Yeah I agree with you Jack could have been more concise during the interview with his questions and just let Messick speak and bury himself with his responses. Instead Jack repeatedly asked the same question in a more and more hostile way, in which he just ended up getting in his own way and ruining is own cause of exposing Ironman's deceit and dishonesty with everyone. I would like to see these tough questions being asked by someone who allows Messick to respond and calmly asks pertinent follow up questions like you posted (i.e. did they have a written contract with Hawaii before they started offering people slots and having them pay to register, book travel). Had he asked that he would have done a much better job exposing Ironman's issues.
Jack speaks way too much as a podcast host as it is. His Brownlee interview could have been half the time, or more informative from Brownlee talking more, but instead Jack takes 5 minutes of babbling just to ask one simple questions.

Some of the Pro races we can only follow through the freaking app only. No broadcast, no highlight, nothing.

I am completely astonished by how many people in this forum are simping for Ironman and siding with them on the pro field argument. Yikes!!!!

The horror that you can only follow a pro race through live updates....Guess what, I'd LOVE to have that option at all WT pro races (or all pro races as min coverage), as 90% of Conti Cup to Conti Champs level races have zero updates, it's all just waiting to see the final result page.

(You aren't going to win the argument that IM treats the pro's "badly".....I can show you who treats pro's "badly" = national governing bodies).

---

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

Looks like ProTriNews has had Messick: podcast out tomorrow. https://podcasts.apple.com/...ri-news/id1559781865
Perhaps they'll have asked some questions Kelly ran out of time on, though think the why Nice/Kona is 2022 news, however: why twice the numbers of athletes racing (why not), why offer Kona slots when you knew it was increasingly iffy, how is the entry fee determined . . and all the other questions Kelly received from 'everyone' in his echo chamber. I wonder how many 50+ yo women even know his name/htt.
Edit: now: https://podcasts.apple.com/...1865?i=1000598971894

I fail to understand the “simping for Ironman” commentary.

Ironman and other triathlon market brands have repeatedly told us what the value of the pro triathlete is. Unfortunately, it is not much to their bottom line. Would I prefer to have live commentary or decent highlight packages for races so I can watch on the trainer? Absolutely. But the fact that a company operating in a niche market of a niche market doesn’t want to outlay cash for that is something most should easily be able to understand.

Just look at the viewers online when you tune into your next Ironman coverage or PTO race. There is literally nobody watching these things. At the PTO races, there are very few there to actually watch in person. Why would a company invest cash in pro prize money or a quality pro broadcast when the viewership numbers prove very few of us care?

Again, would I like to have more (and better) coverage to watch and do I personally enjoy following these pro athletes? Absolutely. But, put yourself in a C Suite position and think about whether you’d walk into your monthly presentation (board meeting) to your PE backer and present to them an idea that you want to run with despite the fact that it will not generate any meaningful return on funds invested - lets call it slide 18 in our deck. For me, if I think twice, I’m deleting slide 18 prior to walking into that meeting. (I may have some very relevant experience here…. ;))

I’m far from someone who is “simping for Ironman”, and I assume most of the posters in here are far from that as well. Understanding finances is not hard though.

And Edit to Add: I’m not sure I understand how people think Messick has the unilateral ability to magically make these calls. They’re all 100% going to get some form of board approval. CEO is a title that rarely comes with unilateral decision making power, especially in the PE world.

As a KQer this past year who was screwed over, this is what I really was hoping that he was able to hang Ironman on. It's indefensible, Messick said himself that they knew very quickly after Kona that 2 days wasn't going to work, yet they continued to sell slots at $1500 per for the next 2 months to KONA (not just the world champs) under knowingly false pretenses. Or why they never disclosed in the first place to people who qualified even before the 2022 race that they didn't have a contract signed sealed and delivered for next year. Even outside of Kona, there's so much to hang Ironman over for not caring about it's customers and harming the spot of triathlon- lack of flexibility/refunds for races (especially during covid), lack of safety on course, increasing pricetags for diminishing race experience, buying out and killing off local races, cancelling races due to low participation. Hell I would've loved to hear open ended questions like what are IM's initiatives to grow the sport, or how does IM decide where and when to add new events.

