Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 35
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cstem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,237

    New USAC liscense rules-what do you think?

    I clipped this off of the FBRA page. --There are a few rule changes that promoters should be aware of for 2014. You can access the new 2014 Rulebook and view the rule changes on page 3-4. Following is a brief highlight.

    • one day licenses are now $15 and intended for first time riders. They are not to be used to enter masters races for riders that have have held a license in previous years in order to skirt buying an annual license.


    Its from USAC and appears that if the promoter has a USAC sanction, and you want to race it you must purchase a full USAC license. As far as I can tell, single speed and rockcrusher would not be a part of this, but I have emailed my local promoter of the state series who in turn emailed USAC to find out.

    I race single speed, but since I raced Cat 2 years ago, would have to pick up a tag from USAC if I want to race that class ever again. I feel very sorry for the promoters in this case, because they are the ones who are going to lose. USAC is such a joke when they try to dictate what Pro's can do- but I can almost understand it because they do help Pro's in certain respects. But to penalize Joe Saturday racer is insane. I guess the only good thing that comes from it is that many promoters will ditch USAC sanction and it will not be a problem in a few years. Forgive if I posted this in the wrong spot.
    Find a ride on FB> AZ MTB

    "Uppercase with a space"

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    211
    "...in order to skirt buying an annual license"

    IMO these are the worst part and what makes people hate them so much.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    383
    Quote Originally Posted by cstem View Post
    USAC is such a joke when they try to dictate what Pro's can do- but I can almost understand it because they do help Pro's in certain respects. But to penalize Joe Saturday racer is insane. I guess the only good thing that comes from it is that many promoters will ditch USAC sanction and it will not be a problem in a few years. Forgive if I posted this in the wrong spot.

    #1 USAC is not helping pros. They are a government granted monopoly that goes to great lengths to be anti-competitive. Forbidding pros from racing outside USAC/UCI sanctioning that in turn, supresses their wage earning, is just one way that is done.

    #2 USAC is not interested in a large numbers of off-road participants. They are happy to take your money and funnel it to road racing development. I don't really understand why USAC members seem to enjoy the abuse, but they do.

    You and your local racers need to tell your local promoter(s) you WILL NOT attend their event unless they switch sanctioning bodies.

    Here are two options: NABRA: North American Bicycle Racing Association (The OBRA guys taking their formula national) American Bicycle Racing ABR has been quietly sanctioning races for years.

    The promoter can get their own insurance easily enough too.

    USAC can be very persuasive when threatened. Instead of improving USAC product, they bribed Tedro not to walk away in 2014. That works out good for Tedro, but so bad for the sport.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Flucod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    572
    Yep, will not be buying a license this year nor will participate in any USAC races.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    5
    Seems to be a pretty common sentiment. Let's throw our $$'s at the local organizers and support racing as it used to be, and as it is meant to be. Not many I know of have any desire to support an organization whose races are sometimes 2x as expensive as other local races, but without those $$'s coming back.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    783
    What section of the rulebook did that highlight come from? I tried looking but couldn't find it.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sbsbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,455
    Jesus,
    USAC is not a government monopoly.
    USAC is a USOC participant, so if you want to go to the Olympics, membership is mandatory, and needed to draw the attention of the Olympic selection committee.

    There are plenty of other arenas and venues to race you bike that are not associated with USAC, and you list 2.

    I agree that USAC has dropped the ball and kicked it down the gutter, and keep wondering when riders will figure out that the people that run USAC were brought to power and control, are part of the Lance Armstrong liars club, and drop out of this corrupt organization.

    I also wonder if the UCI rule banning Pros from participating in non-USAC events will be enforced in 2014.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    157
    All the responses I got from reps, USAC, and event organizers is that cat 2 and cat3 can get a 1 day $10 license in the mountain bike class.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    94
    I have never bought an annual license in the past and have always just bought the one day version when I wanted to do a race. Well this year I saw that the one day licensing fees were going up so I decided to buy an annual license. About a week or two later our local race promoter decided he didn't agree with the higher fees and decided to make the races here non USAC sanctioned. So now I have an annual license that I likely won't use at all.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,651
    Fees did go up for one days. $10 for MTB, $15 for road.

