USA cycling just seems like the big bullies at school and obra just wants to do what's right for the sport and make it grow. I've read about what mr Ross has done for the sport of cyclocross and I wish him the best of luck. Sounds like cyclocross in Oregon is big they must be doing something right.
USA Cycling Pressures OBRA, Independent Organizations and Events
UPDATE: USA Cycling’s response to this report appears in a separate post: USA Cycling Responds: Cyclocross Support and Independent Sanctioning Bodies. We hope that our readers will chime in with comments below, as well as via Twitter as we continue to bring you updates. Also, be sure to check the NEW POLL on our homepage: Is USA Cycling doing a good job of supporting cyclocross? Your opinion matters!
While in Bend, Oregon, this past weekend for the Deschutes Brewery USGP, several sources told Cyclocross Magazine that USA Cycling has been applying pressure on that series as well as on independent sanctioning bodies such as the Oregon Bicycle Racing Association (OBRA). The sources have reported to CXM that USA Cycling will no longer allow dual-sanctioned events, where Elite and series categories must hold a UCI or USAC license but other lower categories can be run under another sanctioning body, such as OBRA. Such an enforcement will directly impact the USGP races in Bend, and perhaps road events such as the Cascade Cycling Classic, an NRC event which also takes place in Bend. We have also learned that there may be a USAC move to prevent its officials from also working as officials of other sanctioning bodies which, again, seems to specifically target Oregon.
At the beginning of this year, USA Cycling began to enforce a UCI rule which stipulates that a member of a UCI trade team may not participate in a race which isn’t sanctioned by the UCI or USAC without an exception for that event. The rule was not new, but its enforcement was. That rule enforcement coupled with USA Cycling’s expressed intention to establish its own local cycling association in Colorado were among the factors which led the American Cycling Association to cease to be an independent sanctioning organization after 13 years, and to fall under the USAC umbrella as Colorado’s local association. USA Cycling also recently ceased offering category reciprocity – in other words, racer categorizations from other bodies no longer apply to USA Cycling categories. And points used to seed Masters National Championships in USA Cycling’s new ranking system also can only be earned in USAC-sanctioned events: another recent adoption which potentially weakens independent bodies.
Kenji Sugahara, the executive director of OBRA, and Brad Ross, who promotes a plethora of high-profile races both under USA Cycling and OBRA, provided their input today. Ross’ perspective is unique: with USA Cycling he has been the race director of the USGP final weekend for its trips to Portland, and now Bend, for the past several years; he’s the race director of the Cascade Cycling Classic, the biggest stage race in the Northwest; he was the National Championship director in 2003, 2004, 2009 and 2010; and he is scheduled to be race director of the 2013 Masters World Cyclocross Championships. Ross also promotes several high-profile OBRA events, including the Cross Crusades, the biggest cyclocross series in the world by participation.
We have also attempted to contact Steve Johnson, CEO of USA Cycling, and Sean Petty, COO of USA Cycling, for their feedback and clarifications. We have not yet heard back from either of them, but Andrea Smith, communications director of USAC, had this to say: “There simply haven’t been any discussions between USA Cycling and OBRA on this and it is the first we’ve heard of it.”
We have also reached out to the promoters of the USGP series. “We have no comment on the subject as we have heard from neither USAC nor OBRA on the issue to date,” USGP series director Joan Hanscom told us via email. “We are secure in our relationship in Bend and will be back in 2012.”
Input from Brad Ross, Race Director and Promoter under Both USAC and OBRA
CXM: We are putting together information regarding any changes afoot with the relationship between USA Cycling, OBRA and the USGP, I suspect you have a little more of the scoop there.
Brad Ross: Long story short: I think USAC is trying to put OBRA out of business. I don’t understand what the motivation is – they’re going to mandate that the officiating staff will have to choose [between the two]. So if you’re an OBRA official, you’ll no longer be allowed to be a USAC official. In my opinion it’s going to hurt USAC more than OBRA.
I don’t think USAC has told most Oregon officials yet – and I think most of them will choose to stay with OBRA, just because there are so many more OBRA events [in Oregon] than USAC events. It’s already pissed me off, and I’ve been one of the big champions of bringing USAC back into Oregon on a somewhat limited basis.
CXM: Previously USAC prohibited riders on UCI teams from competing in events sanctioned by other bodies. The other thing we’ve heard is that USAC is cracking down on events like the USGP, preventing them from sanctioning with different bodies for different categories.
