Amateur racing teams - any good models?

[kgreene10]

I’m both an academic and an amateur bike racer with a team, so Kissinger’s aphorism that “the battles are so vicious because the stakes are so small” rings doubly true to me.

Our team of about 30 3/4/5 (and one 2) racers is in the midst of what I guess could be deemed a civil war. And it’s the second year in a row. Both times, one group decides that its people are better and more committed than others. Eventually they leave the team en masse. This year, it’s happening mid season, which is especially awkward.

Throughout the year, there have been standard recriminations of people not working for others in races and not showing up to team events. Some of the latter is driven by differences in people’s job and family responsibility, and some is down to personality. There have been sporadic attempts to impose rules with documents and leaders, but of course these were either forgotten or became a cudgel with which to bash others. In other words, we experienced all the standard problems of self-governed volunteer organizations, fueled further by the delusions of grandeur that amateur bike racers seem to uniquely suffer.

I should add that our team is hitched to a club with an open membership, so this complicates any move to impose ins vs outs but also makes us a large club and a pillar of the local cycling community.

So, has anyone been involved in a team that has functioned well? If so, what were the lynchpins that made it work? Smaller group and all friends? Strict membership requirements? Strong personality leading the team? Tiered benefits?

[jumphigher]

Wow, your amateur racing experiences remind me of everything I've read about professional teams, so you've got that going for you at least.

[HenryA]

Smaller group and all friends sounds good.

Its an individual sport in terms of most who are attracted to it, but in reality, its a team sport. Resolving that contradiction is what you are after.

Finding people who actually want to work together and help each other is the key, along with competent leadership that is acknowledged and accepted by the group.

[ultraman6970]

IME, if nobody is being paid to race they have the right to say no to responsibilities inside of the team, since the moment money like allowances are in the middle, which is common in south america and europe for amateur teams that pretty much are semi-pro teams compared with pro-pro peloton. Then the things change a lot.

The other thing is that when you have a bunch of amateur riders that arent being paid a dime, and started racing at older age, if not just plain adulthood. Then the things change again because if you have teams with people that started at age 12, the vision of the sport is different, they know it is a thing of being a team, and those riders are easier to handle than a doctor that wants to ride fast and race only. So you have riders that are harder to control depending on the background.

One of my friends is in a female team and she was telling me that nobody plans the races because the tension between the riders is way too big. In a matter of fact she was planning the races herself, trying to make the other members of the team to participate, nothing, actually she got a few 3rd places just because of her planning, the other girls did not even want to talk to her later on, no idea if she is still there. Btw, the whole team started riding older, really old in life too.

Surprise me here, with the ammount of riders moving around, the junior divisions are so poor and non organized as good as they should be. Would be great to see weekly junior division races in this area/county, then state wide races to classify for junior nationals... I think infraestructure has a lot to do aswell... ok kind'a rant that has nothing to do with the subject :P

[EDS]

Originally Posted by kgreene10

I’m both an academic and an amateur bike racer with a team, so Kissinger’s aphorism that “the battles are so vicious because the stakes are so small” rings doubly true to me.

Our team of about 30 3/4/5 (and one 2) racers is in the midst of what I guess could be deemed a civil war. And it’s the second year in a row. Both times, one group decides that its people are better and more committed than others. Eventually they leave the team en masse. This year, it’s happening mid season, which is especially awkward.

Throughout the year, there have been standard recriminations of people not working for others in races and not showing up to team events. Some of the latter is driven by differences in people’s job and family responsibility, and some is down to personality. There have been sporadic attempts to impose rules with documents and leaders, but of course these were either forgotten or became a cudgel with which to bash others. In other words, we experienced all the standard problems of self-governed volunteer organizations, fueled further by the delusions of grandeur that amateur bike racers seem to uniquely suffer.

I should add that our team is hitched to a club with an open membership, so this complicates any move to impose ins vs outs but also makes us a large club and a pillar of the local cycling community.

So, has anyone been involved in a team that has functioned well? If so, what were the lynchpins that made it work? Smaller group and all friends? Strict membership requirements? Strong personality leading the team? Tiered benefits?

Good leadership and communication are key as are personality matches when recruiting new riders to the team. My team has 30+ racers ranging from cat 5s to cat 1s (I think right now we have 4 guys on the team who have gone all the way from 5 to 1 while being on the team, which is pretty cool), with a wide range of ages (we have one teenager and everything up through 50+). Every year a few guys leave because they want more of an opportunity to be a team leader, which is fine. If a guy sacrifices himself for a teammate that is almost always paid back in spades in future races.

