Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Locals
VintageBMX.com > BMX NOW > BMX Racing
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
JAF2
I travel weekly on business and usually ship my bike to get some track time in the cities I visit. BMX people are a different breed and I enjoy meeting them and making new friends. What I have found at most of the tracks I visit is dwindling moto counts - usually around 10 motos. I feel the local scene is the key to introducing new riders to the sport and finding ways to pump it up should be a priority.

Should USABMX require a minimum number of locals to qualify for a NAG plate?
nigelnyc
I think 5 should be a fair amount...if people are really interested in getting a national number than it should be a non-issue but I guess you could argue both sides. I don't think the locals should exceed more than 10% towards your national total though.
CoopersDad
Rockford BMX had 72 moto's at their state qualifier last weekend + Strider. Most tracks here in Illinois and Wisconsin are up 10+ moto's weekly! Local races/points have nothing to do with national races/points rankings and should not have. An extremely low percentage of racers do not race locals in favor of racing nationals, this debate has been going on for decades and is null.

The real reason any local participation suffers is due to lack of commitment from the parents and or guardians to get the racers to the track on a continual basis.
JAF2
QUOTE (CoopersDad @ Jun 1 2012, 06:04 PM) *
Rockford BMX had 72 moto's at their state qualifier last weekend + Strider. Most tracks here in Illinois and Wisconsin are up 10+ moto's weekly! Local races/points have nothing to do with national races/points rankings and should not have. An extremely low percentage of racers do not race locals in favor of racing nationals, this debate has been going on for decades and is null.

The real reason any local participation suffers is due to lack of commitment from the parents and or guardians to get the racers to the track on a continual basis.



A 72 moto State Qualifier is strong and the riders who registered and raced it must have felt that there is a value in earning a State Plate.

I originally raced in FL for many years and the FL State Series required 8 local races, along with the Qualifiers, and the Championship. It was common to exceed 200 motos at both the Qualifiers and at the Championship. In addition to the required 8 locals, each local was scored, so a rider wanted to get 8 "perfects" and would race locals the entire State Season in an attempt to cap out. Some riders would race at other than their local track in an attempt to either capture another "perfect" or spoil a competitors chance at getting one. Local races were always in the 25-30 moto count range insuring that riders would race in their actual class.

As a rider, a parent of a rider, and a Team owner, I felt the level of competition was stronger and the rider/moto count was greater when the local race had a value other than a dust collecting trophy or saver stamps. Riders progressed at a greater rate because they raced more often and pushed themselves to win.

Would requiring locals to earn a State, Redline Cup, or NAG ranking increase the local moto counts, increase the competition, and progress the sport while attracting new riders?
Bikemonkeys
I think taking NAG riders out of the district was a bad idea. While a NAG number is their main goal a District Top 10 was a reward that many worked tword. Besides a almost NAG rider blows a leading district rider out of contention with just a missed main at Grands.
Bmx Prof
Nashville is steadily pulling 25-30 motos at local races and double that at the bigger races. We get 50-75 riders just at practice on tuesday and thursday nights. I'd say that our track is the healthiest that it has been in the last 15 years. We have a good number or NAG riders and Pros at practice... They may or may not race locally, but it doesn't seem to have hurt our numbers.
ILBMX
QUOTE (CoopersDad @ Jun 1 2012, 06:04 PM) *
Rockford BMX had 72 moto's at their state qualifier last weekend + Strider. Most tracks here in Illinois and Wisconsin are up 10+ moto's weekly! Local races/points have nothing to do with national races/points rankings and should not have. An extremely low percentage of racers do not race locals in favor of racing nationals, this debate has been going on for decades and is null.

The real reason any local participation suffers is due to lack of commitment from the parents and or guardians to get the racers to the track on a continual basis.



Right on the head.
thebondtrader55
I really think that the tie with the Nationals is hurting the local scenes.

It seems to me now that the SX/O thing is light years away from what average riders can or want to do. The competition does seem to be doing OK however for the folks qualified. Love to watch it!

Nationals seem to be doing fine but they are also contested on fairly radical tracks. Big fan of the National circuit!

Even many/ most of the local tracks are fairly advanced today. They are quite a bit more difficult than the last time that BMX moto counts at the local level boomed. I still think that Mike C. had something when he discussed his BMX lite idea awhile back.

I know that many will say that the local tracks today are fine as they are and I will go along with whatever the membership thinks is OK. But it really puts it into perspective when you consider that Gary Ellis, Billy Griggs, and the other legendary Pros from BITD never rode a National track regularly that was as hard as the local tracks are today.

Not sure that the 3 levels do or should have very much in common with each other if numbers is the goal.

All the Best!
Bikemonkeys
QUOTE (thebondtrader55 @ Jun 1 2012, 10:46 PM) *
I really think that the tie with the Nationals is hurting the local scenes.

It seems to me now that the SX/O thing is light years away from what average riders can or want to do. The competition does seem to be doing OK however for the folks qualified. Love to watch it!

Nationals seem to be doing fine but they are also contested on fairly radical tracks. Big fan of the National circuit!

Even many/ most of the local tracks are fairly advanced today. They are quite a bit more difficult than the last time that BMX moto counts at the local level boomed. I still think that Mike C. had something when he discussed his BMX lite idea awhile back.

I know that many will say that the local tracks today are fine as they are and I will go along with whatever the membership thinks is OK. But it really puts it into perspective when you consider that Gary Ellis, Billy Griggs, and the other legendary Pros from BITD never rode a National track regularly that was as hard as the local tracks are today.

Not sure that the 3 levels do or should have very much in common with each other if numbers is the goal.

All the Best!

I think you have a good point. I like the French idea of having to lines on one track. I kinda started doing that this year, just need to adjust somethings.
ItryTOfly
You must race LOCALS to earn a NATIONAL title? I see what you want to do but that doesn't even really make sense.

Honestly though, I don't see why so many people are intent on getting the national caliber riders to race locally. We need to increase the local rider base by bringing in new riders who want to be there (opposed to "forcing" riders to be there). If enough new riders are recruited, the state and regional series will become exciting enough that nationals will only be left to the elite riders.
JAF2
QUOTE (Bmx Prof @ Jun 1 2012, 09:48 PM) *
Nashville is steadily pulling 25-30 motos at local races and double that at the bigger races. We get 50-75 riders just at practice on tuesday and thursday nights. I'd say that our track is the healthiest that it has been in the last 15 years. We have a good number or NAG riders and Pros at practice... They may or may not race locally, but it doesn't seem to have hurt our numbers.



