Us Indoor Rowing Team Selection

[[old] johnnybike]

<!--QuoteBegin-george nz+Nov 14 2005, 07:48 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(george nz @ Nov 14 2005, 07:48 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->No John, everyone knew what the letters stood for, but most people (not all I admit) knew that it was not a national team selected by a national body.<br /><br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I am reasonably au-fait with what is going on, more on the UK forum obviously. However when I first heard NH and Ranger talking about USIRT I did understand it to be some sort of official body rowing squad and I did wonder why some of the Olympian standard rowers were not involved. Now I understand. <br />However it should really be called the C2 IRT (US) or something like that<br /><br />John<br />

[[old] ranger]

I suppose I could be wrong in this, but I don't think that selection for the US Olympic team has anything to do with your politics, your economic philosophies, your personal background, your beliefs about training, or even your training practices.<br /><br />Wow.<br /><br />If the assumption was that all members on the US Olympic team, especially those in individual sports, such as erging, had to be homogeneous/in agreement on all of these matters, the team would be very small indeed! <br /><br />An empty plane! Starting lines with no participants! No finishers! No medals!<br /><br />ranger

[[old] ranger]

<!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->it should really be called the C2 IRT (US) or something like that </td></tr></table><br /><br />Agreed, especially if inclusion on the team is not based on rowing performances but on a certain sort of agreement about how to train, how to row, who to agree with and who not, and so forth. <br /><br />The team could be a kind of actualized C2 manual!<br /><br />Or when Mike C. is on the team, a kind of Wolverine Plan in action!<br /><br />A demo tape.<br /><br />ranger

[[old] Bayko]

As I wrote on the UK forum, "Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah."

[[old] John Rupp]

<!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Nov 15 2005, 12:41 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Nov 15 2005, 12:41 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I don't think that the members of the USIRT should have to agree about how to train in order to be on the team and row well. <br /><br />In fact, I think one of the pleasures of being on the team would be just this--being in close contact with others who, for strong and substantiated reasons, passionately disagree about how to train for rowing. <br /><br />Being on the USIRT and conversing face-to-face over an extended period with other USIRT members would be a wonderful opportunity to experience a rich cross-fertilization of ideas about training for rowing, one might make us all better in the end.<br /><br />Disagreement is both productive and fun. Agreement is usually an unproductive bore.<br /><br />ranger <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I agree (with disagreement) completely. The rowing community is very close minded, to their extreme fault and detriment. The most progressive parts of the sport are those who race in singles, then doubles, and least of all 8's, those being the most rigid of all. The most progressive individuals are those who come from other sports, running, swimming, cycling, weight training, triathlon, wind sailing and so on, not those trained by typical conventional coaches, certainly not in the United States.<br /><br />One of the most hilarious things I've seen in a long time was Caviston having a fit because one of the women liked to play music while doing her repetitions. I wonder what he would think when Kenenisa Bekele was racing around the track to a stadium filled with stomping, clapping, and the powerful beating of Ethiopian drums, all the way, every step from the beginning to end and a new world record 26:17 for the 10000 meters.<br /><br />That wouldn't happen on Caviston's watch!<br /><br />Running has a much longer history and progression than rowing, with the top runners varying quite a bit in their training. There are many consistencies as well, which apply to rowing but few of them being applied, at least not in the United States. I can imagine such athletes being barred from C2's USIRC for unconscionable "training innovativeness", unthinkable generosity and sharing with others and worst of all, "shudder", daring to express themselves in public!<br /><br />OMG what if some newbies came to the forum and realized there really are a plethora of ideas in the rowing world, and not everyone lives and sleeps in the same little close minded boxes.<br />

[[old] michaelb]

What is bizarre about this thread, and the 100 pages or so on the UK forum, is that there appears to be no basis, suggestion, or valid suspicion that <i>this years</i> USIRC team was selected based on anything but merit.<br /><br />Ranger, did you submit a qualifying 2k time this year? If not, shut up already.

[[old] george nz]

<!--QuoteBegin-John Rupp+Nov 16 2005, 06:05 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Nov 16 2005, 06:05 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--> ....  is very close minded, to their extreme fault and detriment .....  lives and sleeps in the same little close minded boxes.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />Sounds like an excert from your Bio John

[[old] george nz]

COULD SOMEONE PLEASE CHANGE RANGERS AVATAR !!!!! - (if I was a part of C2 or part of the US Indoor rowing fraternity, dammed if I would want this guy flying my flag)<br /><br />George<br /><br />ps the fact that he has not done it himself of course just shows what an egotistical nightmare he is !!

