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

2011/12 CX Schedule

Expand Messages
  • kjc
    Anyone have any insight or thoughts on the following: Will the UCI limit the amount of races in the US for the 2011/12 CX Season? They handed out more permits
    Message 1 of 12 , Nov 2, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Anyone have any insight or thoughts on the following:

      Will the UCI limit the amount of races in the US for the 2011/12 CX Season?  They handed out more permits in 2010 than I handed out pieces of candy on Halloween night.  Do we have a saturation point?

      Will the UCI try to deter promoters from having UCI races in September?  If not, consideration would be appreciated.

      In the Mid-Atlantic region, we are starting to put together a tentative schedule and it's already, once again, starting to look loaded on the front end.  Trying to change the culture of the racers by having them race later in the season is one thing, but how do we change the promoter's culture so they will want to promote an event after Thanksgiving? 

      Thanks,
      Kelly Cline
      The MAC Series

    • CrossSportif@aol.com
      Kelli, All good questions and points I plan to bring forward at our upcoming fall UCI Cyclocross Commission meeting. I ve been getting a lot of comments from
      Message 2 of 12 , Nov 2, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Kelli,

        All good questions and points I plan to bring forward at our upcoming fall UCI Cyclocross Commission meeting. I've been getting a lot of comments from riders about the saturation point and "soft" races especially. I look forward to hearing others' thoughts as we move forward. 

        Respectfully,
        Geoff Proctor
        Member, UCI Cyclocross Commission
         




        -----Original Message-----
        From: kjc <kc2738@...>
        To: usaico@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Tue, Nov 2, 2010 7:59 pm
        Subject: [USAICO] 2011/12 CX Schedule

         
        Anyone have any insight or thoughts on the following:

        Will the UCI limit the amount of races in the US for the 2011/12 CX Season?  They handed out more permits in 2010 than I handed out pieces of candy on Halloween night.  Do we have a saturation point?

        Will the UCI try to deter promoters from having UCI races in September?  If not, consideration would be appreciated.

        In the Mid-Atlantic region, we are starting to put together a tentative schedule and it's already, once again, starting to look loaded on the front end.  Trying to change the culture of the racers by having them race later in the season is one thing, but how do we change the promoter's culture so they will want to promote an event after Thanksgiving? 

        Thanks,
        Kelly Cline
        The MAC Series


      • Adam Myerson
        Saturation point? Saturation point of what, exactly? Because one person s saturation point is another s growth of the sport. Do we have too many criteriums in
        Message 3 of 12 , Nov 2, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          Saturation point?

          Saturation point of what, exactly? Because one person's saturation point is another's growth of the sport. Do we have too many criteriums in America? Or do you think the Belgians complain the UCI races in France or Switzerland are "soft" as well?

          I promise you, for every complaint you've heard about saturation points or soft races I've got 10 riders who are psyched about the prize money they're making, and for the travel they don't have to do in order to compete in quality events. UCI events are job opportunities for bike racers. Further, the abundance of races is pushing every race to improve, at every level. A local race in New England now is the same quality as what a UCI race used to be. And to really stand out nationally, you need to put on a C1 event now. That's positive growth and improvement.

          If you want to talk about saturation, are you talking about all of the United States? Because we know all the races in Belgium happen in a very, very small area of the country. Do not compare the US to Belgium. When there are as many UCI races in Massachusetts as there are in Belgium, then we can start to talk about saturation. A much better comparison would be how many UCI race there are in Europe as a whole to how many there are in the US.

          The "saturation point" is what's bringing a guy like Valentin Scherz, the best Swiss U23, back to the US for the first half of the season to race again this year, and bringing the 2nd best Swiss U23, Anthony Grand, along with it. It's causing a guy like Luca Damiani to come to the US for 'cross after his road season, instead of staying in Italy like he did last year. It's causing a guy like Jesse Anthony, who was one of the riders bitching about "easy points," to decide instead to get his ass in his car, drive to Granogue, and win 2 hard fought and well-publiced UCI events, taking advantage of the opportunities instead of continuing to complain about them. It's bringing a guy like Alex Candelario back to 'cross after leaving it to focus on the road for the past 10 years.

          What exactly _is_ getting saturated, then? Points? Of course, we have a limit on C2 and C1 point totals, so there's already a check in place for that. Media? Seems like we're getting plenty of great coverage, and making starts out of the riders at every level. So what's the limiter? All I see us getting saturated with is more good events, more prize money, more press, better quality, more competition, and more growth. More please.

          I do not see a situation where the UCI, or USA Cycling, would have any motivation to restrict the number UCI events in the US. This topic came up regarding Belgium when I was on the commission, and the conclusion then was that it was not possible or fair to the riders to limit the number of races in Belgium so that the scenes in Italy, Germany, or France could grow. Curtailing growth or strength in one country was not the way to encourage growth or strength in another.

          This topic comes up once a year. It came up when we first had more UCI than the what was just in the 6 or 8-race national series. It came up again when we started to have conflicts on opposite coasts. It's apparently coming up again now, I assume because we've another big jump in the total number events. The sky was not falling back then, and it's not falling now. 

          I'm going to save this email for next year and save myself the work of writing it again.

          Regarding races in September, the season as defined by the UCI is September 1 until March 1. So I don't see any reason why they would discourage events from happening within that window. Frankly, there are too many conflicts in October and November, and not enough races in early September and December. I got emails this week from new organizers in Georgia and Tennessee who want to be UCI in January of 2012. So we will start to see that late season growth, but it's going to be outside the traditional areas where 'cross is strong, and in places where they are already racing through the (mild) winter, like NC, SC, TN, GA, FL, and TX. For the traditional regions, let's see how having Nationals in January is going to impact scheduling. That has to be the leading edge we fill back from.

          I honestly think we are just scratching the surface of growth of a pro 'cross scene in the US. Until there's a UCI race every weekend in each region at the same time (like there is or was in Switzerland or Italy or France or Belgium), we have room to grow. And until there's a C1 every weekend in the US the same way there's a $10,000 or $15,000 NRC criterium or road race during the summer, we have room to grow. And until more European riders are choosing to come to the US to race (the way they do right now for the US road scene), we have room to grow.

          My fault for checking my email in the middle of the night, but can we not have the same conversations every single year?

          Adam


          On Nov 2, 2010, at 10:56 PM, crosssportif@... wrote:



          Kelli,

          All good questions and points I plan to bring forward at our upcoming fall UCI Cyclocross Commission meeting. I've been getting a lot of comments from riders about the saturation point and "soft" races especially. I look forward to hearing others' thoughts as we move forward. 

          Respectfully,
          Geoff Proctor
          Member, UCI Cyclocross Commission
           




          -----Original Message-----
          From: kjc <kc2738@...>
          To: usaico@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Tue, Nov 2, 2010 7:59 pm
          Subject: [USAICO] 2011/12 CX Schedule

          Anyone have any insight or thoughts on the following:

          Will the UCI limit the amount of races in the US for the 2011/12 CX Season?  They handed out more permits in 2010 than I handed out pieces of candy on Halloween night.  Do we have a saturation point?

          Will the UCI try to deter promoters from having UCI races in September?  If not, consideration would be appreciated.

          In the Mid-Atlantic region, we are starting to put together a tentative schedule and it's already, once again, starting to look loaded on the front end.  Trying to change the culture of the racers by having them race later in the season is one thing, but how do we change the promoter's culture so they will want to promote an event after Thanksgiving? 

          Thanks,
          Kelly Cline
          The MAC Series





        • Adam Myerson
          Here s one more way we re being saturated - with riders: http://www.bikereg.com/events/ConfList.asp?EventID=11828 Full fields with 150 rider field limits. Once
          Message 4 of 12 , Nov 2, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            Here's one more way we're being saturated - with riders:


            Full fields with 150 rider field limits. Once again, more please.

