Slowman, do you have a problem with the USAT elections?

Triathlon Forum
1

Dan, I would have thought your passion for keeping the USAT board honest was still present but I guess I will have to enumerate the problems I am having to get your response:

  1. The by-laws, written by you and Lou to get transparency, state that the annual financial report must be presented for board review in 120 days and posted on the website 10 days later. That gives the powers over 4 months to post and here we are, 8 months into the year, with no financials.
  2. There is this seemingly inability to correct the ranking system, the most popular membership benefit. I have written the president, my board member, and the executive director and, even though I have gotten response to my e-mails, nothing has been done to revise the ranking to eliminate the three Canadian pros listed as No. 1 in their respective age-groups.
  3. We are slowly regressing into the mire of the time prior to by-law changes with the extending of terms and term limits in the name of “Increased Stability of Governance.” 2 year terms and 6 years on a board is long enough and longer periods actually contribute to instability.

I am voting against the longer terms and, probably, against the outside director as I am not sure the board will give the membership the information needed before they place him/her on the board.

Bob Sigerson

2

I’m with you, Bob. I voted against the term extension.

3

First, I agree with you 100%. What I have found as a huge flaw in the system is this…

Triathlon participation in the United States is at an all-time high, following unprecedented growth over the past 10 years. USA Triathlon can easily track the surge through its membership numbers, which surpassed 115,000 annual members in early 2009. To put that into perspective, annual membership hovered between 15,000 and 21,000 from 1993 to 2000.
Download the 2008 USAT Membership Breakdown to view membership growth since 1993, look at the age breakdowns of USAT members, and see what states have the most USAT members (and more).
At the end of 1999, annual membership stood at 19,060. Those numbers had more than doubled to 40,299 by the end of 2002 and doubled again to 84,787 by the end of 2006. Much of the growth in 2006 could be owed to mandatory youth memberships, but adult memberships still soared at a 15% rate over the previous year. The growth during 2007 continued at close to a 16% rate, bringing membership to 100,674.

Another 280,000 individuals purchased one-day membership to compete in USAT sanctioned events in 2007, growing from just over 100,000 in 2000.
Even though many of the “one day” folks will have purchased “one day” more than once a year - why are they still not tracked? Add to that the fact that by these numbers - 115,000 folks paid to be members and thus **CAN VOTE. **The other “just over 100,000” as stated above have no vote. So half of the folks are not represented and dont have the option to let their vote be known…unless they pay for a system they may not agree with.

4

Just to clarify. The USAT financial statement and tax return have been posted to the USAT website for several months.

They can be found here: http://www.usatriathlon.org/content/index/814

You can navigate to that page by going to “About USAT” at the top of the home page, scrolling down to “Governance” and then clicking the “Financials” link on that page.

Hope that helps.

–USAT Communications

5

So you want to give people who aren’t members the right to vote? Somehow I imagine the people in the Republican states have a big problem with this one!!!

6

Unless I’m totally missing something on this, I totally agree. One day “members” aren’t members, they are simply holders of a “single-event permit” that allows them to compete in a USAT sanctioned event without being a member. Just as foreign nationals who are in the US on work visas can’t vote, neither should non-members have the ability, IMHO.

And yes, I’m in a Red state :wink:

7

For me, it is more a matter of the fact it is a shame that fully 50% of folks dont see any value in paying for a yearly membership fee - myself included. Maybe it is time the USAT starts asking why it is we dont see a value in it…

8

Valid point, to be sure.

For me it was a no-brainer… regardless of anything, I was going to do more than 4 USAT sanctioned events this year, so on economics alone the annual membership wins.

9

For me, it is more a matter of my opinion that it is a shame that fully 50% of folks dont see any value in paying for a yearly membership fee - myself included. Maybe it is time the USAT starts asking why it is we dont see a value in it…

Sorry, had to change your quote a little bit. Facts take you to a point, at which time anything thereafter is just postulation, supposition, and guessing.

First off, the stats show 100,000 annual members in 2008, and 280,000 one-day memberships in 2008. But the annuals are unique individuals, whereas the one-days likely contain a significant number of repeats. How many? No idea from the numbers we see.

Next, there used to be one series, the Danskin tri for women, where you didn’t have a choice of signing up as either an annual or a one-day; your entry fee automatically included a one-day, and that’s what you signed a waiver for at packet pickup, even if you had an annual membership. These were/are large races, so they could have a significant impact on some numbers. I don’t know whether this “mandatory one-day” process was still the case in 2008.

I see there being all sorts of different groupings of members/one-days, including:

  1. Annual members that will never race non-sanctioned races
  2. Annual members that also race non-sanctioned races
  3. Annual members that are members because they want the benefits of being able to vote, use the year-end ranking sysems, etc.
  4. Annual members that are members just because of the financial decision of annual vs. 4+ one-day memberships
  5. One-day members that have no clue what USAT is (first-timers, race once a year, etc.)
  6. One-day members that race few enough races to make one-days less costly
  7. One-day members that don’t believe there’s enough value to be an annual member, for lots of individual reasons
  8. Those that will never race sanctioned races

There are parallels to politics here: we can call category 1 the “radical up”, and category 8 the “radical down”, who see everything totally in black/white. For the vast majority of those in between, they understand that there are lots of shades of grey in the middle, but choose a position based on what’s important to them. This ends up being a decision for them at some point as to whether to join as an annual member. Some choose strictly on a financial basis (#4, #6), some have a choice made for them (#5, Danskin). How big is your category, #7 (don’t see any value), and for what reasons? I have no idea - my guess is that it might be bigger than what I think, but significantly smaller than what you think. But it makes for interesting conversation. Now if we just had some real stats to back up some of our gut feels, suppositions, assumptions, and guesses…

10

One days include sanctioned clinic participants too. We have many women that get a one day at each USAT sanctioned swim clinic and then one for the race - 2-3 per person leading up to each event. I have the ‘one day versus yearly’ discussion about a zillion times each year. From my perspective the deciding factor is nearly always cost. USAT benefits don’t seem to factor in much - especially to those people new to the sport or only intending to do our race(s). But we have a specific demographic we target. Repeat racers that come back the next year are more likely to convert.

