I understand your points and I respect them, but I don't fully believe the "Half-Full is totally different" pitch and that it doesn't exist for the sake of racing, etc.... Why the $25K pro purse and Half-Full being part of the $100K series payout in that case, if the purpose and mission of this race is so different from all the rest? And, yes, my race also exists to benefit a charity and my race also has (or had) a pro purse, so I understand the business rationale behind putting money into a prize purse to attract a field in order to give a race credibility, but my purse is a far cry from $25K + $100K series payout. And, the argument is that Half-Full is so different from all the other Rev3 events and this is the justification for tossing aside the rules to allow LA, but I just don't know that the argument holds up under scrutiny.
This is just my gut, but I suspect Brian and Doug were huge supporters of making it possible to get Lance to race, floated it past Charlie, and Charlie didn't think through as much as he should have before giving the a-ok. Will Rev3 regret it long-term? I doubt it they put on good races and that's what matters over all else. Are they correct in catching grief for it now? In my opinion, certainly yes.
This is just my gut, but I suspect Brian and Doug were huge supporters of making it possible to get Lance to race, floated it past Charlie, and Charlie didn't think through as much as he should have before giving the a-ok. Will Rev3 regret it long-term? I doubt it they put on good races and that's what matters over all else. Are they correct in catching grief for it now? In my opinion, certainly yes.