Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

AIOCC Presentation Posted

Expand Messages
  • Brook.Watts@CrossVegas
    USAICO Members You ll find the presentation Overview of USA Cross from the St Wendel meeting on the AIOCC website http://www.aiocc.com Look under the NEWS
    Message 1 of 7 , Feb 7, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      USAICO Members

      You'll find the presentation "Overview of USA Cross" from the St Wendel meeting on the AIOCC website
      http://www.aiocc.com
      Look under the NEWS section


      Brook Watts
      brook.watts@...
      303-684-9170 Phone
      303-907-3133 Cell
      323-329-9315 Fax
      http://www.crossvegas.com
      Wednesday Sept. 14, 2011
    • Tom McDaniel
      USAC Race evaluations of UCI and NRC races. Note: I don t know how this can or should be adjusted to work in areas that use ACA and ORBRA. To restate as a
      Message 2 of 7 , Apr 29, 2011
      • 0 Attachment

        USAC Race evaluations of UCI and NRC races.

         

        Note: I don’t know how this can or should be adjusted to work in areas that use ACA and ORBRA.  To restate as a question how does a ACA or ORBRA race become a NRC / UCI race.

         

        I have some issues with the way races were evaluated this past season. I’ve discussed the issues with USAC and some other UCI promoters. At this time I don’t have a race report for the 2 Granogue races so some of the below suggestions may have already been addressed. 

         

        From my discussions with other promoters, race officials, USAC staff, racers and sponsors:

         

        Closed scoring can lead to Q's about how/why event X was better then event Y ; whereas open scoring allows promoters to identify top performing events and areas of improvement. If "advancing the sport" is the primary objective of USAC then a formal and structured review process should be installed. 

         

        Our UCI reports vary from year to year based more on who is doing the report and less on what changes we made year to year.

         

        More than one official has mentioned there seems to be no improvement from year to year on issues they write up.  The feeling being that no one pays any attention to the reports.

         

        Race X gets special treatment they did such and such wrong and…. (this can go on for some time)  and we Y did such and such better …(again this goes on for a long time) : The result being that without some documentation Y will never shut up about their mistreatment and how USAC is not treating them fairly etc.  Most race directors that have talked to over the years including my self have been both X and Y at various times over the years.

         

        Our 2011 race evaluation score cards are not available 5 months past our events.

         

        Some of the below ideals were stolen from USAT and ACA

         

        If you have comments, changes or suggested improvements then please include how they are to be implemented and by what date.

         

        1.     The USAC present to all NCR and UCI race directors  a copy of the form that USAC is using for the 2012 season  by the end of May 2012 (or some other date no later then end of July) so we can see what we are being graded on and do the long range planning necessary to meet race evaluation requirements.   The form should have enough questions to capture the quality of the race be backed up with a photo to document complaince and each question should have a numerical score. The score of the race should be posted on USAC website.  A photo to back should make any disputes over a races grade easily resolvable.  Races would have to make available to USAC staff a way of presenting or printing the photos on site.

        2.     If the UCI allows it USAC will make available the blank forms that UCI is using each year so we can see what they are looking for each year.  Irgardless of if we can see the form, Photo back up of compliance should be mandotory.

        3.     All USAC races should have their USAC race evaluations presented at the end of each race day with the other forms that cover insurance payment and rider numbers, with  space as necessary for the race director to add their own comments as necessary and/or the race director should fill in his own copy of the form and present it with the officials report. 

        4.     USAC to review the race reports with the race director and  the race graded and the results posted within 10 days of the event.  Within 5 days if there is no substantial disagreement on how the race was scored.

        5.     USAC to define who receives the report at USAC and how disputes are to be resolved.

        6.     USAC to provide weekly updates during the season to officials and race directors on what areas the races are scoring high on and what they are scoring low on.

        7.     USAC to define how our race evaluations are to used to upgrade/downgrade from NRC/Cat2/Cat1

         

         

        Please add comments and suggestions and if you vote up or down on this as a whole or by number before the end of day today to help in the discussion in Colorado on Saturday. 

         

        Thanks to everybody who helped out on this.

         

        Tom McDaniel

        Race Director

        Granogue Cross

         

        302 420 2165

         

         

         

      • Myles Romanow
        All. I am in agreement with McDaniel on this one. For several years we have all known we were being graded but as to on what, has been somewhat of a
        Message 3 of 7 , Apr 29, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          All.  I am in agreement with McDaniel on this one.  For several years we have all known we were being "graded" but as to on what, has been somewhat of a mystery.  Now with the NRC calendar UCI calendar and regular race calendar, I think he is completely correct in that we should have some knowledge of what we are being graded on and how.  

          While I'm certain that many people will merely suggest that I/we consult the almighty UCI guidelines, they have been at times, somewhat vague and/or subjective, and clarification from the UCI on points can be less than expedient or forthcoming.   A guide from USAC (who does have jurisdiction over the races on NRC calendar) would be very helpful. 

