Near the end of Hofstade, my guide through these events, Patrick Demunter, asked me are the ways that commissaires operate at these races much different than in the US. I was truly happy to say that, for the most part, the function and operations are the same. Thanks to Judy Miller and Diane Fortini, I have the good fortune to have always worked with the best cross officials teams in the mid-Atlantic/Northeast corridor. I can say that these top officials operate at the same level as the Belgian commissaires at the Diegem and Hofstade events. From what I could tell, the Northeast officials work as many cross races per year as do the Belgian commissaires.

The major difference lies in the level of the events. Just like the function of the commissaires at the Tour de France is much different than that of the commissaires at a UCI 2.2 stage race, the function of commissaires at these events are much more defined. Particularly at Hofstade, a World Cup event, there are so many other people in charge of the operations of the event and have specific silos of responsibility, the commissaire’s role is focused on supervision of conduct and production of results and decisions. At US races, the organizational staffs are usually stretched thin and the race officials often pitch in on filling in the gaps, which is what one needs to do to help a developing sport.

I noted to Patrick that from a technical standpoint, one of the efficient techniques I noted in their scoring system is their methodical crossing off of rider’s numbers from the previous lap as they pass on the current lap (see scanned scoring sheet). He explained this allowed the scorers and judges to immediately know who has skipped a lap either from being in the pit or getting to the pit. I noted to him that this would not be possible for most of our races which have field sizes near or over one hundred riders. However, this system made sense for field sizes, like in Belgium, of 60 or under riders.

In the US, we use much more radio contact between the officials and with the race organization. I did not see the same at these Belgian races. The jury president did not carry a radio. The Belgian commissaires on the line had a radio link to the commissaires in the pits. I think we use the radio more as: 1) our race organizers tend to be multi-tasking at the event and therefore are in multiple locations at once, making up for their lack of staff vis a vis what we see at these Belgian events; 2) our race judges are keeping track of so, so many more riders across many categories at once, they need more information from the pits; 3) the tape breaks more often at our events and the commissaires are often the ones who see this.

Just as I’ve noted the Northeast officials are very, very comfortable with working with and are on first name basis with our leading US riders, so are the Belgian commissaires working with the world’s best riders.  Races in the Northeast routinely have many of the top Elite men in the fields.  Likewise, a class 1 and higher race in Belgium is like working the world championships.  At Diegem, a class 1 event, 9 of the top 10 Elite men on UCI rankings and 11 of the 11^th to 30th UCI rankings were on the start line.  That said, the Belgian commissaires were always very relaxed and calm.  Everything went like clockwork – that’s because they just did this yesterday, and if not yesterday, then just a few days before. 

I noted only one small error, which was a missing Elite Belgian woman at Hofstade.  Her name was missing on the sign-in signature sheet.  After Patrick Demunter confirmed that she was on the registration sheets, which he had with him on the course, then he called in her name to the race organization and then she signed in. 

Many times in this document, the concept of a “college of commissaires” or the term “race jury” have been used.  For readers not familiar with these terms, they represent the working environment and decision making style used at UCI international races.  The president of the race jury is usually assigned by the UCI for class 1 and World Cup cyclocross events.  The race jury is a panel of commissaires who will discuss, deliberate, and take a decision by majority vote.  The president should represent this decision of the jury.  Thus, one sees communiqués that will say “Decisions of the Race Jury”, which documents the sporting decisions made by this jury.  At the Tour de France and other grand tours, the jury is made up of four commissaires, and at other events it is typically three commissaires.

The president of the jury is often from outside of the host region or country of the event.  Usually, a different commissaire is assigned each year.  This rotation provides a “neutral” and “impartial” person to preside over the event, who theoretically and usually practically has no ties to the organization, the host federation, and importantly, no ties to the local politics if they exist.  This outside President is usually supported by senior commissaires from the host country or region, who more often than not know the host organization and federation.  They serve as a liaison from the race jury to the local bodies and the local commissaires. 

As described in other travelogues at pro road races, the senior Belgian commissaires played this liaison and facilitation role for the two presidents assigned to Diegem and Hofstade.  Patrick Demunter played this role at both races.  He was intimately familiar with both events, living only kilometers from the Diegem course.  At Diegem, when Ruffino Martinelli, from Italy, arrived in the permenance and had greeted everyone, he and Patrick then pow-wowed about the race, the status of things, and the operations at the event.  Like I do at US based UCI cross races, Ruffino worked with Patrick before the Elite race to complete the UCI race report in as much as possible before the end of the race.  For the most part at Diegem, the Belgian commissaires conducted the sporting aspects of the event under the supervision of Ruffino.

At Hofstade, the president Miroslav Janout, from the Czech Republic, was much more hands on.  I couldn’t tell if this was a difference in management style or was it a difference in the status of the event being a World Cup --- more protocols that need to be ensured.   Just as with Ruffino, Patrick played the facilitator and liaison role with Miroslav.  During registration, Miroslav related to me that often the World Cup events are missing elements that the president needs to fix on site.  For organizers in the US, take note that even these World Cups miss things that happen in your races.  Miroslav then needs to address as many as possible.  Thus, his hands-on approach may have evolved from this experience needing to help World Cups in many places.  Upon reflection, I must have looked like Miroslav at a World Cup track race for which I was president and the race organization was in need of “help”.  I suppose that’s the role of the president.

Mutual respect and a longer term point of view is what allows several experienced commissaires to work together in these formats.  A senior commissaire in the host country knows that when they are assigned into the country of the incoming president, they will need that person’s help at a later date.  What goes around comes around.  So collaboration and facilitation is repaid later when you are the president in some race, where you don’t know the customs, history, or organization, and on the jury is someone you have worked with before, perhaps president in a race in your home country. 

At the top levels, you meet each other in different places around the world at different disciplines of the sport and at different years.  When Ruffino greeted the college of commissaires, he eyed me shaking his finger.  It was the smile on his face while he shaked his finger that assured me that this was not a negative rememberance.  I said two words “Mexico City” and that was all he needed to remember that we worked together five years ago at a World Cup track race in Mexico City, where he came in as president.  The same smile came when Janout saw me in the permenance in Hofstade, as we have seen each other over the decades at the UCI commissaires seminars each January and have worked together once in the past.  I smiled even more later in the day as Miroslav was explaining to the race announcer that I had been on the jury of the 2004 Tour de France, something that the announcer was stunned, replying “the whole race?”  Yes, four weeks away from work is a miracle for a corporate executive, but it is possible.

The other style that is common at the UCI international event level is the collaboration between the commissaires and the race organization.  Key decisions that would affect the outcome of the race or the image of the event are made in consultation with the race organization.  On the line at these events are top members of the race organization that are in consultation range of the president.  At Hofstade, the UCI coordinator and technical delegate played more often this role with the race organization.