My only push back is in the idea that PTO is running a bad business model, when in fact they are accomplishing exactly what they have sought out to do- create a professional series and take it to market.
. ...and that is exactly where I sit as far as the PTO is concerned. The only thing I care about is the Pro races for the PTO and don't give a second thought to any age group race associated with those races. Very selfish on my part but my enthusiasm for the plight of age group racing in Nth America ended when I saw how fickle people in the USA and Canada were about racing tri's when Challenge tried to enter the market. Here in my part of the world,I have so many tri's within 200k of home that I could have a full calendar of events with everything from sprints to Ultraman to enter if I wanted. The PTO and Ph3onix already support a few of those events so more aren't needed and I can't see why people are so hung up on the PTO business model. If they succeed then awesome,if they don't long term, (and I don't expect them to) then it was great while it lasted.
My only push back is in the idea that PTO is running a bad business model, when in fact they are accomplishing exactly what they have sought out to do- create a professional series and take it to market.
So it may not be successful, and I agree with that. But this idea that they've mismanaged things, I don't think is very fair or very accurate. That "mismanagement" isn't what is going to led this to not being successful; the lack of buy in from the general public will be the reason why investors don't stay in this long term imo. So that failure is far different than the narrative you guys are suggesting is going on imo.
Again, I dispute this. Otherwise why are they piggy backing everything they do off the mass participation model? Washed up footy player turned Triathlete.
The things they want to broadcast already exist, the racers are already racing. You don't need to throw money at them.
--------
Except they have created an entirely new distance that has been accepted by WT as the "middle distance" (or whatever official title they are calling 100k distance). So if they don't think long course is a broadcastable product and they weren't going to go down the draft legal platform that already had SLT + WTCS. You may not like that and you keep bringing in the 70.3 distance as some equal when in reality they aren't. It's easily what 1/2 hour shorter race and broadcast windows are only so infinite. To be able to 100% do it under 4 horus (not possible for women's 70.3 broadcast) is important when talking about broadcast requirements.
Remember they started out in the "long course" game and very quickly realized that product would never be able to be broadcast in it's entirety. I think they quickly cut out IM distance as even a strategy within a year and then shrinked the distances even more from 70.3. So a lot of what you say is correct but also incorrect on race selection, thus if the race distance isn't correct, then your whole premise is invalid to the discussion at hand, right? IE- they have to start from scratch to build up a marketable distance, not take an pre-existing distance (that they realized isn't going to work).
You conclude that you would buy in if they are making an alternative to IM for racing, and I'm kinda lost at not understanding this is basically the competitor to IM now. To the point IM created their own series to counter PTO. So I'm not really sure what you want them to do? Becuase they don't have AG racing that's your biggest hang up? If you think a new race organization is going to come into the non-draft spectrum and draw AG entries to what they "need" to help offset costs I would call that noobish mindset. They would then draw 448 people and you would then clown them for being a shit AG option. It kinda cracks me up that they are building a pro platform that is going to be broadcast to half the world and enough spots to have a professional series, and apparently that's not good enought to "build something".....that sorta gives me a WTF do you want from them. They've already proven your point on the race distance is invalid by changing the distance already after "learning" from their investments.
Just commenting on what I have highlighted in bold in your response above: I know many of you maybe don't have as much of the history of the sport (from a worldwide perspective, not just US) as I and some others do. This distance (close to the 100k, PTO have just cut the run by 2km to make it a round number for very understandable marketable reasons) was actually the ORIGINAL middle distance of triathlon (officialised by the ITU and other national federations within the ITU) in the 80's and 90's (maybe still the case?). That is before Ironman decided to do Half Ironmans (later called Ironman70.3). The distances for MD would actually vary slightly for the swim, either 2k or 2.5k, but the bike would be about 80k and the run 20k.
So it's not really a new thing. It's what MD originally and officially was.
Great history lesson so whether old is new again sorta doesn’t matter. This was the press release on the “made for tv” race distance. So this info doesn’t really invalidate the point I was making that the PTO decided on a shorter distance that was more tv marketable vs the 70.3 distance (basically 30+ mins shorter racing time). So whether this is copying something from yesturyears or is “new” is as other poster said- irrelevant to the point of discussion.
. In recognition of the new Tour’s designation, World Triathlon is creating a new World Championship title for the 100km distance. Brooks Doughtie, M.S. Exercise Physiology -USAT Level II
Great history lesson so whether old is new again sorta doesn’t matter. This was the press release on the “made for tv” race distance. So this info doesn’t really invalidate the point I was making that the PTO decided on a shorter distance that was more tv marketable vs the 70.3 distance (basically 30+ mins shorter racing time). So whether this is copying something from yesturyears or is “new” is as other poster said- irrelevant to the point of discussion.
