IUF Skill Levels and Rules Committee starting up

To everyone interested in participating in the rule and skill level development
process for IUF:

The Unicycling Society of America Rules Committee is winding down in its work on
changes to the USA Rulebook and Skill Levels. They have come up with a number of
proposals for improvements. When they finish with their proposals and vote on
them, the passed proposals are submitted to the USA board, who approves (or
doesn’t approve) them. You can read all about it at Andy Cotter’s website:
http://www.skypoint.com/~cotter/

At the conclusion of this process, we will start discussions on the IUF
(International Unicycling Federation) Rulebook and Skill Levels. This should
happen by the end of the month. Right now, I’m opening the forum for discussion
of changes or new ideas.

See the current IUF Rulebook (and levels) at:
http://www.unicycling.org/iuf/rulebook/

Why wait until USA is done? Are we a USA puppet? No. The reason we’re waiting is
to incorporate the best of their new proposals into the IUF rules, and maintain
consistency whenever possible. Why did USA go first? Because they started first,
and Andy is more of a go-getter than me. Also, the next USA convention is a year
sooner than the next UNICON. The rules of the IUF were mostly derived from the
rules of the USA. For the past 10 years or so, the two rulebooks have
complimented each other and tried to stay consistent on the important points,
though some details and philosophies diverge.

The 10 IUF skill levels were derived from the original 4 USA skill levels
developed by Jan Layne in 1979. Since USA adopted the 10 levels, their set has
mostly been identical with the IUF set, which I hope will continue. Most of the
current round of changes are for clarity and better accuracy, and are just as
useful for IUF as for USA.

There was the usual discussion of IUF rules during UNICON, plus some email
activity on the subject immediately afterward. I’ve saved most of that, and will
be assembling my first “mailing” with that, plus the relevant proposals from the
USA committee.

Who can play? Anyone. You don’t even have to be an IUF member, because we’re
still figuring out the membership thing. If we get a newsletter launched, we may
switch it over to members only. The requirements of the IUF Skill Levels and
Rules Committee are that you read all proposals and vote on them responsibly,
with the needs of the international unicycling community in mind. Think of what
is best for the world, and not just your world. Also, your discussion, ideas,
and proposals will add to the process. New ideas are encouraged.

Please note that our goal is to keep it simple. There are no known large changes
planned for this round, and energy wasted in this committee would be better
spent building a better IUF. Most of the planned work is based on increased
clarity and accuracy, some new events, and safety. If you have big ideas, please
share them with us. But some changes may be tabled for future rounds.

I hope to do the majority of this process by email. If you know anyone who will
participate and does not have email access, please send me their address. If you
would like to participate in the IUF Skill Levels and Rules Committee, contact
me at my home email address (this is being sent from work): jfoss@unicycling.com

Stay on top, John Foss, Chairman IUF Skill Levels and Rules Committee
jfoss@unicycling.com

Re: IUF Skill Levels and Rules Committee starting up

At 05:05 PM 01/15/1999 +0900, Jack Halpern wrote:
>Greetings
>
>In message “Re: IUF Skill Levels and Rules Committee starting up”, Alberto
>Ruiz wrote…
> >
> >>
> >>See the current IUF Rulebook (and levels) at:
> >>http://www.unicycling.org/iuf/rulebook/
> >>
> >>Why wait until USA is done? Are we a USA puppet? No. The reason we’re
> >>waiting is to incorporate the best of their new proposals into the IUF
> >>rules, and maintain consistency whenever possible. Why did USA go first?
> >>Because they started first, and Andy is more of a go-getter than me. Also,
> >>the next USA convention is a year sooner than the next UNICON. The rules of
> >>the IUF were mostly derived from the rules of
the
> >>USA.
> >This is not true. Originally, there was lots of work from Sem who is Dutch.
>
>Excuse my immodesty, but the original proposal was made by myself together with
>Sem when he was in Japan, if my memory servs me right. Just for the record.

Sorry to have let you out. Your point reinforces my argument. If the USA has a
specific proposal, we should consider it. Same as JUA or any other. But the
proposal must be good on its own. Because they approved it for the USA should
have nothing to do with our decission. Same thing happened when the Japanese
decided to go to shorter cranks for racing.

Alberto Ruiz IUF President
> >
> >>
> >>Stay on top, John Foss, Chairman IUF Skill Levels and Rules Committee
> >>jfoss@unicycling.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >Alberto Ruiz ruizb@coqui.net
> >
>
>
>Regards, Jack Halpern Kanji Dictionary Publishing Society, http://www.kanji.org
>Voice: +81-048-481-3103 Fax: +81-048-479-1323
>
>
>
Alberto Ruiz ruizb@coqui.net

RE: IUF Skill Levels and Rules Committee starting up

The end result of the USA rules committee should be a recommendation to the IUF
to change its rules. The USA should not change its rules but should instead
conform to IUF rules and make recommendations. There should be exceptions that
are documented within the IUF rule book allowing countries or organizations
flexibility in certain area such as competition age groups.

