Olympics? really? think about it.

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Mike Heenan on March 2, 2010 at 7:47pm

It is less about "jumping the shark" and more about receiving funding from USA Cycling. Olympic Sport = dollars. The Olympic Biathlon Team received a budget of 1 million dollars this year because they had a "chance" of being on the podium. BMX has gotten a pretty big influx of money since becoming an Olympic Sport. Most people want to see our World Championship level riders receiving support from our national governing body and not having to hold fund raisers to pay for tickets/lodging/equipment to represent our county at the World Championships, the only way that is going to happen is if cyclocross finds a way into the Olympics --> again Olympics=dollars look at the participation numbers of cyclocross in the US v track racing it is way higher yet track receives a far greater percentage of funds from the US Cycling because of it's Olympic status.

Increasing participation is a good thing it brings bigger and better sponsors, more racing opportunities, better venues, more support/acceptance from local government, more equipment choices, lowers the cost of entry into the sport, exposes more people to biking lifestyles -

The beauty of cross is not in the fringe...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Lisalisadc on March 2, 2010 at 9:03pm

This debate is similar to whether or not the Ironman World Championships in Kona, Hawaii should cater to age groupers (amateurs) or pros. The payout for the winner is pathetic, only $110k. So much for 9 hours of suffering in a lava field.

In an attempt to elevate Pro status, Ironman instituted a new rule that screwed 4 out of 10 podium winners from any prize money in the most recent IM Malaysia, a qualifier for Kona. Under the old rules, triathletes in the top 5 would have gotten at least $2k. Nevertheless, amateurs rush to sign up for these events at $550 a piece and no chance of prize money. The income of the pros will continue to decrease as long as Ironman caters to age group triathletes.

I do not understand how you fail to support Cyclocross in the Olympics when US Pros are struggling for sponsors and to go full-time. Are curling, snowboarding, golf (coming in 2016), rugby (also 2016), table tennis, etc. worthy for the Olympics? If you can do a 'sport', such as, curling or golf while drinking a beer, it shouldn't be in the Olympics. Golf is all about money and IOC ad revenue. I have no idea why the other events are included.

Sports should recognize talent and reward the elite with money. Very few cyclists race track, but you should recognize the value of the Individual Pursuit category to US Cycling, which was cut for 2012 Olympics. If you don't like Cross in the Olympics, keep riding your bike in the woods alone and drunk. No one will rush to sponsor you or try to kill the fringe.

• ▶ Reply