Okay, so I'm going to weigh in with a few more specific thoughts about the "too many Kissenas?" debate.

Perception vs Reality. A couple of folks have made the following points already I think (can't seem to find it now though, sorry for not footnoting y'all appropriately). But they bear repeating/re-emphasizing.

While it is undeniable when Kissena lines up with 1/4 of the field, we dominate the photo-bomb, but are we actually dominating the racing dynamics?

YES WE ARE! Green Jersey and Polka Dot jersey dominance anyone?

NO WE ARE NOT! Dan I think nails it here, when he points out that it is a dedicated group of 3-5 guys making those jerseys happen. (Not lining up two rows of KCC jerseys curb to curb to literally sit up creating an impenetrable wall through which other riders cannot pass.)

NO WE ARE NOT! Some other KCC member pointed out that it seems a little hyperbolic to suggest that any one team dominates a racing series in which they have never captured, controlled or been in contention for the yellow jersey.

NO WE ARE NOT! As an extension of Dan's point about the intermediate jersey competitions, let's take a look in the way-back machine, and do a little "hindsight is 20-20" "Monday Morning QB" post game analysis of how those races shook out. How many of the 20 KCC cat 4s are racing in a way that impacts the overall racing dynamic?

There is an ENORMOUS range rider ability/fitness/experience levels in our Cat 4 races. From guys getting dropped in the first couple of laps to guys soloing off the front and everything in between. Guys who have been racing forever, but don't have the time to train their god-given 4-cylinder engines, guys who showed up with V12 monsters under the hood but still need the help of our more experienced racers to get it done right.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if the number of riders who actually made a move that made some CRCA punk groan in pain, was less than 10. But I could be wrong here...

So for arguments sake say we are dominating and overwhelming the fields from a sporting point of view...

SO WHAT!? Actually, I wish in the 1/2/3s we had a true team domination. It would make the racing from a tactical point of view so much easier. AND SAFER. Even the so called "sprinter teams" like CRCA/Dave Jordan were/are little more than a group of individuals 2 or 3 of whom happen to be good sprinters who freelance their way to top 10 finishes. Their teammates don't chase breaks down, they don't do leadouts, then just say, "go for it" to their sprinters and keep their fingers crossed.

So say I was a Cat 4 competitor, if I rolled up to the line and I knew that KCC was large and in charge, I would be thrilled. Because then, I wouldn't have to worry about a single breakaway that didn't have a KCC represented. Because KCC would be responsible for sending someone up, or bringing it back (or both; go to JPs tactics talk for more explanation on that pro move). I would know after a few weeks who the real players on the team were so I could save energy by avoiding breaks with less-fit KCC riders. I would enjoy knowing that I could practice my finish line sprinting skills safely at the back of a KCC leadout train.

BUT PEOPLE ARE PISSED!
Okay, guess what? I've been on 4 rider teams that dominated a race and got an earful of profanity from another racer, about how I should be racing for myself and why would I do this or that. He later apologized, because he knew he was wrong, and he was a good and smart racer himself. The point is, when you control things like a master play'a, you are definitely going to piss people off because the race didn't go the way they wanted. And as long as we as a team riding responsibly and in a sporting manner (although have you seen what some of the Pro Tour Classics teams do as they approach narrow farm track roads? They block that shit up good.) then I say, game on.

GET YE TO A DIFFERENT RACE BROTHER!
I'm a big fan of traveling outside of the boroughs to race. The benefits are enormous. And I highly recommend it.

BUT, I'm extremely fortunate to have both the financial resources to rent cars, pay for gas and the time and family support to get to many of the out of town races. But the reality of the matter is that this club welcomes all kinds of riders and for some, surely, the only racing they can do is early morning park racing. And so to ask them not to race or race in another jersey on any given weekend is wrong in my opinion. Similarly, asking riders with more/different resources to go to another race when they just want to race in PP is also wrong.

As a rhetorical question/aside: If overcrowding is the real issue, too many cat 4s, then why are we continuing to have new member rides? It seems that these rides are mostly targeting newer, less experienced riders. Before we take drastic steps to limit participation in any one given race or series, I would recommend to first stop recruiting and/or accepting new members into the club. And then, after that...

Big-picture questions ponder:

Who are we as a team? What are the defining characteristics of the Kissena Cycling Club? Who is eligible to become a member? What does being a member of the club mean? What privileges does it grant? What does the club require/ask in return for said privileges?

