A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Racing
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Nature Valley Girl



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old December 6th 08, 03:32 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Carl Sundquist
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,810
Default Nature Valley Girl

MagillaGorilla wrote:
Carl Sundquist wrote:

Bob Schwartz wrote:
MagillaGorilla wrote:
Back in 1984, it was a foregone conclusion that amateur status meant
you did not make any
money from your sport. To do so was to risk being made ineligible for
the Olympics. What
other definition is there?
Dumbass,

Amateur status did not mean what you think it meant. Are you
really under the impression that everyone got merchandise
prizes?

Not only did I occasionally make money from the sport without
jeopardizing my amateur status, I also accelerated in velodrome
turns. Now stop wetting the bed and move along.

Bob Schwartz

Even merchandise prizes would violate the Brundage (or the NCAA for that
matter) interpretation of amateur. The IRS too. If you win a car, you'll
have to pay taxes on the value of it, just like cash. Cycling, and other
sports as well, have had amateurs receiving money related to competition
for many years. Track and field athletes may not have had prize money,
but they received start money at the various Grand Prix held in Europe
each summer. There was an attempt to start up a pro track and field
"league" in the '70's, but it didn't make it. Partially because track
and field doesn't have the following in the US as it does in Europe, and
partially because it really wasn't needed.

Some US swimmers tried to form a pro swimming organization after the
1972 Olympics, but it didn't make it either (although I doubt it was
because of any start/prize money type system existing elsewhere).

Bottom line, like Kayle Leogrande, M-G has shown that he is willing to
lie and move the goalposts in order to support his claims.


I never moved the goal posts and I don't lie.

Magilla


So you never received a salary related to bike racing and never received
any prize money, right?
Ads
  #102  
Old December 6th 08, 03:44 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
MagillaGorilla[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,668
Default Nature Valley Girl



Carl Sundquist wrote:

MagillaGorilla wrote:
Carl Sundquist wrote:

MagillaGorilla wrote:
Carl Sundquist wrote:

MagillaGorilla wrote:
Carl Sundquist wrote:

MagillaGorilla wrote:
What does Carmichael in '96 have to do with Twigg in '84?

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...C0A9679482 60
Apple Lap. 1981. Nitz. $2500. What's that worth in today's money?
Anywhere from $5k to $11k, depending in which relative value calculator
you use. What place is that equivalent to on GC at the Tour?

IIRC, it was a bit of a cluster, because they rode over a steel grate
bridge which wasn't cool. I think Leslie Moore won the women's race.

Jacqui Bradley (Jeff Bradley's sister) won the women's race at the
Mohawk Classic. $15,000. 1981. ($34k to $66k in today's dollars) What's
that worth in today's money on GC at the Tour (for the _men_)? In the
realm of 5th place on GC. Total prize list $71 grand. And it wasn't
split up between 14 different masters categories, either.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...C1A9679482 60

WTF is a Carney abortion?

Keep talkin' Magilla Ahmadinejad, juuust keeeeeep on talking.
Okay, so you split $10k between your 5 teammates and you got $2,000. The Mohawk
Classic purse sounds better but how long did that race last with that kind of prize
money. I would bet no longer than 1 or 2 years.
$10k is $10k and splitting is splitting. It doesn't matter if it was 27
years ago in Jersey or a couple of months ago in Minnesota. It's
irrelevant to the issue at hand.

You're right about the lifespan of the race. I don't know, but what's
the average lifespan of any big $ bike race in the US? How many years
did the Triple Crown (Thrift Drug, West Virginia, CoreStates) that
offered a $1M prize to the winer of all three last? The Super Duper Tour
of America, like many others, can't even get beyond a webpage.

You cherry picked the richest races in the season and then talked about what the
winner would get. 95% of the women made the equivalent of what a Walmart cashier
makes in a summer.

Magilla

ADHD Monkey,

To refresh your memory, this is relevant to your viewpoint that amateurs
did not receive money.
So they competed in the all-amateur Olympics as frauds in violation of the IOC rules at
the time that said athletes could make no money in their sports? Since Connie Carpenter
Bee retired right after the 1984 Games, she technically had to retire with no earned
income at all from cycling or she would have been ineligible to compete in the '84
Olympics.

So are you saying Connie Carpenter made no money in cycling or that she was an Olympic
fraud? Take your pick, O-CarlWan.

