interest in the past few years.


A good editorial:



http://www.ridelcc.com/huzzah/battenkilled

Maybe US Cycling should consider going back to the old USCF model of requiring clubs to host events. I also think cash prizes should be limited to the Pro/1/2 fields and entry fees capped, at least for smaller local races. Maybe there can be a carve-out for larger events where entries are uncapped and significantly higher. The article is right about triathlon: My wife paid $700 to enter the Lake Placid Ironman. She got a bag of swag and a participant medal after finishing. I'd hate to see cycling go this route.

[Tandem Rider]

As a promoter, I'd like to ask this question. What do you think is a reasonable profit for holding a race? What do you think a reasonable budget is for holding such a race?

Weeknight training race?

"Industrial park" weekend crit? (Bethel, etc)

Closing roads crit? (Keith Berger, New London CT)

Downtown (major city) crit? (Boston, Hartford, etc)

Grassroots road race? (Tokeneke, Hilltowns?)

I'm a racer too, but my role as a promoter skews my views on what a racer should expect.

I'm curious about this answer too.

Mrs TR promoted a race series for years. The first year I footed the bill for "startup" on this venture. 3 of the last 5 years she "cleared" enough to have the race buy her and I pizza and beer after the last race of the year.

That works out to something like a $2 per day paycheck. What is the general perception of a reasonable profit for a promoter?

[BumbleBeeDave]

". . . resulting in some lost luster for the race as a whole."

Huh? Maybe from this guy's viewpoint. Note the page says the author, Tony Sylor, is the race team director for this particular cycling club.

I'd hardly say going from 50 to 450 participants in one year for the fondo is not successful. Also note the race this year is later to get more reliable weather and will be a one day format. Easier for more people to attend, easier to organize, easier to limit fields, and easier to get sponsors and exhibitors, especially local ones who may have limited resources to man a booth for two days. It's just easier all the way around. The course is also a lot prettier with leaves on the trees. Trust me on that one. I've ridden over there a lot.

But "lost luster?" To me, Dieter is trying to widen the appeal of the "race" and turn it into a "cycling event." Turn it into an "event" and you draw more people in general. You also attract more riders who are not racers and don't have the expectation Sylor speaks of that the promoter of the event is a an evil monster if he wants to (GASP!) somehow make a profit off of all his work. I also take into account that Dieter is pretty blunt--he readily admits he's getting tired of hearing racers bitch and moan no matter what he does or how much he offers.

I don't race. Many of my friends who are avid cyclists don't race. I don't care who finishes first. I'm seeking a challenging ride in beautiful countryside and hopefully will be good weather. There's a lot more of me out there than there are racer boys and girls who are out there to prove something to somebody else. That's the market he's trying to reach out to and it's a good idea.

BBD

[ldamelio]

No need to denigrate racers as "boys and girls with something to prove". It is not necessarily unhealthy or immature to enjoy competition, and pretty much everyone who races enjoys a nice, scenic ride also. I didn't denigrate fondo riders in my post and there's no reason to be divisive. I (and the author of the article) was merely pointing out that these are two different groups of riders and the target market for the event is ill-defined compared to past years. Separating the events may bring more focus and help with the problems outlined.

[velomonkey]

Is anyone who actually raced from the early 90s and 80s really surprised by any of this? Cause I'm not.

USA cycling has been a self-destruct mode since the new millennium. The quality has gone down, but all they can talk about is the quantity.

This was a sport that was changed and codified to meet the needs to of new-to-the-sport 30 something males with disposable income. Upgraded points based off of "career finishes" and not points earned in a race. You gotta be kidding. Basically it went from bike racing to a something with bikes but akin to suburban karate classes where students chase belt levels.

It's a joke, has been for a long time. Lance blew up and this is what you are left with. BMX was better when it has NBL. Mountain biking was better when it had NORBA. Road racing was better under USCF.

Steve Johnson is finally gone - dude should have been gone years ago. The only shirt I saw sold out at worlds - a shirt that had the old logo USCF - there's a reason for that.

