More "Green" exposure in Iowa :-)

[Bedwyr]

So Cat5-Cat2 are basically the amateur rankings?

[Mario]

The way I understand it, yes.

[Sal Atticum]

"Amateur" to the point that nobody is going to pay you enough to survive to be on their team, but above Cat 5 (or the lowest category) you can win cash prizes.  People are pretty serious about it, so the competition is stiff, especially in places with a lot of cyclists.  To move up, you need to be getting points over the course of a calendar year, and to get points you need to be winning races (or nearly so).

The larger the field at an event, the more points you can get--but also the more serious people you're likely to race against.  You could race in North Dakota (if there were races here), but you would need to win a lot of tiny races to get enough upgrade points--and then if you raced elsewhere after upgrading, you're not necessarily guaranteed to be exactly on par with the rest of the people in your category.  Your mileage may vary.

You'll get a little taste of what can happen once we get the 'cross results up later today.  Check out the points and start thinking about who you need to beat to win out in the end.  This kind of series is a microcosm for how people play the long game of cycling.

[Mario]

In addition to what Beek said, the higher the catgory you want to upgrade, the more restrictions they put on you. For exmple, to upgrade from cat 3 to cat 2 all your races that you wnat to count need to be at least 50 miles long (for the road race), and I believe 25 miles for crit. Also, the number of riders has to be above 50 in at least couple of the races you want to use as your points.

[Plantains]

1. Mario, this upgrade wouldn't cost you anything.
2. goto www.usac.org to see what the governing body looks like.

For road:
Cat 5: You learn how to not crash a bicycle in a group. You learn the very basics involved with racing.
Cat 4: You have an understanding of how not to crash your bike. You're learning basic racing tactics and gaining fitness.
Cat 3: You have a good fitness level, and a good understanding of tactics. You need to build experience in utilizing both of these together. This is about racing smarter, not harder.
Cat 2: This is your first wake up call. You either accept the fact that you're an amateur cyclist, and get fast enough and smart enough to hang in a 2 peloton, or you make a decision to look at the pro level. If you decide that you want to "go pro" Cat 2 is essentially the cat 5 of pro cycling.
Cat 1: You're committed wholly to the sport. You're traveling nationally to compete trying to build a RESUME of experience. This will be used to get a pro license. Cat 1 is the cat 4 of Pro cycling.
Pro: You go pro. You race nationally with your team. You are ranked. You're a working cyclist. You get categorized as a "type" (domestique, sprinter, tt, all rounder, GC, etc.) regardless of what you were before. You are contracted. You're racing for (essentially)...

A Continental Pro B (or C) team. You're basically an alternate to their alternate team. You need to work your way up their ranks.
Continental Pro A team. You're competing nationally at the highest (non international level) you are attempting to earn a spot on a professional UCI B (or C) team.
You get "called up" to race with a Professional UCI B team. You're building a resume on the international circuits. You're vying for a shot to race in one of the B tours (tour down under, tour of california, tour suisse, etc.)

Now you get selected to race one of the B tours. You need to impress by winning it or placing VERY high. You do this and move to a UCI B tour A team. You will be racing in classic races. Tour of Flanders, Paris Roubaix, Milan San Remo, Leige Bastogne Leige, etc. You need to win or place VERY high.

Now you move onto the A tours or "Grand Tours". Giro D'Italia, Vuelta D Espana, Tour De France.

You win all 3 and go down as one of the greatest cyclists to ever live. Eddy Merckx, Alberto Contador. Or you win 2: Fausto Coppi.

Notice neither Mario nor Lance Armstrong grace this list. There are many other great cyclists. My point is that Lance does great things, but as cycling goes... he's not all that decorated.

[Plantains]

Sorry lads... I missed this page and just super posted. All good info.

[Bedwyr]

That's very good information, thanks.  I'm becoming more multi-sport oriented rather than pure cyclist or pure runner, but it's good to know and there's a lot of skills I'd like to learn (heh, parkour?).