            Adam


            On Nov 3, 2010, at 2:29 AM, Adam Myerson wrote:

            Saturation point?

            Saturation point of what, exactly? Because one person's saturation point is another's growth of the sport. Do we have too many criteriums in America? Or do you think the Belgians complain the UCI races in France or Switzerland are "soft" as well?

            I promise you, for every complaint you've heard about saturation points or soft races I've got 10 riders who are psyched about the prize money they're making, and for the travel they don't have to do in order to compete in quality events. UCI events are job opportunities for bike racers. Further, the abundance of races is pushing every race to improve, at every level. A local race in New England now is the same quality as what a UCI race used to be. And to really stand out nationally, you need to put on a C1 event now. That's positive growth and improvement.

            If you want to talk about saturation, are you talking about all of the United States? Because we know all the races in Belgium happen in a very, very small area of the country. Do not compare the US to Belgium. When there are as many UCI races in Massachusetts as there are in Belgium, then we can start to talk about saturation. A much better comparison would be how many UCI race there are in Europe as a whole to how many there are in the US.

            The "saturation point" is what's bringing a guy like Valentin Scherz, the best Swiss U23, back to the US for the first half of the season to race again this year, and bringing the 2nd best Swiss U23, Anthony Grand, along with it. It's causing a guy like Luca Damiani to come to the US for 'cross after his road season, instead of staying in Italy like he did last year. It's causing a guy like Jesse Anthony, who was one of the riders bitching about "easy points," to decide instead to get his ass in his car, drive to Granogue, and win 2 hard fought and well-publiced UCI events, taking advantage of the opportunities instead of continuing to complain about them. It's bringing a guy like Alex Candelario back to 'cross after leaving it to focus on the road for the past 10 years.

            What exactly _is_ getting saturated, then? Points? Of course, we have a limit on C2 and C1 point totals, so there's already a check in place for that. Media? Seems like we're getting plenty of great coverage, and making starts out of the riders at every level. So what's the limiter? All I see us getting saturated with is more good events, more prize money, more press, better quality, more competition, and more growth. More please.

            I do not see a situation where the UCI, or USA Cycling, would have any motivation to restrict the number UCI events in the US. This topic came up regarding Belgium when I was on the commission, and the conclusion then was that it was not possible or fair to the riders to limit the number of races in Belgium so that the scenes in Italy, Germany, or France could grow. Curtailing growth or strength in one country was not the way to encourage growth or strength in another.

            This topic comes up once a year. It came up when we first had more UCI than the what was just in the 6 or 8-race national series. It came up again when we started to have conflicts on opposite coasts. It's apparently coming up again now, I assume because we've another big jump in the total number events. The sky was not falling back then, and it's not falling now. 

            I'm going to save this email for next year and save myself the work of writing it again.

            Regarding races in September, the season as defined by the UCI is September 1 until March 1. So I don't see any reason why they would discourage events from happening within that window. Frankly, there are too many conflicts in October and November, and not enough races in early September and December. I got emails this week from new organizers in Georgia and Tennessee who want to be UCI in January of 2012. So we will start to see that late season growth, but it's going to be outside the traditional areas where 'cross is strong, and in places where they are already racing through the (mild) winter, like NC, SC, TN, GA, FL, and TX. For the traditional regions, let's see how having Nationals in January is going to impact scheduling. That has to be the leading edge we fill back from.

            I honestly think we are just scratching the surface of growth of a pro 'cross scene in the US. Until there's a UCI race every weekend in each region at the same time (like there is or was in Switzerland or Italy or France or Belgium), we have room to grow. And until there's a C1 every weekend in the US the same way there's a $10,000 or $15,000 NRC criterium or road race during the summer, we have room to grow. And until more European riders are choosing to come to the US to race (the way they do right now for the US road scene), we have room to grow.

            My fault for checking my email in the middle of the night, but can we not have the same conversations every single year?

            Adam


            On Nov 2, 2010, at 10:56 PM, crosssportif@... wrote:



            Kelli,

            All good questions and points I plan to bring forward at our upcoming fall UCI Cyclocross Commission meeting. I've been getting a lot of comments from riders about the saturation point and "soft" races especially. I look forward to hearing others' thoughts as we move forward. 

            Respectfully,
            Geoff Proctor
            Member, UCI Cyclocross Commission
             




            -----Original Message-----
            From: kjc <kc2738@...>
            To: usaico@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Tue, Nov 2, 2010 7:59 pm
            Subject: [USAICO] 2011/12 CX Schedule

            Anyone have any insight or thoughts on the following:

            Will the UCI limit the amount of races in the US for the 2011/12 CX Season?  They handed out more permits in 2010 than I handed out pieces of candy on Halloween night.  Do we have a saturation point?

            Will the UCI try to deter promoters from having UCI races in September?  If not, consideration would be appreciated.

            In the Mid-Atlantic region, we are starting to put together a tentative schedule and it's already, once again, starting to look loaded on the front end.  Trying to change the culture of the racers by having them race later in the season is one thing, but how do we change the promoter's culture so they will want to promote an event after Thanksgiving? 

            Thanks,
            Kelly Cline
            The MAC Series






          • Myles Romanow
            Amen.
            Message 5 of 12 , Nov 3, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              Amen. 



              On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 2:29 AM, Adam Myerson <adam@...> wrote:
               

              Saturation point?


              Saturation point of what, exactly? Because one person's saturation point is another's growth of the sport. Do we have too many criteriums in America? Or do you think the Belgians complain the UCI races in France or Switzerland are "soft" as well?

              I promise you, for every complaint you've heard about saturation points or soft races I've got 10 riders who are psyched about the prize money they're making, and for the travel they don't have to do in order to compete in quality events. UCI events are job opportunities for bike racers. Further, the abundance of races is pushing every race to improve, at every level. A local race in New England now is the same quality as what a UCI race used to be. And to really stand out nationally, you need to put on a C1 event now. That's positive growth and improvement.

              If you want to talk about saturation, are you talking about all of the United States? Because we know all the races in Belgium happen in a very, very small area of the country. Do not compare the US to Belgium. When there are as many UCI races in Massachusetts as there are in Belgium, then we can start to talk about saturation. A much better comparison would be how many UCI race there are in Europe as a whole to how many there are in the US.

              The "saturation point" is what's bringing a guy like Valentin Scherz, the best Swiss U23, back to the US for the first half of the season to race again this year, and bringing the 2nd best Swiss U23, Anthony Grand, along with it. It's causing a guy like Luca Damiani to come to the US for 'cross after his road season, instead of staying in Italy like he did last year. It's causing a guy like Jesse Anthony, who was one of the riders bitching about "easy points," to decide instead to get his ass in his car, drive to Granogue, and win 2 hard fought and well-publiced UCI events, taking advantage of the opportunities instead of continuing to complain about them. It's bringing a guy like Alex Candelario back to 'cross after leaving it to focus on the road for the past 10 years.

              What exactly _is_ getting saturated, then? Points? Of course, we have a limit on C2 and C1 point totals, so there's already a check in place for that. Media? Seems like we're getting plenty of great coverage, and making starts out of the riders at every level. So what's the limiter? All I see us getting saturated with is more good events, more prize money, more press, better quality, more competition, and more growth. More please.

              I do not see a situation where the UCI, or USA Cycling, would have any motivation to restrict the number UCI events in the US. This topic came up regarding Belgium when I was on the commission, and the conclusion then was that it was not possible or fair to the riders to limit the number of races in Belgium so that the scenes in Italy, Germany, or France could grow. Curtailing growth or strength in one country was not the way to encourage growth or strength in another.

              This topic comes up once a year. It came up when we first had more UCI than the what was just in the 6 or 8-race national series. It came up again when we started to have conflicts on opposite coasts. It's apparently coming up again now, I assume because we've another big jump in the total number events. The sky was not falling back then, and it's not falling now. 

              I'm going to save this email for next year and save myself the work of writing it again.