Sounds like an excellent local program. Ramping up to a National only helps. My nephew just got into the sport and Music City is his home track. He is racing at the National today along with a few other of our riders.

Concerning local rider/moto counts, I don't know if MCB is an exception. I have not seen 25-30 motos for local racing at any of the tracks I have visited. I am sure there are some, but the feedback I am getting from the TO's I speak with is that local rider count continues to go down.

Best of luck to your and your Team today.
Chris C.
I live in OH and am very fortunate to have what I believe to be alot of tracks to choose from. I am an hour or more from most, so that is my challenge with getting local track time. However, I look at our NE Ohio area and then at SW Ohio - the areas where we have the greatest concentration of tracks. Is it possible there is TOO much BMX available?

When I compare to other organized sports our kids can choose from, the options are clearly limited and defined. My son is 7 and playing baseball for the first time. There are no options. He practices 1 night a week and has 2 games. Compared to BMX, most local tracks offer a practice night and a race night. Add in that 3 tracks within an hour to 90 minutes are doing a the same thing. Eventhough they may be coordinating the best the can to not overstep on each other, how many days a week is a family going to go to a local BMX race or practice? So it becomes very challenging for one tracks riders to support another track, especially if the family is involved in any other activity outside of BMX.

I think our rider count in OH could support 30+ moto locals any most of our tracks, especially on weekends. But, even within our sport, there is a lot of choice to be made as to when and where you spend your ride time.

Personally, I have friends that run tracks or call different tracks their home track, but with my drive and other activities, I can realistically only hit a few locals a month. And I spread that around the best I can to support my friends efforts and create diversity in my riding.
JAF2
QUOTE (thebondtrader55 @ Jun 1 2012, 10:46 PM) *
I really think that the tie with the Nationals is hurting the local scenes.

It seems to me now that the SX/O thing is light years away from what average riders can or want to do. The competition does seem to be doing OK however for the folks qualified. Love to watch it!

Nationals seem to be doing fine but they are also contested on fairly radical tracks. Big fan of the National circuit!

Even many/ most of the local tracks are fairly advanced today. They are quite a bit more difficult than the last time that BMX moto counts at the local level boomed. I still think that Mike C. had something when he discussed his BMX lite idea awhile back.

I know that many will say that the local tracks today are fine as they are and I will go along with whatever the membership thinks is OK. But it really puts it into perspective when you consider that Gary Ellis, Billy Griggs, and the other legendary Pros from BITD never rode a National track regularly that was as hard as the local tracks are today.

Not sure that the 3 levels do or should have very much in common with each other if numbers is the goal.

All the Best!



Interesting perspective. I think we may need to start a thread addressing the difficulty of today's tracks and how that may be affecting local rider count. I would also be curious as to how the SX tracks impact a Pro rider's shelf life. It seems to me that rider injuries today are more severe at both ends of the spectrum, the local and National level, but I have no data to back up this theory.

As a rider who has raced on and off for the past 34 years, I have seen first hand the progression in terms of difficulty of the tracks. There are some tracks that I would not race on or practice hard on due to my skill set (Oldsmar comes to mind). Why are many of the tracks becoming so difficult? Do the people that build these tracks race (maybe a few do)? Is for the spectators? It will be tough to turn BMX racing into a spectator sport (beyond family and friends in the stands) when you have to compete with things like Nitro Circus. What direction will our sport take?
JAF2
QUOTE (ItryTOfly @ Jun 1 2012, 11:00 PM) *
You must race LOCALS to earn a NATIONAL title? I see what you want to do but that doesn't even really make sense.

Honestly though, I don't see why so many people are intent on getting the national caliber riders to race locally. We need to increase the local rider base by bringing in new riders who want to be there (opposed to "forcing" riders to be there). If enough new riders are recruited, the state and regional series will become exciting enough that nationals will only be left to the elite riders.



I see your point. When at a National, I like to watch the most exciting classes which usually are the Pro's and older experts. I think new riders would also enjoy seeing expert level riders going full tilt on the local level. Racing for something that has value to them - qualifying and or earning points toward a NAG plate can only enhance the local scene.

You certainly hit the point dead on, enhancing the local scene will increase rider recruitment and cause a trickle up effect as some riders will want to move to the next level and race the state and National series.
starch
I think increasing the rider count by requiring NAG riders to race locals can only help the sport.
thebondtrader55
Thanks for all the great input.

I think what we may have now is a mix that is not achieving exactly the thing we want which is more riders. BMX racing kinda reminds me of a three legged stool - SX/O racing, National racing, and the local racing/series.

The SX/O is taken care of by international and Pro sanctioning bodies who seem to be doing fine. However, it requires an insane skill set that not many can or will aspire too. The injury issue too is problematic but it is PRO racing with a capital P!

The Nationals are doing fine and represent the cash cow for the ABA. If there is anyway to do a better job here than the ABA does I can't imagine it. IMO they are as professional at this as anything that exists in sport. I can't remember the last time that my family left a National with anything but a smile on our faces. The travel and cost are out there but if you can afford the cost and wear and tear it's a pretty good bang for your buck.

The local scenes seem to be the weak leg of the stool. I've been harsh on the ABA in the past saying that "they have had their chance" but in all honesty it's hard to imagine very much they haven't tried. But through no fault of anyone's the sport seems to have blurred the lines between the three legs of the stool when they in fact have very little in common. In football the field is flat, in baseball the field is flat, in basketball the court is flat - the facilities themselves are not obstacles for the participants. In our sport the facility is as much an obstacle to the rider as the other guys/gals in the motos are. If the tracks were moderated the injuries would go down to such a level that they wouldn't even warrant talking about.

It seems to me that Bikemonkeys has a great idea - another line on the track that is, by design, less difficult. This would tie in with Mike's idea about BMX lite on less difficult tracks. This is not meant to disparage the participants who want to "go big or go home" in anyway. Our sport will always be extreme and that suits me fine. But we need to make sure that everyone who wants to be part of our sport can do so.

I think Mike's term of BMX lite is a good way to describe a "back to the future" way to get more riders. We've been racing since the 70's and I know what it looked like when the sport had it's dynamic growth periods - the local tracks were absolutely clogged with novices and intermediates! It can happen again but we have to give them a place to race where they aren't scared off when they see it and aren't hurt when they try it. And who knows? Some of these kids may move up and be our next Olympic champ!

There is no reason for friction between the SX, Nationals, or the local scenes - all three can be supportive of the sport as a whole. Pretty darn exciting times for BMX racing right now, all we need are a few adjustments here and there to maximize our potential!

