2023 U.S. Cyclocross Nationals Course Director | Darron Sturgeon

[@raglanastan]

I raced the course Thursday and Sunday. It was National level IMHO. The event was very well produced in general. Thanks for all the hard work💕

[@davidhildebrand7181]

Raced 40+ non-championship on Tuesday and Masters 50+ on Thursday. When I arrived and pre-rode for Tuesday, I thought this was far too tame and very grass-crit’ish… I also chatted with Darren and knew he had some alternatives (as he always does) to make adjustments to the course. He does this whether it’s going to rain, it stays dry, it gets overly ridden in, etc… As always, you had to be patient because the course races so much differently as it’s ridden in through the week. For my nationals race, I can say it was an incredible challenging course to race. Not because it was overly technical, but because it was demanding for the whole race. There was almost zero ability to rest on the course. You can see this based on every race. None of them were still in groups of more than 2-3 or 4 riders after 2 laps. In summary for me, from my take-away, I very much enjoyed the course and felt it was national level. I love a more technical course as it fits my strengths - but we need to have all versions to give all riders a fair shake at it. Thanks for all you did Darren - I can’t wait to see your design for 2024!

[@neilashton9459]

This is excellent and very illuminating. Weird how KZbin only just served it up 2 months later (and I follow WAP). 🤔

[@isitrachelorj3953]

The guys from New England loved this grass crit. For an experienced masters racer the high speed was the only challenge - hence winning/dominating 50/60+ racing. Every course we race weekly is more challenging. Bravo Sammy, Rusty and Frank.

[@eloyanzola]

This was good to see, great recon footage of Clem too

[@CampusBuffalo]

That course was the tamest course we have ridden all year, if not ever. Grass crit is exactly what it was prior to the rain. I understand the challenges of designing a course that will ride well and be appropriately challenging, in all weather conditions. To me, having some sections you could remove if the weather goes sideways is better than having a weeks worth of races where we are on a flat course with 3 sets of stairs, 2 barriers and nothing else. The 2018 course was SO challenging, maybe too much so, once it rained. That doesn't mean (to me) that we need a featureless course unless it's muddy. There was literally no where exciting to watch the riders. We'll likely be back in 2024, but really hope for a hybrid course of sorts from 2018/23. Thank you for all the work that goes into this, I know it's a lot, and thank you Bill for the interview!

[@cyclocrosser]

Agreed. We should depend on weather for technical challenges. And UCI pr footage does not justify an amateur course that does not have any technical challenges. And have him take off his glasses!

[@JoshNeck]

It's nice to see his thought process. I don't really like the idea of designing a course where you're counting on it being wet/muddy. Even if a place historically gets consistent rainfall I don't think it's the most prudent thought process. Yes, you want to plan on how to make a course if there's heavy mud. But relying on features to "work" with their being mud versus them not being as exciting If it's dry. It just seems a bit backward. I do really like that there are UCI/Elite only lines. But at the same time, if you're going to do UCI only lines then it should be okay to really push those limits for the riders. That's how we get stronger fields. I like the features that he kept in but I feel like there's definitely still plenty of room to push the riders.

[@cyclocrosser]

It's the amateur course that was not challenging at all. You cannot hope for weather to make it interesting or challenging.