|
Feedback from our coverage of the Atlanta Endurance Race |
|
Dear Chuck: After our pleasant phone conversation last evening, in which you
promised to post my letter on your site without editing it, I am writing
in response to the article you posted on your web site by Joern Beer (click
here). I especially want to address his following comment: "Also, when the prize
money was being awarded at the conclusion of his decision, team MVS stated they wanted to make an "official donation to the Atlanta Barefoot
Club," handing Scott's wife a wad of bills. I only wish I had that on the videotape!" (end quote)
I notice this morning that you have removed that comment from his article and I wonder why. I have the original
copy which I previously printed from your website and emailed to my work
address and to several friends. That comment was very hurtful and implied that the club took a payoff and specifically me. After St. Louis
donated their earnings back to the club, I discussed this with Rob later
in the day and he and I made the decision to donate this money to the National Breast Cancer Foundation.
We chose this charity due to the fact that I have a good friend who recently was diagnosed with this
terrible disease. Neither Rob, myself or the Atlanta Barefoot Club
makes any kind of profit from any of these races and do not wish to be accused of doing so.
What is so wrong about Mr. Beer's comment is that he made a prejudgment that was totally wrong and if he had taken the
time to call me, then this could have been avoided. The comment was
made in such a manner as to defame my character. I further want to say
that I was raised by parents who taught me that when you have a grievance with someone you call them
personally or you go to them and resolve it with that person, not by posting your anger and malicious
comments for thousands of people to see. I personally called Mr. Beer
last night and informed him as well as to where the money went and that it was not a payoff by St. Louis, as he implied.
I also let him know that I have never had someone's comments hurt me as deeply as his did.
These barefooters do not know me or anything about my character any more
than I know anything about theirs or yours. For that matter they
have taken one incident and judged and convicted Rob's character as well.
I would not and will never stoop so low as to berate and belittle anyone
for the world to see. I thought the barefoot community was above that
type of action, but unfortunately I have been proven wrong. I hold no
ill will toward anyone over this misfortunate incident and I pray, yes I
pray because I believe in God, that this community of skiers can focus on the positive in these races more than the negative.
From everything I have read on your website regarding these races, no one mentions the
positive. It is just like the media, the more bad that is written, the more people want. What a sad, sad thing. Wrong
judgments are always going to happen, but lets at least go face to face with whom we have
believed has wronged us. None of us are perfect. I only know One who
walked on water who was perfect. Barefooters try to walk on water, but
they need a boat going 40 mph to do so. That tells me that barefooters
are not perfect. I was taught to build a person up and not to tear them down.
Nothing good ever comes from tearing someone down. There is an old saying that
I try to live by, "If you can't say something good, then don't say
anything at all." Another saying that in my life I have found to be
true is, "What goes around, comes around". If you tear someone down
then the same will happen to you. In closing, may God bless each and every barefooter and may He keep them safe on the water and may He heal
all this anger.