[peanutgallery]

Did the whole road racing deal from 1988 to 1997 then disappeared for a while to work and get the family up and running. Surprised at the how weak the sport seemed upon resurfacing a few years back. Very few events and like no $, what's the point? Still like the youngest guy on the local weekly worlds group ride ....and nobody talks about racing - other than an occasional local MTB (current) or cross (a few years ago). Big into participating and bucket list kinds of events and absolutely no youngsters. B and C version of the ride is as vibrant as it always was. The A ride looks lonely

A sad end, sport is eaten from the inside out

Is anyone who actually raced from the early 90s and 80s really surprised by any of this? Cause I'm not.

USA cycling has been a self-destruct mode since the new millennium. The quality has gone down, but all they can talk about is the quantity.

This was a sport that was changed and codified to meet the needs to of new-to-the-sport 30 something males with disposable income. Upgraded points based off of "career finishes" and not points earned in a race. You gotta be kidding. Basically it went from bike racing to a something with bikes but akin to suburban karate classes where students chase belt levels.

It's a joke, has been for a long time. Lance blew up and this is what you are left with. BMX was better when it has NBL. Mountain biking was better when it had NORBA. Road racing was better under USCF.

Steve Johnson is finally gone - dude should have been gone years ago. The only shirt I saw sold out at worlds - a shirt that had the old logo USCF - there's a reason for that.

[EDS]

No need to denigrate racers as "boys and girls with something to prove". It is not necessarily unhealthy or immature to enjoy competition, and pretty much everyone who races enjoys a nice, scenic ride also. I didn't denigrate fondo riders in my post and there's no reason to be divisive. I (and the author of the article) was merely pointing out that these are two different groups of riders and the target market for the event is ill-defined compared to past years. Separating the events may bring more focus and help with the problems outlined.

Agreed. I race not to prove anything to anyone except myself, but because I enjoy the competitive (sure, it is the boy in me clinging to the memories of high school and collegiate athletics) and social aspects of bike racing.

Battenkill has definitely been a big part of that competitive and social experience for me over the years, whether in terms of the motivation to train in the dark cold days of winter or for the stories and collective yucks with teammates and friends before and after the race.

[rugbysecondrow]

Did the whole road racing deal from 1988 to 1997 then disappeared for a while to work and get the family up and running. Surprised at the how weak the sport seemed upon resurfacing a few years back. Very few events and like no $, what's the point? Still like the youngest guy on the local weekly worlds group ride ....and nobody talks about racing - other than an occasional local MTB (current) or cross (a few years ago). Big into participating and bucket list kinds of events and absolutely no youngsters. B and C version of the ride is as vibrant as it always was. The A ride looks lonely

A sad end, sport is eaten from the inside out


This is anecdotal from somebody who has never bike raced, only triathlons.

The cycling sport participants seem to have a great deal of people who don't have kids, or are coming to the sport after the kids are raised. Even when compared with triathlons, this seems to be the case. I think this is important because young people are not engaged. During formative years, they learn other sports in lieu of cycling.

I am not a cycling fan, I do enjoy riding my bike, but cycling is like watching golf, I just can't do it. If I don't race, if I don't watch, my kids will skip right over it.

I do think Cross and MTB racing is compelling to watch on TV, they make those racing look fun, like something people would want to do. Road racing just doesn't look like any fun, I can't imagine somebody watching that on TV and thinking "I want to do that!"

[EDS]

This is anecdotal from somebody who has never bike raced, only triathlons.

The cycling sport participants seem to have a great deal of people who don't have kids, or are coming to the sport after the kids are raised. Even when compared with triathlons, this seems to be the case. I think this is important because young people are not engaged. During formative years, they learn other sports in lieu of cycling.

I am not a cycling fan, I do enjoy riding my bike, but cycling is like watching golf, I just can't do it. If I don't race, if I don't watch, my kids will skip right over it.

I do think Cross and MTB racing is compelling to watch on TV, they make those racing look fun, like something people would want to do. Road racing just doesn't look like any fun, I can't imagine somebody watching that on TV and thinking "I want to do that!"

In some respects, that is where bike racing fits in - getting younger men and women into the sport. I have a bunch of guys on my team who are only a few years out of college and have picked up the sport as a way to stay fit and do something with a competitive element. Most of these guys are ex collegiate soccer players, rowers, runners, etc.

Personally, I am less fit then I was before I had kids.