    As someone who races both road, MTB, and CX, I'm glad they finally went to a unified license though. Shelling out $90 to get both was annoying. However, the increased 1 days fees suck. Not the way to attract new racers.

  11. #11
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,935
    Quote Originally Posted by briscoelab View Post
    Fees did go up for one days. $10 for MTB, $15 for road.

    As someone who races both road, MTB, and CX, I'm glad they finally went to a unified license though. Shelling out $90 to get both was annoying. However, the increased 1 days fees suck. Not the way to attract new racers.
    It certainly stretches the promoter's budget a bit more. In most cases, it was easy to absorb the $5 fee for the new one day racers, but $10 starts to push that a bit more . Some state series are lucky enough to have sponsors that pay for the one day fee for new riders, but I guess a promoter could be creative and either split the cost with the new racer (promoter pays $5, racer pays $5) or let the full $10 fall either on the racer or the promoter to pay.

    It's been difficult holding entry fee costs down as it is over the years, but this might be a tipping point in raised entry fees for those promoters who eat the one day license fee costs.

    What's everyone think? Should the one day fee for a brand new racer fall on the shoulder of the promoter to pay, or should the racer take full responsibility for it?

    BB

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    353
    It'll just keep new racers from coming out and trying out racing. Once you add in race fee, land use fee (or state park fee), and 1 day license, it starts getting expensive. In Texas, you're missing 80% of the mountain bike racing if you don't want to race USAC sanctioned races.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    383
    Quote Originally Posted by sbsbiker View Post
    Jesus,
    USAC is not a government monopoly.
    USAC is a USOC participant, so if you want to go to the Olympics, membership is mandatory, and needed to draw the attention of the Olympic selection committee.
    They were granted a monopoly along with the rest of the IOC sanctioned sports with the Ted Stevens Amateur Sports Act. Ted Stevens Olympic and Amateur Sports Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia See the top part where the act grants monopolies.

    The UCI rule bans *all* licensees, not just pros from riding outside a UCI recognized federation is apparently under review with some action planned at the end of January. Cookson has publicly stated the rule needs work. Need I remind members USAC was sabre rattling, got a huge negative response, then blamed it on the UCI.

    The way forward is to contact local promoters and tell them to switch to NABRA or whatever insurer that's not USAC. For those really into USAC's product, just pick one race, or one promoter. The sport is better off without USAC/UCI.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    383
    Quote Originally Posted by fontarin View Post
    It'll just keep new racers from coming out and trying out racing.
    Which is the reason why running races outside USAC is so important to the sport.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    783
    Quote Originally Posted by BruceBrown View Post
    It certainly stretches the promoter's budget a bit more. In most cases, it was easy to absorb the $5 fee for the new one day racers, but $10 starts to push that a bit more . Some state series are lucky enough to have sponsors that pay for the one day fee for new riders, but I guess a promoter could be creative and either split the cost with the new racer (promoter pays $5, racer pays $5) or let the full $10 fall either on the racer or the promoter to pay.
    It's not all about what the racers have to pay but what the race organizer has to pay. My road club holds an annual crit and officials fees for it are $1500. If you're a small MTB organizer and only have 100 racers it's hard to do.

  16. #16
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,935
    Quote Originally Posted by jlmuncie View Post
    It's not all about what the racers have to pay but what the race organizer has to pay. My road club holds an annual crit and officials fees for it are $1500. If you're a small MTB organizer and only have 100 racers it's hard to do.
    Yes, I know. I hosted an event this year that was a USAC sanctioned event for the first time. 3 officials were at my event, so I know the cost.

    Prior to this year, I hosted the same event using a 3rd party insurance company, a third party online registration site, and I hired an electronic chip timer. USAC has become a one stop shopping spot for directors where you can get the insurance, online registration, the permits, and the officials for timing all in the same package. So it is easy for me to compare and contrast the costs having done the event 5 years without USAC and now this past year with USAC. Obviously, there were no licenses required or paperwork for them in the prior 5 years.

