Funding To Get To Boston

[[old] Exrook]

<!--QuoteBegin-John Rupp+Feb 16 2005, 06:21 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Feb 16 2005, 06:21 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->JetBlue has good rates but primarily goes from coast to coast.<br /><br />There are good rates Seattle to San Diego r/t from $260 up, but the lowest I've found from Vancouver Island is $662. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I'd fly to Seattle, rent a car, drive up to Anacortes and take the ferry through the San Juans to Sidney, then drive down the island to Victoria. Once you get out of Seattle, it is a beautiful trip, especially the ferry ride(s). Car rental/ferry fare is probably going to be much less than $402 (depending on the length of your trip).<br /><br />

[[old] hwt]

<!--QuoteBegin-John Rupp+Feb 14 2005, 09:36 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Feb 14 2005, 09:36 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->George,<br /><br />It would be nice to go to Boston and have funding.<br /><br />The only equitable way to determine such funding would be comparison of performance across age, gender and weight class. [right] <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />C2 is extremely generous in offering up to 4 trips at each of the 20 Satellite Regattas. If you live in the US or Canada and close enough to get to one of the satellite regattas, all you have to do is beat the qualifying time by enough of a margin that you are one of the 4 to go from that particular regatta.<br /><br />The qualifying times are already based on performance in each specific age, gender and weight class. Sounds fair to me.<br /><br />A lot of people use airmiles to get to Boston.

[[old] John Rupp]

<!--QuoteBegin-Exrook+Feb 16 2005, 02:42 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(Exrook @ Feb 16 2005, 02:42 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I'd fly to Seattle, rent a car, drive up to Anacortes and take the ferry through the San Juans to Sidney, then drive down the island to Victoria.  Once you get out of Seattle, it is a beautiful trip, especially the ferry ride(s).  Car rental/ferry fare is probably going to be much less than $402 (depending on the length of your trip). <br /> </td></tr></table><br />Thanks!!!<br /><br />I will look into this.

[[old] John Rupp]

<!--QuoteBegin-hwt+Feb 16 2005, 05:22 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(hwt @ Feb 16 2005, 05:22 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->all you have to do is beat the qualifying time by enough of a margin that you are one of the 4 to go from that particular regatta.<br /><br />The qualifying times are already based on performance in each specific age, gender and weight class.  Sounds fair to me. <br /> </td></tr></table><br />The qualifying times are not equitable, as they are all over the board.<br /><br />They are not based on equivalent performances. Geesh where did you get such misinformation. <br /><br />Read up - Rich Cureton broke the World Record in one of the Satellite Regattas.<br /><br />He was not given a trip -- and his trip was given to someone who didn't even compete in a trial!

[[old] GeorgeD]

<!--QuoteBegin-hwt+Feb 17 2005, 02:22 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(hwt @ Feb 17 2005, 02:22 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->C2 is extremely generous in offering up to 4 trips at each of the 20 Satellite Regattas.  If you live in the US or Canada and close enough to get to one of the satellite regattas, all you have to do is beat the qualifying time by enough of a margin that you are one of the 4 to go from that particular regatta.<br /><br />The qualifying times are already based on performance in each specific age, gender and weight class.  Sounds fair to me.<br /><br />A lot of people use airmiles to get to Boston. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I agree they are very generous in fact I think the qualifying times you have there is maybe even on the soft side considering the reward. However I would not expect C2 in New Zealand to be willing to fund a whole lot of people, and maybe even just one from each age group and if I was not good enough then so be it. The only thing I struggle with is that I have to match / beat the WR which has stood since 1998 at about 6:07.7 while the qualifying time there is about 6:26.<br />If they said the fastest 50+ HW under 6:20 goes I could live with that, but a WR I think is stretching it for me<br /><br />George

[[old] John Rupp]

I totally agree that C2 is very generous with the trips -- just not that the qualifying times and procedures are equitable, and the people selected are not necessarily those with the best times per age, gender, and weight class.

[[old] whp4]

<!--QuoteBegin-John Rupp+Feb 17 2005, 02:20 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John Rupp @ Feb 17 2005, 02:20 AM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin-hwt+Feb 16 2005, 05:22 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(hwt @ Feb 16 2005, 05:22 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->all you have to do is beat the qualifying time by enough of a margin that you are one of the 4 to go from that particular regatta.<br /><br />The qualifying times are already based on performance in each specific age, gender and weight class.  Sounds fair to me. <br /> </td></tr></table><br />The qualifying times are not equitable, as they are all over the board.<br /><br />They are not based on equivalent performances. Geesh where did you get such misinformation. <br /><br />Read up - Rich Cureton broke the World Record in one of the Satellite Regattas.<br /><br />He was not given a trip -- and his trip was given to someone who didn't even compete in a trial! <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Hmm, I've done some searching, but failed to find anything relevant on the old forum. What year did this take place, and can you point out some threads where it was discussed? I've looked at the current rules for the satellite regattas near ranger's home (one or two weren't available, and I realize they are the current rules, which might differ from the ones in effect at the time), as well as the 2005 qualifying times document, and I have yet to find any suggestion that a) Concept2 has any say in who gets chosen or b) that any regatta reserves the right to choose someone other than those who beat the qualifying time for their event by the widest margin. Who was the individual who got "his trip" and where and when did this happen?<br />

