UCI takes away Kathryn Bertine's Olympic qualifying points

UCI Overlord now apparently onside. The rider’s twitter stream is full tweets/responses full of phrases like “fight the good fight”, an exhortation for a social media campaign to get the points back and my favourite

"Woke up to emails from pro women on various teams: “We will help u get ur points.” I win, UCI. Regardless of outcome, I win this one"

In the interests of balance please excuse me while I use this board to argue the contrary and in parts pose sort of an open letter to Ms Bertine.

We have an athlete that is basically trying to win a bet – can you qualify for the Olympics? Should also add I don’t doubt the same athlete is putting in the time and effort to become the best she can be at the chosen sport, but is coming up against more obstacles than perhaps envisaged at the start of the quest. She failed in 08 to qualify but it was a good story. Is trying again in 12, and remains a good story. I follow it, may others too. Then the linked article appears.

Such a self-aggrandizing, inaccurate, half-a-story blog piece not seen in a long time. But it obeys rule 101 for twitter and blog response – it slags of the UCI and lays all blame for practically everything at their door. It feigns ignorance and surprise where it is not warranted and makes a right meal of everything it possibly can. Such a media savvy operator knows those are the buttons to press.
We now have complaints that UCI does nothing to support globalisation, they are a ship of fools, and the “overlord” using the argument “that UCI is inherently corrupt cant believe it wasn’t this time” as if that makes it all OK, or indeed makes any sense.

Then you drill down into the specifics and absolutely nothing written really stands up to any scrutiny readily available on the net.

“I went to check the UCI standings a few weeks ago”. All inferences indicate that the Venezuela team were docked the points from the race the eight points were scored at prior to the world champs in September, so reasonable to assume you were also. So could/should really read a “few months ago” when change in rankings should have first been apparent. Ven only raced with three riders at the worlds, so outside the top 20 teams as per qualifying rules would guess. So your score should have 13 by then as a maximum – assuming points for the races were all lost together which seems reasonable. (Basing this remark on Ven’s reliable record of racing as many riders as possible most year’s at worlds. Start numbers also give a clue to relevant ranking positions).
This Ven race is one you have raced before in 08 – as part of a series of races prior to Beijing. Your blogs from 08 include such phrases as:

This is cutting it dangerously close to the cycling regulations that require all countries to submit a roster of international athletes to the UCI (international cycling’s governing body) by Dec. 20

Fortunately, after a careful reading of the 68-page guidebook from the International Cycling Union (UCI), I discover that although UCI cycling national teams need to be registered by Dec. 20, 2007, individuals on national teams can still compete in qualifying races … if they are invited to join an established pro team. This means I can represent St. Kitts and Nevis, but only if a professional team asks me to be a guest rider

As was the case in China and Venezuela, to race the Vuelta Ciclista Femenina a El Salvador, I need to be on an UCI-sanctioned composite team of four to six riders. The race director groups me with five other cyclists, all of whom are trying to chase down Olympic points

As someone that seems to have more than a passing resemblance with the rule book is it remotely possible that when you lined up in Venezuela in 11 it was obvious the eight points were ultimately awarded in error, and would be removed when noticed? The rules dont seem to have changed since 05.

You would also know that as the race is going to be run again before the Olympic deadline those points would go anyway as it is a 12 month rolling ranking. Unless you race again and get the same result or better they disappear regardless of a UCi ruling barring them this time around.
Would also know that in an Olympic year the race is much more likely to be contested by many more teams (just like in 08) and thus more likely to be deemed an international race and count this time. Brazil, Mexico etc much more likely to turn up in 12 just like in 08. So although of no real consequence in the scheme of things – you proceed to make a meal of the point.

Which brings us to the Nat Champs. There are two conditions to getting the points available there to count. Run the race, and the Nat Fed send the results on to the UCI in time.
Using the same assumed passing resemblance with the rules can assume you know that. Also reasonable to assume a Nat Fed would go the extra mile to assist a rider in obtaining points and help their riders qualify, making their oversight even more egregious. Particularly as the leaders of the Nat fed had been so helpful in helping you to secure citizenship, stage races, assist you in many many other ways. You would think sending a timely email would be within their capabilities, or that you could have reminded them to do so. But they are (probably) good friends of yours so no reaosn to slag them off in print – although by inference you do just that.

Have had a look at the race results behind your Nat Champs wins. Didn’t beat many home most years. That doesn’t really matter however, you beat the riders that turned up. (my fav one is when the rider in third DNF). It speaks volumes for the attempts to globalize cycling that your result scores the same as many many other nat champs results – but doesn’t quite get to “A national champion potentially not qualifying for the Olympics because of an email mistake doesn’t seem fair”. Rather than acknowledge this largesse in the rules, you now complain about the people that granted this points opportunity to you for a failing at your end.

Cant find your 10 results in the rankings either, 11 don’t show up either any more (if they did in the first place). Doesn’t matter for a worlds ride, as get to race anyway under that race’s rules. Did it suddenly become more important when they had passed and the Olympics now the immediate priority? Why no questions to your fed at the end of 10 for non appearance of the points? Did that not forewarn you as to the remedial actions required in 11?

Could go on and on. To me it looks like you (and others close to you) dropped the ball and now protest too much. (And that is without going into the development (or lack of it) in cycling in St Kitts during your time there – a stated part of the scheme of things)

That all overlooks that despite earning all the qualifying points in question, any place gained as a result of your efforts actually belongs to the NOC to award to a rider of its choice. You may be the obvious candidate, but until nominated the place isn’t yours to moan about, and long term may just be of more use in developing cyclig in St Kitts awarded elsewhere.

I note you have a big announcement re womens cycling due next week.

Aside from my UCI points drama, here’s some good news: my project to get women’s cycling more media attn is going to happen. Stay tuned!

I genuinely hope it is big. I congratulate you on generating a cycling twitter storm prior to the announcement. Genuinely hope it lives up to the billing.
Am all for the further development of womens cycling, just not so keen on what appears hyperbole based on bugger all of a sound basis.
And believe it or not do wish you every bit of luck in qualifying, as previously stated. Would just rather you did it without having to look the rider that came 101 in the face, and possibly the rider chucked off the team that previously had two spaces but now down to one etc and say sorry – but you should have blogged and socially networked better.