No way will I wear overpriced Rapha in a park race! I don't have the special magnets to keep on your number and the crash tastic nature of them isn't conducive to keeping a $300 kit in one piece.

Not to deviate from the serious discussions, I swear I have seen people do exactly that in 5s: Wear crappy kit for the race and change into sweet Rapha gear afterward.

Marc - Thanks for an excellent summary of the discussion's salient points, and boiling down what being Kissena means. 

Regarding the lead out, I can only repeat "failing to prepare is preparing to fail."

Mike, all your questions are valid, but will probably be moot anyway if the Train hasn't practiced.

Like I said, my preference is to practice, try and probably (?) fail rather than to not practice, not try and definitely fail.

Anyway, my point is that this stuff is hard. It's cool that we want to do it, but our lack of a lead-out hasn't been for lack of trying. We have so many guys with such a diverse array of experiences and skills that if we want to make it happen, it's going to take a combination of gaining experience and practice. 
I agree with mike 100% I'm honored by all of the support and enthusiasm. That said the reality is I have zero experience racing in a 123 field on the road. Knowing how I've done things in the past I think a realistic projection is inline with mike and vlad's comments. Plus, I would feel uncomfortable asking my more experienced teammates to sacrifice their own results without being confident I could deliver in the end. Do I want to sprint in the park? Yes it is a goal of mine and having a lead out would be an honor. But on my end, I recognize that I have a lot of learning to do before that becomes realistic.

Jules said:

Regarding the lead out, I can only repeat "failing to prepare is preparing to fail." Mike, all your questions are valid, but will probably be moot anyway if the Train hasn't practiced. Like I said, my preference is to practice, try and probably (?) fail rather than to not practice, not try and definitely fail.

Sure, but practice vs. real race experience is very very different.

I think what's most promising to me about Andy stepping up to express interest in contesting the final sprint is that it may give our team pause when making decisions during that last lap.

Look, we're by far a better breakaway team. I don't think anyone suggests that we shouldn't continue to race that way as our "A-plan." But it would be nice, if we don't get in the breakaway, to have guys think about spending their energy trying to get and keep Andy (or Malcolmson or Ragot or me or whomever raises his hand and says, "I want to rock your world.") protected, at the front with one lap to go, instead of blowing everything on a last lap solo breakaway attempt, or some other move that is virtually guaranteed to fail.

mperlberg said:

Jules said:

Regarding the lead out, I can only repeat "failing to prepare is preparing to fail." Mike, all your questions are valid, but will probably be moot anyway if the Train hasn't practiced. Like I said, my preference is to practice, try and probably (?) fail rather than to not practice, not try and definitely fail.

Sure, but practice vs. real race experience is very very different.

We will never be able to simulate a race experience on open park roads. 

I'm not going to lean on you and curse at you on the downhill with 50 other dudes swarming around us. 

Very little that we can do to simulate that!!! 

Again, I'm super willing to practice and plan, but I do think we need to keep a healthy openness to the fact that experience will bring us as far as practice will. 

I don't disagree - never have.  Not sure about that last sentence: I think you means "experience will teach things practice can't" or words to that effect.  Again, I agree.

While I am happy to head-butt and elbow folks so they can get used to full-contact racing, I can do it on grass so the crash penalty is small and I don't need to get your ears ringing with my sailor-quality vocabulary.

Great idea Wump. Sign me up!

Yes pick a date. This is a great event and a great team-building opportunity.

There are lots of good points in this thread. Here's my two cents short and sweet.

Infield at Kissena is perfect for bumping drills

Joe

Hasn't Charlie already stated he won't tolerate twenty Kissena men in the four field?

mperlberg said:

As far as I know - I'm not an expert in the USAC rule book but I have read some of it, the race director can't ban racers or set team limits in a non-elite event. 

I'm sure Eric JP and Dan might know the exact rule a little better. 

are you suggesting that we Cat 4's are anything short of elite?  shame on you.

Well here's a suggestion that I don't particularly like, because I don't think we have a problem. But...

When I raced in Belgium in the Elite w/o Contract category, in non-invitational events (which were for teams only), team racing was against the rules. So while there were plenty of "teams" racing in my events, no actual team racing was supposed to be going on. To be honest, I was so cross-eyed most of the time that I didn't have the energy to notice such things.