[[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-->I've looked at the current rules for the satellite regattas near ranger's home (one or two weren't available, and I realize they are the current rules, which might differ from the ones in effect at the time), as well as the 2005 qualifying times document, and I have yet to find any suggestion that a) Concept2 has any say in who gets chosen or that any regatta reserves the right to choose someone other than those who beat the qualifying time for their event by the widest margin. Who was the individual who got "his trip" and where and when did this happen?<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Selection for a trip to the CRASH-Bs is objective, exactly specified, and rigorously followed. <br /><br />The dispute has been about selection for the USIRT, which is still entirely subjective and entirely unspecified. <br /><br />Qualifying times are set and trials are scheduled. But membership on the team is determined by an unspecified selection procedure that can ignore entirely the relative quality of performances among rowers who qualify. It appears that, originally, some rowers didn't even have to do specified trials; they were just preferred for unspecified reasons.<br /><br />Not good, I think, and entirely unnecessary. Many more objective selection procedures would be possible: % of world record in a qualifying row, number of seconds under the qualifying standard in a qualifying row, and so forth. <br /><br />Qualifying standards for the USIRT also lack the regularly of the CRASH-B qualifying standards, which are based on the time of the third-place/bronze row in the preceding CRASH-Bs. <br /><br />In 2003, I was the only male to break a world record in my qualifying row (rowing under my qualifying standard by 6 seconds) but was not selected for the team. If this selection procedure has any resemblance to being fair, I am not sure what it could be. C2 was asked about this situation many times but declined to explain.<br /><br />I was also _already_ the CRASH-B champion and world record holder in my division at the time of the USIRT trial. Three weeks after my USIRT trial, I rowed at BIRC and broke the world record for a third time. In the end, I decided to go to EIRC in Paris on my money and won my race by 14 seconds. Many of the rowers selected for the USIRT didn't even row their USIRT qualifying standardes at ERIC. One didn't row at all. Two didn't even win their races. <br /><br />I am afraid I will never do another USIRT trial until C2 changes makes their selection procedure more objective. For the trial, I had to make weight, change my training to peak for the row and chance to make the team at that time, travel to Detroit in the early morning hours on the weekend, wait for three (unscheduled) hours for the USIRT official to arrive for the trial and weigh in, and (in the end) row the trial alone.<br /><br />Waste of time. Won't do it again. IMHO, a _very_ low affair. Nothing I would want to be associated with again. Such arbitrary disregard for effort and accomplishment by an organizing and sponsoring body in sport, I think, is inexcusable.<br /><br />ranger

[[old] dennish]

<!--QuoteBegin-ranger+Feb 17 2005, 02:50 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ranger @ Feb 17 2005, 02:50 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--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've looked at the current rules for the satellite regattas near ranger's home (one or two weren't available, and I realize they are the current rules, which might differ from the ones in effect at the time), as well as the 2005 qualifying times document, and I have yet to find any suggestion that a) Concept2 has any say in who gets chosen or that any regatta reserves the right to choose someone other than those who beat the qualifying time for their event by the widest margin. Who was the individual who got "his trip" and where and when did this happen?<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Selection for a trip to the CRASH-Bs is objective, exactly specified, and rigorously followed. <br /><br />The dispute has been about selection for the USIRT, which is still entirely subjective and entirely unspecified. <br /><br />Qualifying times are set and trials are scheduled. But membership on the team is determined by an unspecified selection procedure that can ignore entirely the relative quality of performances among rowers who qualify. It appears that, originally, some rowers didn't even have to do specified trials; they were just preferred for unspecified reasons.<br /><br />Not good, I think, and entirely unnecessary. Many more objective selection procedures would be possible: % of world record in a qualifying row, number of seconds under the qualifying standard in a qualifying row, and so forth. <br /><br />Qualifying standards for the USIRT also lack the regularly of the CRASH-B qualifying standards, which are based on the time of the third-place/bronze row in the preceding CRASH-Bs. <br /><br />In 2003, I was the only male to break a world record in my qualifying row (rowing under my qualifying standard by 6 seconds) but was not selected for the team. If this selection procedure has any resemblance to being fair, I am not sure what it could be. C2 was asked about this situation many times but declined to explain.<br /><br />I was also _already_ the CRASH-B champion and world record holder in my division at the time of the USIRT trial. Three weeks after my USIRT trial, I rowed at BIRC and broke the world record for a third time. In the end, I decided to go to EIRC in Paris on my money and won my race by 14 seconds. Many of the rowers selected for the USIRT didn't even row their USIRT qualifying standardes at ERIC. One didn't row at all. Two didn't even win their races. <br /><br />I am afraid I will never do another USIRT trial until C2 changes makes their selection procedure more objective. For the trial, I had to make weight, change my training to peak for the row and chance to make the team at that time, travel to Detroit in the early morning hours on the weekend, wait for three (unscheduled) hours for the USIRT official to arrive for the trial and weigh in, and (in the end) row the trial alone.<br /><br />Waste of time. Won't do it again. IMHO, a _very_ low affair. Nothing I would want to be associated with again. Such arbitrary disregard for effort and accomplishment by an organizing and sponsoring body in sport, I think, is inexcusable.<br /><br />ranger <br /> </td></tr></table><br />

