Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: USAT Responds to Life Time Fitness Announcement about "divorce" from USAT Sanctioning [albertok] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
albertok wrote:
h2ofun wrote:
albertok wrote:
Hgwy1 wrote:
I applaud LTF for their decision. USAT has lost their way on many fronts and from the event side pretty much have become an (expensive) insurance provider and not much more. LTF will be able to use a tremendous amount of money (15 per person) and invest it as they feel will best serve their audience.



Was on a training ride yesterday with buddies and this whole USAt/Lifetime situation came up. And I have to admit, our one guy who slows us down the most- yet was a race director a few years back- put this in a view that I frankly would like to hear what others think about. I’ve been a big USAT fan and was surprised by the Lifetime move, but now I am thinking harder about this split.

1) 1) USAT states they have “sanctioned more than 40,000 races over the past 35 years”. Big numbers! But let’s forget about events that date back to a time before computers and when only water was passed out at aid stations. How many events did USAT sanctioned in 2015? 2016? The race director said it was about 1500-1600 a year. Still big numbers, and lots of money pulled in for each of these sanctioning application fees (which runs the RD about $200-$400) and all the one day memberships that are pulled in. On top of, each USAT sanctioned race MUST have a USAT certified race director, which costs a crazy amount of money (paid to USAT) to take the course and be certified.
2)
2) 2) Many people in triathlon think of the USAT SANCTION as a gold standard, the big seal of approval for a proper and safe race with officials to enforce the rules. Yet it is really only a RD filling out an on-line sanction form consisting of about 20 questions, many of which are the RD’s name/address/phone/date of event and then paying their sanctioning fee. A better question may be HOW MANY USAT RACES ARE DECLINED SANCTIONING? Again, the RD in our group says he can’t think of one event that was actually even declined. and he was witness to many poor events, yet USAT would sanction again the next year. So the magical USAT Sanction stamp doesn’t seem so magical anymore for me.
3)
3) USAT states there are no “surprises” using USAT rules and USAT Officials. Our RD used officials, paid dearly for them only to have athletes not know they were penalized and if they did actually know there was a penalty unsure exactly what they did. The cost of having officials is all on the RD and some officials live far away incurring an even higher travel fee. There was no shortage of officials, just the cost of getting them to his event became outlandish and USAT would not assist with the fee to keep the integrity of the event. He learned that there was NO USAT requirement to have officials at his events in order to be USAT sanctioned. It was easy math. He stopped using officials. The best estimate was that only about 30% of races use USAT Officials, and that is how USAT keeps the integrity of the sport.
4)
4) I am unsure why USAT states that having officials on motorized vehicles directing athletes in real time threatens on-course safety? Ironman does this! And USAT has no problem putting their sanctioning stamp on them and accepting all their sanctioning fees and one day memberships. USAT adds that short-courses races differ considerably from long-course races. What? So the short course races only have a 12 or 24 mile bike leg. Do the short-course athletes go that much faster than the long-course athletes? I don’t think so. Does IM not give penalties for the first 24 miles of their USAT sanctioned event that makes their system so much more solid. I think USAT is grabbing at straws here.

I’ll be watching this lifetime split. I’m definitely going to get to a few of their races next year to see how this goes first hand and think they are possibly on to something here.


You are wrong on #1. The only races that must have a certified RD, which I and my wife have paid for and been to class, is for a Nationals event. Other than that, nope.


OK. USAT Certified just for National Events.
Yet this makes it even worse!
USAT will take money from anyone, no training or certification, any Joe that wants to put on a triathlon and slaps "USAT Sanctioned" on their event.
Thanks for that clarification Dave that makes me cringe even more.

Does a race saying it is USAT certified means it is better? Nope. Safer? Nope. That all rules are followed? NOPE

But for me, and I did said me, it allows me to chase something that is fun for me, and that is rankings. Going for my 11th year of AA in Tri. Going for top AA in my AG in Aquathlon. Going for my first AA in Duathlon. Going for Aquabike, but boy do I suck!!!

Each event, based on the RD who is running, determines whether and event is safe, fair, etc.

So bottom line, just do the events one enjoys doing and enjoy life.

I will be heading to Donner Tri in the morning to race. Yep a USAT event. :) Darn hill scares the crap out of me.

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: USAT Responds to Life Time Fitness Announcement about "divorce" from USAT Sanctioning [Sanrafaeltri] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Under current USAT rules a participant can only appeal a rule violation for Equipment or Eligibility. An appeal of a call of drafting, off course advancement etc. (a judgemen call by a marshall). Will be immediately dismissed by the head referee. So unless USAT changes is methodolgy, the process will remain cumbersome and appear unfair. (Which is sort of the whole point of this discussion). The letter from Siff is a restatement of the party line. Which we, of course, expected. But I hope that the USAT Board takes this "shot across the bow" by LTF to heart and begins the process of change or they will have more defections.
Quote Reply
Re: USAT Responds to Life Time Fitness Announcement about "divorce" from USAT Sanctioning [albertok] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
albertok wrote:
A better question may be HOW MANY USAT RACES ARE DECLINED SANCTIONING?

we looked at this a couple of years ago. we couldn't find any. USAT's response to us is was that isn't it better to get an RD to conform to a standard rather than decline the sanction?

still, it seems to me there ought to be a market solution or some kind of solution that allows a consumer to parse between races that are inherently safer. i have some ideas about that, as i have given this a lot of thought. i don't know that the answer is in declining a sanction, but i have seen some pretty questionable races produced, no doubt.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: USAT Responds to Life Time Fitness Announcement about "divorce" from USAT Sanctioning [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
albertok wrote:
A better question may be HOW MANY USAT RACES ARE DECLINED SANCTIONING?


we looked at this a couple of years ago. we couldn't find any. USAT's response to us is was that isn't it better to get an RD to conform to a standard rather than decline the sanction?

still, it seems to me there ought to be a market solution or some kind of solution that allows a consumer to parse between races that are inherently safer. i have some ideas about that, as i have given this a lot of thought. i don't know that the answer is in declining a sanction, but i have seen some pretty questionable races produced, no doubt.