          Myles Romanow


          On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 7:11 AM, Tom McDaniel <granoguecross@...> wrote:
           

          USAC Race evaluations of UCI and NRC races.

           

          Note: I don’t know how this can or should be adjusted to work in areas that use ACA and ORBRA.  To restate as a question how does a ACA or ORBRA race become a NRC / UCI race.

           

          I have some issues with the way races were evaluated this past season. I’ve discussed the issues with USAC and some other UCI promoters. At this time I don’t have a race report for the 2 Granogue races so some of the below suggestions may have already been addressed. 

           

          From my discussions with other promoters, race officials, USAC staff, racers and sponsors:

           

          Closed scoring can lead to Q's about how/why event X was better then event Y ; whereas open scoring allows promoters to identify top performing events and areas of improvement. If "advancing the sport" is the primary objective of USAC then a formal and structured review process should be installed. 

           

          Our UCI reports vary from year to year based more on who is doing the report and less on what changes we made year to year.

           

          More than one official has mentioned there seems to be no improvement from year to year on issues they write up.  The feeling being that no one pays any attention to the reports.

           

          Race X gets special treatment they did such and such wrong and…. (this can go on for some time)  and we Y did such and such better …(again this goes on for a long time) : The result being that without some documentation Y will never shut up about their mistreatment and how USAC is not treating them fairly etc.  Most race directors that have talked to over the years including my self have been both X and Y at various times over the years.

           

          Our 2011 race evaluation score cards are not available 5 months past our events.

           

          Some of the below ideals were stolen from USAT and ACA

           

          If you have comments, changes or suggested improvements then please include how they are to be implemented and by what date.

           

          1.     The USAC present to all NCR and UCI race directors  a copy of the form that USAC is using for the 2012 season  by the end of May 2012 (or some other date no later then end of July) so we can see what we are being graded on and do the long range planning necessary to meet race evaluation requirements.   The form should have enough questions to capture the quality of the race be backed up with a photo to document complaince and each question should have a numerical score. The score of the race should be posted on USAC website.  A photo to back should make any disputes over a races grade easily resolvable.  Races would have to make available to USAC staff a way of presenting or printing the photos on site.

          2.     If the UCI allows it USAC will make available the blank forms that UCI is using each year so we can see what they are looking for each year.  Irgardless of if we can see the form, Photo back up of compliance should be mandotory.

          3.     All USAC races should have their USAC race evaluations presented at the end of each race day with the other forms that cover insurance payment and rider numbers, with  space as necessary for the race director to add their own comments as necessary and/or the race director should fill in his own copy of the form and present it with the officials report. 

          4.     USAC to review the race reports with the race director and  the race graded and the results posted within 10 days of the event.  Within 5 days if there is no substantial disagreement on how the race was scored.

          5.     USAC to define who receives the report at USAC and how disputes are to be resolved.

          6.     USAC to provide weekly updates during the season to officials and race directors on what areas the races are scoring high on and what they are scoring low on.

          7.     USAC to define how our race evaluations are to used to upgrade/downgrade from NRC/Cat2/Cat1

           

           

          Please add comments and suggestions and if you vote up or down on this as a whole or by number before the end of day today to help in the discussion in Colorado on Saturday. 

           

          Thanks to everybody who helped out on this.

           

          Tom McDaniel

          Race Director

          Granogue Cross

           

          302 420 2165

           

           

           


        • Tim Hopkin
          I agree with the points presented. If a standard is to be met or criteria to be adhered to, thus leading to an official evaluation then knowing the
          Message 4 of 7 , Apr 29, 2011
          • 0 Attachment

            I agree with the points presented. If a standard is to be met or criteria to be adhered to, thus leading to an official evaluation then knowing the expectations ahead of time is important.

             

            At present reading the UCI rules and trying to follow those seems to be the criteria one must meet.

             

            Does this evaluation system/process currently occur with other disciplines? Ie. Road racing, mountain bike, etc?

             

            Tim Hopkin

            North Carolina Grand Prix

             


            From: USAICO@yahoogroups.com [mailto: USAICO@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Tom McDaniel
            Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 7:11 AM
            To: USAICO@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: [USAICO] USAC Race evaluations of UCI and NRC races

             

             

            USAC Race evaluations of UCI and NRC races.

             

            Note: I don’t know how this can or should be adjusted to work in areas that use ACA and ORBRA.  To restate as a question how does a ACA or ORBRA race become a NRC / UCI race.

             

            I have some issues with the way races were evaluated this past season. I’ve discussed the issues with USAC and some other UCI promoters. At this time I don’t have a race report for the 2 Granogue races so some of the below suggestions may have already been addressed. 