[[old] dennish]

Rich, To my amazement I actually finally feel compelled to add some information to your continual rant about how you were screwed, as a rule I folow Rick's advice and put your posts on ignore. Of course you are entirely welcome to hold on to you opinion that some heinous foul was perpetrated on you, but I would ask that you at least entertain some other viewpoints. A couple of things you might want to consider before you go on again about how you were slighted. <br />1) As a coach for 24 years of team and individual sports I quite often did not keep the most gifted or talented players. Sometimes they were just too much of a problem to keep around; attitude, morale of the rest, disruptive training, differences of approach to the game than myself or teammates, character (I wouldn't keep an all state player because he stole an exam and then compounded it by lying) No one ever said that the selection process for any of the USIRTeams was to be solely on performance. No coach worth his or her title would put together a team soley on the numbers, merit is not only measured in minutes and seconds. At the time you were passed over you had made a signifcant amount of people less than sympathetic to you, with your swagger and pontificating on training, making and breaking records, and on an on. I would also add to the thought process I'm asking you to consider, that you did and can still do some pretty health risky things to make weight. <br />2) You were not the only one burned by you not being selected. I was not chosen for the simple reason that they didn't take you. No way I could or will ever be able to put up the numbers you do, but still I had met the qualilfying standard for the team, and I might add by a bigger margin than you (ahhh the glories of altitude adjustments) but when the decsion was made not to take you they certainly couldn't take me. So the position that you created for yourself by your forum zealotry worked against you as well as others. So forgive me if I find you wailing about the injustice of it all rather empty. <br />3) Step back a moment. Rich, its indoor rowing for Gods sake. Rowing itself is far down the majority's list of sport, then this is a sub-group of rowing, below sweep and scull, national, international, masters, adaptive etc,. etc. etc. There is not one of us out there that has not had to explain where they get enough water to have an event indoors. The whole CRASH-B event grew out of some tongue in cheek non event of bored, weather induced indoor bound rowers. Perspective man, it sure does a lot for the soul. <br />Keep training, keep breaking records but give it up on the evil C2 empire. The bed you laid down in was of your own making. Accept some responsibility for your words and attitudes.

[[old] John Rupp]

<!--QuoteBegin-dennish+Feb 17 2005, 03:06 PM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(dennish @ Feb 17 2005, 03:06 PM)</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--QuoteEBegin-->As a coach for 24 years of team and individual sports I quite often did not keep the most gifted or talented players. </td></tr></table><br />It is sad that a coach would take it upon himself to play favorites, such leading to expectations of favoritism, probably why you except the same with team selection.<br /><br />Ranger has "always" been very courteous and helpful to everyone on the forum, even or especially his critics, going to great lengths to share his training methods and philosophies.<br /><br />I have not once seen you do the same.<br /><br />You have much to learn from Ranger about character, hard work and performance.

[[old] GeorgeD]

Ranger I guess the question is not if you would try out again but whether you will actually ever get to that point where you would be in a position to - I hope so as we would then be able to judge the merits of your training in a measureable way.... I guess the best way for you to make your point would be to dominate your division but you have repeatedly said that is not your goal (that is your sculling) and that you just do this for fun..... <br /><br />John, I am not sure why you are fighting Rangers battles for him or even getting involved but your reply to Dennis does nothing to clarify anything, and to be honest your comments are belittleing to 'you' and just undermine any credibility you may have.<br /><br />Dennis I dont know the background but I would agree with the assesment that no one - no matter how good they are is worth taking into a team environment if they dont know where the bounds of thier individuality lie. ... just not worth it.<br /><br />As I started this thread (and it had nothing to do with Ranger or selection for USIRT) I would just like to say that none of my criticism of the qualifying standards set for me in NZ to get funding by C2 should be mis-construed to imply that I think they owe us / me as individuals anything in the way of subsidised travel. Those travel subsidies are freely given and I accept that as such that they could be stopped tomorrow and no one would have the right to complain as C2 are in business and have to justify any expenditure. All I ask is that if they do have a policy it is as consistant as it can be allowing for variances in travel costs on the global scale.<br /><br />George

[[old] John Rupp]

George, I am not sure why you are fighting Dennis' battles for him or even getting involved but your reply to Dennis does nothing to clarify anything, and to be honest your comments are belittleing to 'you' and just undermine any credibility you may have.<br /><br />I will agree though, that since Dennis doesn't know his place he shouldn't be selected for any teams, especially not in place of anyone who is faster than him.

[[old] GeorgeD]

So thats how th ignore Poster works, now I know for the future. Tks for the advice John I have taken it on board and implemented. No need to reply of course as I cant see it.<br /><br />Kindest regards George

[[old] Rocket Roy]

What is it with you guys over here?<br /><br />The atmosphere and tension on this board is incredible, compared to the UK site which seems in comparision to be all fun and support. PHEW!