UCI ruins cyclist Olympic dream

[Race Radio]

I'm pretty sure the WC also has small countries at the startline. Small countries can take part if they have good enough athletes. This small island for example has quite some sprinting talent(athletics). So they'll take part of it!

Isn't there a special Olympics for small countries? Why would they have something like that if their ideology says these small countries can come to the big event instead no matter how crappy their athletes are?

The Olympics isn't about small countries by the way, it's about cash. Lot's of it.

Nope, the UCI has A B World Championship for countries with few Pro's.

If they follow your guidelines they will just be a Worlds that comes every 4 years.

 

[Mellow Velo]

I don't want to justify what the UCI did here, but do we really want someone at the Olympics that got the bulk of her points because she won the national title for a small country/island 3 times in a row?

That's exactly what they are aiming for on the track. One rider per event is their new, shiny UCI rule.
Hence, someone who is ranked in the world top ten can miss out on selection, while a rider who is a couple of seconds a lap slower, but from a "small" nation, gets to go.

Bound to end in tears.

 

[Duartista]

Looking at the UCI America Tour Ranking for 2011, it seems all points for the Vuelta a Colombia have been removed under the same rule, meaning that no UCI points were awarded for races in Colombia at all last year - a bizarre situation when you look at the nations' ranking.

I wonder when this rule was introduced, when it was first applied, and why no-one seemed to be aware of it.

 

[simo1733]

Yes.

The Olympics are about "The Countries of the World" their stated goal is to link the global community through sport. This means you do not have 20 Kenyans in the Marathon, 6 Americans in the 100, or 5 US Basketball teams. Instead you have teams from countries big and small

Wouldn't that be 6 Jamaicans in the 100

 

[X'd Out]

While the UCI is wrong

There is more to this story...the athelete in question did not make the US team. after trying, so she went searching for a country were she could make their team. After approaching many countries she finally found one that took her on. this was St kitts + Nevis. It appears to be her country only for the purpose of going to the olympics.

Google "ESPN so you want to be an olympian" for the full story.

So while the UCI is wrong- in my opinion being adopted by a country for what appears to be the sole purpose of being put on their team to go to the olympics, seems to fly in the face of what the intention of countries having their citizens represent them at the olympics means.

What do you guys think?

 

[simo1733]

That's exactly what they are aiming for on the track. One rider per event is their new, shiny UCI rule.
Hence, someone who is ranked in the world top ten can miss out on selection, while a rider who is a couple of seconds a lap slower, but from a "small" nation, gets to go.

Bound to end in tears.

Even up and coming nations suffer.Look at Malaysia, they have 3 top class sprinters now.

 

[Fetisoff]

There is more to this story...the athelete in question did not make the US team. after trying, so she went searching for a country were she could make their team. After approaching many countries she finally found one that took her on. this was St kitts + Nevis. It appears to be her country only for the purpose of going to the olympics.

Google "ESPN so you want to be an olympian" for the full story.

So while the UCI is wrong- in my opinion being adopted by a country for what appears to be the sole purpose of being put on their team to go to the olympics, seems to fly in the face of what the intention of countries having their citizens represent them at the olympics means.

What do you guys think?

Well, I obviously agree with you, hence my comment earlier.

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=780850&postcount=27

I just didn't bother writing it out in detail, as I thought there's really no point to do that, as people have already "found UCI guilty and sentenced it to death" here, so I'd be fighting a losing battle.

Kinda sad of a state that UCI is in right now for people to jump to conclusions about it on every story like that, but that's a whole different story.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Well, I obviously agree with you, hence my comment earlier.

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=780850&postcount=27

I just didn't bother writing it out in detail, as I thought there's really no point to do that, as people have already "found UCI guilty and sentenced it to death" here, so I'd be fighting a losing battle.

Kinda sad of a state that UCI is in right now for people to jump to conclusions about it on every story like that, but that's a whole different story.

Why does how she came to be part of the St. Kitts & Nevis have anything to do with taking the points that she had earned?

The UCI did not take away the points for any other reason except for a delay in filing the results from the Nationals and allowing a race be promoted and run as a 2.1 (therefore having points) and penalizing the rider because they had not upheld their own rules.
Also that event in Venezula is again given 2.1 status for 2012.

 

[Fetisoff]

Why does how she came to be part of the St. Kitts & Nevis have anything to do with taking the points that she had earned?

The UCI did not take away the points for any other reason except for a delay in filing the results from the Nationals and allowing a race be promoted and run as a 2.1 (therefore having points) and penalizing the rider because they had not upheld their own rules.
Also that event in Venezula is again given 2.1 status for 2012.

Well I don't think anyone here will deny that UCI has issues. All I was trying to say that the story is quite one-sided, and maybe because of UCI ****ing up someone more deserving might make it to the Olympics. Someone who doesn't try to take shortcuts

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Well I don't think anyone here will deny that UCI has issues. All I was trying to say that the story is quite one-sided, and maybe because of UCI ****ing up someone more deserving might make it to the Olympics. Someone who doesn't try to take shortcuts

What short-cuts did she take? She actually followed the rules, I doubt the UCI refused taking her UCI membership fee for the country.
As for more deserving, she still has to earn her points by competing, same as everyone else.

 

[More Strides than Rides]

What short-cuts did she take? She actually followed the rules, I doubt the UCI refused taking her UCI membership fee for the country.
As for more deserving, she still has to earn her points by competing, same as everyone else.

But she doesn't have to face in-country competition to the same degree as everybody else.

I agree with the importance of separating out the two issues (UCI points peculiarities and what may be seen as dodging the competition for coveted national roster spots).



Many nations "import" Kenyans to run for them, including Qatar, Eritrea, and Bahrain. They face an arguably less difficult road to international championships (but are still super fast). The result is a competition with 4 or 6 or 12 "kenyans" vs. everybody else.

 

[hfer07]

I guess the article would have been shocking if the UCI had done the right thing-gotta remember the kind of entity the sport is ruled under....

PAThetic indeed

 

[The Hitch]

Yes.

The Olympics are about "The Countries of the World" their stated goal is to link the global community through sport. This means you do not have 20 Kenyans in the Marathon, 6 Americans in the 100, or 5 US Basketball teams. Instead you have teams from countries big and small

You should though. Kenyans have the 10 fastest runners in the world.

Its a disaster that they have to choose between the world number 1, the world champion the official world record holder and the unofficial world record holder. The 2nd fastest runner of all time doesnt even stand a chance nor do the winners of some of the biggest races.

And that decision is very easy compared to what they would have had had the olympic champion not commited suicide. Most likely a olympic champion unable to defend his title thanks to the rules.

 

[Fus087]

Nope, the UCI has A B World Championship for countries with few Pro's.

If they follow your guidelines they will just be a Worlds that comes every 4 years.

They don't have these anymore though. 2007 was the last one; when there was no "B" Worlds in 2011 I contacted the UCI about the matter - and they answered that the "B" Worlds weren't held anymore, and the Continental Championships would take their place in deciding on Olympics spots for small countries (that was basically the only reason for the "B" Worlds).