View Full Version : West Virginia?????
Alan Atwood
July 30th 03, 03:00 PM
Noticed this weekend that a couple of West Virginia riders were listed
in the results with their previous squads. Is this the first ship
from the new D3 fleet to sink? Anybody have any info?
Alan
info.
July 30th 03, 06:02 PM
From what I hear, there was some water onboard for a time, but I think they
have bailed enough out and righted the ship. IMO, their ship was too big w/
keeping the elite squad.
Can they keep the holes plugged?? Good results at Downers Grove would
certainly help.
"Alan Atwood" > wrote in message
om...
> Noticed this weekend that a couple of West Virginia riders were listed
> in the results with their previous squads. Is this the first ship
> from the new D3 fleet to sink? Anybody have any info?
>
> Alan
Marilyn
July 30th 03, 10:23 PM
Check out the Wendy's pictures and results on cyclingnews.
The WVA pro and elite teams were there enmasse and with results.
Paul Martin and several others raced well at Superweek as well, Paul
was very high in the overall rankings there before he left to do
Murrysville and Wendy's.
The riders who want to ride for WVA are riding.
Many D3's were at Superweek.
(Alan Atwood) wrote in message >...
> Noticed this weekend that a couple of West Virginia riders were listed
> in the results with their previous squads. Is this the first ship
> from the new D3 fleet to sink? Anybody have any info?
>
> Alan
Andy Coggan
July 30th 03, 10:56 PM
"Marilyn" > wrote in message
om...
> The riders who want to ride for WVA are riding.
But the real question is, are they getting paid?
Andy Coggan
Marilyn
July 31st 03, 04:33 AM
You'd have to hear from them.
I believe some are getting monthly checks...
Other than Saturn who should not be a D3, I don't think anyone is
getting rich riding bikes in the states.
It would be great if we could change that.
"Andy Coggan" > wrote in message k.net>...
> "Marilyn" > wrote in message
> om...
>
> > The riders who want to ride for WVA are riding.
>
> But the real question is, are they getting paid?
>
> Andy Coggan
Andy Coggan
July 31st 03, 12:38 PM
"Marilyn" > wrote in message
om...
> "Andy Coggan" > wrote in message
k.net>...
> > "Marilyn" > wrote in message
> > But the real question is, are they getting paid?
> > > The riders who want to ride for WVA are riding.
> You'd have to hear from them.
> I believe some are getting monthly checks...
> Other than Saturn who should not be a D3, I don't think anyone is
> getting rich riding bikes in the states.
> It would be great if we could change that.
I guess I should have been more explicit: are they they getting paid *on
time/as expected*? Rumor has it that they aren't.
Andy Coggan
Wade Summers
July 31st 03, 01:37 PM
"Marilyn" > wrote in message
om...
> You'd have to hear from them.
> I believe some are getting monthly checks...
> Other than Saturn who should not be a D3, I don't think anyone is
> getting rich riding bikes in the states.
> It would be great if we could change that.
I had reported here on RBR about 6 weeks ago on a conversation I heard after
a race here in New England. A rider asked one of the WV boys how it was
going and he said that "it wasn't". They hadn't been paid since April and
they had filed a complaint with USA Cycling / USPro. I then noticed that
although they still wore WV clothing in the following races, they're BikeReg
team names were made-up names, F.A.R.T., for example. Then this past
weekend, as Alan pointed out, they were back in their regional team garb.
If "some" are getting monthly checks, that's great. But shouldn't they ALL
be getting monthly checks. Doesn't constitute a D3 team if they are not,
right?
Wade
Bob Schwartz
July 31st 03, 03:10 PM
Andy Coggan > wrote:
> "Marilyn" > wrote in message
> om...
>> The riders who want to ride for WVA are riding.
> But the real question is, are they getting paid?
Aren't they getting the prevailing TT3 wage?
Bob Schwartz
Bensharp13
July 31st 03, 04:17 PM
yes, guys are getting paid their stipends, but no expenses. there is some
major disparity as far as who is getting paid what so, the "no expenses" part
really screws those that weren't getting anything (or much).
benjamin
> "Andy Coggan" > wrote in message
k.net>...
>
>> > "Marilyn" > wrote in message
>
>> > But the real question is, are they getting paid?
>
>> > > The riders who want to ride for WVA are riding.
>
>> You'd have to hear from them.
>> I believe some are getting monthly checks...
>> Other than Saturn who should not be a D3, I don't think anyone is
>> getting rich riding bikes in the states.
>> It would be great if we could change that.
>
>I guess I should have been more explicit: are they they getting paid *on
>time/as expected*? Rumor has it that they aren't.
>
>Andy Coggan
info.
July 31st 03, 05:42 PM
What is "regional garb?"
You do realize that they have two seperate teams, a PRO team and an ELITE
AMATEUR team for developing younger riders. They have seperate team kits for
both -- the green/yellow (similar to last year) for the elite and a new navy
blue/yellow for the pro. Quite a nice kit, I might add.
"Wade Summers" > wrote in message
news:m48Wa.7$qf.6@lakeread06...
>
> "Marilyn" > wrote in message
> om...
> > You'd have to hear from them.
> > I believe some are getting monthly checks...
> > Other than Saturn who should not be a D3, I don't think anyone is
> > getting rich riding bikes in the states.
> > It would be great if we could change that.
>
> I had reported here on RBR about 6 weeks ago on a conversation I heard
after
> a race here in New England. A rider asked one of the WV boys how it was
> going and he said that "it wasn't". They hadn't been paid since April and
> they had filed a complaint with USA Cycling / USPro. I then noticed that
> although they still wore WV clothing in the following races, they're
BikeReg
> team names were made-up names, F.A.R.T., for example. Then this past
> weekend, as Alan pointed out, they were back in their regional team garb.
>
> If "some" are getting monthly checks, that's great. But shouldn't they ALL
> be getting monthly checks. Doesn't constitute a D3 team if they are not,
> right?
>
> Wade
>
>
Wade Summers
July 31st 03, 09:33 PM
"info." > wrote in message
...
> What is "regional garb?"
>
> You do realize that they have two seperate teams, a PRO team and an ELITE
> AMATEUR team for developing younger riders. They have seperate team kits
for
> both -- the green/yellow (similar to last year) for the elite and a new
navy
> blue/yellow for the pro. Quite a nice kit, I might add.
>
I mean their former teams, Wheelworks and Trek/VW.
Funny how you say they have an Elite Amateur Team and a Pro team. Seems to
me like they are both
Elite Amateur teams...
Wade
Bensharp13
August 1st 03, 02:48 AM
begs the question...that was debated here (yet not resolved) this
winter...what's the difference anyway? the UCI are a 'euro organization and
the (spirit of) their rules really only apply to the infrastructure of
professional cycling that is in place...IN EUROPE. the west virginia program
simply was an attempt to conform to the rules set forth by the international
governing body. and for the record, the move to have a professional team was,
ironically, sponsor driven. the move was ambitious, to say the least.
>Funny how you say they have an Elite Amateur Team and a Pro team. Seems to
>me like they are both
>Elite Amateur teams...
>
>Wade
>
Wade Summers
August 1st 03, 02:13 PM
"Bensharp13" > wrote in message
...
> begs the question...that was debated here (yet not resolved) this
> winter...what's the difference anyway? the UCI are a 'euro organization
and
> the (spirit of) their rules really only apply to the infrastructure of
> professional cycling that is in place...IN EUROPE. the west virginia
program
> simply was an attempt to conform to the rules set forth by the
international
> governing body. and for the record, the move to have a professional team
was,
> ironically, sponsor driven. the move was ambitious, to say the least.
>
I think the difference is a step up in responsibility and formality. The
employees of a D3 should have a little
more recourse should things go south. In terms of races entered etc, I think
the difference is
minimal, but there are a handfull, of what people might consider key races,
that a D3 can enter and an elite team can not.
I have done no research, so this is all assumption. The Team is West
Virginia. I assume that the sponsor money comes from the State of West
Virginia , perhaps through the tourism bureau. Can I also assume that like
my State of Connecticut, the State of WV has budget problems and lots of
programs, departments and employees are circling the bowl right now. Could
this be the root of the money problems with the team. I imagine that very
few of the riders and staff can actually vote in WV so no one is going to
stick their neck out when the discussions comes up about programs to cut. I
would bet a cycling team would go right to the top of the list.
Wade
Bensharp13
August 1st 03, 03:40 PM
>"Bensharp13" > wrote in message
...
>> begs the question...that was debated here (yet not resolved) this
>> winter...what's the difference anyway? the UCI are a 'euro organization
>and
>> the (spirit of) their rules really only apply to the infrastructure of
>> professional cycling that is in place...IN EUROPE. the west virginia
>program
>> simply was an attempt to conform to the rules set forth by the
>international
>> governing body. and for the record, the move to have a professional team
>was,
>> ironically, sponsor driven. the move was ambitious, to say the least.
>>
>
>I think the difference is a step up in responsibility and formality. The
>employees of a D3 should have a little
>more recourse should things go south.
the operative word here is "should".
D3, in the eyes of the UCI was never meant to be a truly professional level but
rather a developmental program to bridge the progression for young, talented
riders. Belgium does not acknowledge D3 as professional and many other teams,
Rabo, Quick Step, for example have D3 developmental teams to "feed" their D1
teams, like Triple A in baseball here. In the US however, it is a "loophole"
through which a program with a meager budget, can race professionally. In the
end, IMHO, it's bad for the sport domestically. It permits a lack of
professionalism to pervade the pro peloton (sorry for the alliteration).
sorry...i'm rambling...now, when it comes to the "recourse" of which you speak.
the truth of the matter is that, in the case of our team, the money that is
required for the escrow (presumably to protect the riders should the program
turn to dung), MIGHT cover about 1/2 of the team's contract obligations...for a
month. That is of course, after dragging the sponsor's and management's names
through the mud (thus assuring that neither will be associated again with the
UCI, unless you're jw, of course) and a long, drawn out arbitration hearing, to
go through which, most guys can't afford proper representation. Also, please
don't use the term "employee" too loosely. at least with our program, and i
should assume with most D3 teams, we are independently contracted riders, not
employees of the team. no insurance, no benefits, no pension, etc.
