Start order for Cross Nats Determined by Revamped Rider Ranking

This was passed on to us by one of our readers. This was taken from the USA Cycling website:

Start order for Cross Nats Determined by Revamped Rider Ranking

Call-ups for non-UCI catetories at Cyclo-cross Nationals will be determined by rider ranking in USA Cycling's re-vamped Results and Ranking System, increasing the importance of results submission for local race directors. Start order for all non-UCI categories at the 2012 USA Cycling Cyclo-cross National Championships will be determined by rider ranking using the organization’s new, improved rankings system to debut Sept.1.

Cyclo-cross will be the first USA Cycling National Championship to use the remodeled rankings system to resolve call-up order for all race divisions other than Collegiate, Junior 17-18 and Elite. Following member feedback, this method of seeding aims to offer the most equitable and concise call-up procedure possible and does signify a departure from the previous approach of utilizing time trials, random drawings or based on when a rider registered online for Cyclo-cross National Championships.

USA Cycling’s new rankings system is set for public launch September 1, 2011. The rankings system will use an innovative algorithm to rank riders based on their results compared to other competitors rather than using an arbitrary event value. The new system will allow riders to achieve a ranking, based more on how well they race rather than how often. Rider rankings will be derived from an individual’s average of his/her top three results within a rolling 12 month period. More details on the revamped rankings program will be released in the coming weeks prior to the debut of the new system.

To ensure as fair and accurate a process as possible, USA Cycling is requesting all cyclo-cross race directors to submit results to USA Cycling in an accurate and timely fashion.

Basic instructions for submitting race results are available on the Race Directors page of usacycling.org.

Posted by Andrea Smith - Jun 30, 2011
For more information contact: asmith@usacycling.org

Does this eliminate an ACA rider from being competitive at cyclocross nationals? Where does this leave ACA riders?

News Item: 

58 Comments

thank you

thank you, I moved here from out of region and I've been saying the same thing for ten years now. I'm tired of having to hold two licenses if I want to race out of area, and on those odd years that I don't, arguing with officials in other regions when they don't want to let me race in a 1/2/3 field or whatever.

It seems like the grudges of a few old guard members have long silenced the majority and negate benefits like being able to compare yourself directly across categories, taking part in things like vastly better insurance coverage, meaningful national results/rankings, and maybe even daring to hope an NRC level pro-am (i.e. similar to Redlands/Gila/Sea Otter/Superweek) might actually be held here on the front range.

How so?

I spent 8 years racing in New England and directed a couple of races for my team. ACA runs a good ship but I really see no benefit to it over USAC. I think a lot of this money stuff is drummed up to keep the general racer population behind them when there really is no reason at all. The racers here suffer from having to have two licenses, lack of national ranking and now this type of thing. The ACA is more a political issue that benefits a few at the cost of many. If they were really interested in everyone's general benefit they would become a strong regional chapter of USAC and be done with this.

What do we actually get from

What do we actually get from the ACA as racers, that would need to go away if we got back with USAC? I get it that there would be less money locally if we went back, but someone from the ACA please explain what services you would not be able to provide? As a 30 somehting cat 2 I am not aware of the ACA really doing anything "extra" for me. As best I can tell the best answer might be use of the race kit for putting on a race, the web site, and running BAR/BAT. I think all of those things could still go on if the ACA became our local association and we went with USAC. the biggest thing I hear the ACA really does is the junior camps. Those sound great and are a nice thing, but they only benefit a really, really small portion of the population.

I think the ACA likes to promote the propaganda of them being grass roots. I ask myself what the heck does that mean, masters cat 4 and junior are more important than the rest of is? Is Colorado somehow special that we need a more grass roots organization than say California, TX, or New England? Somehow those places are doing fine with the big bad USAC on board, and without a "grass roots" group. The ACA has sold out to the older, lower level master and it is hurting the other parts of the sport. I am not saying the younger/better riders should get more, but there needs to be some balance, and they should not get less. The demographics in CO are no different than the rest of the US, so it is frustrating the ACA has chosen to sell out to the older/lower lever riders. I do not think my group is any better then them, but we are no worse either.

