Lazy promoters?

In article .com,
Bill C wrote:

wrote:
What is with promoters not submitting results to USA Cycling?! Of the
over twenty times I have raced this year, two of the races have
submitted results to USA Cycling.

Seriously, WTF.

MGA Proving Grounds Superweek Road Race hasn't submitted a result at
all in all the records on the USA Cycling webpage, which goes back to
1999.

Isn't this required? Who is at fault in this? Are people so sick of the
task of promoting the race that as soon as it is over they need a
break, and then never get back to it?

It's definitely a problem, not sure how Casey is dealing with it but
Nebra is really leaning on promoters to submit the results both to them
and USAC. This should be a simple slam dunk, and is if the promoter
uses a reliable results/timing company who sends this stuff in as part
of their service.
Bill C

Most promoters don't submit results to USAC because it is a pain in the
backside ( and it takes time) to reformat the results into the format
the USAC requires. There is a specific format that requires 16 columns
of information. some of the information the promtoer ( or who ever is
doing the results) needs to be able to look up like the event permit
numbr. Also you have to use the specific category names or else the
category doesn't count in the national rankings.

Also since there are a lot of problems with the ranking system in
general many people dont are about the rankings. For example

Ranking points for a race is basd in part on the number of reported
finishers. If you have a very hard race that started with a feld of 100
riders but only about 10 finished then that race will be worth less
ranking points than an easy race that starts out with 75 riders and
ends with 65 finishers who get reported in the results. Likewise if the
promoter /officials have a problem reporting full results ( like a
camera malfunction ) again the race is pretty useless in terms of
points earned.

The USAC ranking system doesn't recognize categorized masters racing. A
35+ 4/5 race is trreated either the same as a 35+ 1/2/3 event or the
same as an elite 3/4 event depending on how the 35+ 4/5 race is
reported.

The ranking system doesn't recognize 35+, 45+ and 55+ events the same
as it does 30+ 40+ and 50+ events. The master groups that end in 0s get
more ranking points then the events that end in 5s

Most riders tend to care more about their own regional ranking programs
since those are the riders they actually race against on a regular
basis.

Most of the Nor Cal results that get reported to USAC do so because
promoters give me a spreadsheet with the basic Info and then when I
have the time I format it ( and deal with Lic # or name typos) and
upload it to USAC.

This is part of why NEBRA decided to start our own "ranking system",
similar to other regions' BAR, etc.

We didn't understand the USAC ranking process at first; nobody had a
PhD in Theoretical Statistics. We felt that we could provide a much
better, and more accurate service to the riders of New England by
creating our own. As such, we have a bit better control of the results,
both through the promoter, but mostly through the timing service that
our races are required to use. Our "ranking system" czar (paid
position) works with the promoters and the results/timing services to
help ensure consistency and quick turnaround. As the last point of
control, our adminstrator (also a paid position) intercedes and helps
get results to Colo Sprgs.

At last year's LA Summit meeting, this was discussed. But as each
region has its own desires (35+/45+/55+ vs 30+/40+/50+ for example),
any unifying system would be difficult, except in the Category fields.
I'm sure it will be discussed again at this year's meeting.


Casey Kerrigan wrote:
In article .com,
Bill C wrote:

wrote:
What is with promoters not submitting results to USA Cycling?! Of the
over twenty times I have raced this year, two of the races have
submitted results to USA Cycling.

Seriously, WTF.

MGA Proving Grounds Superweek Road Race hasn't submitted a result at
all in all the records on the USA Cycling webpage, which goes back to
1999.

Isn't this required? Who is at fault in this? Are people so sick of the
task of promoting the race that as soon as it is over they need a
break, and then never get back to it?