In terms of races entered etc, I think
>the difference is
>minimal, but there are a handfull, of what people might consider key races,
>that a D3 can enter and an elite team can not.
>
>I have done no research, so this is all assumption. The Team is West
>Virginia. I assume that the sponsor money comes from the State of West
>Virginia , perhaps through the tourism bureau. Can I also assume that like
>my State of Connecticut, the State of WV has budget problems and lots of
>programs, departments and employees are circling the bowl right now. Could
>this be the root of the money problems with the team. I imagine that very
>few of the riders and staff can actually vote in WV so no one is going to
>stick their neck out when the discussions comes up about programs to cut. I
>would bet a cycling team would go right to the top of the list.
>
>Wade
some of your assumptions are correct...yes, the team is sponsored by the bureau
of tourism in West Virginia. However, as far as I can tell, all the money that
was promised by THAT sponsor is accounted for but, decidedly later than
anticipated...they are paying in installments, as it were. The problem that
has afflicted this team is two-fold. first, long-time-sponsor, Gomart (with
whom the team has been associated for 11 years) have had their own financial
woes and pulled out in the 11th hour, thus leaving the already poor money
handling (problem two) management with their hands tied, as they had invariably
counted their chickens...
Personally, i have done 8 races this year that I otherwise would not have been
allowed to do (i'm off to NYC for my 9th this weekend) had I not been
professional. IMHO, the headache, for me, a 31 y/o not really improving
anymore, and, more importantly, who has a pretty good handle on where he stands
in the pecking order of the sport, has not been worth it. yeah, racing philly
was great, and the tour of georgia was pretty awesome but...debating on whether
i can afford those trips, getting my teeth kicked in when i can (afford the
trips) and returning home to earn money, however possible, while trying to
maintain some level of fitness (when management can't promise when checks will
arrive) has NOT been worth it.
benjamin
Ryan Barrett
August 1st 03, 06:05 PM
>
> Aren't they getting the prevailing TT3 wage?
You mean the monthly kick in the balls??
Ben, you're not supposed to comment on your own team.
Love,
RB
Ronaldo Jeremiah
August 1st 03, 08:54 PM
(Marilyn) wrote in message >...
> You'd have to hear from them.
> I believe some are getting monthly checks...
> Other than Saturn who should not be a D3, I don't think anyone is
> getting rich riding bikes in the states.
> It would be great if we could change that.
Why would that be 'great?'
-RJ
John Forrest Tomlinson
August 1st 03, 11:03 PM
"Bensharp13" > wrote in message
news:20030801104002.13124.00000551@mb-[honest inside stuff]
Thanks for your post -- very informative.
JT
PS -- consider "paucity" instead of "lack" in your alliteration and
you'll be way over the top...
--
*******************************************
NB: reply-to address is munged
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
*******************************************
chris
August 2nd 03, 12:24 AM
Actually Bob, sounds like that's what they are getting...that being
nothing. I don't think D3 riders need to be paid a minimum wage. I
think the DI teams are set at something like 40,000 euro.
CH
Bob Schwartz > wrote in message >...
> Andy Coggan > wrote:
> > "Marilyn" > wrote in message
> > om...
>
> >> The riders who want to ride for WVA are riding.
>
> > But the real question is, are they getting paid?
>
> Aren't they getting the prevailing TT3 wage?
>
> Bob Schwartz
>
Kurgan Gringioni
August 2nd 03, 01:30 AM
"Ryan Barrett" > wrote in message
om...
> >
> > Aren't they getting the prevailing TT3 wage?
>
> You mean the monthly kick in the balls??
>
> Ben, you're not supposed to comment on your own team.
Dear Receiver of the Monthly-kcik-in-the-balls -
Didn't you just do that? (comment on your own team)
Kurgan Gringioni
August 2nd 03, 01:36 AM
"Bensharp13" > wrote in message
...
<good post snipped>
Mr. Sharp -
Earlier this year, we had an argument here with the infinitely esteemed Greg
Avon of Lemond Fitness. He claimed that going pro was going to take his team
"to the next level".
My position was that the $10k spent on D3 status would be better used to
support riders' living expenses so that they could train more. After all
it's training that makes the rider, not the license, IMO.
Anyways, your post seems to support the position that when trying to
maximize one's talent, it would be better to have living expenses than pro
license (if there is so little $$ that one has to choose one or the other).
Is my impression correct?
chris
August 2nd 03, 03:24 AM
Apparently, about 9 or 10 races is the difference...At least according
to your other post.
> winter...what's the difference anyway? the UCI are a 'euro organization and
I think its disapponting to see so many riders throw away decent
talent to "turn pro" in the U.S. rather than take the time and money
to spend a year racing in Europe. I mean, for the most part, a lot of
these guys are paying to get their asses handed to them stateside,
when they could do it in Europe for less money. Seriously (as
always), the expereince of spending time outside the U.S. and racing
from a different view can be invaluable. Its not hard to find a good
place to live and race, either.
