USA Cycling named 16 athletes to its team competing at the Cyclocross World Championships in Hoogerheide, Netherlands, February 2–5. Holding firm to its qualification criteria, USA Cycling filled less than half of the available roster spots for the championships. USAC’s athlete selection criteria is here:
Thanks Bill, but for clarity the mud fund block of racers were in Europe for 5 races during December-January block. Also, while the selection criteria standards are high, for our U23's, the selection process renders the domestic racing scene irrelevant other than one race, US Nationals. By definition, Pan American champion isn’t a domestic races. I realize usac has discretion to select riders, but they didn’t other than the juniors category. So if we look at it from a u23 riders view, it would be discouraging going into season now knowing domestic racing doesn’t really count and usac is only taking, effectively, one racer to worlds. Pan am champ doesn’t have to be American, although it was this year. You want worlds selection process to be difficult but not unobtainable.
I agree with you on the u23 front and thanks for the clarification on racing for the Mudfund. I don't think anyone knows the right balance for worlds selection. That's why we have this annual debate. I will say that the domestic calendar is still important to get on USAC's radar. It's like open tryouts. If you don't do well at home, you won't get the support to race the events that will qualify you for worlds. I would love to see that carrot expanded and our U23/junior racers have the opportunity to spend more time racing in Europe earlier in the season.
Thanks Bill - that’s what was missing…. And, while those other pieces you reference may be out there, your perspective is one that can always be counted on to be thoughtful and insightful. Oh well, sad there will be so few elite riders in the Stars and Stripes…
I am happy to see the selection of 6 riders in the men’s junior field, but not so much the selection of only 2 riders in the U23 field. From my vantage the more a young rider is exposed to the top end of the sport the better chance they have for future success. If the aim of USAC is to foster our competitiveness then in my opinion they are failing by excluding riders. Perhaps some one can explain to us why USAC is holding firm to it’s qualification criteria?
If all of the juniors and u23 racers hadn’t been in Europe racing close to 10 times in the past month against the same competition that will be at worlds I’d agree with you. But as long as that commitment remains, I think it’s okay to be more selective for worlds.
Yea I am with JM - need to know more on the selection criteria that leaves out our US National Champion? Also seems like outside of Fayetteville Curtis is getting better results in Europe.
Best wishes to Brunner but doesn’t explain USAC not selecting Curtis - or does US only get one Elite Mens slot? Even so IMO Curtis in better form at present injury to EB notwithstanding (particularly on European courses).
Yes I get that but only because Brunner bowed out. The debate is about USAC’s selection process which seems wonky. And no I am not going Scotland Yard to find that criteria that they are clinging too - thats what we read the Bulletin for ☺️!
I’m not sure what there is to analyze. USAC and the mud fund had a large contingent in Europe racing world cups and other events gaining experience over the past month. When it comes to worlds selection, they set a high standard. The athletes knew that standard. Those who met it are going. There will always be an argument USAC should send more and those opinion pieces are out there.
Thanks Bill, but for clarity the mud fund block of racers were in Europe for 5 races during December-January block. Also, while the selection criteria standards are high, for our U23's, the selection process renders the domestic racing scene irrelevant other than one race, US Nationals. By definition, Pan American champion isn’t a domestic races. I realize usac has discretion to select riders, but they didn’t other than the juniors category. So if we look at it from a u23 riders view, it would be discouraging going into season now knowing domestic racing doesn’t really count and usac is only taking, effectively, one racer to worlds. Pan am champ doesn’t have to be American, although it was this year. You want worlds selection process to be difficult but not unobtainable.
I agree with you on the u23 front and thanks for the clarification on racing for the Mudfund. I don't think anyone knows the right balance for worlds selection. That's why we have this annual debate. I will say that the domestic calendar is still important to get on USAC's radar. It's like open tryouts. If you don't do well at home, you won't get the support to race the events that will qualify you for worlds. I would love to see that carrot expanded and our U23/junior racers have the opportunity to spend more time racing in Europe earlier in the season.
Yep, let’s keep improving/advancing US cyclocross. I appreciate your effort. Thank you.
Thanks Bill - that’s what was missing…. And, while those other pieces you reference may be out there, your perspective is one that can always be counted on to be thoughtful and insightful. Oh well, sad there will be so few elite riders in the Stars and Stripes…
Thank you.
I am happy to see the selection of 6 riders in the men’s junior field, but not so much the selection of only 2 riders in the U23 field. From my vantage the more a young rider is exposed to the top end of the sport the better chance they have for future success. If the aim of USAC is to foster our competitiveness then in my opinion they are failing by excluding riders. Perhaps some one can explain to us why USAC is holding firm to it’s qualification criteria?
If all of the juniors and u23 racers hadn’t been in Europe racing close to 10 times in the past month against the same competition that will be at worlds I’d agree with you. But as long as that commitment remains, I think it’s okay to be more selective for worlds.
Yea I am with JM - need to know more on the selection criteria that leaves out our US National Champion? Also seems like outside of Fayetteville Curtis is getting better results in Europe.
https://www.instagram.com/p/CnPlvequNwX/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=
Best wishes to Brunner but doesn’t explain USAC not selecting Curtis - or does US only get one Elite Mens slot? Even so IMO Curtis in better form at present injury to EB notwithstanding (particularly on European courses).
Curtis is going. He was the one selected.
Yes I get that but only because Brunner bowed out. The debate is about USAC’s selection process which seems wonky. And no I am not going Scotland Yard to find that criteria that they are clinging too - thats what we read the Bulletin for ☺️!
No, he was selected regardless of Brunner’s status.
Curtis AND Brunner were selected. Only Curtis accepted the invitation.
Yea I mis-understood the original post and thought there was only the one Elite Men’s slot. Bill set me straight (with admirable patience) no less.
Why in the world did Brunner decline?
https://www.instagram.com/p/CnPlvequNwX/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=
Ah, well that makes sense. Thx.
Maybe a bit more analysis? People are declining and we leave open spots? Seems a less positive outcome than one might expect?
I’m not sure what there is to analyze. USAC and the mud fund had a large contingent in Europe racing world cups and other events gaining experience over the past month. When it comes to worlds selection, they set a high standard. The athletes knew that standard. Those who met it are going. There will always be an argument USAC should send more and those opinion pieces are out there.