Going the Distance
So someone help me out here... what is the big stinkin' problem with people on mtb's racing in cyclocross races? What is up with the cyclo-luddites who can't stand a teensy-weensy bit of extra competition? Now don't get me wrong, I own a genuine cyclocross bike, custom built by RockLobster of Santa Cruz. I race it almost exclusively the entire cross season. In the last 3 years I've switched to the mtb maybe 4 times, 3 for mechanicals and once because Bob Leibold reverted to his old ways and made a full-on jungle-cross course (in fairness to bob, who works awfully hard so we can race, and who I genuinely like, the course was dictated by the land he had available).
It really irks me that otherwise reasonable people, like Dan Norton and the rest of the Seattle crowd, seem to be so scared of MTB-ers that they make them do a completely different race? (For those of you with short memories, Dan's interview with Dave Carr, which was published in Velo-News, brought cyclo-cross-dressing ala team DFL to the forefront of the national press). It's not like they have that much reason to worry. Dan, Tim Rutledge, Jonathan Sundt and Dale Knapp (and probably some others too) have been pretty successful stomping on mtb-ers and crossers alike.
Like duh. It's like, totally faster. The end. Why is it faster? I'm glad you asked, grasshopper. A real cross course has some fast sections, has some run-ups, often has some mud, and has frequent dismounts that require maximal acceleration after remounting. These are all areas where I think a cross bike is usually superior.
This is a no-brainer. 700c wheels, narrower tires, higher pressures, less rolling resistance. The new slick MTB tires cut the gap a little, but they suck pretty much all the way in mud, so they're limited to good weather. If you're local cross race doesn't have any fast sections, suggest some to the promoter. Promoters want happy racers. If you approach them in a reasonable way, they'll often make changes when possible. If not at that race, then at the next race at that venue.
Some Einstein on wreck.bicycles.racing questioned my statement that it's much easier to carry a cross bike than a mtb. This shows that, like most newsgroup weenies, he doesn't actually ride a bike all that much. He certainly didn't race cross, which makes him pretty much useless in my book (when I'm elected governor, we'll have mandatory cross for all age groups). Check out the picture (of me, handsome devil, eh?).
Though Jim Moser and 3 (three!) guys from Gianni cycles are stomping me into the ground like the half-crippled, aging, fat-ass that I am, they're not doing it on the runs. By reaching under the top tube and grasping the lower part of the handlebar, I can transfer some of the weight from my shoulder to the inside of my elbow, and I can keep my arm closer to my body and stabilize the bike somewhat. These things all add up to a natural and relaxed running position, at least as natural and relaxed as you can be while chasing a bunch of dope-smoking hippie mutants around in muddy circles on a rainy day. I swear I think those Gianni guys have figured out a way to metabolize THC directly into glycogen. Anyway, there's no way to carry a mountain bike as comfortably, believe me I've tried. I raced mtb's in cross races for 2 1/2 years, until I saved up enough cash to buy a real bike.
Wait, there's more. Check out your mountain bike. Notice how much of your seat post is showing. Probably anywhere from 3-6 inches more than on your cross bike. Guess what? You have to lift your bike that much higher every time you shoulder it. Then once you lift it, you have to wriggle your scrawny shoulder into a significantly smaller main triangle, which is a pain in the ass. The more you work doing extraneous crap, the slower you ride. And what if you're not nice and tall? What if you're normal sized, or maybe even freakishly small. Try to imagine Anton, who must be all of 5'2" getting his mtb on his shoulder. I'd be surprised if he could even get his wrists into the main triangle of a frame small enough to fit him.
Well don't lift it, just roll it along, you say. Sure, this works for Larry Hibbard, but he wins MTB races on a K2/Proflex. He's obviously so much faster than the rest of us that he can afford a huge disadvantage. Actually, rolling it along is very efficient as long as the ground is relatively smooth. It's that much less you have to carry. Usually however, the ground is bumpy or muddy or rocky or some other bad thing. After all, if it were smooth, you'd be riding your bike instead of pushing it. Once your bike starts bouncing or sticking in the goop or whatever, you're better off just picking it up, in which case, all the previous carrying information applies.
This one is a little less clear cut. Mud comes in many wonderful varieties. There's a particular sort of mud that's very resilient and semi-solid and almost silly putty-esque. The Norcal Districts in Reno a few years back had a bunch of this stuff. A wide fat mtb tire can sometimes stay more on top of this type of mud, and push less of it around, thus going faster. Of course you can get fairly chubby tires for a cross bike too, to even things out, and you have the added benefit of a larger circumference, so the tire naturally sinks less. Because I'm a dork, I used super skinny mtb tires that year and got rocked. I felt like I was pedaling in glue. Guys with full-on MTB's (larry hibbard) and guys with real cross bikes (Dave Carr and Dave Edwards) rolled easily away from me in the mud. At least I beat that getting' off the bike on the wrong side Pat Schott (just about in a spring) and I won enough money to play blackjack for an hour or so and ponder the errror in my ways. I bought a cross bike the following year.