Ms. Scott: We feel bad that you took Mr. Beer's article as an attack against your character. We did not take it that way at all. We looked at it as a confirmation of what Chris Morrison perceived as he (a 14 year old) watched on as a group of adults 's debated an emotional issue. I agreed to remove Mr. Beer's comment in his article after you told me how much it hurt you and that you wished that I would remove it. I understand your point of view and didn't feel it fair to leave the statement on the website without first giving you a chance to reply to how it made you feel. I think your donation to the National Breast Cancer Foundation is a great idea, but please remember that Chris, nor Mr. Beers, knew nothing of this when they saw the St. Louis team hand you the money. It was great that you thought of such a good way to use the money. Maybe next time Rob can give the teams the option upfront to donate their winnings to a charity that your club supports. That way, everyone will know about it in advance. Your
comments about BarefootCentral.com only focusing on the negative is just
like Mr. Beer's implied comment about you accepting money as a
bribe. You are implying something that just isn't true. It's
not that we are negative, but that people tend to only remember the controversy
that we stir up when we point out an injustice (ie. Scarpa being voted
off the US Elite Team) or decision or action by a top skier that we feel
reflects bad on the sport. So in order to refresh your memory of
some of the things we did this year that we think are positive and
helped promote the sport of barefoot waterskiing: In all, we have spent over $50,000 so far in 2004 helping to promote and report on the sport. Can you tell us anyone who has spent more? I know this incident has caused you a lot of worry and heartache, and I respect you personal beliefs, upbringing, and religion. But I also don't want to cloud the issue with the emotion that surrounds religion. This is not a debate on religious beliefs. I have spoken with Rob several times on the root cause of Chris' article and Rob feels he made the right decision and he bases it on his trust of the guys from St. Louis and feels they would not cheat on purpose. I also know the St. Louis team, and don't believe they would cheat on purpose either. But the fact still remains that they did admit to going off course and thus took a short-cut that allowed them to gain an advantage over the other teams in the race. Whether they did it or purpose or not is not the issue. The issue is Rob decided to allow it based on his gut feeling of what was right. How he enforces the rules of his race is a direct reflection on his ability to manage a highly competitive event. Using an argument that staying on course was not a written rule, therefore you'll put it in next year doesn't hold water. Each team is given a map and highlighted course to follow. That in itself is a written guideline that shows the course that has to be followed be every team in the race. I think everyone would agree that we shouldn't have to put in writing that each team is required to stay on the course or they will be disqualified. That's an unwritten rule any any race in any sport. If a team uses that as an excuse, then we should assume their intensions were to bend the rules and not look at them as all innocent. Bottom-line is if any team goes off course and gains an advantage because of it, they should be penalized somehow, either by adding time to their score, or by disqualification. If a team goes off course, realizes it, then back-tracks to the point where they went off, then completes the race, that would be OK because the back-tracking would cost them the extra time. If the course Rob has currently laid out leaves room for confusion during the race, my advise is change it up so there is absolutely no room for misunderstanding. I would rather see him lay out a shorter race that is easy to navigate than take pride in having the longest race and one that is not so easy to follow. If he thinks his current course is easy to navigate, then he should have disqualified the St. Louis team without a second thought. If he totally believes they did vary off course by mistake, he should eliminate the confusion by either making sure he places boats with observers at key points in the race to guide racers in the right direction (like the St. Louis club did during the Mississippi race), or lay out a new course that doesn't require the extra people to help. Nobody that I know questions Rob's, or your, love of the sport and desire to host a great event for all who attend. But I can attest that Rob is one of the most stubborn organizers of all the racing events. He is, in our opinion, the slowest to adapt his rules to what the skiers want despite having many people give him the same feedback. He is very defensive when you bring up the topic of his rules, and he always makes comments that he doesn't want to apply Dam-to-Dam rules because he doesn't agree with them and wants his race to be more challenging. He seems to only hear what he wants to hear, but the stats speak for themselves. The Dam-to-Dam has grown from a few boats a mult-day, 4 heat race consisting of 19 teams in 2004. Each year the Austin event keeps getting bigger. Rob's event has shrunk from 10 boats to only a few, and none of the big name skiers come to Atlanta anymore. Most of the reason is because of his special rules and his non-consistent approach to how he applies them. I would love to see the Atlanta Race get back to a 10+ boat event. But in order to do that, Rob is going to have to take a hard look at his course, his rules, and how he plans to regain the trust of the skiers that he will apply the rules in a way that is fair to all teams involved, whether those teams have skied his race before or not. Rob is one of the most motivated and dedicated organizers. He manages to raise money from sponsors when nobody else can. He gives a lot of prizes away at his event each year. But unless he has the skier's respect, all of that kind-hearted effort is for not. We can only wait and see what Rob plans to do next year. I hope he chooses to channel his passion in a way that will entice the skiers to come back to event. Chuck Do you have a comment or opinion you would like us to reply to? Here's your opportunity. Send an email containing your comments to the Webmaster, cg@barefootcentral.com. We appreciate all the feedback our readers give us. Without it, we wouldn't know whether we were creating the type of content you are looking for. |