Ross: Oh yeah, I think this last weekend was the last time you’ll ever see a dual-sanctioned event. Of course, they’re blaming it on insurance risk, but it’s bullshit. In fact, [USAC] tried to not allow it just this last weekend. Mid-season they tried to crack down on that for [USGP Bend]. We’ve been putting on dual-sanctioned events for 10 years. The Cascade Classic has always been a dual-sanctioned event, the GP has been ever since it’s been here in Oregon. There’s never been a problem with that in the past.
CXM: Who is communicating that from USA Cycling about the sanctioning bodies?
Ross: [USAC President and CEO] Steve Johnson.
CXM: So will there be a USGP in Oregon next year?
Ross: Yeah, but we’ll probably have to go all USAC on it, which will probably hurt our numbers – definitely our age-group races and CAT 3/4s. The majority of Oregon riders don’t carry a USAC license, and they won’t want to buy it for one event. As expensive as the USGP is already, forcing somebody to buy a $60 license on top of that is just going to kill that participation. USAC is really showing they don’t give a shit about participation. Oregon and OBRA is all about encouraging participation; USAC is all about making sure that the Elite riders are happy and they don’t [care] about anybody other than that any more.
CXM: Do you think these actions will have an impact on OBRA?
Ross: It isolates us more, and it feels like USAC wants to come after us even harder. I don’t know, but it’s not going to be good. It seems like we’re at war instead of being partners – and I’d rather be partners with USAC.
The thing is, I get along great with everybody at USAC except the top-tier people. I deal directly with [national events director] Kelli Lusk, and I get along with all of the officiating staff, and [mountain bike and cyclo-cross program director] Marc Gullickson and I are very close friends. But way up at the top it seems like they’ve completely lost touch with what’s important. What do they want to accomplish? I don’t know.
I was once a pioneer for bringing USAC back to Oregon on a limited basis. But they have burned that bridge. They have lost sight of what is important. I personally am on a mission to get them out of cyclocross all together. Otherwise, they will destroy it like they did mountain bike racing.
Input from Kenji Sugahara, Executive Director of OBRA
CXM: What have you heard about officials needing to choose between USAC and OBRA?
Kenji Sugahara: As far as I know that’s not true, and even if it is, we already know which way most officials would go – 99.9 percent are going to stay with us.
CXM: How has your relationship with USA Cycling changed over the years? Was there ever a common ground and understanding?
Sugahara: I’ve been totally cool with them – I hung out with Steve Johnson at Nationals, and I’ve been trying to drill it into their heads that we’re on the same side here. I think they’ve forgotten that idea, and they don’t realize we’re out there trying to get more people racing, just like they are. You look at OBRA and we’re the most successful bike racing organization in the United States, period. Per capita we have way more that USA Cycling, and we have a great grassroots program. I’m not going to just bash on USA Cycling – they do some good things; frankly, they do the Elite side really well. They take Juniors and turn them into Elites, which is great. But the problem is, there’s no support for grassroots cycling. You need to grow the grassroots and make the pool bigger, then it’s more likely you’re going to find the really good athletes. You’re going to find that guy on the couch munching potato chips and playing X-Box who could be a potential bike racer – he says, ‘Wow! This looks pretty cool, there’s a lot of people participating, maybe I’ll give it a shot.’ Next thing you know, he’s the next great thing, the next Jacob Rathe [an OBRA racer who has gone on to the Garmin-Cervelo World Tour team].
There’s also the stereotype of the snobbish racers who race on their $10,000 carbon bikes, and you look at Oregon and we completely break the mold. We’ve got folks on steel-tubed bikes with down tube shifters doing really well. You take guys like that and you give them the opportunity. If you have to spend a lot more money for races and licenses, nobody’s going to do it. You get more people out racing bikes – that’s what matters.
CXM: How do you perceive USAC’s actions, what are they trying to do in Oregon?
Sugahara: I have no idea what their intentions are. I could speculate that their trying to get rid of us. We have a good product, and it’s going to be very difficult for them to compete. I want to work with them and have a good relationship with them, but why are they trying to destroy an organization that has built up a great thing that a lot of people love and a lot of people enjoy?
CXM: So what do you think happened with ACA in Colorado?
Sugahara: I know Chris [McGee, executive director of ACA] very well. I told Chris straight up: You can’t compete on price; you’re more expensive than USA Cycling. There’s no incentive for promoters to go with him, and that’s a huge thing. In the Colorado market, USA Cycling is already there. And I know USA Cycling was going to form a local association there if ACA didn’t cave. It was “come with us or face extinction,” and I don’t blame them.
CXM: Elite racing in Colorado is a big part of the scene there, and there are tons of pros there. When USAC made the ruling that a rider on a UCI team couldn’t compete in a non-USAC event, that helped push that agenda long there. That doesn’t seem to be having the same impact in Oregon?