              Regarding races in September, the season as defined by the UCI is September 1 until March 1. So I don't see any reason why they would discourage events from happening within that window. Frankly, there are too many conflicts in October and November, and not enough races in early September and December. I got emails this week from new organizers in Georgia and Tennessee who want to be UCI in January of 2012. So we will start to see that late season growth, but it's going to be outside the traditional areas where 'cross is strong, and in places where they are already racing through the (mild) winter, like NC, SC, TN, GA, FL, and TX. For the traditional regions, let's see how having Nationals in January is going to impact scheduling. That has to be the leading edge we fill back from.

              I honestly think we are just scratching the surface of growth of a pro 'cross scene in the US. Until there's a UCI race every weekend in each region at the same time (like there is or was in Switzerland or Italy or France or Belgium), we have room to grow. And until there's a C1 every weekend in the US the same way there's a $10,000 or $15,000 NRC criterium or road race during the summer, we have room to grow. And until more European riders are choosing to come to the US to race (the way they do right now for the US road scene), we have room to grow.

              My fault for checking my email in the middle of the night, but can we not have the same conversations every single year?

              Adam


              On Nov 2, 2010, at 10:56 PM, crosssportif@... wrote:



              Kelli,

              All good questions and points I plan to bring forward at our upcoming fall UCI Cyclocross Commission meeting. I've been getting a lot of comments from riders about the saturation point and "soft" races especially. I look forward to hearing others' thoughts as we move forward. 

              Respectfully,
              Geoff Proctor
              Member, UCI Cyclocross Commission
               




              -----Original Message-----
              From: kjc <kc2738@...>
              To: usaico@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Tue, Nov 2, 2010 7:59 pm
              Subject: [USAICO] 2011/12 CX Schedule

              Anyone have any insight or thoughts on the following:

              Will the UCI limit the amount of races in the US for the 2011/12 CX Season?  They handed out more permits in 2010 than I handed out pieces of candy on Halloween night.  Do we have a saturation point?

              Will the UCI try to deter promoters from having UCI races in September?  If not, consideration would be appreciated.

              In the Mid-Atlantic region, we are starting to put together a tentative schedule and it's already, once again, starting to look loaded on the front end.  Trying to change the culture of the racers by having them race later in the season is one thing, but how do we change the promoter's culture so they will want to promote an event after Thanksgiving? 

              Thanks,
              Kelly Cline
              The MAC Series






            • Terry Buchanan
              150 Elites? We are talking elite racing right? Terry ________________________________ From: USAICO@yahoogroups.com [mailto:USAICO@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
              Message 6 of 12 , Nov 3, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                150 Elites? We are talking elite racing right?
                 
                Terry


                From: USAICO@yahoogroups.com [mailto:USAICO@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Adam Myerson
                Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 11:43 PM
                To: USAICO
                Subject: Re: [USAICO] 2011/12 CX Schedule

                 

                Here's one more way we're being saturated - with riders:



                Full fields with 150 rider field limits. Once again, more please.

                Adam


                On Nov 3, 2010, at 2:29 AM, Adam Myerson wrote:

                Saturation point?

                Saturation point of what, exactly? Because one person's saturation point is another's growth of the sport. Do we have too many criteriums in America? Or do you think the Belgians complain the UCI races in France or Switzerland are "soft" as well?

                I promise you, for every complaint you've heard about saturation points or soft races I've got 10 riders who are psyched about the prize money they're making, and for the travel they don't have to do in order to compete in quality events. UCI events are job opportunities for bike racers. Further, the abundance of races is pushing every race to improve, at every level. A local race in New England now is the same quality as what a UCI race used to be. And to really stand out nationally, you need to put on a C1 event now. That's positive growth and improvement.

                If you want to talk about saturation, are you talking about all of the United States? Because we know all the races in Belgium happen in a very, very small area of the country. Do not compare the US to Belgium. When there are as many UCI races in Massachusetts as there are in Belgium, then we can start to talk about saturation. A much better comparison would be how many UCI race there are in Europe as a whole to how many there are in the US.

                The "saturation point" is what's bringing a guy like Valentin Scherz, the best Swiss U23, back to the US for the fir st half of the season to race again this year, and bringing the 2nd best Swiss U23, Anthony Grand, along with it. It's causing a guy like Luca Damiani to come to the US for 'cross after his road season, instead of staying in Italy like he did last year. It's causing a guy like Jesse Anthony, who was one of the riders bitching about "easy points," to decide instead to get his ass in his car, drive to Granogue, and win 2 hard fought and well-publiced UCI events, taking advantage of the opportunities instead of continuing to complain about them. It's bringing a guy like Alex Candelario back to 'cross after leaving it to focus on the road for the past 10 years.

                What exactly _is_ getting saturated, then? Points? Of course, we have a limit on C2 and C1 point totals, so there's already a check in place for that. Media? Seems like we're getting plenty of great coverage, and making starts out of the riders at every level. So what's the limiter? All I see us g etting saturated with is more good events, more prize money, more press, better quality, more competition, and more growth. More please.

                I do not see a situation where the UCI, or USA Cycling, would have any motivation to restrict the number UCI events in the US. This topic came up regarding Belgium when I was on the commission, and the conclusion then was that it was not possible or fair to the riders to limit the number of races in Belgium so that the scenes in Italy, Germany, or France could grow. Curtailing growth or strength in one country was not the way to encourage growth or strength in another.

                This topic comes up once a year. It came up when we first had more UCI than the what was just in the 6 or 8-race national series. It came up again when we started to have conflicts on opposite coasts. It's apparently coming up again now, I assume because we've another big jump in the total number events. The sky was not fallin g back then, and it's not falling now. 

                I'm going to save this email for next year and save myself the work of writing it again.

                Regarding races in September, the season as defined by the UCI is September 1 until March 1. So I don't see any reason why they would discourage events from happening within that window. Frankly, there are too many conflicts in October and November, and not enough races in early September and December. I got emails this week from new organizers in Georgia and Tennessee who want to be UCI in January of 2012. So we will start to see that late season growth, but it's going to be outside the traditional areas where 'cross is strong, and in places where they are already racing through the (mild) winter, like NC, SC, TN, GA, FL, and TX. For the traditional regions, let's see how having Nationals in January is going to impact scheduling. That has to be the leading edge we fill back from.

                I honestly think we are just scratching the surface of growth of a pro 'cross scene in the US. Until there's a UCI race every weekend in each region at the same time (like there is or was in Switzerland or Italy or France or Belgium), we have room to grow. And until there's a C1 every weekend in the US the same way there's a $10,000 or $15,000 NRC criterium or road race during the summer, we have room to grow. And until more European riders are choosing to come to the US to race (the way they do right now for the US road scene), we have room to grow.

                My fault for checking my email in the middle of the night, but can we not have the same conversations every single year?

                Adam


                On Nov 2, 2010, at 10:56 PM, crosssportif@... wrote:



                Kelli,

                All good questions and points I plan to bring forward at our upcoming fall UCI Cyclocross Commission meeting. I've been getting a lot of comments from riders about the saturation point and "soft" races especially. I look forward to hearing others' thou ghts as we move forward. 

                Respectfully,
                Geoff Proctor
                Member, UCI Cyclocross Commission
                 




                -----Original Message-----
                From: kjc <kc2738@...>
                To: usaico@yahoogroups.com
                Sent: Tue, Nov 2, 2010 7:59 pm
                Subject: [USAICO] 2011/12 CX Schedule

                Anyone have any insight or thoughts on the following:

                Will the UCI limit the amount of races in the US for the 2011/12 CX Season?  They handed out more permits in 2010 than I handed out pieces of candy on Halloween night.  Do we have a saturation point?

                Will the UCI try to deter promoters from having UCI races in September?  If not, consideration would be appreciated.

