I agree with you, i'm not a huge fan of the upcloseandpersonal stories that play on the Ironman show, but seeing something related to triathlon is better than anything else on tv, especially Gershwin on Ice. They dropped the RD, its time to drop the Network. NBC makes a lot of money off of that program, in my opinion, and i think they'd hate to lose it on their network. You forgot to mention OLN as a possible source.

---

Want: 58cm Cervelo Soloist. PM me if you have one to sell

Vintage Cervelo: A Resource

Amen to all of the above. Here in Houston we are getting 2 hours of rotisserie chicken infomercials. I would say however that when ESPN was broadcasting the IM events with Phil Liggett announcing they seemed better than the current OLN productions.



fal7

I'll second the motion to sanction NBC. I turned over at 4:30 today, requisite tissue paper in hand for the obligatory human interest stories. What did I see? PAT FREAKIN ROBERTSON hem-hawing on the TV screen about the evils of automobiles and why I needed to send him my $$$$ now or risk eternal damnation in hell. Eternal damnation in hell? That's what NBC deserves for allowing him to hijack my IMH coverage! What a crock!

Well, here in the Bay Area, we got the full coverage and let me say, 20 or however many minutes makes a big difference. I have a whole new respect for Peter Reid now after seeing the part with him that was cut wholescale in the first broadcast. Since NBC doesn't actually do the footage, would changing networks really do anything? I am quite tired of the black/white/grey half body shots, the upclose face/hands shots and the big gold M. But boy am I pulling for Marc Herremans.

---

clm
Nashville, TN
https://twitter.com/ironclm | http://ironclm.typepad.com

I agree, seeing the parts that were cut the first time made it more palatable this time. However, overall it still sucks. The people watching have no idea what the conditions were, except for a brief mention of the swells during the swim and a passing reference to the heat. Also never mentioned is what it takes to even get in the race for the age groupers they chose to follow. No mention of having to qualify or the extent of the training most people do. For all a non-triathlete knows all you have to do is pay the entrance fee and you're in the race.

I also wonder just how they select the various age groupers they report on. Almost everyone competing must have a good story. For instance, a friend and his dad both competed. They have both done the race several times. Usually when the dad ages up. My friend has finished sub 10 in the past and was training hard to do well again. He was on track for a good time and got overwhelmed by the heat during the run and ended up with his worst time ever, about 10:40. His dad got something in his eye during the swim and during the bike it swelled shut, meaning he did most of the bike and all of the run with only one eye. In spite of that he still took third in his age group! That would have been a good story.

I did watch the coverage this time with lower expectations because I had already seen the earlier cut down version. It seems like they could do a much better job and cover more of the race if they bumped in up to 2 hours. They've had coverage of dog shows on NBC lasting 2 hours and I would venture there are more triathletes than people showing dogs at shows. Even Joe six-pack would probably much rather watch 2 hours of triathlon instead of a dog show.

I wish I could watch the coverage they get in Canada so I would have a more complete comparison because the reports are the CBC does a far better job than NBC.

Don

The question about common footage is an interesting one. While I have no crystal ball, I can refer to one personal experience. OLN's TdF coverage far outranks Eurosport's (the coverage I got while living in Germany), even though both use the same common race footage. It's a matter of packaging and personalities, and in the OLN-TdF case, Phil Liggett and Paul Sherwin (and their produces at OLN) provide personality and a package that is heads-and-shoulders above the competition.

---

Ben H

Christian, Husband, Father, Ranger, Triathlete

You are right about the CBC coverage. Their coverage of the Worlds in Cancun was excellent. I figure that whoever is doing the filming for NBC or the WTC or whoever actually produces the show must have hours and hours of film that gets left out of the crappy, theatrical broadcast that pretends to be coverage of a sporting event. I wish someone would pick up some of the "lost" footage and put together an extended coverage video that fans of the sport could purchase.

Remember when ironman coverage was on ABCs Wide World of Sports? Maybe they'd like to try covering it as a separate event now that it has grown?

I think that I'm going to have to start emailing the CBC to petition them to cover ironman like they did the Worlds this year ..... I wonder if there is some exclusive deal with NBC that prohibits this?

