This is part of why NEBRA decided to start our own "ranking system",
similar to other regions' BAR, etc.
We didn't understand the USAC ranking process at first; nobody had a
PhD in Theoretical Statistics. We felt that we could provide a much
better, and more accurate service to the riders of New England by
creating our own. As such, we have a bit better control of the results,
both through the promoter, but mostly through the timing service that
our races are required to use. Our "ranking system" czar (paid
position) works with the promoters and the results/timing services to
help ensure consistency and quick turnaround. As the last point of
control, our adminstrator (also a paid position) intercedes and helps
get results to Colo Sprgs.
At last year's LA Summit meeting, this was discussed. But as each
region has its own desires (35+/45+/55+ vs 30+/40+/50+ for example),
any unifying system would be difficult, except in the Category fields.
I'm sure it will be discussed again at this year's meeting.
Casey Kerrigan said:In article <[email hidden]>,
Bill C said:Quoted message said:What is with promoters not submitting results to USA Cycling?! Of the
over twenty times I have raced this year, two of the races have
submitted results to USA Cycling.
Seriously, WTF.
MGA Proving Grounds Superweek Road Race hasn't submitted a result at
all in all the records on the USA Cycling webpage, which goes back to
1999.
Isn't this required? Who is at fault in this? Are people so sick of the
task of promoting the race that as soon as it is over they need a
break, and then never get back to it?
It's definitely a problem, not sure how Casey is dealing with it but
Nebra is really leaning on promoters to submit the results both to them
and USAC. This should be a simple slam dunk, and is if the promoter
uses a reliable results/timing company who sends this stuff in as part
of their service.
Bill C
Most promoters don't submit results to USAC because it is a pain in the
backside ( and it takes time) to reformat the results into the format
the USAC requires. There is a specific format that requires 16 columns
of information. some of the information the promtoer ( or who ever is
doing the results) needs to be able to look up like the event permit
numbr. Also you have to use the specific category names or else the
category doesn't count in the national rankings.
Also since there are a lot of problems with the ranking system in
general many people dont are about the rankings. For example
Ranking points for a race is basd in part on the number of reported
finishers. If you have a very hard race that started with a feld of 100
riders but only about 10 finished then that race will be worth less
ranking points than an easy race that starts out with 75 riders and
ends with 65 finishers who get reported in the results. Likewise if the
promoter /officials have a problem reporting full results ( like a
camera malfunction ) again the race is pretty useless in terms of
points earned.
The USAC ranking system doesn't recognize categorized masters racing. A
35+ 4/5 race is trreated either the same as a 35+ 1/2/3 event or the
same as an elite 3/4 event depending on how the 35+ 4/5 race is
reported.
The ranking system doesn't recognize 35+, 45+ and 55+ events the same
as it does 30+ 40+ and 50+ events. The master groups that end in 0s get
more ranking points then the events that end in 5s
Most riders tend to care more about their own regional ranking programs
since those are the riders they actually race against on a regular
basis.
Most of the Nor Cal results that get reported to USAC do so because
promoters give me a spreadsheet with the basic Info and then when I
have the time I format it ( and deal with Lic # or name typos) and
upload it to USAC.