Us Indoor Rowing Team Selection

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » November 12th, 2005, 5:41 pm

<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'>I don't compromise my beliefs and my philosophy on what's right and wrong (or reasonable or fair) just because someone overseas questions me </td></tr></table><br /><br />And it is your sense of right and wrong that the social power of ownership is more important than an ethic of fairness in competitive sports?<br /><br />Really?<br /><br />ranger<br /><br />

[old] Mike Caviston · Post by **[old] Mike Caviston** » November 12th, 2005, 5:55 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Nov 12 2005, 05:35 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I am also sorry that you don't see my point, Mark.<br />No need to restate it.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />And yet he does… again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and…<br /><br />I’ve already made my point regarding this issue on the UK forum (if you want to see it, you only have to wade through about 100 pages of Ranger’s repetitious lamentations to find it). I do have one new observation to make… When Ranger states, “I suppose I had a certain possibility of meeting the 6:30 standard in order to qualify for the 2004 team, but <b>it seems evident that the standard was set to make these chances very slim (and therefore, in essence, to eliminate this division from consideration)”, </b> he ignores what has been an obvious pattern from the beginning: standards for a given year are based on winning times in that category for the previous year. The standard remains even if you personally had the fastest time and the next fastest time was considerably slower. Right or wrong, there is clearly no conspiracy to eliminate anybody. Ask Ranger what the qualifying standard was for 50LW men in 2002 (hint: 6:44). Ask Ranger what he though of that (hint: ridiculously soft; he would beat it by 20 seconds). Ask Ranger what the final result was (hint: he didn’t beat it by 20 second…)<br /><br />Mike Caviston<br /><br />

[old] gw1 · Post by **[old] gw1** » November 12th, 2005, 5:56 pm

<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'>-- this is NOT a "National Team" which would imply being funded by the citizens of the US, or an organization funded by same </td></tr></table><br /><br />Not always Mark some "National Teams" for lower profile sports (which this would certainly qualify) are only partially funded or the athletes either pay much of their own expenses. <br /><br /><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'> and C2 can do what they wish with their investment </td></tr></table><br /><br />Agreed and they are very generous to offer 12 trips. Congrats to all that were selected.<br /><br />This horse has pretty much been flogged to death. Obviously there are some very good indoor rowers who were not selected on the USIRT. The fact is that there are always good athletes left off teams or out of drafts for various reasons, just be glad that being left off the team didn't affect your ability to provide for your family. <br /><br />Maybe a private e-mail to C2 requesting the qualification standards next year then having the criteria published will solve this happening again!<br /><br />Then maybe not!!!!!! <br /><br />GW

[old] mpukita · Post by **[old] mpukita** » November 12th, 2005, 6:03 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Nov 12 2005, 05:41 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><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'>I don't compromise my beliefs and my philosophy on what's right and wrong (or reasonable or fair) just because someone overseas questions me </td></tr></table><br /><br />And it is your sense of right and wrong that the social power of ownership is more important than an ethic of fairness in competitive sports?<br /><br />Really?<br /><br />ranger <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Rich:<br /><br />You're changing the topic my friend. Trying to portray my comments as something they're not. Nice try ... let's explore ...<br /><br />Fairness in sports has to do with being honest and not cheating, being drug-free, etc. Choosing a COMPANY-SPONSORED team has nothing to do with fairness. It has very little to do with what you term the "social power of ownership". It's a marketing, sales, and business decision.<br /><br />I sense that you might be suggesting that C2 has some level of "social responsiblity" because of who they are. I would contend that they have the privilege of doing as they like with their money because they earned it by providing value that people paid for ... that value being the benefits that the C2 erg and associated services provide. Their "tribute" (so to speak), is paid in taxes to the various government agencies. Sure, it's likely good business for them to have a team selected in the fairest way possible ... but that doesn't mean that they don't have the right to do whatever they wish in making the selections in the way they choose. We've seen a great example of a company's "right to choose" the past few weeks in the NFL. If you have a "star" that's not a team player, and you're paying his or her salary, you have the right to demand certain behaviour of them. If they don't comply, they can be FIRED.<br /><br />Of course, you and everyone else can, or cannot, voice their agreement or disagreement by "voting" with their pocketbook.<br /><br />I congratulate those that were selected, and hope this thread doesn't in any way demean the hard work they've invested to achieve their selection.<br /><br />Regards -- Mark