Thanks All!
JAF2
QUOTE (thebondtrader55 @ Jun 2 2012, 08:37 AM) *
Thanks for all the great input.

I think what we may have now is a mix that is not achieving exactly the thing we want which is more riders. BMX racing kinda reminds me of a three legged stool - SX/O racing, National racing, and the local racing/series.

The SX/O is taken care of by international and Pro sanctioning bodies who seem to be doing fine. However, it requires an insane skill set that not many can or will aspire too. The injury issue too is problematic but it is PRO racing with a capital P!

The Nationals are doing fine and represent the cash cow for the ABA. If there is anyway to do a better job here than the ABA does I can't imagine it. IMO they are as professional at this as anything that exists in sport. I can't remember the last time that my family left a National with anything but a smile on our faces. The travel and cost are out there but if you can afford the cost and wear and tear it's a pretty good bang for your buck.

The local scenes seem to be the weak leg of the stool. I've been harsh on the ABA in the past saying that "they have had their chance" but in all honesty it's hard to imagine very much they haven't tried. But through no fault of anyone's the sport seems to have blurred the lines between the three legs of the stool when they in fact have very little in common. In football the field is flat, in baseball the field is flat, in basketball the court is flat - the facilities themselves are not obstacles for the participants. In our sport the facility is as much an obstacle to the rider as the other guys/gals in the motos are. If the tracks were moderated the injuries would go down to such a level that they wouldn't even warrant talking about.

It seems to me that Bikemonkeys has a great idea - another line on the track that is, by design, less difficult. This would tie in with Mike's idea about BMX lite on less difficult tracks. This is not meant to disparage the participants who want to "go big or go home" in anyway. Our sport will always be extreme and that suits me fine. But we need to make sure that everyone who wants to be part of our sport can do so.

I think Mike's term of BMX lite is a good way to describe a "back to the future" way to get more riders. We've been racing since the 70's and I know what it looked like when the sport had it's dynamic growth periods - the local tracks were absolutely clogged with novices and intermediates! It can happen again but we have to give them a place to race where they aren't scared off when they see it and aren't hurt when they try it. And who knows? Some of these kids may move up and be our next Olympic champ!

There is no reason for friction between the SX, Nationals, or the local scenes - all three can be supportive of the sport as a whole. Pretty darn exciting times for BMX racing right now, all we need are a few adjustments here and there to maximize our potential!

Thanks All!



Agreed on all points. My only repetitive comment would be that the local scene feeds the State, Redline Cup, National scene, and eventually the SX/O. To your point, maybe the new kid that races for the first time this weekend, becomes the the next Olympic champ.
thebondtrader55
QUOTE (JAF2 @ Jun 2 2012, 07:55 AM) *
Agreed on all points. My only repetitive comment would be that the local scene feeds the State, Redline Cup, National scene, and eventually the SX/O. To your point, maybe the new kid that races for the first time this weekend, becomes the the next Olympic champ.

Right J.

Everything starts at the local level and the riders should be able to progress naturally to whatever their desire and skill level is. The local level should always be the huge base for everything above it.

Thanks
JAF2
QUOTE (JAF2 @ Jun 1 2012, 04:27 PM) *
I travel weekly on business and usually ship my bike to get some track time in the cities I visit. BMX people are a different breed and I enjoy meeting them and making new friends. What I have found at most of the tracks I visit is dwindling moto counts - usually around 10 motos. I feel the local scene is the key to introducing new riders to the sport and finding ways to pump it up should be a priority.

Should USABMX require a minimum number of locals to qualify for a NAG plate?



Voting so far - 70% in favor of a required minimum number of locals to qualify for a NAG plate.
bmxundergrounddotcom
The easiest answer I've found to getting those kids to race is to throw 25 bucks in to start a money open.

Top 3 get 50, 30, 20 percent.

All of a sudden, Joe Expert doesn't mind staying if he can make even 20 or 30 bucks.
thebondtrader55
QUOTE (bmxundergrounddotcom @ Jun 3 2012, 04:39 PM) *
The easiest answer I've found to getting those kids to race is to throw 25 bucks in to start a money open.

Top 3 get 50, 30, 20 percent.

All of a sudden, Joe Expert doesn't mind staying if he can make even 20 or 30 bucks.

B, I hate to even write this because I know it's not the answer long term.

But some of the strongest racing I've ever seen is a Pro/Am where the kids get to do a rideout and there's 100 bucks or so in the kitty.

We had 4 full racks of 16 year olds to A Pros before the last Grands and it was some of the most exciting, in your face BMX racing I ever saw!

Thanks
Elvis
'Round here we're having one of our best seasons ever. Add to that it's not by chance, as the track operators have been paying attention to sanction advice.

Which is to say I'm not seeing the problem you point out.

Adding further that making the rule book thicker for number plate/ points hasn't worked out yet. You're essentially asserting that taking an incredibly minor percent of BMXers and putting an increased load on them will somehow (*airquote*) "fix" (/quotes) the situation at hand. In my experience it won't.

/broke record

Recruiting riders ups local counts. Period.

/record
thebondtrader55
Yea, I just don't see that the SX, Nationals, locals have that much if anything in common.

I don't know what can be done at this point to get NAG's to race local again. As bad as I hate it, that horse left the barn long ago.

IMO the problem is with novies, intermediates, and average experts. I firmly believe that these are the people that will fill out the moto counts one day.

All the Best

SirMarco
I understand that local racing is the heart of this sport. I do not feel that you need a minimum number of local races to hold your NAG number. Many of the top NAG riders spend a majority of their time going from national to national and are not around for many local races. I know this doesn't apply to all of them though.
If they did require it then they should not pull them out of the district points system when they earn the top 10 NAG place.
Army125r
I think it would be a good idea to have locals be the first qualifying step to Nationals.

We can put our recruiting techniques out there but in some areas you just won't see the return on your investment. In the last few years, our track has seen moto counts anywhere from 8-27 per race. The average is around 16-17. The majority of these riders are at the novice and inter levels. Our experts are no longer. Just like our cruiser classes.

The newbies are learning from some of us older riders and from the only two experts left at our track. It's pretty exciting to watch the experts during practice / warm up. The new riders sometimes watch in amazement with the skill these riders have. Right there is your advertising.

We can throw money at the situation as Nick mentioned earlier, but sometimes that just isn't enough. Making track changes helps keep the "stale feeling" out of the picture. But even that isn't enough.

If the locals were to become part of the stepping stone for the national series qualifying, you would have to see a decrease in the amount of nationals for this to work. But we all know that isn't reality. That's the cash cow for the sanctioning body.

So, where do you go to improve rider counts or bring the experts back to your track?

