[NCNCA] Women's Races

Wed Apr 30 17:57:38 PDT 2008

I have a couple more thoughts on this.  I think that we all are not really trying to complain, but to let promoters know what women are looking for in a bike races. I am hoping that if a few more people understand what we want, that some changes might occur in a few races that will help a lot.

I think that women are already voting on what they do and don't want by which races they show up to.  If you see low numbers at a particular race, there is probably a reason.  Just like there are reasons some women's fields are large.

I will say again that I don't think that picking 3/4s separately is a step in the right direction.  I think it makes the race less safe. (As does staggered starts)  I would rather you take the extra prize money you would be giving the 2nd field, and give it out as a raffle for all finishers in the 4s field.  They are still eligible for the overall 3/4 prizes too (plenty of 4s beat 3s in these races) but have a chance for a prize just if they show up and race.  That might be a better way to promote that race.

The decision for a cat 3 to race with the 1/2/3 or the 3/4 is almost absurd.  Do I want to race with someone who is doing their first race, or do I want to race with someone who is a pro and holds national titles?  Neither is really what I want or need.

With the service fees for online reg for some events($3.10 for Cat's Hill) it almost negates the late fee.  Another disincentive on pre-reging.

So, let me finish by emphasizing that I appreciate everything that is being done to help women's racing.  I appreciate these discussions because the people involved care about women's racing and want to help make a good thing even better.