    You are right. It can be difficult for smaller races, but at least this year - USAC was very helpful to help get me up and going as a USAC sanctioned race.

    BB

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Flucod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    572
    Quote Originally Posted by BruceBrown View Post
    Yes, I know. I hosted an event this year that was a USAC sanctioned event for the first time. 3 officials were at my event, so I know the cost.

    Prior to this year, I hosted the same event using a 3rd party insurance company, a third party online registration site, and I hired an electronic chip timer. USAC has become a one stop shopping spot for directors where you can get the insurance, online registration, the permits, and the officials for timing all in the same package. So it is easy for me to compare and contrast the costs having done the event 5 years without USAC and now this past year with USAC. Obviously, there were no licenses required or paperwork for them in the prior 5 years.

    You are right. It can be difficult for smaller races, but at least this year - USAC was very helpful to help get me up and going as a USAC sanctioned race.

    BB
    So, in other words you received services for your payment to USAC. Well I hope so, YOU are paying them, they better give good service.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    157
    Our club part of SORBA have a 6 or 7 race series with a few clubs each year and also do a long distance race. We do the races to raise money to build new trails, have fun and get more people involved. The turn out is around 100 riders ($25 entry)plus kids which ride for free and it seems to be growing. Our prizes are a lot better than the USAC races also as we give cash to the expert class and to the other classes we give coupons to the several bike shops in the area 1st $50, 2nd $35 and 3rd $25. You can save them up and use them at the end of the year at any of the listed shops.Last year I think we gave away around $8,000 in prizes. In the last 2 years our club has built a 9mile trail, working on a new park to be 6miles and about half way done,working on another park 6miles about half done, purchased a enclosed trailer and 18 kids bikes for our new Bike Buddy Program to take kids out mountain biking.
    Several of our riders do go and do a USAC series also with a lot of riders going to do several USAC races with a one day license, but that may change now that it cost more and there prizes pretty much suck for the amount you have to pay just some item that does not fit or you don't need.

  19. #19
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,935
    Quote Originally Posted by Flucod View Post
    So, in other words you received services for your payment to USAC. Well I hope so, YOU are paying them, they better give good service.
    Maybe I didn't communicate my thoughts clearly, but I was simply responding to the previous post by jlmuncie with regard to costs for USAC officials and permits from the point of view as a race director. In so doing, I was stating that whether doing a race under USAC sanctioning or doing it on my own as a non-sanctioined event using third party services - I have the accounting and know the differences in costs from my stand point. Of course services are provided for the cost. And of course I can easily compare the amount of service and my satisfaction with that service between the USAC method and the third party method.

    At least there are options out there to hold a race.

    The three neighboring states all conduct their state series as USAC sanctioned events. Iowa, up to this point, has not committed the entire series in terms of them being required to be USAC sanctioned, but is left up to each individual race director. We also don't have sponsors for our state series like the three neighboring states I mentioned (Nebraska, Minnesota, and Wisconsin). It could be that with sponsorship and working something out with USAC, a state series could help the smaller races and their race directors function in a way that is not cost-prohibitive as jlmuncie had mentioned in the post I was responding to above. That I don't know, but am aware it has been on the discussion table here in Iowa the past year or two. I have met and dealt with both the regional and state USAC officers and can report they have been very pleasant to work with and were a big help this year in adjusting my opinion.

    I guess I am not as anti-USAC at this point as you Flucod. Although I do take care to approach the subject from both sides of the opinion. Are there snags and issues I would like to see ironed out a bit more? Sure. Ditto on the side of non-sanctioned races. I say that from the point of both being a participating racer and a participating race director.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    383
    Quote Originally Posted by BruceBrown View Post
    ...s stating that whether doing a race under USAC sanctioning or doing it on my own as a non-sanctioined event using third party services - I have the accounting and know the differences in costs from my stand point. Of course services are provided for the cost. And of course I can easily compare the amount of service and my satisfaction with that service between the USAC method and the third party method.
    So, post it up. Which cost more? Don't dance around it.