Now if only a USAT sanctioned race meant you got the standards to be followed. I know of many where the water temp was over the spec, and, well, ..

Or the transition area has an equal distance no matter where you put your bike.

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: USAT Responds to Life Time Fitness Announcement about "divorce" from USAT Sanctioning [smoothoperator] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I would like to see USAT fee/membership as optional at a race. I chase USAT rankings too, but not everyone cares about USAT participation (points, race series, championships, worlds, etc).

I like the "standards" that USAT tries to set and (maybe) hold RDs and races to. A great goal, and expected of a National Sport Sanctioning body participating in World competition (ITU, Olympics, etc). I just wish USAT was more consistent with the Worlds programs (why do we still have Non-draft Sprint Duathlon at Nationals?). They do a good job, not great...we all have room to improve.

Nothing wrong with LTF doing their own thing. Some will race them, for their own reasons. Some will avoid at all costs...again, their choice. Nothing wrong with that in my view, we all have choices on races.

Registration fees should have some logical cap based on actual costs and some added profit for the company providing the service. But, like many here, I think Active.com is expensive relative to the value they provide. I get that they offer more than a money taker service, but like anything else, maybe they need to offer tiered services with requisite fees for those added services. I don't want an Active Premium account for extra cost, so why do you make it so frigging easy to click signup for that crap when I just want to pay for a simple reg fee for my local/regional/national race?!?!?!

RDs probably are getting some great feedback in this thread. I can only hope USAT and Active monitor it as well as adjust their business models a bit.

D
Quote Reply
Re: USAT Responds to Life Time Fitness Announcement about "divorce" from USAT Sanctioning [Dalancas] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Dalancas wrote:
I would like to see USAT fee/membership as optional at a race. I chase USAT rankings too, but not everyone cares about USAT participation (points, race series, championships, worlds, etc).

I like the "standards" that USAT tries to set and (maybe) hold RDs and races to. A great goal, and expected of a National Sport Sanctioning body participating in World competition (ITU, Olympics, etc). I just wish USAT was more consistent with the Worlds programs (why do we still have Non-draft Sprint Duathlon at Nationals?). They do a good job, not great...we all have room to improve.

Nothing wrong with LTF doing their own thing. Some will race them, for their own reasons. Some will avoid at all costs...again, their choice. Nothing wrong with that in my view, we all have choices on races.

Registration fees should have some logical cap based on actual costs and some added profit for the company providing the service. But, like many here, I think Active.com is expensive relative to the value they provide. I get that they offer more than a money taker service, but like anything else, maybe they need to offer tiered services with requisite fees for those added services. I don't want an Active Premium account for extra cost, so why do you make it so frigging easy to click signup for that crap when I just want to pay for a simple reg fee for my local/regional/national race?!?!?!

RDs probably are getting some great feedback in this thread. I can only hope USAT and Active monitor it as well as adjust their business models a bit.

D

Totally agree with your comment about why are we allowing folks to qualify for TeamUSA worlds which is DL sprint, both tri and DU, when they are racing a NDL sprint tri or du. Easy to answer, just follow the money.

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: USAT Responds to Life Time Fitness Announcement about "divorce" from USAT Sanctioning [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
h2ofun wrote:
Now if only a USAT sanctioned race meant you got the standards to be followed.

And this is probably the key to most people's issue with USAT sanctioning. If all you really get from the sanctioning is points towards a ranking, and you aren't seriously chasing those points, what do you actually get? I'd much rather do a non-sanctioned event that has good organization, clearly marked and accurately measured courses, chip timing, and fair and consistent enforcement of the rules (even if they don't specifically adhere to USAT rules) than do a sanctioned race that has none of the above...

"I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 10, and I don't know why!"
Quote Reply
Re: USAT Responds to Life Time Fitness Announcement about "divorce" from USAT Sanctioning [Warbird] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Warbird wrote:
h2ofun wrote:

Now if only a USAT sanctioned race meant you got the standards to be followed.


And this is probably the key to most people's issue with USAT sanctioning. If all you really get from the sanctioning is points towards a ranking, and you aren't seriously chasing those points, what do you actually get? I'd much rather do a non-sanctioned event that has good organization, clearly marked and accurately measured courses, chip timing, and fair and consistent enforcement of the rules (even if they don't specifically adhere to USAT rules) than do a sanctioned race that has none of the above...

I have raced tons of USAT events, and none have ever been as bad as you state.

I have raced USAT and non USAT events in the past. A bad RD, is a bad RD. Even WTC gets bad RD's.

Folks can just choose a race based on whatever they want. No reason to fight over USAT or not.

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply

Prev Next