Age categories, USRowing--again

[R.C. Sleigh]

Some of you may remember my effort two years ago to add three age categories to World Rowing and US Rowing. I failed completely with World Rowing, but with your support we were successful in having the following three age groups added to US Rowing's Master age categories for indoor rowing:
L. 90 to 94, M. 95 to 99, N. 100 and over. And K was changed to 85 to 89 from 85 and over.
A proposal now being considered by US Rowing would delete all three of those categories, thus making 85 and over the last category again.
The period for feedback on rule change proposals closes on October 31, 2024.
Feedback should be emailed to: Hugh.McAdam@USRowing.org.
To view the proposed rule change, go to USRowing.org, scroll down to "News" and click on September 30, 2024, "2025
Proposed Rules of Rowing Changes".
There are two proposed changes concerning classification by age. Only one is of current concern. The rule proposed to be changed is: 11.402
Classification by Age, e) Master.

My reason for strongly opposing adoption of the proposed rule change is my main reason for proposing the adoption of categories L, M and N-fairness. It is clear that the athletic capability required for competing in indoor rowing diminishes with age, and I can personally assure you that that is especially true in the nineties. It is unfair to require those in their nineties to compete against those in their eighties. The number of those treated unfairly by deleting categories L, M and N is small. But obvious unfairness is not removed by noting that the number of those so treated is small--especially when the unfairness is so easily remedied.
The only reason cited in the proposal for accepting the proposed rule change is that it would align indoor categories with those currently governing on the water rowing. But there are two ways to bring about the desired alignment. Since the reasons for favoring retaining the L, M and N categories apply as much to Masters OTW rowing as to indoor rowing, my recommendation is obvious--add those categories to the rules governing Masters OTW rowing. I will make such a proposal in the next round of proposals.

I hope Hugh McAdam hears from some of you. Bob Sleigh

[Gorow]

It would take USRA almost no effort to keep these age categories. Why limit competition/participation in any way? Isn't age a part of USRA's stated goal of inclusivity? Further, the rationale that indoor and outdoor age categories should match is lame: They are very different athletic endeavors. In the future, I may feel less comfortable on the water. I would still like to have an indoor competition option, against my peers.

Thanks to Bob for bringing this up. I will send a more detailed note to Mr. McAdam at USRA.

[R.C. Sleigh]

Here is an improved road map to the proposed rule change, which I oppose, and hope you do as well.

Go to USRowing.org. Insert "2025 Proposed Rules of Rowing Changes" in the search bar on the home page.
Follow the directions to an index to the proposed changes.
Go to page 18. 11-402 Classification by Age, (e) Master.
When you reach the proposed text note that categories L, M and N have been deleted.

[R.C. Sleigh]

Some with whom I have spoken suggested that retaining the age categories L, M and N, as I recommend, would perhaps add to the number of events required at a regatta. No. Each event ('flight', as it is often called) at the typical indoor regatta may consist of a number of races going on at the same time. This is usually the case with flights composed primarily of those in the upper age categories. Suppose we have a flight composed of those from 50 to 100. Every person in that flight will be racing in an age category covering only five years except those from 90 to 100, if the proposed elimination of categories L, M and N is accepted.

Totally unfair. And what is the downside of eliminating this unfairness by retaining the categories L, M and N? Perhaps a small amount of clerical work, a small sum to pay for awards, and--the only consideration noted in the proposal to eliminate those categories--some abstract notion of the importance of alignment with current OTW categories.

[reevio]

That is a strange stance to just make a big "and the rest of you" group.

Late response, but i've also dropped your man an email to oppose the change. GL!