Future Changes to the MTB Individual Omnium?
In the years since mountain biking first came onto the national stage, and even since it became a major collegiate sport, the discipline has changed dramatically, as gravity and endurance events have become distinct disciplines. Fewer and fewer athletes compete in both events, and as courses adapt to these specialized athletes and their specialized equipment, it becomes more and more difficult for riders to compete in all events with a single bike. 
A relatively recent change to the collegiate rulebook requires that any individual competing for the omnium at USAC Collegiate Mountain Bike National Championships contest at least one endurance and one gravity event, to ensure that the best all-around rider wins the title, rather than a pure specialist in one or the other. While it is certainly a core value of collegiate cycling to reward diversity of talent, in recent years there have arisen several concerns with this aspect of the event:
1. Safety: In an effort to win omnium points, riders are competing in events that they are not comfortable tackling. Part of this solution lies in strict enforcement of upgrades, but nonetheless, while USA Cycling wants to encourage riders to try new events and diversify, it benefits no one to encourage riders to put themselves in dangerous situations which they are not comfortable handling (this especially applies to endurance specialists tackling treacherous gravity courses, who either injure themselves taking lines they shouldn't, or dismount to clear sections, only to hold up or hurt the riders barreling down the mountain behind them.
2. Expense: As mentioned above, endurance courses are growing steeper uphill, and gravity courses are getting steeper downhill. It is next to impossible, not to mention unwise, to tackle a cross country race on a big-hit huckster bike, or to try a downhill on a carbon hardtail. This adds significant expense to event travel for those that would otherwise choose to specialize in a single event or discipline, lends an advantage to teams that are better funded, and limits gravity racers that might want to bring one bike for DS/4X and one for DH, but are forced to leave one at home in favor of a Cross-Country machine. 
3. Quality of Competition: While some of the motivation behind the omnium requirements lies in preventing specialists from beating out quality all-arounders, the rule is not always successful in its aim: it is by no means impossible to place well in either the endurance or gravity events, and suffer through the others, earn a point or two, and place highly in the individual omnium, beating out a rider that places moderately in all four races. Which of these athletes is a truer champion? An argument can be made either way, but in the end it could also be argued that it is an apples-to-oranges comparison.
4. Participation: Another component to the rule is to increase participation in different events and, as stated above, encourage riders to try new things. Yet each year the number of individuals eligible for the omnium decreases, as riders become more specialized one way or the other. With fewer than 10 competitors eligible in some divisions and genders, it becomes easier for someone to perform relatively poorly and still place well.
There are, of course, extensive arguments to counter those made above. In some ways we are playing the devil's advocate here by listing out these issues, in an effort to arouse a discussion amongst collegiate athletes, and find out exactly what you want for your championships. We want to hear your thoughts! So express your opinion and fill out the survey here. Where should we go with this discussion? It's up to you.