Jeff
JAF2
QUOTE (Army125r @ Jun 4 2012, 09:22 AM) *
I think it would be a good idea to have locals be the first qualifying step to Nationals.

We can put our recruiting techniques out there but in some areas you just won't see the return on your investment. In the last few years, our track has seen moto counts anywhere from 8-27 per race. The average is around 16-17. The majority of these riders are at the novice and inter levels. Our experts are no longer. Just like our cruiser classes.

The newbies are learning from some of us older riders and from the only two experts left at our track. It's pretty exciting to watch the experts during practice / warm up. The new riders sometimes watch in amazement with the skill these riders have. Right there is your advertising.

We can throw money at the situation as Nick mentioned earlier, but sometimes that just isn't enough. Making track changes helps keep the "stale feeling" out of the picture. But even that isn't enough.

If the locals were to become part of the stepping stone for the national series qualifying, you would have to see a decrease in the amount of nationals for this to work. But we all know that isn't reality. That's the cash cow for the sanctioning body.

So, where do you go to improve rider counts or bring the experts back to your track?

Jeff



Jeff, you and I are on the same page. I have donated some very nice items to several tracks to fund ProAm Opens. When these events are promoted, there is an increase in moto count for that particular day but falls off the very next weekend.

I am really trying to look at this from a TO's perspective. It gets really tough to hold a race with less than 20 riders showing up for a local. Not to mention that it is not much fun for a new rider to race out of class/age.

Thanks for your input.
JAF2
QUOTE (Elvis @ Jun 3 2012, 07:58 PM) *
'Round here we're having one of our best seasons ever. Add to that it's not by chance, as the track operators have been paying attention to sanction advice.

Which is to say I'm not seeing the problem you point out.

Adding further that making the rule book thicker for number plate/ points hasn't worked out yet. You're essentially asserting that taking an incredibly minor percent of BMXers and putting an increased load on them will somehow (*airquote*) "fix" (/quotes) the situation at hand. In my experience it won't.

/broke record

Recruiting riders ups local counts. Period.

/record



I have not visted your particular track but it sounds like you guys are running a great program and enjoying a strong season - congratulations.

At the tracks I have visited in the states of FL, GA, SC, NC, TX, OH, TN, NV, AZ, and CA I have seen first hand the weak moto counts I speak of. In further conversations with the TO's, I am getting feedback that local moto counts are diminishing.
Elvis
Of course there's another side to this (and based on my local experience): Our NAG heros come out (and toy with us like a cat with a captured bird).

They're mostly out there to get some gates, get some training laps in. The ultimate point being they're not there to race anyone, because they're faster than anyone. But then that's why they compete at the NAG level, the locals just aren't fast enough for them anymore.

But your proposal raises the bar for NAG, in turn putting a greater burden on the NAG rider, for what amounts to -- with rare exception -- just going out and flying the flag. Show up, transfer in one round, win the main, load up and go home.

Why? To show the noobs they have a long way to go before they're "good?"

To add maybe, at best, one percent more riders to that evening's moto sheet?

To increase the record keeping burden?

To make it harder to get a NAG plate?

All due respect, I'm not seeing the logic here.
thebondtrader55
It is an odd situation that the Nags and the Pro's are, for all intents and purposes, irrelevant. I wonder if the factories and the sanction have realized this. They have reduced cash flows, if they have any at all, and yet their "paid" employees either through choice or direction refuse to go where their customers are. Again, its hard to figure out if this is a plan or it just happened like this.

Weird!

You know, one of the easiest, oldest, and most effective business techniques that still works well is to look back in the past to see what your firm was doing when it was booming. Compare the two and see what is different now. Simply put, just identify what worked in the past and do more of it.

This is what troubles me - the fact that today's BMX looks nothing at all like it did in past periods when the sport boomed. The Pro's don't come to the track, the Nags can't be bothered, you can't bribe a top bike shop to carry BMX racing inventory, and money flow to the Pro's is bad. See the people, see the people, see the people - or see the customers, see the customers, see the customers.

Even though SX and National racing is very high quality and not very related to "average" racing anymore it's imperative for the firms to maintain a high profile at the potentially huge local level. When the company reps aren't connecting with the one thing that could expand sales that can't be good.

All the Best

PS : If the pro's and the Nags can't get out to their local tracks once or twice a week to "see the people/customers" while they practice then why would I spend my corporate dollars on them exactly? I do know that BITD when Pros ( and some Nags) made a salary that all but a very few can dream of today you could see them weekly at the tracks in Cali and Texas. Seeing the customers.
JAF2
QUOTE (Elvis @ Jun 4 2012, 12:10 PM) *
Of course there's another side to this (and based on my local experience): Our NAG heros come out (and toy with us like a cat with a captured bird).

They're mostly out there to get some gates, get some training laps in. The ultimate point being they're not there to race anyone, because they're faster than anyone. But then that's why they compete at the NAG level, the locals just aren't fast enough for them anymore.

But your proposal raises the bar for NAG, in turn putting a greater burden on the NAG rider, for what amounts to -- with rare exception -- just going out and flying the flag. Show up, transfer in one round, win the main, load up and go home.

Why? To show the noobs they have a long way to go before they're "good?"

To add maybe, at best, one percent more riders to that evening's moto sheet?

To increase the record keeping burden?

To make it harder to get a NAG plate?

All due respect, I'm not seeing the logic here.



Fair enough, but I am not really talking about the 1% (if that is indeed the correct percentage of NAG ranked riders vs. the general USABMX membership population). If we are only talking about the NAG ranked riders from the previous year, the impact of "forcing" them to qualify by racing locals would have a minimal numerical effect on moto counts.

Increasing the record keeping burden? Any business that says it does not want to increase transactions to reduce it's record keeping burden would be out of business. Not to mention, even an old guy like me knows they use this new fangled thing called a computer to keep records.

I am suggesting that ANYONE who aspires to aquire a NAG ranking, or qualify for the Redline Cup, or race a state series (many states do require a minimum number of locals to qualify for the State Championship) , should be required to race a minimum number of locals per season.

There are plenty (and I see them at every track), of non ranked NAG riders who show up and practice, socialize, maybe volunteer and leave without racing. This of course is their choice. These guys are good riders, they may or may not be Experts, but they are not NAG ranked and still don't race. If they all did race, then they would have someone to race against. Not really sure why they don't race. Maybe it just isn't cool to race a local. Maybe it's not worth the reward (trophy/saver stamps). Or maybe they don't want to get hurt. Only they can chime in and tell us.

