I like where the fed's are going with the upgrade standards.  This should make it easier for everyone and take the "subjectiveness" out of the upgrade decision.  This should be a more objective approach.  We now don't have to tell people to travel around the country to different races to get their points.  This should also help Cameron out, because alot of the upgrade requests he gets are from riders without the points, but are hoping to get the upgrade based on other things (great teammate, dedication, etc.).  Call me a hardliner but if you don't have the points you don't get the upgrade.  That has been tough to tell Utah riders, since 99% of races don't qualify.  Now you should know if you have the points or don't. 

I also think this will make it much easier to upgrade, especially the 3 to 2 and 2 to 1.   We'll see.

 

By the way, this system is retroactive.  Just as your points go back 1 calender year, this system will go back 1 calender year.

 

I take that back on it being easier to get an upgrade.

Only counting in state races, I got a whopping 11 points.  Dave Harward would just miss a Cat 1 upgrade with 26 points.  I think the only recent Cat 1 upgrade recently was Nate Page.  Nate is lucky, he only has 15 points.

Bryson Perry had 46 points.  So if you want that Cat 1, you need to be somewhere between Dave and Bryson.  Good luck!! 

So if you want to upgrade, you need to win and win ALOT.  Doing well in every stage of a stage race would help too.

I like this.  I've seen the Cat 1's get diluted over the years.  I think this will bring it back to where is was 15 years ago, when there were only 4 or 5 Cat 1's in each state.  We have over 30! But that's my opinion and a whole other discussion.
 

I think it's going to be easier to get up to cat. 2. Last year I know that a lot of races didn't count because they didn't have enough people, but now you can still get the points even if it's a smaller race...

---

sit in all day and wait for the sprint?
no...go hard from the start

I just did a couple of more quick counts (don't kill me if I'm wrong on the counts, they are not certified!)

Ira Tibbits: 34 points (upgraded)

Brad Gehrig: 25-30 (depends how they score hillclimbs) (upgraded)

Patrick Fasse: 19 points (not counting anything out of state)-Bubble

I think that sounds right.  Ira and Brad should be upgraded and Patrick would have had it if he had a stronger second half of the season. 

 

 

Curious why points are not awarded for stage races for 4-3 upgrades? Is this to slow the move from 4-3?

---

"Pain is temporary, quitting lasts forever"

My feeling is that they should continue with this trend of making upgrading easier and more clear cut.  However, they should also start downgrading people who do not maintain their category requirements.  Of course, everyone can have a bad year, or take a year off or whatever, but I feel that people who score no points (disregarding field size requirements, distance, et al) for more than two years straight should be downgraded.  I realize this has pretty much no relevance to the discussion above, but it's something I thought of awhile ago.  Give upgrades to guys who are motivated and earn it.  Downgrade guys that are not continuing to race.  I have known people who took out a license every year for close to 10 years without racing to maintain a category.  It seems silly.

What does down grading riders willing to keep their licenses up to date accomplish? What harm is it in someone keeping a category that they worked hard to attain? If they don't race for few yrs (school ,kids ,ect) do they forget how to train or race?

 

 

 

I agree with RB. If you have a bunch of people upgrading who shouldn't be upgrading then the Pro 1,2 field is going to be inexperienced and dangerous and will not have the "elite" status it does now. But if you let those people have a chance to be in there, and they can't prove they should be in there, down grade them.

---

sit in all day and wait for the sprint?
no...go hard from the start

I quess you're right ,We do need to keep those guys with elite egos happy

Maybe it should be like teachers. After a certain point, you get tenure.  I'm celebrating my 15th year as a Cat 1.  If you can maintain the category for 5 years, you can keep it.  Personally, I would like to see the prestige brought back to the Cat 1's.  It's been diluted over the years.  This new upgrade system I think is a step in the right direction.  I only got 11 points and no where near enough to upgrade to a 1.  I think I did enough (barely) to maintain my Cat 1.  I wouldn't care if in a few years I lost my Cat 1 license.  I'm only doing a few Pro/1 events anyways and very soon it will be none.  And if the Cat 1's got trimmed, the races become P 1/2 races.  Same people are racing, but the prestige of the Cat 1 is restored.  Most of our Cat 1's concentrate on the RMR/DMV's.  Nothing wrong with that because most are 35+.  The USCF cycling handbook used to have a description of each category and the Cat 1 was "International".  I don't think West Valley is another country, but I could be wrong. There were about 250 Cat 1's.  I think there are well over 1000 now.  If they keep this system, I think in a few years you will see the number of Cat 1's go down. 
 

So once you are a cat. 1 do you have to maintain it or you get downgraded?

---

sit in all day and wait for the sprint?
no...go hard from the start

You used to have to maintain it, but they got rid of that over 10 years ago.  I don't ever remember anyone actually losing their license. I think it was on the books, but not enforced. It probably depended on who your district rep was.   I think you had to get at least one top ten in a qualifying race to maintain it.  So it was like 1 upgrade point. But that part of it is foggy.

USAC position on this a couple of years ago was since the membership is so  masters heavy, they wouldn't be serving their membership if they started downgrading riders. 

I don't want to lose my Cat 1, but if the wind changes directions and they are trying to tighten the requirements on the category, I have no problems with taking a Cat 2 license.  It doesn't change my life one bit.  Like I said before, if there are only 200 Cat 1's in the country, all the Pro 1 races I've done would have to go to Pro 1/2 to fill their fields.  Cat 1's should be for riders knocking the door of the pro ranks and doing the necessary traveling and racing, with RESULTS. Not 37 year old father of two who is lucky to get 10 hours in a week.

There is a difference between a good Cat 2 and a Cat 1.  I think we have a whole lot of good Cat 2's, but only 1 or 2 Cat 1's in Utah.

For scoring purposes, is the field size for a stage race determined by how many riders start on the first day, how many riders start on the last day, or how many riders finish?

Also, is a field size still valid in a pro 1/2/3 race?
 

It would be the number of starters.

Field size is still valid for the 1/2/3 races.  Remember that USAC doesn't count the first Cat 3 in a 1/2/3 race, where you finish is where you finish regardless of the category of the riders in front of you.