Road Cycling · Public discussion

D3 discussion

Started by Bill Laudien · · Last activity · 9 posts · 560 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Road Cycling
Published
6 August 2003
Last activity
9 August 2003
Original author
Bill Laudien
Posts
9
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
560
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–9 of 9
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Let's review what we've learned here:

    Not knowing what the heck he's talking about will never stop Chris Harnish from babbling on
    like an idiot.

    Ben Sharp has a right to [censored] about not getting what he was promised, but the main problem is that
    he didn't get what he was promised. By his own admission, he got to do some really cool races and
    ultimately was no worse off than he was when he rode for amateur teams.

    In my opinion, the D3 thing does not lower the standard of the pro peleton...[censored], I don't even know
    if that's possible. What it does do is allow riders access to bigger races and, typically, greater
    support of some kind of another.

    Most of those riders will find that their abilities are not up to snuff and that their future
    does not include a position ( and salary) on a big time US or euro team. But what have those guys
    lost ? If anything they've gained some neat experience, some travel, and some perspective on how
    good they are.

    But these same teams will continue to see revelations such as Mike Jones, Adam Bergman, and one of
    those Jacque-Maynes.

    I've spent almost a full season at this and can attest to the fact that teams such as Sierra Nevada,
    Jittery Joes and Ofoto do make differences in the races. Their riders race hard, contrubute to the
    outcome of the race and their support staffs are professional. Those teams are in their second or
    third years and that makes all the difference in the world. You'll see some of the teams that were
    new this year fall by the wayside, but you'll also see others use this year's experience to get more
    out of their budgets and out of their riders. Director's, mechanics, soigniers will all improve as
    will the riders that stick around and continue to develop. Many people forget that the Navigators
    and 7-UP ( formerly Nutra Fig) were driving around in rentals jam packed with [censored] and sleeping 4 in
    a room not too long ago.

    Additionally, the new teams aren't complete patsies. Webcor especially has put in some pretty good
    rides and if you go back through the results you'll see that any given break might have a Webcor,
    Cola-Vita, LeMond or Sportsbook.com rider who snuck into the move on a good day.

    As for the money. Harnish and some others don't really know of what they speak. I can attest to
    the fact that without being able to get into Philly, NYC and San Fran, our budget would be $0. So
    I and Sportsbook.com and our other sponsors are willing to eat the UCI fees in exchange for the
    exposure that being pro brings. Our budget minus the $10,000 is still a heck of a lot more than $0
    and provides access to our riders to races in which they are competitive and some races in which
    they are not. But it all has provided the guys with travel and racing opportunities in Mexico,
    Ireland, California, and beautiful Johnstown Pennsylvania. Ultimately, it's not your money, so
    don't worry about it.

    How anyone can look upon all of this in a bad light is beyond me. More than anything it smells of
    jealousy and sour grapes.

    Bill

  2. "Bill Laudien" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    As for the money. Harnish and some others don't really know of what they speak. I can attest to
    the fact that without being able to get into Philly, NYC and San Fran, our budget would be $0. So
    I and Sportsbook.com and our other sponsors are willing to eat the UCI fees in exchange for the
    exposure that being pro brings. Our budget minus the $10,000 is still a heck of a lot more than $0
    and provides access to our riders to races in which they are competitive and some races in which
    they are not. But it all has provided the guys with travel and racing opportunities in Mexico,
    Ireland, California, and beautiful Johnstown Pennsylvania. Ultimately, it's not your money, so
    don't worry about it.

    Dumbass -

    It used to be that teams could get into Philly without having to pony up the $10,000 license fee
    to the UCI.

    No, it's not my money, but it's a legitimate topic for dicussion, especially when you had Greg
    Avon coming in this forum talking about how getting pro status was going to take his team to the
    next level.

  3. So I'm unclear on something here, Bill. How is it that in all the 55 posts on this topic you managed
    to pull me out as a babbling idiot? Honestly, I thought you were a bit more genuine than that.
    Clearly, I have been known to babble, but I'd like you to point out what exactly I said that marks
    itself as not knowing what I'm talking about. I saw you bring up a lot of good points, but some of
    them had nothing to do with what I said.

    Several individuals brought up good points, bad points, sarcastic or cycnical points of view or
    really nothing meaningful at all. But I was under the assumption this was a discussion group and its
    common place for us non-D3 persons to discuss [censored] that has nothing to do with us, but that
    interests us. Now I apologize if you feel hurt or frustrated by our comments. However, I believe you
    are simply unwilling to see all points of view in the D3 issue and there are problems.

    I don't recall ever stating that I thought these teams were useless or [censored], or bad for the sport
    (I'll stay out of that discussion). I simply made mention that busting your ass everyday on your
    bike for poverty wages sucks and is [censored], regardless of the experience of riding Philly.
    Cycling is possibly the hardest sport around and riders who dedicate themselves to as a profession
    deserve a bit more than paying their way to races. Sure Ben had great experiences and he's not
    really complaining about the decision. All we were really getting at is that the money issues
    should be CLEAR.

    Now again, I'm sorry if you felt offended, but please spare me your expertise in running a pro team.
    If you recall, I made mention of the importance of spending the money to make it to Philly; its a
    huge race and gets huge exposure for any team whether they ride like [censored] or win (obviously winning
    is better). I'd also like to point out that I don't talk out of my ass; much of my assessment of the
    value of going pro is based on my discussions with Bill Sykes, who knows a bit about running pro
    teams too.

    Here's my two sense: if you're goal is exposure values and getting to big races with a few choice
    riders, then go pro, but if your goal is really development of young riders and money is tight,
    save your $12
    k.

    CH

    BTW: I think I learned that Bill Laudien is much friendly drunk than he is sober.

  4. "chris" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    BTW: I think I learned that Bill Laudien is much friendly drunk than he is sober.

    Me too.

    Dashii

  5. [email hidden] (Bill Laudien) wrote in message
    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    Let's review what we've learned here:

    (100 blank lines sniped)

    Newbie dumbass, you need to read this newsgroup for a couple of more years (they call this lurking)
    before posting again.

    Thank you,

    Henry

  6. [email hidden] (chris) wrote in message
    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    So I'm unclear on something here, Bill. How is it that in all the 55 posts on this topic you
    managed to pull me out as a babbling idiot?

    - Um, please reference the remainder of this post for clarification.

    Quoted message said:

    Honestly, I thought you were a bit more genuine than that. Clearly, I have been known to babble,
    but I'd like you to point out what exactly I said that marks itself as not knowing what I'm
    talking about. I saw you bring up a lot of good points, but some of them had nothing to do with
    what I said.

    Several individuals brought up good points, bad points, sarcastic or cycnical points of view or
    really nothing meaningful at all. But I was under the assumption this was a discussion group and
    its common place for us non-D3 persons to discuss [censored] that has nothing to do with us, but that
    interests us. Now I apologize if you feel hurt or frustrated by our comments. However, I believe
    you are simply unwilling to see all points of view in the D3 issue and there are problems.

    I don't recall ever stating that I thought these teams were useless or [censored], or bad for the
    sport (I'll stay out of that discussion). I simply made mention that busting your ass everyday on
    your bike for poverty wages sucks and is [censored], regardless of the experience of riding Philly.
    Cycling is possibly the hardest sport around and riders who dedicate themselves to as a profession
    deserve a bit more than paying their way to races. Sure Ben had great experiences and he's not
    really complaining about the decision. All we were really getting at is that the money issues
    should be CLEAR.

    Now again, I'm sorry if you felt offended, but please spare me your expertise in running a pro
    team. If you recall, I made mention of the importance of spending the money to make it to Philly;
    its a huge race and gets huge exposure for any team whether they ride like [censored] or win (obviously
    winning is better). I'd also like to point out that I don't talk out of my ass; much of my
    assessment of the value of going pro is based on my discussions with Bill Sykes, who knows a bit
    about running pro teams too.

    Here's my two sense: if you're goal is exposure values and getting to big races with a few choice
    riders, then go pro, but if your goal is really development of young riders and money is tight,
    save your $12
    k.

    CH

    BTW: I think I learned that Bill Laudien is much friendly drunk than he is sober.

  7. Whoa...If I didn't know better, I'd say I was drunk...That should be "...a much more friendly
    drunk...".

    Or maybe Bill's a much friendly drunk...I am! "Dashi Toshii" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    "chris" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    BTW: I think I learned that Bill Laudien is much friendly drunk than he is sober.

    Me too.

    Dashii

  8. [email hidden] (chris) wrote in message

    Quoted message said:


    Here's my two sense:

    That's funny

    Quoted message said:


    BTW: I think I learned that Bill Laudien is much friendly drunk than he is sober.

    Then you went to bed too early. The friendly thing usually lasts about two drinks and then I turn
    into a real son-of-a-[censored].

  9. Yes, that's TWO sense...that's the way I right when I'm trying not to be illiterate. Too much time
    relying on MS Word for grammar checks.

    But really Bill, can you please make a greater effort putting the smack down on someone else (who
    doesn't make it so easy) besides me? Please, please for me. After all we've been though.

    Ciao, Chris

    PS-For anyone who doesn't know, I am impressed with what Bill has done with Sportsbook, just not on
    his close-mindedness to this aweinspiring discussion.

    [email hidden] (Bill Laudien) wrote in message
    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    [email hidden] (chris) wrote in message

    Quoted message said:


    Here's my two sense:

    That's funny

    Quoted message said:


    BTW: I think I learned that Bill Laudien is much friendly drunk than he is sober.

    Then you went to bed too early. The friendly thing usually lasts about two drinks and then I turn
    into a real son-of-a-[censored].

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.