JRSL wrote:
Messick also had this to say, in the context of competing races in the Okanagan on the same date. Newscaster: "But triathletes being forced to pick either Penticton or another Okanagan city was avoidable, says Ironman organizer."
Messick: "I think that it is unfortunate that Penticton chose to put their race on the historical date of IMC."
Gets me thinking , he used the term "historical"....since when did the WTC care about history, they systematically stripped the IMC of its staus in the IM world, they put another IM (louisville) on the same damn day, they reduced the AG Kona slots to 50, the same as other run of the mill IM, they reduced the Kona Pro ranking points to the lowest level, and mandated that the Pro Prize money was at the lowest level, it was not an "historical event" it was a second tier race, uncared for by the WTC.....The WTC didn't care then, they don't care now about IMC, Penticton, or anything else other than a cash cow just ran off to another farmers field, and they claim "historical date of IMC".....Mr Messick, you are an ass, you addressed the Penticton city council, you refused to confirm IMC would remain in Penticton long term, you called it a "business decision".....stop with the Historical crap.....It was a "business decision"......You (the WTC) screwed up a perfectly good thing, end of story.
I hope the Challenge race is a success, I hope that IMC can continue in some form elsewhere, but the WTC is full of crap on this.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>X
If you run long enough....something is bound to happen