Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6
Results 126 to 133 of 133
  1. #126
    mtbr member
    Reputation: quicklaps's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    319
    Quote Originally Posted by rydbyk View Post
    Just to be clear.. a sandbagger is not someone who ends up on the podium. These are guys with more talent. Simple.

    A sandbagger has numerous top 5 finishes (in whatever) category, yet do not cat-up. These guys are tools. Simple.

    For all of you calling folks "sandbaggers", I hope you did your research.
    agree 100%

    Q

  2. #127
    mtbr member
    Reputation: quicklaps's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    319
    Quote Originally Posted by Xenu View Post
    Norcal tested 17 athletes with 17 negatives last season. In the wake of Armstrong that is not enough; NCNCA increased the budget and will test more athletes in 2013. I think this is a fine decision so long as it doesn't rob funding from other areas of cycling, like junior development.

    Budget is a real concern. You say that the tests are cheap. Others say it is cost-prohibitive. Another problem is the ineffectiveness of tests -- some drugs are undetectable and we all know that Armstrong passed hundreds of tests. If tests are ineffective and expensive then testing is a waste of resources.

    But then what do we do with a positive test for the ADHD drug Ritalin? Under USADA's rules an athlete without a TUE faces suspension even if the medications are legally prescribed. And the TUE process is lengthy and difficult. And what of recreational pot smokers who do not have prescriptions or TUEs? Or a downhill champion who smokes pot?

    Drug testing is a whole new can of worms.

    Ultimately I'm with you. If the costs were low enough I would petition for everyone to pee in the cup at least once or twice a year.
    All good points. Simple tests are cheap and probably simple to pass.... and as far as rec use of pot is concerned... a Professional is a Professional and should be able to pass all drug tests regardless of "preformance enhancing" or not... just sayin..

    Q

  3. #128
    XCdude
    Reputation: moab63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    1,189
    Is easy train more you win, and catup. Then youŽll get the satisfaction of getting 20th or 30th in your new category.

  4. #129
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    98
    I prefer to use PED and race beginner!

  5. #130
    JHH
    JHH is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: JHH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    259
    As a clyde I'd get all bent about the sandbaggers who weighed no more than 205 I'd have to race. But once the race started the pack would sort itself out, I'd have a fantastic time racing with those around me, clearly more evenly matched competitors.I've had some great scraps with another slower, bigger racers. At Boggs one year me and this guy raced the whole time. I flatted and he waited in the end I got him fair and square. I might not have won anything, but I beat THAT GUY! The battles along the courses have always been spirited, fun and what I enjoy about racing.
    Keep pedaling no matter what

  6. #131
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    421
    Will the people in Men's XC Cat 3 be faster than Collegiate Men's C due to more sandbagging?

    Also, not relevant to this thread, but I don't want to start a new one, are collegiate USAC licenses valid for Sea Otter?

  7. #132
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    53
    Newbie question, please forgive the total ignorance: I've never raced, but why--other than age brackets--have categories at all? Or if you must have them, why not Pro and Amateur...Pros being anyone with a sponsor, no matter how small.

    Is the only reason to have all these categories to increase the chance of "feel good" awards and to thereby increase participation/profit? I do compete in another sport and it's exactly how I suggested above, comps are either no-category or Pro/Am. It works out fine and everyone understands that if you want to win you have to put in the time and effort to get there.

    What am I missing?

  8. #133
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,457
    It's hard to make a one size fits all race. If everyone raced together, it becomes very difficult to do multi-lap races with the fast people lapping a bunch of slow people. The slower people probably wouldn't enjoy racing the same distance the experts could crank out. Likewise, the experts aren't going to show up for a half hour race, which the beginners will be churning through for well over an hour.

    Keep in mind the speed potential. The difference in mph between fast and slow runners isn't huge. That isn't the case on a bike.

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •