Should a private company dictate who races at nationals?

While there is lots of discussion in another thread, as to the right or wrong of Gord's lawsuit
etc... I am a bit surprised by the lack of discussion on another topic which I find much more
disturbing.

It seems really wrong to me, that someone private agenda (whether right or wrong isn't really the
issue) should dictate who gets to ride in the National championship.

I mean this isn't Dave Chauner's private party, shouldn't the best rider's be invited? And doesn't
this show potential sponsors, not to mention first year sponsor Health Net, a complete lack of
professionalism in "professional" cycling.

Is there anything that the riding public can do about this?

 

two spoke <[email protected]> wrote:
> It seems really wrong to me, that someone private agenda (whether right or wrong isn't really the
> issue) should dictate who gets to ride in the National championship.

I'm sympathetic to this argument. But I've got to point out that it isn't a national championship
race for Gord Fraser.

Bob Schwartz [email protected]

 

Bob Schwartz <[email protected]> wrote in news:vds1t9fs29s210 @corp.supernews.com:

> two spoke <[email protected]> wrote:
>> It seems really wrong to me, that someone private agenda (whether right or wrong isn't really the
>> issue) should dictate who gets to ride in the National championship.
>
> I'm sympathetic to this argument. But I've got to point out that it isn't a national championship
> race for Gord Fraser.
>
> Bob Schwartz [email protected]

This opens up another can of worms: Why are foreigners allowed to race in our national championship
race in the first place? Its stupid. Are Americans allowed to race in an other country's national
championship races. I think not; nor should they be.

- Boyd S.

 

"Boyd Speerschneider" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Bob Schwartz <[email protected]> wrote in news:vds1t9fs29s210 @corp.supernews.com:
>
> > two spoke <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> It seems really wrong to me, that someone private agenda (whether right or wrong isn't really
> >> the issue) should dictate who gets to ride in the National championship.
> >
> > I'm sympathetic to this argument. But I've got to point out that it isn't a national
> > championship race for Gord Fraser.
> >
> > Bob Schwartz [email protected]
>
> This opens up another can of worms: Why are foreigners allowed to race in our national
> championship race in
the
> first place? Its stupid.

That "can of worms" has been discussed ad nauseum and everyone agrees.

 

Imagine how exciting a US Pro only race might be and what kind/how many sponsors would be interested
in that. Do a google search...it's been discussed here many times before.

"Boyd Speerschneider" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Bob Schwartz <[email protected]> wrote in news:vds1t9fs29s210 @corp.supernews.com:
>
> > two spoke <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> It seems really wrong to me, that someone private agenda (whether right or wrong isn't really
> >> the issue) should dictate who gets to ride in the National championship.
> >
> > I'm sympathetic to this argument. But I've got to point out that it isn't a national
> > championship race for Gord Fraser.
> >
> > Bob Schwartz [email protected]
>
> This opens up another can of worms: Why are foreigners allowed to race in our national
> championship race in
the
> first place? Its stupid. Are Americans allowed to race in an other country's national championship
> races. I think not; nor should they be.
>
> - Boyd S.

 

"B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Imagine how exciting a US Pro only race might be and what kind/how many sponsors would be
> interested in that.

There was a time when the US-only field wasn't so deep and it was felt that a Euro infusion would be
needed to make the race more of a spectacle.

Hard to argue with that logic at the time since the formulae for the race was fabulously successful.

That time has passed. There are enough quality American riders now to put on a good show. Time to
change the formulae, IMO.

 

"Kurgan Gringioni" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
>
> "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Imagine how exciting a US Pro only race might be and what kind/how many sponsors would be
> > interested in that.
>
>
>
> There was a time when the US-only field wasn't so deep and it was felt
that
> a Euro infusion would be needed to make the race more of a spectacle.
>
> Hard to argue with that logic at the time since the formulae for the race was fabulously
> successful.
>
>
> That time has passed. There are enough quality American riders now to put
on
> a good show. Time to change the formulae, IMO.
>
>
Am I really going to agree with Henry?? Oh shit, the world's gonna end!

I think that the time has come to make the race US only. There's enough depth of talent to make it
work. When/if the situation changes for the worse, you can always revert back to the way it is now.

Mike

 

two spoke wrote:
> While there is lots of discussion in another thread, as to the right or wrong of Gord's lawsuit
> etc... I am a bit surprised by the lack of discussion on another topic which I find much more
> disturbing.
>
> It seems really wrong to me, that someone private agenda (whether right or wrong isn't really the
> issue) should dictate who gets to ride in the National championship.
>
It shouldn't matter if Gord isn't allowed to race the US Nats since he's Canadian and can't be
national champ.

 

Bob Schwartz <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> two spoke <[email protected]> wrote:
> > It seems really wrong to me, that someone private agenda (whether right or wrong isn't really
> > the issue) should dictate who gets to ride in the National championship.
>
> I'm sympathetic to this argument. But I've got to point out that it isn't a national championship
> race for Gord Fraser.

So other teams can have non-US citizens racing in support of their riders, but Health Net can't have
who someone who is arguably their best rider helping their Americans? That's sure not fair for
Sayers. It's 100% wrong of the Philly organizers to exclude anyone who is otherwise qualified
because of the lawsuit.

JT

 

Bob,

What you say is totally true, and only strengthens my point. Healthnet as a team is more deserving
to be there then say Colivita Or Lemond.... with or without Gord.

Bob Schwartz <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> two spoke <[email protected]> wrote:
> > It seems really wrong to me, that someone private agenda (whether right or wrong isn't really
> > the issue) should dictate who gets to ride in the National championship.
>
> I'm sympathetic to this argument. But I've got to point out that it isn't a national championship
> race for Gord Fraser.
>
> Bob Schwartz [email protected]

 

Bob Schwartz <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> two spoke <[email protected]> wrote:
> > It seems really wrong to me, that someone private agenda (whether right or wrong isn't really
> > the issue) should dictate who gets to ride in the National championship.
>
> I'm sympathetic to this argument. But I've got to point out that it isn't a national championship
> race for Gord Fraser.
>
> Bob Schwartz [email protected]

It is for some of his teammates! Who have nothing to do with the lawsuit and weren't even riding
with him on the same team at the time the dispute began. This thing is dispicable and USA Cycling
shouldn't allow it. Anyone with a Pro license should be able to compete in the Pro national
championship.

 

> This opens up another can of worms: Why are foreigners allowed to race in our national
> championship race in the first place? Its stupid. Are Americans allowed to race in an other
> country's national championship races. I think not; nor should they be.

The UCI leaves this up to the national federations. The Baltic states, for example, run a combined
championship that awards multiple champions. The UCI discourages this by awarding fewer points in
these cases. But they don't prohibit it.

As others have mentioned the issue of foreign riders in US national championships has been discussed
and condemned. My guess is that the sponsors want the added flash and attention that the foreign
riders bring and since it's their money they get what they want. But that's just a guess. There is a
lot of money on the line in Philly so it's not exactly the same situation as in other countries.

Bob Schwartz [email protected]

 

Only one way to find out and that's to do it. . "Mike S." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Kurgan Gringioni" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news[email protected]...
> >
> > "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > Imagine how exciting a US Pro only race might be and what kind/how
many
> > > sponsors would be interested in that.
> >
> >
> >
> > There was a time when the US-only field wasn't so deep and it was felt
> that
> > a Euro infusion would be needed to make the race more of a spectacle.
> >
> > Hard to argue with that logic at the time since the formulae for the
race
> > was fabulously successful.
> >
> >
> > That time has passed. There are enough quality American riders now to
put
> on
> > a good show. Time to change the formulae, IMO.
> >
> >
> Am I really going to agree with Henry?? Oh shit, the world's gonna end!
>
> I think that the time has come to make the race US only. There's enough depth of talent to
> make it work. When/if the situation changes for the worse, you can always revert back to the
> way it is now.
>
> Mike

 

"Boyd Speerschneider" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Bob Schwartz <[email protected]> wrote in news:vds1t9fs29s210 @corp.supernews.com:
>
> > two spoke <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> It seems really wrong to me, that someone private agenda (whether right or wrong isn't really
> >> the issue) should dictate who gets to ride in the National championship.
> >
> > I'm sympathetic to this argument. But I've got to point out that it isn't a national
> > championship race for Gord Fraser.
> >
> > Bob Schwartz [email protected]
>
> This opens up another can of worms: Why are foreigners allowed to race in our national
> championship race in
the
> first place? Its stupid. Are Americans allowed to race in an other country's national championship
> races. I think not; nor should they be.

I think that Canadian Nationals will be open to Americans this year. Also in other sports
countries use an event like the Boston Marathon (for the Kenyans) as their Olympic Trials.

I agree it is a bit weird, but in the case of USPRO that is the way it is.

>
> - Boyd S.

 

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (two spoke) wrote:

> It seems really wrong to me, that someone private agenda (whether right or wrong isn't really the
> issue) should dictate who gets to ride in the National championship.
>
> I mean this isn't Dave Chauner's private party, shouldn't the best rider's be invited? And doesn't
> this show potential sponsors, not to mention first year sponsor Health Net, a complete lack of
> professionalism in "professional" cycling.
>
> Is there anything that the riding public can do about this?