                In the Mid-Atlantic region, we are starting to put together a tentative schedule and it's already, once again, starting to look loaded on the front end.  Trying to change the culture of the racers by having them race later in the season is one thing, but how do we change the promoter's culture so they will want to promote an event after Thanksgiving? 

                Thanks,
                Kelly Cline
                The MAC Series






              • Adam Myerson
                Guess what field next year s elites come from? -- Adam Myerson 413-204-3202 adam@cycle-smart.com Sent via iPhone
                Message 7 of 12 , Nov 3, 2010
                • 0 Attachment
                  Guess what field next year's elites come from?

                  --
                  Adam Myerson
                  413-204-3202
                  Sent via iPhone

                  On Nov 3, 2010, at 10:22 AM, Terry Buchanan <terry@...> wrote:

                  150 Elites? We are talking elite racing right?
                   
                  Terry


                  From: USAICO@yahoogroups.com [mailto:USAICO@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Adam Myerson
                  Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 11:43 PM
                  To: USAICO
                  Subject: Re: [USAICO] 2011/12 CX Schedule

                   

                  Here's one more way we're being saturated - with riders:



                  Full fields with 150 rider field limits. Once again, more please.

                  Adam


                  On Nov 3, 2010, at 2:29 AM, Adam Myerson wrote:

                  Saturation point?

                  Saturation point of what, exactly? Because one person's saturation point is another's growth of the sport. Do we have too many criteriums in America? Or do you think the Belgians complain the UCI races in France or Switzerland are "soft" as well?

                  I promise you, for every complaint you've heard about saturation points or soft races I've got 10 riders who are psyched about the prize money they're making, and for the travel they don't have to do in order to compete in quality events. UCI events are job opportunities for bike racers. Further, the abundance of races is pushing every race to improve, at every level. A local race in New England now is the same quality as what a UCI race used to be. And to really stand out nationally, you need to put on a C1 event now. That's positive growth and improvement.

                  If you want to talk about saturation, are you talking about all of the United States? Because we know all the races in Belgium happen in a very, very small area of the country. Do not compare the US to Belgium. When there are as many UCI races in Massachusetts as there are in Belgium, then we can start to talk about saturation. A much better comparison would be how many UCI race there are in Europe as a whole to how many there are in the US.

                  The "saturation point" is what's bringing a guy like Valentin Scherz, the best Swiss U23, back to the US for the fir st half of the season to race again this year, and bringing the 2nd best Swiss U23, Anthony Grand, along with it. It's causing a guy like Luca Damiani to come to the US for 'cross after his road season, instead of staying in Italy like he did last year. It's causing a guy like Jesse Anthony, who was one of the riders bitching about "easy points," to decide instead to get his ass in his car, drive to Granogue, and win 2 hard fought and well-publiced UCI events, taking advantage of the opportunities instead of continuing to complain about them. It's bringing a guy like Alex Candelario back to 'cross after leaving it to focus on the road for the past 10 years.

                  What exactly _is_ getting saturated, then? Points? Of course, we have a limit on C2 and C1 point totals, so there's already a check in place for that. Media? Seems like we're getting plenty of great coverage, and making starts out of the riders at every level. So what's the limiter? All I see us g etting saturated with is more good events, more prize money, more press, better quality, more competition, and more growth. More please.

                  I do not see a situation where the UCI, or USA Cycling, would have any motivation to restrict the number UCI events in the US. This topic came up regarding Belgium when I was on the commission, and the conclusion then was that it was not possible or fair to the riders to limit the number of races in Belgium so that the scenes in Italy, Germany, or France could grow. Curtailing growth or strength in one country was not the way to encourage growth or strength in another.

                  This topic comes up once a year. It came up when we first had more UCI than the what was just in the 6 or 8-race national series. It came up again when we started to have conflicts on opposite coasts. It's apparently coming up again now, I assume because we've another big jump in the total number events. The sky was not fallin g back then, and it's not falling now. 

                  I'm going to save this email for next year and save myself the work of writing it again.

                  Regarding races in September, the season as defined by the UCI is September 1 until March 1. So I don't see any reason why they would discourage events from happening within that window. Frankly, there are too many conflicts in October and November, and not enough races in early September and December. I got emails this week from new organizers in Georgia and Tennessee who want to be UCI in January of 2012. So we will start to see that late season growth, but it's going to be outside the traditional areas where 'cross is strong, and in places where they are already racing through the (mild) winter, like NC, SC, TN, GA, FL, and TX. For the traditional regions, let's see how having Nationals in January is going to impact scheduling. That has to be the leading edge we fill back from.

                  I honestly think we are just scratching the surface of growth of a pro 'cross scene in the US. Until there's a UCI race every weekend in each region at the same time (like there is or was in Switzerland or Italy or France or Belgium), we have room to grow. And until there's a C1 every weekend in the US the same way there's a $10,000 or $15,000 NRC criterium or road race during the summer, we have room to grow. And until more European riders are choosing to come to the US to race (the way they do right now for the US road scene), we have room to grow.

                  My fault for checking my email in the middle of the night, but can we not have the same conversations every single year?

                  Adam


                  On Nov 2, 2010, at 10:56 PM, crosssportif@... wrote:



                  Kelli,

                  All good questions and points I plan to bring forward at our upcoming fall UCI Cyclocross Commission meeting. I've been getting a lot of comments from riders about the saturation point and "soft" races especially. I look forward to hearing others' thou ghts as we move forward. 

                  Respectfully,
                  Geoff Proctor
                  Member, UCI Cyclocross Commission
                   




                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: kjc <kc2738@...>
                  To: usaico@yahoogroups.com
                  Sent: Tue, Nov 2, 2010 7:59 pm
                  Subject: [USAICO] 2011/12 CX Schedule

                  Anyone have any insight or thoughts on the following:

                  Will the UCI limit the amount of races in the US for the 2011/12 CX Season?  They handed out more permits in 2010 than I handed out pieces of candy on Halloween night.  Do we have a saturation point?

                  Will the UCI try to deter promoters from having UCI races in September?  If not, consideration would be appreciated.

                  In the Mid-Atlantic region, we are starting to put together a tentative schedule and it's already, once again, starting to look loaded on the front end.  Trying to change the culture of the racers by having them race later in the season is one thing, but how do we change the promoter's culture so they will want to promote an event after Thanksgiving? 

                  Thanks,
                  Kelly Cline
                  The MAC Series






                • kc2738@yahoo.com
                  Unfortunately in the MAC, less than 5% of the Killer B s upgrade to Elite the following year. And then a small percentage of that 5% either quits or
                  Message 8 of 12 , Nov 3, 2010
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Unfortunately in the MAC, less than 5% of the Killer B's upgrade to Elite the following year. And then a small percentage of that 5% either quits or downgrades within a year or two because you ride circles around them. There is definitely an intimidation factor.

                    Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T


                    From: Adam Myerson <adam@...>
                    Sender: USAICO@yahoogroups.com
                    Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 10:41:49 -0400
                    To: USAICO@yahoogroups.com<USAICO@yahoogroups.com>
                    ReplyTo: USAICO@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: Re: [USAICO] 2011/12 CX Schedule

                     

                    Guess what field next year's elites come from?

                    --
                    Adam Myerson
                    413-204-3202
                    Sent via iPhone

                    On Nov 3, 2010, at 10:22 AM, Terry Buchanan <terry@...> wrote:

                    150 Elites? We are talking elite racing right?
                     
                    Terry


                    From: USAICO@yahoogroups.com [mailto:USAICO@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Adam Myerson
                    Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 11:43 PM
                    To: USAICO
                    Subject: Re: [USAICO] 2011/12 CX Schedule

                     

                    Here's one more way we're being saturated - with riders:



                    Full fields with 150 rider field limits. Once again, more please.

                    Adam


                    On Nov 3, 2010, at 2:29 AM, Adam Myerson wrote:

                    Saturation point?

                    Saturation point of what, exactly? Because one person's saturation point is another's growth of the sport. Do we have too many criteriums in America? Or do you think the Belgians complain the UCI races in France or Switzerland are "soft" as well?

                    I promise you, for every complaint you've heard about saturation points or soft races I've got 10 riders who are psyched about the prize money they're making, and for the travel they don't have to do in order to compete in quality events. UCI events are job opportunities for bike racers. Further, the abundance of races is pushing every race to improve, at every level. A local race in New England now is the same quality as what a UCI race used to be. And to really stand out nationally, you need to put on a C1 event now. That's positive growth and improvement.

                    If you want to talk about saturation, are you talking about all of the United States? Because we know all the races in Belgium happen in a very, very small area of the country. Do not compare the US to Belgium. When there are as many UCI races in Massachusetts as there are in Belgium, then we can start to talk about saturation. A much better comparison would be how many UCI race there are in Europe as a whole to how many there are in the US.

                    The "saturation point" is what's bringing a guy like Valentin Scherz, the best Swiss U23, back to the US for the fir st half of the season to race again this year, and bringing the 2nd best Swiss U23, Anthony Grand, along with it. It's causing a guy like Luca Damiani to come to the US for 'cross after his road season, instead of staying in Italy like he did last year. It's causing a guy like Jesse Anthony, who was one of the riders bitching about "easy points," to decide instead to get his ass in his car, drive to Granogue, and win 2 hard fought and well-publiced UCI events, taking advantage of the opportunities instead of continuing to complain about them. It's bringing a guy like Alex Candelario back to 'cross after leaving it to focus on the road for the past 10 years.

                    What exactly _is_ getting saturated, then? Points? Of course, we have a limit on C2 and C1 point totals, so there's already a check in place for that. Media? Seems like we're getting plenty of great coverage, and making starts out of the riders at every level. So what's the limiter? All I see us g etting saturated with is more good events, more prize money, more press, better quality, more competition, and more growth. More please.

                    I do not see a situation where the UCI, or USA Cycling, would have any motivation to restrict the number UCI events in the US. This topic came up regarding Belgium when I was on the commission, and the conclusion then was that it was not possible or fair to the riders to limit the number of races in Belgium so that the scenes in Italy, Germany, or France could grow. Curtailing growth or strength in one country was not the way to encourage growth or strength in another.

                    This topic comes up once a year. It came up when we first had more UCI than the what was just in the 6 or 8-race national series. It came up again when we started to have conflicts on opposite coasts. It's apparently coming up again now, I assume because we've another big jump in the total number events. The sky was not fallin g back then, and it's not falling now. 

                    I'm going to save this email for next year and save myself the work of writing it again.

                    Regarding races in September, the season as defined by the UCI is September 1 until March 1. So I don't see any reason why they would discourage events from happening within that window. Frankly, there are too many conflicts in October and November, and not enough races in early September and December. I got emails this week from new organizers in Georgia and Tennessee who want to be UCI in January of 2012. So we will start to see that late season growth, but it's going to be outside the traditional areas where 'cross is strong, and in places where they are already racing through the (mild) winter, like NC, SC, TN, GA, FL, and TX. For the traditional regions, let's see how having Nationals in January is going to impact scheduling. That has to be the leading edge we fill back from.

                    I honestly think we are just scratching the surface of growth of a pro 'cross scene in the US. Until there's a UCI race every weekend in each region at the same time (like there is or was in Switzerland or Italy or France or Belgium), we have room to grow. And until there's a C1 every weekend in the US the same way there's a $10,000 or $15,000 NRC criterium or road race during the summer, we have room to grow. And until more European riders are choosing to come to the US to race (the way they do right now for the US road scene), we have room to grow.

                    My fault for checking my email in the middle of the night, but can we not have the same conversations every single year?

                    Adam


                    On Nov 2, 2010, at 10:56 PM, crosssportif@... wrote:



                    Kelli,

                    All good questions and points I plan to bring forward at our upcoming fall UCI Cyclocross Commission meeting. I've been getting a lot of comments from riders about the saturation point and "soft" races especially. I look forward to hearing others' thou ghts as we move forward. 

                    Respectfully,
                    Geoff Proctor
                    Member, UCI Cyclocross Commission
                     




                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: kjc <kc2738@...>
                    To: usaico@yahoogroups.com
                    Sent: Tue, Nov 2, 2010 7:59 pm
                    Subject: [USAICO] 2011/12 CX Schedule

                    Anyone have any insight or thoughts on the following:

                    Will the UCI limit the amount of races in the US for the 2011/12 CX Season?  They handed out more permits in 2010 than I handed out pieces of candy on Halloween night.  Do we have a saturation point?

                    Will the UCI try to deter promoters from having UCI races in September?  If not, consideration would be appreciated.

                    In the Mid-Atlantic region, we are starting to put together a tentative schedule and it's already, once again, starting to look loaded on the front end.  Trying to change the culture of the racers by having them race later in the season is one thing, but how do we change the promoter's culture so they will want to promote an event after Thanksgiving? 

                    Thanks,
                    Kelly Cline
                    The MAC Series






                  • Granogue Cross Ver
                    Saturation? Nope Dilution of the pro fields on 3 race weekends yes. For now, I prefer the model where there s some attempt to organize a schedule through this
                    Message 9 of 12 , Nov 3, 2010
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Saturation?
                      Nope

                      Dilution of the pro fields on 3 race weekends yes.

                      For now, I prefer the model where there's some attempt to organize a schedule through this list, and our races compete for riders, then a top down management from USA cycling or UCI.  

                      Tom




                      On Nov 3, 2010, at 2:29 AM, Adam Myerson <adam@...> wrote:

                       

                      Saturation point?


                      Saturation point of what, exactly? Because one person's saturation point is another's growth of the sport. Do we have too many criteriums in America? Or do you think the Belgians complain the UCI races in France or Switzerland are "soft" as well?

                      I promise you, for every complaint you've heard about saturation points or soft races I've got 10 riders who are psyched about the prize money they're making, and for the travel they don't have to do in order to compete in quality events. UCI events are job opportunities for bike racers. Further, the abundance of races is pushing every race to improve, at every level. A local race in New England now is the same quality as what a UCI race used to be. And to really stand out nationally, you need to put on a C1 event now. That's positive growth and improvement.

                      If you want to talk about saturation, are you talking about all of the United States? Because we know all the races in Belgium happen in a very, very small area of the country. Do not compare the US to Belgium. When there are as many UCI races in Massachusetts as there are in Belgium, then we can start to talk about saturation. A much better comparison would be how many UCI race there are in Europe as a whole to how many there are in the US.

                      The "saturation point" is what's bringing a guy like Valentin Scherz, the best Swiss U23, back to the US for the first half of the season to race again this year, and bringing the 2nd best Swiss U23, Anthony Grand, along with it. It's causing a guy like Luca Damiani to come to the US for 'cross after his road season, instead of staying in Italy like he did last year. It's causing a guy like Jesse Anthony, who was one of the riders bitching about "easy points," to decide instead to get his ass in his car, drive to Granogue, and win 2 hard fought and well-publiced UCI events, taking advantage of the opportunities instead of continuing to complain about them. It's bringing a guy like Alex Candelario back to 'cross after leaving it to focus on the road for the past 10 years.

                      What exactly _is_ getting saturated, then? Points? Of course, we have a limit on C2 and C1 point totals, so there's already a check in place for that. Media? Seems like we're getting plenty of great coverage, and making starts out of the riders at every level. So what's the limiter? All I see us getting saturated with is more good events, more prize money, more press, better quality, more competition, and more growth. More please.

                      I do not see a situation where the UCI, or USA Cycling, would have any motivation to restrict the number UCI events in the US. This topic came up regarding Belgium when I was on the commission, and the conclusion then was that it was not possible or fair to the riders to limit the number of races in Belgium so that the scenes in Italy, Germany, or France could grow. Curtailing growth or strength in one country was not the way to encourage growth or strength in another.

