Tripleshot Cycling

I am looking for some input here.

I really like TS becasue of its inclusive nature. I would never have kept cycling if it wasnt for joining this club and having strong guys like Lister, Chris F & Bob turn around REPEATEDLY to drag me along when the best I could average was 27 km/h. So its really important, in my view, that we not lose sight of that. We all were slow at one point and the fast guys waited for us so if we are now "fast" shouldnt we "pay it forward"?

Having said that I also am (now) really enjoying the chance to jam with the big boys.

A third factor is our group size and the recent discussions about safety etc.

So I am proposing the following as our "rides"

Tuesdays - 2 groups
Group 1 does the box with the "normal" 4 laps sprinting on laps 2 & 4 then no drop to King George
Group 2 does the box with 3 laps a bit slower then hits the waterfront so that we all end up at coffee together. Also a no drop ride.

Wednesdays - 1 group - own pace hill ride with coffee at PV

Fridays - 2 groups
Group 1 - does a "race" ride with a paceline along Blenkinsop and attacks anywhere AFTER Blenkinsop are fair game. if you get dropped we dont wait. We then add 1 or 2 loops of Beacon Hill Park so we dont arrive at Coffee too early
Group 2 - does the same route (this is critical) as the first group but does it in a "traditional" TS no drop way.

Saturdays - Josh's sufferfest Saturday - its gonna hurt...and you may end up alone bleeding from the eyes... I will say no more!

Sundays - NO DROPS in either the short ride or the long ride. Remember most new people have shown up on a Sunday so lets not turn them off.

So those are my thoughts. What do you all think? I hope we can strike a balance between being the best club in town with the coolest attitude (and gear!) and most welcoming rides while still allowing for people to crush each other from time to time - especially as we are moving into the racing season.

All comments & thoughts gladly welcomed.

Peter

Sounds largely sensible, Peter.

I'd just resile again from the ordination and call the rides "Training/Racing" and "Rec(reational)/Rec(overy)", instead of "1" and "2". What's in a name, you might ask? ...implied expectations and unnecessary subordination.

I'd also suggest that the Rec ride standard include a sprint on lap 3 on Tuesdays and aim to hold it together until, say, Beacon Hill Park on Fridays. Despite the more easygoing pace (today we averaged 30.5 with a flat), we're still getting some great sprints in.

I think Friday needs a 3rd ride that doesn't do Blenkinsop. Once the weather gets a bit nicer we are going to get those who have taken the winter off as well as new cyclists joining us. I think a more beginner friendly ride is need on Friday, especially because it's the hilliest of the rides. We had over 30 today, by May I bet we're going to have over 40. We have enough riders for 3 decent sized groups.

I think we should name the groups to let people know exactly what's going on. I propose:

Taste Your Own Vomit Group - Race training ride
Status Quo Group - Exactly the same as what's been happening up till now
Intro Group - Introduces new members to group riding. Tailored to those who show up

I think we need to split the groups, as 30+ gets unwieldy. With 10-15 you can still yell from the front to the back, single up quickly when needed, etc.

I don't want to force people into particular groups, but if it's clear what each group is doing, then it because easier to self select a group. And if everybody is riding with like minded people, everybody should have more fun.

From a purely selfish perspective, I really enjoyed the ride this morning. I haven't turned myself inside out like that (trying to stay on Scotts wheel as he pulled me back up to Peter after Ash) probably ever on a tripleshot friday ride. The pace, and the all out "race-like" nature of the rest of the ride in that lead group of 10 or 12 was just plain fun.

I'm not sure how much fun it was for the people who couldn't stay with that lead group, especially if you are out there hoping for a workout, stuck in no mans land, and still not wanting to drop back to the "grupetto" pace. I was talking to Glen this morning. She was saying she'd prefer to be out there for the workout too, but wasn't able to stay with the lead group. The question then, if we're trying to make this ride fun for everyone, is where does this group of people fit into the equation? Maybe as it evolves, if you leave with the race group and get dropped, secondary groups will form and work together. Then if you want to sit up and wait for the grupetto, there's always that option as well. I'm really not sure.

I think the whole thing this morning surprised a lot of people more than anything. To be fair, Peter did say in the parking lot that the first group going out would be the "hammerheads", would break into a paceline on Blenkinsop, and would not be no drop. I don't think that registered with everybody, and we mostly filed out in our normal "A" and "B" groups. There was a lot of confusion at the top of Ash when nobody waited.

If it were a little better defined from the start what the different groups were than it was this week, I think the idea has merit. The reality of having 30+ people show up is that everybody in one group is becoming increasingly dangerous. The other factor is the varied skill levels, and individual training, recreation, and/or social objectives that everybody brings to the ride. Next week, I imagine there will be a much smaller group leaving with the "hammerheads", as there were only 10 or so left in that lead group by the end. A regular "no drop till king george A" ride can leave after that. Nothing different about the "A" ride experience, just 10 fewer hammerheads to contend with. Both groups have fewer people sprinting along Dallas, which makes it safer.

As the weather gets nicer, and the group gets even larger, I see no reason why there couldn't be the introductory "B" ride as well, just like Roland initiated last summer.

Peter,

Really like your idea and am sad that I missed this mornings ride! The race ride gives people an opportunity to try and hold on but then drop back to the recreational ride if need be.

I would just add that I think Sunday rides are becoming large and that we should break into two groups with numbers of 20 plus.

Steve

Good discussion Peter, and I think the suggestions are good.

Making no particular point, the following came to mind:

Bob could have dropped me at any time in the past five years without changing gear. And I think that says something about our ride, though I'm not sure how to put it into words. It has been was very motivating to ride with him, which over-separating groups could reduce.

When I lived there, the Ottawa Bicycle club tried to deal with this by having five rides every weekend, with designated leaders. The groups were named, such as 'easy rollers', through 'sportif' and 'extra sportif'. With success, but limitations. The local racers sniffed their disdain, but showed up to the fastest group and treated it like a race. Often the leader was left to making sure the cannon fodder found the route and got home again.

It's also getting complicated, I count seven different rides a week. Will people, especially new riders, remember what each thing is?

Australia and BC Masters have for years used the handicap format to accommodate different abilities. i.e. slower groups start first, try to stay away, and have a chance to jump on as the stronger riders go by, but also to join forces and hold off the strong guys. Is there any guidance there? Rather than just having a place to drop back to, for dropped A riders, it gives that je ne sais quoi of motivation for the rec/rec riders being more than just the broom wagon for the fast guys who blow up.

As one of the less than strong cyclists (i.e. hammerhead describes my mental but not physical capacity) I enjoyed this morning very much. I like the proposal from the Human Torch (as he will be known after tomorrow) and think that for those of us that get dropped on Ash we should be able to organize into a very effective chase group. I think we ended up with 4 or 5 guys chasing after Ash as we picked up a few that were shot out the back.

With a bit of thought we could easily get into a rolling pace line to chase back to the main group by Beacon Hill (though I will inevitably leave on Caddy Bay and sneak into the bushes for a quick cry). This may help ensure that we do not simply end up practicing our TT skills at 330 yard intervals. If we plan for it, the guys that are at the back can start picking up other riders as we build up some steam and riders ahead may even slow for a minute when they see the chase train coming along and jump onboard.

I also agree with the need to ensure that we manage to maintain a cohesive and welcoming group environment - this may mean that sometimes people choose to go with the non-race group partially for reasons of recovery, but also for reasons for helping other riders along - I think our group has done an exceptional job of this to date. (Even today, Norm stayed back with the second group rather than going off with the faster group - thanks Norm).

I guess the key is to ensure that we establish the parameters for each ride so that I can effectively choose which group I want to tackle on any given day. That way if I decide (because I am daft) to try to go with 'HT and the Hammerheads' (Hmmm... cool cycling rock band name perhaps) and get shelled at Ash Road (quelle surprise!) that is fine because I expected that to happen.

How is that for a long post - I was almost not able to finish it - I was dropped on the third paragraph but managed to gut my way back up to the keyboard and tuck in behind the space bar. I will post my HR data for writing this post a little later after my cool down lap and tea

Michael

Lister Farrar wrote:
Bob could have dropped me at any time in the past five years without changing gear. And I think that says something about our ride, though I'm not sure how to put it into words. It has been was very motivating to ride with him, which over-separating groups could reduce.

...

Australia and BC Masters have for years used the handicap format to accommodate different abilities. Eg. slower groups start first, try to stay away, and have a chance to jump on as the stronger riders go by, but also to join forces and hold off the strong guys. Is there any guidance there? Rather than just having a place to drop back to for stronger riders, it gives that je ne sais quoi of motivation for the rec/rec riders being more than the broom wagon for the fast guys who blow up.

