Results 1 to 35 of 35
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cstem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,842

    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.
    Vassago Cycles, Shadetree Bikes, Flat Tire Bikes, Galfer Brakes USA

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    246
    "...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
    596
    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:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    11
    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.

  5. #5
    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.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sbsbiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,998
    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.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    168
    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.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    142
    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.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,908
    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.

  10. #10
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,515
    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

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    577
    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.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    596
    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.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    596
    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.

  14. #14
    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.

  15. #15
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,515
    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

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    168
    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.

  17. #17
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,515
    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.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    596
    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.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    596
    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.

  20. #20
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,515
    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

  21. #21
    I should be out riding
    Reputation: ACree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,476
    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.

  22. #22
    I should be out riding
    Reputation: ACree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,476
    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

  23. #23
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,515
    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.

  24. #24
    I should be out riding
    Reputation: ACree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,476
    I can't speak for Oregon, but I'm not necessarily anti USAC, and definitely not anti something to be anti something. I am anti poor value. I live in WA now, and grew up in OR and visit frequently. WA road and cross are mostly USAC, with MTB having gone independent. The difference in Oregon vs. WA is striking. Oregon has a LOT more racing, and is growing the sport on a local level far more than the USAC scene around Seattle. USAC doesn't provide enough value for the $ in my opinion. Worse, they seem intent on bullying promoters and racers into using them instead of improving their product.

    Quote Originally Posted by BruceBrown View Post
    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.

  25. #25
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,515
    Quote Originally Posted by ACree View Post
    I can't speak for Oregon, but I'm not necessarily anti USAC, and definitely not anti something to be anti something. I am anti poor value. I live in WA now, and grew up in OR and visit frequently. WA road and cross are mostly USAC, with MTB having gone independent. The difference in Oregon vs. WA is striking. Oregon has a LOT more racing, and is growing the sport on a local level far more than the USAC scene around Seattle. USAC doesn't provide enough value for the $ in my opinion. Worse, they seem intent on bullying promoters and racers into using them instead of improving their product.
    I guess it all depends on your definition of value and how you utilize the USAC Membership Benefits. We could argue the value of a lot of things we pay for in life (health, auto, home insurance and on and on) and come up with a list of pros and cons for everything we pay for as a consumer. Annual car registration, annual property tax, annual license fee for one's particular profession, annual membership dues for professional organizations, etc... - all certainly fall under the topic of discussion when it comes to value.

    I receive a 20% discount at Training Peaks for an annual subscription as a USAC Member. That's a $24 savings. I get 15% discount from Rainbow Racing as a USAC Member which comes in handy for the annual race I host. That amounted to $46 in savings last year alone. Our bike team (USAC Member) gets 10% discount on our kits from Primal, so that saves me about $10-15 a year. That same 10% applies if ordering something from Primal on your own as well that is not team related gear. 10% off of MapMyRide MVP account is available for USAC Members and there are plenty of other benefits available as well...

    Member Benefits - USA Cycling

    Again, I realize that may not be important to many as they don't use any of those services or products - but it is available and when thinking about what one gets back in return for an annual membership, there may or may not be value in the product. It depends on the individual consumer/member or potential member.

    We could also discuss the practice that some XC State Series use of tracking a racer's series points. Some, believe it or not, charge an additional annual/seasonal registration fee of $15-$25 to keep track of your points if a racer is interested in being considered for the series points or is participating in the team competition. You could win every race in the series, but without paying that additional registration fee - you wouldn't be considered the overall series winner. Again - it may or may not be valuable to each individual consumer.

    It would be interesting to see a state by state list of which states do hold their series under USAC and which do not. It sounds like Oregon is doing a very good job of their racing scene by attracting riders from what you say. I don't know the particulars of the sponsorships for the Oregon XC Series (outside of what I see on their website), what the product the organization provides is like, what the costs are for a racer's entry fee compared to a USAC sanctioned series, and if there really is that much of a difference from the end user (racer) in terms of what they get for the value of an entry fee.

    I see what a race in the OBRA (Oregon the Chainbreaker entry fee was for 2013 from their website in Oregon... (and note that an annual $25 OBRA license is required to compete in one of their events, otherwise there is a daily license fee charged similar to that of a USAC sanctioned event).

    DAY OF RACE REGISTRATION @ THE RACE
    REGISTRATION OPENS @ 9:30 AM

    ADULTS = $35
    JUNIORS = $15
    LATE FEE OF $5 AFTER 5/10

    And one called the Mudslinger for 2014 pricing can be seen here.


    One of the largest XC State Series in the Nation is the Wisconsin Off Road Series which certainly serves as an excellent role model in this part of the US. They are and have been USAC sanctioned for some time. In spite of that, there doesn't seem to be a shortage of racers coming out for every event with each event averaging around 800 racers.

    Here were their entry fees for the 2013 season (plus an additional annual registration of $23 to have your points tracked for the overall series if interested)...

    Entry Fees

    Pre-Registration Online at Wisconsin Off Road Series | Wisconsin Off Road Series - America's largest state MTB race series or Mail-in:

    (Elite (Pro/Cat 1) – $32*, Cat 1 Juniors (racing age 15-18) – $27 (UCI International or USA Cycling Mtn Cat 1 license required). No One Day license option.*Pros are excluded from this entry fee for Subaru Cup Pro XCT entry.

    Comp & Sport, 19 & over – $27 with USA Cycling Mountain Annual License,$32 with One Day License.

    Citizen, 19 & over – $25 with USA Cycling Mountain Annual License, $30 with One Day License.

    Sport, Citizen, & Junior, 18 & under – $18 with USA Cycling Mtn Annual License, $23 with One Day License.