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » November 12th, 2005, 6:43 pm

<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'>Rich:<br /><br />You're changing the topic my friend. Trying to portray my comments as something they're not. Nice try ... let's explore ...<br /><br />Fairness in sports has to do with being honest and not cheating, being drug-free, etc. Choosing a COMPANY-SPONSORED team has nothing to do with fairness. It has very little to do with what you term the "social power of ownership". It's a marketing, sales, and business decision.<br /><br />I sense that you might be suggesting that C2 has some level of "social responsiblity" because of who they are. I would contend that they have the privilege of doing as they like with their money because they earned it by providing value that people paid for ... that value being the benefits that the C2 erg and associated services provide. Their "tribute" (so to speak), is paid in taxes to the various government agencies. Sure, it's likely good business for them to have a team selected in the fairest way possible ... but that doesn't mean that they don't have the right to do whatever they wish in making the selections in the way they choose. We've seen a great example of a company's "right to choose" the past few weeks in the NFL. If you have a "star" that's not a team player, and you're paying his or her salary, you have the right to demand certain behaviour of them. If they don't comply, they can be FIRED.<br /><br />Of course, you and everyone else can, or cannot, voice their agreement or disagreement by "voting" with their pocketbook.<br /><br />I congratulate those that were selected, and hope this thread doesn't in any way demean the hard work they've invested to achieve their selection.<br /><br />Regards -- Mark<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Honestly, Mark, I am appalled by your materialistic ethics, especially where sports are concerned, but I guess this is just my opinion. <br /><br />I seem to be in a disappearing minority. There seem to be few others here who value basic fairness in a sports contest over merchantile interest in a freely offered and publicly announced sports competition, officially run at remote locations with the implication that the best will win, even if the company offering the competition funds the "winners" and therefore supplies the reward.<br /><br />All I can say is, good luck with it, C2! You'll need it!<br /><br />A much better solution for C2, I think, would be just to appoint a team, based on the past and current accomplishments of some group of rowers. Then the purpose of the team would be clear. It is not a team that is the result of the winners of fair athletic contests cønducted under equal conditions. It is just a group of people, pretty good on the erg, who will row pretty well and speak pretty well for C2 at EIRC, and therefore represent their company interests. <br /><br />I am sorry. But whoever you are, you just can't hold rigorously controlled and witnessed sports competitions and then disqualify clear winners after the fact. <br /><br />It just doesn't wash.<br /><br />ranger

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » November 12th, 2005, 6:45 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(mpukita @ Nov 12 2005, 12:13 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Gosh, it probably sucks to you that you can't impose your world view on everyone. Grow up, man. This is America, not CUBA. And thank goodness for that!<br /><br />-- Mark[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br /><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(mpukita @ Nov 12 2005, 01:26 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Ugly stuff I'm saying? Stereotype of "Ugly American"? Fuel for those overseas that have a problem with America? What a bunch of baloney.<br /><br />You insult me with your arrogant insinuations.<br /><br />I travel extensively overseas ... in fact I have just purchased a property overseas because I love the diversity that living amongst those that are different than me provides.[right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />You got it in Cuba... right???? <br />

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » November 12th, 2005, 6:49 pm

<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'>I congratulate those that were selected, and hope this thread doesn't in any way demean the hard work they've invested to achieve their selection. </td></tr></table><br /><br />Excuse me for thinking so, but if the team is really just a group of rowers selected to represent C2 because of their financial interests, then the team is already demeaned, I think, at least from what I assume that most of those who were trying out for the team, myself included, had considered the status and honor of those selected.<br /><br />ranger

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » November 12th, 2005, 6:49 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(mpukita @ Nov 12 2005, 12:13 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>You fail to realize that this is NOT a "national team" ... it's essentially a "Concept 2 Team" </td></tr></table><br /><br /><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Nov 12 2005, 01:00 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>What does USIRT stand for? [right] </td></tr></table><br /><br />You still haven't answered my question!! <img src='http://www.d2ksoft.com/blog/images/smiles/whistle.gif' border='0' alt='user posted image' />

