Cannondale SEQ Tour

[warrwych]

http://www.seqtour.com/

Is this what CSV is trying to copy in its new teams racing categories??
And if so, why only dip the tip of the toe into the water? Why not allow
more time for planning etc, wait a season to see how the SEQ Tour pans
out, and launch a more comprehensive program for 2007?

Anyhoos, from a very quick glance over, the SEQ Tour looks promising,
and I want one here!!!


--
warrwych

[Bleve]

flyingdutch wrote:

> slugging crits a $2 fee has reaped NOTHING for us (clubs and
> competitors)

yeah, but it keeps the lights on at the joedome.

white ... white .. ELEPHANT ...

[warrwych]

Bleve Wrote:
> flyingdutch wrote:
>
> > slugging crits a $2 fee has reaped NOTHING for us (clubs and
> > competitors)
>
> yeah, but it keeps the lights on at the joedome.
>
> white ... white .. ELEPHANT ...

heard some recent feedback from bowlers using the blue green in the
middle of the drome: the lights are positioned in such a way that they
can't see the bowls and ..... the cyclists whizzing past are too
distracting and dangerous!


--
warrwych

[Bleve]

warrwych wrote:
> adam85 Wrote:
> > Yeah I'm registered for it and have a team put together, it should be
> > good. The first race is this sunday. Some of the categories desperately
> > need more people though, especially the women's grades. The website
> > isn't that attractive, but I think a new design is coming soon.
> > Anything that gets more people racing and attracts more attention to
> > the sport is good.
> >
> > What is CSV trying to do?
> >
> > Adam
>
> I saw the min requirement of 17 per category and thought it very
> ambitious for the women's grades, particularly at masters level. It's
> an foregone that they then won't have women's masters categories.
>
> CSV has introduced teams racing ie 2 (?? could be wrong) races that
> have been listed as including teams categories. Teams are club based,
> composite club derived if not enough club members in an individual
> club, and sponsored teams.

The best way to do it, I think, is to explicitly allow team riding.
this means that you can ride as a team legally (while at the moment you
can often get away with it). Why will this work? Some people will get
organised, and then the rest will have to follow suit if they want to
be competitive.


>
> Seems a bit halfhearted and 1/4 @rsed.

They can't do a full blown teams thing (yet?). As you say, not enough
people in a lot of grades to make it work. But, if it's *allowed* then
it may start to happen through evolutionary chanels rather than force.

Along the way there'd be a lot of whinging, but the whingers just need
to get organised.

[Tamyka Bell]

adam85 wrote:
>
> warrwych Wrote:
> > http://www.seqtour.com/
> >
> > Is this what CSV is trying to copy in its new teams racing categories??
> > And if so, why only dip the tip of the toe into the water? Why not allow
> > more time for planning etc, wait a season to see how the SEQ Tour pans
> > out, and launch a more comprehensive program for 2007?
> >
> > Anyhoos, from a very quick glance over, the SEQ Tour looks promising,
> > and I want one here!!!
>
> Yeah I'm registered for it and have a team put together, it should be
> good. The first race is this sunday. Some of the categories desperately
> need more people though, especially the women's grades. The website
> isn't that attractive, but I think a new design is coming soon.
> Anything that gets more people racing and attracts more attention to
> the sport is good.
>
> What is CSV trying to do?
>
> Adam

I would've entered the Nathan O'Neill classic, except you have to enter
your licence number in order to register on the website (which I believe
was the only way to enter) and CA didn't send my licence, or reply to my
request for emailed licence number, until after entries closed. Not that
I'd be good enough to race anyway because they don't have low enough
women's grades.

Tam

[Tamyka Bell]

adam85 wrote:
>
> Tamyka Bell Wrote:
> >
> > I would've entered the Nathan O'Neill classic, except you have to
> > enter
> > your licence number in order to register on the website (which I
> > believe
> > was the only way to enter) and CA didn't send my licence, or reply to
> > my
> > request for emailed licence number, until after entries closed. Not
> > that
> > I'd be good enough to race anyway because they don't have low enough
> > women's grades.
> >
> > Tam
>
> That's slack about the number, get that sorted out. Give em a call. If
> it was a renewal from last year the number will be the same.

That's beautiful, except despite signing up in August, I never actually
received my licence last year. I've got it now, after it disappeared in
the mail, apparently it did this twice.

> Re: not being good enough, unless they get heaps of women entrants,
> they are run with one of the men's grade, so you'd probably be in with
> Masters C in which case you'd do fine.

Surely I wouldn't stand a chance with a Masters C. Maybe a D or an E.

Tam