The IUF can bring worldwide consistency to certain events. If each country has
their own rules it doesn’t properly prepare one for international competition.

            -----Original Message----- From: Alberto Ruiz
            [<a href="mailto:ruizb@coqui.net">mailto:ruizb@coqui.net</a>] Sent: Thursday, January 14, 1999 8:07
            PM To: Foss, JohnX; 'unicycling@winternet.com';
            'iuf-discuss@winternet.com' Subject: Re: IUF Skill Levels and
            Rules Committee starting up

>
>See the current IUF Rulebook (and levels) at:
>http://www.unicycling.org/iuf/rulebook/
>
>Why wait until USA is done? Are we a USA puppet? No. The reason
>we’re waiting is to incorporate the best of
their new
>proposals into the IUF rules, and maintain consistency
whenever possible.
>Why did USA go first? Because they started first, and Andy
is more of a
>go-getter than me. Also, the next USA convention is a year
sooner than the
>next UNICON. The rules of the IUF were mostly derived from
the rules of the
>USA.
This is not true. Originally, there was lots of work from Sem
who is Dutch. The Standard Skill part was mostly derived from
the Germans.

            The changes made about 10 years ago were derived from lots of
            persons including myself, John Foss, and many others. But the
            single individual who had the most input might have been
            Carlos Medina.

            The changes made more recently was the contribution of many
            persons, from all over the world. They mostly evolved from the
            experiences we had in UNICON.

            There can be many good reasons to change our Rules, but because
            the USA changed theirs' is not one of them. We should not change
            our rules because the Japanese change them either or because
            Germany changes them.

            Most of the changes should be based on what we learn from each
            UNICON, how we can improve them, and on the development of new
            skills and disciplines. They should not be based on what the
            USA decided.

            But there could be some elements that were discussed and
            developed at the USA that we should consider. We should receive
            and consider similar suggestions from the JUA, Europe, China,
            and Australia-NZ.

>

>
>Who can play? Anyone. The requirements of the IUF Skill Levels
>and Rules Committee are that you read all proposals and vote on
them
>responsibly, with the needs of the international unicycling
community in
>mind. Think of what is best for the world, and not just
your world.

            Agree. Very important. But we are interested on what is
            important on each part of the world. Something might be
            happening on Australia or China that they might want to share
            and in the future it could be a worldwide activity. That
            happened with hockey and MUNI.

>Also, your discussion, ideas, and proposals will add to the
process. New ideas are
>encouraged.
>
>Please note that our goal is to keep it simple. There are
no known large
>changes planned for this round, and energy wasted in this
committee would be
>better spent building a better IUF. Most of the planned
work is based on
>increased clarity and accuracy, some new events, and
safety. If you have big
>ideas, please share them with us. But some changes may be
tabled for future
>rounds.

            We should not prejudge that. Personally, I don't see the need of
            any big changes, except maybe on MUNIs, but we should wait and
            see what comes from the floor.

            Alberto Ruiz IUF President

>
>Stay on top, John Foss, Chairman IUF Skill Levels and Rules
>Committee jfoss@unicycling.com
>
>
>
Alberto Ruiz ruizb@coqui.net

RE: IUF Skill Levels and Rules Committee starting up

Good morning, (yes, I know it’s later for me here at the end of the world, plus
I was late for work…)

I opened my inbox to see a long list of messages on this topic. Joy! People are
interested in IUF rules improvement! But no, it was a discussion of who gets the
credit for the IUF rules of today.

This will be my last message on the topic to both mailing lists (excuse the
double posts), then I’ll move it over to iuf discuss. For those that are
interested, you can join iuf-discuss and listen to us argue semantics and who
should handle IUF memberships (plus more interesting stuff) by sending the
message “subscribe iuf-discuss” to majordomo@winternet.com - It works the same
way as rec.sport.unicycling via email (without the dropped messages).

So, I’m sure you guys would enjoy arguing about the creation of the IUF rules.
My purpose was to see who wants to improve them. Alberto and Jack are already
part of the committee from the past, and I’ll be sending out a copy of my last
list of committee members soon. Jean Ascher (Denmark) and Christian Hoverath
(Germany) have also joined so far. We’re going to write rules.

I mentioned in my last post why we’re waiting for USA to finish. I think my
explanation of why was sufficient, and that USA does not write policy for the
IUF. If anyone needs further explanation let me know. USA and IUF rules are very
consistent with each other and I would like it to stay that way. But if USA has
a deadline to make some changes before their next convention, it’s their
prerogative to take the initiative and work on their own rules. They can’t be
expected to wait for us to make changes to fit their schedule, or their needs.
Now that they’ve done the hard work, we might like some of the proposals and use
them as well. Less work for us! But we will still make our own decisions.

