AwardsThis discussion has an associated proposal. View Proposal Details here.
Comments about this discussion:
In the current USA Rulebook it states:
Because awards are paid for out of the convention budget, and are one of the major expenses of large competitions, the type, number, and quality of awards are the choice of the convention host. All awards must include both the year of the event and one or more of the following:
• Unicycling Society of America logo
• The words “Unicycling Society of America”
• The words “North American Unicycling Championships and Convention” or “NAUCC”
The host may determine the amount and level of those awards based upon USA Board approval. Generally there are trophies/expert medals for “top” events, medals for “subtop” events, and ribbons for lower events or places. The USA has most usually awarded 1st- 5th place in most events, but this too is up to the convention host.
In the new IUF Rulebook it states:
The type, number, and quality of awards are the choice of the convention host. Because awards are paid for out of the convention budget, the host may determine the amount and level of those awards. Generally there are trophies for“top” events, medals for “subtop” events, and ribbons or certificates for lower events or places. The IUF has most frequently awarded 1st-3rd place in most events, but this too is up to the convention host.
Does the USA still want to mandate USA logo/verbiage on its awards?
Under the IUF rule a host could use generic awards with no wording at all. For USA events I think that continuing to use the current USA rule which at least specifies wording of the year and some verbiage linking to the event is preferred.
I guess i'm on the opposite side i think generic awards would be ok if the helps a club be able to host
I actually think that the important part of this rule is the part about getting approval by the USA Board. I'm less concerned about the awards being personalized. However, if memory serves, this rule was created after NAUCC 2013 in which the host's budget didn't allow for medals except for the experts and there was large upset. So in my opinion, it is the second part of the USA rule (under the bulleted list) that merits keeping. But I'm fine with taking the whole rule.
I agree with Patricia about approval by the USA Board.
There seem to be two issues being discussed here: (1) should USA enforce a certain set of rules on how the medals should look? (2) should USA enforce a certain set of medals?
1. Yes, but not what the current rules state. I think that NAUCC or the full event title should be on there, I don't believe the "USA" logo should be required on the medal design. I'm okay with the logo appearing on the labels on the back, but I don't think it needs to be part of the medal design.
2. Yes, but again not as currently stated in the rules. I think we should define a "bare minimum" award set that hosts can add upon if they desire. The host should always get their award system approved by the USA board. In the bare minimum, I would say medals for top three experts in individual/group events and ribbons for top 3 age-group finishers in individual/group events. Extras can include awards for overall categories, medals for age group finishers (not ribbons), ribbons for top 5, etc. I think it is important that every top 3 finisher get something, but I also understand that medals are EXPENSIVE (I ordered them for the 2013 NAUCC).
I agree with the bare minimum idea. I think that clubs could end up spending a lot of money on awards if there is a strict set of mandated elements that could be spent somewhere else.
Jenni, the USA logo isn't required. The medals only have to include one of three bullet points. I don't really feel strongly about this rule either way. However, I do think that the text should be changed to 1st-3rd place as the recommendation instead of 1st-5th. That is no longer the norm.
I could agree with 1st-3rd instead of 1st-5th.
So I think we can throw this one to a vote. I think that the verbiage in the current (old) USA Rulebook would suffice since "awards must include both the year of the event and one or more of the following" certainly can be interpreted to mean "on the sticker on the back," can't it?
Do you want to go ahead and make the proposal, Wendy? I agree that the current verbiage works fine with the amendment of 1st-3rd as the recommendation.