    Your self-sourced timing vendor couldn't post results to the Internet?

    Did USAC contact you and make you an incredible offer as they have done with others? Yes or no will suffice.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    383
    Quote Originally Posted by dlennard View Post
    ..We do the races to raise money to build new trails, have fun and get more people involved.
    ^^^^How to grow an active, healthy population^^^^
    ..that ride mountain bikes, had a positive experience with bikes, or something like that.

  22. #22
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,935
    Quote Originally Posted by asphalt_jesus View Post
    So, post it up. Which cost more? Don't dance around it.

    Your self-sourced timing vendor couldn't post results to the Internet?

    Did USAC contact you and make you an incredible offer as they have done with others? Yes or no will suffice.
    Dance?

    Yes, all new races in 2013 that were not USAC sanctioned before, had the permit fee waived and the per rider insurance charge for the race director was $2 rather than $3.

    And yes, the self-sourced electronic chip timing companies post results directly to the internet. I've used the Nebraska Cycling's series owned chip timing, and I've used Elvish Consulting from Illinois. Now, if USAC would just provide chip timing as a bundled service for a cost...

    In terms of the accounting, there were not too many major differences between the two (non-sanctioned years and sanctioned year) in terms of cost. It's not a real apples to apples comparison because due to a change of race date on my part from a Sunday to a Saturday, I lost my chip timing company as they were already booked on the rescheduled date. The original plan was to use the same chip timing from last year and have only one USAC Official. So the additional cost for that Official to accompany the chip timing would have been only $141 for 2013 if that had worked out.

    2012 Electronic Chip Timing Expense of $738 plus $81.76 for motel.
    2013 for the USA Officials (3 officials who did the timing the old fashioned way) was $378. Otherwise, it would have been $141 plus the same chip timing costs as in 2012.

    2012 Third Party Online Transaction Fees were $350.70 and Third Party Insurance was $437.50.
    2013 USAC Insurance was $348 (thanks to the $1 per rider discount this year), plus $20 for 2 additional certificates for the State Park and DNR, and I had an additional insurance policy rider for the kids race which was $50. 2013 USAC online transaction fees were $388, but I believe I received a .40 cents per rider rebate for that.

    Since it was a State Championship, USAC provided the medals which saved a cost that is normally $330 for me. The rest of the accounting has nothing to do with the race being sanctioned or non-sanctioned, so it's not worth posting here. But in terms of insurance, online transaction fees - it was pretty much a wash even if the $1 discount was not applied since it was a first time newly sanctioned event. Now this year, I will have to pay the permit fee and the full per rider insurance cost.

    All in all, I was pretty satisfied with the event's transition to USAC. I probably will go back to chip timing for 2014 which would only require 1 USAC Official namely due to having results posted as quickly as possible at the event to speed up the awards ceremony. It's just worth it even though chip timing is so dang expensive.

    However you do it, hosting a race is a time consuming matter and no matter how much you try to keep expenses down so that entry fees can be lower, it's always barely a break-even endeavor. However, total expenses to host the race are usually in the $4300 - $5300 range so those additional fees will not really take it out of the normal range for the past 6 years.

    BB

  23. #23
    I should be out riding
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    956
    In Oregon, a $25 OBRA license will get you all the road, cross, mtb, track, TT racing you want for a year, without supporting Steve Johnson's $250K salary and settlements to juniors on the national team that were being doped. Just say no to FUSAC. If you want to see how your membership $ is spent, check out the USAC form 990 at guidestar.org.

    The unified license is a step in the right direction. I have absolutely no doubt that it wasn't done for members benefit though, but because the financial projection showed a net increase to USAC.

    Quote Originally Posted by briscoelab View Post
    Fees did go up for one days. $10 for MTB, $15 for road.