Thanks,

Magilla
Do you consider yourself to have been an amateur fraud?


No, because the chief never stomped my ass.

Magilla


You need to capitalize the C, or Gibby will sit on you.


Gibby Fatton wishes he were Jackie Simes. A lot of people were jealous of that Rt. 28 book
when it came out. The Blade and Indiana Granite think they made the gerbil wheel what it is
today,. One day J-Me will drive a Catepillar onto the Air Products hamsterdrome and turn it
into a public built-in swimming pool. Who's gonna stop him - the little Reinhart boy...Andy
Lakatosh? Who? That convicted felon Chenowth?

Then what will the Chief have to say? Art can call lap times for the butterfly over the PA
system just as easily as a miss-and-out. Chauner's the only guy smart enough to put a roof
over a gerbil wheel.

Once the Blade moves up to Top Fuel, he'll get his own reality show and then you'll wish you
stayed in the game and got some of the new cats.

How come I don't see you on the Thursday ride at the Rodale chipmunk track? Even the girls
come out to race that, Carl - you can keep up.

You don't seem to remember when The Beard use to drop the Carney brothers in Norristown, do
you? That 7-Eleven jersey Jonas use to show up in didn't matter.

You can even see Alan "Ric Ocasek" Roginiski, who stopped taking steroids after finally
finishing Corestates 1 lap down. Those days of being able to clean up on the Corestates KOM
without finishing are long gone.

Somebody is jealous of Shawn Wallace in here, and it's not the monkey.

Magilla

  #103  
Old December 6th 08, 03:58 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Carl Sundquist
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,810
Default Nature Valley Girl

MagillaGorilla wrote:
Carl Sundquist wrote:

MagillaGorilla wrote:
Bob Schwartz wrote:

MagillaGorilla wrote:
So are you saying Connie Carpenter made no money in cycling or that she was an Olympic
fraud? Take your pick, O-CarlWan.
Amateur? You keep using that word. I do not think it means what
you think it means. Dumbass.

Bob Schwartz
Dude,

Lance Armstrong and Jonas Carney delayed turning pro until 1993 because they both didn't
want to make themselves ineligible for the '92 Barcelona Games. What definition of amateur
are you using?

Back in 1984, it was a foregone conclusion that amateur status meant you did not make any
money from your sport. To do so was to risk being made ineligible for the Olympics. What
other definition is there?


Magilla

Says who? And what difference was there between pre'84 and post'84? Name
one rider who was deeked from the Olympics for receiving money?


A lot of athletes were threatened with a ban if they received any money....athletes like Steve
Prefontaine.

Magilla


Goalpost mover,

I asked you to name one rider and you you come up with Steve Prefontaine.

Less than two minutes of research shows that while Prefontaine raised
the issue of start money, his issue was _not_ with the IOC, but with the
AAU (Amateur Athletics Union), the organization that more or less
preceded the USOC as the US governing body to the IOC for many sports
(cycling not among them). Why was Prefontaine raising the issue? Because
his non-American competitors were free to accept start money, but the
AAU would not let Americans do so and remain amateur.

"The AAU became the subject of criticism, notably by outspoken track
star Steve Prefontaine, over the living conditions for amateur athletes
under the AAU, as well as arbitrary rules, such as a prohibition on
women participating in running events. Congress adopted the Amateur
Sports Act of 1978 in response to such criticisms, effectively removing
the organization from any governance role."

The circumstances of Prefontaine and track and field athletes had no
bearing on riders.
  #104  
Old December 6th 08, 04:02 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
MagillaGorilla[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,668
Default Nature Valley Girl

Carl Sundquist wrote:

MagillaGorilla wrote:
Carl Sundquist wrote:

MagillaGorilla wrote:
Bob Schwartz wrote:

MagillaGorilla wrote:
So are you saying Connie Carpenter made no money in cycling or that she was an Olympic
fraud? Take your pick, O-CarlWan.
Amateur? You keep using that word. I do not think it means what
you think it means. Dumbass.

Bob Schwartz
Dude,

Lance Armstrong and Jonas Carney delayed turning pro until 1993 because they both didn't
want to make themselves ineligible for the '92 Barcelona Games. What definition of amateur
are you using?

Back in 1984, it was a foregone conclusion that amateur status meant you did not make any
money from your sport. To do so was to risk being made ineligible for the Olympics. What
other definition is there?