. In recognition of the new Tour’s designation, World Triathlon is creating a new World Championship title for the 100km distance.
There are many points of discussion in this thread. The quote above (creating a new World Championship title for that distance) is different to saying this is a new distance.
Cool you win the semantics part of the discussion that is irrelevant to the point I was making. But cool story bro. Brooks Doughtie, M.S. Exercise Physiology -USAT Level II
Cool you win the semantics part of the discussion that is irrelevant to the point I was making. But cool story bro.
Fine, if you guys think history (for example the history of relations and non-relations between the ITU/WT and Ironman/WTC and all its related components) has no bearing on what is happening today, feel free to carry on ignoring (or worse being rude about it) comments about history.
Your right I think it matters none whether the "middle distance" was newly crowned by the WT with this new PTO series or was truly created a long long time ago in the sport.
People wanted the PTO to have an AG component and they wanted the PTO to just use existing "current" races (70.3). PTO decided that the 100k "made for tv" distance was much more tv friendly while also getting kudos from WT to be able to market a "world championship" at that distance for both AG and Pro's (AG- 1 day world champ, PTO through the series). Any AG component is going to take years to break through and gain race entries that come close to "sustainability" for a race production company in the current non-draft spectrum of our sport. And chopping off 30+ mins for a broadcast window will certainly help with marketability when talking about broadcasting a sport.
So when I think about what the PTO has been able to achieve in what 3 years now when the 1st non- CC races were formed. They have an world championship authorized by the governing body to be able to market to AG's to do the PTO events and they have a what 6-8 event pro series paying out pro's a "salary"......That's big time. There's not a lot of negative steps they are taking to try and make this a long term success story. By having the WC recognized by WT, they can use that as marketing and of course this is going to take time, they aren't going to get 3400 racers the 1st few years; that's completely unrealistic. But they have a "hook" to gain AG participants that everyone is saying they need (which can be an "easy" assist to the offsetting costs assuming you get enough numbers to justify the time/expense of actually doing an AG wave). So I think they are taking the right necessary steps and again "bad management" won't be the reason they fail imo. Bad management wouldn't get all the steps they've already achieved in this short time already.
So I don't think it really matters whether the PTO stole the "middle distance" from a long time ago or it truly is a "new" distance. But your the triathlon historian by your earlier comment, so maybe it does. Brooks Doughtie, M.S. Exercise Physiology -USAT Level II
My only push back is in the idea that PTO is running a bad business model, when in fact they are accomplishing exactly what they have sought out to do- create a professional series and take it to market.
So it may not be successful, and I agree with that. But this idea that they've mismanaged things, I don't think is very fair or very accurate. That "mismanagement" isn't what is going to led this to not being successful; the lack of buy in from the general public will be the reason why investors don't stay in this long term imo. So that failure is far different than the narrative you guys are suggesting is going on imo.
I think you and I are in alignment. PTO is doing what they want to do. My question is if there are enough eyeballs out there who will get interested enough in their series to make it self sustaining and a big media growth play. In my example, IPL became a massive media growth play that could scale revenue without scaling cost. Right now PTO cost exceed revenue so the question is how they scale the revenue so that costs per unit revenue goes down and drops below the 1:1 ratio in the future.
But the flaw in both your hypotheses is that because the best are racing T100 they will then not race Nice. I guarantee you that this is not the case: the vast majority of the top ten long distance (>70.3) capable athletes will race Nice.
Possibly, but looking at the 8 PTO World Tour dates, 2, possibly 3 of the 8 races will interfere with a strong performance in the other series. So with only 8 races, why would an athlete that signed with PTO only race 5, 6 or 7 of their series? Ibiza being the obvious overlap. Athletes racing Nice might also be out Las Vegas, which is 3 weeks later and possibly London before depending on their prep. http://www.sfuelsgolonger.com
But the flaw in both your hypotheses is that because the best are racing T100 they will then not race Nice. I guarantee you that this is not the case: the vast majority of the top ten long distance (>70.3) capable athletes will race Nice.
Possibly, but looking at the 8 PTO World Tour dates, 2, possibly 3 of the 8 races will interfere with a strong performance in the other series. So with only 8 races, why would an athlete that signed with PTO only race 5, 6 or 7 of their series? Ibiza being the obvious overlap. Athletes racing Nice might also be out Las Vegas, which is 3 weeks later and possibly London before depending on their prep.