[oldpotatoe]

US Pro Challenge also(Tour of Colorado)

http://velonews.competitor.com/2015/09/news/usa-pro-challenge-changes-ownership-seeks-investors_386863

[benb]

The cycling sport participants seem to have a great deal of people who don't have kids, or are coming to the sport after the kids are raised. Even when compared with triathlons, this seems to be the case. I think this is important because young people are not engaged. During formative years, they learn other sports in lieu of cycling.


This is somewhat due to the format. You don't get pulled from Triathlons & Running so you can go into the event at your own level of commitment. I hadn't run much at all since I started cycling but this summer I did a bunch of running and got myself up to running a 5K decently again. Once I got there I didn't do an event but I could have and it would have been fun. (I kind of just said, "this still kind of sucks I want to ride my bike instead." ;) )

But in cycling you get pulled.. getting pulled sucks. So you have a minimum time commitment to get yourself to the fitness level where you're not going to get pulled at a minimum. Then there is almost no satisfaction in just finishing as pack fodder.

So it does naturally bifurcate into young single guys and old guys who either never had kids or seemingly pass off all the child rearing to their wives. (I had teammates like that, it was weird IMO to want to spend so much time with other riders and not with family.)

I know there is no real way I'm going to get to 10+ hours a week where I'd want to be to race & feel good about it married with a kid.. highly unlikely I will ever do any USAC racing again. (I've managed about 5 hours a week the past 5-6 weeks, it feels great but not enough for racing IMO.) It is also beyond my acceptable risk level now that I'm married & have a kid too. Cross & MTB are not as risky IMO so it is possible I would race those again.. particularly MTB where it seems like you're not going to get pulled. But MTB seems to take a larger time commitment in maintenance & travel so I barely ride my MTB these days.


I am not a cycling fan, I do enjoy riding my bike, but cycling is like watching golf, I just can't do it. If I don't race, if I don't watch, my kids will skip right over it.


I don't really care to watch much either, at least on TV.. crits and cross are fun to watch in person though. I don't see how that stops kids from wanting to ride bikes. I never saw any bike racing on TV (growing up in the 80s & 90s) as a kid, didn't even know there was an active racing scene nearby, could not have gotten my parents to get me a bike decent enough to race on ($$$), etc.. but I still rode my bike a ton as a kid and would have impromptu races with my friends. I don't think cycling is like football or something where it needs the whole hype machine to survice.


I do think Cross and MTB racing is compelling to watch on TV, they make those racing look fun, like something people would want to do. Road racing just doesn't look like any fun, I can't imagine somebody watching that on TV and thinking "I want to do that!"

They all have their own type of thrill... road is kind of fun for the insanity of riding along in a peloton.

[El Chaba]

The sport is sick, but I doubt that it will die.......but the trend is downward. USAC is a hindrance rather than a help......unfortunately.....

[54ny77]

You should make whatever the heck you want to make.

If someone or some folks don't like it, they can bitch & moan all they want. Tell them to go run a race/series.

I've helped put a couple of 'em on (back when USCF club rule was they had to host/organize 1 per year) and it was a bear. Sooooo many consituents--cities, police, medical, insurance, sponsorship, local businesses (some want it, some hate it), and on and on and on.

I don't envy a promotor's job--it's almost thankless.

As a promoter, I'd like to ask this question. What do you think is a reasonable profit for holding a race? What do you think a reasonable budget is for holding such a race?

Weeknight training race?

"Industrial park" weekend crit? (Bethel, etc)

Closing roads crit? (Keith Berger, New London CT)

Downtown (major city) crit? (Boston, Hartford, etc)

Grassroots road race? (Tokeneke, Hilltowns?)

I'm a racer too, but my role as a promoter skews my views on what a racer should expect.

[shovelhd]

I think it's interesting that very few people have answered CDR's question. I have refrained because I'm a part of each constituent base and thus already know the answers.

There is good feedback in the article comments.

Unsanctioned racing is fine as a complimentary product but without some kind of performance incentive like an upgrade system, or the pro card system used in triathlons, you will alienate the vast majority of the current amateur racers. Racers take valuable free time to participate in an expensive and dangerous sport, and want to be rewarded for their hard work by moving up the ranks. If you have never raced in a pro criterium, you wouldn't understand what a completely different experience that is versus a Cat5 criterium.

[FlashUNC]

I think it's interesting that very few people have answered CDR's question. I have refrained because I'm a part of each constituent base and thus already know the answers.

There is good feedback in the article comments.

Unsanctioned racing is fine as a complimentary product but without some kind of performance incentive like an upgrade system, or the pro card system used in triathlons, you will alienate the vast majority of the current amateur racers. Racers take valuable free time to participate in an expensive and dangerous sport, and want to be rewarded for their hard work by moving up the ranks. If you have never raced in a pro criterium, you wouldn't understand what a completely different experience that is versus a Cat5 criterium.

I don't disagree with your general point, but as a partial counter-argument, the Red Hook series has cultivated an pretty incredible following of amateur racers, all without the structure you've outlined. Maybe having the largesse of one of the largest video game companies on Earth to write the checks to sponsor the series helps, but its definitely a global race series that exists outside the traditional sport power structure.

[rugbysecondrow]

I think it's interesting that very few people have answered CDR's question. I have refrained because I'm a part of each constituent base and thus already know the answers.

There is good feedback in the article comments.

Unsanctioned racing is fine as a complimentary product but without some kind of performance incentive like an upgrade system, or the pro card system used in triathlons, you will alienate the vast majority of the current amateur racers. Racers take valuable free time to participate in an expensive and dangerous sport, and want to be rewarded for their hard work by moving up the ranks. If you have never raced in a pro criterium, you wouldn't understand what a completely different experience that is versus a Cat5 criterium.

The easy answer, as much profit as he/she can. You build it, manage it, execute it, get paid for it.

I don't think we can determine the amount of profit somebody should make, I think what we can determine is the value of an entry fee relative to the event.

For instance, I think "Color Runs" and other silly events are ridiculous and won't pay $50 to get colored and run/jog/walk a 5k. Apparently people do think it is worth it, so these events make money. Same with Tough Mudder and other such events.

I don't bemoan profit at all, I don't even think about it when I enter an event. All I ask "Is the fee for the event worth it"?

[beeatnik]

The sport is sick, but I doubt that it will die.......but the trend is downward. USAC is a hindrance rather than a help......unfortunately.....

In some places participation levels are exploding.

Great product means great courses w/ limited barriers to participation

Hardest ride in Southern California. The World Famous Rose Bowl Ride (Crit). 150+ strong. Free

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8730/16806290042_3eeb04993f_b.jpg

Diverse. Young, old, fat, skinny
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7626/16807382475_99ebbfa35d_b.jpg

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/355/19771375362_58a219aac4_o.jpg


Wolfpack Hustle Civic Center Crit. Future of the Sport
Youthful. Diverse. Urban. Serving many constituencies.
https://farm1.staticflickr.com/637/21854729882_6bb82fc319_b.jpg

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/647/21854729532_f86c4c8f41_o.jpg

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/691/21679767979_d31c04d1da_o.jpg

The promoter is a cycling advocate/commuter who has never raced nor worn lycra. The after party was at a bike shop which doesn't even sell race bikes.

[bcroslin]

As a promoter, I'd like to ask this question. What do you think is a reasonable profit for holding a race? What do you think a reasonable budget is for holding such a race?

Weeknight training race?

"Industrial park" weekend crit? (Bethel, etc)

Closing roads crit? (Keith Berger, New London CT)

Downtown (major city) crit? (Boston, Hartford, etc)

Grassroots road race? (Tokeneke, Hilltowns?)

I'm a racer too, but my role as a promoter skews my views on what a racer should expect.

I can't answer most of these questions except to say I never thought one could actually make a living off promoting races. With that said, I don't really see a reason why someone shouldn't be able to do it and I guess we'd get a more organized and high quality experience if someone was able to devote all of their time to planning and executing a race series.

I think transparency is important and from my experience here in FL there are some slimy people promoting races. Too many canceled races and promotors walking away with race fees or leaving the city holding the bag for services rendered and people get suspicious. I don't think promoters are getting rich but there seems to be a perception problem. The team-sponsored races I've volunteered for were thankless endeavors that make me wonder why anyone would want to organize a bike ride let alone a race series.