Sugahara: Yeah, it’s a few racers.
CXM: None of this will have a huge impact on OBRA, is that a fair statement?
Sugahara: It’s gonna do nothing, zero, zilch, zippo. Quote me on that. It’s going to suck in terms of losing stage races, but it’s going to hurt the promoter, it’s going to hurt Chad [Sperry, promoter of Cascade, Mt Hood Cycling Classic]. Who will want to pay $300, or close to it, for one stage race, including [USAC] license. A lot of people didn’t do ’Cross Nats because of that – how much is it per minute?
CXM: What about someone in Oregon who does want to be successful on the Elite level, or who wants that Cat 1 USAC upgrade?
Sugahara: It really sucks. Are our races less competitive than the others? Are our fields that much lower quality than other states? No. But [the lack of category reciprocity] does affect them. I encourage these guys to go and do some Washington races. Our neighbors to the north are awesome, and Erik Anderson, the WSBA [Washington USAC regional chapter] president is a great guy, he puts on good races. [Note: Erik Anderson is VP, Joe Holmes is president]
Here’s the biggest thing I want to emphasize: I really want to work with USA Cycling. I really like the people there. I hope they’ll open their eyes and work with us, not against us. As I said before, we’re all on the same side to get more racers out there and we can’t lose that vision. We’re here to support the sport of cycling, and I’d like to help them out by giving them some of the ideas I have.
Stay tuned to CXMagazine.com as we hope to bring you more perspectives on this important cyclocross story.
Have you subscribed yet? You're missing out if not. Get all-original content and your cyclocross fix throughout the year with our killer print and digital magazine for less than 8 cents a day!
I used to race in Oregon and now live in Colorado. Totally having second thoughts of racing and having the money go to USAC and not have it go back into the race scene. Having raced in Oregon and other places in the nation, OBRA knows exactly what they are doing. Personally would love to see OBRA take over running USAC, you would have more riders, better quality races, and I bet a ton more races throughout the nation.
I race in Oregon and have for the last decade. I'm not going to waste my money by giving it to USAC for zero benefit at all. This isn't going to hurt OBRA at all, it is a well run organization, and since USAC does nothing to help Oregon racing, this will actually help OBRA...Maybe USAC could explain why we need to join their organization...
I think USAC looks at OBRA's ridership #'s and want's a bigger piece of our sweet delicious pie. I don't know what else they could be thinking. Oregonians don't take well to being told what to do by national organizations. This is a dumb move on the USAC's part.
P.S. can you guy's at the USAC get rid of those awful Stars and Stripes, Evil Knievel, Captain America Team kits. this Isn't 1976
Note regarding UCI trade teams not being allowed to any races that are non usac...Would this mean that nobody from a pro team can do leadville and similar races?
It seems to me that USAC is doing everything they can to wipe out or assimilate these "rogue" groups. I'm sure that's what Steve Johnson would call theses groups.
Ways that they've done this?
No category or race reciprocity. I see that a lot with CBR and USAC. Cat 1 CBR roadies have to do USAC as 5's because their races don't count.
USAC basically copied Colin Reuter's crossresults.com to use as rankings. (outright theft I say) Using this as seeding for CX nationals means every other bodies' races count for less.
The officials issue is blatant restraint of trade.
USAC CX races need something like 4-6 officials at a pretty steep price. Other bodies require less officials, lowering promoters costs and potentially lowering racers' costs as well.
Am I wrong, or does the changes with ACA mean that an ACA rider will actually be paying more $ than USAC riders in other regions?
Might be a conspiracy theory, but I'm betting Boulder gets CX nats as reward for being assimilated by the borg.
Between travel and registration the USGP is already one of the most expensive races I do every year. Not to mention the start times in frigid temperatures. It is already on the chopping block for next year. An additional more expensive license would probably break the camel's back. I'd rather spectate and drink some Dechutes.
Unless I start doing a few more Washington or other races outside Oregon and have a need for it I don't see a big reason to drop USAC 60 bucks. I've paid it before when I lived on the east coast, and after racing with both USAC seems like a bulky and impersonal organization. I'd rather spend my money with OBRA. I've never thought of OBRA as a product, but I agree with Kenji that USAC just can't compete. Their best bet if to keep working with OBRA for elite level events, otherwise I'm sure they'll it in their numbers in everything but elite cats (which you need a UCI license for anyways) will suffer.
I am not Steve Johnson.
I am a completely different Steve, and I live in the UK.
I think that CXMagazine is the best 'cross riding site on the www.
If I have caused any confusion, I apologise.
Mmmmmmmmolly's biggest fan!
Let me see, how can I put this in simple terms for you Steve Johnson?
You can lick my chamois butter - there's not one thing I need you or USAC for. You are a shortsighted thug who would rather tear down another organization than to improve your own. As long as you and USAC operate that way you'll not get one dollar of my competition money nor another hour of my volunteer time in support of your events.
ACA did NOT close its doors, far from it. The ACA has become the new Local Association for Colorado. The ACA will change internally but it will be status quo from the racers' perspective. We will still get the same great service, chip timing, lap times at CX races, local rankings for CX and Road events, and a progressive organization raising the bar on its cycling events and driving change at the mothership, USAC. Yes, the ACA felt pressured by USAC and will have to change its business model to make up for lost license revenue, but at least its now part of the National scene again after a decade away and the racers will get their due respect. Look out Madison and Louisville, here comes COLORADO !
Hi. I'm in the UK, and here's my take on what should be going on.......
USA Cuycling should be the main governing body that all State organisations deal with / look up to. USAC should maintain their control on the elite level of the sport, the UCI events, and all SERIES of events (such as USGP).
The State committees should continue to look after the grass-roots side of the sport, and any events where there is a one day eventt, or multiple day (weekend?) scenario. Where the single or multi-day event is not sanctioned at a National USAC level, then it will be sanctioned as an event under the rules of the State committee.
Any organiser, in any state, must approach their local committee first, who (in turn) would deal with USAC at a National level.
All officials should be shared, but ultimately they should be under the umbrella of the State.
Rider licensing, age and ability categories, and rules should be managed by USAC, and enforced at a State level.
Ok, this is a perfect scenario, but someone needs to say it because it sounds like there's too much smoke for the officials at all levels (current) to see it.
Steve (the one who is in love with TGWTC-BT)
Here is a link to the ACA website with a little clarification where the ACA stands in the grand scheme of things...basically, ACA will serve as the USAC's local association:
re: Officials - I don't see anything in the USA Cycling Rulebook w/repect to this. I wonder about that Restraint of Trade thing...
For some time now I have determined that the goals of USA Cycling don’t really align with my own goals. I will be retiring next year from my primary occupation and intend to promote bicycle races. At this point it is unlikely I will be doing that within the constraints of USAC. They don’t provide anything that can’t be outsourced or easily replicated except a national ranking system. And I believe the vast majority of us really couldn’t care less about that “feature”.
@thesteevo I doubt it because those races don't really have a "sanctioning body"
@Boulder CX That's a great point and an important distinction. We've changed the article to read, "...led the American Cycling Association to cease to be an independent sanctioning organization after 13 years, and to fall under the USAC umbrella as Colorado's local association."
@SteveMcCrory Steve, have you looked at the OBRA race schedule and seen all the races or how much an OBRA license cost and the entry fee to typical race? There is nothing USA Cycling and/or USAC can do for us. Oregon has 3 time the participation per capita than the rest of the US.
@SteveMcCrory I think most Oregon riders won't get a USAC license, with the exception of the elite riders. OBRA has really bred a great cycling scene based off participation. The license and events are cheaper than anything USAC can show. And we have a plethora of events and more every year that most of us will simply find another event and not pay the higher fees. Maybe we are spoiled. Or maybe we just believe you don't need a manager's income to moonlight as a bike racer. I believe the latter. And it is among the reasons I moved back from the east coast to Oregon.
@NorCal Talk to ABR. They are already sanctioning a large number of cx events nationwide.
@JonMaule@thesteevo Pros can only ride races that are "recognized" by the NGB, which in the US is USAC. If the race is independently run USAC can elect to recognize it or not. Actually they could elect to blanket recognize OBRA races and have done so in the past. This stuff is all classic cutting off your nose to spite your face.
@no_use_for_a_name@cyclocross@NorCal ATRA does not sanction races. ATRA has a liability insurance program that allows velodromes to hold racing. It offeres considerable advantages over other sources of liability insurance. This program is expanding. Most US velodromes purchase insurance through ATRA, even if they hold USAC races. Most of these velodromes hold at least some of their racing without purchasing a sanction from USAC.
@cyclocross@NorCal CBR is gone though. USAC put Chris out of business by funding prize purses in his region. This from a federation that has zero prize money, or even a stinking jersey for their overall series winners. It's all about command and control.
The last 10+ years of zero growth in USAC events or membership means they really, really don't care about growing grassroots participation or a even the appearance of a viable domestic pro scene.