CH
warren
August 2nd 03, 04:21 AM
In article >, chris
> wrote:
> Apparently, about 9 or 10 races is the difference...At least according
> to your other post.
>
> > winter...what's the difference anyway? the UCI are a 'euro organization and
>
> I think its disapponting to see so many riders throw away decent
> talent to "turn pro" in the U.S. rather than take the time and money
> to spend a year racing in Europe. I mean, for the most part, a lot of
> these guys are paying to get their asses handed to them stateside,
> when they could do it in Europe for less money. Seriously (as
> always), the expereince of spending time outside the U.S. and racing
> from a different view can be invaluable. Its not hard to find a good
> place to live and race, either.
I don't disagree since by brother did what you suggest, but staying in
the USA is much more comfortable and convenient. How many guys could go
to Europe and end up good enough to do well there? Nearly all of them
will end up back in the US anyway, especially for the guys who are best
suited for criteriums. The European experience seems to be good for
some guys but bad for others.
-WG
Dashi Toshii
August 2nd 03, 04:32 AM
"chris" > wrote in message
om...
> Apparently, about 9 or 10 races is the difference...At least according
> to your other post.
>
> > winter...what's the difference anyway? the UCI are a 'euro organization
and
>
> I think its disapponting to see so many riders throw away decent
> talent to "turn pro" in the U.S. rather than take the time and money
> to spend a year racing in Europe. I mean, for the most part, a lot of
> these guys are paying to get their asses handed to them stateside,
> when they could do it in Europe for less money. Seriously (as
> always), the expereince of spending time outside the U.S. and racing
> from a different view can be invaluable. Its not hard to find a good
> place to live and race, either.
>
> CH
Is that what you did/do?
Dashii
chris
August 2nd 03, 02:02 PM
What you say is true, which is likely why most stay. Life is eay in
America, but in many respects its eassier in Europe. I know a number
of riders to take the plunge and live in Spain, Switzerland or Italy.
The sport of cycling is hard and not being successful in Europe does
not equate to failure. I've looked at my cycling experience as a way
to get a different view. Staying in America, IMO, leads to stagnation
and a boring life.
Live a little and try it for a month. At worst you'll be out a few
extra bucks than you would here racing; do the math on racing
stateside and traveling and money, or lack thereof, is a poor excuse
for staying in America. Its usually about comfort, which is all the
more reason to go.
warren > wrote in message >...
> In article >, chris
> > wrote:
>
> > Apparently, about 9 or 10 races is the difference...At least according
> > to your other post.
> >
> > > winter...what's the difference anyway? the UCI are a 'euro organization and
> >
> > I think its disapponting to see so many riders throw away decent
> > talent to "turn pro" in the U.S. rather than take the time and money
> > to spend a year racing in Europe. I mean, for the most part, a lot of
> > these guys are paying to get their asses handed to them stateside,
> > when they could do it in Europe for less money. Seriously (as
> > always), the expereince of spending time outside the U.S. and racing
> > from a different view can be invaluable. Its not hard to find a good
> > place to live and race, either.
>
> I don't disagree since by brother did what you suggest, but staying in
> the USA is much more comfortable and convenient. How many guys could go
> to Europe and end up good enough to do well there? Nearly all of them
> will end up back in the US anyway, especially for the guys who are best
> suited for criteriums. The European experience seems to be good for
> some guys but bad for others.
>
> -WG
TritonRider
August 3rd 03, 01:29 AM
>From: warren
>chris
> wrote:
>
>> Apparently, about 9 or 10 races is the difference...At least according
>> to your other post.
>>
>> > winter...what's the difference anyway? the UCI are a 'euro organization
>and
>>
>> I think its disapponting to see so many riders throw away decent
>> talent to "turn pro" in the U.S. rather than take the time and money
>> to spend a year racing in Europe. I mean, for the most part, a lot of
>> these guys are paying to get their asses handed to them stateside,
>> when they could do it in Europe for less money. Seriously (as
>> always), the expereince of spending time outside the U.S. and racing
>> from a different view can be invaluable. Its not hard to find a good
>> place to live and race, either.
>
>I don't disagree since by brother did what you suggest, but staying in
>the USA is much more comfortable and convenient. How many guys could go
>to Europe and end up good enough to do well there? Nearly all of them
>will end up back in the US anyway, especially for the guys who are best
>suited for criteriums. The European experience seems to be good for
>some guys but bad for others.
>
>-WG
>
>
I don't know if we'll ever really need it, but that's why we have kept in
close touch with our club in Germany, and the other cycling people we know
there.
If my son ever gets motivated again he's going back to race next summer and
most likely get his ass kicked, but it's all part of the game. Our club there
has been great about keeping in touch and offering support.
Racing in Europe is a great experience if you can find the right people. We
have been incredibly lucky both there, and here in the States.
Bill C
Your Momma
August 4th 03, 02:41 PM
He could always ride for Pharmacia.