                      This topic comes up once a year. It came up when we first had more UCI than the what was just in the 6 or 8-race national series. It came up again when we started to have conflicts on opposite coasts. It's apparently coming up again now, I assume because we've another big jump in the total number events. The sky was not falling back then, and it's not falling now. 

                      I'm going to save this email for next year and save myself the work of writing it again.

                      Regarding races in September, the season as defined by the UCI is September 1 until March 1. So I don't see any reason why they would discourage events from happening within that window. Frankly, there are too many conflicts in October and November, and not enough races in early September and December. I got emails this week from new organizers in Georgia and Tennessee who want to be UCI in January of 2012. So we will start to see that late season growth, but it's going to be outside the traditional areas where 'cross is strong, and in places where they are already racing through the (mild) winter, like NC, SC, TN, GA, FL, and TX. For the traditional regions, let's see how having Nationals in January is going to impact scheduling. That has to be the leading edge we fill back from.

                      I honestly think we are just scratching the surface of growth of a pro 'cross scene in the US. Until there's a UCI race every weekend in each region at the same time (like there is or was in Switzerland or Italy or France or Belgium), we have room to grow. And until there's a C1 every weekend in the US the same way there's a $10,000 or $15,000 NRC criterium or road race during the summer, we have room to grow. And until more European riders are choosing to come to the US to race (the way they do right now for the US road scene), we have room to grow.

                      My fault for checking my email in the middle of the night, but can we not have the same conversations every single year?

                      Adam


                      On Nov 2, 2010, at 10:56 PM, crosssportif@... wrote:



                      Kelli,

                      All good questions and points I plan to bring forward at our upcoming fall UCI Cyclocross Commission meeting. I've been getting a lot of comments from riders about the saturation point and "soft" races especially. I look forward to hearing others' thoughts as we move forward. 

                      Respectfully,
                      Geoff Proctor
                      Member, UCI Cyclocross Commission
                       




                      -----Original Message-----
                      From: kjc <kc2738@...>
                      To: usaico@yahoogroups.com
                      Sent: Tue, Nov 2, 2010 7:59 pm
                      Subject: [USAICO] 2011/12 CX Schedule

                      Anyone have any insight or thoughts on the following:

                      Will the UCI limit the amount of races in the US for the 2011/12 CX Season?  They handed out more permits in 2010 than I handed out pieces of candy on Halloween night.  Do we have a saturation point?

                      Will the UCI try to deter promoters from having UCI races in September?  If not, consideration would be appreciated.

                      In the Mid-Atlantic region, we are starting to put together a tentative schedule and it's already, once again, starting to look loaded on the front end.  Trying to change the culture of the racers by having them race later in the season is one thing, but how do we change the promoter's culture so they will want to promote an event after Thanksgiving? 

                      Thanks,
                      Kelly Cline
                      The MAC Series





                    • Adam Myerson
                      You let your Cat 2 s race your B race. We don t. Elites are P/1/2 here, and 3 s have their own race. So that s 150 3 s you re seeing (with about 10 juniors).
                      Message 10 of 12 , Nov 3, 2010
                      • 0 Attachment
                        You let your Cat 2's race your B race. We don't. Elites are P/1/2 here, and 3's have their own race. So that's 150 3's you're seeing (with about 10 juniors). We'll have 50-60 elites. 

                        That's also why the over enforcement of the 80% rule is such an issue here. We have a strong group in the middle. 

                        The non-UCI MAC race in Fair Hill is a bigger conflict for elites in Northampton than the CA UCI races. 

                        --
                        Adam Myerson
                        413-204-3202
                        Sent via iPhone

                        On Nov 3, 2010, at 10:53 AM, kc2738@... wrote:

                        Unfortunately in the MAC, less than 5% of the Killer B's upgrade to Elite the following year. And then a small percentage of that 5% either quits or downgrades within a year or two because you ride circles around them. There is definitely an intimidation factor.

                        Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T


                        From: Adam Myerson <adam@...>
                        Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 10:41:49 -0400
                        Subject: Re: [USAICO] 2011/12 CX Schedule

                         

                        Guess what field next year's elites come from?

                        --
                        Adam Myerson
                        413-204-3202
                        Sent via iPhone

                        On Nov 3, 2010, at 10:22 AM, Terry Buchanan <terry@...> wrote:

                        150 Elites? We are talking elite racing right?
                         
                        Terry


                        From: USAICO@yahoogroups.com [mailto:USAICO@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Adam Myerson
                        Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2010 11:43 PM
                        To: USAICO
                        Subject: Re: [USAICO] 2011/12 CX Schedule

                         

                        Here's one more way we're being saturated - with riders:



                        Full fields with 150 rider field limits. Once again, more please.

                        Adam


                        On Nov 3, 2010, at 2:29 AM, Adam Myerson wrote:

                        Saturation point?

                        Saturation point of what, exactly? Because one person's saturation point is another's growth of the sport. Do we have too many criteriums in America? Or do you think the Belgians complain the UCI races in France or Switzerland are "soft" as well?

                        I promise you, for every complaint you've heard about saturation points or soft races I've got 10 riders who are psyched about the prize money they're making, and for the travel they don't have to do in order to compete in quality events. UCI events are job opportunities for bike racers. Further, the abundance of races is pushing every race to improve, at every level. A local race in New England now is the same quality as what a UCI race used to be. And to really stand out nationally, you need to put on a C1 event now. That's positive growth and improvement.

                        If you want to talk about saturation, are you talking about all of the United States? Because we know all the races in Belgium happen in a very, very small area of the country. Do not compare the US to Belgium. When there are as many UCI races in Massachusetts as there are in Belgium, then we can start to talk about saturation. A much better comparison would be how many UCI race there are in Europe as a whole to how many there are in the US.

                        The "saturation point" is what's bringing a guy like Valentin Scherz, the best Swiss U23, back to the US for the fir st half of the season to race again this year, and bringing the 2nd best Swiss U23, Anthony Grand, along with it. It's causing a guy like Luca Damiani to come to the US for 'cross after his road season, instead of staying in Italy like he did last year. It's causing a guy like Jesse Anthony, who was one of the riders bitching about "easy points," to decide instead to get his ass in his car, drive to Granogue, and win 2 hard fought and well-publiced UCI events, taking advantage of the opportunities instead of continuing to complain about them. It's bringing a guy like Alex Candelario back to 'cross after leaving it to focus on the road for the past 10 years.

                        What exactly _is_ getting saturated, then? Points? Of course, we have a limit on C2 and C1 point totals, so there's already a check in place for that. Media? Seems like we're getting plenty of great coverage, and making starts out of the riders at every level. So what's the limiter? All I see us g etting saturated with is more good events, more prize money, more press, better quality, more competition, and more growth. More please.

                        I do not see a situation where the UCI, or USA Cycling, would have any motivation to restrict the number UCI events in the US. This topic came up regarding Belgium when I was on the commission, and the conclusion then was that it was not possible or fair to the riders to limit the number of races in Belgium so that the scenes in Italy, Germany, or France could grow. Curtailing growth or strength in one country was not the way to encourage growth or strength in another.

                        This topic comes up once a year. It came up when we first had more UCI than the what was just in the 6 or 8-race national series. It came up again when we started to have conflicts on opposite coasts. It's apparently coming up again now, I assume because we've another big jump in the total number events. The sky was not fallin g back then, and it's not falling now. 

                        I'm going to save this email for next year and save myself the work of writing it again.

                        Regarding races in September, the season as defined by the UCI is September 1 until March 1. So I don't see any reason why they would discourage events from happening within that window. Frankly, there are too many conflicts in October and November, and not enough races in early September and December. I got emails this week from new organizers in Georgia and Tennessee who want to be UCI in January of 2012. So we will start to see that late season growth, but it's going to be outside the traditional areas where 'cross is strong, and in places where they are already racing through the (mild) winter, like NC, SC, TN, GA, FL, and TX. For the traditional regions, let's see how having Nationals in January is going to impact scheduling. That has to be the leading edge we fill back from.