Getting back with USAC, and having the ACA as our local association (which we would all have to join for a fee, say $20/year) to me sounds like the best of both worlds. We could have one license (which would be money in the pocket for every single ACA rider with a USAC license), USAC could provide better insurance and focus on NRC races in CO and their high end development camps already running, ACA could continue to run the web site, do junior development camps, it would positive for anyone who races outside of CO, for anyone who goes to nationals, and for anyone from elsewhere who wants to race here.

ACA vs USAC

Most of these comments have nothing to do with the thread concerning CX Nats, so i am just continuing that since i am never going to CX Nationals.
The USCF, and later USAC did not have any local or state programs until the Local Associations started in 2003. Prior to 2003, and specifically when ACA (or BRAC as it started) was formed, the USCF did NOTHING to promote racing or develop grass roots programs--they did nothing more than provide insurance, and collect money. They were all about the National Team, if you were below the level of competing to be on the National team, you were nothing other than a money donator. At the same time that ACA broke away, Oregon and Northern Cali did as well (ORBA and NCNCA), I believe, that got the attention of USAC. NCNCA has since gone back to USAC specifically for financial reasons (cost of insurance).
Bottom line of my point, when ACA/BRAC was formed, there was a good reason, keep more money locally to promote grass roots racing, develop more juniors, and try to bring in more riders in general.
The real question is; Is that still a neccessity? Can ACA continue doing that while being a part of USAC?

One thing

I know we like to say things like develop juniors, but this is only partly true. The ACA has said, more than once, that their focus is masters racing, so anything that they do for juniors is merely a sideshow to what their focus is. Personally, aside from one or two programs, I don't think they do *that* much that can't be still provided as part of USAC.

Juniors race for free =

Juniors race for free = junior development. When I raced juniors in the 80's my dad spent a lot of money to keep me racing, I was lucky to have that support.

Personally I think the ACA does a great job and I LOVE racing in Colorado. It's one of the reasons I say I'll never move out of state again. The USAC seems to be sticking it to the ACA and OBRA, which is a bummer, but I'm racing several masters points races this year so not a big deal come Natz.

Junior race for free in many regions

Juniors race for free in many events across the USA.. Usually race promoters contribute this piece of the financial equation.

Also the USCF makes donations to development programs and junior Nationals... good junior racing is focused on U23 development, collegiate, and finally junior nationals. All successful Colorado Juniors race out of state at nationals and NRC races.. A local CO juniors race with 10 riders in the field will not develop champions

I have a good question, does the ACA pay for out of state junior racing? Why doe keep using the junior racing crutch ? Weak. Let's move on please

"Why doe keep using the

"Why doe keep using the junior racing crutch ? Weak. Let's move on please"

I think I get what you're saying here, but it's difficult. You say 'move on' but you posted on this topic so you might want to listen to your own advice. I think you're complaining just to complain - that's my take - and anonymously posting complaints is about the weakest form of debate I can imagine.

Again, I like the ACA and juniors seem to be doing well at CX Natz, 5-6 podiums! Is the ACA perfect, no. Is the USCF, absolutely not. I'm having a good time racing in Colorado, it sucks for you that you're not.

In the big picture man, what

In the big picture man, what does the ACA really do besides provide insurance and collect money? Seriously? And the insurance they give us is the same company as USAC used, but we have worse coverage. So to your point they are doing the same thing USAC does, granted they focus on CO only.

The ACA does not promote racing in CO, the clubs/teams/promoters do that. The ACA even says so, the ACA simply permits racing and make some top level policy like BAR/BAT, the new masters cats (thank god we got them, I love to see 17 45 plus cat 4 riding in crit) and things like the chip timing.

Clearly the ACA does some things well and USAC does other things well. That is why going back to USAC, and keeping ACA as out Local Association, would be the best of both worlds. Not a single person has said what all we are going to lose financially if we got back.

Pages