Road Cycling · Public discussion

categories

Fork · 2003-06-04T06:30:20+00:00

What do the racing categories (Cat 1, Cat 3...) stand for? Thanks

Started by Fork · 4 June 2003 · Last activity 7 June 2003 · 31 posts · 1,722 views

← Back to Road Cycling

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

01 / Original postcategoriesFork · 4 Jun 2003 02 / This pagePosts 1–20Page 1 of 2 · chronological order 03 / Latest replyPost #31Nick Burns · 7 Jun 2003

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section: Road Cycling
Published: 4 June 2003
Last activity: 7 June 2003
Original author: Fork
Posts: 31
Discussion status: Public discussion
Total views: 1,722
Views / 30 days: 0
Topics: UCI rankings and points Gran fondos Women's professional racing

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Original post
Fork
Archived post

4 June 2003, 06:30 UTC #1

What do the racing categories (Cat 1, Cat 3...) stand for? Thanks

Report
Davide Tosi
Archived post

4 June 2003, 10:01 UTC #2

(fork) said:
What do the racing categories (Cat 1, Cat 3...) stand for?
american [censored]

Report
Mike S.
Archived post

4 June 2003, 16:00 UTC #3

"Davide Tosi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
(fork) said:
What do the racing categories (Cat 1, Cat 3...) stand for?
american [censored]

As opposed to what? How's that The US's system different than any other system?
Mike

Report
Kurgan Gringion
Archived post

4 June 2003, 16:00 UTC #4

"Mike S." <mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet> wrote in message news:62oDa.144829$eJ2.113187@fed1read07...
Quoted message said:

"Davide Tosi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
(fork) said:
What do the racing categories (Cat 1, Cat 3...) stand for?
american [censored]

As opposed to what? How's that The US's system different than any other system?
Yes.
In Belgium, for instance, they don't have categories. That's the way it should be, IMO.

Report
Steve@Printemp.
Archived post

4 June 2003, 16:30 UTC #5

Quoted message said:
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand

this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
--B_3137561689_9870777 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Kurgan Gringioni said:

"Mike S." <mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet> wrote in message news:62oDa.144829$eJ2.113187@fed1read07...
Quoted message said:

"Davide Tosi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
[email hidden] (fork) wrote:
> What do the racing categories (Cat 1, Cat 3...) stand for?
american [censored]

As opposed to what? How's that The US's system different than any other system?
Yes.
In Belgium, for instance, they don't have categories. That's the way it should be, IMO.

God forbid we should do things the way they do them in Belgium!!
Luckily the United States does not give a [censored] what Henry thinks we should do either...
You should be working in the UN as the ambassador to "Parrotistan"
Maybe you could get in the rotation to be on the "Fat Masters Security Council"
--B_3137561689_9870777 Content-type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding:
quoted-printable
<HTML> <HEAD> <TITLE>Re: categories</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY> On 6/4/03 8:31 AM,
in article VgoDa.163$Jw6.134942@new=
s1.news.adelphia.net, "Kurgan Gringioni" <kgringioni.remove.it.=
[email hidden]> wrote: > > "Mike
S." <mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet> wrote in message >
news:62oDa.144829$eJ2.113187@fed1read07... >> 
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
"Davide Tosi" <[email hidden]> wrote in = message >>

"]news:[email hidden]... >>>
[email hidden] (fork) w= rote: >>> >>>> What do the racing categories= (Cat 1, Cat 3...) stand
for? >>> >>> american [censored] 
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
 >> As opposed to what? How's that =

The US's system different than any other >> system? > > > > Yes. > > In Belgium, for
instance, they don't have categories. That's the way i= t > should be, IMO. > 
Quoted message said:
 God forbid we should do things the way they do them in Belgium!! 

Luckily the United States does not give a [censored] what Henry thinks we should = do either... 
 You should be working in the UN as the ambassador to "Parrotistan&quot= ; 
Maybe you could get in the rotation to be on the "Fat Masters Security= Council"
</BODY> </HTML>
--B_3137561689_9870777--

Report
Kurgan Gringion
Archived post

4 June 2003, 17:00 UTC #6

<[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
On 6/4/03 8:31 AM, in article

[email hidden],
Quoted message said:
Kurgan Gringioni said:

"Mike S." <mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet> wrote in message news:62oDa.144829$eJ2.113187@fed1read07...
Quoted message said:

"Davide Tosi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
> [email hidden] (fork) wrote:
>
>> What do the racing categories (Cat 1, Cat 3...) stand for?
>
> american [censored]
>
As opposed to what? How's that The US's system different than any

other
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
system?
Yes.
In Belgium, for instance, they don't have categories. That's the way it should be, IMO.