Both of these points struck me. In the first paragraph, I'd change "Bob" to "Lister, Peter, Dave S. and others" and "five years" to "eight months". There is no substitute for riding with greatness... I guess so long as veterans like Norm and Lister continue to occasionally ride with us slower folks, the wisdom/experience transfer may be preserved.

As for slower groups starting first: it's very motivating knowing that at some point, you might be passed by the snorting speedies. I know on Tuesday it seemed to drive the Rec ride after Clover Point. ["Help! Help! Josh is coming...!"]

A broom wagon is a great concept to support a "shelling-okay" racing ride; I get that. I really like knowing that guys like Josh, Scott, Bob, Bruce, Chris M. and other superfast folk can be unbridled and still keep Tripleshot a habit (and not that riders "graduate" from the club and we never see them because they're insufficiently challenged). We all benefit from including all levels. But as for ensuring there is a no-drop, cleanup group following the hammerheads, maybe that's where Roland's Status Quo Group could come in?

This is a great discussion to have -- a symptom of success. I hope we hear from some of our quieter members, especially those really new to the group!

Although it's hard for me on a slow Friday, I'm going to shut up now...

mlawless wrote: This may help ensure that we do not simply end up practicing our TT skills at 330 yard intervals.

Michael

And there is something wrong with time trialing in on one's own? That is my modus operandum most days. Better than crying in the bushes.

Interesting string. I think we should try not to over-complicate the approach to this issue (KISS--Keep It Simple (and) Safe.

I went to a triple shot ride and a hammerfest broke out.....

I wasn't elated with being spit out the back end of the A ride, however being one of 7 riders (8 if you count the tandem as 2), helped assuage my wounded ego. I did enjoy the workout - I would give it a '9'.

The premise of this morning's ride bothered me - if you get dropped from the A ride, the B ride will ride the same route and be there to pick you up. And for the B ride, don't drop anybody because we're a no drop club. In last week's article, some one even quoted the marines.

I enjoy the A rides, because it has raised my game. When I first tried an A ride, I had my ass handed to me on a sling, and didn't venture to try one again for a couple of months until I had improved. I checked the ride stats from this morning and compared them to last October and today was almost 3 km/hr faster. That's a lot faster.

I think the addition of a third group on Friday would be a good idea if the numbers warrant and if today is any indication, the numbers warrant. However, I think each ride should be responsible for not dropping their riders.

It was interesting to note this morning that some were finished and leaving Mocca House, by the time the second group arrived. If we want remain a cohesive club, we should be careful about stratifying into too many levels.

- David B

I'd vote for:
1. A Wreck ride and
2. A Rec ride
That would make the confusion perfect and nobody would know what's going on

I like Rolf's suggestion of a sprint on lap 3 on Tuesday's Rec ride, we did that this last Tuesday already (mainly because Dave S. told me that I should sprint).

If we have an Intro Group as Roland suggested, I think it would be really good if 1 or 2 stronger riders could join that group, i.e. have different people going with that group every week. When I started riding with you guys back in August, I thought it was really great to have a couple of experienced riders around that kept the group orderly and advised newcomers. I surely appreciated it.

One thing I would like to see is to build the rec riders up to be able to do pace lines. I've ended up a couple of times in one and wasn't quite certain about what to do. I would certainly not be happy to go out on a hammerfest to practice a pace line -- neither would anybody else be happy with it. So it would be great if we could practice a pace line in an environment that is less mad. It will also make it easier for a rec rider to join the occasional training ride.

Btw, Peter, was there really a time when you averaged only 27 km/h? I would find it highly encouraging if there was as it means that there is hope (though Ian destroyed that hope by saying it was probably when you were 6 years old!).

Rita

Rita wrote:I'd vote for:
1. A Wreck ride and
2. A Rec ride

Brian S wrote: And there is something wrong with time trialing in on one's own?

Figures it would be the triathlete who didn't notice we'd changed the meeting spot...