T100 athletes are contracted to race minimum 5 of 7 plus the GF. The T100 rankings will be determined on their 4 best scores (likely 3 plus GF; latter scores more, roughly 50% more). The prize money per race after the first 6 is unexceptional and drops to only $2.5k for #11-#20 so there limited incentive to race more than 5 of the 'regulars' except to discard a score after two poor earlier races. That's a decision for mid season. Ibiza: For the T100 women who want to race IMWC Nice (whether 'standalone' or as part of an IM Series campaign) Ibiza is a race they can do, continuing the Promenade des Anglais restaurant social after party/warm down, satisfying one of their five contractual obligation. And Knibb, Spivey and Duffy (plus van Coevordon, Loevseth and Derron wildcards?) will be there, kicking the proverbial. London: Discard the idea that racing London end July will be to the detriment of a Nice performance. Probably the reverse: it'll be great prep race (and still without the Olympians a better scoring one). Las Vegas: Four weeks after Nice and three after Ibiza, is entirely doable, competitively. But I can see that race being missed if athletes already have 3 reasonable scores in the bag. Then do Dubai and the GF.
An athlete's calendar, to race T100 and Nice might look like this (only missing Singapore, brown text is 'extra'): March Miami April Texas (to gain NQ or to validate, and keep IM Series open) May - training block, 70.3 if not already 70.3WCQ June Escape to California July London September Nice and Ibiza October Las Vegas November Dubai and GF December Taupo
Edit to add (to give an insight to why the IMWC in Nice will be as much a World Championships as the race in Kona for the men will be): Here's Kanute's plan: he'll race 4 of 6 of T100 races then "all eyes on Kona" then T100 Dubai and GF. Taupo likely not.
I don't think anybody would stay healthy with that schedule. But if anybody could do it, I would put my money on Anne Haug, though I have no idea of her intentions. http://www.sfuelsgolonger.com
I don't think anybody would stay healthy with that schedule. But if anybody could do it, I would put my money on Anne Haug, though I have no idea of her intentions.
I, like any sane person, worry that such a schedule creates an increased risk of injury. And there is also the hazard that athletes will feel 'forced' to race though injury or low wellness. Management of training to recover from hard races, in particular the 3 IMs necessary for success in the IM Series will be /would be complex. There's bound to be stretches of 'training through' T100 races. For example training through Miami with focus on Texas. The T100 schedule offers/allows a decent run in to both Nice and Kona, though. For the women they can race London and have 8 weeks, including weeks recce'ing the Nice bike course. For the men, they can race London, have even more time prepping for Kona: racing T100 Ibiza hard as a 'warm-up' four weeks before Kona (with ample to time to acclimatise, perforce missing Las Vegas). Philipp's take below, as reported by tr1247, noting that she's chosen to train in Nice in January. Great to see an athlete enthusing about a venue's bike course: that never happens for Kona. One wonders who the swim-bike hares are going to be ?Langridge, Norden, ahead of the main pack (Ryf, Matthews, Sodaro, McCauley, Haug, Philipp, Moench, True) in the women's World Championship on 22 September in Nice. https://www.trirating.com/...w-the-race-unfolded/ https://www.tri247.com/...nship-t100-nice-race
It's been said and I'll said it again. The best appear to have chosen T100. Nice will be underwhelming and that's a shame.
Someone is definitely getting crowned, but all due respect it is a B level race.
. . . apart from the fantastic aberration in Kona last year) there has never been a World Championship, ever. There's always someone missing, through choice or injury. If your definition of "the best" is: "must include the winner from last year" then very many IMWCs over the years fail that criterion: did that make them 'underwhelming' or 'B level'? (Of course it didn't)
@timr and @thatzone - name the lowly ranked athletes in this 'B level' race who you think will be challenging for top 5. I have suggested that the following will race in Nice: Haug (light and suits), Ryf (GOAT), Philipp (been out recceing/training in Nice), Matthews (racing Texas so IM Series in sights), Sodaro (one more 70.3 to validate), Moench (NQ), Langridge (NQ), Norden (NQ).
Someone being key word here. Not the current WC, or Ryf, Haug, Phillips etc etc.
The Women's IMWC in France is like comparing the UFC to a local fighting circuit. I am sure whoever wins will have the confidence, but KONA is where the 'big dogs' throw down.. Will make *KONA* 2015 more interesting.
Still waiting for your nominations of the lowly ranked athletes who might podiumin Nice. I note that Sodaro (IMWC 2022) has said she'll race IMNZ: which will serve to validate her slot for Nice. And she'll be racing the World Champions from 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2021.