So, I suppose we might say anytime the field gets over 10-ish Kissenas, then, as a gentleman's agreement, the Kissena's would agree to race only as individuals and not as teammates. We would make the announcement at the beginning of every race based on participation numbers on any given day.

We would emphasize to the field, that as part of this "deal" they could NOT expect to look to a Kissena during the course of a race and say things like, "C'mon Kissena you don't have anyone in that break, you have to chase it down!" Or "You've got 10 guys in the field, why the hell aren't you doing a leadout?!" And going for sprints and KOM points would be a strictly freelance affair (so you know, good luck with that).

I LIKE IT !!!  as I've always fashioned myself a bit of a....

I just noticed that the Mar 16th race's registration is now closed and also now there's a Van Dunk race scheduled for Prospect Park that day.

Rick Perner said:

I just noticed that the Mar 16th race's registration is now closed and also now there's a Van Dunk race scheduled for Prospect Park that day.

https://www.bikereg.com/Net/lucarellicastaldicupround1

Rick Perner said:

I just noticed that the Mar 16th race's registration is now closed and also now there's a Van Dunk race scheduled for Prospect Park that day.

https://www.bikereg.com/Net/lucarellicastaldicupround1

https://www.bikereg.com/Net/2014-new-york-city-spring-bicycle-racing-series1

Charlie & AVD are having scheduling issues.

Marc Bertucco said:

Well here's a suggestion that I don't particularly like, because I don't think we have a problem. But...

When I raced in Belgium in the Elite w/o Contract category, in non-invitational events (which were for teams only), team racing was against the rules. So while there were plenty of "teams" racing in my events, no actual team racing was supposed to be going on. To be honest, I was so cross-eyed most of the time that I didn't have the energy to notice such things.

So, I suppose we might say anytime the field gets over 10-ish Kissenas, then, as a gentleman's agreement, the Kissena's would agree to race only as individuals and not as teammates. We would make the announcement at the beginning of every race based on participation numbers on any given day.

We would emphasize to the field, that as part of this "deal" they could NOT expect to look to a Kissena during the course of a race and say things like, "C'mon Kissena you don't have anyone in that break, you have to chase it down!" Or "You've got 10 guys in the field, why the hell aren't you doing a leadout?!" And going for sprints and KOM points would be a strictly freelance affair (so you know, good luck with that).

I don't see this working.  I'm not sure I understand it.  Are you suggesting that all ten change their plans race day and ride as individuals?  That's not fair to those who have team strategy in mind or want to practice or take advantage of it.  And it will probably be confusing both to others and to our own people.

mugwump said:

Marc Bertucco said:

Well here's a suggestion that I don't particularly like, because I don't think we have a problem. But...

When I raced in Belgium in the Elite w/o Contract category, in non-invitational events (which were for teams only), team racing was against the rules. So while there were plenty of "teams" racing in my events, no actual team racing was supposed to be going on. To be honest, I was so cross-eyed most of the time that I didn't have the energy to notice such things.

So, I suppose we might say anytime the field gets over 10-ish Kissenas, then, as a gentleman's agreement, the Kissena's would agree to race only as individuals and not as teammates. We would make the announcement at the beginning of every race based on participation numbers on any given day.

We would emphasize to the field, that as part of this "deal" they could NOT expect to look to a Kissena during the course of a race and say things like, "C'mon Kissena you don't have anyone in that break, you have to chase it down!" Or "You've got 10 guys in the field, why the hell aren't you doing a leadout?!" And going for sprints and KOM points would be a strictly freelance affair (so you know, good luck with that).

I don't see this working.  I'm not sure I understand it.  Are you suggesting that all ten change their plans race day and ride as individuals?  That's not fair to those who have team strategy in mind or want to practice or take advantage of it.  And it will probably be confusing both to others and to our own people.

Yup. Having 10 guys change their plans on the race line would be fairer then telling 10 people they can't race at all that day. Or that they should go race someplace else. Or they should wear a black jersey.

Like I said I don't think the suggestion is necessary. BUT if the board and/or KCC officers are going to put a rider limit on L&C races, I think it's fairer to members who have paid their dues to be a part of a club to race the race they would like to race.

@Marc, as the saying goes, if a frog had wings he wouldn't bump his ass a-hoppin'