http://www.idsnews.com/news/story.aspx?id=75577
News from the Little 500 rider banquet-
- Sarah Rieke Schlifke inducted into HoF. Well deserved and she gave a nice acceptance speech.
- Clayton Feldman was on the ballot for HoF and results of the vote will be announced later. In a very unofficial pole of 3 2010 top ten teams he got 2 'yes' votes so if that continues then he'll get in (50% required). The lower placed teams often will not vote so that might also work in his favor.
- Some nice $-value scholarships were handed out (as ever). I get the sense more students need apply for these are there are prizes out there to be had!
Another IDS story about the Cutters love/hate. Clayton's being a good guy and helping some other teams get onto the podium!
From this website
31 comments:
Idiotic story, IDS.
Congrats, Sarah!! You are the toughest women I have ever raced against.
First-class by Clayton on the podium. Easy to understand the other side, but top 10 deserves their moment, end of story. First-class.
CAT 2s and 1s should not be allowed in the race. IUSF needs to come up with a better strategy because having CAT 1, who has raced with pros all summer has an unfair advantage. if the rider is better than 3, then they arent in the race. bottom line.
This is the wrong way to approach making the race more competitive. The Cutters obviously train hard and smart, and their efforts have paid off. They have not broken any rules that I know of, and someone with no racing experience before little 5 upgrading to 2 is impressive and well-deserved. The field would be more competitive if other teams could match the Cutters dedication. I doubt this rule change will occur, but if this is being pursued, I would propose a different rule change to make the field more balanced- everyone uses the same bike, no exceptions. Teams that have small or no budgets cannot afford dura-ace bottom brackets and new cranks and wheelsets. I've ridden both a stock little five bike and one with new components, and the difference in weight is noticeable.
Brent
Really, what is the advantage? They are in better physical shape? Black Key Bulls had a Cat 2 rider and a national level triathlete and finished 10th. Eric was a 3 this year, and would be a 2 next year. Why don't you train harder? Maybe they should only let guys in who never raced a bike because anyone with any bike experience has an unfair advantage. If you played high school sports you should be excluded too because you are used to competing while others aren't. Ban them too. Ban everyone but your fat self!
Why shouldn't Cat 2's and 1's be allowed if they came in with no experience? Do these people have some super power that makes them better bike riders? No! They train their asses off. Why should they be penalized for this? You have they same opportunity to train hard and upgrade so that you can "race with pros all summer." (p.s. Cat 1's and 2's are by no means "pro") The Cutters set out to win the race. Maybe you should stop bitching and looking for excuses as to why you lost and just shut up and go ride your bike! You have every opportunity to train as hard as they do. Quit whining. I am sorry you feel that it is some rule that kept you from winning the race when in reality it was just your lack of preparation.
The biggest problem with little 5 is when a rider stops competing so they dont get auto-catt'd up. isnt the reason for going down a category because you are too good for those that you are competing against? how does that make it fair for everyone else? I dont agree with banning 1s and 2s, but you shouldnt be allowed to sneak through things so that you can compete more years. how many riders have reached CAT 3 and then sat up for a bit so they could still race little 5. the event is set up to be competitive
Just heard the upgrade came through too close to little 5 and young is ineligible next year! who will win now?
The category ban makes for an interesting argument. First off, choosing to remain a 3 is a prioritization of Little 5 eligibility over USAC races. It is definitely not cheating.
One might also argue that if people like Neff and Sherer (super talented guys) had been given the opportunity to ride their senior years, assuming they wanted to ride Little 5, the field would have been stronger. And maybe the class of 2010 would have gotten to see a different team win the race.
As 1's, they weren't allowed to race. But they did race in 2008, and guess what? Even though they were 1's, their teams still didn't win.
Shei was also a Cat 2 in this year's race, but no one has really singled him out in any of these discussions. He's a strong rider, but he didn't shape the race quite like Young, who was actually a 3 on race day. Being a Cat 1 or 2 on the road doesn't necessarily translate to the Little 5 track. Road racing is very, very different from Little 5.
Honestly, I feel like racing category has become a crutch to justify why other teams aren't winning; it's an excuse to fall back on ("Well it's because so-and-so should be semi-pro...").
Until you have have done EVERYTHING right, training AND lifestyle-wise, with the exception of luck on race day, everything else is an excuse and deflected responsibility for why you didn't get the W.
Let the race be the best it can be; let the field be composed of those who are the best of the best. A ring for a second-tier win just doesn't seem as badass.
The rule works now, don't screw with it. It keeps teams from recruiting well-established and very talented guys while allowing current riders to compete and work their way up the ranks. I am not the best Little 500 rider ever, but my skills and strengths on the bike would be nowhere near where they are now without racing. Ask anyone (particularly this year's Beta squad) how much racing can benefit Little 500. Riders shouldn't be punished for it. Don't let the laziness or lack of dedication of the masses adversely affect those who really love cycling (or at least really love the Little 500.)
There have been so many 1/2 racers over the years (as others have duly noted), to bring this up now just because Eric is a phenomenal Little 500 rider is ridiculous. Way to go, IDS.
Let the boy race, even these old farts can pedal faster than him and they aint cat 2's
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sh_KI15pGMQ
I am getting so sick of all this anti cutter crap. It's getting really old. It's just funny that as a female rider I have never blamed a loss on another women's team. From what I can tell most shit talked about Caroline was from boys (not men because you don't have the balls to write your own name) and you don't see anygirls ripping on CVK. We look at ourselves before we decide to "bitch." At the end of the day, you can only blame yourself for loosing.
Second, the only teams crying about this category rule are the ones that are probably drinking during the course of the spring semester. And it's not so much the drinking, it's the lack of discipline. Maybe put your discipline from writing online anonymous posts into your riding.
