|
RE: [NWWC] One of these days...
|
MINDY ZIFFREN-Hall
|
Sep 10, 2004 11:08 PDT
|
Only thing I feel really strongly aboout is leaving this as a
competition-based thing. I don't necessarilyl feel it should be a
participation-based series. There are processes in place that limit how many
points a rider can earn based upon when she hits the mandatory uscf upgrade
level. That reduces sandbagging. I feel strongly though that this should be
based upon performance and participation. The participation part comes in by
allowing riders participation points for ALL races, in many disciplines now.
I doubt I'll be able to make Monday's call so please consider my stance on
this one point.
Thanks,
Mindy
| | From: Michelle Maislen <mich-@microsoft.com>
Reply-To: NW-@topica.com
To: NW-@topica.com
Subject: RE: [NWWC] One of these days...
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 09:56:24 -0700
For the record, I totally agree that allotting points for track races is
a plus, but how would we do that? Would they all be lumped in together
or called out separately? My concern is that it's going to give some an
unfair advantage and/or make others feel pressured to race track in
order to maintain high standings.
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Lynch [mailto:ely-@bigfoot.com]
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 2:40 AM
To: NW-@topica.com
Subject: RE: [NWWC] One of these days...
Joyce - you make some great points about our focus. I'm looking forward
to
reading your revised mission statement.
As to assigning points from non-road races: It's a moot point (no pun
intended) for 99.9% of the racers in the series anyway. I think there
was
only one person in the Cat 4 series who requested non-road points. So
the
impact to our racers by saying this is a road-only series should be
minimal.
Regards,
Eric
-----Original Message-----
From: Joyce LaGow [mailto:joyce-@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2004 11:59 PM
To: NW-@topica.com
Subject: Re: [NWWC] One of these days...
The Cat 4 series next year will likely be participation-based, not
points
based. Participation-based = cash/prizes resulting from racing a set
number
of races on the WSBA calendar. It's my understanding that NWWC's
objective
is to educate and inspire women cycling enthusiasts, so in my opinion
the
cat 4 series should take the pressure off and encourage discovery.
* By making the series based on performance, you lose an audience with
weaker riders relatively quickly into the season.
* By making the series singularly focused on the road, you discourage
riders
exploring other cycling activities like track
* By encouraging women to continue to race as the season matures, they
will
become stronger and their results will improve which should in turn
improve
the upgrade rate.
* I'm also in favor of including mid-week training races as well, but
primarily to support our local promoters and show them that women's
cycling
is a viable contributor to their businesses.
However, we can't be responsible for tracking the results of every
single
cycling event in the NW for beginning racers - it's overwhelming. I'd
like
to continue the partnership w/ the MVA because there is so much
cross-over
between road racing & track in the NW, but I don't see a reason to track
mtn
biking, especially when they aren't governed by the USCF and race under
a
different classification system and different rules.
I would support continuing the Cat 3 series on the road, and not
including
the track, since I also think we don't want to be in the business of
keeping
track of who is a 3 on the track as well - this would be business as
usual
for the '05 season, yes?
This is a great topic for discussion for the core team.
Thanks again Eric for your thoughts! Good luck to Suz in SF and have
fun :)
- JLG
----- Original Message -----
From: "MINDY ZIFFREN-Hall" <mzif-@msn.com>
To: <NW-@topica.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2004 7:49 PM
Subject: RE: [NWWC] One of these days...
Good points, thanks Eric! Now get some sleep and I"ll see ya soon!
Did we score other non-road events in this year's 2004 Series into our
road
racing Series?
I don't think we should include points for any events outside of a Road
race. Perhaps I missed this point if it was included in this year's
Series.
I feel strongly though that this is a Road series.
Thanks,
Mindy
| | From: Eric Lynch <ely-@bigfoot.com>
Reply-To: NW-@topica.com
To: NW-@topica.com
Subject: [NWWC] One of these days...
Date: Thu, 09 Sep 2004 21:09:22 -0400
I will learn to send e-mail properly.
Last night I wrote a very lengthy reply to Kirstin's excellent note
|
about
| | her efforts tracking the Cat 4 series and a few concerns that she had.
|
This
| | will be a very abridged version of what I spent much time writing, and
|
to
| | my
great surprise appears to have never been sent. (Read: operator error)
First: Kirstin, many thanks for actig as pointskeeper for the Cat 4
|
series
| | for two years. You've done a stellar job in taking over from Sarah and
have
made the series possible for these beginner women. Good luck in your
|
future
| | project management efforts!
Second: Here are the three items I think we should change in the series
"rules". I wrote long, long paragraphs on the "why" of my logic in the
"lost" e-mail. These are the short, but hopefully as effective,
|
versions:
| |
1. Cycling Events Outside the Series: Any cycling event outside of the
series that a rider participates in will count as 15 points for that
|
rider.
| | These non-series events must be events that any Cat 4 rider could
participte
in as a beginner. Ie: Cat 4 track racing is fine, but Cat 3 is not. The
same
would be tru of mountain bike racing: Beginner races count; higer level
races do not. By this guideline, masters events would not qualify as
|
other
| | racers in the senior ranks would not always qualify.
2. Stage races: I agree with Kirstin that we should not "triple score"
stage races. However not everyone does all three stages, so GC placing
|
is
| | also somewhat biased. I propose that we offer 1/3 of the usuals points
|
for
| | each stage in the race (ie: 1st place in any stage would be worth 33.3
poits
vs 100 points). A bit of a pain to score, but more fair to more riders
|
in
| | more situations.
3. Last minute changes: As long as we send out regular updates to the
series on nwcycling in '05, I think it would be easy to put a
|
reasonable
| | deadline by which time we will no longer accept "corrections". Since
|
we
| | publish what we have to the listserv, it should be the riders'
responsibilities to verify their data is correct and let us know in a
reasonable time. Both Kirstin and I had people e-mail at the last
|
minute,
| | and some even after the awards ceremony. So if we set a deadline and
publish
it, the riders should be able to work within the time frame we give
|
them. I
| | hope that makes sense, as I am falling asleep as I write this.
I also hope my spelling errors are minimal tonight :-), but that's too
|
much
| | to hope for. We're over-nighting in Montreal before heading to SF
|
tomorrow
| | morning at 6 am (ouch), so I have an excuse this time.
See you next week,
Eric
|
_________________________________________________________________
Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfeeR
Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
|
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
|
|
 |
|
