Mike Murray
This must have changed since the last reciprocity agreement which still has
the 60-rider number on it and we were not told by USAC and missed it.
Either that or USAC is not consistent in what they publish. Regardless,
Candi has asked that the info on the web page be changed.
Mike Murray
-----Original Message-----
From: obra-bounces@list.obra.org [mailto:obra-bounces@list.obra.org] On
Behalf Of Joshua Creem
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 17:03 PM
To: cmurray@obra.org; obra@list.obra.org; obrarace@list.obra.org
Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] [OBRA Race] FW: Same subject - now
titledUpgrades/Downgrades
Just to clarify, USAC rules only require a field size of 50 to upgrade from
Cat 3 to Cat 2. The 60-rider fields are for upgrades from Cat 2 to Cat 1.
OBRA rules should be updated to reflect this. USAC upgrade rules:
http://www.usacycling.org/news/user/story.php?id=580
One thought - it is my understanding that all race participants must
register for races, and therefore the promoters have records of how many
participants are in each field (and their categories). Having upgrade
points on the individual results page would be fantastic (although the
rolling one-year window would have to be emphasized), but may be a large
administrative burden. Just consistently having field sizes on the general
results pages for each race would be a great and easy way to help racers
track their points.
______________________________________________________________________
Joshua A. Creem
> From: cmurray@obra.org
> To: obra@list.obra.org; obrarace@list.obra.org
> Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 12:54:12 -0700
> Subject: [OBRA Race] FW: Same subject - now titled Upgrades/Downgrades
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Members
>
> Both of these gentlemen bring up points that need some clarification. This
> may be long, go get a cup of coffee.
>
> Upgrades
>
> When OBRA broke away from USAC there was an initial problem as USAC did
not
> want to honor our categories or give credit for upgrades in their system
for
> participation in any OBRA races . They stated that it was a safety issue
> since they could not guarantee the rider status. To solve this problem we
> adopted their guidelines. Each year we sign a reciprocity agreement that
> states we will adhere to the shared guidelines. These guidelines can be
> seen at http://www.obra.org/upgrade_rules.html
> .
>
> I do not see how these guidelines can be done arbitrarily. You achieve the
> points or experience level, you move up. You don't, then you stay the
same.
> There is no way that someone that has the required points would be refused
> an upgrade. But let's go over them.
>
> To upgrade from 5 to 4 or 4 to 3 can be done in 2 way. You can do it by
> results (Placing in the top 6 of road races or criterium) or by just
> completing the required number of races. You can do it one way or another,
> or a combination of both.
>
> To upgrade from 3 to 2 gets trickier. You can only upgrade on results.
Only
> road races, criterium, or stage race general classification counts. The
> kicker here is that there must be a minimum field size. The guidelines say
> 60 riders. We have taken the leeway to consider races with 50. But time
> trials, hillclimbs, handicap events and races with less then the minimum
do
> not count. Also the field must consist of at least 50% of the category
that
> you are trying to move out of. So if you want a 3/4 race to count for
> upgrade to Cat 2, the majority of the field must be 3s. The problem with
> this is how do you determine this? It is near impossible and for that
reason
> 3/4 races have not counted toward Cat 2 upgrades. If you look at the
upgrade
> rules you will see that there is a minimum number of points and a maximum.
> What that says is that with 25 points you CAN upgrade, but with 60 you
MUST.
> This allows a rider to stay in the category for a while longer if they are
> reluctant to move. ;-)
>
> Just for clarification. PIR does count toward upgrade, when it meets the
> field size requirements. You just cannot have all your points at PIR.
>
> Riders interested in upgrading are asked to petition by submitting a
request
> and listing their results. This is particularly important for riders that
> have results out of the area, as they will not be listed on the OBRA page.
I
> have kept careful records of the field sizes of the road and criteriums so
> that the minimums can be verified. I have reviewed these on each upgrade
> request.
>
> Sal had a terrific idea. It was to add upgrade points to your results page
> on the web. I have contacted Scott and Cheryl and they have put it on
their
> extensive to do list. Maybe we can work it out so that when riders reach
> the point of upgrade it can notify them or Kenji or whoever. We will work
> on this project.
>
> Upgrades on the track are done at the discretion of the velodrome manager.
> They are set to the ATRA guidelines that require riders to place in a
> minimum number of omniums before upgrading.
>
> Upgrades on mtn are done by the Mtn Bike Representative, Mike Ripley, who
> lives in Eugene.