Anyway, that kind of mud is pretty rare, all things considered. Most of the time it's goopier and stickier and wetter and yuckier and slipperier, and narrower tires cut through it better, with less resistance. I've used this same principle with some success in muddy mtb races too, switching to 1.7" ritchey z-maxes. It works (unless it's muddy and rocky both, in which case everything sucks, so you may just as well go slow).
The real reason I bought a cross bike is because you can't use barends on your mtb in a real cross race. Since cross has historically been governed by that benevolent bunch of assholes at the USCF, there's some sort of worry about forward pointing extensions in mass-start races. As a result, crossers on mtb's are restricted to the plain old flat bar approach, unless they want to cheat and use some jury-rigged, bag-lady, goofball apparatus like joe blanco of Team DFL does. He uses cardboard and duck tape (quack!) to connect the ends of his bar ends so he can pretend that they're a big closed oval or something. It's pretty lame looking, and I would be too self-conscious to use something like that, so I just took my bar ends off, like all the other god-fearing american mtb-ers.
Now I try to hide it, but once upon a time I was actually a (gasp) roadie, so I'm pretty used to having my hands oriented back and forth (like on the brake hoods or drops, or on mtb bar-ends). I believe that the typical human has more pulling power with the hands oriented this way than with them side to side, like on a mtb flat bar. Most people can do pull-ups easier that way too. By using a real cross bike with real drop bars, I get my hands where I want them for maximum pulling power and maximum acceleration after every remount.
When I switched to a cross bike, I couldn't believe how much faster and better it felt. I wanted to tell everyone else to ride mtb's so I would have an advantage. It's not just me, either. The last 3 years, cross bikes have dominated the podium at every major cross series in northern california. The lone exceptions to the rule are dave wyandt, larry hibbard and (this year) brian miller. I got news for you though, it ain't the bike. These guys are all world-class riders, they're just too stupid (larry's probably too poor) to ride cross bikes. Good thing too, because they'd really kick some ass otherwise. Look at the rest of top guys. Probably 12 out of the top 15 in A's at surf city are on cross bikes. In master's a's, Kai Brown is the only competitive rider on a mtb. All the fast chicks are on cross bikes. All the fast guys at the super cup races are riding cross bikes. That should tell you something.
Dan Norton makes a couple points, (click here to read dan's email to me) both of which show logical failure. First he mentions that they do have a separate race for guys on mtb's, so they're not excluding them. That's pretty dang lame. Praise be to Allah that they don't do that at Surf City. I find cross to be a tremendously exciting spectator sport, and I want to see wyandt, hibbard and miller mixing it up with damon kluck, brent prenzlow, justin robinson, daryl price, todd hoefer, dave carr and all the other big honches on cross bikes. Having a separate race would diminish the excitement, and that's what racing is all about.
Dan's other point is that european races are restricted to cross bikes, so ours should be too... Ummm, what? European nations elected a bunch of fascist dictators too, does that mean we should (oops, I forgot about reagan and bush, let me try a different argument...) In case no one noticed, the US is not very competitive with the europeans right now. This has nothing to do with who rides what bikes, and everything to do with the level of participation in cycling. Allowing mtb-ers in cross races boosts participation, and makes racing more exciting, which boosts spectator interest, which hopefully boosts participation even more. When we can send guys to Europe and have them consistently finish only half a lap down on real bike riders, then maybe it's time to worry about what bike they're riding.
In Dan's defense, few individuals can claim to have done as much for cross in this country as he has. He's a major part of the race promotion scene in seattle (one of the strongest areas in the country for cross). He's been national champion in the really old fat guys age group (45+, as compared to my age group, the regular old fat guys) about a zillion times. Heck, his group started behind me at the '96 nats, I got 8th in 35+ and dan caught me and dropped my like a california sissy (of course it was his home course and he had a crew of whimpering sycophants to clean and fondle his bike every lap. I raced 1 bike, unsupported, in a proud and manly fashion). What most impresses me about dan, though, is that he puts on weekly cross clinics in seattle, sharing his wealth of experience with riders who are new to the sport. It almost makes we want to overlook the whole "separate but equal" idea...; Almost. While I have the greatest respect for dan, I still vehemently disagree with his position on mtb's and I think he's a luddite weenie. I hope he shows up at the super cup in san jose on december 5th. I'll let you know if he kicks my ass again.
The bottom line is this: cross bikes are superior for cross. Most serious crossers have cross bikes. A lot of newer riders don't. A few serious riders don't. They're at a slight disadvantage, but so what. One of the great things about cross is that it's not like road racing. No one will dq you for not having white socks. People are friendly, even if they're serious. No one has an attitude (well, buckwheat is sort of developing one, but he's pretty fast and going through some hard personal times, so I'll cut him some slack until he either shapes up or I start kicking his butt again). By making cross as open and inclusive and diverse (ooooh, politically correct word) as we can, we make it more fun, more competitive and more interesting.
mw
Hate this page? Too bad, make your own website, don't email me.