dave&amy
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C31BBE.9E088300
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Richard Randleman makes some valid points (although a bit heavy handed) as does David Auker. I don't think these points, however, must somehow be universal. There is no universal philosophy we can apply to promoting bike races. I know most are quite sick of the topic at this point, and I to not mean to belabor the point, but I must speak my peace.
I would like to offer an alternative take that illustrates HOW valuable a race like Even Steven is to cycling. While promoting the sport and encouraging maximum participation through maximal categories and minimal exclusion is great, I don't believe that has to be the goal of every promoter and every event. Clearly, it has a role and needs to happen as much as possible, but sometimes people put on a race for other reasons. And that is OK. Perhaps even beneficial to the sport I would argue.
The Even Steven concept...one I personally find creative, interesting, and quite cool, clearly motivated Shirley to put on a race. She was very motivated, went to a lot of work, and made it happen. And it sounds like she did a great job. Good promoters like that are hard to find. People who "realize their vision" through promoting, whether it is all things to all people or not, enjoy the experience of putting on a race and want to do it again. As a result, there is another quality event available to potential riders and another person fired up about putting on top-notch events!
Ultimately, I see THIS aspect as benefitting cycling in our area. In a perfect world, we have lots of events that are open to everyone and promote the sport at all levels. Reality, as most of us realize, is quite different from the perfect world, however. Good promoters are hard to find. And putting on a race is DAMN hard and a HELL OF A LOT OF WORK. It has to in some way be rewarding to the person who puts it on. Perhaps the "promote cycling to the maximum # of people" mantra doesn't get a potential promoter going and so they stay out of the game altogether. What good is that to our sport?
We always talk about the sport having to be "fun". Same with promoting. If promoting isn't fun, people don't do it again. I say find your vision (All women, Elite, All masters, mtn, road, all juniors, or something for everyone) that you believe in and do the best damn job you can do with it. A new event put on by a motivated promoter that is well-done and is fun for all involved...how can this not be a good thing?
DC
------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C31BBE.9E088300
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2919.6307" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Richard Randleman makes some valid
points (although a bit heavy handed) as does David Auker. I don't
think these points, however, must somehow be universal. There is no
universal philosophy we can apply to promoting bike races. I know most are
quite sick of the topic at this point, and I to not mean to belabor the point,
but I must speak my peace. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I would like to offer an alternative take that
illustrates HOW valuable a race like Even Steven is to cycling. While
promoting the sport and encouraging maximum participation through maximal
categories and minimal exclusion is great, I don't believe that has to be the
goal of every promoter and every event. Clearly, it has a role and needs
to happen as much as possible, but sometimes people put on a race for other
reasons. And that is OK. Perhaps even beneficial to the sport I
would argue.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The Even Steven concept...one I personally find
creative, interesting, and quite cool, clearly motivated Shirley to put on a
race. She was very motivated, went to a lot of work, and made it
happen. And it sounds like she did a great job. Good promoters like
that are hard to find. People who "realize their vision" through
promoting, whether it is all things to all people or not, enjoy the experience
of putting on a race and want to do it again. As a result, there is
another quality event available to potential riders and another person
fired up about putting on top-notch events! </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Ultimately, I see THIS aspect as
benefitting cycling in our area. In a perfect world, we have lots of
events that are open to everyone and promote the sport at all levels.
Reality, as most of us realize, is quite different from the perfect world,
however. Good promoters are hard to find. And putting on a race is
DAMN hard and a HELL OF A LOT OF WORK. It has to in some way be rewarding
to the person who puts it on. Perhaps the "promote cycling to the maximum
# of people" mantra doesn't get a potential promoter going and so they stay out
of the game altogether. What good is that to our sport?
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>We always talk about the sport having to be
"fun". Same with promoting. If promoting isn't fun, people don't do
it again. I say find your vision (All women, Elite, All masters, mtn,
road, all juniors, or something for everyone) that you believe in and do the
best damn job you can do with it. A new event put on by a motivated
promoter that is well-done and is fun for all involved...how can this
not be a good thing?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>DC </FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C31BBE.9E088300--