Free distance races
Comments about this discussion:
Started
As I mentioned in Ben's discussion on fixed distance races, I propose that free-distance races should have an additional attribute related to the race format. This format can be the race start mode or the race topography, such as: mass start, time trial, climbing road race. In other words, a free distance race shouldn't be like a fixed distance race with something less. On the contrary, it should have something extra.
The fact that the length is free should make it easier for organizers to identify a suitable starting and finishing point.
Participants could say that they had taken part in the time trial, mass start or climbing road race, and the winner would have the title of mass start, time trial or climbing road race champion (to which the approximate length of the event could be added).
I don't really like the idea of adding constraints to the organizers, but it seems to me to be the best option for enhancing the value of free distance races in the right direction.
Comment
I think that a free distance race may offer a nice start, nice finish and a nice road in between. It could be a hilly race from A to B.
I partly agree with Simon Jan. When we talk about race topography, we should consider something more than just climbing road race. It could be a ride around the mountain, or around the lake, are A to B. I think all possibilities are good.
In case the route is relatively flat, I would consider Time Trial as requirement or at least a suggestion. I do not see a Mass Starts doable in bigger events like Unicon, unless the start is at the airport.
I see that Simon has an issue with titles, and I agree, the Champion of 2 Loops around the Lake doesn't sound very serious.
Time Trial Champion - would be OK
Mass Start - I don't think it is a realistic concept
Climbing Champion - oh yes, very appriopriate.
What about others scenarios, including a races with 2 Loops around the Lake ;)
I think that the option would be to name Short, Medium or Long Distance Champion (with limits for examle: S≤20km<M≤60km<L)
I think that allowing the organizer of choosing free distance race makes him easier to find a nice road with good tarmac, and possibly without or small car traffic. I personally hate unlimited (fast) races on bicycle roads, because very often the surface is unpredictable and there are present various installations without proper safety margin (concrete benches, metal posts, rails), often with potential of killing when hit. Car roads are usually build to some safety standards that are much higher than of bicycle roads)
That is why I am in favor of free distance race, even if it is on the same race mode as fixed distance, but I would expect to have a ride on nice and safe road.
Comment
What do you think is unrealistic about the mass start? The fact of being able to organize a mass start or the fact that it's a WC title?
As far as the title is concerned, it would be necessary to add information on the distance : S, M or L, or an approximate distance in km. The longer the race, the more important the distance information. For a time trial or hill climb, distance information is less important.
The mass start is a format that originated in the biathlon and has been extended to other disciplines (speed skating, long-distance cross-country skiing...). It's a format used more for long distances.
I think that a mass start can leave participants with a good memory: it's impressive to start all together. For me, it's a fairer format than waves. Position at the start is an important factor, and can be defined on the basis of a target/seed time. A mass start makes for great photos, which is important for communicating our sport.
However, I propose to make the definition of mass start 3D.10.3 more flexible, with 3 options:
1/ standard and unlimited start together, all genders combined (1 start)
2/ standard and unlimited start separately, all genders combined (2 starts)
3/ standard and unlimited depart separately, male and female separately (4 starts)
It's not that I want to separate male and female, but it may make it more realistic to organize.
I agree with you that it's not just the start and finish that are important. The quality of the road is essential, but I'm not sure that a free-distance race is any more likely to find a quality road than a fixed-distance race.
Comment
I meant organizational part and form of mass start. I am now commenting on this in Mass start discussion.
Comment
Mass start is always the 'ideal' option for a road race. It makes for a more exciting race with everyone competing with each together. I agree that free distance races allow more flexibility in terms of where to stage the start/finish areas, whereas there are constraints of trying to fit it into a fixed distance.
It may still be problematic for race organisers if they are restricted to narrow cycle paths, but I've suggested using race loops (eg around a stadium) to spread riders out before they get to the narrow sections. Many of my suggestions were not followed even as race director, but if it was formalised in a rulebook then that is an incentive to try for a mass start in future.
As an example with loop the lake- a mass start could have been done in the carpark area- putting riding up and down the main road a couple of times before sending them around the lake.