>
> Downgrades
>
> The OBRA rules state
> Downgrade Guidelines: Riders who do not score points in a 12 month period
> may elect to be downgraded one category.
> The one area that I have veered on this, is that I do not believe that a
> rider should stay a Cat 1 for life. If they do not place in a race in 2
> years I automatically downgrade them to 2.
>
> Is this clear to everyone?
>
> Now let's address some of the comments from the two gentlemen.
>
> Mr. Shucker states that a different standard was held to Northern riders
> then to those south of Salem. This is patently untrue and I ask him to
> provide examples. I will admit to early on in my career that I made some
> decisions not based wholly on points. Almost every time I did this it came
> back to bite me. When Sal took over I shared this experience and stressed
> that it was important to be consistent. I can honestly say that I never
> looked at anyone's address before I did an upgrade. The only disadvantage
> of living out of the area is that the field sizes are harder to achieve.
> Winning the weekly Eugene and Medford series races with only 15-20 rides
in
> the field does not count toward upgrade. Winning the PIR race with 60-100
> riders in the field does count.
>
> I have no idea where this Portland bias comes from. It surfaces from time
to
> time and I do not understand its origins. The Board is comprised of 6
> members. 1/3 of them are from out of the Portland area. There has been a
> Medford member for the last 8 years. I have no recollection of an Eugene
> person ever running for the board. At most annual meetings there is little
> or no representation from any club from Eugene.
>
> Mr. Root states that a Masters 1/2/3 race should be considered differently
> then a Sr 1/2/3 race. I closely looked over the upgrades rules, and sent
> messages to USAC and have shown that there is no difference in ability
level
> from a Masters 1/2/3 race and a Senior 1/2/3 race. If you look at the
> guidelines no where does it state any different. As I stated above if the
> composition of the riders cannot be determined then the race cannot count.
> Therefore a Masters race (open, no category definition) would not count
but
> a 1/2/3 race is a 1/2/3 no matter what age the riders are. Placing in a
> Masters 1/2/3 race and stating that it should not count is disingenuous.
At
> no time were the decisions made twisted to suit a personal opinion.
>
> Sal
>
> The Board of Directors has taken the stance that silence is golden. I
agree
> that subject of changes in personnel is not something we consider
> appropriate for discussion in a public forum out of respect for both the
> organization and those involved. While there has been some demand for
> answers I think that the requests were not well thought out. I feel that
the
> termination of an employee is between the employer and employee and no one
> else. To cover the particular reasons would do nothing but cause
> embarrassment for Sal, myself and the organization. I choose not to do
that.
> One point that does need clarification. Sal was hired to step into my job.
> Our intent was for him to take on tasks over 12 months and if successful
to
> gain the title at that time. We did not give him a title at the beginning.
I
> called him Administrator. He was not the Executive Director. Mistakes were
> made, many were mine. We have moved forward.
>
> Me
>
> I asked to be relieved of the Executive Director position over 1 year ago.
> Maybe I should have just walked away at that time. I want to show up and
> wear a yellow shirt and officiate. After 20+ years, I no longer have the
> energy or stamina to do this position. I truly want someone to succeed in
> replacing me. It was my hope that it would have happened by this time.
> Candi
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: obra-bounces@list.obra.org [mailto:obra-bounces@list.obra.org
> ] On Behalf Of David Root
> Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 9:42 PM
> To: Jason Shucker; obra@list.obra.org
> Subject: Re: [OBRA Chat] Sal - Kenji - & the Murrays
>
> Jason, I tend to strongly agree about the upgrade / downgrade bias. I told
> myself that I wasn't going to write anything about this but I read your
> e-mail and I couldn't help myself.
> First off I have to say that the Murrays have done great things for
> Cycling in Oregon.
> That being said, I think that there needs to be a more clear standard to
> upgrades and downgrades.
> Since I have been a OBRA racer I have seen many inconsistency's and flaws
> in this current system. One example is the fact that Candi is upgrading or
> denying downgrades based upon Masters race's and Master PIR and as far as
I
> know any type of Masters race especially if it is a open Masters or 123
> Masters race. So assuming you are a master cat 3 and you do a masters 123
> and place in the points no matter the field size then you get upgrade
> points. If any dont believe me on this then I have the e-mail saved
> confirming this and I will repost it if nessesary. My original upgrade was
> also partly based on Masters points.
> In USA Cycling (USCF) they do not use such practices in
> upgrades/downgrades. They go according to category races and correct field
> sizes only in counting towards upgrades/downgrades.