[[old] John Rupp]

<!--QuoteBegin-michaelb+Nov 15 2005, 10:26 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(michaelb @ Nov 15 2005, 10:26 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Ranger, did you submit a qualifying 2k time this year? [right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />Michael,<br /><br />Rich won his USIRC trial 2 years ago and broke the WR in the process.<br /><br />He was the only rower that did this.<br /><br />Then he was left off the team, while another rower who had not even participated in a trial race was given his spot on the team.<br /><br />The standards have not changed in the last two years thus Rich, realizing that winning a trial race and breaking the world record again would likely get the same results, did what the other rower had done two years ago. Obviously that wasn't enough as this year a guy was selected who only did a 6:51, and Rich was again left off of the team.

[[old] John Rupp]

George,<br /><br />Your training experience is as limited as your thinking.<br /><br />I have completed more training sessions, of all different types, than you will ever be able to do.<br /><br />Thank you for proving my point, again, and again, and again.

[[old] TPMcT]

<!--QuoteBegin-ranger+ Nov 15 2005, 04:17 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Nov 15 2005, 04:17 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I suppose I could be wrong in this, but I don't think that selection for the US Olympic team has anything to do with your politics, your economic philosophies, your personal background, your beliefs about training, or even your training practices.<br /><br />Wow.<br /><br />If the assumption was that all members on the US Olympic team, especially those in individual sports, such as erging, had to be homogeneous/in agreement on all of these matters, the team would be very small indeed! <br /><br />An empty plane! Starting lines with no participants! No finishers! No medals!<br /><br />ranger <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />The selection procedures for US oarsmen may not be based on "your politics, your economic philosophies, your personal background," but they do have something to do with compatibility.<br /><br />Let me quote from pp. 3-4 of the <a href='http://www.usrowing.org/uploads/docs/05 ... roceed.pdf' target='_blank'>USRowing Team Selection Procedures</a> for the 2005 FISA World Championships:<br /><br /><!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Second Priority Big Boats (M8+, LM4-)<br /><br />The National Men’s Sweep Coach, Mike Teti, shall select and recommend nominees for the crews of the M8+ and LM4- respectively. While athlete support and funding have directed returning athletes to the priority events, second priority events allow for the development of new athletes. Second priority events are open to returning, experienced athletes as well.<br /><br />These recommendations will be approved by a nomination committee comprised of the National Team Head Coaches, the High Performance Committee Chair, Jay Feenan, and the USRowing Board Representative or Alternate Representative to the USOC AAC, Kate Johnson or Pete Cipollone.<br /><br />Invitation to selection camp will be based on the following criteria, which are listed in no particular order:<br /><br />1. 2005 National Selection Regatta I and II Results<br />2. Performance at 2005 Identification Camps<br />3. Coaches Recommendation<br />4. Performance in National Team Testing (Submit 6k and 2k erg score by June 30, 2005)<br />5. November and April Speed Orders<br />6. National Team Trials<br />7. Athlete’s compatibility with the rest of the crew<br />8. Performance in international competition during the 2004-2005 seasons<br />9. In the case of lightweights, the athlete’s weight<br /><br />The national team head coaches will make final boat selection, basing their nomination recommendations upon the following factors, which are listed in no particular order:<br /><br />1. 2005 National Selection Regatta I and II results,<br />2. 2004-2005 National Team Testing,<br />3. November and April Speed Order<br />4. Performance at 2005 Identification Camps<br />5. 2005 World Cup Racing [if applicable]<br />6. Athlete’s compatibility with the rest of the crew<br />7. Performance in seat racing and competitive pieces<br />8. In the case of lightweights, the athlete’s weight<br /><br />If, in the process of making the final boat selection, two or more athletes are found to be equally qualified based on the combination of factors above, the coach will determine between the two candidates by assessing the long term athlete potential of those involved.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />In the small boat trials, it is, of course, winner-take-all. But for the big boats, compatibility, apparently, is very much an issue. The same criteria, by the way, apply to the 2005 priority big boats (W8+, W4x, M4x, M4-).<br /><br />In any case, ranger, be careful what you wish for. Let's suppose for a moment that USRowing did concern itself with trivialities such as indoor rowing and for the year 2003 had picked a team with one person representing each age/gender/weight class. You probably would have been chosen as the M50L rower. I say "probably" because Dennis Hastings, if I recall correctly, beat the altitude standard by a greater margin than you beat the sea-level standard. But let's set that aside and assume you are now on the 2003 USRowing IRT team and on your way to Paris. What would that have gotten you?<br /><br />Beyond a spiffy all-in-one, it would have earned you . . . the right to pay your way. From p. 12 of the Selection Procedures:<br /><br /><!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The actual cost for self funded athletes and coaches [for the trip to Gifu] will be posted no later than May 1, 2005 and is estimated between $6k-$7k per person. </td></tr></table><br /><br />The sad fact is that our national team members pay their own way to non-Olympic regattas, and even for the Olympics they may have to pay to qualify. According to press reports, it cost Jennifer Devine something like $10,000 to transport herself and her shell to Europe to qualify for Athens -- after she had won the US trials.<br /><br />Ranger, the proper analogy for the USIRT is not winning a race or even earning a seat in a boat. Rather, it's like gaining admission, with a scholarship, to a rather exclusive school. Every school that doesn't have an open enrollment policy has to turn down some students, and elite schools turn down a lot of highly qualified applicants, some of whom may be more qualified than those who are admitted. Every year Harvard turns down some poor kid with 1600 SATs and a 4.0 GPA. There are a lot of necessary conditions for gaining admission to Harvard, but there is no sufficient condition, nor is there at your own institution, the University of Michigan. Elite schools don't simply arrange test scores from highest to lowest and mark a cut-off point. A young woman sued the U of M some years ago to compel something like that sort of admissions policy, and your school, quite rightly, contested the matter all the way to the Supreme Court.<br /><br />So a lot of necessary conditions, but no sufficient condition to guarantee admission to the U of M. And, you will note from the quote above, no sufficient condition for gaining a seat in a US boat, either. In the same way, it seems, there is no sufficient condition -- not even setting a world record -- for earning a place on the USIRT.<br /><br />Now, is that unfair? Did C2 "exclude" you, as you keep claiming, or is it simply the case that you didn't get into the school of your choice? (As an aside, I'm fascinated that you think the basis for your "exclusion" was your endless bloviation on this board, both before and after 2003. Is that the sign of a guilty conscience?)<br /><br />Let's examine the teams that C2 has selected for evidence of bias and discrimination. In 2002, C2 took everyone that met the time standard for his/her age/weight category. The Dreissigacker brothers may have deep pockets, but they are apparently not deep enough to do that every year. So each of the last three teams has been limited to 12 rowers: six men, six women, six HWTs, six LWTs, across the spectrum of ages from young to old. No evidence of bias toward national team members. In fact, Michelle Guerrette, then a member of the women's eight and most recently the Bronze medallist in the W1x at Gifu, originally didn't make the team and was selected only after one of the other team members dropped out. (She went on to win the Gold in Paris, you will remember.) There is no preference for men over women. And there is certainly no bias against the elderly. But there is a consequence of this inclusiveness. You were competing in 2003 for one of only three spots on the team for LWT men, not one of 12.<br /><br />Now if I understand you correctly, you want C2, in selecting its teams, to arrange the 2000M times of its applicants from lowest to highest, as measured by difference from the time standard -- much as Jennifer Gratz wanted the U of M to do -- and pick the 12 best, come what may. Given what C2 is obviously attempting to do with the USIRT, I don't think you'll find many takers for that position.<br /><br />Alternatively, you may argue that for each group of three, LWT men, in your case, C2 should use as the sole criterion the net difference from the time standard. Here, at least, you have a plausible case. But here, also, is the end of our trail of evidence. If I recall correctly, Dennis Hastings beat the altitude standard for M50L by something like 10 seconds. You beat the sea-level standard for the same group by six seconds. ("But I set a world record!") Neither of you were selected. I don't recall there ever being any information about the time trial results of the three male LWTs who were selected in 2003. In fact, the only one of them I can recall is Mike Caviston (or "Caviston," as you call him). There is no evidence that either you or Dennis were “excluded,” merely that you were both among the no doubt many worthy candidates whom C2 couldn’t afford to fund.<br /><br />Any sensible person would have reached this conclusion a long, long time ago. But your two-year jeremiad is not really about your exclusion at all, is it? What gored your ox was not so much your "exclusion," but Mike's selection. It's an understatement to say that you're obsessed with him. He's your white whale. There’s poor Mike, minding his own business in the U of M athletic department, and all of a sudden he’s got Ahab trying to harpoon him wherever he goes.<br /><br />And that’s sad, really, really sad.<br /><br />Tim McTighe