             

            From my discussions with other promoters, race officials, USAC staff, racers and sponsors:

             

            Closed scoring can lead to Q's about how/why event X was better then event Y ; whereas open scoring allows promoters to identify top performing events and areas of improvement. If "advancing the sport" is the primary objective of USAC then a formal and structured review process should be installed. 

             

            Our UCI reports vary from year to year based more on who is doing the report and less on what changes we made year to year.

             

            More than one official has mentioned there seems to be no improvement from year to year on issues they write up.  The feeling being that no one pays any attention to the reports.

             

            Race X gets special treatment they did such and such wrong and…. (this can go on for some time)  and we Y did such and such better …(again this goes on for a long time) : The result being that without some documentation Y will never shut up about their mistreatment and how USAC is not treating them fairly etc.  Most race directors that have talked to over the years including my self have been both X and Y at various times over the years.

             

            Our 2011 race evaluation score cards are not available 5 months past our events.

             

            Some of the below ideals were stolen from USAT and ACA

             

            If you have comments, changes or suggested improvements then please include how they are to be implemented and by what date.

             

            1.     The USAC present to all NCR and UCI race directors  a copy of the form that USAC is using for the 2012 season  by the end of May 2012 (or some other date no later then end of July) so we can see what we are being graded on and do the long range planning necessary to meet race evaluation requirements.   The form should have enough questions to capture the quality of the race be backed up with a photo to document complaince and each question should have a numerical score. The score of the race should be posted on USAC website.  A photo to back should make any disputes over a races grade easily resolvable.  Races would have to make available to USAC staff a way of presenting or printing the photos on site.

            2.     If the UCI allows it USAC will make available the blank forms that UCI is using each year so we can see what they are looking for each year.  Irgardless of if we can see the form, Photo back up of compliance should be mandotory.

            3.     All USAC races should have their USAC race evaluations presented at the end of each race day with the other forms that cover insurance payment and rider numbers, with  space as necessary for the race director to add their own comments as necessary and/or the race director should fill in his own copy of the form and present it with the officials report. 

            4.     USAC to review the race reports with the race director and  the race graded and the results posted within 10 days of the event.  Within 5 days if there is no substantial disagreement on how the race was scored.

            5.     USAC to define who receives the report at USAC and how disputes are to be resolved.

            6.     USAC to provide weekly updates during the season to officials and race directors on what areas the races are scoring high on and what they are scoring low on.

            7.     USAC to define how our race evaluations are to used to upgrade/downgrade from NRC/Cat2/Cat1

             

             

            Please add comments and suggestions and if you vote up or down on this as a whole or by number before the end of day today to help in the discussion in Colorado on Saturday. 

             

            Thanks to everybody who helped out on this.

             

            Tom McDaniel

            Race Director

            Granogue Cross

             

            302 420 2165

             

             

             

          • Tom McDaniel
            Here are Granogue s race evaluations from 2011. Tom
            Message 5 of 7 , Apr 29, 2011

            Here are Granogue’s race evaluations from 2011.

             

            Tom

          • Douglas Dobrozsi
            Tom, Thanks for letting us all see these. Couple of questions? Did these come from Kelly? And, were the contents of the reports consistent with your
            Message 6 of 7 , Apr 30, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              Tom,
              Thanks for letting us all see these.  Couple of questions?  Did these come from Kelly?  And, were the contents of the reports consistent with your post-race briefings?

              Doug Dobrozsi

              On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 2:53 AM, Tom McDaniel <granoguecross@...> wrote:
              [Attachment(s) from Tom McDaniel included below]

              Here are Granogue’s race evaluations from 2011.

               

              Tom


              Attachment(s) from Tom McDaniel

              2 of 2 File(s)



            • Tom McDaniel
              Yes these came from Kelli Lusk, I thought everybody was going to get there reports at the same time but that could have changed, were putting on two days of
              Message 7 of 7 , Apr 30, 2011
              • 0 Attachment

                Yes these came from Kelli Lusk, I thought everybody was going to get there reports at the same time but that could have changed, were putting on two days of MTB bike races at Granogue this weekend so I can’t go into detail about our total experience with the race review process at this time.

                 

                We have a question in to Kelli about the missing grades on the summery and all the missing info on the USAC race report.

                 

                In haste

                 

                Tom

                 

                From: USAICO@yahoogroups.com [mailto:USAICO@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Douglas Dobrozsi
                Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2011 8:56 AM
                To: USAICO@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [USAICO] Granogues 2011 Evaluations

                 

                 

                Tom,
                Thanks for letting us all see these.  Couple of questions?  Did these come from Kelly?  And, were the contents of the reports consistent with your post-race briefings?

                Doug Dobrozsi

                On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 2:53 AM, Tom McDaniel <granoguecross@...> wrote:

                [Attachment(s) from Tom McDaniel included below]

                Here are Granogue’s race evaluations from 2011.

                 

                Tom

                 

                Attachment(s) from Tom McDaniel

                2 of 2 File(s)

                 

                 

              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.