God forbid we should do things the way they do them in Belgium!!
In cycling, Belgium is no slouch. They produce a lot of quality riders for a nation of 10
million people.
Italy does it that way also. They are the #1 cycling nation in the world in terms of UCI points and
number of Division 1 teams.
Their system being better is just my opinion as I stated in the post you replied to.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, including you.

Report
Bart
Archived post

4 June 2003, 19:00 UTC #7

I like it our way too, real racers have the Belgian federation races, the delusionsal ones and those
'just for occasional fun' can compete in small side-federations with one day licenses etc.

Report
Mike S.
Archived post

4 June 2003, 20:00 UTC #8

"Bart" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
I like it our way too, real racers have the Belgian federation races, the delusionsal ones and
those 'just for occasional fun' can compete in small side-federations with one day licenses etc.

So, basically, you're average putz can go race with the pros? As far as I can see, that's a good
thing and a bad thing all rolled into one...
Mike

Report
Davide Tosi
Archived post

4 June 2003, 20:00 UTC #9

Dalla voce di "Mike S." <mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet>, eresiarca minore:
Quoted message said:
"Bart" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
I like it our way too, real racers have the Belgian federation races, the delusionsal ones and
those 'just for occasional fun' can compete in small side-federations with one day licenses etc.

So, basically, you're average putz can go race with the pros?
Yes, be has to find a pro team hiring him. That's not that simple ...

Report
Davide Tosi
Archived post

4 June 2003, 20:00 UTC #10

Dalla voce di "Mike S." <mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet>, eresiarca minore:
Quoted message said:
"Bart" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
I like it our way too, real racers have the Belgian federation races, the delusionsal ones and
those 'just for occasional fun' can compete in small side-federations with one day licenses etc.

So, basically, you're average putz can go race with the pros?
By the way, it did happen. Marco Fertonani, a pro climber now racing for Phonak and being nr. 488 of
the UCI classment, never raced in any competitive category before becoming a pro. He used to take
part to the "Gran Fondo" races, a sort of not completely competitive races (in the sense that they
are not sanctioned by any official organization) that are very popular in Europe and that are
accessibile to anyone. Usually you have a few thousand people taking part in those races. Fertonani
won 7 of them in a row. A pro team noticed him and hired him. He showed that in fact he was able to
race in the pro peloton.

Report
Nick Burns
Archived post

4 June 2003, 22:30 UTC #11

What is the history here? Didn't it start out as a way of identifying national team riders vs. the
rest? There were only 2 or 3 initially. Having 5 is out of control. When you consider all of the
problems the promoters have in filling some of the races, I think you are correct. At the very
least, it should be simplified. I say segregate everyone in to licensed and unlicensed riders. Then
make a rule that you have to have some number of "training" races before you get to endanger
everyone else. Guys like Tom K could just race with the public. The "real" racers would get much
larger fields.
"Kurgan Gringioni" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:

"Mike S." <mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet> wrote in message news:62oDa.144829$eJ2.113187@fed1read07...
Quoted message said:

"Davide Tosi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
[email hidden] (fork) wrote:
>What do the racing categories (Cat 1, Cat 3...) stand for?
american [censored]

As opposed to what? How's that The US's system different than any other system?
Yes.
In Belgium, for instance, they don't have categories. That's the way it should be, IMO.

Report
Nick Burns
Archived post

4 June 2003, 22:30 UTC #12

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_006F_01C32AA9.45177270 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Re: categoriesI can't figure out why you always pick fights with him. = What is your motivation? Do
you think you will "get even" one day? <[email hidden]> wrote in message =
"]news:[email hidden]... On 6/4/03 8:31 AM, in article =
[email hidden], "Kurgan Gringioni" =
Quoted message said:
=20
"Mike S." <mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet> wrote in message news:62oDa.144829$eJ2.113187@fed1read07...
Quoted message said:
=20
"Davide Tosi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
[email hidden] (fork) wrote:
=20
> What do the racing categories (Cat 1, Cat 3...) stand for?
=20
american [censored]
=20

As opposed to what? How's that The US's system different than any =

other
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
system?

