I've read with great interest over the past couple of years the comments posted on this issue.  I don't wish to waste the forum readers time retstating all the potential positive points for moving forward with this idea.  I simply wish to add that I agree with them and whole-heartedly support the idea. 

That being said, I believe a number of very valid concerns have been expressed as to why this may not be a good idea-- logistical and/or field-size-reducing reasons, etc.  We'll probably never really know what is right thing to do unless we try it, test it, measure it, and re-valuate it.  If we "cast it in stone" this year and, upon experiencing and evaluating the numbers, we conclude it isn't a beneficial thing to continue, we can throw out the "new stone" and go find the old one.  Let's give it a try.  I don't mind being told, "I told you so."  As the ancient Polish proverb says, "in order to profit from your mistakes, one must risk going out and making some." 

If this doesn't pass, I will still race and happily so--diligently holding down the back of the field.  Remember, every day above ground on our bikes is a damn good day--regardless of the category.  Thanks for the chance to comment.

Patrick Putt