Basic logic. If riders aspiring to earn any level ranking beyond District, such as State, Redline Cup, or NAG were required to race a set number of locals per season, would local rider/moto counts increase? Logic says yes.

The local scene is the lifeblood of the sport and from the looks of the moto counts, we are on life support. Why would USABMX require riders to race a minimum number of locals to qualify for a NAG, Redline, or State? To increase local moto counts. Or we can only focus on the big show and watch the sport we love die on the vine.
JAF2
QUOTE (thebondtrader55 @ Jun 4 2012, 05:09 PM) *
It is an odd situation that the Nags and the Pro's are, for all intents and purposes, irrelevant. I wonder if the factories and the sanction have realized this. They have reduced cash flows, if they have any at all, and yet their "paid" employees either through choice or direction refuse to go where their customers are. Again, its hard to figure out if this is a plan or it just happened like this.

Weird!

You know, one of the easiest, oldest, and most effective business techniques that still works well is to look back in the past to see what your firm was doing when it was booming. Compare the two and see what is different now. Simply put, just identify what worked in the past and do more of it.

This is what troubles me - the fact that today's BMX looks nothing at all like it did in past periods when the sport boomed. The Pro's don't come to the track, the Nags can't be bothered, you can't bribe a top bike shop to carry BMX racing inventory, and money flow to the Pro's is bad. See the people, see the people, see the people - or see the customers, see the customers, see the customers.

Even though SX and National racing is very high quality and not very related to "average" racing anymore it's imperative for the firms to maintain a high profile at the potentially huge local level. When the company reps aren't connecting with the one thing that could expand sales that can't be good.

All the Best

PS : If the pro's and the Nags can't get out to their local tracks once or twice a week to "see the people/customers" while they practice then why would I spend my corporate dollars on them exactly? I do know that BITD when Pros ( and some Nags) made a salary that all but a very few can dream of today you could see them weekly at the tracks in Cali and Texas. Seeing the customers.



Another angle. I am pumped!
Bill Curtin
QUOTE (JAF2 @ Jun 4 2012, 04:43 PM) *
Fair enough, but I am not really talking about the 1% (if that is indeed the correct percentage of NAG ranked riders vs. the general USABMX membership population). If we are only talking about the NAG ranked riders from the previous year, the impact of "forcing" them to qualify by racing locals would have a minimal numerical effect on moto counts.


What you are proposing would add no more than 1% ridership to a local track in a perfect scenario. Being that there are 360 tracks and about 308 riders in the NAG point standings, your proposal would add less than one rider per track. Pro riders, to an infinitesimally small amount

While the thought can be commended, the logic is not there that it will fix the problem. The problem is, why does a rider come to a track, try it once or twice and never come back. Answer that question and you've doubled ridership overnight.
The rest are tire kickers and while we can throw all sorts of money at the problem, it isn't broken. It is a matter of a sport that is meant not for everyone.

My parents bought my brother several racing bikes. They took him to races, he had me to look up to to and yet, BMX was not a fit for him. He was successful at lacrosse, baseball, and hockey. BMX didn't spin his top. It did mine and I stuck with it for most of my life. Why is it that two brothers had different interests when we were both brought up in the same family with the she mindset?

Forcing national level riders is not the fix. Growing your ridership is. National level BMXrs do not race locals because there is no challenge for them. Same for a major league sports athlete playing pick up games.

JAF2
QUOTE (Bill Curtin @ Jun 4 2012, 07:14 PM) *
What you are proposing would add no more than 1% ridership to a local track in a perfect scenario. Being that there are 360 tracks and about 308 riders in the NAG point standings, your proposal would add less than one rider per track. Pro riders, to an infinitesimally small amount

While the thought can be commended, the logic is not there that it will fix the problem. The problem is, why does a rider come to a track, try it once or twice and never come back. Answer that question and you've doubled ridership overnight.
The rest are tire kickers and while we can throw all sorts of money at the problem, it isn't broken. It is a matter of a sport that is meant not for everyone.

My parents bought my brother several racing bikes. They took him to races, he had me to look up to to and yet, BMX was not a fit for him. He was successful at lacrosse, baseball, and hockey. BMX didn't spin his top. It did mine and I stuck with it for most of my life. Why is it that two brothers had different interests when we were both brought up in the same family with the she mindset?

Forcing national level riders is not the fix. Growing your ridership is. National level BMXrs do not race locals because there is no challenge for them. Same for a major league sports athlete playing pick up games.



Based on the math you are 100% correct, less than 1 NAG rider per track will have no impact on moto counts. But there are many "other" riders who are not in the NAG point standings, who choose not to race locals but do race their closest National. Collectively, this is a much larger group. Would the perceived value of a local race increase if A) their was more competition and cool.gif the race counted toward a higher goal?
edwards
Would the pre-race double at permanent tracks be considered a local? I understand the issue but maybe it should be up to the riders sponsor to mandate local racing for better exposure for rider, team, and kids looking up to said NAG rider.
Elvis
Okay, good, we got some hard numbers to chew on.

The proposal is a situation based upon inducing (forcing, whatever) 308 riders under the umbrella of mother sanction to show up at the track three times a year.

308. 3 times.

Would it not be more useful to grow ridership by introducing new riders to the sport? Would not the resources be better utilized than those used for the NAG/local tracking function?

I'm not saying the proposal is not without merit, but I am saying that worrying about what 308 riders are doing, why not just grow the sport overall?

QUOTE
Based on the math you are 100% correct, less than 1 NAG rider per track will have no impact on moto counts. But there are many "other" riders who are not in the NAG point standings, who choose not to race locals but do race their closest National. Collectively, this is a much larger group. Would the perceived value of a local race increase if A) their was more competition and the race counted toward a higher goal?


Okay, but this skews your proposal a bit, so let's look at this from the same angle: Why are those racers hitting the nearby nationals instead of racing locals? I propose that an environment where locals are the only outlet, those riders would leave the sport. They would do this because they don't want to race locals. And while they'll give you a laundry list of justifications, it -- generally -- comes down to the level of comp. The 16x Death Punch just doesn't get much out of gates with 15i. And, and pay attention here, you can use logic to show to Death Punch the err of his or her thinking, but have you ever used logic with a 16 year old who's mind's made up?

Talk about wasting resources!

The sport grows from the bottom up. It's a simple system and it works well. Noob shows up, tries it, if s/he likes it gets a membership, if life's fortunes keep the flame of joy lit they keep racing. They work there way up, get sponsors, hit some nationals, up and up, one day they're in the starting gate for the Olympics.