[[old] george nz]

<!--QuoteBegin-TPMcT+Nov 16 2005, 08:24 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(TPMcT @ Nov 16 2005, 08:24 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Tim McTighe<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Tks for your post, it sums it up very well. Problem is there are 2 people who will only read the bits they want then probably attack you as well.<br /><br />If it makes any difference the 'rest of the world' agree with you.<br /><br />George

[[old] mpukita]

<!--QuoteBegin-TPMcT+Nov 15 2005, 03:24 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(TPMcT @ Nov 15 2005, 03:24 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><br />Any sensible person would have reached this conclusion a long, long time ago. But your two-year jeremiad is not really about your exclusion at all, is it? What gored your ox was not so much your "exclusion," but Mike's selection. It's an understatement to say that you're obsessed with him. He's your white whale. There’s poor Mike, minding his own business in the U of M athletic department, and all of a sudden he’s got Ahab trying to harpoon him wherever he goes.<br /><br />And that’s sad, really, really sad.<br /><br />Tim McTighe <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />OUCH! Hate it when that happens. <br /><br />Well, gotta get back to following that darned Wolverine Plan, which Mike has been so kind as to share with the world, and then answer very specific personal questions about (for many of us). Kinda like a free coach just looking out for the best interests and performance of anyone else (and the sport in general) who wishes to take advantage of his expertise, wisdom, and generosity.<br /><br />I'll say it again, THANKS MIKE!

