caffeinatedtri wrote:

the pros need to get together and ...

That's the hard part.

http://www.slowtwitch.com/.../features/union.html

---

---

In the immortal words of the late great Todd Jacobs (a pro's pro), "Pro triathletes are like a box of rats fighting over one Cheeto. "

The more things change...

-bobo

---

"What's good for me ain't necessarily good for the weak-minded."

I really wish there was a like button for that quote

---

Jim
"In dog beers, I've only had one"
http://www.shakercolonial.com/
Creating custom made furnishing to your requirements

Let me play devils advovate....Does the WTC even need pros?
What would a boycott accomplish except from saving the WTC from having to hand out prize money. Not having a pro field at IMLP and other races would have zero impact on revenues ..aka..paid participants. You think Joe 'bucket list' Shmo or Johnny 'I train 30 hours a week to beat everyone and pad my ego' AGer aren't going to register because pros won't be racing?? Not likely

I enjoyed following TRS's awareness campaign this past weekend in LP. Thought it creative and quite entertaining but thats about it. Doubt it will change anything. WTC know they dont need a pro field at the races to be profitable but will likely keep tossing them a bone.
In major sport leagues paying customers are shelling out big bucks to watch the top athletes in the given sport . Player strikes(boycotts?) usually are effective because owners are losing money and people wont pay to watch replacement hacks. Ironman is unique. The paying customers are the ones on the 'playing field'. Keep them happy by offering a great race experience -which WTC apparently does-and many will keep coming back for more ....regardless of an absent pro field or not




.

Yes without the pros there is no NBC show. Without the show there is no more IM dream of the one and done person. That hits at their bottom line. You're not getting network coverage of an amateur race in Hawaii for a fringe sport.

They need them or they would not be trying so hard to prevent from doing other races like challenge and rev.. The kpr system is a way to prevent them from having Time to race other races..yet they refuse to pay them a living wage.. Most of them
I agree them getting together would be tough but it would be worth it.

I actually disagree with this. I don't think you are able to sustain 3000 participants without the pro's. You are right that people are still going to want to race but people are going to want to race more when there are pro's in attendance. I would be shocked if a financial analysis concluded that not having a pro field is just as profitable as having one.

If all pro's stopped racing WTC and switched to rev/challenge/or something else I think you would see the money start flowing differently. Maybe not a ton at the beginning but definitely in the long-term.

The sports most similar to triathlon are pure running or cycling. There are plenty of mass participant events in both which have no pro field. E.g. last year in the UK I ran the Edinburgh marathon which had ~8000 marathon runners and ~30,000 participants overall in a weekend that included half-marathon, 10k, 5k, kid's races, etc. As far as I know there were no pros involved, certainly not anybody I'd heard of or who was making big money. Then I did the Ride London 100 mile sportive, which had 16,000 riders and included a scattering of celebrities but nobody was paid. There was a separate pro race in the afternoon but it didn't attract any big name riders and nobody I knew bothered to watch it. I don't see any reason why triathlon is different - people enter these kind of events as a personal challenge, not because of the pros. The only way triathlon is ever going to pay big money to the pros is if (like cycling and running) large numbers of people actually start turning up to watch them.

I think it's kind of cool that you can go to a triathlon and see the pros, but if they weren't there it wouldn't stop me from entering. I enter plenty of races where there are no pros, and enjoy them just as much.

The WTC wants professionals - they just don't care who they are. I agree that there needs to be a pro race for the NBC coverage, but do 95% of viewers care if that pro is FVL, Macca or some 8:45 finishing pro? The WTC will do a great job of packaging and marketing. That's what they do.

They need pro racers, but on their terms.

If you were right and their influence is nill, then sponsers are wasting a ton of money on pros.

I don't think the impact would be immediate, but there is a significant trickle down effect of a lot of people wanting to ride/wear what the pros ride/wear. That elevation of status is important. If that group of respected individuals said "mdot is overpriced", it wouldn't be stretch for quite a few people to rethink their entry fees.




How many of the riders in your Ride London example were wearing a team jersey? What about Oakley's because rider X wears them and he's cool? The further toward the front of any big ride you get, the more everyone dresses like their favorite rider. That is influence.

You're missing the point, the "large number" of triathlon fans of pros - are the ones showing up to races.

Somewhat furthering the playing of devil's advocate, does WTC really even care about the NBC show? It's one hour televised a few weeks after the actual event. The format and approach to it hasn't changed in years. I don't know how their contract works with NBC (do they pay or does NBC pay them?). Could they just put together the same type of show in-house and post it on Ironman.com? It would probably get just as many eyeballs and be cheaper. It also seems that many folks enjoy the age grouper special interest stories as much as the pro story anyway. There are a few of us that like the pro race, but we are in the minority when you look at the global viewing audience. For the average viewer who happens to stumble across it, they have little to no appreciation of the difference between going sub 8 hours and finishing in 11 hours or 16 hours and 59 minutes. It just sounds like a damn long day of exercise. But, throw in the cancer story or the celebrity sighting and you might pique their interest.

When it comes down to it, as long as paying customers are focused on being able to say they are an Ironman, the WTC doesn't need the pros. I'm convinced that the WTC is convinced of this. If you look at IMLP by itself, it sells out and there aren't any "brand name" pros even there - Ironman(tm) is the brand everyone cares about. People race Ironman for themselves. People still want to qualify for Kona because saying you're a Kona Qualifier is prestigious enough in itself.

After Rev3 dropped the pro prize purses, WTC gained even more leverage, as I believe that leaves them and Challenge as the only big long-course series that pay the pros (somebody can probably come up with others?). We'll see how Rev3 does - as long as they continue to do well or even grow (and I hope they do), that could demonstrate that a series doesn't need the pro field - something the WTC will probably be watching closely.

That's just my odd little perspective on it all. I don't mean to sound down on the pros or anything, but I think their best chances to make a living at this are in draft-legal short-course racing. You can race more often in a given year, if anything - these long-course races take too much of a toll on the body.

---

Travis Rassat
Vector Cycle Works
Noblesville, IN
BikeFit Instructor | FMS | F.I.S.T. | IBFI
Toughman Triathlon Series Ambassador

really? so all those spectators were there to watch the professional field? dont think so. How many age groupers know who was in the pro field? how many spectators could name more than 1-2 pros at LP? If the pro field was so important to sign ups then why would people sign up and sell out a race 12 months in advance before ever knowing which pros will race? ya know my buddy pointed out that you walk around seeing people wearing shirts or jerseys with manning's name on it, or Ortiz or Labron. i cant recall anyone wearing apparel with rinnys name on it, or mccormack, etc. i just dont see how spectators or particpants really care or more importantly spend money on goods or services based on what pros they see. Yeah pro equipment or apparel sponsership provides some benefits (mostly awareness and maybe some trial) but i have yet to see what the ROI is of those sponserships specifically. Im not sure Kuotas bike sales skyrocketed after Stadlers high profile coverage on NBC or that travel to Dubai increased tenfold with coverage of the Tri Dubai team years ago (and that team had high profile triathletes like alexander, deboom, lessing, etc).

No way they move the recap to online and get anywhere close to same viewers. With nbc atleast you can get accidental viewers not so much with online recap show in dec.

---

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com

We all know that except for the highest tier pro's, triathlon is a brutally tough way to make a living. For that reason alone, I would like to see them paid more. However, I can't help but agree that apart from Kona the pro's do not add value to the races. If there were no pro's we would just look at the top age group finishers instead, marvel "Wow" at their times compared to our own, and then move on with our business. In other words, the top pro's add nothing more than the fastest age groupers. Take away the pro's and there will still be a front runner. Sadly, I must conclude that the current prize money structure is sufficient compensation in this market for what the pro's bring to the table.

Agreed, which begs the question, "how much value does WTC see in the accidental viewers?" They'll have the engaged fans who would find it on NBC or on IM.com or YouTube regardless and, of course, the accidentals. Will exposing them to more chocolate milk commercials increase the value of the show/advertising opportunity enough to outweigh the costs? How many of the accidental viewers are inspired to do an Ironman and become paying customers?

I have no idea how much any of this aspect of it costs or how much money is to be made. That's the big cost-benefit question. The lines between TV and Internet as separate marketing media, their costs, and their perceived values continue to blur.