                        I honestly think we are just scratching the surface of growth of a pro 'cross scene in the US. Until there's a UCI race every weekend in each region at the same time (like there is or was in Switzerland or Italy or France or Belgium), we have room to grow. And until there's a C1 every weekend in the US the same way there's a $10,000 or $15,000 NRC criterium or road race during the summer, we have room to grow. And until more European riders are choosing to come to the US to race (the way they do right now for the US road scene), we have room to grow.

                        My fault for checking my email in the middle of the night, but can we not have the same conversations every single year?

                        Adam


                        On Nov 2, 2010, at 10:56 PM, crosssportif@... wrote:



                        Kelli,

                        All good questions and points I plan to bring forward at our upcoming fall UCI Cyclocross Commission meeting. I've been getting a lot of comments from riders about the saturation point and "soft" races especially. I look forward to hearing others' thou ghts as we move forward. 

                        Respectfully,
                        Geoff Proctor
                        Member, UCI Cyclocross Commission
                         




                        -----Original Message-----
                        From: kjc <kc2738@...>
                        To: usaico@yahoogroups.com
                        Sent: Tue, Nov 2, 2010 7:59 pm
                        Subject: [USAICO] 2011/12 CX Schedule

                        Anyone have any insight or thoughts on the following:

                        Will the UCI limit the amount of races in the US for the 2011/12 CX Season?  They handed out more permits in 2010 than I handed out pieces of candy on Halloween night.  Do we have a saturation point?

                        Will the UCI try to deter promoters from having UCI races in September?  If not, consideration would be appreciated.

                        In the Mid-Atlantic region, we are starting to put together a tentative schedule and it's already, once again, starting to look loaded on the front end.  Trying to change the culture of the racers by having them race later in the season is one thing, but how do we change the promoter's culture so they will want to promote an event after Thanksgiving? 

                        Thanks,
                        Kelly Cline
                        The MAC Series






                      • Brook Watts
                        Unfortunately the top-down model is the UCI mandated model otherwise we d be sending our inscription forms directly to Aigle not Colo Spgs. Let s face it,
                        Message 11 of 12 , Nov 3, 2010
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Unfortunately the top-down model is the UCI mandated model otherwise we'd be sending our inscription forms directly to Aigle not Colo Spgs.

                          Let's face it, there's a place for the National Federation in the schedule development but I think we'd all like to see a more active involvement including a definitive statement of how the sport should develop in the USA, date protection for major races or enforcement of course standards.

                          Sure, as a group we need to do our preliminary discussions and date-swaps to create and then present a partially formed schedule to USAC who then needs to step up as a referee to mediate any issues.   That's the leadership role (vs. a purely bureaucratic role) that we need.



                          Brook Watts
                          brook.watts@...
                          Wednesday Sept. 14, 2011






                          On Nov 3, 2010, at 8:55 AM, Granogue Cross Ver wrote:

                           

                          Saturation?
                          Nope

                          Dilution of the pro fields on 3 race weekends yes.

                          For now, I prefer the model where there's some attempt to organize a schedule through this list, and our races compete for riders, then a top down management from USA cycling or UCI.  

                          Tom




                          On Nov 3, 2010, at 2:29 AM, Adam Myerson <adam@...> wrote:

                           

                          Saturation point?


                          Saturation point of what, exactly? Because one person's saturation point is another's growth of the sport. Do we have too many criteriums in America? Or do you think the Belgians complain the UCI races in France or Switzerland are "soft" as well?

                          I promise you, for every complaint you've heard about saturation points or soft races I've got 10 riders who are psyched about the prize money they're making, and for the travel they don't have to do in order to compete in quality events. UCI events are job opportunities for bike racers. Further, the abundance of races is pushing every race to improve, at every level. A local race in New England now is the same quality as what a UCI race used to be. And to really stand out nationally, you need to put on a C1 event now. That's positive growth and improvement.

                          If you want to talk about saturation, are you talking about all of the United States? Because we know all the races in Belgium happen in a very, very small area of the country. Do not compare the US to Belgium. When there are as many UCI races in Massachusetts as there are in Belgium, then we can start to talk about saturation. A much better comparison would be how many UCI race there are in Europe as a whole to how many there are in the US.

                          The "saturation point" is what's bringing a guy like Valentin Scherz, the best Swiss U23, back to the US for the first half of the season to race again this year, and bringing the 2nd best Swiss U23, Anthony Grand, along with it. It's causing a guy like Luca Damiani to come to the US for 'cross after his road season, instead of staying in Italy like he did last year. It's causing a guy like Jesse Anthony, who was one of the riders bitching about "easy points," to decide instead to get his ass in his car, drive to Granogue, and win 2 hard fought and well-publiced UCI events, taking advantage of the opportunities instead of continuing to complain about them. It's bringing a guy like Alex Candelario back to 'cross after leaving it to focus on the road for the past 10 years.

                          What exactly _is_ getting saturated, then? Points? Of course, we have a limit on C2 and C1 point totals, so there's already a check in place for that. Media? Seems like we're getting plenty of great coverage, and making starts out of the riders at every level. So what's the limiter? All I see us getting saturated with is more good events, more prize money, more press, better quality, more competition, and more growth. More please.

                          I do not see a situation where the UCI, or USA Cycling, would have any motivation to restrict the number UCI events in the US. This topic came up regarding Belgium when I was on the commission, and the conclusion then was that it was not possible or fair to the riders to limit the number of races in Belgium so that the scenes in Italy, Germany, or France could grow. Curtailing growth or strength in one country was not the way to encourage growth or strength in another.

                          This topic comes up once a year. It came up when we first had more UCI than the what was just in the 6 or 8-race national series. It came up again when we started to have conflicts on opposite coasts. It's apparently coming up again now, I assume because we've another big jump in the total number events. The sky was not falling back then, and it's not falling now. 

                          I'm going to save this email for next year and save myself the work of writing it again.

                          Regarding races in September, the season as defined by the UCI is September 1 until March 1. So I don't see any reason why they would discourage events from happening within that window. Frankly, there are too many conflicts in October and November, and not enough races in early September and December. I got emails this week from new organizers in Georgia and Tennessee who want to be UCI in January of 2012. So we will start to see that late season growth, but it's going to be outside the traditional areas where 'cross is strong, and in places where they are already racing through the (mild) winter, like NC, SC, TN, GA, FL, and TX. For the traditional regions, let's see how having Nationals in January is going to impact scheduling. That has to be the leading edge we fill back from.

                          I honestly think we are just scratching the surface of growth of a pro 'cross scene in the US. Until there's a UCI race every weekend in each region at the same time (like there is or was in Switzerland or Italy or France or Belgium), we have room to grow. And until there's a C1 every weekend in the US the same way there's a $10,000 or $15,000 NRC criterium or road race during the summer, we have room to grow. And until more European riders are choosing to come to the US to race (the way they do right now for the US road scene), we have room to grow.

                          My fault for checking my email in the middle of the night, but can we not have the same conversations every single year?

                          Adam


                          On Nov 2, 2010, at 10:56 PM, crosssportif@... wrote:



                          Kelli,

                          All good questions and points I plan to bring forward at our upcoming fall UCI Cyclocross Commission meeting. I've been getting a lot of comments from riders about the saturation point and "soft" races especially. I look forward to hearing others' thoughts as we move forward. 

                          Respectfully,
                          Geoff Proctor
                          Member, UCI Cyclocross Commission
                           




                          -----Original Message-----
                          From: kjc <kc2738@...>
                          To: usaico@yahoogroups.com
                          Sent: Tue, Nov 2, 2010 7:59 pm
                          Subject: [USAICO] 2011/12 CX Schedule

                          Anyone have any insight or thoughts on the following:

                          Will the UCI limit the amount of races in the US for the 2011/12 CX Season?  They handed out more permits in 2010 than I handed out pieces of candy on Halloween night.  Do we have a saturation point?