It's definitely a problem, not sure how Casey is dealing with it but
Nebra is really leaning on promoters to submit the results both to them
and USAC. This should be a simple slam dunk, and is if the promoter
uses a reliable results/timing company who sends this stuff in as part
of their service.
Bill C

Most promoters don't submit results to USAC because it is a pain in the
backside ( and it takes time) to reformat the results into the format
the USAC requires. There is a specific format that requires 16 columns
of information. some of the information the promtoer ( or who ever is
doing the results) needs to be able to look up like the event permit
numbr. Also you have to use the specific category names or else the
category doesn't count in the national rankings.

Also since there are a lot of problems with the ranking system in
general many people dont are about the rankings. For example

Ranking points for a race is basd in part on the number of reported
finishers. If you have a very hard race that started with a feld of 100
riders but only about 10 finished then that race will be worth less
ranking points than an easy race that starts out with 75 riders and
ends with 65 finishers who get reported in the results. Likewise if the
promoter /officials have a problem reporting full results ( like a
camera malfunction ) again the race is pretty useless in terms of
points earned.

The USAC ranking system doesn't recognize categorized masters racing. A
35+ 4/5 race is trreated either the same as a 35+ 1/2/3 event or the
same as an elite 3/4 event depending on how the 35+ 4/5 race is
reported.

The ranking system doesn't recognize 35+, 45+ and 55+ events the same
as it does 30+ 40+ and 50+ events. The master groups that end in 0s get
more ranking points then the events that end in 5s

Most riders tend to care more about their own regional ranking programs
since those are the riders they actually race against on a regular
basis.

Most of the Nor Cal results that get reported to USAC do so because
promoters give me a spreadsheet with the basic Info and then when I
have the time I format it ( and deal with Lic # or name typos) and
upload it to USAC.

"Agree to submit race results" doesn't necessarily mean
electronically.

The insurance rebate was 50 cents per and that disappeared 4 or 5 years
ago.

I would suggest that only cat 1/2 results matter for a national ranking
system.

NRC races are required to submit results asap.

Until USAC supplies the same software that can export the needed files
to all promoters and requires its use the national ranking system will
never be worth while.

At a recent UCI race in the USA I noticed half the pros had their USCF
license numbers listed on the start sheets instead of their UCI
numbers. As long as the top riders carry multiple licenses (against
the rules) trying to match up the many thousands of results will be
incorrect anyhow and the rankings will be wrong. The top riders don't
care. The promoters don't care.


yeahyeah wrote:
alan_atwood wrote:

The rebate may be gone, but the requirement exists. You have to sign
this agreement to get a permit (although the phrase "action /may/ be
taken" gives a bit of wiggle room):

Event Promoters

* Agree to submit race results in the 21 days following the
conclusion of the event.

yeahyeah wrote:
wrote:
What is with promoters not submitting results to USA Cycling?! Of the
over twenty times I have raced this year, two of the races have
submitted results to USA Cycling.

Seriously, WTF.

MGA Proving Grounds Superweek Road Race hasn't submitted a result at
all in all the records on the USA Cycling webpage, which goes back to
1999.

Isn't this required? Who is at fault in this? Are people so sick of the
task of promoting the race that as soon as it is over they need a
break, and then never get back to it?

I always wonder why results don't get sent in, since the club is
supposed to get $1 per registered rider back when they submit results.
Submitting results is supposed to be mandatory, but I can't see how
they'd enforce it. What would they do, refuse to give the promoter
another permit? We wouldn't have any races in this country!

It's not that hard to do the results - all it takes is Excel and some
copy-pasting. I think that once the race is over, promoters are so
exhausted that they just don't want to be bothered.

I don't see why this is such a big deal. Even the promoter's 6 year
old kids have laptops nowadays.

Bring a laptop to the race, have the responsible official enter the
results into Excel, hit "save" and when the promoter gets home, email
the file to USAC. Simple.

And yes, if the promoter fails to submit results, hold on to their next
race permit. They'll eventually fall into line.

Casey Kerrigan wrote:
In article .com,
Bill C wrote:

wrote:
What is with promoters not submitting results to USA Cycling?! Of the
over twenty times I have raced this year, two of the races have
submitted results to USA Cycling.

Seriously, WTF.

MGA Proving Grounds Superweek Road Race hasn't submitted a result at
all in all the records on the USA Cycling webpage, which goes back to
1999.

Isn't this required? Who is at fault in this? Are people so sick of the
task of promoting the race that as soon as it is over they need a
break, and then never get back to it?

It's definitely a problem, not sure how Casey is dealing with it but
Nebra is really leaning on promoters to submit the results both to them
and USAC. This should be a simple slam dunk, and is if the promoter
uses a reliable results/timing company who sends this stuff in as part
of their service.
Bill C

Most promoters don't submit results to USAC because it is a pain in the
backside ( and it takes time) to reformat the results into the format
the USAC requires. There is a specific format that requires 16 columns
of information. some of the information the promtoer ( or who ever is
doing the results) needs to be able to look up like the event permit
numbr. Also you have to use the specific category names or else the
category doesn't count in the national rankings.

And it requires more than cutting and pasting results -- our officials
do not include license numbers on results sheets, so finding the
information required by USAC for each finisher may mean wading through
300 on-site applications. Which ain't gonna happen.

Kathleen

"kgleason" wrote in message
ups.com...

Casey Kerrigan wrote:
In article .com,
Bill C wrote:

wrote:
What is with promoters not submitting results to USA Cycling?! Of the
over twenty times I have raced this year, two of the races have
submitted results to USA Cycling.

Seriously, WTF.

MGA Proving Grounds Superweek Road Race hasn't submitted a result at
all in all the records on the USA Cycling webpage, which goes back to
1999.

Isn't this required? Who is at fault in this? Are people so sick of
the
task of promoting the race that as soon as it is over they need a
break, and then never get back to it?

It's definitely a problem, not sure how Casey is dealing with it but
Nebra is really leaning on promoters to submit the results both to them
and USAC. This should be a simple slam dunk, and is if the promoter
uses a reliable results/timing company who sends this stuff in as part
of their service.
Bill C

Most promoters don't submit results to USAC because it is a pain in the
backside ( and it takes time) to reformat the results into the format
the USAC requires. There is a specific format that requires 16 columns
of information. some of the information the promtoer ( or who ever is
doing the results) needs to be able to look up like the event permit
numbr. Also you have to use the specific category names or else the
category doesn't count in the national rankings.

And it requires more than cutting and pasting results -- our officials
do not include license numbers on results sheets, so finding the
information required by USAC for each finisher may mean wading through
300 on-site applications. Which ain't gonna happen.



It sounds like a complete pain in the butt but I don't understand why the
promoters don't modify their data recording systems to capture the
information that USAC requires. If you know in advance what they are
looking for it seems that you could do it.

Frank Drackman wrote:
"kgleason" wrote in message
ups.com...

Casey Kerrigan wrote:
In article .com,
Bill C wrote:

wrote:
What is with promoters not submitting results to USA Cycling?! Of the
over twenty times I have raced this year, two of the races have
submitted results to USA Cycling.

Seriously, WTF.

MGA Proving Grounds Superweek Road Race hasn't submitted a result at
all in all the records on the USA Cycling webpage, which goes back to
1999.

Isn't this required? Who is at fault in this? Are people so sick of
the
task of promoting the race that as soon as it is over they need a
break, and then never get back to it?

It's definitely a problem, not sure how Casey is dealing with it but
Nebra is really leaning on promoters to submit the results both to them
and USAC. This should be a simple slam dunk, and is if the promoter
uses a reliable results/timing company who sends this stuff in as part
of their service.
Bill C

Most promoters don't submit results to USAC because it is a pain in the
backside ( and it takes time) to reformat the results into the format
the USAC requires. There is a specific format that requires 16 columns
of information. some of the information the promtoer ( or who ever is
doing the results) needs to be able to look up like the event permit
numbr. Also you have to use the specific category names or else the
category doesn't count in the national rankings.