Instead Jack got stuck for almost 45 mins trying to get Messick to admit that he didn't want a true WCs and a single day Kona because IM would make less money. Well no shit, IM is a private company and wants to make money, and the WCs probably subsidize a number of events which break even or lose money each year. I did think that Jack won over Andrew on the pros not getting paid but again- they just went in circles and Messick more blatantly evaded until he basically admitted that they pay as little as they need to to have pros at marquee events. Which again, no shit if you've followed IM pro racing with any degree of interest in the last 10 years.

Jack had a lot of good questions in the queue- he wasn't gonna get a 4 hour interview with Messick like with Olav Alexander Bu, so he needed to have a list and pre-planned questions, ask, and let Messick hang himself with his non-responses or evasions. Then move on to another critique of IM. Lot of potential missed here, at least with the issues that impact more than a small subset of racers.

You just outlined you do agree. Those were different people yet the same experience. Utah , blu, Lionel, curry . In kona laid low, gustav, blu, max.

The race was good the names don’t matter. The point on the pod was nba players get money because they bring in money and get a share. If the top 10 guys don’t show up to kona the guys 11-15 have just as good a finish. Sometimes? But lebron sells out every stadium and his team in not in the playoff picture right now. Only a small percent of triathletes follow pros and even then it’s only free content they subscribe too. You would be amazed how many average triathletes think Lionel has won world champ yet do not know who Craig Alexander is even Patrick Lange.

---

Technique will always last longer then energy production. Improve biomechanics, improve performance.
http://Www.anthonytoth.ca, triathletetoth@twitter

If you go back to another origin of SIMP [Single, Interested, Might Pay]*, that usage gets really weird


* there's another one that's worse - look it up

---

"What's your claim?" - Ben Gravy
"Your best work is the work you're excited about" - Rick Rubin

Meh...I dont know, I find watching triathlon racing very enjoyable. The last two IM world champs couldnt have been scripted any better, they had it all-the feel good backstory of the mum winning from behind against all odds, the men's smashing records, the young gun out front waiting to blow up, the chase downs, the penalties, it had it all. Soccer...omg sure there are seconds of brilliance interrupted by hours of boredom, same with basketball...run down one end score, run down other end score, repeat for two hours...

But I often wonder if it's a chicken or egg scenario. I wouldn't push my kids to take up triathlon professionally just because the money isn't there, the risk reward is hopeless. Does the lure of money though drive increased participation at a grass roots level...perhaps? If a sport has coverage it piques interest and drives participation, otherwise except for the water cooler talk or insta photos it gets lost.

I probably enjoy more triathlon racing than most on slow twitch. I also enjoy nfl and nba.

That said let’s all stop talking about this podcast it is was one of htt’s worst. Go listen to greg Bennett and Mecca talk about last year and pass triathlon experiences.

They outline many better ways to drive participation and what has happened to the landscape over the last decade.

The media outlets of tri are trying to make a bad guy as all have to have a bad guy. Ironman has to play that role now. Pto left Edmonton and Dallas and crickets, also race entry levels were a bust. Why is Ironman have to be so responsible by pto can just do what is good for them?

---

Technique will always last longer then energy production. Improve biomechanics, improve performance.
http://Www.anthonytoth.ca, triathletetoth@twitter

I don't think the discussion on prize money should be so lightly excused or overlooked. Though because IM is a PE it probably has a very short timeframe in mind-this is not good for any sport. You need to be looking 10+ years into the future.

By increasing prize money to a sustainable level I'd expect there would be a whole lot of excited parents who would love to get their kids into the sport and live vicariously through them, heck even enjoy one of the most amazing things about our sports-being able to compete at the same time at the same venue as their 'professional' kids. The pure athletic achievement of our sport is so exciting, so see these already super human walls get broken down, its thrilling.

There is just so much untapped potential in this sport its crazy. Its the best kept secret out there..

As an ex pro. It will be always. I got more out of playing college basketball then being a pro triathlete. The written was always on the wall. Most guys you see are living off family money or hope. Ironman and triathlon doesn’t need pros to survive , pros need them. Hence the emergence of the pto and the talk of Mecca and greg saying how when greg won lifestyle fitness tri prize in the 2000 he know it wouldn’t last as this was just a guy with money having a bit of fun but it cools off and they leave. If you have been around tri since pre 2005 you have seen this peak and valley 3 x now and the pros today are just lucky vs the Craig Alexander’s and Christi Wellington as the money was so low then. No a ride for now but …. It will fade again.

Not to sounds preachy but I have a lot of information over time that seeing the written and path. These are same posts as Ironman vs rev, Ironman vs challenge. Etc

---

Technique will always last longer then energy production. Improve biomechanics, improve performance.
http://Www.anthonytoth.ca, triathletetoth@twitter

You say Ironman doesn’t need pros to survive and whilst correct, why do so many say, one of the great things about Ironman is racing the same course as the professionals unlike baseball or ufc or nfl etc….

I’ve always thought that was bullshit and this is more proof it is.

Ironman should just dump professionals and be done with it.

So rather than pay them something, kill them off and pay them nothing and don't allow them a platform to race and promote their sponsors? How does that make sense?!?

Make it short.
The winner of a triathlon is the winner they don’t need to be called pro because no one cares but a very small few.

California had over 2800 athletes and no pros.
As well as many other racers.

The same guys that said kona needs 50 spots for female pros a few years back . Are now saying the women don’t need their own day.

The same guys that said if you took $10 off my fees for no pro prize purse when I was a pro racer are now saying Ironman doesn’t pay the pros enough and doesn’t grow the sport, they don’t actually do races anymore they just bitch and can’t move on.

what you talk about it a marketing tool like the other marketing tool in triathlon.

Nostalgia, pre race hype, past reflection, and don’t miss out.

The best part of kona in the lead up just like the Super Bowl the race usually a bore compared to others and short course.

---

Technique will always last longer then energy production. Improve biomechanics, improve performance.
http://Www.anthonytoth.ca, triathletetoth@twitter

That's an inconvenient truth, Tony :) thanks for posting.

A lot of misunderstandings in this thread come from people thinking we're living in stakeholder capitalism as opposed to shareholder capitalism. In stakeholder capitalism, corporations would take more than shareholder profit maximization into account, but also the interests of suppliers, customers (more than is required to maximize profits), the public, etc. In stakeholder capitalism, Ironman would be doing what we want them to do, including nurturing PRO triathlon for the sake of making the world better or whatever, growing the sport not just to grow their bottom line, etc.

Whether we are living in stakeholder capitalism is debatable at best. Ironman's behavior is an argument to the opposite. But people are getting angry and demanding that Ironman pay PROS what they deserve, etc. What I take an issue with is the hypocrisy, the pretense of caring about something other than money. I don't think it would hurt Ironman if Messick was more direct in answering questions.

---

"FTP is a bit 2015, don't you think?" - Gustav Iden

The HTT Response / Follow-up podcast is live now on Patreon.

Just FYI

Pending as in 'not going to happen, ever'?

Is this going to be “patreon only” content or will the free version be out in another week?

Jack mentioned only patreon was getting the “inside” scoop on all the “ban” info. Wasnt sure if there was going to be another episode on the talk.