[Walter]

Seth Davidson is a lawyer in SoCal and a member of a very active amateur club team here. He has written some interesting pieces on his blog on the dramas that infest some clubs.

https://pvcycling.wordpress.com/

He would be a great source of information on what he has seen work. You might try reaching out to him.

[David Tollefson]

The OP experience mirrors what happened in the club I raced with. In my years in that club, it spawned no less than three other racing teams. It was strange to be racing against riders I'd been racing with just the season prior. After I stopped racing (my own personal reasons that had nothing to do with the club), there was another mass exodus that spelled the end of the non-masters portion of the club.

Much of the friction stemmed from the attitudes of the major sponsor (a bike shop owned by one of the master's racers) and the division of support between the master's squad and everyone else.

[peanutgallery]

Does it even matter? There's no money and even less resources. Anyone wound to the moon over 3/4 racing needs an evaluation in a padded room. It's the beer league, or it should be...it just doesn't matter yet

As far as pr/marketing...it's all about development and being a good ambassador to your sponsors to curry favor for development. As far as those that are getting wacky...a serious sitdown and tough questions. What do you bring to the table and when does the check get here? If they want to Walter Mitty somewhere else, great. But you're going to work for it. If they attempt to take sponsors, break their knuckles

Rant over, funny how nothing changes

PS: Masters racing matters even less

[11.4]

Let's be realistic.

First, there are a few riders you don't really want in your club (except to score wins) and you probably don't like riding with. You have to be smart about who you invite onto your team.

Second, we all agree that we're not in it for the money. Not seriously, anyway. But we're all in it because we're competitive and we're ego-conscious. We want to be in a better team and we want to be recognized the best. If you're on a team that doesn't have a lot of tangible benefits (like travel reimbursement, equipment, and so on), you simply aren't going to be incentivizing team members to stay, to behave, and to win. That's just what bike racing is. There are some people who will join a team and compete just to be part of a team, but that's a minority, and you are the ones who are left after the rest of the team walks out. Talking masters? You absolutely have to address this. Same for juniors -- you have to be recognizing a rider enough that he wants to race and bring his girlfriend (or her boyfriend, or whatever) to a race. Basic rule: You don't get much more from a team member than you do for them.

Teams that have done well over prolonged periods and seen solid growth have been those with good support of riders. The best way to do this is to tier your riders, with active support (race support, funding, equipment, kit, etc.) for the top percentage, some more limited support for the next percentage range, and then riders at the bottom will tend to stay because they like being part of a hot club and they don't expect as much.

A club that isn't actively pursuing sponsorships and putting money out there for riders won't keep its team. Those that keep fundraising and keep getting better at it (because it's a process that takes several years and gets better and better) end up with top regional riders, good coaches, more equipment freebies, and overall become the most attractive teams. They learn how to act pro and that makes the members think pro and behave pro. Of all the hundreds of teams I've seen, that's how it always works.

Do a serious job of raising material sponsorship. Use the money to support some better riders who can also help develop those coming along behind them. Consciously market a high profile that rewards the riders you want on your team. It may sound mercenary, but you'll be very pleased by the results. I've never seen another way that worked for a racing team.

[djg21]

Originally Posted by kgreene10

I’m both an academic and an amateur bike racer with a team, so Kissinger’s aphorism that “the battles are so vicious because the stakes are so small” rings doubly true to me.

Our team of about 30 3/4/5 (and one 2) racers is in the midst of what I guess could be deemed a civil war. And it’s the second year in a row. Both times, one group decides that its people are better and more committed than others. Eventually they leave the team en masse. This year, it’s happening mid season, which is especially awkward.

Throughout the year, there have been standard recriminations of people not working for others in races and not showing up to team events. Some of the latter is driven by differences in people’s job and family responsibility, and some is down to personality. There have been sporadic attempts to impose rules with documents and leaders, but of course these were either forgotten or became a cudgel with which to bash others. In other words, we experienced all the standard problems of self-governed volunteer organizations, fueled further by the delusions of grandeur that amateur bike racers seem to uniquely suffer.

I should add that our team is hitched to a club with an open membership, so this complicates any move to impose ins vs outs but also makes us a large club and a pillar of the local cycling community.

So, has anyone been involved in a team that has functioned well? If so, what were the lynchpins that made it work? Smaller group and all friends? Strict membership requirements? Strong personality leading the team? Tiered benefits?

What is your definition of a team? Mine was 2-3 guys who I enjoyed riding bicycles with and being in a car with for a couple of hours while driving to races. It worked pretty well. We happened to be on the same racing club, and sometimes even wore matching jerseys, but most importantly, we were, and still are, friends.

[.RJ]

Originally Posted by kgreene10

So, has anyone been involved in a team that has functioned well? If so, what were the lynchpins that made it work? Smaller group and all friends? Strict membership requirements? Strong personality leading the team? Tiered benefits?

Accept that for all intents, its a bowling club.

Go ride/race bikes hard in your bike underwear and have fun and be good people/teammates and give back to the local community somehow and dont take it to seriously.

[KonaSS]

I think you need to define what you want your team to be upfront, and that will take care of many issues. Is it a more of a club, and hey we race once in awhile. Is it a masters team that races as a hobby, but we don't take ourselves too seriously and our goal is not to move up the ranks but to have fun. Is it a race team, meant to develop serious racers, move them up the ranks, etc.

I think if provide this type of clarity, people will know upfront whether this is the right team or not.

[fignon's barber]

Of all the teams I've been on over the years, there was one that was most fun. I would recommend setting up your racing riders into small teams (ie Masters 30+,40+, cat 4, cat 5,etc). Let each small team set their own atmosphere, train together, race strategize, socialize, etc). All prize money gets split within the small team. As an over view, use race expense reimbursement (entry fees, gas money,etc) to reward these small teams working together.

[GregL]

I've been on several teams over the years. Some were very competitive at the 1-2-3 level, some were much more social in nature. The ones that lasted the longest and had the least amount of interpersonal issues seemed to have the following characteristics:

- Benevolent dictatorship - someone leads the team and makes "good" decisions on its direction. Can't have a successful ship without a captain!

- Common goals - have a mission statement that everyone signs up to. On the best team I was on, we had a social mission in addition to just "racing fast" as a goal. Two of our team members were type 1 diabetics. Our team participated in the local ADA Tour de Cure and were in fact one of the top fundraisers. We rode the event as a team training ride, keeping a safe paceline and allowing anyone who wanted to follow along. There were lots of happy riders who gladly sat in and were towed along for a sub 4:30 century.

- Similar personalities - if the people don't mesh, the team will eventually split or fold. We were very picky about who we asked to join the team. "Type A with big hearts" seemed to be our common theme. One self-centered egotist can ruin a team in a hurry.

- Have race plans in advance - the best teams have A, B, and sometimes C plans for the races they participate in. Who will chase down breaks, who will (attempt to...) go in breaks, who are the sprinters, etc... Just riding along and hoping for the best is a crapshoot. Much more fun to have plan(s) and make them happen. Do you want the race to define your team's performance, or does your team want to define the race?

- Keep it small.

- Delegate and follow up. If the leader gets overwhelmed, things will go bad shortly. Spread the support workload amongst the team.

- Don't make it about money. I've never understood amateur bike racers getting cash prizes or sponsorships. In the best teams I was on, financial reward was not even part of the discussion. Sponsorships were at best discounts through a bike shop or cycling equipment company. Winnings at races were shared with all team members in the race, put back into the team treasury, or given back to the race promoter. I still follow this model today even though I essentially race as a privateer. I was on the podium at a circuit race a few weeks back. The cash prize was only $15. I handed it back to the promoter and thanked him for putting on such a great race.

- Look to the long term. One of the best parts of running a team is watching riders grow in the sport and move on to "better" things. We had one team member start as a 15 year-old. Ten years later, he's a Cat 1 who raced for a top national collegiate program. Growing new riders and promoting local races are two of the best things a team can do.

That's it at a high level.

Greg

[coreydoesntknow]

In my experience, which spans from elite-am teams to local squads made up of the 3 best friends anyone could ever have, there's only two good ways to get group cohesion:
1) The team is made up of people who have people that have reached their potential and have realized that they just can't win on their own, which usually doesn't happen until you're at least a 2, so that doesn't sound like it's going to help you
2) A smaller group of people who are either real life friends or at least respect each other

It's difficult with the open format of a club team to get everyone on the same page, but at the end of the day it comes down to respect.