> I feel that I am partly responsible for Sal's untimely departure because
> he gave me and some other racers who race mostly masters and hadn't placed
> in any 1/2 races for a long time or not at all a downgrade. I am sure he
> felt he was doing the right thing based upon OBRA rules on
upgrade/downgrade
> procedures but he was demanded/forced to change that decision based on a
> personal opinion and twisting of the rules.
> If this upgrading/downgrading based on Masters races is going to be apart
> of the OBRA rules then it needs to be officially added to the rule book
and
> the Web site and not left to interpritation.
> Just my humble opinion.
>
> David
>
> Jason Shucker wrote:
> Hello OBRA,
>
> Let me start by saying this e-mail most likely will not be popular with
> the majority of the list, but that's ok. I am going to say what I think a
> lot of people have felt for a while now, and with the firing of Sal, and
the
> hiring of Kenji, I feel that now might time to bring this up.
>
> First off, what the Murray's have done for Oregon Cycling has been great,
> and without them, we would not have one of the best, if not the best
states
> in the country for cycling. Their endless dedication to our sport and our
> state have been a great asset to all of us, and I have no problem thanking
> them for all their hard work and efforts over the years. Thank You
> Murrays!!!!!
>
> That being said, for anyone living south of Salem, it has become painfully
> obvious to a number of us southern riders that there is a HUGE bias
towards
> Portland area riders. I won't get into specific details, but Candi has had
> no problem upgrading PDX riders who haven't "earned" their upgrade and in
> all honestly don't deserve to be where they are. While riders in Eugene,
> Medford, Bend, etc all have to get the exact number of upgrade points. I
> even know of a few instances in-which a rider had the needed points, but
> they were not upgraded because Candi did not want to. I have more
examples,
> but I don't want to get into details or name, names. Simply put, for all
> the great things the Murray's have done for us, there has been a blatant
> bias towards Portland riders and race organizers. This was something I was
> hoping would change with the hiring of Sal Collura last year. Sadly
though,
> with his firing, it does not appear this will change
>
> For many of us, we have no clue why Sal was fired, nor did we see any
> reason for his firing. Myself along with many other riders thought he was
> doing a great job and saw nothing different with Sal helping to run the
> show, then we did while Candi was 100% in charge. However after one year,
> Sal was fired for what appears was no reason. My thought, along with
> others, is that simply Sal lived in the wrong zip code. How could someone
> from Springfield, OR show biased towards Portland riders?
>
> As for Kenji, I am sure he'll do a good job, he his a smart educated
> individual who is passionate about cycling. However, aside from his great
> blogging skills, I fail to see what he brings to the table that Sal did
not.
> Sal has been a bike racer for many years, he has promoted many successful
> races, he has volunteered numerous hours to OBRA, and he is very
passionate
> about cycling and OBRA. Aside from the fact he lives outside of the 503
> area code, I just don't see what he did wrong. Can anyone fill me into to
> what Sal did wrong?
>
> Thank you Sal for all your hard work, those of us in the Willamette Valley
> appreciate you and all you do, and hopefully the fact that you were
treated
> in poor fashion from OBRA will not discourage you from promoting all the
> races you provide to all of us in Valley. Without you, we would be
screwed!
>
> Once again, Thank you to the Murray's for all your hard work and
> dedication throughout the years. Regardless of my opinion, without you and
> your efforts we would not have the opportunties we have and I thank you a
> million times over for you dedication to us bike racers.
>
> And to Kenji A.K.A. "KMan", I know you will do a great job and help lead
> OBRA into the future, I just hope this new job does not take away from
your
> blogging skills. And please remember to keep in mind, this is the Oregon
> Bicycle Racing Association, not the Portland Bicycle Racing Association.
:)
>
> Shuck On It!
> Jason
>
> PS. I know there are probably mixed opinions, but I think the majority of
> those of us in OBRA feel we are owed at least some information as to why
Sal
> was fired.
>
> ---------------------------------
> Luggage? GPS? Comic books?
> Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo!
> Search._______________________________________________
> OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
>
> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Catch up on fall's hot new shows on Yahoo! TV. Watch previews, get
> listings, and more!
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OBRArace mailing list
> obrarace@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obrarace
> Unsubscribe: obrarace-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
_____
Gear up for HaloR 3 and get a $25 Best Buy gift card. It's our way of saying
thanks for using Windows LiveT. Get
it now!