[[old] John Rupp]

<!--QuoteBegin-TPMcT+Nov 15 2005, 11:24 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(TPMcT @ Nov 15 2005, 11:24 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Beyond a spiffy all-in-one, it would have earned you . . . the right to pay your way. </td></tr></table><br />Ah, so C2 didn't pay the way of any of the USIRT rowers. Thanks for that info.<br /><br /><!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->it seems, there is no sufficient condition -- not even setting a world record -- for earning a place on the USIRT. </td></tr></table><br />There are no obvious objective public standards, apparently only biased secretive ones.<br /><br /><!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Now, is that unfair? Did C2 "exclude" you, as you keep claiming, or is it simply the case that you didn't get into the school of your choice? (As an aside, I'm fascinated that you think the basis for your "exclusion" was your endless bloviation on this board, both before and after 2003. Is that the sign of a guilty conscience?) </td></tr></table><br />Several of the "insiders", Caviston and Hastings being two of them, stated at the time the reasons for Rich's non selection were his training style and his posts on the forum. And yet you seem to take pride in this kind of thing in the rowing community.<br /><br />That is very strange. If you want to think of something being very, very sad, think of that.<br /><br /><!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Now if I understand you correctly, you want C2, in selecting its teams, to arrange the 2000M times of its applicants from lowest to highest, as measured by difference from the time standard </td></tr></table><br />What I would like to see is to have the times ranked based on world record performances for each age, weight class, and gender. Then the 3 fastest of each, women, men, lightweight, and heavyweight, selected to be on the "team".<br /><br /><!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If I recall correctly, Dennis Hastings beat the altitude standard for M50L by something like 10 seconds. You beat the sea-level standard for the same group by six seconds. </td></tr></table><br />Rich's standard was the world record, which he beat in his trial race. Hastings was nowhere close to a record, but simply beat the "altitude" standard because it was set to be much easier to achieve. I really think no intelligent person would think Hastings was anywhere close to Rich in 2003, nor this year either.<br /><br /><!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I don't recall there ever being any information about the time trial results of the three male LWTs who were selected in 2003. In fact, the only one of them I can recall is Mike Caviston (or "Caviston," as you call him). </td></tr></table><br />You must be one of the few who knew of it then. Apparently "real results", trial races, and world records were excluded from such consideration at the time.<br /><br /><!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->There is no evidence that either you or Dennis were “excluded,” merely that you were both among the no doubt many worthy candidates whom C2 couldn’t afford to fund. </td></tr></table><br />Yeah well since as you said everyone earned the right to pay their own way, then C2 should have been able to afford this quite easily.<br /><br /><!--QuoteBegin--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->What gored your ox was not so much your "exclusion," but Mike's selection. It's an understatement to say that you're obsessed with him. He's your white whale. There’s poor Mike, minding his own business in the U of M athletic department, and all of a sudden he’s got Ahab trying to harpoon him wherever he goes. </td></tr></table><br />I seriously doubt Rich loses any sleep over Mike, as he is up at 4 or 5am every morning. It sounds to me that he sleeps quite well, though I have seen Mike post about being up late at night and not being able to sleep while reading all of Rich's messages on the forum. Hmmm which one is Ahab and which one is the whale?<br /><br />Can you imagine Jim Ryun winning the Olympic Trials in a new world record, and then being left off the team, in favor of some buddy of those who were doing the selecting of the athletes.

[[old] John Rupp]

<!--QuoteBegin-mpukita+Nov 15 2005, 12:01 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(mpukita @ Nov 15 2005, 12:01 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Well, gotta get back to following that darned Wolverine Plan, which Mike has been so kind as to share with the world, and then answer very specific personal questions about (for many of us).  Kinda like a free coach just looking out for the best interests and performance of anyone else (and the sport in general) who wishes to take advantage of his expertise, wisdom, and generosity.<br /><br />I'll say it again, THANKS MIKE![right] </td></tr></table><br /><br /><!--QuoteBegin-Mike Caviston+Nov 13 2005, 06:29 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Mike Caviston @ Nov 13 2005, 06:29 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Don’t you know the “Wolverine Plan Discussion” thread is the only good thing on your whole crummy website?  (Except for all those lame questions all those idiots keep posting under all my insightful training advice.)[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />Enjoy "the Plan", Mark! <br />