Re: RC: RE: THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP

[CMKSAGEHIL@aol.com]

In a message dated 8/24/99 9:39:34 AM Pacific Daylight Time, step@fsr.com 
writes:

<< I still think a single, big, race is a good format
 for a National Champion. We already have mileage
 champions, and 100 Mile (points) champions - an 
 overall high point champion would also be a 
 reasonable award (right now it's confined to high
 points within a region). But there's no arguing
 with 'first across the finish line'.  >>

Let's be honest here.  All of these things are "champion" of something.  But 
in order to "highlight" those things, the national points championship was 
DESTROYED.  It was the ONLY championship that meant anything to a lot of 
people.  We need a diverse range of competition because we are a diverse 
sport.  All that many of us have asked for for years is the return of a 
national points champion.  We get the irrational argument that that would 
take away from other forms of competition.  Go ahead and HAVE a head-to-head 
system of some sort.  That's what you are trying now, and as Steve Shaw so 
aptly pointed out, only 12 or so bothered to go.  Of course, as another 
poster pointed out, the details were hardly available to those from far away 
until it was too late--so that isn't exactly a level playing field either.  
But the bottom line is--let's HAVE a points champion.  That is meaningful to 
many of us.  MIght even get some of us back in the saddle.  The high point in 
my career (having never aspired to be #1 due to lack of time and money) was 
to actually make it into the Top 25 of the points championship.  And that IS 
in range of many of us.  Our sport was heck of a lot smaller back then, but 
there were A LOT of us vying for those last spots in a Top 25, and now we 
only have half that many even show up for a so-called "championship."  What 
is wrong with that picture???

I've always illustrated the point of different sorts of champions by 
comparing the Jim Jones award to the Bill Thornburg award.  I've got 
stallions and no kids.  Lots of folks have kids and no stallions.  If we 
eliminate the Bill Thornburg award, will that make the stallion mileage more 
meaningful?  Or visa versa?  I think not.  So why have we eliminated a form 
of competition that was very much valued by many of our riders?  Time to get 
it back up and running, and meanwhile, go right on ahead with other forms of 
competition such as the head-to-head championship.  They prove different 
things, and therefore have different meaning to different people.  

And Steph, believe me, when you are running for points, you can't AFFORD to 
miss the bigger rides just because you are running for points.  You might not 
win, but Top Ten points are nothing to sneeze at.  Even in "olden times" that 
was true.  The real champions did those, too, and kept right on trucking.  
That's what being a champion is all about.  

As for head-to-head competition--when there was a points championship, I went 
back through and checked several years, and for the time frame I checked, not 
ONE champion rode in less than 3 regions (many of us lower down in the 
standings got away with it, so lower placings were within the reach of those 
who couldn't afford the travel), and believe me, those folks in adjacent 
regions had their stars, too, who did their best to beat the contender from 
the next region...

We can thrash the flaws of the old system all we want, but it served a 
purpose and did it well.  It need not be the only game in town, but I fail to 
understand the paranoia about bringing it back as just one more form of 
competition.  What's the matter?  Are we afraid people might LIKE it or 
something?

Heidi


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.    
Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/RideCamp   
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=