And it requires more than cutting and pasting results -- our officials
do not include license numbers on results sheets, so finding the
information required by USAC for each finisher may mean wading through
300 on-site applications. Which ain't gonna happen.



It sounds like a complete pain in the butt but I don't understand why the
promoters don't modify their data recording systems to capture the
information that USAC requires. If you know in advance what they are
looking for it seems that you could do it.

In our case, we didn't know in advance -- the results thing is
completely separate from permitting. I only learned about the results
reporting thing when I got angry emails from racers. Don't know if
this ignorance is my fault or that of USAC; that question is only
relevant at this point if USAC is not doing a good enough job letting
promoters know about the "service." Next year we will make sure
license numbers in particular get on day-of registration sheets. Even
with this, though, it requires more than cut and paste in the case of
the race my club promotes because our "data recording system" for
day-of registration is pen and paper. Not the biggest deal in the
world, but not automatic.

Although I don't really care who is the fifth-ranked fourth-tier racer
in the US, I can appreciate that there are some who do.

Kathleen

"kgleason" wrote in message
oups.com...

Frank Drackman wrote:
"kgleason" wrote in message
ups.com...

Casey Kerrigan wrote:
In article .com,
Bill C wrote:

wrote:
What is with promoters not submitting results to USA Cycling?! Of
the
over twenty times I have raced this year, two of the races have
submitted results to USA Cycling.

Seriously, WTF.

MGA Proving Grounds Superweek Road Race hasn't submitted a result
at
all in all the records on the USA Cycling webpage, which goes back
to
1999.

Isn't this required? Who is at fault in this? Are people so sick
of
the
task of promoting the race that as soon as it is over they need a
break, and then never get back to it?

It's definitely a problem, not sure how Casey is dealing with it
but
Nebra is really leaning on promoters to submit the results both to
them
and USAC. This should be a simple slam dunk, and is if the promoter
uses a reliable results/timing company who sends this stuff in as
part
of their service.
Bill C

Most promoters don't submit results to USAC because it is a pain in
the
backside ( and it takes time) to reformat the results into the format
the USAC requires. There is a specific format that requires 16 columns
of information. some of the information the promtoer ( or who ever is
doing the results) needs to be able to look up like the event permit
numbr. Also you have to use the specific category names or else the
category doesn't count in the national rankings.

And it requires more than cutting and pasting results -- our officials
do not include license numbers on results sheets, so finding the
information required by USAC for each finisher may mean wading through
300 on-site applications. Which ain't gonna happen.



It sounds like a complete pain in the butt but I don't understand why the
promoters don't modify their data recording systems to capture the
information that USAC requires. If you know in advance what they are
looking for it seems that you could do it.

In our case, we didn't know in advance -- the results thing is
completely separate from permitting. I only learned about the results
reporting thing when I got angry emails from racers. Don't know if
this ignorance is my fault or that of USAC; that question is only
relevant at this point if USAC is not doing a good enough job letting
promoters know about the "service." Next year we will make sure
license numbers in particular get on day-of registration sheets. Even
with this, though, it requires more than cut and paste in the case of
the race my club promotes because our "data recording system" for
day-of registration is pen and paper. Not the biggest deal in the
world, but not automatic.

Although I don't really care who is the fifth-ranked fourth-tier racer
in the US, I can appreciate that there are some who do.

Kathleen


Now I understand, thanks for the response.

I sometimes help out on the scoring at a weekly training race and the
biggest complaint from racers is the lack of posted results. It drives some
people totally bonkers.

Frank Drackman wrote:
"kgleason" wrote in message
oups.com...

Frank Drackman wrote:
"kgleason" wrote in message
ups.com...