Maybe Laudien will let him wager a little bit and win some money for his
team.
"TritonRider" > wrote in message
...
> >From: warren
>
> >chris
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Apparently, about 9 or 10 races is the difference...At least according
> >> to your other post.
> >>
> >> > winter...what's the difference anyway? the UCI are a 'euro
organization
> >and
> >>
> >> I think its disapponting to see so many riders throw away decent
> >> talent to "turn pro" in the U.S. rather than take the time and money
> >> to spend a year racing in Europe. I mean, for the most part, a lot of
> >> these guys are paying to get their asses handed to them stateside,
> >> when they could do it in Europe for less money. Seriously (as
> >> always), the expereince of spending time outside the U.S. and racing
> >> from a different view can be invaluable. Its not hard to find a good
> >> place to live and race, either.
> >
> >I don't disagree since by brother did what you suggest, but staying in
> >the USA is much more comfortable and convenient. How many guys could go
> >to Europe and end up good enough to do well there? Nearly all of them
> >will end up back in the US anyway, especially for the guys who are best
> >suited for criteriums. The European experience seems to be good for
> >some guys but bad for others.
> >
> >-WG
> >
> >
>
> I don't know if we'll ever really need it, but that's why we have kept in
> close touch with our club in Germany, and the other cycling people we know
> there.
> If my son ever gets motivated again he's going back to race next summer
and
> most likely get his ass kicked, but it's all part of the game. Our club
there
> has been great about keeping in touch and offering support.
> Racing in Europe is a great experience if you can find the right people.
We
> have been incredibly lucky both there, and here in the States.
> Bill C
>
chris
August 5th 03, 12:23 AM
I heard Bill was actually wagering on which teams would implode and is
using the winnings to help fund the team next...or maybe that's just a
rumor. I'd try it, though.
"Your Momma" > wrote in message >...
> He could always ride for Pharmacia.
>
> Maybe Laudien will let him wager a little bit and win some money for his
> team.
>
> "TritonRider" > wrote in message
> ...
> > >From: warren
>
> > >chris
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Apparently, about 9 or 10 races is the difference...At least according
> > >> to your other post.
> > >>
> > >> > winter...what's the difference anyway? the UCI are a 'euro
> organization
> and
> > >>
> > >> I think its disapponting to see so many riders throw away decent
> > >> talent to "turn pro" in the U.S. rather than take the time and money
> > >> to spend a year racing in Europe. I mean, for the most part, a lot of
> > >> these guys are paying to get their asses handed to them stateside,
> > >> when they could do it in Europe for less money. Seriously (as
> > >> always), the expereince of spending time outside the U.S. and racing
> > >> from a different view can be invaluable. Its not hard to find a good
> > >> place to live and race, either.
> > >
> > >I don't disagree since by brother did what you suggest, but staying in
> > >the USA is much more comfortable and convenient. How many guys could go
> > >to Europe and end up good enough to do well there? Nearly all of them
> > >will end up back in the US anyway, especially for the guys who are best
> > >suited for criteriums. The European experience seems to be good for
> > >some guys but bad for others.
> > >
> > >-WG
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I don't know if we'll ever really need it, but that's why we have kept in
> > close touch with our club in Germany, and the other cycling people we know
> > there.
> > If my son ever gets motivated again he's going back to race next summer
> and
> > most likely get his ass kicked, but it's all part of the game. Our club
> there
> > has been great about keeping in touch and offering support.
> > Racing in Europe is a great experience if you can find the right people.
> We
> > have been incredibly lucky both there, and here in the States.
> > Bill C
> >
Bensharp13
August 5th 03, 04:43 PM
hmmm...not sure what you mean by "overstatement". actually, the figure you
have given is MORE than what is in escrow, which sadly WOULD cover about half
the guys for a month.
benjamin
>From: (chris)
>Date: 8/1/2003 6:48 PM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>Ben's numbers are, sadly, likely a gross overstatement. Unless the
>reg's have changed from a couple years ago, D3 teams need only about
>$5000 in escrow, which would cover very little.
Bensharp13
August 5th 03, 04:44 PM
>Mr. Sharp -
>
>Earlier this year, we had an argument here with the infinitely esteemed Greg
>Avon of Lemond Fitness. He claimed that going pro was going to take his team
>"to the next level".
>
>My position was that the $10k spent on D3 status would be better used to
>support riders' living expenses so that they could train more. After all
>it's training that makes the rider, not the license, IMO.
>
>Anyways, your post seems to support the position that when trying to
>maximize one's talent, it would be better to have living expenses than pro
>license (if there is so little $$ that one has to choose one or the other).
>
>Is my impression correct?