Magilla

Says who? And what difference was there between pre'84 and post'84? Name
one rider who was deeked from the Olympics for receiving money?


A lot of athletes were threatened with a ban if they received any money....athletes like Steve
Prefontaine.

Magilla


What bike races did he do?


Prefontaine wasn't allowed to receive any prize money or appearance fee or he would have been DQ'ed
from the Olympic Team as per thhe AAU rules back in the mid 1970's going into Montreal, right
before Pre rolled it. I don't see how the rules were different for cyclists.

Magilla

  #105  
Old December 6th 08, 04:18 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Bob Schwartz[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 935
Default Nature Valley Girl

MagillaGorilla wrote:
Bob Schwartz wrote:

MagillaGorilla wrote:
Back in 1984, it was a foregone conclusion that amateur status meant you did not make any
money from your sport. To do so was to risk being made ineligible for the Olympics. What
other definition is there?

Dumbass,

Amateur status did not mean what you think it meant. Are you
really under the impression that everyone got merchandise
prizes?

Not only did I occasionally make money from the sport without
jeopardizing my amateur status, I also accelerated in velodrome
turns. Now stop wetting the bed and move along.

Bob Schwartz


How do you know you didn't jeopardize your Olympic status? Half the elite riders today don't
even know what the selection criteria are for the Olympic team going into an Olympic year even
though they can download the freakin' pdf file from the USAC website.

Yet you will have everyone in here believe you knew for a fact you didn't jeopardize your
Olympic status back in the day before the Internets was invented?


What about the velodrome turns? Aren't you going to address
the velodrome turns?

Bob Schwartz
  #106  
Old December 6th 08, 05:15 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Amit Ghosh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,384
Default Nature Valley Girl

On Dec 5, 5:55*pm, MagillaGorilla wrote:
Bob Schwartz wrote:
MagillaGorilla wrote:
So are you saying Connie Carpenter made no money in *cycling or that she was an Olympic
fraud? *Take your pick, O-CarlWan.


Amateur? You keep using that word. I do not think it means what
you think it means. Dumbass.


Bob Schwartz


Dude,

Lance Armstrong and Jonas Carney delayed turning pro until 1993 because they both didn't
want to make themselves ineligible for the '92 Barcelona Games. *What definition of amateur
are you using?

Back in 1984, it was a foregone conclusion that amateur status meant you did not make any
money from your sport. *To do so was to risk being made ineligible for the Olympics. *What
other definition is there?


dumbass,

different sports used different standards to mean what amateur meant.
in alpine skiing all the top world cup skiers were able to compete as
amateurs.

you talk about poor pro riders as indentured servants, but when there
are funds available the riders get a share. the biggest exploiter of
athletes is the NCAA, since they've set up a system that generates
millions from a free workforce.
  #107  
Old December 6th 08, 07:02 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Amit Ghosh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,384
Default Nature Valley Girl

On Dec 2, 9:04*pm, MagillaGorilla wrote:

I understand that.

But that doesn't really refute anything I was saying concerning prize money and how having a poor purse
****es off pro riders. *They just hate racing for nickels and dimes.

Let me ask you something...why do you think Sara Carrigan retired at the age of 28?

She was actually on the verge of retirement since the Athens Olympics (age 24) because she couldn't make
any money in the sport. *So lowering the women's purse by 50% - which is what LaPorte was trying to sell
as a good thing - is not a good thing.

Kristin Armstrong will probably also retire because no team will pay her a decent salary..nobody cares
about her gold medal. * She will reap her just desserts for not starting or joining a union..


dumbass,

carrigan should complain to the IOC about the size of the purse for
the olympics.

personally i don't think it's a tragedy if a person can't get paid to
ride a bicycle and i couldn't care less if every pro team folded
tomorrow. generally the amount a person gets paid is going to be
related to what their perceived economic value is.

all the rbr kunichs should stop day dreaming that bike racing will be
a big time american pro sport and dr. frank's cross-country
extravaganza will be the superbowl of march madness.

cycling is a great activity, but a lousy profession for 99% of those
that are trying to make it their profession. american racing has a
long way to go before it can even hope to pay for itself. even bike
racers aren't that interested in watching a bike race. master fatties
would rather go antiquing with their trophy wives than "stick around
to watch the pros race".