11

from my point of view i get the annual membership if it will pay for itself.

that’s the only reason. I don’t want the magazines.

they don’t do anything else that affects me.

in fact from my point of view, all they do is make registration more painful.

perhaps things behind the scene are going on that I’m missing.

12

I apologize as I wrote without checking the website as I had looked for it back in May and June and could not find the 2008 financials. I thought that I would have had to eat a lot of crow until I read that the date the tax return return was signed was 7/22/09.

Bob Sigerson

13

http://forum.slowtwitch.com/gforum.cgi?post=2322580;search_string=usat%20benefits;#2322580

Please see this debate, as this has been beaten to death!!

Some valid points about “things behind the scenes, that you don’t know about”.

Food for Thought.

14

they don’t do anything else that affects me.

in fact from my point of view, all they do is make registration more painful.

perhaps things behind the scene are going on that I’m missing.
Do you enjoy watching and/or cheering for US athletes in international triathlon competition? Then the USAT does stuff for you.

I get the annual membership, even though I only do a couple of triathlons a year. They are our NGB, they run the US athletes, and our annual membership fees help support that.

Now, I agree that some of their “perks” are rather horrendous, the magazine isn’t all that useful and the “points” system is abysmal. But I pay the money more to support the athletes and the Olympic movement than I do the USAT itself.

John

15

I read that entire thread some weeks back…

Sure wish I knew what the “behind the scenes” things were…well, other than the flawed points system and failure to require RD’s to maintain a minimum standard.

16

as stated in the the thread:

USAT as validity to the sport of triathlon, and leads to the sports growth and increase in participation numbers. A sport needs a governing body to make it legit.

It might be a whole different world if it was USA Duathlon, instead. Think about that!

17

I read that entire thread some weeks back…

Sure wish I knew what the “behind the scenes” things were…well, other than the flawed points system and failure to require RD’s to maintain a minimum standard.
Maybe one thing they wouldn’t do is allow a race to go on during a mini hurricane? I know everyone patted you on the head and said great job, but IMHO from the conditions you described, the race that was put on was dangerous and unsafe, and it was irresponsible of you as RD to let it continue.

I mean, when half your transition area gets blown into the lake, it might just be time to think about pulling the plug…

John

18

How oh wise one…your weather is 20% chance of storms. You have 200 folks on a bike course and 200 on a run course? WHAT DO YOU DO?

Please…elighten us…

Buses with bike racks for all?

Oh, and BTW, NO ONE got hurt, NO ONE went to the hospital, NO ONE lost anything (but me). We had no less than 25 police cars and four Ambulances on the bike course. Why dont you ask the same of NAS as it was pouring at IMLP a few times I did it.

So - what is your oh so smart idea?

19

How oh wise one…your weather is 20% chance of storms. You have 200 folks on a bike course and 200 on a run course? WHAT DO YOU DO?

Oh, and BTW, NO ONE got hurt, NO ONE went to the hospital, NO ONE lost anything (but me). We had no less than 25 police cars and four Ambulances on the bike course. Why dont you ask the same of NAS as it was pouring at IMLP a few times I did it.

 Maybe you should ask the RD of the Rattlesnake Triathlon (USAT sanctioned) in Colorado. They had lightning in the 8 mile radius requiring a shutdown last year, and they had everyone off the course within 20-30 minutes, ~ 400 people also. They didn't just "soldier on", and hope nobody got hurt.

From your race reports:

Pulling back into the park…I hear the sirens. Tornado. The winds pick up and the rain starts

Folks were rolling into transition as I see some of our banners fly across the park. I head out onto the run course as I hear that our volunteers are running for cover

I got to the third aid station (Jordan was checking 1 and 2), lightning had struck not 100yds from the “Ha Ha” hill and I got there in time to see the local swim team running for cover in their cars.

The 52 foot truck has actually moved about 3 feet from the wind.

(And IIRC, this was a 52 foot truck at least partially loaded with ice, drinks, etc, so it’s not exactly light)

Yes, some of the people that post on here patted you on the head and said good job, but I’d rather be a bit disappointed in a race being called (As the Rattlesnake was) and trust that the RD is looking out for my safety, not trying to pull off a miracle, by begging spectators and people that live around the course to take the place of the volunteers that bailed for safety, in the middle of a race that SHOULD have been called off, people on the course or no.

You keep wondering if you should get USAT sanctioning, but I’m wondering if USAT would even touch Rockman?

John

20

Your an idiot…with all due repsect.

You still did not say what you would do - pre race get every phone number for every person with a home on the course? Enligten us.

And USAT would not need to worry about it. I would not request their bull shit blessing as it is proven that it means nothing, not to course lenghth, safety (how many deaths this year?), rule enforcement or any other thing really…they take the money and then do…we dont really know what. And, charge more for less insurance coverage. Pitty really…