I didn't see the coverage this time around. From memory, the reason they don't talk about what it takes to qualify is that none of the people they profiled, except for some of the pros, did qualify. I am probably off the mark in a couple of cases, but you get my point. They profiled mostly hardship cases of someone with a husband/sister/brother/fellow worker who died/got sick/got hurt and they were allowed entry on the basis of their story. Nothing against WTC letting people in or featuring people on that basis, but how about a few crumbs to the incredible age group athletes that worked hard and qualified.

I caught the fuller coverage from this broadcast and I'd have to bump them a letter grade over the shortened one. I wonder if part of our disappointment comes from the timing, most of us are in need of racing fix by this time of the year, and we just aren't the target audiance. Anyone know if there is a chance to purchase an extended version of the broadcast?

There were some real-time brief clips of Natasha on the bike... looked like she has got one smooth powerful and efficient stroke going on there. I could not detect a hitch anywhere.

I agree, this wasn't race coverage at all.
It was a drama-mentary.

Sortof like a documentary, but without facts and focusing on a few drama stories.

I wouldn't mind if they had labeled it as a documentary, or something like 'Behind the faces of Ironman" or something like that, but no, they call in Ironman Hawaii Coverage.
Ya. Right.
Bad NBC.

[reply]I didn't see the coverage this time around. From memory, the reason they don't talk about what it takes to qualify is that none of the people they profiled, except for some of the pros, did qualify. I am probably off the mark in a couple of cases, but you get my point.[reply]

Actually this year you are way off the mark. I believe that both Larry Parker and Rae Gene Berger qualified. Rae Gene Berger has done something like 30 IM-distance races, including Kona a number of times.

---

clm
Nashville, TN
https://twitter.com/ironclm | http://ironclm.typepad.com

[reply]There were some real-time brief clips of Natasha on the bike... looked like she has got one smooth powerful and efficient stroke going on there. I could not detect a hitch anywhere.[/reply]

Yeah! Did you see the difference between her and Nina Kraft as Natasha flew by Kraft? Natasha is amazing.

---

clm
Nashville, TN
https://twitter.com/ironclm | http://ironclm.typepad.com

The amateurs they cover are selected in advance, usually off the questionaire. They try to pick stuff that will make good TV, spouse dying, which has been done before, disease, military/fireman/police, father/son or mother/daughter. I had a friend they did some background on a few years ago, but they elected not to use him.

The former pro to disabled competitor was the only good part of the show, as far as I was concerned. I didn't actually mean to watch it, having choosen not to in November, but was spinning on my trainer when it suprised me by coming on. So I watched it. Again, other than the former pro guy, it was a waste of 90 minutes of my life.

I can understand the logistical nightmare of recording an event that takes place over 140 miles, with the competitors spread out over most of the course, but they could still do a better job. No, it is not going to be as easy as doing a bike race, where most of the people are together, but they could use a few stationay cameras to let us know when the top 10 or 20 pros pass certain areas. They are very popular pros that never got mentioned.

---

---------------

"Remember: a bicycle is an elegant and efficient tool designed for seeking out and defeating people who aren't as good as you."

--BikeSnobNYC

Actually, Larry Parker qualified at Ironman USA in 2001. If you notice, he also posted a quite commendable time in Kona this year, and I believe he also raced at Ironman Florida less than a month later, posting another quite commendable time. We interviewed him on Slowtwitch last October after he'd made the decision to stay behind in New York to help with the rescue and, later, recovery operations after 9/11. You can find the coverage of my interview with him in the Kona 2001 section. He's a very talented athlete and quite a good guy. It's my understanding that the WTC folks deferred his slot for a year, which to me seems a good thing to do.

Amy White

[reply]I can understand the logistical nightmare of recording an event that takes place over 140 miles, with the competitors spread out over most of the course, but they could still do a better job. No, it is not going to be as easy as doing a bike race, where most of the people are together, but they could use a few stationay cameras to let us know when the top 10 or 20 pros pass certain areas. They are very popular pros that never got mentioned.[/reply]

They aren't filming/broadcasting for you, me or everyone on this forum. How many people, hell, how many TRIATHLETES can name 20 pro women and 20 pro men. I'd venture to guess it's a very, very low percentage of triathletes who can name even 10 of each. And the general public? The still don't know how far the race is or even that there are other distance tris. For real race coverage, isn't that what the internet (and sites like this) is for?

---

clm
Nashville, TN
https://twitter.com/ironclm | http://ironclm.typepad.com

When you do the race you see the pros have their number highlighted in one colour and the "potentially on tv" people have their number highlighted in a different colour so the camera people can spot them.

