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

Re: [USAICO] Commission meeting

Expand Messages
  • Joel Brown
    Hello Adam and others, I¹d like to see the process for payment of UCI fees simplified. During the last two years I have had problems with the UCI keeping
    Message 1 of 12 , Oct 17, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Re: [USAICO] Commission meeting Hello Adam and others,

      I’d like to see the process for payment of UCI fees simplified. During the last two years I have had problems with the UCI keeping track of my fee payment. This has resulted in my having to send copies of the bank transfer information out to Colorado for verification of payment. In general, I find that the current system is a real pain in the ass... Or, perhaps I’m doing something wrong? For the last five years I’ve had the bank wire Swiss francs to the UCI.

      The commission may not be the right place to discuss this issue, perhaps someone out there has found a more efficient and effective technique for paying the UCI? If so, please let me know.

      Thank you,
      Joel
      W.E. Stedman G.P. Of Cross – Rhode Island
      --
      Joel D. Brown, M.Sc.
      METHOD Athlete Development, LLC
      1110 South Road
      Wakefield, Rhode Island 02879
      P. 401.742.5604
      M. method@...
      W. www.methodathlete.com




      On 10/16/06 11:24 PM, "Adam Myerson" <adam@...> wrote:


       
       

      Organizers,

      I have a commission meeting via conference call this Thursday morning.

      If there's a topic you feel needs addressing, please pass it along, and I
      will do my best.

      Adam

    • Tom McDaniel
      We have used a paper check from our regular bank account and US postal service air mail. Never had a problem with UCI not cashing the check. Tom Granogue
      Message 2 of 12 , Oct 17, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Re: [USAICO] Commission meeting

        We have used a paper check from our regular bank account and US postal service air mail.  Never had a problem with UCI not cashing the check.

         


        Tom

        Granogue Cross

         


        From: USAICO@yahoogroups.com [mailto: USAICO@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Joel Brown
        Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 8:32 AM
        To: USAICO
        Subject: Re: [USAICO] Commission meeting

         

        Hello Adam and others,

        I’d like to see the process for payment of UCI fees simplified. During the last two years I have had problems with the UCI keeping track of my fee payment. This has resulted in my having to send copies of the bank transfer information out to Colorado for verification of payment. In general, I find that the current system is a real pain in the ass... Or, perhaps I’m doing something wrong? For the last five years I’ve had the bank wire Swiss francs to the UCI.

        The commission may not be the right place to discuss this issue, perhaps someone out there has found a more efficient and effective technique for paying the UCI? If so, please let me know.

        Thank you,
        Joel
        W.E. Stedman G.P. Of Cross – Rhode Island
        --
        Joel D. Brown, M.Sc.
        METHOD Athlete Development, LLC
        1110 South Road
        Wakefield , Rhode Island 02879
        P. 401.742.5604
        M. method@...
        W. www.methodathlete.com




        On 10/16/06 11:24 PM, "Adam Myerson" <adam@...> wrote:


         
         

        Organizers,

        I have a commission meeting via conference call this Thursday morning.

        If there's a topic you feel needs addressing, please pass it along, and I
        will do my best.

        Adam


      • Tom Stevens
        Adam, As you remember, I would like the issue of the start line up addressed. I would like the ruling to be; at least 8/row with 75 cm per rider. As opposed to
        Message 3 of 12 , Oct 17, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Adam,
          As you remember, I would like the issue of the start line up addressed. I would like the ruling to be; at least 8/row with 75 cm per rider. As opposed to 8/row.
          Thanks
          Tom Stevens

          Adam Myerson <adam@...> wrote:
          Organizers,

          I have a commission meeting via conference call this Thursday morning.

          If there's a topic you feel needs addressing, please pass it along, and I
          will do my best.

