Does what it says on the tin.

[Ian A4size]

I fully agree Sean, we went far too fast.
I suppose as the ride leader i should have flagged it up .
I blame everyone
We should do the avg speed, however it will be faster in some in areas as we can't do 19mph up the hills and drags, and 19.6 is not a million miles out.
That group is capable of nearly 22 on a good day- and the thru and off will push the avg up.
I hear what you are saying tho and will do better next time.
I posted on another thread about discussing re-group areas and will bring this up on the next CR i do- it will give people a chance to get back on as they usually "fall off" up the drag to rusper.

[-Adam-]

If my knee/shoulder permit me to ride on saturday, i will lead a definate 19mph group. If anything its likely to fall to a 18 group!

[Graham O]

I think that you have a point here. These days the training group is knocking on the 23-24mph level and 19 group is really a 21 group..

Think its time to call the 18 group and a 20 / 21 group..

[Andrew G]

Agree Sean. I seem to remember Huw posting something along the lines that with some of the stronger riders in the 19s being capable of 21s that this group should be resurrected. I think part of the problem is that if most people in the group are going well it naturally speeds up, but this doesn't help those new or stepping up a group.

There used to be a 21s group before the Training Group formed, and this has sort of taken over from it. As per Huw's suggestion why not re-start the 21s as a faster group, but that keeps a steadier pace and without attacks. The Training Group then stays in its current state as a 21+ with attacks on hills/drags group, and there is a stepping stone between the 19s and Training Group.

Obviously it all depends who's out on any given week, but the groups could then stick to the tin better. If there's no 21 group that week, either go in the training group or stick to a 19s pace doing longer turns on the front if you want the workout. Shouldn't be too much of a problem and if you did have to reign yourself in then just ride back with faster(training group) riders.

[Alan M]

Why not call them A, B C etc. and get away from descriptions that can never be totally correct because of various factors such as wind, weather, group dynamic etc.

Since there is mostly a group behind to pick up the pieces, and in any case individuals make their own decisions about the length of the ride, my feeling is that it is a pretty fluid situation. At worst the group breaks up a bit and a couple of people that know where they are going get dropped - so what?

With one exception, that is not to leave anyone isolated on the dual carriageway, the role of leader, particularly among those that have done the ride many times before is probably to enable the best fit between conditions and riders. He/she should aim to reach a consensus about route, pace etc. but without recourse to instruction or command culture, and, except of course in the face of dangerous behaviour, to let the agreeable other world of the Saturday club run take its course .

Just some random thoughts!

[Stu Merckx Man]

ive been thinking about this recently too. the training group is now doing about 23-24 to the cafe, and its a huge step for anyone to go from 19 to 24!

theres a lot of strong 19s who are above that level, but its near impossible for them to make the jump up. so i recon keep the training group, and it should be a whatever speed goes type thing, as i think labeling it on the website as a 21 group is grossly miss informing , but there should now be a 21 group for the many 19s that could comfortably do 21, but not make the jump to 23-24.

stu

[Snoop Doug]

Ahhh, this old chestnut. S'funny how when a slowcoach like me mentions this kinda thing I seem to get the internet equivalent of a pat on the head and a there there type reply (tin hat and flak jacket on but that's how it's felt to me in the past). Now that the matter has been raised by someone in a fast group it gets more serious consideration. Anyhoo....

People like me (oh please tell me I'm not the only one) need a bit of reassurance if/when we step up that we're in with a shout of keeping up. Last weekend (and not for the first time) I considered going up a group to 18mph. I didn't, and what put me off was the worry that 18 would become 19 and I'd get dropped.

I do think that the groups need to be categorised by approx mph so people can get a feel for what they're letting themselves in for. I guess it's up to the guvnor on the day to read the bunch and particularly if there are new folk on board, keep it all under control. I take Alan's point that there's the insurance policy of a group behind going at a steadier pace - but that should be something to stick in the back pocket, not something to be relied on. Add to that another fast group in between 19 and training as per Stu's suggestion and you'd probably have all the options covered.

Snoop - I'll try the 18s next time I'm out come what may!

[George]

Well its good news to have a problem like this

So many people out on the club-run and everyone going too fast naughty naughty

[Alan M]

A few more thoughts on the chesnut

Keeping the groups to a particular speed in MPH is akin to herding cats.

The issue of stepping up a group is always going to invite possible failure, but we need to reframe it as a success. To have tried means that you have moved beyond your comfort zone; from this you get 2 things, a good work out for as long as you can hang on and some feedback about your current performance.

Your choice of group depends on who you see in it, what it might be up to and your own ambitions on the day.

2 examples

1. Last weekend, there was no way that I would have gone with the training group although I have survived with some of the same people on other occasions - 24 mph was an obvious possibility weighing the combination of no race the next day and the people in the group. I imagine George's attacks were at least to some extent aimed at incapacitating Steve for the sprint, or maybe just 'cos its George.

2. A few weeks ago, the 19 group was a bit of a shambles with people pinging to the front and 3 abreast cycling. Rather than admonish them (which I am quite prepared to do if I think they jeopardize my safety) I went on the front and moved it along at a pace that strung the group out - maybe a few were uncomfortable and in truth I would have been happier doing a steady 19/20 but conditions dictated otherwise.

So again, lets use common sense and not get too rule bound. What it really should say on the tin is this group goes very fast - usually but not always; this group goes less fast but sometimes goes pretty fast; and, this group is a bit slower but can surprise us in certain situations.

[-Adam-]

I think the 'problem' is being blown out of proportion. When i first came out with the club nearly 3 years ago, you just went with the group you felt you could do. If you got dropped, theres probably a group behind you. If not there was the possibility to move up a group the next week.

Let the people decide, learn their abilities. Force themselves to go harder. Whatever. Lets not turn the CR into some kind of Blairite nanny state.

Stu's call for a 20/21 between the 19s and trainig group is a good one. There has been before and it works well.

C'mon people, make up your own minds. But most of all, just test yourself!

[jon avery]

I agree with Adam, sometimes i fell strong and go with the 18s or at a push the 19s (in which i have always been dropped ) but that would not put me off trying again in the future.I always look to see whos in the group, if i see George say he is saving himself for a race and taking it easy in the 19s then i stay well clear!!

[George]

This is the best thread!

EVERYONE'S RIDING TOO FAST

[Alan M]

[quote]Blairite nanny state

[George]

eventually becoming a Brownrite not for long Cameron state

[-Adam-]

Alan I can only comment on the politics i remember!