Soni> Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:34:41 -0700> From: zronn at sbcglobal.net> To: ncnca at ncnca.org> Subject: Re: [NCNCA] Women's Races> > The solution is quite simple.> Show the promoters that the market is there and we will accommodate the demand.> > While picking the 3/4s separately may not be a perfect solution for the Women, it is a step in the right direction and a compromise. The alternative is running the fields together and not picking separately.> > Taking Rick's suggestion about staggered starts is an option worth weighing on race day. It will mostly be up to the refs and the field.> > Maybe most have not really looked at our race yet, but the Women 3s have two opportunities to race, with an engineered break in between.> > Advice given to me on unrelated topics, it might make sense for folks take a step back and count the blessings rather than curse them.> > Show the promoters you appreciate the efforts by pre-registering, then send us suggestions on how you would like to see things improved.> Your suggestions carry more weight when they are backed by dollars bills.> > Complaining about something that is speculative for the promoter in the first place is a great insurance policy for there being no speculation the next year. The path becomes extremely clear.> > You Savvy?> > Ron> (I guess I just lost my diplomacy award)> > ----- Original Message ----> From: Rick Warner <rickwarner at cycle-tours.com>> To: Ron Castia <zronn at sbcglobal.net>> Cc: NCNCA <ncnca at ncnca.org>> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 1:23:51 PM> Subject: Re: [NCNCA] Women's Races> > > Ron,> > Picking separately does not resolve the issue for either category; the 3's run a race with a pace and tactics that frustrates a lot of the 4's, and the 3's still have to ride with some women who may be doing their first race ever. Sort of a chicken and egg problem: the women do not like the mixed fields so they do not register, so the promoters see the fields as speculative and either do not offer them next year or continue to mix the fields. One partial resolution is what was used at Madera in some of the races; stagger the starts of the fields racing at the same time. The 35+ women and women 4's were ecstatic with that solution, and I know some of the women 3's were very happy to get a start after the P/1/2 group instead of with them. > > It is problem for promoters, I admit. But some of the women get really frustrated. My wife will have, at most, one women's field in which she can race at any one event. I get to pick and choose. At your EBC crit there are 4 fields/3 races for which I could register: E4, 35+ 4, 45+, or 55+. For now I am picking fields based on which one' is most convenient, time-wise, relative to my wife's races. The disparity in opportunity is frustrating to many of the women with whom I have spoken.> > > - rick > > On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 1:03 PM, Ron Castia <zronn at sbcglobal.net> wrote:> True, but if it were not such a speculative category for a promoter to run, the solution would be easy.> We are picking the 3s and 4s separately.> > Ron> > ----- Original Message ----> From: Rick Warner <rickwarner at cycle-tours.com>> To: Ron Castia <zronn at sbcglobal.net>> Cc: NCNCA <ncnca at ncnca.org>> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 11:02:55 AM> Subject: Re: [NCNCA] Women's Races> > > One other aspect is both Cats Hill and EBC have combined 3/4 fields for the women. A lot of the W4's I know hate it because the 3's run the race and they do not get a good experience, and a lot of the 3's I've talked to are happier without racing with some of the novices in the 4's for safety reasons. I know women in both fields who tend to avoid the combined field races. Some will relent in the end, but others will stay home or on the sidelines.> > - rick> > On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Ron Castia <zronn at sbcglobal.net> wrote:> OK, how about we stop taking everything the wrong way here?> It's not a slap at all, as matter of fact it could be seen as exactly the opposite.> > If you did pre-register, thank you for being one of the few to show us early that we won't have an empty course and for setting a good example.> Hold your head proud that you are setting a good example.> > Gordon and I are just saying, show us that our efforts to acknowledge your needs will be returned in kind by a little pre-reg.> It let's a promoter have some idea of what to expect day of.> > There is a balance that needs to exist, it can't be a 1 way street.> > Thanks,> Ron (who will be hand picking the purple skittles out just for Eli)> > > ----- Original Message ----> From: "Morgan, Cathy L." <cathy.morgan at pillsburylaw.com>> To: Ron Castia <zronn at sbcglobal.net>; NCNCA <ncnca at ncnca.org>> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 10:03:50 AM> Subject: RE: [NCNCA] Women's Races> > Nice slap to those of us who have already registered. Just sayin'.> clm> > -----Original Message-----> From: ncnca-bounces+cathy.morgan=pillsburylaw.com at ncnca.org> [mailto:ncnca-bounces+cathy.morgan=pillsburylaw.com at ncnca.org] On Behalf> Of Ron Castia> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 10:02 AM> To: NCNCA> Subject: Re: [NCNCA] Women's Races> > It's not just Cat's Hill.> At the EBC Criterium we are doing a 40% cash payback 10 deep for the> Pro 1/2/3 Women and have no entries, none, zero, zip. What's up with> that/> > We really wanted to support Women this year and offered 3 fields. We> have a total of 10 Women registered.> > If you are going to be the loudest to complain, it's a good idea to show> some love when your voice is acknowledged.> Right now, we are not seeing it and the Women's fields are hinting that> they may be just a big waste of our schedule time.> We could have easily just run more masters 4s and 3s and made some bank,> or gone home early.> > Ron> > > > ----- Original Message ----> From: "Gordon, Barry" <Bgordon at Structint.com>> To: NCNCA <ncnca at ncnca.org>> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 8:59:27 AM> Subject: [NCNCA] Cat's Hill Women's Races> > NCNCA,> > Last year the LGBRC made the bad decision to replace the Women's 3/4> race with Master 45 race and the cycling community let us know in no> uncertain terms that we made a BIG mistake. Therefore, we reinstated> the women's 3/4 race plus increased the cash prize list for the women's> 1/2/3 race from $600/6 places to $1000/10 places in 2008. So what is> the response to our return to sanity? We currently have 11 women> pre-registered for each race. (As it stands now only one 1/2/3 woman> will place out of the money.)> > Lots of people last year complained about our dumb decision and we> listened to you. In return, we hope that the cycling community would> have a change of heart and would support our women's races this> Saturday.> > On-line registration: www.catshill.org> > Thank you for your consideration.> > Barry Gordon, President> Los Gatos Bicycle Racing Club> Team Easton/SugarCRM/Specialized> A USA Cycling Club of the Year> www.lgbrc.org> 408-978-8200> bgordon at structint.com> > > > _______________________________________________> NCNCA discussion list> NCNCA at ncnca.org> http://lists.ncnca.org/mailman/listinfo/ncnca> > > > _______________________________________________> NCNCA discussion list> NCNCA at ncnca.org> http://lists.ncnca.org/mailman/listinfo/ncnca> > > ============================================================> The contents of this message, together with any attachments, are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed and may contain information that is legally privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message, or any attachment, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the original sender or the Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman Help Desk at Tel: 800-477-0770 x4860 immediately by telephone or by return E-mail and delete this message, along with any attachments, from your computer. Thank you.> *> Internal Revenue Service regulations generally provide that, for the purpose of avoiding federal tax penalties, a taxpayer may rely only on formal written advice meeting specific requirements. Any tax advice in this message does not meet those requirements. Accordingly, any such tax advice was not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding federal tax penalties that may be imposed on you or for the purpose of promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters.> ============================================================> > > > _______________________________________________> NCNCA discussion list> NCNCA at ncnca.org> http://lists.ncnca.org/mailman/listinfo/ncnca> > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________> NCNCA discussion list> NCNCA at ncnca.org> http://lists.ncnca.org/mailman/listinfo/ncnca
_________________________________________________________________
Make i'm yours.  Create a custom banner to support your cause.
http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Contribute/Default.aspx?source=TXT_TAGHM_MSN_Make_IM_Yours