Ok I am stepping out of goofy Tibbs mode here and trying to figure this out.
What is the purpose of the USAT?
Why should I join?
What is getting in the way of a national championship?
These questions are very loaded but with what I don’t know yet.
What is the purpose of the USAT?
Provide old executives with some extra cash while allowing them to engage in political debates and the generation of paper work.
Why should I join?
Sponsor the above. It is very costly.
What is getting in the way of a national championship?
See answer 1 - Too many political debates and paper work.
one good reason - if you are doing a lot of USAT sponsered races, it makes more sense than paying one day fees.
All the rest is bells, whistles, and fancy paint (or not). Rankings, magazines, bike passes, championships, rules, Olympic participation - none are core products (i.e., none bring home the bacon). The bacon comes from the sale of insurance.
So, why should you join? No need, unless of course you want to do any event that buys the USAT core product. Because that’s the deal the race organizers have to make with USAT in order to buy this product.
Easy answer? They narrowed their choices to a single city (Rochester, NY) and then lost the city. Why did they lose the city? Some say it’s because the new board froze the process at a key time (late summer, early fall), and when they returned to Rochester, something else had snapped up the only reasonable venue. Why did the board freeze the process? Slowman can tell this story in much more detail - but basically, it’s because the national office had gotten the priorities for a national championship warped beyond recognition. The board thought the national championship should be much more than it had become and wanted to rethink (and reinvestigate) the entire process. In retrospect, the board was doing something both necessary and worthwhile - but probably should have been doing it for 2006, while letting 2005 go on its (flawed) way. NOTE: Because we had been in the habit of granting two-year contracts for nationals, however, it meant that choosing Rochester would have delayed any real reform of the national’s selection policy until 2007. That would have been a bitter pill to swallow.
I would agree that it would be wise to not have one in 2005 and regroup of 06 and after but the problem is these guys have shown zero ability to do anything but bitch and moan. It seems to me that all cancling the race will do is kill it for the years to come because they will have to talk through their lawyers to even consider having a lunch.
It’s not that hard to put on a National Championship. The governing body of the sport should be able to put on a race and call it the National Championships. No other sport has a problem with a championship why do we have to be different?
Is there anyone on the board who reads this forum who can talk?
Tibbs, I gave up on USAT a while ago. They get their sh$t together and I will rejoin. I haven’t scrapped the membership decal off the truck yet but every post like this I read makes me think about it.
Would you loin a competing organization that would help get the races insurance and media coverage even it is a start up nothing?
Just wondering.
A local race company is not USAT affiliated, I don’t have to join anything, they put on great races, there is no extra fee. If I do USAT race (about one a year) I pay for the one day liscense. I’m not good enough to worry about national championships, I don’t race enough races to do well in a national ranking and I never read anything in the USAT magazine worth reading except the ads. I’d rather belong to the “Peaceful Tribe”.
The local race company puts on like a dozen races a year, including a 1/2. I know supporting USAT would supposedly make the sport better, but I still fail to see why.
To put it in some perspective on it, every sport of any size has a national governing body. As much as people would like to go libertarian, it just really helps to have something buy the insurance, set some standards, put out a rule book and some communication, etc.
I am very involved in the sport of sailboat racing. And I can tell you that the exact same comments and criticisms are directed at the USSA. Like Triathlon, Sailing is really a “fringe” (not mainstream participation) sport, that is very decentralized in its practice and the administration of its races. The “state of the sport” threads between the sailing forums (why not more TV? Why not more sponsors? Why are some so rich?, etc) could be interchangeable between sailing and tri.
The people who run the NGB organizations such as ASAT and USSA are usually well-meaning, but there isn’t a big enough revenue base and org structure to hire professional level career managers, of the type that many of the participants would like. Sort of like suburban government. Many of the residents (customers) are active professionals with higher educations, but the town is run (vendor) by a small-business owner who isn’t as sophisticated and rather likes being a big fish in a small pond.
At the end of the day, it is better to have the well-meaining staff and structure and limited, easily criticized services than not have anything. But sometimes it sure does seem like we’d be better off without anything, or at least without the actions or inactions of the managers we “hired”.
I doubt few people would know that in the arly 90’s IM Canada was in so much trouble that the Penticton council even made noises about closing it down, you could still get a race slot in July in '90/'91. Look at it now, it took one man who took control and put the event back to what it was and on the path to what it should have always been. He may also have gone a bit overboard since but thats another topic!
I dont think running a championship purely to have a “champion” for one season is as important as getting much of the work done for future “championships”.
Why join? Because flawed or not, USAT represents the “intention” to ensure that quality triathlons exist and that standards may be established and upheld. Its also the only opportunity to manage the rapid evolution of triathlon. Insurance yes. Increasingly risk management is going to become a better constructed concept and I believe USAT sanctioning will stand for a better race. Officiating. I’ve seen the events in Canada where there are no clear standards maintained and great races are huge draft fests. I think the officiating program is getting stronger all of the time and the athletes appreciate it. Organization…I believe that there are many sports promoters, coaches, businessmen who see triahtlon as the current Atkins Diet of the age group athlete and will take every advantage. USAT has the ability to stand in the way of pure opportunists and try to establish coaching credentials, quality business practices etc. The Nationals are obviously a complex topic. What I am increasingly wondering about is…what was so wrong about Rochester? They stepped up to the plate, ready to put on a nationals. Maybe they have as much to offer as a Tempe, San Antonio Lake, Oceanside or Raleigh? I think IMNA has strove to prove you can make most any site work. Lack of attendence at Shreveport is a much a marketing problem as anything. Couer De’Alene was fantastic and had a good turnout. I become less clear all the time about what the problem was. Was Shreveport a bust. Quality events aren’t simply about eh numbers. Dan wrote a glowing report about the first year.
USAT is our governing body and has the ability to be responsive to the needs of triathlon. As any rapidly growing organization it just needs continuing work and evolution. In the life of all organizations there is a period when it must grow beyond the ‘storming’, passionate beginnings and must establish norms and procedures to accomadate the rapid growth and responsibilities. USAT is becoming an organization responsible for a “brand” serving over 150,000 athletes and 30,000+ annual members. Its governance and advocates need to start acting like leaders of a maturing organization.It needs the support of all athletes that care about the state of triathlon in the US.
“USAT represents the “intention” to ensure that quality triathlons exist and that standards may be established and upheld.”
OK, sure. But at some point intention and reality needs to converge. I applaud USAT for maintaining and publishing rules, and for their officials program. And certainly all races benefit from this, whether sanctioned or not as USAT refs and rules are often employed at non-sanctioned races. Perhaps that’s not fair. However, I’ll say it again, the USAT sanction is currently meaningless. It is not the hallmark of a well run or well officiated race. Some sanctioned races are great, some suck. The same goes for the non-sanctioned races.
USAT has a hell of a lot of cash for a NGB. At some point, someone needs to ask for what? Why should racers continue to pay annual fees or one day fees? If the answer is for rules and officials, that’s fine. I just think the price is pretty steep for that. Beyond these two things, I fail to see the benefit for members or race directors. The coaches program is ~interesting~, nationals is in the crapper (for whatever reason), and apparently the insurance is unappealing to RDs.
I like the idea of having a governing body. I also like the idea of its budget being in line with what it provides.