WCPP London 2012

[monk]

While the WCPP criteria currently says athletes must have potential for next olympics and one after the rules seem not to be applied for riders who have reached world championship medal level. Riders (e.g. Bryan steel) continue until they are ready to retire/cannot make plan times.

Our current plan includes many names who may just scrape to Beijing (Hoy, Queally, McClean, Norfolk, Newton, Hayles, Manning, Davies) but will be old crocks come 2012. Should the WCPP reduce its chances for the next 3-4 years after March's c'wealths to streamline the funding to give us the widest base of talent for 2012?

While our senior rider's deserve credit for their acheivments, they should IMO be able to acheive their own sponsorship to support themselves (personal sponsorship/pro team) once they reach the point where they will not survive the next olympic cycle. 2008 should be a development opportunity for potential 2012 olympians, not a retirement camp for a stack of 1973-1977 born been there done thats. They have just gained a huge increase in funding so there is IMO unlikely to be yet more funds now the 2012 games will be in London.

[Billy Boy]

C - Double the funding, that'll sort it.
_________________
"Well done, you are 100% absolutely without a shadow of a doubt spot-bollock-on correct." - Tucker

"Eating is not for wimps" - coal miner

"most of us don't have your brilliance." - John McC

[Roy Gardiner]

I think we're on a roll; see what's been achieved with the largest catchment area in the country with no velodrome.

Get the London one built, and just get a few of those footy players who are all over Hackney marsh to switch. Even without that the place'll be packed -- there'll be winners among 'em WCPP or not! And with Legro down there coaching, look out world...
_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." H. L. Mencken

"Everything in war is simple, but the simplest thing is difficult." Carl Von Clausewitz

[Trevor Reade]

[Roy Gardiner]

[monk]

But should we have a 'cull' of the elder riders on finding slots who will be of little use to the nation come 2012? Honestly, we have a heavily ageing WCPP.

[Trevor Reade]

[joxster]

[monk]

[joxster]

Experience can't be passed on, only learned by racing at that level.
_________________
When offered the choice between the path of Desire and the path of Virtue I chose the path marked Diversion.

Programming is like 5ex, one mistake and you have to support it for life.

[monk]

Exactly. We should be identifying our talent for 2012 and using it in 2008. Not carrying a bunch of OAPs to beijing and having a posse of firsttimers in london.

[Billy Boy]

[joxster]

Catch 22 - You don't win medals, you get the funding cut. So they have to use the OAPs if they are still up to it. There is too much at stake just to throw the youngsters in and hope for the best.
_________________
When offered the choice between the path of Desire and the path of Virtue I chose the path marked Diversion.

Programming is like 5ex, one mistake and you have to support it for life.

[Trevor Reade]

[Bally]

Having proven winners in the plan helps to build a sense of confidence and team spirit with the younger riders which can only be of a benefit.

I was chatting to Vicki at the weekend and she is seriously considering trying BMX as well for the next Olympics (she's got a bike on order). This is with the encouragement of Jamie Staff and Chris Hoy who both come from a BMX background. Jamie believes he could coach Vicki to world standard by then (she obviously has the speed and explosive power - it just has to be seen whether she has the necessary skills).

It is this sort of interaction between the riders that can only be good for the Plan as a whole.

At the end of the day, if we keep winning medals then the funding should keep coming in.

[Richard Lodge]

If we are to become the best Olympics cycling nation, then we need rides to be performing at the top of the profession. This is where there is a difference between sprinters squads and endurance squads.

Sprinters - what can they do to improve? Well probably more of the same, as there isn't a higher league to move up to.

Endurance - big difference here - more of the same is not going to be good enough. Look at how Bradley Mcgee and Stuart O'grady performed off the back of their involvement on a longer term basis with a Pro-tour type road season. I think this is what Dave Brailsford is looking for in getting the riders farmed aout for a year or two in the run up to the 2008 Olympics - he wants to see which riders strecth themselves and compete at a higher level. We can already see this is likely to be the impetus for the u23 academy as well. Get the riders into the highest level of competition they can be in, and then get them back to fine tune their fitnerss in the run up to big competitions. Hopefully also with the (higher )salaries the riders will be on in ProTour teams, the funds from WCPP can be spread even further so there is greater consistency. And also the older riders will not be picked up by these teams and will not be able to progress, so there is then a natural law of refreshing the younger talent.

