Road Racing Demographics
Fred Flintstein
jerk. This is stuff that I found interesting and thought
others might also.
What sort of started it all was the realization that
bicycle ownership was near universal among my kid's
friends. But that none of them, flat zero none, owned a
road bike.
I've been involved in racing a long time. I think just
about every older rider will tell you that the peloton
didn't used to look the way it does today. In the early
1980s I remember being in a race at Superweek and being
surprised at seeing Eric Heiden's dad there. Not so much
that it was a celebrity's dad, more that it was anyone's
dad. I wasn't used to seeing guys his age in the regular
categorized rider's race. At the time he was one of the
top Veteran class riders in the country, and a former
Veteran's national champion. This was a time when they
only gave out one champion's jersey for the old guys.
Not like today where Masters champion jerseys are
delivered by a semi. But it was very unusual to see
someone old enough to be my dad in the race.
The Grandview Firehouse 50 is a useful race to look at in
this respect. It's an age graded race and it has data
going back years. It's a citizen race, and quite a large
one. The top riders are always among the best regional
USCF/USAC road riders.
This is what the top 125 at Firehouse looked like in 1992.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kondrag/4865056984/sizes/o/in/photostream/
There is an element of apples to oranges in any comparison
across years. Originally there was a single road race. Time
trials were added, and later a shorter loop was run. In 1992
there was still a single road race and the time trials were
still quite small events. There were 793(!) recorded racers.
But still, it isn't like TTs are flooded with younger riders
these days. If anything it is the opposite, older riders are
more likely to gravitate to individual start events. So in
terms of age proportions, I think comparisons are pretty
valid.
So in 1992 we see a leading group that is mostly in their 20s
and 30s, with older riders in a distinct minority. To put
numbers to it, I count 23 riders older than 40. And of those
only two are 50+.
Contrast that to this year's race...
http://www.itiming.com/raceresults/647-fh50-ovl10.pdf
The shorter race and the TTs have bled off some entries,
leaving 373 riders. So the top 125 reaches deeper into the
total than it did in 1992. But if you look at the TT and
Fantasy 50 (the shorter race) results, it is difficult to
make the case that the age proportions are any different
as a result.
At any rate, in the early 80s it was unusual for me to look
over in a race and see someone that I could picture as my
dad. In 2010, that's the majority position. 55% of the top
125 are 40+, an age where they could be the winner's father.
Where we had only two 50+ riders in that group in 1992 we
now have 26 in 2010. In 128th place we have our first 60+
rider, a guy that could conceivably be the winner's
grandfather.
Like I said, I found this interesting. I think anyone
marketing a race would be interested as well. Now you guys
can go back to the Lafferty reach around.
Fred FLintstein
Fredmaster of Brainerd
wrote:
>
> At any rate, in the early 80s it was unusual for me to look
> over in a race and see someone that I could picture as my
> dad. In 2010, that's the majority position. 55% of the top
> 125 are 40+, an age where they could be the winner's father.
> Where we had only two 50+ riders in that group in 1992 we
> now have 26 in 2010. In 128th place we have our first 60+
> rider, a guy that could conceivably be the winner's
> grandfather.
>
> Like I said, I found this interesting. I think anyone
> marketing a race would be interested as well. Now you guys
> can go back to the Lafferty reach around.
So I guess there are several questions. Apart
from the idea that now we know why Masters champion
jersey have to be ordered by the gross - because that's
where the customers are.
One is whether this means that more old farts are racing
longer while the number of 20-something racers is
more or less constant. Or is it that fewer 20-somethings
are racing? On the one hand, I suspect that the 20-something
or just "open" race categories fill up in popular races in
your area - this seems more or less true in most places.
On the other hand, you'd think if there were more good
20-somethings, they could keep some of the old farts
out of the top 40 or so places.
I was going to look at the Tour de Tucson results to see
if they were useful in some way, but they only started listing
ages in 2000. Before that they tagged the 50+ riders, and
maybe one could look at how many riders in the top N
were 50+. On the other hand it only goes back to 1997
and the 1997 winner was Kent Bostick (not yet 50+) so
good luck figuring out a trend from that.
There is yet another issue which is figuring out if some
of the riders in the 90s and early 2000s were diverted
into MTBing.
FredMASTER Ben
Plano Dude
wrote:
But we don't know how that compares to other sport-for-life events
like running or golf to see how those numbers have changed across the
board. There are old people's professional tours for golf and tennis
that likely didn't exist 20 years ago.
Choppy Warburton
at least here in the US. It will become too expensive to race on the
road because of insurance and permitting. CX can support crowds,
it's entertaining and arguably requires more skills and creates better
athletes. Lastly, we have yet to have someone run over by a pick up
truck while training or racing CX. The attitude is more and more that
bikes don't belong in the streets
derf...@gmail.com
wrote:
>
> Like I said, I found this interesting.
Equally disturbing, er, I mean "interesting", is the winner of the
USAC elite TT ... who is also the winner of the elite RR ... who is
also the winner of the M 35+ TT and RR. The future is USA cycling
indeed. Any self-respecting cat 1 in his 20's should be embarrassed.
Around here ... if everyone over 35 stopped racing the category fields
would have only handfuls of racers.
Brad Anders
general, dads didn't race. Instead, they ran the club, organized the
events, and spent their time on developing their kids. As a result, we
had about as many kids (midgets, intermediates, and juniors) as
seniors, and two of our riders in the junior ranks were pretty top-
level (Eric Dubbe and Stefan Dolezalek). As a kid, it was a great time
to be racing.
Seems like things are very different today.
Brad Anders
derf...@gmail.com
>
> Seems like things are very different today.
These days everyone seems to want $ to coach kids -- in any sport.
And the parents' egos seem more than happy to pay for the privilege of
having their own little professional in the house.
Henry
wrote:
I don't know the local scene well enough, but one of our premier
race's "Le Race" got won in 2005 by Brian Fowler, aged 44 (I think).
Almost all our top pro's enter this event.
I heard a theory that the 50+ brigade doing well is a sign of an
ageing population with money in their pockets and time on their hands.
And a desire to race
Fred Flintstein
> Seems like things are very different today.
This is how I think things are different.
- In 1992 the twenty somethings were people whose
first bike was a road bike. If they had one bike
it was a road bike.
- In 2010 twenty somethings are people whose first
bike had fat tires. If they own one bike it has
fat tires. If they own a road bike it's because a
parent races.
No one gets a road bike as their first bike anymore.
The road bike doesn't happen until the second or
third bike. As a result of this, beginning racers
are a lot older than they used to be. And for a
lot of them, the third bike happens after college
when more spending cash appears.
When I first started seeing Cat 5 Masters races I
thought... wtf! But what that means is that beginning
racers are way older than they used to be.
That also means that total race days and average
rider age can both increase simultaneously. If races
are getting bigger because new 30+ riders are
showing up, that's what happens.
That also means that running a youth program the
way they used to be won't work. You can't pitch a
youth program to kids that don't have the basic
equipment and expect growth. All you'll get is the
kids of racers.
Fred Flintstein
derf...@gmail.com
wrote:
> - In 1992 the twenty somethings were people whose
> first bike was a road bike. If they had one bike
> it was a road bike.
>
> - In 2010 twenty somethings are people whose first
> bike had fat tires. If they own one bike it has
> fat tires.
well you may be on to something there. But did people use those road
bikes significantly differently than how most beginners use fat tire
bikes? I suppose you could still argue that the barrier to entry
level racing is now higher, in part because of the equipment factor.
maybe it's just that peoples' asses are fatter now than in 1992.
Scott
With the exception of time trials, the equipment factor is mostly a
marketing-induced phenomenon. I did a crit today on a steel framed
single speed w/ box-section clinchers, and while I didn't place very
well, it wasn't the bike that held me back. I just don't have any
race miles in my legs, I've only raced once - back in April. Even
with a flat on the last lap, I still wasn't DFL and finished just off
the back of the field.
H. Fred Kveck
Fred Flintstein <bob.sc...@sbcREMOVEglobal.net> wrote:
I think the fact that bikes are a lot more popular now than they were back in the
late '70s through the early '90s might also have some amount of influence on the
number of older riders. By that I mean that bikes are not considered to be "toys" by
a greater proportion of the population than they were back when. Plus older people
seem to be more concerned with their health now than back then. Those might account
for some of the increase in older racers. The lack of younger racers might be due to
(in addition to the things you've suggested) the greater range of short attention
span activities available to kids. As you know, cycling requires a certain dedication
via a lot of hours in the saddle to get to the levels of fitness needed to race at
the top. I'm not sure kids want to dedicate themselves like that as much now.
By the way, when I was first around races (late '70s), there were no older guys to
be seen. To my young eyes, someone in their 30s was ancient but there really weren't
many of those at those races. It was almost all "kids" (what I'd say was guys up to
about their late 20s). I was helping register riders at a couple of races last year
and was struck by the number of older guys that were extremely fit that showed up.
