2004 Us Indoor Rowing Team

[[old] PaulS]

<!--QuoteBegin-Cran+Jul 19 2004, 02:04 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'><span class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></span> (Cran @ Jul 19 2004, 02:04 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I think you need to decide if playing the game is worth the cost... being true to yourself is more important than getting in a team.<br><br>Hopefully you can do both, but that's not always possible. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><br> Well said.<br><br>To address Canoeists post, it would also depend largely on what the definition of "character" was. Ranger certainly has plenty of character, but it was apparently deemed that it was not of the correct type. Worst of all, it seems that this was done based on forum discussions rather than any evidence of actual "in person" experience, which can be very different things indeed.<br><br>- Paul Smith

[[old] ranger]

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'><span class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></span> </td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Last year you were probably the most physically fit rower compared to your class. But you hadn't learned how to be a humble winner.<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><br><br>Paul (Canoeist)--<br><br>This sort of revisionist history and loose judgment (on the basis of such a revisionist history) is just the problem I am pointing up. Most of the hooting and hollering at my contributions to this forum over the last few years occurred long before I won anything at all. It were based on various sorts of dismissals of what I was reporting about (1) my extensive (and somewhat odd) training and (2) my hopes for this training, something that is not at all unique to me, something that has nothing to do with character (other than good things!), and something that has nothing whatever to do with being a "good winner." As I mention in my longer note above, it does indeed have something to do with the "character" of those doing the hooting and hollering, though, and this something is not at all good. <br><br>By and large, the hooting and hollering ended when I just executed my plans and realized my hopes. <br><br>As I mentioned repeatedly during the hooting and hollering, I think that the value of this forum would be greatly diminished if we (who post here) cannot (1) report what we do in training and (2) express what we would like to do and think we can indeed do (but have not done yet). And indeed, much of the talk on this forum is talk of just this sort! So if I am banned from participation on the USIRT because of this sort of talk, almost everyone who participates on this forum should be banned, too, you included. This is a pretty serious result. <br><br>Honestly, I think the process of selection last year involved some things that were a little more complicated than what is being discussed here, and I think that the influence of these more complicated (and unspoken) things should not be used as further occasion to hoot and holler (again). <br><br>Really. <br><br>ranger <br><br>

[[old] ranger]

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'><span class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></span> </td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><br>Some sports award extra points for "style".<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><br><br>Paul--<br><br>If the "style" of the hooters and hollerers over the last few years is the "style" that is preferred and valued by Concept2 and indoor rowers more generally, I would be very, very surprised. The biggest proof of this is the British forum and the new and continuing US forum that we have right here. In both fora, there are now regular threads devoted to reporting workouts done from day to day and for reporting hopes and dreams (even if they are not yet realized). Interestingly, the one on workouts done on the British forum (initiated by Roy Brook a while back) now has more than 5000 (!) posts. <br><br>Hmm.<br><br>The real problem with the selection process last year and my participation on the team, I think, is that, as it turned out, the hooters and hollerers were proved dead wrong and in the process thoroughly embarrassed themselves (in the process, revealing some deeply disturbing things about their true "character"?) and that some of the most prominent hooters and hollerers were closely connected with C2, the selection process, the rowing "establishment" more generally, and the other members of the USIRT. <br><br>ranger

[[old] Rocket Roy]

I say the more colourful the character the more that should count in their favour. We need "characters" in Indoor rowing, In the UK we have a few and it really helps the day go with a smile.

[[old] Andrew Burrows]

Roy is one such character - he is famous for being old!!!

[[old] mileypau]

Just read this thread.......shocking really.<br><br>I think the key point was well made that the USIRT isn't ...... it is the US C2 Team and should be presented as such. They are then free to use whatever criteria they wish.<br><br>However I would have thought though, that diversity in the sport is exactly what C2 would want to promote. I for one as a fairly new erger am delighted to see the whole range of people who are enthusiastic and involved, whether world record breakers, or simply plugging away at their personal fitness, weight loss or rehab goal.<br><br>If this came across in the C2 sponsored team then it can only encourage more uptake of the sport and more sales of ergs.<br><br>"Politics"....no time for it !!!