>
Bensharp13
August 5th 03, 04:52 PM
yes, i would agree with that...unfortunately the sponsors don't. as an amateur
team, Gomart (West Virginia's old sponsor) won a couple NRC races as well as
three elite national championships in the last two years. Unfortunately,
except for about 10 minutes of coverage of Downers Grove on FoxSports Chicago,
none of those races are really televised. West Virginia, as a title sponsor
have a strong desire to attract vacationers from all over the country and feel
the best way to do that (while using the team as an avenue) is by turning
professional and riding more of the televised races; philly, san fran, nyc,
etc. the rub, of course is that the same guys from the amateur team aren't
necessarily going to be able to guarantee results immediately. and, without a
HUGE increase in budget, the team can't afford to get some of the bigger names
so...everyone is learning at once, riders, staff, management, sponsors, etc.
the learning curve is steep. when you think about it, in today's environment,
rarely does a first-year pro team have a particularly good year. the exception
that comes to my mind is prime alliance a couple years ago however...they were
stocked with some classy veterans like jonas and peters and some already
established and talented younger guys, pate, creed, walrod, etc.
i'm off track a bit from the original post but, in the end, no matter what is
best for the "team" as an entity may not be in agreement with the vision the
sponsors might have.
benjamin
>From: "Kurgan Gringioni"
>Date: 8/1/2003 7:36 PM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>
>"Bensharp13" > wrote in message
...
>
>
><good post snipped>
>
>
>
>Mr. Sharp -
>
>Earlier this year, we had an argument here with the infinitely esteemed Greg
>Avon of Lemond Fitness. He claimed that going pro was going to take his team
>"to the next level".
>
>My position was that the $10k spent on D3 status would be better used to
>support riders' living expenses so that they could train more. After all
>it's training that makes the rider, not the license, IMO.
>
>Anyways, your post seems to support the position that when trying to
>maximize one's talent, it would be better to have living expenses than pro
>license (if there is so little $$ that one has to choose one or the other).
>
>Is my impression correct?
>
>
>
Bensharp13
August 5th 03, 05:00 PM
imho, "going pro" should be even more difficult or involved. it doesn't do the
pro ranks in this country much good to have low budget teams out there. what
would be nice is if there were more respect given to the elite ranks as
development.
i think mr. sykes is partially right. for our team, which actually, from an
exposure standpoint, had a decent philly (one rider was in a two-up chasing
group for 95km) it's hard to quantify if we got our money out of just being
there. from a rider's perspective, just being at philly was great and the
realization of a long, circuitous path that started with watchiing guys like
oravetz, gaggioli, and kiefel on the same roads. however, my question is, how
professional is, "just being there"? i don't think "just being there" is
enough for the guys that are truly in contention. as well as i might have
ridden at philly, realistically the best i was going to do was finish yet, i'm
still good enough to have a spot on a professional team? hmmmm...seems like a
lot of disparity for such an exclusive club.
benjamin
>Subject: Re: West Virginia?????
>From: (chris)
>Date: 8/2/2003 8:08 AM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>I agree that the money is a bit much to go pro, particularly because
>most of these little teams are unable to manage the tiny budgets they
>have; they want to feel like they are running D-I teams on an regional
>team budget. You can't blame them though, they need to give sponosrs
>the impression they'll be everywhere, but most corporations can't
>grasp what's needed or the benefit cycling will bring in exposure.
>
>However, I spoke to Bill Sykes (Panasonic, IME-Bolla wines, SAAB)
>about this earlier in the year and he said that Philly more or less
>makes or breaks a team and simply riding there is worth the money to
>go pro and pay to enter. He's probably right, but the D3 boom in the
>U.S. has bred some pretty bad experiences for riders.
>
>CH
>
Bensharp13
August 5th 03, 05:07 PM
what do you think happens when you go to europe? i was there for a year, i had
some decent rides and until my age was revealed, 27, i was chatted up by a
couple smaller teams. yes, the experience was invaluable, and yes, had i not
gone to belgium, i don't think i would have the success i did in '01 but, had i
not come back, i never would have been on a professional team, that is certain.
i don't understand how staying to race in the u.s. is a waste of talent?
benjamin
>Subject: Re: West Virginia?????
>From: (chris)
>Date: 8/1/2003 9:24 PM Eastern Standard Time
>I think its disapponting to see so many riders throw away decent
>talent to "turn pro" in the U.S. rather than take the time and money
>to spend a year racing in Europe. I mean, for the most part, a lot of
>these guys are paying to get their asses handed to them stateside,
>when they could do it in Europe for less money. Seriously (as
>always), the expereince of spending time outside the U.S. and racing
>from a different view can be invaluable. Its not hard to find a good
>place to live and race, either.
>
>CH
Bensharp13
August 5th 03, 05:08 PM
funny
>Subject: Re: West Virginia?????
>From: "Your Momma"
>Date: 8/4/2003 8:41 AM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>He could always ride for Pharmacia.
>
> Maybe Laudien will let him wager a little bit and win some money for his
>team
Bensharp13
August 5th 03, 05:11 PM
try about 15k euros.
>Subject: Re: West Virginia?????
>From: (chris)
>Date: 8/1/2003 6:24 PM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>Actually Bob, sounds like that's what they are getting...that being
>nothing. I don't think D3 riders need to be paid a minimum wage. I
>think the DI teams are set at something like 40,000 euro.