    As someone who races both road, MTB, and CX, I'm glad they finally went to a unified license though. Shelling out $90 to get both was annoying. However, the increased 1 days fees suck. Not the way to attract new racers.
    Last edited by ACree; 01-14-2014 at 02:37 PM.

  24. #24
    I should be out riding
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    956
    It's interesting that USAC is so willing to more or less bribe promoters. They give a discount of a buck or two per ride to the promoter in order to receive a one day or annual license fee from every rider.

    Quote Originally Posted by BruceBrown View Post
    Dance?

    Yes, all new races in 2013 that were not USAC sanctioned before, had the permit fee waived and the per rider insurance charge for the race director was $2 rather than $3.

    And yes, the self-sourced electronic chip timing companies post results directly to the internet. I've used the Nebraska Cycling's series owned chip timing, and I've used Elvish Consulting from Illinois. Now, if USAC would just provide chip timing as a bundled service for a cost...

    In terms of the accounting, there were not too many major differences between the two (non-sanctioned years and sanctioned year) in terms of cost. It's not a real apples to apples comparison because due to a change of race date on my part from a Sunday to a Saturday, I lost my chip timing company as they were already booked on the rescheduled date. The original plan was to use the same chip timing from last year and have only one USAC Official. So the additional cost for that Official to accompany the chip timing would have been only $141 for 2013 if that had worked out.

    2012 Electronic Chip Timing Expense of $738 plus $81.76 for motel.
    2013 for the USA Officials (3 officials who did the timing the old fashioned way) was $378. Otherwise, it would have been $141 plus the same chip timing costs as in 2012.

    2012 Third Party Online Transaction Fees were $350.70 and Third Party Insurance was $437.50.
    2013 USAC Insurance was $348 (thanks to the $1 per rider discount this year), plus $20 for 2 additional certificates for the State Park and DNR, and I had an additional insurance policy rider for the kids race which was $50. 2013 USAC online transaction fees were $388, but I believe I received a .40 cents per rider rebate for that.

    Since it was a State Championship, USAC provided the medals which saved a cost that is normally $330 for me. The rest of the accounting has nothing to do with the race being sanctioned or non-sanctioned, so it's not worth posting here. But in terms of insurance, online transaction fees - it was pretty much a wash even if the $1 discount was not applied since it was a first time newly sanctioned event. Now this year, I will have to pay the permit fee and the full per rider insurance cost.

    All in all, I was pretty satisfied with the event's transition to USAC. I probably will go back to chip timing for 2014 which would only require 1 USAC Official namely due to having results posted as quickly as possible at the event to speed up the awards ceremony. It's just worth it even though chip timing is so dang expensive.

    However you do it, hosting a race is a time consuming matter and no matter how much you try to keep expenses down so that entry fees can be lower, it's always barely a break-even endeavor. However, total expenses to host the race are usually in the $4300 - $5300 range so those additional fees will not really take it out of the normal range for the past 6 years.

    BB

  25. #25
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,935
    Quote Originally Posted by ACree View Post
    It's interesting that USAC is so willing to more or less bribe promoters. They give a discount of a buck or two per ride to the promoter in order to receive a one day or annual license fee from every rider.
    Yes, you've made your opinion clear (as has Oregon). I guess I'm not so anti-anti something just to be anti something.

    I pay the man to drive a car. I pay the man to hold a job. I pay the man to own a house. I pay the man to see a doctor. I pay the man to drink a beer. I pay the man to ride a bike. I pay the man.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 25
    Last Post: 04-07-2014, 02:54 PM
  2. USAC rules encouraging sandbagging?
    By dan4jeepin in forum XC Racing and Training
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-07-2013, 10:01 PM
  3. USAC of $#17
    By willymcd in forum XC Racing and Training
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 07-09-2012, 09:04 AM
  4. What is the point in USAC?
    By Shytie in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-08-2012, 06:09 AM
  5. Way to go USAC, Way to go...
    By COLINx86 in forum XC Racing and Training
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 06-22-2011, 10:12 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •