Wrt "the increased pro field size and quality here was so that they could get a next year worlds spot" I suggest you're wrong. The Pro fields' sizes had zero to do with Taupo: it's just a good race before Christmas. As to quality, there was a (successful) Viking raiding party and (I think) they all got Taupo slots.//

In one breath you tell me I'm wrong, then in the next one give an example why I was right...Of course the Norgs came for the slots in worlds(the men) and they got them. They are not coming here for anything else, even the little money was not really an incentive, just a little bonus along with getting the sought after slots. And no doubt there were a few more in the fields with that goal in mind, but just those that are at the point end, and that end was stacked. Others did do the race for racing sake, like Sam and a few others who specialize in this distance. So the size of field was just lightly influenced, but quality was much more so at the pointy end...


For those guys that did get the slots this early in the cycle, gives them a lot more flexibility now for their crossover seasons. Crap the bed in ITU and you have an off ramp to the ironman series, as well as the 100k series. But that ironman one is going to be really, really tight I'm guessing, and guys will need those WC starts to get the bonus points to set themselves apart from the masses who will be going for the 200k...

I believe that he is dating Jess Belcher as well (she does everything with him and travels with the Norwegians a lot) and so...fun little fact - one of my athletes beat her in women's OA AG race to keep it from a full Norwegian sweep (yes...she's American but...)

Pretty great day out there - the Norwegians really were crushing the bike today...

---

DFRU - Detta Family Racing Unit...the kids like it and we all get out and after it...gotta keep the fam involved!

Correct, the last place Women's pro went 5:01 which was a 7 minute PB for her. Not sure how on earth someone who's never broken 5:00 gets to call themselves a pro. Yet she's one of the larger IG triathletes. It boggles the mind.

In one breath you tell me I'm wrong you're wrong, and then acknowledge that I was right.
I said: "The Pro fields' sizes had zero to do with Taupo" and you almost agreed: "The size of field was just lightly influenced" by the chance of getting a 2024 "worlds spot". Nope. Only the front end had any such motivation: had zero to do with "pro field size" men or women.
Quality "at the pointy end"? Agree: if it had been a challenge/clash race the Norges would've gone elsewhere, but the 70.3s in USA are easy pickings cf the alternative of Bahrain, for example.
None of these Norges are going to be the slightest bit interested in the IM Series (no "off ramp": the IM Series boat is long gone come 6 August.) After Paris they can work their way towards Taupo (for a good thrashing by world standard athletes). No athlete without at least one IM plus the IMWC will make top 10 in the IM Series. The Vikings just want to race Taupo because it's 'the' de facto MD WC.

Is there a 100k series (as you put it)? I guess there a chance these winners might get a wild card to Ibiza when PTO are scrabbling for participants.

Well at least name names and give us a link.
https://www.instagram.com/la_triathlete/?hl=en

Her IG profile is mostly playful tiktok type stuff, so that's why she has a following. She's obviously talented as far as general triathlon population goes, but not a contending pro. Still, from my perspective if the stars lined up and I earned a pro card and could race back of pack pro, I'd jump on it in a heart beat given the current offer. Pay a licensing fee and then get free entry and various pro priority treatment? Absolutely. I don't think she's out there hyping herself up as a pro caliber athlete all over the place. If anything a lot of her content seems to not take herself too seriously. Does anyone know how she qualified?

Everyone bitching about the "to many pro's" that peaked 10 years ago when USAT had 7 different "loopholes" that athletes could find. Now it's basically finish top 3 at a prize purse race 3x in 1 year (so basically all IM events with pro purses). Now that may still be too many opportunities but I actually think 1/2 the athletes who "qualify" don't even take the pro card anymore. The DL pathway is basically finish top 3 at an DL specific "EDR" event.

It actually looks better on IG to NOT take the pro card and keep beast mode AG races and proclaim your "win" as a race win, etc.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Ajax -- you gotta find a little more balance here. You're right about why Indian Wells is so popular. It's similar to Oceanside as the start to the NA season. This is the last big race of the year. You get good competition. You get good weather. Good place to go and see where you stack up. Obviously some short course athletes showed up so that they don't have to pencil in another 70.3 before the Olympics.