          Adam
          --
          Adam F. Myerson
          President, Cycle-Smart, Inc.: Solutions for Cycling
          Member, UCI Cyclo-Cross Commission
          Member, AIOC-Cross Management Committee
          Organizer, Cycle-Smart International Cyclo-Cross

          32 Ditson St., #5
          Dorchester, MA 02122
          (413) 204-3202 Mobile
          (617) 288-1460 Office
          (512) 681-7043 Fax
          adam@...
          http://cycle-smart.com






          Yahoo! Groups Links

          <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/USAICO/

          <*> Your email settings:
          Individual Email | Traditional

          <*> To change settings online go to:
          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/USAICO/join
          (Yahoo! ID required)

          <*> To change settings via email:
          mailto:USAICO-digest@yahoogroups.com
          mailto:USAICO-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

          <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          USAICO-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

          <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
          http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



        • kjc
          Joel, I agree. This is not an issue. For four consecutive years, I have mailed a check (my cycling club s check), written out in US dollars, sent via USPS to:
          Message 4 of 12 , Oct 17, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            Joel,

            I agree. This is not an issue. For four consecutive
            years, I have mailed a check (my cycling club's
            check), written out in US dollars, sent via USPS to:

            Union Cycliste Internationale
            CH 1860 Aigle
            Switzerland

            Kelly Cline
            Wissahickon

            --- Tom McDaniel <ctmcdaniel@...> wrote:

            > We have used a paper check from our regular bank
            > account and US postal
            > service air mail. Never had a problem with UCI not
            > cashing the check.
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Tom
            >
            > Granogue Cross
            >
            >
            >
            > _____
            >
            > From: USAICO@yahoogroups.com
            > [mailto:USAICO@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
            > Joel Brown
            > Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 8:32 AM
            > To: USAICO
            > Subject: Re: [USAICO] Commission meeting
            >
            >
            >
            > Hello Adam and others,
            >
            > I'd like to see the process for payment of UCI fees
            > simplified. During the
            > last two years I have had problems with the UCI
            > keeping track of my fee
            > payment. This has resulted in my having to send
            > copies of the bank transfer
            > information out to Colorado for verification of
            > payment. In general, I find
            > that the current system is a real pain in the ass...
            > Or, perhaps I'm doing
            > something wrong? For the last five years I've had
            > the bank wire Swiss francs
            > to the UCI.
            >
            > The commission may not be the right place to discuss
            > this issue, perhaps
            > someone out there has found a more efficient and
            > effective technique for
            > paying the UCI? If so, please let me know.
            >
            > Thank you,
            > Joel
            > W.E. Stedman G.P. Of Cross - Rhode Island
            > --
            > Joel D. Brown, M.Sc.
            > METHOD Athlete Development, LLC
            > 1110 South Road
            > Wakefield, Rhode Island 02879
            > P. 401.742.5604
            > M. method@...
            > W. www.methodathlete.com
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > On 10/16/06 11:24 PM, "Adam Myerson"
            > <adam@...> wrote:
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Organizers,
            >
            > I have a commission meeting via conference call this
            > Thursday morning.
            >
            > If there's a topic you feel needs addressing, please
            > pass it along, and I
            > will do my best.
            >
            > Adam
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >


            __________________________________________________
            Do You Yahoo!?
            Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
            http://mail.yahoo.com
          • Alan Atwood
            I feel that this one should get top priority. While C1 races should be held to higher standards and be strictly bound by the UCI regulations, this one is
            Message 5 of 12 , Oct 17, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              I feel that this one should get top priority.  While C1 races should be held to higher standards and be strictly bound by the UCI regulations, this one is unrealistic for any North American country.  In Europe it fits better because there are many more countries within a 1000 mile radius; but in North America, you have Canada and the U.S. who participate in cyclocross, but that's it.  Not Mexico, not any other central American or south American country participates in cyclocross.
               
              We don't want to be getting constant pardons and exceptions to the rules, but this rule in particular needs to be tailored to the areas that have limited options to import foreign riders.  I'm sure countries like Japan and Australia which have lots of cycling activity could benefit from an adjustment here as well and perhaps would even allow cross to grow and flourish there.
               
              Thanks,

              Alan



              To: USAICO@yahoogroups.com
              From: ctmcdaniel@...
              Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 23:36:52 -0400
              Subject: RE: [USAICO] Commission meeting

              I'm concerned about the 10 foreign riders from 5 different countries that
              would be necessary to hold on to C1 status.

              I don't have a counter proposal. I'm not even sure if we consistently get
              ten foreign riders and the 5 different countries is way beyond what Granogue
              can currently count on.