=20 20 20
Yes.
=20
In Belgium, for instance, they don't have categories. That's the way =

it
Quoted message said:
should be, IMO.
=20 20

God forbid we should do things the way they do them in Belgium!!
Luckily the United States does not give a [censored] what Henry thinks we = should do either...
You should be working in the UN as the ambassador to "Parrotistan"
Maybe you could get in the rotation to be on the "Fat Masters Security = Council"
------=_NextPart_000_006F_01C32AA9.45177270 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Re:
categories</TITLE> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; = charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1170" name=3DGENERATOR> <STYLE></STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY
bgColor=3D#d8d0c8>
<DIV>I can't figure out why you always pick = fights with=20 him. What
is your motivation? Do you think you will "get even" one=20 day?</DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; = BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px
solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DV><<A = href=3D""][email hidden]">[email hidden]</A>> wrote=20 in
message <A=20
=
href=3D""]news:[email hidden]">news:BB036459.4331A%steve=
@printemp.net</A>...</DIV><FONT=20 face=3DVerdana>On 6/4/03 8:31 AM, in article=20
[email hidden], "Kurgan Gringioni"=20
<[email hidden]> wrote: <FONT=20 color=3D#0000ff>>
 > "Mike S." <mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet> = wrote in=20 message > =
news:62oDa.144829$eJ2.113187@fed1read07... <FONT=20 color=3D#008000>>> >>
"Davide Tosi"=20 <[email hidden]> wrote in message >>=20
"]news:[email hidden]... <FONT=20 color=3D#ff0000>>>>
[email hidden] (fork)=20 wrote: >>> >>>> What do=20 the racing categories (Cat 1, Cat 3...) stand
for? <FONT=20 color=3D#ff0000>>>> >>> american =
[censored] >>>=20 >> As opposed to what? = How's
that=20 The US's system different than any other >> = system? <FONT=20
color=3D#0000ff>> > > > Yes. > > = In=20 Belgium, for instance,
they don't have categories. That's the way = it >=20 should be, IMO. > >
 God forbid we should do = things the=20 way they do them in Belgium!! Luckily the
United States does = not give a=20 [censored] what Henry thinks we should do either... You should
be = working in=20 the UN as the ambassador to "Parrotistan" Maybe you could get = in the=20
rotation to be on the "Fat Masters Security Council"=20 </BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_006F_01C32AA9.45177270--

Report
John Forrest To
Archived post

4 June 2003, 23:00 UTC #13

"Nick Burns" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
When you consider all of the problems the promoters have in filling some of the races, I think you
are correct.
I don't understand what you mean. Can you explain it?
JT
--
*******************************************
NB: reply-to address is munged
Visit jt10000.comjt10000.com
*******************************************

Report
Xzzy
Archived post

4 June 2003, 23:30 UTC #14

1. I heard that a long time ago, the categories were A, B, C. Or A=National/World class,
B=Regional, C=Beginner
2. Then it changed to numbers. Loosely it is: 1=National/World class, i.e. has good genetics and
the time to train 2=Regional - i.e. has a good motor 3=Local races, or has a family and lacks
the time to train 4=Beginner 5=used to be called citizens( not licensed)
My 2 cents on another post in this thread regarding UCI points and Belgium having the most
points and T1 teams. This is a self fulfilling prophecy because majority of the UCI points are
in the European circuit = the so called world ranking points should really be called European
ranking points.
John Bickmore www.BicycleCam.com www.Feed-Zone.com
"fork" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
What do the racing categories (Cat 1, Cat 3...) stand for? Thanks

Report
Casey Kerrigan
Archived post

5 June 2003, 00:00 UTC #15

In article said:
When you consider all of the problems the promoters have in filling some of the races, I think you
are correct. At the very least, it should be simplified. I say segregate everyone in to licensed
and unlicensed riders. Then make a rule that you have to have some number of "training" races
before you get to endanger everyone else. Guys like Tom K could just race with the public. The
"real" racers would get much larger fields.
IN Nor Cal the promoters aren't having problems filling the more popular categories. In the mroe
popular races if you don't pre-Reg you run the risk of not gettign into the race. We have even had
some Cat 4 women races reach the field limit and either have to turn some riders away or add an
overflow event. The only thing wrong with som many categories is dawn to dusk race schedules when
promoters try to include races for everyone. In Nor Cal most races even offer 35+ Cat 4/5 racesin
addition to a masters 35+ 1/2/3 and a 45/55 race.

Report
Raptor
Archived post

5 June 2003, 05:30 UTC #16

fork said:
What do the racing categories (Cat 1, Cat 3...) stand for? Thanks
Since I post my share of stupid questions (no offense meant), I'll break protocol and actually
answer. Of course, I'm not one to speak authoritatively on the rules... (See "Dumbass rules."😉
Cat 5 is entry level. After 3 races, you automatically become a Cat 4. Cat 4 is entry level with 3
races under your belt. Cat 3 is a Cat 4 who's won a few Cat 4 races. Etc.
Despite my disclaimer, I'm 100% confident in the accuracy of the above, and you should be
too. Really.
--
--
Lynn Wallace xmission.com~lawall "I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we
could to protect our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security." --Microsoft VP in
charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine.

