Who is open, who is pro?

Wesley Tucker · Post by **Wesley Tucker** » Sat Jan 11, 2003 12:10 am

My only issue with all this is whether or not you can go back and forth. I said this last spring and I'll repeat it here: once you take money, no matter the denomination, you're a PRO. Sure, you might kick yourself later because you find yourself in contests later in life where the competition is blowing your doors off, but that's life in the big city.

If nothing else, maybe there should be a simple rule that says once you go pro, you stay pro UNLESS you are absent from ONE FULL YEAR OF COMPETITION. This would "revitalize" your Open status and you can once again race for pride as opposed to cash.

I know: who wants to miss a whole year of racing? Then again, though, it might make racers think long and hard before taking the plunge thinking they can pick up some easy money in the pro ranks.

Chris Eggers · Post by **Chris Eggers** » Sat Jan 11, 2003 12:08 am

What about this:

Having EVERYONE have two qualifying runs, best one counts. The first 32 are group A the next 32 are group B (if there are enough) and then group A goes head to head and groub B goes head to head and boom we have an A and a B group winner seperated by ability (fastness)

Andy Bittner · Post by **Andy Bittner** » Sat Jan 11, 2003 12:04 am

okay... I tried to see a new sense in the system, but now I'm back to finding it confusing.

Chris Eggers · Post by **Chris Eggers** » Sat Jan 11, 2003 12:03 am

Andy wrote: Actually... it just occurred to me that there could be an amateur "open" class, where top-level amateur riders from all age groups could compete against each other. In that regard, FCR's use of the term suddenly makes sense

- yes, but FCR had both, Open and Juniors.....so what...

difficult, isn´t it?

[ This Message was edited by: Chris Eggers on 2003-01-10 18:09 ]

Chris Eggers · Post by **Chris Eggers** » Sat Jan 11, 2003 12:00 am

Thanks Adam.

So, whats your opinion on this, I am sitting here with a glass of red wine and snow outside at 12 p.m. and think of warm slalomweather, so I want to read about it.

Andy Bittner · Post by **Andy Bittner** » Fri Jan 10, 2003 11:58 pm

Chris, I have no knowledge of FCR's intentions for the coming year. FCR is run by a partnership, and Jack Smith, USSSF President, is just one voice in that partnership. At this time, FCR has not chosen to have their 2003 Series sanctioned by the USSSF, and are very difficult to reach to discuss the matter.

As for your question about age classifications, my personal opinion is that, once enough numbers are involved, this is the only way to go for the amateur level competitors.

Actually... it just occurred to me that there could be an amateur "open" class, where top-level amateur riders from all age groups could compete against each other. In that regard, FCR's use of the term 'open' suddenly makes sense, if that's what they intended. However, I'd still prefer they keep the word 'amateur' in the label, to avoid confusion with the pro/am "open" concept.

[ This Message was edited by: Andy Bittner on 2003-01-10 18:00 ]

Adam Trahan · Post by **Adam Trahan** » Fri Jan 10, 2003 11:54 pm

Thanks for asking this question, I too have wondered a little about this.

Chris, when you "edit" you can DELETE the "...message edited" entry so you do not have multiple stamps, that is, if you feel like it. I think the most I have seen is about three on a post. Eventually, people will figure it out.

Chris Eggers · Post by **Chris Eggers** » Fri Jan 10, 2003 11:44 pm

Thanks Andy very interesting, is the FCR and USSF thinking about going on with last seasons classes?

Then another question comes to my mind: is a categorization by age better? And what should be the stages 16 and younger and 16 and up or something else?

.... hm , I always have to edit....have to get better at my english...

[ This Message was edited by: Chris Eggers on 2003-01-10 17:57 ]

Andy Bittner · Post by **Andy Bittner** » Fri Jan 10, 2003 11:35 pm

I have a personal opinion, but there's never been any "official" discussion of the subject by anyone at the USSSF, so this opinion is mine and mine alone.

The most commonly regarded difference between pro and amateur is the money, and a person should have the latitude to choose to accept or even pursue money (prize or other professional compensation), and not be forced into it because of their skill level. Amateur does not mean less-skilled!

Throughout the majority of the 20th Century, the Olympic Games were (at least in theory) purely amateur, and yet world records were routinely set at Olympic Games. So, obviously, these amateurs weren't less skilled athletes.

Some people in the slalom community believe that no slalom skateboarder will make any kind of sustaining income from slalom skateboarding, and if that's what you believe, the whole notion of being a "professional" is just a lark and an ego trip anyway.

However, if you believe there's any chance we could ever grow the sport to the point of actually having REAL professionals, then you must realize that the choice to be one or not is no lark and involves tax situations, professional commitments to the sport and operating yourself like a business.

My personal opinion is that, if the very best slalom skateboarder in the world wants to compete as an amateur, there's nobody who should be able to make him do otherwise.

As for FCR's use of the term "Open" to label the amateur class, I find it to be a real confusing use of the word. In most of the sports in which I've been involved that use the term "Open", it has always meant basically the same thing, and that is a class or tournament where competitors compete together without regard to their pro or amateur status. The existence of such a class, where pros and amateurs compete together is, of course, entirely appropriate in a world where the choice to "pursue the money" as a professional is made above and beyond considerations of skill level. Every year, great amateur golfers compete in the U.S. Open, and when it was someone like Tiger Woods as an amateur, he'd beat siginificant numbers of the world's professionals. By the time Tiger one his first U.S. Amateur, he could probably beat most of the best golfers in the world on a regular basis, and yet he competed as an amateur for at least two more years and wining two more U.S. Amateurs. In Open events, there may be a cash purse available, but it is only disbursed to pre-declared professionals in the order of their finish.

Chris Eggers · Post by **Chris Eggers** » Fri Jan 10, 2003 10:57 pm

I just thought of a topic we should really discuss seriously and I think this is really important.

Who is open and who is pro and who is qualified to determine this if there is some sort of controversy?

I am refering to the FCR categorization here as we only had categories seperated by age in Europe up to now. During the vert series we had here in the 80´s and 90´s we had an A and a B group where you could label yourself ability wise which worked quite good most of the time. For a short time we had a Pro and Am class where the pros were definitely labeled pro when they had a model or a sponsor contract. I don´t think this is common in slalom to this date.
I really think this might become a major issue in the future as there is no clear regulation for that.
I for my part did not know about anything when I registered for the Morro Bay race, so I entered open as it was my first race ever on American ground and in the FCR Series.

Maybe Andy or Jack are the ones who can give clear answers, but I like to hear opinions on this from a lot of racers.

[ This Message was edited by: Chris Eggers on 2003-01-10 16:58 ]

Join the ISSA 25-cone series. 5 international sessions per year.
Create your own local race. Discover slalom skateboarding now!

| World Ranking | 25-cone Series | Calendar