How to save XC?

"32 degrees" wrote in message
...
Get $1,000,000.
Then get 100 coaches in small towns around the USA.
Then divide the money up...
Each coach gets $10,000 to recruit 20 kids to become skiers and coach them
.....

I think XC skiing will only be "popular" and a strong sport if it's oriented
less toward racing and more toward recreational skiing. I think the
over-emphasis on racing turns most people off. You might get a few better
racers, but this would do nothing to popularize the sport. Just MHO. I
think I saw the ideal in Norway when I've visited there. The HUGE majority
of skiers just go out and have fun skiing. Racers race, sure, but the
reason skiing is a national sport and so popular is because everyone else
just has fun skiing and don't view it as a racing sport.

Cam

"John Forrest Tomlinson" wrote in message
...
On 8 Feb 2005 19:13:25 -0800, wrote:

I'm thinking we need a big backer for one skier. That's all it will
take. Greg had one. Lance had one.

I think we need places to ski and places for kids to do outdoor sports
safely and easily -- skate parks, safe streets for cycling, running
paths, more pools, more skating rinks, more ball courts, etc. Plus
decent highs school sports programs -- programs that encourage health
and fun, and (for competitve sports) are much more participatory with
more kids involved. Like no-cuts teams where every who comes to
practice regularly is on the team.

Supporting elite or future elite ski racers is gravy.

Agree 100%

"George Cleveland" wrote
Good points. My 18 year old switched from XC ski racing to basketball
( his true love) a few years ago. The difference in the "culture" of
the two high school sports is amazing. The very top echelon of both
sports is very similiar. Very talented, genetically gifted and driven
people, some to the point of obscession. But once you leave that top
tier behind the differences are stark. In the local HS XC scene
everyone in the club gets to race if they want to. There are no bench
sitters. Here in Wisconsin its only the top 3 finishers in each school
that earn points in each race. The rest can race and finish where ever
and it made no difference in the team standings. I've seen some of the
local HSs put 25 racers into the field. Everyone gets to "play". And
it showed in the kids attitudes. Happiest group of student athletes
I've ever met, by a long shot. BB is pretty different. There is a real
disgrace in being considered a "scrub" but even worse is the fact that
if the kids go out for the team they almost always love the game.....

Excellent point George, and I've seen it too. The even worse tragedy of
conventional team sports, and the one I experienced as a young, not-gifted
but enthusiastic would-be athlets is this: a lot of team sports, take
volley ball or basketball (soccer, baseball, etc.) make "cuts" at the
earliest stage. If you don't make that cut even as a young 7th or 8th
grader, you'll never even have a chance to develop as a player. It's
virtually your last chance. You can't learn to play volley ball if you're
not on the team.

The endurance sports, around here at least, have their superstars and
super-committed participants. They also have the not-so great kids who just
are having fun and/or are trying their hardest, but still aren't at the
elite level. But they can keep doing it, because most coaches around here
don't cut in these sports. Sure, they come up with the top kids to travel
to meets or be on the final "state team" or what have you. But for normal
practices and most meets, even some trips, all kids who show a level of
commitment are able to participate.. How many times have we seen a local
superstar runner or skier emerge at age 15 or 16 - or even 17 or 18 if
they're a boy. This is because they were able to keep at it and not be cut.
An even better benefit is all the kids who never achieve racing success, but
love skiing and pass that on to their friends and kids and make it a
life-long habit. Yours truely!

Cam

I don't know much about the program, but I think the Maine Winter
Sports organization ( http://www.mainewsc.org/ ) is trying to take the
cultural approach to re-establishing x-c skiing/winter sports as a way
of life.

Unfortunately, artificial snow is more like buying time. I haven't
found anyone who thinks it's going to save skiing in the long run.

Gene

"Bjorn A. Payne Diaz" wrote:

I think you need snow, and in particular, snow in big cites. So if you
combine snow with money (from the cities) and a couple of motivated
people who get things done, good things are going to happen. They
already have in the past.
...
I think there's a lot of potential energy in MPLS, but the lack of snow
is holding back the projects. On the flip side, the lack of snow has
developed Trollhaugen and Elm Creek.

Jay Wenner

On 9 Feb 2005 09:07:56 -0800, wrote:

Well, I'm talking about snowy places. Also, I bet that ski culture
could survive and maybe even thrive even in shaky snow periods if the
culture was there.

'Course the worse the snow the better the culture would have to be.

I've seen bike race culture thrive in terrible conditions---Detroit in
the 70's was terrible for crime, with cyclist kids at big risk, yet
that's when the Wolverines were strongest. They did daily road training
in lousy conditions and thrived as a club.