[Willi Tarran]

I think it is very simple.

Pick and support the best people who can win the medals at World and Olympic level.

Do not worry too much about blooding younger riders, concentrate on winning AT EVERY COST. If the young riders have role model winners then they will aspire to improve. If you cosset them at every turn they will be underachievers.

IMHO Monk, you are talking through the wrong part of your body. If Bryan Steel was not producing the goods he would have been off the squad. WCPP has no sentimentality at all. See the list of riders who think they are good enough but do not match up to the requirements.

Which is a very good thing.

The trouble is that some sports think they have a god given right to funding even if the produce no winners whatsoever. The BOA Sports advisor, one Peter Keen, has very fixed views on realistic achievability of sports.

I do remember at least 2 members of the BC Board saying he was out of his mind stating that GB would be in the top 3 track nations in 7 years and the top nation in 10 years.

Of course those persons forget their comments now, but I remember.

Funnily enough one of them said he was not interested in June/July 1992 when I reported that a certain C Boardman had just gone 4 seconds faster that the World Record in a 4km training session in Ghent.

Still what can you expect????!!!

WIlli Tarran

[Jimmy Jazz]

I agree - it is/should be very simple. You pick the best athletes/performers - the ones who are most likely (given all available data & results) to produce the goods at the highest level.

If a particular athlete is say, 32, and gets the nod over a 21 year old, so be it. The key, however is to ensure the 21 year old is given every opportunity to maximise their potential - which I appreciate is partly what Monk is getting at.

I have been fortunate to coach at world level in several sports but this same funding issue/quandary almost always rears it's head (Gymnastics has been one example).

As an interested observer of the WCPP, I would also agree with Willi in that they appear to continually get it right in many areas, not least on the "lack of sentimentality" issue. Indeed, quite a few national governing bodies/teams are looking to the likes of Yachting and Track Cycling and seeing the clear link between their successes and their working methods.

[Coggy]

I think a problem with most sports is the preponderance of old crocks, with an aging population and youngsters all-too easily seduced by the attractions of computer games or the riches of football, the lack of youngsters is changing the face of sport across the world, not only in the UK. Look at France and Italy and Belgium, whare are all the winners ? How come a rider from a country where cycling is almost invisible as a sport is the greatest Tour champion ever ? What is the only growth area in British Cycling ? The vets ! Sad but true. But I think that we should forget the aging generation of Gold Medal winners, in 2008 they will be past it. Lets face it, bike racing at that level is a youngish persons sport, getting under 4.30 for 4000M is not something us old geezers can contemplate. Better to have a couple of medal prospects for the future than us old crocks. Nothing personal about Hoy et. al., but age takes its toll, as I well know.

[De Rosa]

I don't get an impression of old crocks. I see a complete mixture of riders performing at World Class level. You have Hoy and Queally and other older riders still riding at a high level but this year they took a lot of new/young blood to LA and it seems that we have tremendous strength in depth that is being very carefully nurtured. Crampton, Clancy, Cavendish, Thomas, Harris, Pendleton, Cummings and others are going to be around for some time and are the envy of many nations. The Dutch were all raving about Clancy and wanted his autograph! Besides that, with careful preparation riders can race to a high standard now for far more years than was previously possible. It will always be a mixture of more mature riders with younger ones coming through with the selectors having to pick the best riders for the big events at the time - such as the Olympics - whilst perhaps being able to blood younger riders at World Cups which are not quite so important. We are in an incredibly fortunate position in that the WCPP is deservedly well funded, results driven and seems to get the very best from the relatively small pool of junior talent available. What is funny is that the Under 23 squad were supposed to take some time to mature and they have ruined all the best plans by having a couple of World Champions this year to put "the old crocks" under pressure Imagine being an old crock and seeing Cavendish, Thomas and and co coming up behind you, pushing you for selection!