>CH
K. J. Papai
August 5th 03, 10:59 PM
"Andy Coggan" > wrote in message k.net>...
> "Marilyn" > wrote in message
> om...
>
> > The riders who want to ride for WVA are riding.
>
> But the real question is, are they getting paid?
>
> Andy Coggan
I was wrong -- Coggan is NOT boring.
-Ken
chris
August 6th 03, 01:49 AM
Hmmm...that was what the D1 minimum was supposed to be, at least
according to Cycle Sport. In either case, 15 k euros is not a bad
wage, but for the amount of work it takes to race, it does come in
low.
(Bensharp13) wrote in message >...
> try about 15k euros.
>
> >Subject: Re: West Virginia?????
> >From: (chris)
> >Date: 8/1/2003 6:24 PM Eastern Standard Time
> >Message-id: >
> >
> >Actually Bob, sounds like that's what they are getting...that being
> >nothing. I don't think D3 riders need to be paid a minimum wage. I
> >think the DI teams are set at something like 40,000 euro.
> >CH
Kurgan Gringioni
August 6th 03, 02:22 AM
"Bensharp13" > wrote in message
...
> yes, i would agree with that...unfortunately the sponsors don't. as an
amateur
> team, Gomart (West Virginia's old sponsor) won a couple NRC races as well
as
> three elite national championships in the last two years. Unfortunately,
> except for about 10 minutes of coverage of Downers Grove on FoxSports
Chicago,
> none of those races are really televised. West Virginia, as a title
sponsor
> have a strong desire to attract vacationers from all over the country and
feel
> the best way to do that (while using the team as an avenue) is by turning
> professional and riding more of the televised races; philly, san fran,
nyc,
> etc. the rub, of course is that the same guys from the amateur team
aren't
> necessarily going to be able to guarantee results immediately. and,
without a
> HUGE increase in budget, the team can't afford to get some of the bigger
names
> so...everyone is learning at once, riders, staff, management, sponsors,
etc.
> the learning curve is steep. when you think about it, in today's
environment,
> rarely does a first-year pro team have a particularly good year. the
exception
> that comes to my mind is prime alliance a couple years ago however...they
were
> stocked with some classy veterans like jonas and peters and some already
> established and talented younger guys, pate, creed, walrod, etc.
>
> i'm off track a bit from the original post but, in the end, no matter what
is
> best for the "team" as an entity may not be in agreement with the vision
the
> sponsors might have.
Thanks for the input.
Bensharp13
August 6th 03, 03:17 AM
>From: (chris)
>OK, so I did some checking. The minimum wage for 2003 is indeed 15 k
>(about $18 k) euro for new pros, 18 k for other (not sure what other
>means, non-first year), but increase to 20 k and 23 k, respectively in
>2004. I do know that D-3 are exempt from this pay scale, but not sure
>how that all works.
>
>OK, so we learned what from all this???
>
i'm not sure, exactly, except that being a "professional" bike racer, in most
cases, isn't very "professional" at all, when you consider that the minimum
wage rivals the poverty level for this country. also, don't forget that some
teams have a way of "working the system" and including rider expenses as part
of their minimum salary.
>So Ben, how about you suggest WV tourism starts selling coffee to
>increase its cycling team budget. This has proven to be a highly
>effective means of supporting a cycling team, hasn't it?
>
>CH
>
i know you you guys get a kick out of ripping on jittery f joes but...i have to
hand it to micah, he's turned that program around (remember we ARE still
talking D3 teams here) with the help of some supportive folks in athens.
scaling back the program and having a realistic approach to the season an
potential results has liberated those guys and in the end, they have earned
some good results. a case where, for them, less really is more.
but...if we could bottle and market some moonshine...hmmm...
chris
August 6th 03, 01:30 PM
OK, there you go...That's the kind of ingenuity teams need. Get in a
rut, sell homemade alcohol. You could toss it out at races, like the
Jelly Belly guys do with jelly beans. Just not in bottles.
> but...if we could bottle and market some moonshine...hmmm...
chris
August 6th 03, 01:31 PM
This is the sad part of "pro" racing in the U.S. You're not actually
paid in many cases but you work more than 40 hours per week in many
cases. Its quite sad...
"Kurgan Gringioni" > wrote in message >...
> "Bensharp13" > wrote in message
> ...
> > >From: (chris)
>
> > >OK, so I did some checking. The minimum wage for 2003 is indeed 15 k
> > >(about $18 k) euro for new pros, 18 k for other (not sure what other
> > >means, non-first year), but increase to 20 k and 23 k, respectively in
> > >2004. I do know that D-3 are exempt from this pay scale, but not sure
> > >how that all works.
> > >
>
> > >OK, so we learned what from all this???
> > >
> >
> > i'm not sure, exactly, except that being a "professional" bike racer, in
> most
> > cases, isn't very "professional" at all, when you consider that the
> minimum
> > wage rivals the poverty level for this country.
>
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
> The $0k Dream seems like it is less than poverty level.
warren
August 6th 03, 04:23 PM
In article >, chris
> wrote:
> This is the sad part of "pro" racing in the U.S. You're not actually
> paid in many cases but you work more than 40 hours per week in many
> cases. Its quite sad...