Lots of great discussion. It's clear that we all have the inclusive and encouraging nature of the club as a top priority. I like Peter's suggestions and have the following comments:

1. It was great to do a paceline again. I have really missed this part of our regular rides. There was a time when we did it Tuesdays around campus and Fiday on Blenki. I think it is a very effective training tool and also teaches skills and awareness. I also think it's safer than 2X2 on narrow winding roads as it eliminates the 4 wide effect when 2 are falling back. The Friday Status Quo ride should also do a paceline. If UVic ever deals with the rabbits we could have a "paceline training day" on ring road for the newer members. We tried a paceline on the Tuesday box a couple times but with the sharp corners it's tricky.
2. I am not sure we need a third group on Fridays but we can decide that in the parking lot depending on the numbers and the mix out that day. If we do we should ensure there are experienced riders with both the Rec (status quo) ride and the Intro (easy) ride.
3. Sundays should stay as a more rec oriented ride. Even a huge group can safely ride together to Mattick's Farm or even Islandview, then we can split up if needed.
4. There is also a "Farm Team" ride on wednesdays, meeting at Richmond and Richardson. A few TSC members ride it each week along with others mostly from Fairfield. It is a TSC-like ride with no drop and usually goes out on Shelbourne to Caddy Bay Road then back on Ash, around the waterfront, staying together until Ross Bay and with a sprint down Cook St to Mocha House on Cook. If your on a recovery week or too lazy to do the hils it's a ride alternative. After yesterday I can see I need to train more and Dolly and I are planning to alternate our Wednesday ride between Hills and Farm team.
Cheers,
Eric

eric.partlow wrote:If we do we should ensure there are experienced riders with both the Rec (status quo) ride and the Intro (easy) ride.

I'd be more than happy to do this. As race season rolls into full swing, I plan to be doing a VCL race every week, and some of the masters races.
An additional 50 minute full on hammerfest like this week every friday would be far too hard on the body and the weekly training cycle.

a couple of us were speaking Sunday morning and one other point seems worth mentioning. For example our speed (at the front) on Friday was an average of 34.5 or so for the ride. While this is certainly faster than what we do in witner it is right where we usually are in the spring / summer in the A group. Last summer's rides on Fridays averaged anwhere from a slow 33 to a fast 35.5 Tuesday rides at UVic averaged up to 36 with the UVic laps sometimes up as high as 40kmh!

I bring this up because I dont want people thinking we have "changed" something (speed) when we have not. I fully expect that as we move into summer and get onto our fast bikes etc the speeds are goingto come up.

At the same time I think Josh is bang on as well in that as the race season gets cranking a bunch of the fast guys wont want to blow their doors off on Fridays so wil likely end up in the Rec ride. Frankly I expect that this is going to work out really well - as long as we all make a concious effort to not exclude anyone etc.

Peter

(Disclaimer: I'm a bit down from not going well on the bike. Read with a grain of salt.)

It's also how you ride, not just the average speed. There were several accelerations Sunday with no-one looking back (never mind coming back), a few riders getting shelled and kms alone until the regroup points. Eg. after Matticks, it immediately split again.

Even with getting myself to the front at the start of every climb, falling to the back by the top, and avoiding every turn on the front, I can tell you for me it was hard. And I know how to do this stuff; beginners don't, never mind how chaotic it would be if everyone started floating out of their pairs.

As well, I noticed accelerations at the top of the climbs, just where the weakest, at the back, still climbing, are most vulnerable. If you wait 5-10 seconds until everyone is over the top, you can blow your brains out on the downhill and still not drop anyone. But you have to look back for that.

The average speed could be as high or even higher if the strong guys took it just a bit easier on the climbs (or even push someone up it) and then pedalled down the hills. (As usual, I found I had to brake all the way down the hills in the group).

To be fair, it was steadier after Saanichton, but signs of Burnside-itis I'd say.

hoping I am not beign hypocritical I have to say that I STRONGLY agree with Lister on this. I confess that about the only thing thatis guaranteed to drive me nuts with our club is when guys go over a hill fast and dont look back. It never ceases to amaze me how people can say - "I didnt know anyone was off the back". To me that is becuase the people at the front arent looking around! Its not good enough to get over a hill and coast as the people like me at the back are still slogging it out uphill while you coast away from me. In my view the first group over a hill has a postive obligation to apply the brakes and look to see where the last person is - if you dont know who the last person is ----- wait longer!

Now I do not think this applies to a "hammerfest" such as what is probably going to happen for a few weeks in the Friday Race ride while we all start to get our spring speed going for racing season but for all of our other rides I challenge the people that are going over a hill first to actively find the last person and make sure they are beside you before you descend. (plus if you really want to challenge yourself uphill then try starting at the back every hill - you will get a great challenge plus you wont be so far ahead that you feel liek you are waiting forever for me to hump my big bum over the hill!)