What you're proposing -- and again, it's not without merit, but -- is to put a loop somewhere around the center of that process by a rule book change. Now it's gone from a fairly simple, linear, system to one, well, loopy.

And here's where I'm really concerned: Anything about "We need to change the rules so _______" has a cost, and it's almost unfailingly a cost in unexpected areas. At least one thing I see from putting this loop in is the surge in "Track operator's kid / ghost rider / to get the point / NAG plate / stupid rule" threads. The law, as I'm sure you're aware, of unintended consequences.

I'm saying tools to induce the more-skilled to show up at locals exist. They're subtle, and take some finesse on the part of a track operator. But most importantly is the track should be focusing on bringing new people into the sport. Nationals aren't killing the local scene (to use a long-popular phrase), nationals are keeping more experienced and skilled riders in the sport longer.

And this being typed by a guy who's rolled way back on nationals this year specifically so he could spend more time at locals. (Not that I'm a target demographic, or especially skilled.) (Seriously.)

ps. "Mother Sanction," we need to use that more.
JAF2
QUOTE (Elvis @ Jun 4 2012, 08:40 PM) *
Okay, good, we got some hard numbers to chew on.

The proposal is a situation based upon inducing (forcing, whatever) 308 riders under the umbrella of mother sanction to show up at the track three times a year.

308. 3 times.

Would it not be more useful to grow ridership by introducing new riders to the sport? Would not the resources be better utilized than those used for the NAG/local tracking function?

I'm not saying the proposal is not without merit, but I am saying that worrying about what 308 riders are doing, why not just grow the sport overall?



Okay, but this skews your proposal a bit, so let's look at this from the same angle: Why are those racers hitting the nearby nationals instead of racing locals? I propose that an environment where locals are the only outlet, those riders would leave the sport. They would do this because they don't want to race locals. And while they'll give you a laundry list of justifications, it -- generally -- comes down to the level of comp. The 16x Death Punch just doesn't get much out of gates with 15i. And, and pay attention here, you can use logic to show to Death Punch the err of his or her thinking, but have you ever used logic with a 16 year old who's mind's made up?

Talk about wasting resources!

The sport grows from the bottom up. It's a simple system and it works well. Noob shows up, tries it, if s/he likes it gets a membership, if life's fortunes keep the flame of joy lit they keep racing. They work there way up, get sponsors, hit some nationals, up and up, one day they're in the starting gate for the Olympics.

What you're proposing -- and again, it's not without merit, but -- is to put a loop somewhere around the center of that process by a rule book change. Now it's gone from a fairly simple, linear, system to one, well, loopy.

And here's where I'm really concerned: Anything about "We need to change the rules so _______" has a cost, and it's almost unfailingly a cost in unexpected areas. At least one thing I see from putting this loop in is the surge in "Track operator's kid / ghost rider / to get the point / NAG plate / stupid rule" threads. The law, as I'm sure you're aware, of unintended consequences.

I'm saying tools to induce the more-skilled to show up at locals exist. They're subtle, and take some finesse on the part of a track operator. But most importantly is the track should be focusing on bringing new people into the sport. Nationals aren't killing the local scene (to use a long-popular phrase), nationals are keeping more experienced and skilled riders in the sport longer.

And this being typed by a guy who's rolled way back on nationals this year specifically so he could spend more time at locals. (Not that I'm a target demographic, or especially skilled.) (Seriously.)

ps. "Mother Sanction," we need to use that more.



I agree with a big chunk of your thought inducing input and glad to see the contributors to this thread are passionate about the sport and their ideas. Thanks to all.
Sprite - Caffeine Free
QUOTE
Honestly though, I don't see why so many people are intent on getting the national caliber riders to race locally.


Since they allow ALL skills set to race the nationals, ALL riders are national caliber riders.

This one line I quoted speaks more to the solution to the problem then all other comments combined. IMO
Bikemonkeys
QUOTE (thebondtrader55 @ Jun 4 2012, 06:09 PM) *
It is an odd situation that the Nags and the Pro's are, for all intents and purposes, irrelevant. I wonder if the factories and the sanction have realized this. They have reduced cash flows, if they have any at all, and yet their "paid" employees either through choice or direction refuse to go where their customers are. Again, its hard to figure out if this is a plan or it just happened like this.

Weird!

You know, one of the easiest, oldest, and most effective business techniques that still works well is to look back in the past to see what your firm was doing when it was booming. Compare the two and see what is different now. Simply put, just identify what worked in the past and do more of it.

This is what troubles me - the fact that today's BMX looks nothing at all like it did in past periods when the sport boomed. The Pro's don't come to the track, the Nags can't be bothered, you can't bribe a top bike shop to carry BMX racing inventory, and money flow to the Pro's is bad. See the people, see the people, see the people - or see the customers, see the customers, see the customers.

Even though SX and National racing is very high quality and not very related to "average" racing anymore it's imperative for the firms to maintain a high profile at the potentially huge local level. When the company reps aren't connecting with the one thing that could expand sales that can't be good.

All the Best

PS : If the pro's and the Nags can't get out to their local tracks once or twice a week to "see the people/customers" while they practice then why would I spend my corporate dollars on them exactly? I do know that BITD when Pros ( and some Nags) made a salary that all but a very few can dream of today you could see them weekly at the tracks in Cali and Texas. Seeing the customers.


There is a bunch of truth in this. I can almost tell what frames will be popular at the local track each year by what each local teams are running and the "National" riders are on. If the "National" riders don't come out often, no one is going to run out and get one. The "National" kids that do come out often, there's usually a following of kids looking to get on whatever they're on.





JAF2
QUOTE (Sprite - Caffeine Free @ Jun 5 2012, 06:27 AM) *
Since they allow ALL skills set to race the nationals, ALL riders are national caliber riders.

This one line I quoted speaks more to the solution to the problem then all other comments combined. IMO

Would you elaborate? Thanks.
Bikemonkeys
QUOTE (JAF2 @ Jun 5 2012, 07:36 AM) *
Would you elaborate? Thanks.


Looks like he's saying, since they allow all racers to attend nationals without any form of qualifying, all racers that have a USABMX membership are by default "National" racers.

CoopersDad
QUOTE (JAF2 @ Jun 3 2012, 05:17 PM) *
Voting so far - 70% in favor of a required minimum number of locals to qualify for a NAG plate.


So if you force a rider to race locals to obtain a NAG ranking, should the local racer also be required to race a minimum amount of nationals to carry a State plate? Should a rider not be able to get a State plate if they do not attend a national that is scheduled within their state? By your proposal it really is the same as your trying to fill gate spots and rider count at nationals is just as important for rider points. I guess I am missing where the potential NAG rider has to carry the burden of the sport at the local level.