Casey Kerrigan wrote:
In article .com,
Bill C wrote:

wrote:
What is with promoters not submitting results to USA Cycling?! Of
the
over twenty times I have raced this year, two of the races have
submitted results to USA Cycling.

Seriously, WTF.

MGA Proving Grounds Superweek Road Race hasn't submitted a result
at
all in all the records on the USA Cycling webpage, which goes back
to
1999.

Isn't this required? Who is at fault in this? Are people so sick
of
the
task of promoting the race that as soon as it is over they need a
break, and then never get back to it?

It's definitely a problem, not sure how Casey is dealing with it
but
Nebra is really leaning on promoters to submit the results both to
them
and USAC. This should be a simple slam dunk, and is if the promoter
uses a reliable results/timing company who sends this stuff in as
part
of their service.
Bill C

Most promoters don't submit results to USAC because it is a pain in
the
backside ( and it takes time) to reformat the results into the format
the USAC requires. There is a specific format that requires 16 columns
of information. some of the information the promtoer ( or who ever is
doing the results) needs to be able to look up like the event permit
numbr. Also you have to use the specific category names or else the
category doesn't count in the national rankings.

And it requires more than cutting and pasting results -- our officials
do not include license numbers on results sheets, so finding the
information required by USAC for each finisher may mean wading through
300 on-site applications. Which ain't gonna happen.



It sounds like a complete pain in the butt but I don't understand why the
promoters don't modify their data recording systems to capture the
information that USAC requires. If you know in advance what they are
looking for it seems that you could do it.

In our case, we didn't know in advance -- the results thing is
completely separate from permitting. I only learned about the results
reporting thing when I got angry emails from racers. Don't know if
this ignorance is my fault or that of USAC; that question is only
relevant at this point if USAC is not doing a good enough job letting
promoters know about the "service." Next year we will make sure
license numbers in particular get on day-of registration sheets. Even
with this, though, it requires more than cut and paste in the case of
the race my club promotes because our "data recording system" for
day-of registration is pen and paper. Not the biggest deal in the
world, but not automatic.

Although I don't really care who is the fifth-ranked fourth-tier racer
in the US, I can appreciate that there are some who do.

Kathleen


Now I understand, thanks for the response.

I sometimes help out on the scoring at a weekly training race and the
biggest complaint from racers is the lack of posted results. It drives some
people totally bonkers.

Which is why I spend time immediately after our event getting results
to our web master, even though I am completely fried at that point; I
understand how the Internet has changed expectations (used to have to
wait for the regional reports in the next Velonews). Our results have
always been posted on our web site by first thing the next morning at
the latest.

As I said earlier, the USAC thing was virtually impossible without
pre-planning because the information required by the USAC was not
readily available -- even though we did post the results on the web in
a more than timely fashion.

Kathleen

FWIW....they aren't carrying multiple licenses; the USAC international
license carries their USAC number as well as the UCI number. It's the
fault of the registrar that the domestic numbers appear on the
registration form.

Alan

wrote:
"Agree to submit race results" doesn't necessarily mean
electronically.

The insurance rebate was 50 cents per and that disappeared 4 or 5 years
ago.

I would suggest that only cat 1/2 results matter for a national ranking
system.

NRC races are required to submit results asap.

Until USAC supplies the same software that can export the needed files
to all promoters and requires its use the national ranking system will
never be worth while.

At a recent UCI race in the USA I noticed half the pros had their USCF
license numbers listed on the start sheets instead of their UCI
numbers. As long as the top riders carry multiple licenses (against
the rules) trying to match up the many thousands of results will be
incorrect anyhow and the rankings will be wrong. The top riders don't
care. The promoters don't care.


yeahyeah wrote:
alan_atwood wrote:

The rebate may be gone, but the requirement exists. You have to sign
this agreement to get a permit (although the phrase "action /may/ be
taken" gives a bit of wiggle room):

Event Promoters

* Agree to submit race results in the 21 days following the
conclusion of the event.