I guess I take a different perspective on the coverage. I try to focus on the positives. How often do we get to see anything triathlon-related on TV? For me, it was huge inspiration to see people like myself crossing the finish line -- you can almost feel their every emotion.

Could the coverage have been a whole lot better??? Absolutely -- I think they should have done many things different. But what's shocking to me is that a triathlete can say that it was a waste of 90 minutes of his life. Wow!! I loved every second of it.

I think one of the biggest problems is that WTC (or whoever their agent is) does a poor job of marketing the Ironman. It seems it is marketed as human interest versus a real sporting event. I know it must be hard to market something that has such a small niche -- you can tell by the dearth of advertising during Ironman broadcast as compared to NASCAR, golf, etc. Ironman doesn't seem to have the broad based appeal. You can't blame NBC for cutting the coverage short when they can make more money off something else. There are no big-name sponsors willing to put up big bucks to get more commercials (I'm talking Nike, Anhauser-Busch, Ford that pay big bucks to be associated with other sporting events).

The biggest thing we can hope for is a dominant US personality (like Mark Allen, Dave Scott) to hit the Ironman. Did you ever see the TdF on daily TV before Lance started blowing the European peloton away?

Back when they used to actually cover the race, many people knew who all the pros were. Coincidence or not?

If people could actually watch the pros race, and were actually told what was going on, when passes were made, what the top 10 of the race looked like all the time, and stuff like that, they might understand the race more- works for NASCAR, NFL, NBA, NHL, Baseball, TdF, and all the popular sports. When they see nothing but "volcano arty shots" of pros, an old lady struggling to make a cut-off, or 15 minutes with a guy talking about how he lost his companions/ co-workers/ training buddy/ wife/ kid/ dog/ gold fish, they still don't understand this race, realize there are other races, and know much more about triathlons.

When was the last time you watched an NFL playoff game, and while the action was going on you were subjected to stories about the third string kicker, the offensive lineman with the thyroid problem, or the wide receiver who just lost hs father? If they showed that crap instead of the game, the ratings would be crap.

Oh, and at the end of the pro coverage I liked when Helriegal came in and the announcer said something like, "Oh and here is Helriegal! I guess he made a pass that we didn't see." Talk about an understatement.

---

---------------

"Remember: a bicycle is an elegant and efficient tool designed for seeking out and defeating people who aren't as good as you."

--BikeSnobNYC

I don't remember Rae Gene Berger. That is one. I knew there would be at least one and I would get flamed.

I will never make it to Kona, but I know some who have. For me their accomplishment is what Kona is all about. I never see people like them on NBC. WTC and NBC have to do what they have to do to attract audience and promote the sport. I understand that, but it doesn't mean I have to like the end result.

From my perspective, the TV coverage mirrors the two-sided nature of this event. It's World Championship combined with a let's-see-if-you-can-finish-it sideshow.

Quite frankly, with few obvious exceptions I don't find Ironmans to be all that exciting to watch on TV. Then again, the Boston Marathon or Olympic cross-country mountain biking don't keep me glued to my seat either. It's just the nature of these events that they reward the participant much more than the spectator.

I don't know, its roughly equivalent to Olympic coverage- and that seems to work for most people. Remember, this isn't mainstream sports. It's a feature show. The formula seems to work. Maybe not for you or me, but for John Q. Public the ratings seem to be there. It's a business. Look at it this way, they are making guys like you and I into heros, and we're just regular guys.......

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

I won't argue most of your points. This one seems flawed, however. If the rating were there, many affiliates would not be pre-empting.

And then.....



... I wish. Most people think this race is about old and sick people trying to "do" something. If people find out I am an Ironman I usually have to explain that I am not terminally ill, my spouse did not just die, and that I would never spend 17 hours walking/ crawling /crying /losing bowel control to complete a race.

---

---------------

"Remember: a bicycle is an elegant and efficient tool designed for seeking out and defeating people who aren't as good as you."

--BikeSnobNYC

Mmmm, yeah, good point. I mean, I guess I could be all dramatic about my participation in Ironman: "Tom Demerly, the ex-Army Ranger who miraculously survived a deadly parachute accident in 1987 only to come back and race again, who was once afflicted by a nearly terminal hangnail, doctors offered him no hope....." So there is a substantial amount of sensationalism that costs the sport some credibility. You're right. It is a circus. No denying that.

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com