              Tom McDaniel
              Granogue Cross

              -----Original Message-----
              From: USAICO@yahoogroups. com [mailto:USAICO@yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of
              Adam Myerson
              Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 11:24 PM
              To: USAICO
              Subject: [USAICO] Commission meeting

              Organizers,

              I have a commission meeting via conference call this Thursday morning.

              If there's a topic you feel needs addressing, please pass it along, and I
              will do my best.

              Adam
              --
              Adam F. Myerson
              President, Cycle-Smart, Inc.: Solutions for Cycling
              Member, UCI Cyclo-Cross Commission
              Member, AIOC-Cross Management Committee
              Organizer, Cycle-Smart International Cyclo-Cross

              32 Ditson St., #5
              Dorchester, MA 02122
              (413) 204-3202 Mobile
              (617) 288-1460 Office
              (512) 681-7043 Fax
              adam@cycle-smart. com
              http://cycle- smart.com

              Yahoo! Groups Links


            • Tom McDaniel
              Tom I don t understand the issue. Current UCI start area is 6m wide 10m deep with 8 lanes. Each lane is 75cm wide. If you have bigger fields then you have
              Message 6 of 12 , Oct 17, 2006
              • 0 Attachment

                Tom

                 

                I don’t understand the issue.  Current UCI start area is 6m wide  10m deep with 8 lanes.  Each lane is 75cm wide.

                 

                If you have bigger fields then you have to extend the 10 meter deep section because each bike takes up about 2m so the official UCI grid only holds about 40 riders.

                At Granogue we made the grid about 26m deep to allow for up to 125 riders.

                 

                Tom McDaniel

                 


                From: USAICO@yahoogroups.com [mailto: USAICO@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Tom Stevens
                Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 9:44 AM
                To: USAICO@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [USAICO] Commission meeting

                 

                Adam,

                As you remember, I would like the issue of the start line up addressed. I would like the ruling to be; at least 8/row with 75 cm per rider. As opposed to 8/row.

                Thanks

                Tom Stevens

                Adam Myerson <adam@...> wrote:

                Organizers,

                I have a commission meeting via conference call this Thursday morning.

                If there's a topic you feel needs addressing, please pass it along, and I
                will do my best.

                Adam
                --
                Adam F. Myerson
                President, Cycle-Smart, Inc.: Solutions for Cycling
                Member, UCI Cyclo-Cross Commission
                Member, AIOC-Cross Management Committee
                Organizer, Cycle-Smart International Cyclo-Cross

                32 Ditson St., #5
                Dorchester , MA 02122
                (413) 204-3202 Mobile
                (617) 288-1460 Office
                (512) 681-7043 Fax
                adam@...
                http://cycle-smart.com






                Yahoo! Groups Links

                <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/USAICO/

                <*> Your email settings:
                Individual Email | Traditional

                <*> To change settings online go to:
                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/USAICO/join
                (Yahoo! ID required)

                <*> To change settings via email:
                mailto:USAICO-digest@yahoogroups.com
                mailto:USAICO-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

                <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                USAICO-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


              • Adam Myerson
                Tom Steven s point is that if your start stretch is wide enough to accommodate more than 8 lanes, you should be permitted to have more. At least is the
                Message 7 of 12 , Oct 17, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  Tom Steven's point is that if your start stretch is wide enough to
                  accommodate more than 8 lanes, you should be permitted to have more.

                  "At least" is the phrase in question with this rule. Does it HAVE to be 8
                  lanes, or should it be "at least" 8 lanes.

                  I've discussed this with Peter before, and we were the first ones to raise
                  the question.

