Topic: USA Qualifying Totals for 2010

[Chris Ⓐ LeRoux]

Mike,

Thanks for taking the time to answer. Personally, I don't think financially supporting lifters in subsistence payments is really a solution, and I really don't think increasing recruitment of young kids is the answer since they mostly quit in the 20s anyway. There are things the USAW could do to keep lifters that do not cost a lot of money IMO, if its the priority.

Happy Saturday

[Mike Wittmer]

Mike,
There are things the USAW could do to keep lifters that do not cost a lot of money IMO, if its the priority.

Happy Saturday

Could you name a few? 

[Chris Ⓐ LeRoux]

Mike, yes I will name a couple but it is basically a change in philosophy I am calling for the USAW to take. As I have said before, with our low numbers and especially low number of talent, the USAW IMO should take a personal interest in the welfare of its elites. A phone call to one that skips a nationals or doesn't lift for a year or two, for instance. One of the cheapest and most effective things the USAW could do to help its athletes support themselves and thus perform is just simple letter writing. In my career, the USAW not once contacted my local town press. After the 92 Olympics, the St. Pete Times called the USOC to talk to my coach about me missing the Team. Lyn Jones went on to blast me saying I refused to listen to my coaches about going 56 and insisted on going 60 when in fact Dragomir wanted me 60. That article was the last they ever did on me, aside from reprinting AP blurbs, and I never got another sponsor again. So, I think the power of such efforts is clear. Another example might be lifetime USAW membership for real senior American record breakers or international medalists. I'd also add that I view subsistence support payments as the wrong track, for almost all the same reasons why people are happier to have a job than being on welfare. I would suggest instead giving lump sums for performance in competitions, not a monthly dole, for real records and medals. It will work much better. The possibilities are endless though I do not feel they fit with the USAW's priorities or philosophy as I have seen it over time.

Thanks for asking and listening.

Chris

[Mike Wittmer]

Chris, I've had similar ideas.  For example, why not have the office contact the local media and perhaps school of every schoolage, junior and senior national medalist and send out an official press release?  They could use some sort of form letter, just plug in names, wt. class, lifts and placing.  I ended up contacting the local paper before the Olympic Trials.  They did a very nice article on Jeff and even hired an out of town photographer to get a picture, as he was away at school. 

You're right, we could do a lot better.  I'm going to mention this to Rick at the AO.

Mike 

[Chris Ⓐ LeRoux]

Mike,

Good luck with it. I believe if the USAW would start putting its elite athletes first, make them the priority, good things will happen. I also believe if the USAW starts following such a philosophy, they will begin to see other opportunities to implement it. I would always keep an eye on "my" elites, always look for ways to promote them, make them money, etc- versus the long history of kicking us around in favor of bureaucrats. I'd also strongly suggest dumping subsistence payments in favor of prize money. Big lumps sums talk. Monthly doles suck bad, and have even been promised and not delivered. You might even get me and some other uninterested weightlifters back on the platform with some decent prize money. :)   Prize money would also generate press and draw talent. I'd also say the USAW should find ways to make profit and start supporting themselves instead of relying on the USOC. Start making and selling weightlifting equipment- just not racks as I don't need more competition. :) Besides our racks are the bomb, powder-coating included now for no extra price. :)

Thanks