IUF’s rules were derived almost directly from the rules of the USA. If you want,
I can send out a copy of the rules from UNICON I, if anyone’s interested. After
the first IUF convention it was a more international team that brought those
rules up to the high standard we have today. In 1987/88 Sem Abrahams wrote the
rules for Standard Skill as we know it, based on Artistic Bicycling. He
certainly deserves the credit for that. Many of us have been on the IUF Rules
Committee, some as early as 1984 (83?), developing our current, excellent rules.
But the USA rules were the original “template”. I like being controversial (in
case you couldn’t tell), but if we want to continue digging into rules history,
let’s do it under a different subject line please.

IUF rules have since influenced unicycling organizations and competitions around
the world, including the USA, which uses IUF Standard Skill verbatim. But beyond
that, I’m realizing the IUF doesn’t really have any policy on how to “water
down” the international rules for specific national needs. This might be another
interesting topic of discussion, a set of recommendations on how to have your
own rules in your country while staying consistent with the international stuff,
so riders can still compete at a UNICON without having to start over. Certainly
we cannot force individual countries to use our rules.

> There can be many good reasons to change our Rules, but because the USA
> changed theirs’ is not one of them.

I agree. In case anyone is still unsure of what I meant, we’re going to look
at the USA’s changes, and use the ones we like. They’re good! The reason we’ve
waited is to make sure their changes are finalized, so we match. No one made
us wait, we didn’t have to. We’re volunteers. We work when we have the time. I
was in fact working on the USA committee and didn’t want to get confused with
two different sets of proposals at the same time. This way makes much more
sense to me.

> Most of the changes should be based on what we learn from each UNICON, how

Yes and no. I think we can also learn a lot from watching what happens, what
works and doesn’t work, and what’s popular in the rest of the world too. Hockey
for exmple was not used by IUF until it became popular elsewhere.

> We should not prejudge that. Personally, I don’t see the need of any big
> changes, except maybe on MUNIs, but we should wait and see what comes from
> the floor.

We will.

Stay on top,

John Foss, the Uni-Cyclone http://www.unicycling.com

Re: IUF Skill Levels and Rules Committee starting up

Greetings

In message “Re: IUF Skill Levels and Rules Committee starting up”, Alberto
Ruiz wrote…
>
>>
>>See the current IUF Rulebook (and levels) at:
>>http://www.unicycling.org/iuf/rulebook/
>>
>>Why wait until USA is done? Are we a USA puppet? No. The reason we’re waiting
>>is to incorporate the best of their new proposals into the IUF rules, and
>>maintain consistency whenever possible. Why did USA go first? Because they
>>started first, and Andy is more of a go-getter than me. Also, the next USA
>>convention is a year sooner than the next UNICON. The rules of the IUF were
>>mostly derived from the rules of the USA.
>This is not true. Originally, there was lots of work from Sem who is Dutch.

Excuse my immodesty, but the original proposal was made by myself together with
Sem when he was in Japan, if my memory servs me right. Just for the record.

> The Standard Skill part was mostly derived from the Germans.
>
>The changes made about 10 years ago were derived from lots of persons including
>myself, John Foss, and many others. But the single individual who had the most
>input might have been Carlos Medina.
>
>The changes made more recently was the contribution of many persons, from all
>over the world. They mostly evolved from the experiences we had in UNICON.
>
>
>There can be many good reasons to change our Rules, but because the USA changed
>theirs’ is not one of them. We should not change our rules because the Japanese
>change them either or because Germany changes them.
>
>Most of the changes should be based on what we learn from each UNICON, how we
>can improve them, and on the development of new skills and disciplines. They
>should not be based on what the USA decided.
>
>But there could be some elements that were discussed and developed at the USA
>that we should consider. We should receive and consider similar suggestions
>from the JUA, Europe, China, and Australia-NZ.
>
>
>
>>
>
>>
>>Who can play? Anyone. The requirements of the IUF Skill Levels and Rules
>>Committee are that you read all proposals and vote on them responsibly, with
>>the needs of the international unicycling community in mind. Think of what is
>>best for the world, and not just your world.
>
>Agree. Very important. But we are interested on what is important on each part
>of the world. Something might be happening on Australia or China that they
>might want to share and in the future it could be a worldwide activity. That
>happened with hockey and MUNI.
>>Also, your discussion, ideas, and proposals will add to the process. New ideas
>>are encouraged.
>>
>>Please note that our goal is to keep it simple. There are no known large
>>changes planned for this round, and energy wasted in this committee would
>>be better spent building a better IUF. Most of the planned work is based on
>>increased clarity and accuracy, some new events, and safety. If you have
>>big ideas, please share them with us. But some changes may be tabled for
>>future rounds.
>
>We should not prejudge that. Personally, I don’t see the need of any big
>changes, except maybe on MUNIs, but we should wait and see what comes from
>the floor.
>
>Alberto Ruiz IUF President
>
>>
>>Stay on top, John Foss, Chairman IUF Skill Levels and Rules Committee
>>jfoss@unicycling.com
>>
>>
>>
>Alberto Ruiz ruizb@coqui.net
>

Regards, Jack Halpern Kanji Dictionary Publishing Society, http://www.kanji.org
Voice: +81-048-481-3103 Fax: +81-048-479-1323