---

Travis Rassat
Vector Cycle Works
Noblesville, IN
BikeFit Instructor | FMS | F.I.S.T. | IBFI
Toughman Triathlon Series Ambassador

exactly " . . .the current prize money structure is sufficient compensation in this market for what the pro's bring to the table. "

if you want a raise you need to highlite what value you bring, what you would like to add if you were to be compenstaed further or what would decrease if you were to leave. They only argument i've heard so far is basicaly we deserve it becasue we work hard, the event is longer than other events that pay more, etc .. .thats not a compelling reason for anyone to compensate you for those reasons. Find something that convinces WTC rather than whining about how much YOU think you deserve more

the other thing to consder is pros have chosen this for themselves. this wasnt forced on them, this wasn't their only option for employment (there are pros that have walked away from lucrative investment banking positions or consulting jobs unlike a poor, uneducated minority that only gets offered min wage work) nor was their a bait and switch in that they were told they would make millions and that changed to mere thousands. So for me to chose this life to pursue glory and kona and then complain about it . .i just . .really .this was a freewill decision you made for yourself. i could easily walk downtown in my city and find dozens that would jump at the chance for these "high quality" problems and trade places. Its hard for me to find empathy here.

You're smoking crack right???

95% of the people who watch the Ironman on TV could not tell the difference between Craig Alexander and Craig Agegrouper. Half the Kona broadcast are "Biggest Loser", Disabled Army Vet, or similar interest stories.

WTC could easily do the SAME broadcast, no pros and just highlight the front of the AG men's and women's race and have the EXACT SAME PRODUCT.

The whole IRONMAN Dream started well before the big prize purse, and there would probably be MORE interest making it "man vs self" rise above the odds than a "Pro race"

as i look at this photo of the 7th place finisher (from herberts interview on the main page) . .its interesting how few spectators there are in the oval at the finish. If pros brought so much to the table and encouraged such spectator engagement why is it that i can count less than 30 people in the stands? Does this make a compelling argument to WTC?

at midnight when there are no pros and all the 16-17 hour Age groupera finish these stands ar packed. kind of makes you wonder what spectors care about, a pro or the emotion of an age grouper crossing the line at the final moments. if you were a sponser when would you rather have promotion or pay for exposure? ..in front of 30 people at the pro finish or closer to midnight when a few hundred more will see your message. why would WTC pay more? give them back value and they will pay but you have to find that reason.

.

Without pro's would Kona even have the "wc" feel it has now? Aka all the sponsors showing up, the "world championship" feel, the media circus, etc. Would the overall qualify/feel of a big event be lost? I would think so.

---

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com

Your 95% who could not tell the difference in a pro from an ag'er would not even have that opportunity without the pro race, it would not be on tv to begin with. You better check your pipe.

The bigger question... Are there TOO many pros. How many men are competing for the Kona Spots? How many women?

WTC needs to cut total prize money by 30 - 50%, cut out purses at 50% of the races, increase the purses at the remaining races and have a tighter field race head to head more.

And yes, there is a far better model out there for the pros than currently exists, one that creates more interest, more personality, higher viewership and even more sponsor money, input and probably even TV coverage. I have already discussed with Charlie, for it to really work probably would need Felix on board as well, and best of all, would take a serious bite out of the WTC

Or... if the WTC were to adopt the model, would for sure change the face of the sport. Now if Messick wants to pony up, has the potential to seriously increase annual revenues from the TV / streaming coverage

Really? In 1980 when Wide World of Sports really launched all of this, how many Pro triathletes were there?

WTC could still package the race the same way... the best AG triathletes of the world competing to be WORLD CHAMPION on the historic course...

The Kona broadcast is the biggest marketing fail for "professional" triathlon and why nobody gives a shit.
It is apparent that either NBC or WTC, or both, don't believe the professional race is enticing enough.
As supposedly the premier event in long course triathlon, the coverage should be 100% focused on the professionals.

Why are they not selling the pros?
Interviews, statistics, bios, rivalries, background clips from qualifying events... there's more than enough material to fill a 90min broadcast interspersed with bits of actual racing.
Instead we get more victim/survivor age group stories.

Here's a fun exercise... go to ironman.com.
Try to find information about the professional athletes racing the Ironman circuit. About all you get is the KPR.
Now go to triathlon.org and click the Athletes tab. BAM.

There's a lesson here for Challenge... I wonder if they see it.

Really? In 1980 when Wide World of Sports really launched all of this, how many Pro triathletes were there?

WTC could still package the race the same way... the best AG triathletes of the world competing to be WORLD CHAMPION on the histori//

When the race was first aired, it was no more than a man in a barrel falling off niagara falls. It was not a sport, but a crazy thing that a few people did. Without the pros and eventual money, there would be no broadcast now, i can guarantee that. How many AG races do you see on TV today, yesterday, tomorrow?