A couple of days ago, cyclingnews.com ran a story about how USAC had recently released its new selection criteria for Track Worlds. The contentious issue wasn't so much the criteria themselves, but their release in March for the July championships. That issue was originally discussed in cyclingnews.comnewsOpen ↗
"Robert Chung" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
...
Quoted message said:
Here's an interesting excerpt: "USAC in fact didn't change the selection criteria, we simply had not yet published them for this year."
Don't be harsh on USAC for taking their time to get around to publishing the selection criteria. We all know they have to take the time to incorporate many points of view other than their own and its not like its their day job or anything. Is it?
Actually, I think its kind of sporting, if you will. Just think how much more fun doing your taxes would be if they didn't pass the rules until April the 16th. Or publish the forms...
-- Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA) Just someone on two wheels...
Go there and check out the World's Team Selection Battle.
Jame
whiner-boy,
If you trained as much as you whine, you might get some results. USAC gave you the criteria, now go meet it. If you can't meet the criteria, what are you [censored] about? I have full confidence that USAC will pick the best riders for the job.
As I read the selection procedures, winning at the Trials in the Springs is only trumped by a podium placing at a World Cup. I'd agree that the selection procedures should have been published earlier, but is a top-3 at a World Cup at all likely?
Is this primarily a matter of prinicipal, or is it really likely to affect who goes to Worlds?
Jame is absolutely correct to be hot about this, but he's not the only one. The US took the team title in last year's World Cup. The list of people that have a reasonable shot at a WC podium is a long one.
Dave is being diplomatic. Since I've already established that I have no career as a diplomat, I'll put a point on the favortism issue.
What do you think the odds are that the coaching staff knew about the change in selection procedures well in advance of their being made public? And thus that some athletes also knew, and structured their training plans around that knowledge?
What do you think the odds are that the coaching staff knew about the change in selection procedures well in advance of their being made public? And thus that some athletes also knew, and structured their training plans around that knowledge?
I used to do a lot of policy analysis, and I think that one of the keys is not to ask "why?" but rather "why *now*?" (This could be applied not just to the decision on track worlds selection).
