Perhaps I am giving USAC too much credit here, but I see these changes as being forward-looking.
If we are to believe that the ABS National Championships will continue to grow as an annual event, these changes could help to accommodate that growth. However, these changes will certainly have immediate drawbacks that will hopefully be temporary in nature. If the event continues to grow, despite these necessary "growing pains," we may look back on these decisions as wise and timely. But if these changes are premature, and based on overly optimistic projections of growth, the event could possibly stagnate or potentially be downsized. (The former being rather unlikely)
Some potential pitfalls:
Holding ABS Nationals in a non-gym setting has the potential for larger venues with a more spectator-friendly atmosphere. However, this also has the potential of alienating large gyms who previously benefited from hosting large ABS events such as Nationals. Also, as was mentioned in the previous post, ABS Nationals does not draw a large crowd of "spectators." The audience consists almost entirely of climbers, industry professionals, event volunteers, and family members of the aforementioned. By splitting the two events and holding the event in a large venue with copious amounts of "spectator seating," you run the risk of having a huge arena of empty seats for two weekends in a row. Sponsors will not respond well to this scenario.
Cross-over athletes, those who compete in both the youth and open ABS National Championships, constitute a very small amount of the over-all participants in either event. However, their presence is not negligible. Due to financial realities these athletes would most likely choose to attend one event, rather than both. I will assume that these athletes would choose to compete in the Open division with the pros. This effectively reduces the competitiveness of the Youth National Championships, as the elite athletes will infrequently attend. In my opinion, this further reduces the likelihood for sponsors or spectators to get involved with the Youth National Championship. And as a coach I can confidently say that my students would have little motivation to pay the entrance fee, travel across the country, and not even be able to see their elite peers climb, let alone the pros.
As I mentioned before, these changes could be GREAT for the event IF they are being made to accommodate for a huge growth in the sport. In this case, growth would have to come in the for of increased sponsorship, increased participation in the event (by athletes), increased audience participation (pure spectators, not family and outdoor industry reps), or drastically increased coverage of the event.
I have not seen or heard any signs of this type of significant growth. My only hope is that the people at USAC are scrambling to secure ESPN coverage of the event, secure greatly increased sponsorship of the event so that they can offer scholarships to youth athletes, or some other form of growth. Otherwise, we will be looking at two ill-attended events whose results will become increasingly irrelevant.
I'm hoping for the best!