    First Timer – $22 One Day License included.
    Online Race Registration for each event closes at midnight on the Monday just before the race. Mail-In entries: Must be postmarked at least 8 days (Saturday in most cases) before the day of the event to avoid being assessed late fee at race registration.

    Late/Day of Entry Fees: $6 more, all categories.

    All USA Cycling Mountain License holders must present their license at race registration to avoid being charged for a one day license. Elite (Pro/Cat 1) Racers are required to hold either a UCI International or USA Cycling Mountain Annual License (membership) and present their license at race registration.

    I haven't seen the 2014 pricing structures for anyone yet, but hopefully the end user (racer) will find value wherever they race, whether the event is or is not USAC sanctioned.

  26. #26
    Endurance Junkie
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    216
    That is definitely a problem for the pros, not the CAT 1-3 crowd. I really don't get all of the USAC hate on this forum. I'm just indifferent.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,908
    Quote Originally Posted by Flucod View Post
    None of the USAC races pay out cash. You only get points, that is the biggest problem here. If they were to have pay outs in % to license and entry's then that would work. But I race to get paid, so there is zero interest in out of pocket expense without the chance of earning it back.
    What USAC races don't payout cash? If you're local races aren't paying out for the Cat1/pro field... that's the race promoter's decision. USAC has nothing to do with it. Every sanctioned race in my area pays out (some to even cat2/sport!).

    If you're referring to Nationals, then yes... there is no payout there.

    I'm OK with people hating on USAC, but at least have valid complaints. If you're local races aren't paying out that is because the promoter is greedy. USAC has nothing to do with payout schedules.

  28. #28
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,515
    Quote Originally Posted by Flucod View Post
    None of the USAC races pay out cash. You only get points, that is the biggest problem here. If they were to have pay outs in % to license and entry's then that would work. But I race to get paid, so there is zero interest in out of pocket expense without the chance of earning it back.
    Hmmm....not true here in Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. Cash Awards are paid out at the USAC races. It is all based on the number of participants. The more racers, the higher the payouts.

    As I mentioned above, in Iowa the races have not required to be USAC sanctioned as some of our smaller venues where there may be less racers simply couldn't make it work financially. I found out that there are no new plans for the 2014 season to require Iowa events to be USAC sanctioned either. It is left up to each invidividual race director - which is good. It gives us options.

    The fee increases and structure of requiring licences is being talked about though in many places with the changes. The 2nd largest series of the 4 states I mentioned above, is the Minnesota Series which usually has about 350 racers at each event. This interesting post (and Survey Monkey) was just posted at the Minnesota Series website which is very a propos for this thread...

    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/7166535@N05/11981517314/" title="MNMBSSurvey by BBcamerata, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3669/11981517314_5cf782463c_c.jpg" width="800" height="478" alt="MNMBSSurvey"></a>

    What everyone is concerned about - and rightly so - is inflation hitting the racing scene in terms of entry fees and the actual cost of participating. Maybe not a problem for those with the latest carbon and high tech mountain bikes that are selling for $6 - $10K, but reality for the majority. What will happen to entry fees in 2014 with the new daily license fees and what will happen to the largest segment of racing (in terms of sheer numbers) with the Cat 2 and Cat 3 racers facing increased fees?

    I know I am still trying to figure out which direction to go for the event I host this year (having tried it both ways as sanctioned and non-sanctioned). In the end, I want what is best for the racers - and what will draw the best crowd. I paid out over $1000 in awards both as sanctioned and as non-sanctioned.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    814
    Quote Originally Posted by skibum1321 View Post
    I really don't get all of the USAC hate on this forum. I'm just indifferent.
    I kinda of feel this way as well. I do get an annual license because 99.99% of the road and cyclocross racing in Colorado is USAC, and that makes it worth it with the volume of cross races I do every season, and on top of it I do the handful of sanctioned MTB races and love traveling and competing at Nationals. I live in Wyoming, and we have nothing USAC... then again, we don't have much of anything in general. I am very pleased that USAC went to a $70 license that covers all disciplines instead of having to choose one primary and adding on a second license.

    I've attended crappy events on both sides of the fence and I don't think one side necessarily outshines the other.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    596
    Quote Originally Posted by BruceBrown View Post
    ...

    It would be interesting to see a state by state list of which states do hold their series under USAC and which do not. It sounds like Oregon is doing a very good job of their racing scene by attracting riders from what you say.
    Every state but Oregon is owned by USAC.

    For the Colorado racer that posted up thread, Steve Johnson told the independent federation to either join USAC, or USAC would run every one of their promoters out of business.

  31. #31
    I should be out riding
    Reputation: ACree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,476

    New USAC liscense rules-what do you think?

    Quote Originally Posted by asphalt_jesus View Post
    Every state but Oregon is owned by USAC.

    For the Colorado racer that posted up thread, Steve Johnson told the independent federation to either join USAC, or USAC would run every one of their promoters out of business.
    Washington doesn't have any USAC mtb races that I know of. Road is nearly all USAC though (the exceptions being weeknight series), and 1 of the 2 seattle area cross races are independent. The Indy one seems to be growing more than the usac one.
    If it's not powered solely by you, it's a motorcycle.

    Worshiping at the Church of Singletrack since 1993.

Similar Threads

  1. USAC rules encouraging sandbagging?
    By dan4jeepin in forum XC Racing and Training
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-07-2013, 10:01 PM
  2. USAC of $#17
    By willymcd in forum XC Racing and Training
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 07-09-2012, 09:04 AM
  3. What is the point in USAC?
    By Shytie in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-08-2012, 06:09 AM
  4. 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
  •