B1 = A2

[Rolf]

Periodically, there have been some entertaining and protracted discussions on the forum about what to call our rides. I'm not going to link to past threads as that would attract Clairesnark—and Allah knows, we get enough of that.

But rather than get caught up in nominations for nomenclature, I thought I'd mention to anyone who sets out from the parking lot with B1, that it has evolved into an A ride in all but name. I haven't ridden B1 in a while. But here's what I observed this morning (as a slower rider, getting faster):

1. Top of Ash to BHP took 30 minutes at a 37.3 km/h average.
2. A slightly easier pace immediately followed Ash—but no waiting and certainly no foot down!
3. People shelled off the back? No problem. Other groups will pick them up. I asked many people about this, both during and after the ride. There was clearly consensus that it's a drop ride.
4. A paceline while going around the fast curve from Ferndale to Gordon Head.
5. Craig Bosenberg is big, strong, and fast on the downhill. But zooming down past the QA Centre on Arbutus, he was yelled at for not pedaling on the front.
6. Hasagawa thinks "B" is for "saBoteur".
7. Caddy Bay was a full-on free-for-all, riding five abreast. More shelled off the back? No problem.
8. Uplands and Oak Bay waterfront saw two-up, single-up, and paceline, depending on who was at the front. When at the front, there is apparently no need to look at the back and determine the group's aggregate pace, ever.
9. KGT was fast and furious with only two or three of us able to put a foot down for a few seconds before rolling through.
10. More mixed pacelining and single-up holding-on-for-dear-life along Ross Bay/Dallas. During the latter half of the ride, there were almost always one or two riders at the back, skipping turns in the paceline.

It was a fast, exhilarating, and sometimes fractious ride. I wouldn't really want to change any of it! I just think people's expectations should be clear if they (like me) try it out after a while away.

[Brently_G]

Since moving I miss the "Friday Morning Road Race" .

[Lund]

Thanks for the observations, Rolf.

As some will inevitably feel compelled to chime in that "B" has always been and always will be a no-drop category, I'll add this (which I believe is the generally accepted philosophy among the B1 regulars):

Yes – B (as a whole) is no-drop. But B1 (as a sub-segment of B) isn't. If you get dropped from B1, B2 will be there to catch you. You're still with B. B didn't drop you. And if you trickle off the back of B2, there's usually a B3 safety net. Again...you're still in the loving embrace of B. Everything is right the universe. It is just as it always was and always will be. Allelujah and amen.

So stop whining.

[Rolf]

I haven't heard any whining today, Steve, save from Ritchie's carbon wheels.

But I can't decide whether your post is best summed up as self-deceptive casuistry, or simple sophistry.

C'mon, try repeating it one more time: B rides are no-drop. But it's fine to drop people from B rides? By your reasoning, today's A ride was actually B1 (we picked up some of their detritus) and we were, in fact, B2. Think about it.

When a ride leaves the parking lot there should be consensus that it's either a drop ride, or a no-drop ride. I think it's simpler to refer to the former as "A", and the latter as "B" (or "C"). e.g. I don't think anyone riding B2 considers it to be a drop ride, even if there's a known B3 or C ride following.

Fundamentally, the names don't really matter; the most important thing is that each group on the road shares the same expectations among themselves. And by sharing this morning's fun experience in "B1", that's what I'm trying to encourage.

[Paula]

Agreed, that if all are in agreement about whether it is a drop or no drop ride is key.

As it is important not to drop people on a no drop ride, it is also important to seed yourself with the group that is best suited to your riding ability on that day.. as best you can. Although on a B ride there should be no shame on calling 'steady' once in a while or hanging at the back to recover once in a while, if you need to do that through the whole ride, maybe its time to ride in an easier group.

And - a rose is still a rose by any other name, yes…. BUT why don't we just call the B1 a A2 ride… it's good for their egos… And good for all of us - as we will all be riding up a level… except A's, but their egos are big enough

[John D]

A few comments:

>So stop whining.

I didn't detect whining. Rolf was totally keyed up about how great today's B1 ride was when I spoke to him this morning, describing it as having felt "...more like home than I remember for a long time."

>But I can't decide whether your post is best summed up as
>self-deceptive casuistry, or simple sophistry.

Bravo. I think this comment merits a new "Who Got a Thesaurus for Xmas?" award.

>And if you trickle off the back of B2, there's usually a B3 safety net.

Aw, shucks. Thanks for the shout-out Steve, but we still prefer to call ourselves the C-ride.

Bottom line: Tripleshot ride descriptions are not written in stone. The fact that our club's rides continue to grow and evolve (both in number of ride options and overall participation) is a very positive thing and a sign that we're doing something right. Other clubs should be jealous.

J.

[Lund]

I can't decide whether your post is best summed up as self-deceptive casuistry, or simple sophistry.

I don't know either. I just know that if you decide to ride B1 and you can't sustain the pace you're going to get dropped.

(My "stop whining" comment wasn't aimed at Rolf. It was more of a general admonition to those inclined to whine about B1's willingness to drop people.)

[leftcoaster]

Got dropped, good workout, didn't whine, see you next week.

[Bosie]

Hi Rolf and others.

Thanks for starting this thread. A few observations:

I think there is a BIG difference between the A and B1 ride: The A ride is no holds barred and no one is going to wait for anyone. The B1 ride will slow up at Ash, Caddy Bay, past the golf course and on KGT. I have never been on a B1 ride when a call to "steady up" was not heeded. Today there were a few times when this happened.

There is an expectation though for some self seeding.

Todays ride was an anomaly in that it was BIG with a number of strong riders and it It was fairly "frisky" as a result. But it was really great!

I am wondering if there isnt the need for a true "A2" ride in the Spring as the groups get bigger. Maybe a slightly "gentler" A1 ride where dropping is allowed, but people are encouraged to sit in if they cant pull through as they are in the A ride.

Its not a bad idea either to have a less "ordered" ride below the A1 ride, for those trying to make the step up to A.The A ride a very different type of group ride, compared to anything in the lower rides. More breaks, closing gaps, reversing pacelines, accelerations AFTER the hills etc..Things that arent seen much below the A ride..

Craig

[mtsmith439]

I love the discussion.

I think part of what is going on is basic human nature. People enjoy being leaders not followers, especially in the group riding world. Stronger riders in B1 prefer to be a leader in B1, more than a follower in A. I think club rules are club rules: B and C are no drop rides. If stronger B1 riders are looking to race and dish out some punishment, they should move up to A. As I grew stronger last year, I was feeling that I was almost at the point where I wanted to test the waters in B1. I didn't quite make it, but if my progression continues, that was a goal for this year. I would hope that B1 stays as inclusive as B2 and B3 normally are.

Self seeding is important. The one time a B/C group is free to leave a rider occurs when the rider gives the group permission to "Ride On". That being said, the group should be convinced that the rider truly means this, and is not just being polite. Mount Douglas is a lonely place to be, all by yourself, at 6:45am (or whatever time it is, it's been too dark to read my bike computer) in the morning.

Let's not lose sight of why TSC is such a fantastic and popular club. Lord knows I love a challenging ride as much as anyone, but I love the camaraderie even more.

[Claire]

I understand the desire to have firm rules so that everyone knows what to expect. However, I have other thoughts on this, too...

One of the beautiful things about cycling is when you "click" with a group and get a great rhythm working together. And one of the beautiful things about this club is the plethora of groups and pace options on hand.

We can call the group B1 or A2 but it's still basically the same group of people - we know who we are. In an ideal world, we'd all want to ride at the same pace, and we'd put up with getting gapped or dropped occasionally and relish the training benefits that can bring. There are options for shortcutting here and there to try to make up a gap. There is also the "chase like hell" option, ideally with another friend or two who is with us. And there is always - as has been pointed out above - another group or two behind so one is rarely, if ever, left riding all alone.

Now back to that "great rhythm" concept... It can be addicting and desirable and bring us great pleasure. And when we sense there is a critical mass of like-minded rhythm addicts, it can feel really excellent to keep it going. There is always a "slowing" at the top of Ash and KGT but every now and then, the pep and spring is in our legs and the momentum of the group says "roll on."

So, rather than signing a formal agreement to "never drop anyone on a B1 ride without prior approval," how about we let the group behave as an organic entity? If the sense of the group is that slowing/steadying/waiting is the right move, then do so. But if a nice clear division occurs and the front group has that tickly urge in their legs that says "let's keep a good thing going," then some riders may have to muster up a little humility and some other friends and soldier on to the great coffee shop equalizer at the end of the ride.

I say all this with full awareness that I am nowhere near the top of the fitness curve in the B1 group and that practising what I've suggested may result in my own ass getting dropped. And I'm okay with that. It would certainly motivate me to dig deep and/or train harder and/or train less so that it won't happen again.

[Rolf]

I'll just repeat that I'm not suggesting (nor, I think, is anyone else) that the ride I described above be changed in any way! It was a stonking good time, and I love knowing that kind of ride is part of the impressive (and growing) Tripleshot milieu.

I'm just suggesting it be called A2, both to preserve the freedom to "keep it organic" (including keeping it frisky and dropping riders without controversy) and to make things clear to new riders, and riders progressing from the slower groups.

Several folks have reinforced the importance of self-seeding. Ensuring riders know what to expect and are thus able to choose the right ride is essential for group cohesion and integral to the overall ride experience. I think calling the current B1 ride "A2" would facilitate this process.

But, what-everrrr. Even if the names remain unchanged, so long as everyone knows the current "B1" is a drop ride, everything should be copacetic.

[mtsmith439]

I would totally agree with Claire's sentiment of an "organic entity". If every rider in a particular group on a particular day agrees "This is a take-no-prisoners ride", then there isn't a problem and the "letters" are irrelevant. For example: If I were to move up from B2 to A next Friday, and got dropped by Home Depot (if I was lucky to hang on for that long), I would be cool with that. I knew what I was getting myself into.

Where we run a risk, is when we get movement between the groups. A B1 rider has had an epic riding week, the legs are feeling burned out and need some recovery, and decides to drop down to B2 for Friday's ride. I still consider myself new to TSC but I have seen this happen numerous times: The stronger rider has full intentions of taking on the values of the group but it is tough to change riding habits. Subconsciously, he pushes that group. He puts stress on the other riders. This is good and bad. As I said in my previous post, I love a challenging ride: It is a good feeling when your boundaries are pushed and you succeed. On the other hand, what happens if you fail: You start to analyze the things that you are doing wrong. B2 riders might start to think "If I am going to succeed next time, if I am going to improve as a rider, I need to start riding like the B1 group. We need to ride with more intensity in B2". We run the risk of B2 becoming a drop ride, B3 becoming a drop ride, and C becoming a drop ride.

Rules create structure and structure decreases stress in an organization. I am the first to admit that I have struggled with rules and structure in my life ("Problem with Authority" is a term that has been used a few times). However, I have been a member of enough organizations (now I'm talking about the workplace) to know that if an organization does not have a good structure in place it's stressful and frustrating.

It may not seem like a big deal or a big change but it may, very well, have a significant impact on the overall club. I'm sure the powers-that-be made these rules for a reason.

[Rolf]

Huh? Where has anyone suggested any changes to what happens on our rides as they are? I don't see no suggestions of new rules, neither.

If every rider in a particular group on a particular day agrees "This is a take-no-prisoners ride", then there isn't a problem and the "letters" are irrelevant.

This would be nice. If there was some mechanism to discern every rider's mindset before a ride and reach a consensus on what kind of ride people want that day. But there isn't.