If I wanted to watch a men's race full of cat 5 men, I would watch the last ten teams the whole race. Also, we have national ranked triathletes and other cat 2's besides Young.
I support ALL my rider friends (Greeks and non Greeks) and congratulate everyone for your tremendous efforts. Now go to Kilroys instead of crying at home with a Cosmo and your computer.
much love,
Jenna Johnson
The Cutters would still win without Young because the race would go back to being a slow grandfather pace and either Patch or Lusk would contend and probably win in the final sprint. They took a lot of criticism but in fact they are pretty decent riders. They only did what they had to in the race to win. Playing the team strengths has worked out pretty well for the Cutters so why stop it now?
what did they do? 35 or 40 laps total? you have no idea.
they've got 2 rings though...of course eric and clayton did the majority of the work but they've got 2 rings and did what they needed to; didn't falter to other teams targeted them and you can't deny this. I was sitting in the Cutter fan section and there was a point at which Lusk was about to go in and it looked like Matt Kain of Phi Delts was about to shit his pants alerting everyone that now is the time to make a move...didn't seem to work so I accredit both of these 2 young men with riding a hell of a race when they were out there and keeping the pace hot which dropped many good teams. I know you are talking out of jealously which is fine because I would be pissed too if they both had more rings than I did races
"The Cutters would still win without Young..." This statement is based on blind ignorance, but what's worse, it demeans and insults the quality teams that work, plan, and train every bit as hard as the Cutters. I'm the fan of another team, but I don't hate the Cutters. They have a world class training program and dedication to it. So do at least several other of their competitors. The Cutters deserved the win. But they also had the strongest sprinter on the track by far. As long as the team (i.e., Clayton) could deliver him to the final laps, they were all but guaranteed the V. Their 3 & 4 did their job, but are not exceptional. My hat is off to the competing teams that finished within seconds on the lead lap. They were tenacious and aggressive, and showed true class and perseverance. Let's get real, folks. See ya next year.
Lot of talk about next year...sounds like a bunch of Cubs fans
Young is a shutdown rider. We all know that. But don't forget, they won 9 titles before Young and he didn't even make the team his freshman year. I think the Cutter program is better than any program in Little 5. And it's not just the riding, because it's possible that another training program could be similar. It's the mentality that sets them apart. They are obsessed with winning Little 500. They are so obsessed that good riders from other teams sometimes snicker at the importance Cutters place solely on Little 5 when there are so many other great cycling events that have "more importance". That's 9 wins in 24 years without Young, and Young never rode a bike before joining the Cutters. He's a phenom though. That's for sure.
No argument with the above post. Everyone sets their own priorities. My argument is with the statement that they would have won THIS YEAR without him. Wouldn't have happened and insults the other top teams. The strength of Cutters 3 & 4? Just look at Team Pursuit. You may have noticed a higher level of racing and competitiveness from the other top teams this year. They will work even harder for the next race. This is not a Cubs scenario.
Clayton was 2nd best sprinter on the track both this year and last year. Though it would have limited their ability to get to the finish, he could have won the sprint last year with 100 laps in his legs, and this year with 80, not a jab at other riders, but people seem to ignore how good he actually was just because he only ever did exactly what he had to do. Which left him able to do more if an accident or penalty came up, he is after all the greatest winner in the history of little five, that has to mean something.
'Clayton was 2nd best sprinter on the track both this year and last year.'???? Not if ITT is an indication.
'he is after all the greatest winner in the history of little five, that has to mean something.' It means something, just not what you think it does.
ITT's are not a sprint, they are also when riders are starting from standing, without any laps in their legs. ITT's has no creativity, small group sprints are an art form, ITT's are about who is prepared on that day to go fast, the "fastest" sprinter does not always win the sprint.
So how do you back up the statement that he's the 2nd best sprinter, MnO? Subjective opinion + cutter love? I thought so. Anyway, I'm outahere. No point in arguing with the blind faithful.
Quick hypothetical: switch Eric and Clayton's respective roles this year and if I had to bet, I'd bet on Clayton over those last 5 laps. No disrespect to Sharp or RJ or Ellis, but Clayton was the second best rider on the track and if we asked him to win the sprint he would have (in a different manner though).
No one will ever really know, so we can all be comfortable in our respective opinions.
As a rider, I can say that all the debate is interesting but unnecessary. Only the facts matter--Cutters have won Little 500 four years in a row. They won in a variety of scenarios (breakaway, field sprint(2), and small group sprint). Their riders have prepared more diligently and deserve the credit. The field made every attempt to drop them this year, which was a welcome surprise. It's nice to see everyone race from the gun instead of wait for the sprint.
Hopefully 2011 can bring as much excitement as 2010. What a great race.
Eh I'd have taken Neibler last year over anyone but Young, everyone remembers Young winning, but Neibler went from close to last in that pack to 2nd by the end.
Which pit was Courtney Bishop in last year because I think he counts getting second for Delts as his team as well as MT. Did they pit next to eachother and he coached them both as if they were the same team?
"The Cutters would still win without Young..." This statement is based on blind ignorance, but what's worse, it demeans and insults the quality teams that work, plan, and train every bit as hard as the Cutters."
This is more of an insult to the other guys on the cutters team than the opposing teams. Their race strategy would be completely revised without Young and I would say that they would stand a pretty good chance of winning still. The thing about other teams training harder than the Cutters is bullshit too. Everyone knows that those guys are always striving the get better; even their coaches are too. TO me trying to beat the Cutters in Little 5 is like trying to test for steroids in professional sports: you will always be a step behind
Opinions are like assholes; everyone has one.
Post a Comment