Report
Sam
Archived post

5 June 2003, 05:30 UTC #17

"Raptor" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
fork said:
What do the racing categories (Cat 1, Cat 3...) stand for? Thanks
Since I post my share of stupid questions (no offense meant), I'll break protocol and actually
answer. Of course, I'm not one to speak authoritatively on the rules... (See "Dumbass rules."😉
Cat 5 is entry level. After 3 races, you automatically become a Cat 4.

The USCF rule is 10 mass start races to go from 5 to 4 on the road.
Quoted message said:
Cat 4 is entry level with 3 races under your belt.

There is a points system for this. You can see the rule book online at www.usacycling.org
Quoted message said:
Cat 3 is a Cat 4 who's won a few Cat 4 races. Etc.
Despite my disclaimer, I'm 100% confident in the accuracy of the above, and you should be
too. Really.
--
--
Lynn Wallace xmission.com~lawall "I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we
could to protect our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security." --Microsoft VP
in charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine.

Report
Casey Kerrigan
Archived post

5 June 2003, 14:00 UTC #18

In article said:
fork said:
What do the racing categories (Cat 1, Cat 3...) stand for? Thanks
Since I post my share of stupid questions (no offense meant), I'll break protocol and actually
answer. Of course, I'm not one to speak authoritatively on the rules... (See "Dumbass rules."😉
Cat 5 is entry level. After 3 races, you automatically become a Cat 4.
As posted in another thread for USCF the requirement for the road is 10 mass start races worth of
experience and the upgrade isn't automatic the rider has to ask to be upgraded
Quoted message said:
Cat 4 is entry level with 3 races under your belt. Cat 3 is a Cat 4 who's won a few Cat 4 races.
Again for USCF the requirements are earning 20 upgrade points by placng in the top 6 in races with a
min field of 30 riders. Points go 7, 5,4,3,2,1 for the top 6 places. There is also a Min. race
length requirement.
Quoted message said:
Etc.
Despite my disclaimer, I'm 100% confident in the accuracy of the above, and you should be
too. Really.

Report
Les Earnest
Archived post

5 June 2003, 19:01 UTC #19

John Bickmore said:
1. I heard that a long time ago, the categories were A, B, C. Or A=National/World class,
B=Regional, C=Beginner
Actually the old A, B, C system was based on rider self-categorization. In other words, each rider
got to choose which level to enter and could change from week to week if he or she desired. In my
experience this scheme worked well but for some reason it was effectively superseded by assigned
numeric categories.
There is nothing in the current USCF rules that prohibits race organizers from using rider-selected
race categories. In fact some still do. However, in order for riders to qualify for certain
championships they must work their way up in numerically categorized races.
John continues:
Quoted message said:
2. Then it changed to numbers. Loosely it is: 1=National/World class, i.e. has good genetics and
the time to train 2=Regional - i.e. has a good motor 3=Local races, or has a family and lacks
the time to train 4=Beginner 5=used to be called citizens( not licensed)
Actually category 5 was never called "citizens." The official designation of the first four
categories (in old USCF Bylaw J) was: 1 - national or international capability 2 - regional or
sectional capability 3 - state or district capability 4 - local or novice capability
The fifth category was introduced for men in 1994 along with an ill-considered change from numbers
to names. According to the 1994 rulebook, the five men's categories were Elite, Expert, Sport,
Novice and Beginner. However, by popular demand the numeric categories were promptly restored,
replacing these names.
Earlier, in 1989, the so-called "citizens races" for unlicensed riders had been renamed as "public
races" on the grounds that they were open to non-citizens, but some die-hard race organizers
continued to use the old name. This class was eliminated in 1997 when one-day licenses were
introduced.
-Les Earnest

Report
Nick Burns
Archived post

6 June 2003, 04:00 UTC #20

That is what I remember although it wasn't all THAT long ago, was it? It was changed in the
80s...(I think?)
"xzzy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:_JuDa.21592$d51.68004@sccrnsc01...
Quoted message said:
1. I heard that a long time ago, the categories were A, B, C. Or A=National/World class,
B=Regional, C=Beginner
2. Then it changed to numbers. Loosely it is: 1=National/World class, i.e. has good genetics and
the time to train 2=Regional - i.e. has a good motor 3=Local races, or has a family and lacks
the time to train 4=Beginner 5=used to be called citizens( not licensed)
My 2 cents on another post in this thread regarding UCI points and Belgium having the most points
and T1 teams. This is a self fulfilling prophecy because majority of the UCI points

are
Quoted message said:
in the European circuit = the so called world ranking points should really be called European
ranking points.
John Bickmore www.BicycleCam.com www.Feed-Zone.com
"fork" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
What do the racing categories (Cat 1, Cat 3...) stand for? Thanks

Report

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.

Jump through the discussion

What we know about this thread

Continue through CyclingForums

Active in this thread