---

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

i finally listened to the podcast. i haven't read quite all 12 pages on the thread thus far but my thoughts.

it wasn't as "bad" as i thought it was going to be. the host asked tough questions, yes, but his tone i thought was deliberately confrontational and i think he was not "good" at conducting an interview. at all. He would have to speak 10 sentences to ask a question when 2 would do, and the leftover 8 was just him beating a dead horse on what he perceived to be the correct answer to be. i don't think messick went off the deep end for no reason. he was being prodded, and i don't think he should be skewered for reacting.

i thought the questions the host was asking about pro prize purses were purposefully crafted to have messicks response be taken out of context, and were, for lack of a better word, dumb questions. i want pro triathletes to succeed financially and i enjoy that component of our sport tremendously, but the reality is that the triathlon model is completely different than any other pro sport and any comparisons are meaningless, as messick described. i think the host made himself look ridiculous with those questions.

i'm not fully defending messick, i think he has made some poor decisions. but my opinion of him (which was basically neutral to begin with) did not change one bit after listening to this.

For the record, my position is for Kona to have remained 1 day for men and women as it always has been and try to improve the race from within that structure. the move to two days, which somehow is seen as mandatory by messick, is what has caused these cascading problems. so thats where i disagree with him. but i think this podcast is being way overblown and there should be discussion about the host and his role in this and how flawed HIS opinions were too. i apologize if i missed that in the 12 pages of posts prior. he claims to have his finger to the pulse of the triathlon community, but it sounds like he only talks to FOP'ers between 30 and 55...which yes, those are the vast majority of people who go to kona, but they aren't the ONLY ones, nor are they the ONLY ones who should dictate how our sport's most important event is structured because even if, like me, you've never participated in the IMWC, the way it is organized, watched, and marketed affects our entire sport top to bottom.

EDIT: in searching thread for discussion on the host, turns out there is plenty so comforted by that! The post done as a fight summary is indeed an all-timer.

I find watching triathlon racing very enjoyable.
---
How much would you be willing to pay for the ability to watch a tri? Or how much would you pay to have an app that broadcasts races/ stats/ etc on tri events?

For most people, that answer is $0.00 yet they still get grumpy with the news that the pros don't make a bunch and that the coverage isn't up to par. They expect someone else to pay for it.

---

---

---

Take a short break from ST and read my blog:
http://tri-banter.blogspot.com/

I pay something around $30/year for Triathlon Live and my wife and I watch all of the WTCS races and some World Cups. Easily worth it for us. It is nice that the PTO, Ironman, and Superleague races are broadcast for free (with ads) as we watch all of those too. I paid a few dollars to watch Challenge Daytona too a few years back when the field was stacked.

If you base it off WT's coverage/payment structure, $30-$40 for the series is about the going rate (you get full WTCS and 2nd level WC race feeds). I'd pay $100 total to watch LC and ITU racing (which I pay the yearly ~$30ish coverage easily....it's the best "value" in the sport).

---

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

I’d pay the $100 to be able to watch live and on demand for sure. I also pay TriathlonLive and I love it. Been paying it for a few years now.

O.K just finished listening to the podcast. What people are claiming are 'gotchya' question I think are largely misunderstood. I think Jack was genuinely trying to get an understanding of a couple of points, and Messick being a CEO continued to give CEO answers, so Jack would try a different angle.

Essential this is how I saw it:

Jack: Why cant we have males and females on the same day

Messick: Because we want to ensure the females get fair coverage

Jack: But you control the media and the amount of cameras, why can't you ensure they are given equal airtime?

Messick: changes the narrative-it's because we can't get everyone finished intime and it's a safety issue.

Jack: Why can't you change the cut off times, it is after all a world championships?

Messick: Why don't you like 80 year old women?

JACK: I never said that,, the sport has evolved and got faster, why not take this into account and have faster cut off times for a world championship?

Messick: Why don't you like old people

Jack: trying a different angle " why don't you reduce the size of the field, by having too many people it makes people think you are only about money"

Blah blah blah..I didn't think Jack was bad at but could have definitely been a little less direct at times. Messick super aggressive and not used to being questioned. That being said I think Messick raised some good points I wasn't necessarily aware of such as the need to get to church on Sundays so no Sunday race, the increased people working at the energy lab etc. All very interesting.

But essentially it comes back to this for me-single day used to work but now it doesn't due to safety risk with people not being able to finish in time. So what s changed-are there just a lot more people competing now...?