instead of wasting money on stupid short sighted projects that burn
through sponsor cash without anything to show for it (ie. all 12k
dreamer teams), cycling people should work at attracting more riders
and work towards being able to put on bigger and better events.

hotshot cat 3s will be put off by the influx of freds, but that is how
triathlon and running are able to put on sustainable events.

we are paying $800/hr just to keep roads closed for a quality road
race, given a 400 rider field that event is barely sustainable, not to
mention the hostility we get for using the road. apparently marathon
organizers, the santa claus parade and millions of stupid food fairs
have their **** together more than cyclists do.
  #108  
Old December 6th 08, 10:57 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Les Earnest
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 52
Default Nature Valley Girl

Carl Sundquist wrote:
. . . (ISTR there was a
_published_ cap on what an amateur rider could win/earn, (i.e. receive)
on a daily basis. I think the amount was $10k per day. Somebody with an
old USCF rulebook please check it out and report back.)


I was editor of the USCF Rulebooks from 1978 to 1985 but recall no such
published caps in that era. However I did find an authorization for such
caps that was adopted in 1982 by FIAC (the amateur cycling arm of UCI,
not to be confused with the modern FIAC). Their Article 9 said:

Art. 9 To be admitted to take part in the Olympic Games an athlete must:
-Hold a license issued by a national federation affiliated to FIAC,
-Be 17 years old or reach his 17th years during the solar year of the
Olympic Games,
-Observe and respect the FIAC rules and Rule 26 of the I.O.C. as well as
its bye-law and guidelines, in conformity with the text of the rule
enclosed within the FIAC Technical Guidelines,
-Not have received prizes in cash or kind of value exceeding the amount
hereunder specified: the maximum value of prizes in cash or kind of
value for road races, for each stage of a stage race or a track race
will be established each year by each national federation. The amount
established by the national federation should be acknowledged by FIAC,
which will notify all affiliated federations.
[etc.]

No such cap was adopted by USCF at that time but in the late 1980s (I
would have to dig some to pinpoint the year) USCF adopted Rule 1E5a
saying that "The maximum that can be accepted by a rider is $2,500 per
day of racing." However that rule was removed in 1992, which was when
the old FIAC disappeared. Thereafter you were an "amateur" or a
"professional" based on which kind of license you purchased but you
could earn a lot of money in either case if you were good enough.

This was during the long era of "shamteurism" in which various athletic
organizations officially continued to endorse amateurism while winking
at enforcement. After World War 2 the Eastern Bloc countries set up
programs to win Olympic medals in which top athletes were put on salary
while pretending to be amateurs.

Western countries pretended to continue following the amateurism rules
but with increasing hypocrisy. For example, when I started racing and
officiating in the early 1970s only equipment prizes were allowed--no
cash. However over time promoters began to quietly hand envelops
containing cash to winners and eventually this practice was officially
condoned.

Unfortunately while the Internal Revenue Service follows the sensible
rule that a cycling pro is one who makes his or her living from cycling
and can therefore deduct their expenses for this work, another U.S.
Federal Law, the Ted Stevens Olympic and Amateur Sports Act, still
pretends that there is another distinction between amateurs and pros.
That law gives the U.S. Olympic Committee and its members, including USA
Cycling, monopolies on access to international amateur competition but
fails to define what that is.

Even worse, though these sports monopolies are required to be charitable
nonprofit corporations there is no requirement that they provide
democratic representation of their members. In practice, commercial
interests have spent what it takes to gain control of these
organizations that oversee their businesses, as has happened to USA
Cycling. So far the truly amateur riders don't seem to give a damn and
the truly pros are evidently afraid to rock the boat and jeopardize
their job, so this situation will likely continue for awhile.

However given that Ted Stevens' influence is waning, there is a chance
that the U.S. Congress will eventually wake up and fix this mess.
Unfortunately there are some bigger messes that they need to address first.

-Les Earnest
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nature Valley GP on TV [email protected] Racing 0 June 28th 07 12:47 AM
Nature Valley GP [email protected] Racing 0 June 12th 07 12:21 AM
Nature Valley GP on OLN - U.S. Viewers Frank Drackman Racing 0 August 8th 06 06:45 PM
Nature Valley Grand Prix on TV David LaPorte Racing 1 August 3rd 06 10:27 PM
Nature Valley Race coverage Jet Racing 2 September 13th 05 05:01 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.