As stated in my original post locals and nationals have absolutely nothing to do with each other in any way except for at times the track is used for a national event. I also firmly believe that more national riders participate in their local program than you think. These types of threads get started all the time and are favored to by those that lack the depth to understand the question they are asking and the issue they are creating.



Bikemonkeys
Has there ever been a minimum number of locals required to get a NAG number? I remember as a kid there was a minimum requirement for a racer to get a State plate in Las Vegas at the NBL track.

Why is there a difference in the style of tracks between what is a National and Local track? I was told that local tracks shouldn't try to be like national tracks. But without a difference in the riders, why should there be a difference in tracks? New racers? But New racers don't know what BMX racing is till they've been to your track. So no matter how hard the track is, or isn't shouldn't really matter.
Army125r
I guess what I truly hear is that a lot of local tracks aren't seeing the increase in new riders based on demographics, finances, lack of competition or a motivating factor.

We all just mentioned thoughts and ideas on how to increase the local races. Bill gives us some hard facts. And yet it is mentioned that a 1% increase at events isn't the ticket. Maybe my memory from math class 25 years ago is off, but isn't a 1% increase still an increase? Right now some tracks are seeing a decrease in rider counts. And their advertising doesn't seem to fix that.

You have to start somewhere.
So maybe that 1% could move from staging to in the gate to jumpstart the resurrection of saving BMX and these struggling tracks.

Just my .02$

Jeff
Brett Middaugh
BMX racing sure is diffunt than when ah was a youngster...

When I used to get my a** handed to....I mean race at my local track, Braddock BMX, back in the heyday of racing, ALL the, what you would now call "NAG" riders, would gate up every weekend that they weren't away at a national and race us local squag's.
It's how we all got faster.

But your RIDER counts are so far below what they were in the 80's and 90's that everyone is correct, it wouldn't amount to a hill of beans if you made NAG riders race locals, as it wouldn't affect the rider levels at all.

BMX racing, it does not appeal to today's generation like freestyle BMX does. Sorta sucks but it is just reality.
JAF2
QUOTE (CoopersDad @ Jun 5 2012, 08:29 AM) *
So if you force a rider to race locals to obtain a NAG ranking, should the local racer also be required to race a minimum amount of nationals to carry a State plate? Should a rider not be able to get a State plate if they do not attend a national that is scheduled within their state? By your proposal it really is the same as your trying to fill gate spots and rider count at nationals is just as important for rider points. I guess I am missing where the potential NAG rider has to carry the burden of the sport at the local level.

As stated in my original post locals and nationals have absolutely nothing to do with each other in any way except for at times the track is used for a national event. I also firmly believe that more national riders participate in their local program than you think. These types of threads get started all the time and are favored to by those that lack the depth to understand the question they are asking and the issue they are creating.

It is just a conversation, nothing to take personal. I value others input even if it is different than mine. You are participating in this tread, does that mean you favor it?
thebondtrader55
QUOTE (Bill Curtin @ Jun 4 2012, 06:14 PM) *
What you are proposing would add no more than 1% ridership to a local track in a perfect scenario. Being that there are 360 tracks and about 308 riders in the NAG point standings, your proposal would add less than one rider per track. Pro riders, to an infinitesimally small amount

While the thought can be commended, the logic is not there that it will fix the problem. The problem is, why does a rider come to a track, try it once or twice and never come back. Answer that question and you've doubled ridership overnight.
The rest are tire kickers and while we can throw all sorts of money at the problem, it isn't broken. It is a matter of a sport that is meant not for everyone.

My parents bought my brother several racing bikes. They took him to races, he had me to look up to to and yet, BMX was not a fit for him. He was successful at lacrosse, baseball, and hockey. BMX didn't spin his top. It did mine and I stuck with it for most of my life. Why is it that two brothers had different interests when we were both brought up in the same family with the she mindset?

Forcing national level riders is not the fix. Growing your ridership is. National level BMXrs do not race locals because there is no challenge for them. Same for a major league sports athlete playing pick up games.

Bill, I believe that the tracks at the local level are too big to attract the biggest group of racers that aren't already with us - the average and the truly awful. It seems to me that most have forgotten what the tracks looked like that Gary, Billy, Terry, and Mike King rode on. They were nowhere near as big as most (all?) of the local tracks are now. I still have most of my BMXers from this period and it shocks me when I see the lack of obstacles. The truth is that you have to be a pretty darn good rider to race on ANY BMX track today and most just don't have the skill set for it - and sadly never will. About the second time they fall on their head them or she who must be obeyed (Mom) decides that baseball or soccer is beginning to look a lot better.

I couldn't agree with you more about this sport not being for everyone. We've done everything and I can tell ya now that no sport has a stranger skill set than BMX. If it's done halfway right it is darn hard work and fairly dangerous to boot.

But shouldn't we be trying to make it where the great unwashed masses want to come spend their money with us? SX/O racing will take care of itself, you guys IMO can't do a better job at the Nationals than you do (KUDOS from here on perfection), and the local tracks as now constructed take care of the very good (but not great). The only thing we don't have in great numbers is the average and the truly awful ( which should be our biggest group by a mile). They can't stay very long if they come out because they don't have enough skin and ER visits are too expensive.

This where Mike C's idea about BMX lite comes in - something that any jamoke off the street can ride and not endanger life and limb. If we could double or triple our ridership by making another line or even another relatively flat side by side track wouldn't it be worth the gamble?

IMO the only thing missing right now is the firm base provided by these low impact riders - everything else is about finished.

Thanks.
thebondtrader55
QUOTE (JAF2 @ Jun 4 2012, 08:06 PM) *
Based on the math you are 100% correct, less than 1 NAG rider per track will have no impact on moto counts. But there are many "other" riders who are not in the NAG point standings, who choose not to race locals but do race their closest National. Collectively, this is a much larger group. Would the perceived value of a local race increase if A) their was more competition and cool.gif the race counted toward a higher goal?

J, it's hard to quantify this but there is some fallout from the lack of participation from the Nags and the Pros. You just never know what is going to motivate a new rider to stick around and keep going.

For my family it was Steve Veltman, John Purse, Bull Dyer, and Tank Carder. They showed us twice a week what COULD BE DONE. There is no telling how many stuck around for a long time just trying to beat these guys at the local tracks, cheered them on at the Nationals, and then bought thousands of dollars of their sponsors products. Win on Sunday- Sell on Monday!

As far as why the "factories" that sponsor these guys/gals today don't REQUIRE their employees to show up and represent their products at the local level I have no idea.