You're getting fed, get to travel, and ride and race your bike for "a
living". There are alot of ski bums, snowboard bums, surfers, etc.
gettting less than that to have their fun.
-WG
Kurgan Gringioni
August 6th 03, 04:26 PM
"warren" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, chris
> > wrote:
>
> > This is the sad part of "pro" racing in the U.S. You're not actually
> > paid in many cases but you work more than 40 hours per week in many
> > cases. Its quite sad...
>
> You're getting fed, get to travel, and ride and race your bike for "a
> living". There are alot of ski bums, snowboard bums, surfers, etc.
> gettting less than that to have their fun.
$0k dreamers don't get fed.
chris
August 7th 03, 12:09 AM
Its a hell of alot more fun hangin out smoke pot than it is traveling
to races...its just not comparable.
warren > wrote in message >...
> In article >, chris
> > wrote:
>
> > This is the sad part of "pro" racing in the U.S. You're not actually
> > paid in many cases but you work more than 40 hours per week in many
> > cases. Its quite sad...
>
> You're getting fed, get to travel, and ride and race your bike for "a
> living". There are alot of ski bums, snowboard bums, surfers, etc.
> gettting less than that to have their fun.
>
> -WG
warren
August 7th 03, 12:45 AM
In article >, chris
> wrote:
> Its a hell of alot more fun hangin out smoke pot than it is traveling
> to races...its just not comparable.
The guys are making their own choices. They're not slaves.
-WG
Dan
August 7th 03, 02:21 PM
(chris) wrote in message >...
> Its a hell of alot more fun hangin out smoke pot than it is traveling
> to races...its just not comparable.
So smoke pot while driving to races. Or make energy bars.
Tom Arsenault
August 7th 03, 07:50 PM
(K. J. Papai) wrote in message >...
> "Andy Coggan" > wrote in message k.net>...
> > "Marilyn" > wrote in message
> > om...
> >
> > > The riders who want to ride for WVA are riding.
> >
> > But the real question is, are they getting paid?
> >
> > Andy Coggan
>
> I was wrong -- Coggan is NOT boring.
>
> -Ken
I was just wondering if Mike Jones is ever going to race again this
season? Seems as though he's been "absent" since Fitchburg. Just
wondering.
Tom
chris
August 8th 03, 01:09 AM
How about making energy bars with pot in them...damn, that'll make
racing real interesting.
CH
(Dan) wrote in message >...
> (chris) wrote in message >...
> > Its a hell of alot more fun hangin out smoke pot than it is traveling
> > to races...its just not comparable.
>
> So smoke pot while driving to races. Or make energy bars.
Dan
August 10th 03, 03:10 AM
(chris) wrote in message >...
> How about making energy bars with pot in them...damn, that'll make
> racing real interesting.
>
nah, not racing. But the long training rides...getting lost and
running out of light. wow that would be fun...not that I have any
firsthand knowledge of that.
chris
August 10th 03, 09:16 PM
Of course you don't...and any discussion of drugs on this group is
purely for entertainment purposes and no one, including myself,
condones drug or alcohol use/abuse in any form.
> nah, not racing. But the long training rides...getting lost and
> running out of light. wow that would be fun...not that I have any
> firsthand knowledge of that.
chris
August 10th 03, 09:20 PM
I can't disagree...it would be nice to see some better management of
the riders. By this I mean help securing health insurance. Some of
the guys are really just kids (or men who never grew up) who could
really use help thinking past this weeks training. One bad crash and
they might be done, competitively AND financially. It might be nice
if USAC help arrange something; they could clearly by into a group
policy reducing the price for all riders.
Bob Schwartz > wrote in message >...
> warren > wrote:
> > In article >, chris
> > > wrote:
>
> >> This is the sad part of "pro" racing in the U.S. You're not actually
> >> paid in many cases but you work more than 40 hours per week in many
> >> cases. Its quite sad...
>
> > You're getting fed, get to travel, and ride and race your bike for "a
> > living". There are alot of ski bums, snowboard bums, surfers, etc.
> > gettting less than that to have their fun.
>
> I think one thing we have to keep in mind is that no matter how grim
> the financials of the 'professional' racing circuit in this country,
> there have never been more people making a living at it than there are
> now.
>
> Racing a bicycle will never be an easy way to make a lot of money. But
> it is less hard now than it used to be. The whole TT3 thing may blur
> the lines between professionals and elite amateurs but I believe the
> bottom line is that progress is being made.
>
> Bob Schwartz
>
Amit
August 11th 03, 03:15 AM
(chris) wrote in message >...
> I can't disagree...it would be nice to see some better management of
> the riders. By this I mean help securing health insurance. Some of
> the guys are really just kids (or men who never grew up) who could
> really use help thinking past this weeks training. One bad crash and
> they might be done, competitively AND financially. It might be nice
> if USAC help arrange something; they could clearly by into a group
> policy reducing the price for all riders.
They could become Canadian.
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.