I am, but I'm also not.
1. The format is overly complicated. This is supposed to enliven the sport and attract new fans, but with the complications new fans will not know what the heck is going on. Short courses, high action are great ideas, but this is not a good execution.
1a. I don't think athletes are going to race overly hard for the first or second round to conserve for the final. 10 minutes between is not much time. I predict tactical more than "throwing down", at least until the last round.
2. Prize money is too heavily weighted for the win. $50K win, 25k second then counting down with 10th getting more money or paying deeper.
As it is, $2,500 for 10th means expenses aren't even covered. I think this would attract much deeper fields and you'd have athletes whom were perhaps really strong cyclists but talented enough to win trying to thow down in their individual strength which would liven the race up a bit.
2a. A "Prime" for first across in each leg / segment / whatever could be exciting, as with intermediate sprint points in stage racing.
I talk a lot - Give it a listen:
http://www.fasttalklabs.com/category/fast-talk I also give Training Advice via
http://www.ForeverEndurance.com The above poster has eschewed traditional employment and is currently undertaking the ill-conceived task of launching his own hardgoods company. Statements are not made on behalf of nor reflective of anything in any manner... unless they're good, then they count.
http://www.AGNCYINNOVATION.com