                          Will the UCI try to deter promoters from having UCI races in September?  If not, consideration would be appreciated.

                          In the Mid-Atlantic region, we are starting to put together a tentative schedule and it's already, once again, starting to look loaded on the front end.  Trying to change the culture of the racers by having them race later in the season is one thing, but how do we change the promoter's culture so they will want to promote an event after Thanksgiving? 

                          Thanks,
                          Kelly Cline
                          The MAC Series











                          Brook Watts
                          303-684-9170 Phone
                          303-907-3133 Cell
                          323-329-9315 Fax




                        • Michael Hewitt
                          Ouch! There goes the neighborhood! ... Michael Hewitt mikeh@iglou.com To be Jedi is to face the truth, and choose. Give off light, or darkness...Be a candle,
                          Message 12 of 12 , Nov 3, 2010
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Ouch!  There goes the neighborhood!

                            On Nov 3, 2010, at 11:18 AM, Brook Watts wrote:

                             

                            Unfortunately the top-down model is the UCI mandated model otherwise we'd be sending our inscription forms directly to Aigle not Colo Spgs.


                            Let's face it, there's a place for the National Federation in the schedule development but I think we'd all like to see a more active involvement including a definitive statement of how the sport should develop in the USA, date protection for major races or enforcement of course standards.

                            Sure, as a group we need to do our preliminary discussions and date-swaps to create and then present a partially formed schedule to USAC who then needs to step up as a referee to mediate any issues.   That's the leadership role (vs. a purely bureaucratic role) that we need.



                            Brook Watts
                            brook.watts@...
                            Wednesday Sept. 14, 2011






                            On Nov 3, 2010, at 8:55 AM, Granogue Cross Ver wrote:

                             

                            Saturation?
                            Nope

                            Dilution of the pro fields on 3 race weekends yes.

                            For now, I prefer the model where there's some attempt to organize a schedule through this list, and our races compete for riders, then a top down management from USA cycling or UCI.  

                            Tom




                            On Nov 3, 2010, at 2:29 AM, Adam Myerson <adam@...> wrote:

                             

                            Saturation point?


                            Saturation point of what, exactly? Because one person's saturation point is another's growth of the sport. Do we have too many criteriums in America? Or do you think the Belgians complain the UCI races in France or Switzerland are "soft" as well?

                            I promise you, for every complaint you've heard about saturation points or soft races I've got 10 riders who are psyched about the prize money they're making, and for the travel they don't have to do in order to compete in quality events. UCI events are job opportunities for bike racers. Further, the abundance of races is pushing every race to improve, at every level. A local race in New England now is the same quality as what a UCI race used to be. And to really stand out nationally, you need to put on a C1 event now. That's positive growth and improvement.

                            If you want to talk about saturation, are you talking about all of the United States? Because we know all the races in Belgium happen in a very, very small area of the country. Do not compare the US to Belgium. When there are as many UCI races in Massachusetts as there are in Belgium, then we can start to talk about saturation. A much better comparison would be how many UCI race there are in Europe as a whole to how many there are in the US.

                            The "saturation point" is what's bringing a guy like Valentin Scherz, the best Swiss U23, back to the US for the first half of the season to race again this year, and bringing the 2nd best Swiss U23, Anthony Grand, along with it. It's causing a guy like Luca Damiani to come to the US for 'cross after his road season, instead of staying in Italy like he did last year. It's causing a guy like Jesse Anthony, who was one of the riders bitching about "easy points," to decide instead to get his ass in his car, drive to Granogue, and win 2 hard fought and well-publiced UCI events, taking advantage of the opportunities instead of continuing to complain about them. It's bringing a guy like Alex Candelario back to 'cross after leaving it to focus on the road for the past 10 years.

                            What exactly _is_ getting saturated, then? Points? Of course, we have a limit on C2 and C1 point totals, so there's already a check in place for that. Media? Seems like we're getting plenty of great coverage, and making starts out of the riders at every level. So what's the limiter? All I see us getting saturated with is more good events, more prize money, more press, better quality, more competition, and more growth. More please.

                            I do not see a situation where the UCI, or USA Cycling, would have any motivation to restrict the number UCI events in the US. This topic came up regarding Belgium when I was on the commission, and the conclusion then was that it was not possible or fair to the riders to limit the number of races in Belgium so that the scenes in Italy, Germany, or France could grow. Curtailing growth or strength in one country was not the way to encourage growth or strength in another.

                            This topic comes up once a year. It came up when we first had more UCI than the what was just in the 6 or 8-race national series. It came up again when we started to have conflicts on opposite coasts. It's apparently coming up again now, I assume because we've another big jump in the total number events. The sky was not falling back then, and it's not falling now. 

                            I'm going to save this email for next year and save myself the work of writing it again.

                            Regarding races in September, the season as defined by the UCI is September 1 until March 1. So I don't see any reason why they would discourage events from happening within that window. Frankly, there are too many conflicts in October and November, and not enough races in early September and December. I got emails this week from new organizers in Georgia and Tennessee who want to be UCI in January of 2012. So we will start to see that late season growth, but it's going to be outside the traditional areas where 'cross is strong, and in places where they are already racing through the (mild) winter, like NC, SC, TN, GA, FL, and TX. For the traditional regions, let's see how having Nationals in January is going to impact scheduling. That has to be the leading edge we fill back from.

                            I honestly think we are just scratching the surface of growth of a pro 'cross scene in the US. Until there's a UCI race every weekend in each region at the same time (like there is or was in Switzerland or Italy or France or Belgium), we have room to grow. And until there's a C1 every weekend in the US the same way there's a $10,000 or $15,000 NRC criterium or road race during the summer, we have room to grow. And until more European riders are choosing to come to the US to race (the way they do right now for the US road scene), we have room to grow.

                            My fault for checking my email in the middle of the night, but can we not have the same conversations every single year?

                            Adam


                            On Nov 2, 2010, at 10:56 PM, crosssportif@... wrote:



                            Kelli,

                            All good questions and points I plan to bring forward at our upcoming fall UCI Cyclocross Commission meeting. I've been getting a lot of comments from riders about the saturation point and "soft" races especially. I look forward to hearing others' thoughts as we move forward. 

                            Respectfully,
                            Geoff Proctor
                            Member, UCI Cyclocross Commission
                             




                            -----Original Message-----
                            From: kjc <kc2738@...>
                            To: usaico@yahoogroups.com
                            Sent: Tue, Nov 2, 2010 7:59 pm
                            Subject: [USAICO] 2011/12 CX Schedule

                            Anyone have any insight or thoughts on the following:

                            Will the UCI limit the amount of races in the US for the 2011/12 CX Season?  They handed out more permits in 2010 than I handed out pieces of candy on Halloween night.  Do we have a saturation point?

                            Will the UCI try to deter promoters from having UCI races in September?  If not, consideration would be appreciated.

                            In the Mid-Atlantic region, we are starting to put together a tentative schedule and it's already, once again, starting to look loaded on the front end.  Trying to change the culture of the racers by having them race later in the season is one thing, but how do we change the promoter's culture so they will want to promote an event after Thanksgiving? 

                            Thanks,
                            Kelly Cline
                            The MAC Series











                            Brook Watts
                            303-684-9170 Phone
                            303-907-3133 Cell
                            323-329-9315 Fax






                            Michael Hewitt
                            mikeh@...

                            "To be Jedi is to face the truth, and choose. Give off light, or darkness...Be a candle, or the night...but choose!"
                            -Yoda

                            m 502-930-1036
                            SKYPE ME: mike2wheelsports

                            Please consider the environment before printing this email.



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