From: rich@boreas.whoi.edu
Subject: Re: NCCA - Let's Fix It
Organization: Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 18:46:37 GMT

In article <1993Jan22.213745.25056@netcom.com> marquis@netcom.com (Roger Marquis) writes:
>
> [...]  The only proponent we've heard from in
>rec.bicycles.racing, Polly, believes that the format encourages a
>closer participation and more collegial atmosphere between the 2 teams
>but I'm not sure I agree.  
> [...] The current format merely re-allocates the
>points in a less than optimal, and often less than fair manner with no
>compelling benefits (IMHO).
>
>Roger Marquis


I don't agree - I think combined teams are much better (and more fun
too). To me, the major difference between USCF and collegiate races are
the whole aspect of teams - Here in the NE there are anywhere from 4 to
6 race categories - and final results will depend on people at all
levels of skill. There is a regrettable tendency among top-level riders
to sometimes "forget their roots", and being reminded of them is no bad
thing - after all, this is supposed to be *fun* right? No money, maybe
some trophies, but it's not like a paycheque is hanging from that
finish line banner. This is collegiate racing, the home of wobbly
freshman, hacked-out semi-retired ex-pros, has-beens and never-weres,
as well as the odd fresh talent that may go somewhere but probably
won't (not because they can't, but if you want to go to the Olympics
you should probably be no older than 21). Amateurism at its finest.
Schools clustered in a cold muddy field waiting to hear the final score
at Conference championships as the wind whips through the trees. Teams
lining up at the nationals podium looking goofy in stars-and-stripes
jerseys about 4 sizes too large while the rest of us clap; nothing to
show for time and effort except for some good memories. The gasping
breath and rubber legs as you warm down from a TTT where for 15 miles 5
people managed to work as one, synchronicity in action. People crammed
into motel rooms cooking pasta and so what if you personally didn't
win, XXXXX over on the other side of the room did - and you feel happy
for them.

But, you say, that's OK for regular season racing - Nationals is
different - Nationals should be for the *best*. And let's be honest and
admit that many of the riders that show up at nationals under the
current system probably don't really belong there at all if you
categorize riders individually. Look at the results - most of the top
placings belong to individuals without teams (the "top individual"
qualifiers). Teams show up with B class riders because the A riders are
making money at a USCF Big-Bucks (tm) crit, many womens teams are
scraped together from whoever wanted to come... 

So the crux of the matter is - define "best". And this is arbitrary -
in the USCF "best" means the individual who winds the most races.
more-or-less.  But in collegiate racing, it means a team that is strong
in all areas - not necessarily dominant in any one, but strong overall.
And so Nationals should reflect that.  (Recall that Cornell, who
placed 3rd last year by a handful of points on the strength of an
incredibly powerful men's team, could have won if only they had brought
*one single women* to ride the TTT all by herself - there were more
point-scoring places then teams, all she had to do was finish...is your
reaction: "Cornell got gypped out of winning", or "Cornell did it to
themselves"...).


I mean, what's fair? This is *sports* - an artificial structure in which
people compete in some arbitrarily specified way under some given set
of restrictions. If you think teamwork is important - then that's
how you set the rules. In this case I think teamwork is important,
and I'm glad the rules reflect it. 



--
Rich Pawlowicz ----------------- INTERNET: rich@boreas.whoi.edu
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
"Home of the 99 cent squid burger (cheese extra)"
--------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.racing