Use the rules against them.

From my new little 2003 USCF Rulebook:

1G8: "Except for invitational races, the organizer must provide an equal opportunity for all
qualified applicants to participate without discrimination."

How can Nationals be an invitational?

Nationals, if it is indeed a UCI International event, UCI and USCF rules also guarantee that 30 days
prior to the event at least 50% of the entire prize list will be deposited in an escrow account - if
the race is not held, the money is payable in full to the Federation. I wonder if that rule also
also is something Gord can use in his fight for the cancelled BMC race cash...

----------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Gladu - Cycling Photojournalist & webmaster of "the 'drome"
Email: [email protected] Online: http://www.velodrome.com/
================================================================
track racing discussion group: [email protected]
================================================================

 

Looking at the USPRO fields for the past few years is interesting. The only year that I was able to
come up with a start list was 2001.

1995 53 US 87 Foreign (finishers) 2000 35 US 88 Foreign (finishers) 2001 12 US 36 Foreign
(finishers) 86 US 92 Foreign (starters) 2002 38 US 87 Foreign (finishers)

So, if you replace the foreigners with US professionals, how much depth is there really? To phrase
it another way, "How many crit monkeys can you pack into a field, still keep the race interestingly
competitive and keep your big money sponsors?"

"Mike S." <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> "Kurgan Gringioni" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news[email protected]...
> >
> > "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > Imagine how exciting a US Pro only race might be and what kind/how
many
> > > sponsors would be interested in that.
> >
> >
> >
> > There was a time when the US-only field wasn't so deep and it was felt
> that
> > a Euro infusion would be needed to make the race more of a spectacle.
> >
> > Hard to argue with that logic at the time since the formulae for the
race
> > was fabulously successful.
> >
> >
> > That time has passed. There are enough quality American riders now to
put
> on
> > a good show. Time to change the formulae, IMO.
> >
> >
> Am I really going to agree with Henry?? Oh shit, the world's gonna end!
>
> I think that the time has come to make the race US only. There's enough depth of talent to
> make it work. When/if the situation changes for the worse, you can always revert back to the
> way it is now.
>
> Mike

 

Correction below. Foreign finishers is actually total finishers. Total finishers also includes
Canadians.

> Looking at the USPRO fields for the past few years is interesting. The
only
> year that I was able to come up with a start list was 2001.
>
> 1995 53 US 87 (total finishers) 2000 35 US 88 (total finishers) 2001 12 US 36 (total finishers) 86
> US 92 Foreign (starters) 2002 38 US 87 (total finishers)

 

In article <[email protected]>, Mike Gladu <[email protected]> wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (two
> spoke) wrote:
>
> > It seems really wrong to me, that someone private agenda (whether right or wrong isn't really
> > the issue) should dictate who gets to ride in the National championship.
> >
> > I mean this isn't Dave Chauner's private party, shouldn't the best rider's be invited? And
> > doesn't this show potential sponsors, not to mention first year sponsor Health Net, a complete
> > lack of professionalism in "professional" cycling.
> >
> > Is there anything that the riding public can do about this?
>
> Use the rules against them.
>
> From my new little 2003 USCF Rulebook:
>
> 1G8: "Except for invitational races, the organizer must provide an equal opportunity for all
> qualified applicants to participate without discrimination."

The only problem is this is a USPRO event we are talking about and not subject to USCF rules.

 

Mike Gladu wrote:
> From my new little 2003 USCF Rulebook:
>
> 1G8: "Except for invitational races, the organizer must provide an equal opportunity for all
> qualified applicants to participate without discrimination."
>
> How can Nationals be an invitational?

As the original author of that rule, let me comment. USCF Nationals are subject to performance
qualifications but otherwise cannot be invitational. However USPRO is run under different rules and
for the benefit of pro race organizers, so their "nationals" can have arbitrarily different rules.

In my opinion there should be just one national championship for elite men and one for elite women,
both pro-am, with qualifications based only on performance and no race promoter should have a say in
who races. Unfortunately USA Cycling is now under the control of pro race promoters so I expect that
unfair practices such as this will continue to get worse.

-Les Earnest

 

[email protected] (two spoke) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> Bob,
>
> What you say is totally true, and only strengthens my point. Healthnet as a team is more deserving
> to be there then say Colivita Or Lemond.... with or without Gord.
>
>
If Gord really wanted his team to race those events he could drop his lawsuit. He obviously feels
the lawsuit is more important. He also said after Nicole's death he wanted the money to go to her
survivors, which I think he now means him.