Thanks for your views.
thebondtrader55
QUOTE (Elvis @ Jun 4 2012, 08:40 PM) *
Okay, good, we got some hard numbers to chew on.

The proposal is a situation based upon inducing (forcing, whatever) 308 riders under the umbrella of mother sanction to show up at the track three times a year.

308. 3 times.

Would it not be more useful to grow ridership by introducing new riders to the sport? Would not the resources be better utilized than those used for the NAG/local tracking function?

I'm not saying the proposal is not without merit, but I am saying that worrying about what 308 riders are doing, why not just grow the sport overall?



Okay, but this skews your proposal a bit, so let's look at this from the same angle: Why are those racers hitting the nearby nationals instead of racing locals? I propose that an environment where locals are the only outlet, those riders would leave the sport. They would do this because they don't want to race locals. And while they'll give you a laundry list of justifications, it -- generally -- comes down to the level of comp. The 16x Death Punch just doesn't get much out of gates with 15i. And, and pay attention here, you can use logic to show to Death Punch the err of his or her thinking, but have you ever used logic with a 16 year old who's mind's made up?

Talk about wasting resources!

The sport grows from the bottom up. It's a simple system and it works well. Noob shows up, tries it, if s/he likes it gets a membership, if life's fortunes keep the flame of joy lit they keep racing. They work there way up, get sponsors, hit some nationals, up and up, one day they're in the starting gate for the Olympics.

What you're proposing -- and again, it's not without merit, but -- is to put a loop somewhere around the center of that process by a rule book change. Now it's gone from a fairly simple, linear, system to one, well, loopy.

And here's where I'm really concerned: Anything about "We need to change the rules so _______" has a cost, and it's almost unfailingly a cost in unexpected areas. At least one thing I see from putting this loop in is the surge in "Track operator's kid / ghost rider / to get the point / NAG plate / stupid rule" threads. The law, as I'm sure you're aware, of unintended consequences.

I'm saying tools to induce the more-skilled to show up at locals exist. They're subtle, and take some finesse on the part of a track operator. But most importantly is the track should be focusing on bringing new people into the sport. Nationals aren't killing the local scene (to use a long-popular phrase), nationals are keeping more experienced and skilled riders in the sport longer.

And this being typed by a guy who's rolled way back on nationals this year specifically so he could spend more time at locals. (Not that I'm a target demographic, or especially skilled.) (Seriously.)

ps. "Mother Sanction," we need to use that more.

E, you're 1000 % right - the sport does grow from the bottom up. It seems that the top and the middle are doing fine. Lets get to work on the bottom where the folding stuff is!

Glad to see your track is doing great - we raced your State race a few years back and the only thing better than your perfect track was the great people! We want to come back.

All the Best
AshHill
quote name='JAF2' date='Jun 1 2012, 06:27 PM' post='1173987']
I travel weekly on business and usually ship my bike to get some track time in the cities I visit. BMX people are a different breed and I enjoy meeting them and making new friends. What I have found at most of the tracks I visit is dwindling moto counts - usually around 10 motos. I feel the local scene is the key to introducing new riders to the sport and finding ways to pump it up should be a priority.

Should USABMX require a minimum number of locals to qualify for a NAG plate?
[/quote]


Fantastic question JAF. You seem to have a knack for getting great conversation rolling. Some of our fellow BMXers or Rather "The Parents" of oBMXers dont have the respect or gratitude for a great discussion. They would rather ruin a great opportunity to listen, learn and share. The only way our sport will survive is if we come together and find a solution to the problems we have.

Our sport has roughly 22,000 registered riders. The riders are not renewing their license due to the economy and lack of interest. As a former national rider for 8 straight years and belonging to a family that owned a track for 9 years, I raced locally as much as possible. Not just my track, but any track within a 2 hour drive. As did every national rider in my state. I didnt become the national rider I did by watching/racing intermediates run the local scene. I also respected my roots and gave back to the tracks who made me!

Nationals arent all built for the weekend inside arenas... They are mostly at local tracks. If those tracks dont have the funds to make it through the year, you will end up racing the same tracks over and over... Tracks shut down every year due to lack of consitant rider/moto count.

To the issue of All riders aspiring to the earn a NAG plate... Its a complicated question. Some riders enjoy points chasing, traveling the country and racing only the elite. I understand your desires. But if YOU (the elite) do not race at home you will eventually ruin the chance of building our sport. I remember as a child... tender age of 4... going to my first couple locals and meeting expert/Pros/national riders... Those ridesr are the ones who teach the others around them -whether its just by watching them or actually coaching. Who Else Is Going/Able To Do It??!! $20 clinics teach the basics but they dont teach the Heart of the sport. Those Pros and Experts do!

Those new kids pull up to the track, unpack, race, pack up and go home... What happened to the days when you pull up, unpack, practice, watch those awesome riders hit the big jumps-pro/expert sets, talk-learn, race, get autographs and hope that one day that A Pro you just hung out with all day will one day be that National #1 Pro - Possible Olympic Gold Medalist... then head home with so much excitement you cant fall asleep because your thinking about going to the track again.

The nationals allow any level to race at their events. Those novice and intermediates who race at home will begin to win... they move up. They have false sense of accomplishment once they race others at Nationals. they get their butt kicked... If those "national" riders were required to race a certain number of locals, the competitors will get better. What happens if you begin your national career once you turn expert -Yet to have raced a real expert. Your classed without return! I can pull multiple scenarios from every direction.

You parents sign your children up for clinics run by Pros... why? Because watching those guys is the best thing for your young riders. Why wouldnt you want them to give back to the tracks who made them? Those Track Opperators who bust their butt keeping YOUR track ridable and never receive a paycheck for the back breaking hours devoted to YOU! and eventually YOUR KIDs! Homage my fellow BMXers.

Our season is roughly 11 months long... 30 weekends of Nationals.... Then the Grands. You only need 6 Nationals and the Grands the earn a NAG plate. For the sanction to require NAG chasers race a minimum of 15 locals is asking NOTHING... But the impact is so great. A lot of local tracks run races during the week once school it out. I guarantee you that ANYONE would rather race for training than just do sprints down their road. Then there is the issue of the Moocher... The Moocher is the racer who will ride the track for gate practice -a lot of tracks practice is $0-$5 but wont race.. and if they do they dont give a crap because it means nothing to them. They take the gate but sit down after the first turn. Why not give those guys a reason to RACE! Make those locals count towards their NAG chase.

AshHill
QUOTE (JAF2 @ Jun 4 2012, 07:47 PM) *
Another angle. I am pumped!


Yes!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.