[pff]

Hardest ride is Southern California. The World Famous Rose Bowl Ride (Crit). 150+ strong. Free


RB is very fun, but this post is hyperbole, there have never been 150 riders at this ride (at least not since 2011), and if you think it's the hardest ride in socal, you haven't tried Simi, Como, Bud's, Telo, etc. OK, I'm sure RB was hard in '88 when Mercury came and TTT'd it. But if a hard ride is what makes people skip races, you'd think the trend towards an easier RB ride would drive more folks to racing.

As far as the civic center crit, this year it attracted some fairly big names and the road and fixed events were both won by full time USAC racers. It can't really claim to be a grassroots event any more.

[beeatnik]

RB is very fun, but this post is hyperbole, there have never been 150 riders at this ride (at least not since 2011), and if you think it's the hardest ride in socal, you haven't tried Simi, Como, Bud's, Telo, etc. OK, I'm sure RB was hard in '88 when Mercury came and TTT'd it. But if a hard ride is what makes people skip races, you'd think the trend towards an easier RB ride would drive more folks to racing.

As far as the civic center crit, this year it attracted some fairly big names and the road and fixed events were both won by full time USAC racers. It can't really claim to be a grassroots event any more.

Count the riders in the pic. And that's just the "fast group." As for hardest, obviously it's all relative/subjective. But what makes the World Famous Rose Bowl Ride undeniably hard is that it's essentially a race with no teams. If you go to the front and want to stay away, you'll need to TT at 30mph for 30min. I've done all the other rides you mention and none of them have that dynamic.

https://www.strava.com/segments/5536152?filter=overall

https://www.strava.com/segments/7454437?filter=overall

Food for thought:


https://pvcycling.wordpress.com/2015/05/29/the-sport-killers/


The problem with race participation numbers lies at the feet of the riders themselves. We know who our teammates are, we know they汷e AWOL on race day, and it痴 not a complicated problem that needs more secret USAC meetings to anguish over. It痴 a simple problem that requires you to get off your ass and go race your fuggin bike. It痴 a simple problem that requires team bosses to tell their prima donnas that the gravy train comes with an obligation: You want to wear the stuff and ride the rig, you have to race, no exceptions, and if five weekends out of the year is too tough on your schedule, maybe you don稚 belong on something called a 途acing team.

And while weæ±·e at it, letç—´ not take our eyes off the ball by blaming USAC or SCNCA. These organizations have never figured out how to grow the sport and never will because itç—´ not in their DNA. They exist to skim money off license fees and soak money from race promoters so they can pay officials and promote the national team and pay their own salaries. They do not care if the sport grows because itç—´ currently big enough to fund their existing pork projects. If amateur cycling has ever had a constant, itç—´ that USAC and the local organizations cannot and will not increase membership and will not make it easier or cheaper or more profitable for promoters to put on races.

[54ny77]

surprisingly, the world doesn't revolve around so cal go-fast rides.

but thm m3 cranks sales probably do.

;)

[Uncle Jam's Army]

The guy who owns California Bike Racing claims he makes a decent profit off his monthly CBR crit series. But he pays out very little $ to any category (some categories get a free race coupon as prizes) except the PRO/1/2/3. He is a cheap bastard and is very gruff, but he runs a tight ship and I enjoy having local races available on a regular basis.

His races in March attracted fields of 120+ riders in almost all categories, and the fields the final race of his series in late August were 60+.

Having said all of that, he's looking to sell his company and his monthly dates for around 50K, as he's looking to live off his pension that kicks in next year and train more.

I think there is a profit to be made, but it is so small it's not worth the hassle, at least for me.

[beeatnik]

surprisingly, the world doesn't revolve around so cal go-fast rides.

but thm m3 cranks sales probably do.

;)

well, one day it might and then cycling wont be dominated by little twerps from Belgium (Spain, Italy....). see NBA 1940s. ;)

[carpediemracing]

As a promoter, I'd like to ask this question. What do you think is a reasonable profit for holding a race? What do you think a reasonable budget is for holding such a race?

Weeknight training race?

"Industrial park" weekend crit? (Bethel, etc)

Closing roads crit? (Keith Berger, New London CT)

Downtown (major city) crit? (Boston, Hartford, etc)

Grassroots road race? (Tokeneke, Hilltowns?)

I'm a racer too, but my role as a promoter skews my views on what a racer should expect.

How about we make it hourly? Or percentage of costs?

$5/hour? $10/hour? $20/hour?

5% of costs? 1%?

[carpediemracing]

I'm really curious what people who participate in races (or, probably more importantly, in rides) think is fair.

You go put a tip in a tip jar and you have a certain expectation that the person that served you gets a portion of that tip. It is shocking to find out that the tips may go directly to the business, not to the employees. I think riders have an expectation that a portion of the entry goes to the promoter, or somehow the promoter gets compensated. It may be a surprise to learn that promoters don't necessarily get compensated.

Because no one would be idiotic enough to do it without getting compensated, right? (and I am saying that because I'm the idiot/imbecile/moron/etc here).

Bike terms. Would it be okay for a promoter to buy themselves a pair of cheaper carbon wheels after an event? A custom frame set? A tubular tire? An inner tube?

[Tandem Rider]

I started racing in the '70s, started promoting races in the '80s because every club had to and I was "dumb" enough to do the job. The only time I ever was in the black was for a couple of stage races in the late '80s. The club got the money, it was less than $100.

Flash forward to the last 10 years. Mrs TR quit promoting her series not because she was only making at the most a quarter an hour, but she got sick of the grumbling about where the profits went and why didn't she have a bigger prize list, and why didn't she have this or that.

I think there is a historical perception that races/rides should be inexpensive. The rider in me agrees, I love to race and cheaper entries means I can race more. The promoter in me says time for a reality check. As a promoter, you are attaching your name and everything you own, to the hope that hundreds or thousands of cyclists who each paid you a small sum of money, are going to ride or race in close quarters with each other, on public roads, in the company of automobiles driven by persons who both have no idea what is going on and don't want the cyclists slowing them down, all marshaled by volunteers in orange vests, won't get hurt.

Afterwards, you are to give the money back to the riders in the form of prizes. It's a wonder there are any events at all.

[ldamelio]

I think the expectation of prize money in anything but a P/1 race is bizarre. A little swag (eg, series winner jersey at the end of the year or a pair of LBS-donated tires for winning a 3/4 race) is nice, but actual money is crazy. They don't pay out at the local 5k if I run sub-20 minutes; the 4 handicap golfer doesn't expect to get paid when he shoots 78 on his Saturday round, etc. Especially true in the Masters categories. Who in their right mind expects a $50 prize for 5th place in a 45+ crit that he drove to in his $50,000 car with his $10,000 bike on top? This is an extension of the sponsorship thing where the same guy chisels away at the LBS owner for discounts and free service.

All this being said, the Battenkill situation is more complex as discussed in the article and this thread.

[shovelhd]

How about we make it hourly? Or percentage of costs?

$5/hour? $10/hour? $20/hour?

5% of costs? 1%?

My opinion, 10% of costs is the bare minimum. In the grand scheme of things, it's almost an insult.

[CDM]

Free market means no insult. If you have an interest in these races being profitable then I see your angle.

[velomonkey]

I think the expectation of prize money in anything but a P/1 race is bizarre.

Back in the 90s as a CAT II I won $50 plus a 105 derailleur. I thought I was a king.

Just last summer a master racer I know in 50 plus got 5th place and $50.

C'est des conneries!

[rugbysecondrow]

This isn't a fair question though. How much profit should a custom frame builder make? How much profit should my lawn guy make? How much profit should Subway make?

The questions isn't about profit, or margins, it is about can a good product be delivered to the public at a market price? If a promoter can't do that while staying in the red, then I suspect the race gets cancelled. If the Promoter can do that and make a ton of cash, then go for it.

I just don't think about the profit when I buy something, only is it a fair price to me.



I'm really curious what people who participate in races (or, probably more importantly, in rides) think is fair.

You go put a tip in a tip jar and you have a certain expectation that the person that served you gets a portion of that tip. It is shocking to find out that the tips may go directly to the business, not to the employees. I think riders have an expectation that a portion of the entry goes to the promoter, or somehow the promoter gets compensated. It may be a surprise to learn that promoters don't necessarily get compensated.

Because no one would be idiotic enough to do it without getting compensated, right? (and I am saying that because I'm the idiot/imbecile/moron/etc here).

Bike terms. Would it be okay for a promoter to buy themselves a pair of cheaper carbon wheels after an event? A custom frame set? A tubular tire? An inner tube?

[shovelhd]

I think the expectation of prize money in anything but a P/1 race is bizarre. A little swag (eg, series winner jersey at the end of the year or a pair of LBS-donated tires for winning a 3/4 race) is nice, but actual money is crazy. They don't pay out at the local 5k if I run sub-20 minutes; the 4 handicap golfer doesn't expect to get paid when he shoots 78 on his Saturday round, etc. Especially true in the Masters categories. Who in their right mind expects a $50 prize for 5th place in a 45+ crit that he drove to in his $50,000 car with his $10,000 bike on top? This is an extension of the sponsorship thing where the same guy chisels away at the LBS owner for discounts and free service.

All this being said, the Battenkill situation is more complex as discussed in the article and this thread.

Payouts have a long history in the sport. I don't think it's unreasonable for a Masters racer who has been racing for a long time to have the opportunity to earn his/her entry fee back as a prize. Changing expectations is tough though and as we all know it is a complex issue. USAC has been of very little help in this area. If anything needs to change its the focus of USAC.

[Tandem Rider]

Payouts have a long history in the sport. I don't think it's unreasonable for a Masters racer who has been racing for a long time to have the opportunity to earn his/her entry fee back as a prize. Changing expectations is tough though and as we all know it is a complex issue. USAC has been of very little help in this area. If anything needs to change its the focus of USAC.

I don't choose to sit out a race anymore because there isn't a cash prize list. But it's part of the game at the bigger races and so is splitting up the cash afterwards. Everyone wants to have a little bit of the "coolness" of opening up the envelope and counting it, a little "PROness" if you will. As Idamello stated, the well heeled 50+er doesn't need the cash, but it's a nice bonus for us less well to do guys and it's part of the tradition.

I think that the entire USAC road model is failing and needs an overhaul but bigger or smaller prizes for Master's isn't going to fix it because that's not the problem.

[shovelhd]

Tandem Rider gets it.

[54ny77]

FYI, registration is open. Any Paceliners doing the Gran Fondo?

[Walter]

I have always been troubled by the model in many sports of a "sanctioning body" taking money from every stakeholder, all the while essentially providing nothing but a set of rules, and squeezing everyone financially to the point of perhaps driving competitors away and killing off promoters. At the same time, the body takes no financial risk and essentially adds no promotion to the sport or to any event.

Cycling federations, national and world-wide, take money from riders for licenses, extract often exorbitant fees from the promoter for the sanction fee or "officials fees and expenses," yet take no financial risk for the event and does nothing to promote it. They also will try to enforce the self-created power by pulling licenses from those who compete is non-sanctioned events and telling promoters that they will deny entry to riders who license with them unless the promoter pays them money for the sanction.

The interesting thing is this power was granted by no one. It was just self-created and no one seems to question it.

The UCI has been the worst. Riders pay for licenses. Teams pay really big money to get in the door. Promoters pay huge money for the race sanction. Teams are required to attend all races thus requiring larger and far more expensive teams to cover all of the races, even though some may be far out of the sponsor's target market.

Just one case in point is the Tour of the Gila. Really cool event. Many pro teams wanted to come for training. Having some hitters there would help the race as well. UCI blocked it unless the little regional event paid big money to the UCI. Result: race is in financial trouble.

Crazy stuff...and we let it go on.

Bottom line: What does a national cycling body add to the sport aside from a set of rules? The old saw is that they develop new riders and everyone else has to pay for that. BS: The teams who have development squads really do that.

[carpediemracing]

Something that I think was the case was when I went to Belgium I was surprised to learn that a license cost I think $300 there (and $36? in the US - this was in the early 90s).

In Belgium the races I entered there were 20 or 40 places, money places (no idea what the payouts were). Entry fee was $3 and you got back $2 if you gave your number back. If you got shelled in the first lap (me) the registration people usually took pity on you and gave you your whole $3 back, because obviously you needed the money for food or something because you sucked so bad at racing.

The races were cheap because, as I understood it, the federation covered much of the costs - prize money for example. Maybe betting covered it also, since everyone could bet on riders. At any rate I realized that the cheapest way to race would be to get a US license and race in Belgium (not sure of other countries). Since I was so pitifully weak it really didn't matter, but at least I was exposed to a different fiscal model of how things might work.