I'm thinking it's not a technical problem, not even to the point of
snow. But of course one needs to be able to get out at least a few
dozen times! : )

Maybe not an applicable comparison but deerhunting is huge, right? I
bet that's nearly ALL about culture. Because it sure ain't about meat.
That meat is the most expensive on the planet for 90% of deerhunters.
You got your 2 weeks a year to do it. And MANY TIMES the weather sucks.
Many times these hunters don't even hunt: if it's raining or lousy,
they stay in the cabin. It's MORE about the culture than the sport, for
most.

I think that a culture of dryland fun---hiking, camping, biking, the
works---could be seen as a rock solid part of XC culture. Some years
there might not be any snow at all. You'd still have your skis. They're
cheap. They last for decades. They're ready when the snow is. See, if
there's a culture there, the sport will live. It's in no hurry. If it's
trying to rely on trends or technical details or cash or materialism,
well, that's fly by night.

Now, many businesses do need this short-term cashflow to survive. They
panic if they don't get it. They try to think of fixes. But a panic
never results in a solution. Repairing a short-term type of problem
isn't a solution. If the bigger problem is addressed by cultural
leaders who aren't letting themselves get caught up in short-term panic
then the short-term will take care of itself for enough equipment
providers. (Boy, remember how FEW there were back when XC racing was
big? I remember waiting for everyone in lower Michigan to put in their
order to Champion Nordic---a hardware store in the UP! We all got the
same skis! Rossi KRs. This was when we had 4 races around the state
every winter Saturday and they competed with prizes to get skiers.
First man and woman usually got new skis or poles.)

Even with my idea that $1MIL will put us over the top is a cultural
idea. It gives the people a can-do feel, that's all. But that's a big
thing!

Greg didn't have cancer and he sparked up cycling BIGTIME. It's not
just Lance's cancer story that helps cycling. AT ALL. We have a winner
to get young folks sparked. It's just the spark. They don't know what
winning is really about. Doesn't matter. All it takes is one. Most who
are inspired sure don't even take up racing. A race winner gets more
kids out on bikes playing around, dreaming of this'n'that. Go on an
hour ride, maybe 10 minutes of fantasy of racing. That's enough. It's
the cultural spark that this cash to create a winner would provide.

We have to start thinking like winners and millionaires here. Someone
with tons of money and power doesn't think about money. They think
about CULTURE. They know that's what determines outcomes. My literary
hero Jack Saunders coined the phrase "the business of business is
culture." That can be bad. But it can work to good as well.

--JP

I don't know. Although I enjoyed playing sports I was never interested in
following it. Maybe I'm the fluke.
I rode a bike as a kid because it was the only way to get around.
I got into windsurfing because a friend put the bug in my head when I told him I
was going to the Caribbean and I found it very challenging.
I got into running because I wanted to stay in shape.
I got into XC ski because one year there was just too much snow to run. I was
originally looking for treadmills. At one store I saw a pair of XC skis on sale
and the rest is history.

Ben

On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 15:20:20 +0100, Janne G
wrote:

Ben Kaufman wrote:
On 8 Feb 2005 19:13:25 -0800, wrote:


I'm thinking we need a big backer for one skier. That's all it will
take. Greg had one. Lance had one.

I'm not sure how many other big/medium backers there were for other
contenders out there. Probably some. But I suspect that those in the
know knew that Greg was our national hope at the time. So the biggest
backer backed him. No dilution. Same with Lance. We need to
rocket-propel ONE GUY/GAL to the very top. Then watch the trickledown.

In the meantime we need good solid ski culture more than money. What
gets the average joes and janes out there is the cultural values. If
you can sell people on going out and having fun all year round and call
it XC and training for it then we win. Sell people on hanging out in
the woods with picnic stuff and bota bags. You just have to get them
picturing it and it's a winner.


There are some non-parallels here. Lance (I hope you are referring to Lance
Armstrong) is a lot more than just a champ bike racer. There is an incredibly
powerful story behind his journey from near death with metastatic cancer that
entered his brain to recovery beyond anyone's wildest imagination. The chances
of finding an XC champion racer with an equally dramatic story is of extremely
low probability.

I really enjoy XC skiing and windsurfing but I couldn't tell you squat about who
the current champs are. The only reason I know a name or two is because I
studied tapes of them (which JeanneG provided years ago before he stopped using
std. mpeg format g) to study technique.

Ben i can start doing them in 156x120 mpeg so you can take them in also?
;-) Nice name i have got....