                  Adam


                  on 10/17/06 11:37 AM, Tom McDaniel at ctmcdaniel@... wrote:

                  > Tom
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > I don't understand the issue. Current UCI start area is 6m wide 10m deep
                  > with 8 lanes. Each lane is 75cm wide.
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > If you have bigger fields then you have to extend the 10 meter deep section
                  > because each bike takes up about 2m so the official UCI grid only holds
                  > about 40 riders.
                  >
                  > At Granogue we made the grid about 26m deep to allow for up to 125 riders.
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Tom McDaniel
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > _____
                  >
                  > From: USAICO@yahoogroups.com [mailto:USAICO@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
                  > Tom Stevens
                  > Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 9:44 AM
                  > To: USAICO@yahoogroups.com
                  > Subject: Re: [USAICO] Commission meeting
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Adam,
                  >
                  > As you remember, I would like the issue of the start line up addressed. I
                  > would like the ruling to be; at least 8/row with 75 cm per rider. As opposed
                  > to 8/row.
                  >
                  > Thanks
                  >
                  > Tom Stevens
                  >
                  > Adam Myerson <adam@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > Organizers,
                  >
                  > I have a commission meeting via conference call this Thursday morning.
                  >
                  > If there's a topic you feel needs addressing, please pass it along, and I
                  > will do my best.
                  >
                  > Adam
                • Joel Brown
                  RATS!... Do you mean I¹ve been the fool wiring money to some bank in Switzerland, when I could have been sending a check? You¹d think that after five years
                  Message 8 of 12 , Oct 17, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Re: [USAICO] Commission meeting RATS!... Do you mean I’ve been the fool wiring money to some bank in Switzerland, when I could have been sending a check? You’d think that after five years I’d have figured this out.

                    Joel


                    On 10/17/06 9:14 AM, "Tom McDaniel" <ctmcdaniel@...> wrote:


                     
                     

                    We have used a paper check from our regular bank account and US postal service air mail.  Never had a problem with UCI not cashing the check.
                     

                    Tom
                    Granogue Cross
                     


                    From: USAICO@yahoogroups.com [mailto:USAICO@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Joel Brown
                    Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 8:32 AM
                    To: USAICO
                    Subject: Re: [USAICO] Commission meeting

                    Hello Adam and others,

                    I’d like to see the process for payment of UCI fees simplified. During the last two years I have had problems with the UCI keeping track of my fee payment. This has resulted in my having to send copies of the bank transfer information out to Colorado for verification of payment. In general, I find that the current system is a real pain in the ass... Or, perhaps I’m doing something wrong? For the last five years I’ve had the bank wire Swiss francs to the UCI.

                    The commission may not be the right place to discuss this issue, perhaps someone out there has found a more efficient and effective technique for paying the UCI? If so, please let me know.

                    Thank you,
                    Joel
                    W.E. Stedman G.P. Of Cross – Rhode Island


                  • CrossSportif@aol.com
                    Adam, I have one point that I ve already mentioned to Peter VDA and to you. Specifically, 5.1.045 which stipulates a change in staging for World Champs Juniors
                    Message 9 of 12 , Oct 18, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Adam,

                      I have one point that I've already mentioned to Peter VDA and to you. Specifically, 5.1.045 which stipulates a change in staging for World Champs Juniors and Espoirs. New reg calls for staging of first row of Juniors and first two rows of Espoirs by current WCS rankings in those categories. We know the impetus is to get Albert, Stybar, Boom to do the WCS, but it's detrimental for nations like ours where our juniors and espoirs are not realistically able to attend all the WCS. At best, our juniors and espoirs will get to 3 of the 5. In other words, while the intentions of the reg. change are understandable, a euro-centric effect results.

                      In the case of our US juniors, we finished 5th as a team in Zeddam last January. That would have earned us a front row start under the old regs. Now, our first guy will be second row. And our next guy, maybe 4th or 5th. With some strong talent in our juniors this year and only a 40 minute race, every row counts. So, I'd appreciate it if you raised this point, just so the commission is aware of it.

                      I guess the other question I had was, since Europe is not going to go to an earlier Nationals date, are we going to be pressured to move ours to their date or keep as is?

                      I know the commission is to discuss travel allowance discrepancies and vision for that.  I would like to see a system that would ultimately grow the sport the most. Since WCS is so UCI point heavy, that's one incentive already in place. But perhaps a system where less strong nations get ample travel money and give the power house nations less travel money but more prize money. Some sort of tiered system like they have now, but more favorable to nations like ours that have substantial travel costs to get to European WCS. Please update with that dialogue.

                      Also, maybe the whole issue of entry fees in our UCI races and the future implications of that.

                      Thanks for your work on these issues,
                      Geoff Proctor
                      National Team Coach, USA Cyclocross
                      Technical Director, USGP
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.