But nobody finished an hour after the winner except the last place MPro who blew up on the run to a 2:16. There's significant drop off in the MPro field after 4:0x. Take a guy like Ari who had an off day but qualified for 70.3 Worlds in his last race. It happens. Most of the pro field came to race & test themselves. Maybe folks aren't impressed by mid-pack pros or pros finishing in the last 1/3 because there are some AGers hitting the same times but not turning pro. Those people should turn pro. The qualification system in place is fair. It's not just a walk in the park to hit the standard. Saying that the last 1/3 has a history of finishing in those times is disrespectful. You want them back to winning AG races & taking Worlds slots from amateurs who can't train as much as they do? Some people aren't super talented but can get up to that ~4hr to 4:10 shape with a lot of hard work. Large fields are a good thing. More pros paying their Ironman dues. This isn't a track race. Long course racing can accommodate these field sizes.

Looks like she got in through an elite qualifying race (I think LA) based on race results. I don't think anyone should be anonymously calling her out but it does look like an outlier. Usually the elite criteria do a decent job at lining up. The pro score rating is 106.2198 (hit it twice to become a pro). It usually takes well over that at AG Nats & at elite qualifying races to finish in those slots. So most people who hit the score rating at one of those races likely have to do it again because maybe they finished 10th but still scored high enough. This looks like a rare case where the amateur field didn't show up & the top-3 wouldn't have been able to get their license through the other criteria. But this doesn't affect me and I don't blame them at all. There are times when USAT score ratings are low across the board and at some races they're super high. It doesn't always make perfect sense. She grabbed a PR at this race and can swim/bike well enough to finish mid pack in the future. Put in a big run block and then people on here won't be able to talk about you. This is USAT letting someone use the standard to try and develop with increased competition. She is PRing. Now work on the run & prove that you belong. All good.

All good points dc.
I'll wind my neck in (a bit) but it's still 'an issue' imo. Totally recognise you can have an off day. Still think there's merit in an annual requirement to show that pro licence is merited: just one race (say) within 15% of the winner (220 mins + 33 in this race) or within 68 minutes of an IM winner. Perhaps all these guys would hold onto their licence - forgive me if I don't go though the (long) list - and you're right: I should put that effort in and otherwise show respect for the status quo.
For the record the best of the 'bottom third' MPRO finished in 4:03. Only beaten by 3 amateurs. In WPRO the best of the 'bottom third' finished in 4:40. Beaten by only 4 amateurs.
Will be interested to see the best amateur woman (Shappell) race in the pro field next year if she so chooses: she'd be right up there in the USA rankings.

For full disclosure to the conversation usat requires a pro to validate within 3 years I believe within 5-8% of winner.

Funny enough if it were haven to validate every year, an athlete like Morgan Pearson would have lost his license due to not racing for I believe 15 months due to injury/mental stress. That’s why it’s a 3 year window for US based pros to “validate” their pro license.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

I would also add that you can get your pro status racing short, draft-legal races. I know at least 2 of the ladies racing qualified that way. Being a great DL athlete doesn't always mean you'll be a great 70.3 athlete and vice-versa but they've got their pro card and if they want to race a 70.3 they have to race it as a pro.

Yeah everything reasonable in here. You have to come within 8% of the winning time once every 3 years. Maybe it should be yearly? Clock resets every time you do that so theoretically you could have someone fall off & compete as a pro for 3 years without hitting what you need to hit to re-up. But I would guess most pros are there to push themselves & stay in the pro field. Guessing someone would hang them up if they were getting deeper into that 3 years without doing it. I tend to think the pros that come in towards the back of the pack are committed to racing better than the 8% & trying to move up as high as they can. Some people hit their limits & don't get a lot better than that. They're still pros imo & I'm more than ok with them not taking AG podiums.

Don't know who these people are but they have started making some pretty cool little race highlight videos. I hope they can expand a bit in the future as they do a great job.

Annoyingly I can't see the video. I'm cleared my cache, logged out and accepted cookies, but still no luck.

Do you mind posting the title so I can find it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHj4-Y0hR9U

Really cool video

---

http://www.sfuelsgolonger.com

....and now,Ari's story