These guys were obviously putting in serious hours of training.
Beloved Fred No. 1
> The lack of younger racers might be due to
> (in addition to the things you've suggested) the greater range of short attention
> span activities available to kids. As you know, cycling requires a certain dedication
> via a lot of hours in the saddle to get to the levels of fitness needed to race at
> the top. I'm not sure kids want to dedicate themselves like that as much now.
Perhaps if there was a playstation bike racing game with lots of crashes.
Fred Flintstein
I'm very skeptical of cultural explanations. As has been pointed
out many, many times, the US is getting fatter. And I am not
aware of any data that says there is an age based skew to this.
Older people are getting fatter and kids are getting fatter.
Much of this is because both groups are getting more screen
time.
I'm curious how the bulge in racers during the 70s and 80s will
play out over time. In 1960 no 20 year old guys were racing. So
it makes sense that there would be no older guys at races you
were attending in the late 70s. And it makes sense that the 20
years old guys that were racing then would be showing up in
Masters categories today.
So it would be consistent that younger Masters races would start
to thin out over the next decade. The force that would be working
against that would be my theory that beginning racers are getting
older because they are buying their first road bike later in
their lives.
Fred Flintstein
Ryan Cousineau
There was a 10 or 20-year period where the racing action was
definitely in mountain bikes, not road bikes. The tide has largely
turned.
My first bike race was a mountain bike race, for a few reasons. The
series I raced in is no more, and when I started racing in 2002 or so,
there basically wasn't a cyclocross season locally. Now there's
probably more CX races than MTB races.
One caveat: there are a few local "event" MTB races that draw far
better than any road event. The Test of Metal sells out every year,
and has thousands of participants. OTOH, we're about to have an
inaugural Gran Fondo event locally, and it sold out, too.
Fred Flintstein
> One caveat: there are a few local "event" MTB races that draw far
> better than any road event. The Test of Metal sells out every year,
> and has thousands of participants. OTOH, we're about to have an
> inaugural Gran Fondo event locally, and it sold out, too.
This is not unusual. The Grandview Firehouse races have topped
1000 people in the past, currently they are just under that.
The American Birkebeiner is similar. Both events draw a large
percentage of their entrants from people for whom it is the
only race they do all year.
Race schedules are pretty different between the two disciplines.
At least they are here. MTB races are way fewer and much larger
than road events. There is a 12 race state series, there is the
Chequamegon race (which is large enough to have it's own
gravitational field). Aside from that there are smallish marathon
races with a single larger event.
On the road side there are races all over the state every
weekend. Superweek and other series mean there are large road
events nearly every day from mid-June to mid-July.
The total number of race days is pretty lopsided in favor or
the road, and I think that is entirely due to the massive
difference in the number of events. MTBers here don't seem
to believe in local or regional events, which is the staple
of the road schedule.
Fred Flintstein
marco_f...@yahoo.com
> Equally disturbing, er, I mean "interesting", is the winner of the
> USAC elite TT ... who is also the winner of the elite RR ... who is
> also the winner of the M 35+ TT and RR. The future is USA cycling
> indeed. Any self-respecting cat 1 in his 20's should be embarrassed.
>
> Around here ... if everyone over 35 stopped racing the category fields
> would have only handfuls of racers.
When I first started in the mid 70's, there was only old one guy
competitive with cat 1s in California... Lindsay Crawford who was ~35
years old. He was sort of a freak in that regard. Now you've got guys
in masters 35+, 45+, even 50+ races(*) who are a threat in any P/1/2
event they enter. Experience and trickery, along with gnarly pain
threshold, can frequently beat youth and raw power. Elite nationals RR
two years ago had three of the top-10 over 45 years old.
That said, from what I see around here, there is a resurgence in
junior road racing. The fields are definitely larger than, say, 10
years ago. I also see better support structure (mentors, teams,
promoters, etc.) which should help retain these kids in the sport, so
it's probable that we'll see a higher percentage of younger strong
riders over the next decade as they mature.
Mark
(*) ...including that old guy who blew by you last week, derFarher!
H. Fred Kveck
marco_f...@yahoo.com wrote:
> When I first started in the mid 70's, there was only old one guy
> competitive with cat 1s in California... Lindsay Crawford who was ~35
> years old. He was sort of a freak in that regard.
I still see Lindsay out on the road every now and then - which is to say we cross
paths every few weeks. He rides all the time and is still pretty damn fast. His main
thing is that he has the ability to ride pretty fast forever. I don't know if he
races all that much anymore.