LOL, You are failing to realize the main reason why XC skiing is not
popular in many places..... because there is no snow! How many
people would be alpine
skiing if the resorts didn't make snow? How many people would be ice
skating if one could only do it on a frozen lake or pond?


Talking of (no) snow:
http://mora.vasaloppet.se/Startbild/
http://kamera.mora.se/

Janne G

Janne, lol, sorry I miss typed your name.. I didn't forget the conversation we
had here last year about the compression ratio thingie.

Ben

"Jim Kelley" wrote in message
oups.com...
I don't know much about the program, but I think the Maine Winter
Sports organization ( http://www.mainewsc.org/ ) is trying to take the
cultural approach to re-establishing x-c skiing/winter sports as a way
of life.

I can see this on their web site, however, the emphasis is, again, almost
totally on racing. The images and text on the opening page are all of
racers and of racing. The Events tab is all races, even the "Healthy
Hometowns" program seems entirely oriented toward racing (ie: the use of the
term "coaches"). Where's the duffers skiing slowly just for fun and fresh
air? Where's the non-racing events (like the 25 km tour with 1,000s of
participants and lots of fun and eating I did in Norway)? Where's the
picnics and bonfires? Focus on racing will never be a way of life for anyone
but fairly hard core people and will not popularize a sport.

I have absolutely nothing against racing, and on my own lowly level, enjoy
it... but again, to me if XC is going to be a large sport, part of winter
culture, it will be on a recreational: touring, picnicing, backcountry
downhill, hut-to-hut (maybe even restaurant to restaurand and even bar to
bar!), etc. stuff like what XC a national passtime in Norway - it's not the
racing that does it. It's the same with downhill skiing here in the US: the
reason it's popular is NOT because there is good development of racers and
an emphasis on racing. It's because it's just a plain fun sport for kids,
adults and families to do WITHOUT even thinking about racing. Racing is
just a tiny subculture of alpine skiing. If there was a website dedicated
to promoting alpine skiing a part of a community's winter culture, it sure
as he11 wouldn't make total emphasis on racing because (1) that would
attract only a tiny, tiny percentage of the public and (2) would intimidate,
turn off or scare away a bunch of other people.

Justh mho, of course, but something to think about.

Cam

PS: I agree 100% with the folks who have written that it is near impossible
to develop XC as a part of winter culture if snow isn't reliable and
plentiful. That's essential and the other stuff is on top of that.

Janne G wrote in message
Talking of (no) snow:
http://mora.vasaloppet.se/Startbild/
http://kamera.mora.se/

Janne G

Today they have finally got some snow from above. (1 dm promised)

Some background:
The Vasaloppet arangers have been haunted by a "winter" with nearly no
snow and temperatures above the freezing point. But cancelling the
race would cost them twice as much (+ additional expenses because of
lost tourism etc) as making (and transporting from places far away)
enough snow for the whole track. This means enough snow for several
parallel 90 km tracks and enough snow for sustaining the wear of 14
000 pairs of skis only the last race day, but once they finally got
temperatures below the freeezing point they started working on it and
are quite positive about running all the races as scheduled
(especially if they get some more help with real snow from above).
I'm impressed and quite positive about skiing there this year just
like the last couple of years. :-)

Some pictures from the "snow-making" (+daily updates in Swedish):
http://www.vasaloparen.se/race_article.jsp?d_id=1330

Lance got sacked off of his teams when he had cancer. Postal took a
chance on him and he didn't make the big, big bucks until after he won.

I agree that we need money and the incentive of big money for results.
But that is there already. Kris Freeman is doing pretty well for himself,
and he will do even better when he starts winning World Cups and World
Championships medals.

But the support of a team is more important than paying him millions.
It might make more people join the sport and stick with it, so the
probability of producing a champion would increase. But right now, all the
USST athletes are completely dedicated to skiing. Large salaries would not
help them as much as having support: a full wax team, medical team, coaching
team, etc.

-Nathan
www.nsavage.com


wrote in message
oups.com...
I'm thinking we need a big backer for one skier. That's all it will
take. Greg had one. Lance had one.

I'm not sure how many other big/medium backers there were for other
contenders out there. Probably some. But I suspect that those in the
know knew that Greg was our national hope at the time. So the biggest
backer backed him. No dilution. Same with Lance. We need to
rocket-propel ONE GUY/GAL to the very top. Then watch the trickledown.

In the meantime we need good solid ski culture more than money. What
gets the average joes and janes out there is the cultural values. If
you can sell people on going out and having fun all year round and call
it XC and training for it then we win. Sell people on hanging out in
the woods with picnic stuff and bota bags. You just have to get them
picturing it and it's a winner.