The only real tool we have to help people self-seed effectively, is calling out the names in the parking lot and doing what we can to make sure folks know what to expect from each one. Hence this thread...

[mtsmith439]

The point I was trying to extend was that every decision made in an organization, no matter how small it seems, usually affects more people than the decision-maker realizes at the time. I have been guilty of this numerous times.
Whenever a change is made in an organization, we should also be asking "How will this affect the overall health of the organization?".
That's it. Nothing more.

Once again, I love this discussion. There should be more of these on the forum.

[AJ Neale]

I too find this a really great discussion; it describes the wonderful entity that is a “ride”, it provides an opportunity to offer opinions and discuss improvements from various perspectives, we have been offered up some humour ( especially our president ….. worth the price of admission IMHO ), it is confirmation that being active, passionate and a bit crazy is a good thing, and I have even learned two new words: “casuistry”, and “clairesnark”!

Let me start by saying that if the first group behind the current A group regularly ( or possibly ) sees riders dropping off the back before Beacon Hill Park, then it should be given an A prefix. It’s not such big deal. Everybody leaving the parking lot knows what can happen and we can all “Go ride our bikes”. A famous Claire expression!

I am having trouble finding anything to disagree with in the thread, but I would like to add a comment. Is it not inevitable that the formation of an A2 group becomes necessary due to sheer numbers? In the 2 years I have been riding with Tripleshot, I have seen the size of each group growing year-to-year, not to mention the increase in attendance caused by the phenomenon that is summer. I recall a recent Tuesday ride where the A’s swept past our B1 group on Foul Bay, and there must have been 18 A riders. As we all know, a group of 16 leaving the parking lot can become 22 in no time and so the issue of road safety comes in to play. Maybe the optimal group size for any ride can be our next major topic.

I would also like to echo John’s comment that the evolution of the rides based on their popularity should be embraced and celebrated.

Lastly, I still think our rides could be described succinctly in repeating some post-ride comments overheard last year:

B rider: “Did you see the beautiful sunrise this morning?”
C rider: “Yes, we stopped to take a photo”
A rider: “There was a sunrise?”

Andrew


[mfarnham]

I'm fine with making B1 a drop ride (and calling it A2). Just as long as it's made explicit. If we do this, then I think it's best to do it on a lasting basis rather than deciding at the start of each ride (too many riders miss the announcements).

I would suggest, however (and I believe it's club policy), that mechanicals are dealt with within groups as much as possible. B1 rolled up on someone with a flat this morning at the top of KGT, and people just kept rolling. Some of us stayed behind to provide support, but I think the group should have waited, or at least talked about how we were going to handle it, before tearing off down the hill. If people roll on when someone has a mechanical, they're deciding--without consultation--to make it someone else's problem. Handing mechanicals down to the next group isn't fair, nor is leaving someone out in the cold without being 100% sure that the person wants that outcome.

Martin

[Claire]

Today's flat was by Stéphane who was not in our group at the time (not sure why... he had been earlier). We rolled up on him and Lisa asked him if we should wait, and he said we could go ahead. Some folks might have missed that, but there was consultation. Just FYI.

[mfarnham]

The problem is that unless everyone in the group knows that we're good to go, some will stay back to make sure the mechanical is sorted. And by the time they find out it's sorted, they're dropped. It's not a big deal (4 of us were able to ride to the park together), but it would have been nice to keep the group together (or at least give people that option) and would only have cost everyone else a few seconds.

Martin

[katew]

Maybe the optimal group size for any ride can be our next major topic.


<sniff>

I miss youse guys so much.

On the matter above, I remind those who had the misfortune of riding with me of my favourite completely-made-up guideline:

"If we're collectively bigger than a tractor-trailer, we're too big."

The point of that thought is that we shouldn't be longer or more difficult to pass than the biggest thing generally allowed on the road.

<gets back on her stoopid indoor trainer, spins up a sufferfest>