[old] mpukita · Post by **[old] mpukita** » November 12th, 2005, 6:55 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Nov 12 2005, 06:43 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><br />Honestly, Mark, I am appalled by your materialistic ethics, especially where sports are concerned, but I guess this is just my opinion. <br /><br />I seem to be in a disappearing minority. There seem to be few others here who value basic fairness in a sports contest over merchantile interest in a freely offered and publicly announced sports competition, officially run at remote locations with the implication that the best will win, even if the company offering the competition funds the "winners" and therefore supplies the reward.<br /><br />All I can say is, good luck with it, C2! You'll need it!<br /><br />A much better solution for C2, I think, would be just to appoint a team, based on the past and current accomplishments of some group of rowers. Then the purpose of the team would be clear. It is not a team that is the result of the winners of fair athletic contests cønducted under equal conditions. It is just a group of people, pretty good on the erg, who will row pretty well and speak pretty well for C2 at EIRC, and therefore represent their company interests. <br /><br />I am sorry. But whoever you are, you just can't hold rigorously controlled and witnessed sports competitions and then disqualify clear winners after the fact. <br /><br />It just doesn't wash.<br /><br />ranger <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Rich:<br /><br />Who do you believe you are to pass judgment on my ethics ... when you do not even know me ... and then profess that you are part of "a disappearing minority" that value fairness? This is pure nonsense.<br /><br />Rich, I see your responses as all being built to put yourself on some "holier than thou" pedestal where anyone that disagrees with you is wrong, and anyone that agrees with you is right.<br /><br />Honestly, this is nothing more than a philosophical exercise for me in debating a topic where there are two perspectives and -- like most -- no perfect answer. It does (mildly) amuse me that you've elected to question my ethics rather than, again ... as before, debate the facts.<br /><br />Regards -- Mark<br /><br />PS -- I'm willing to bet that C2 will do just fine over the next few years ... I just have a feeling ...<br /><br />

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » November 12th, 2005, 7:08 pm

<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'>standards for a given year are based on winning times in that category for the previous year </td></tr></table><br /><br />I don't understand why this was even done in the first place, if you yourself were last year's winner.<br /><br />Makes no sense at all.<br /><br />ranger

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » November 12th, 2005, 7:12 pm

<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'>It does (mildly) amuse me that you've elected to question my ethics rather than, again ... as before, debate the facts </td></tr></table><br /><br />Your ethics are clear.<br /><br />And you are right that your ethics are not mine.<br /><br />You also seem to be right that most people here have your ethics.<br /><br />I guess C2 will be in good company!<br /><br />And I guess that's what you need to make money selling a product.<br /><br />Sad stuff.<br /><br />ranger

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » November 12th, 2005, 7:13 pm

<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'>rather than, again ... as before, debate the facts </td></tr></table><br /><br />We agree on the facts. There is nothing to debate.<br /><br />ranger

[old] ranger · Post by **[old] ranger** » November 12th, 2005, 7:17 pm

I have seen <br />The old gods go<br />And the new gods come.<br /><br />Day by day<br />And year by year<br />The idols rise<br />And the idols fall.<br /><br />Today I worship the hammer.<br />

[old] PaulS · Post by **[old] PaulS** » November 12th, 2005, 7:21 pm

Ranger,<br /><br />Since you are apparently ignoring the Uk forum I'll ask again here.<br /><br />"BTW - What was the result of your 2005 EIRC 2k Trial Time?"<br /><br />

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » November 12th, 2005, 7:35 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(PaulS @ Nov 12 2005, 03:21 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>What was the result of your 2005 EIRC 2k Trial Time?" </td></tr></table><br /><br />EIRC hasn't occurred yet, has it?<br /><br />You need to be on the "team", to get a trip to the EIRC.<br /><br />Rich wasn't picked by the selectors, to be on the USIRC "team" for the EIRC.

Concept2 Forum

Us Indoor Rowing Team Selection

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions