I would say that VeloNews has a very poor understanding of how the current triathlon business model benefits the sport...



Really? I must have missed the lineup of sponsors trying to "compete" for the title sponsorship of the IM series or Kona.

They also note that WTC has "virtual control" Of the sport's strategic direction. Maybe VN can explain why this is a good thing....

I'm not a WTC hater by any means, but advocating a similar structure for cycling as triathlon just demonstrates a poor understanding of the situation.

Edit for typos

---

Chicago Cubs - 2016 WORLD SERIES Champions!!!!

"If ever the time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." - Samuel Adams

i think cycling would have to change a lot in order to adopt the triathlon approach. Most people "racing" triathlon are just out to finish, get their event tshirt, get the finisher medal, and take a ton of selfies along the way. In cycling that mindset does not exists in competition, but does exist in cookie rides and Fondos. While racing is down in my area across the board participation is charity rides and Fondo's is up, but these events do not benefit USAC at all.

Not sure how to bridge the gap between category racing, and participation events. If someone can figure out a way to get the recreational riders to enter a local crit at least once a week then they will solve the problem.

Funny thing that having a corporate entity controlling most of a sport single-handedly is being pitched as a good thing somehow.

At least they are right about one thing, it is the way of the future.

Now that's funny! There is basically no competition whatsoever at a high level to sponsor the sport from non-endemic companies. That's one thing I'm constantly baffled by is that WTC cannot pull in and retain major sponsors

And the few major non-endemic companies they did manage to pull in get out really quick. I spoke with several of them (the ceo's and/or decision makers) personally who told me that their Ironman title sponsorship was a giant waste of money for them :-/

of course, the authors (not VeloNews, per se), have a business proposal for a "pro cycling league"

Apparently they're not old enough to remember this:

http://articles.latimes.com/...658_1_cycling-league

I don't know they just pull in a 650 that's a big title sponsor......

Pro cyclists can make millions of dollars. Pro triathletes cannot. I don't think pro cyclists want pro cycling to become like pro triathlon.

Pro cycling has a rigid team structure. Pro triathlon does not. I don't think pro cycling can ever become like pro triathlon.

---

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

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

--BikeSnobNYC

Indeed - it's a fascinating and interesting comparison, but there are some major, as you pointed out inaccuracies in the piece.

There are things that each sport is doing well and right and there are things that each sport is doing wrong!

Cycling, is more professional at that high level. Triathlon, still has the feel of amateur-hour even at some of the biggest races and events in the sport.

Cycling on the other hand, has done a poor job of consolidating much of it's data, and also that many people ride, often a lot and at a serious level, but they never enter an event - thus are somewhat invisible, and unaccountable. Whereas in triathlon, it's a rare person that swims/bikes/runs, for the hell of it. It's an event/race oriented sport. That offers, an opportunity in these days of big data to capture the data and information of almost all the participants regularly when they enter races/events - the WTC, who is the biggest race/event series in the world, is sitting on a mountain of participant data! One would think that would be of some value!

However, as noted, Ironman does not have a title sponsor - since Ford left in North America a number of years ago, there has been no sponsor at that level. Cycling, perhaps because of the possible TV exposure opportunities does pull in and attract a range of non-endemic sponsors. But as noted in the article - the business of the teams and the events, after the Tour de France, and a few other events is non-sustainable.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

Crits are the problem with promoting cycling in a similar fashion to triathlon. Because of the short course, riders must get pulled if they are lapped or about to be lapped, otherwise they obstruct the race leaders. Perhaps ironically, folks who shell out $1k to finish dead last in an IM won't want to shell out $30 to get pulled half-way through a neighborhood 4-corner crit. To avoid pulling riders, there would need to be twice as many heats (...and you thought cat 5's were scary...). I can't think of a city (or group of potentially irritated residents) that would want to close down streets any longer than they already do.

Starting, promoting, and opening up honest to goodness road races to all comers would be your only shot. I think the gap filler is the semi-competitive fondo, for which the organizer lists and ranks all finishers and provides some medals or tube socks for the top finishers, but keeps the roads closed (at least partially controlled) for all riders no matter how fast and makes sure they know they're welcome in the ride. If you keep the course static year after year, people may start to compete against themselves (you'd have to promote that the same way you do with first timer 5k runners). And even the road races that already exist, and any triathlon or foot race, really, still end up with the road closure and closure duration issue to deal with...and it's worse the longer the course.

Also, rider categories tend to skew any race toward riders looking to constantly improve and move up to the next cat.

The big problem associated with the "numbers" in cycling is that a lot of people don't consider it to be very accessible to the average individual looking to achieve something of physical noteworthy. If you look at running and triathlons, it's all about "hey do this at your own pace, go have fun, be you, don't worry about anyone else" where cycling is essentially the opposite, even in the cat 4's-5's. Entry level cycling is still a large focus on a group effort to establish a peloton to complete a set distance based upon the race organizers determination, followed by a hard effort to cross the finish line first. Not necessarily "hey just go have fun, ride your bike and whatever happens happens!! kind of ordeal that running and triathlons set precedence to. Even your Cat 5 "pro cyclist" is somewhat concerned about individuals holding their line in a peloton, and there's been enough complaints on the ST forum to understand that a LARGE, LARGE body of individuals doing their first and probably only triathlon should never, ever, ever, step foot inside of a peloton.

So yeah, I think it's pretty obvious that triathlons would best cycling in a variety of both amateur and pro events. Sure, the ITU world championship is open to both Age group qualifiers and pro qualifiers, many of the amateurs who would have no business being in the pro race *no offense of course to you AG qualifiers.* But you don't see that at the Tour De France, the "amateur TdF AG qualifiers!." You see it at some world champ events, like 'Cross nat's where your 30+/masters dudes duke it out, but some may be old pro's, may have some sponsorships lined up already or race at such a high level that they actually deserve to be where they're at *given that I think 1st and 2nd may only go, if that, haven't looked into it for 'cross.*


In regards to numbers associated with both events, I still think cycling takes the cake when we look at overall continual support from individuals. Cyclist tend to race or compete in multiple events throughout the year than the average weekend triathlete who does their local tri with a 1 day license to say "hey I did a triathlon!" This is in comparison to the not so average competitive triathlete who does 3-4 events throughout the year, goes to nat's to try and qualify for a world spot. These individuals who race multiple times throughout the year are small.. The numbers exist but they aren't big....


That being said, look at the numbers associated with draft legal triathlons throughout the U.S..... The Clermont Draft Legal tri sold out in the U25 category since it's a pro qualifier, but I think the age group draft legal was less than half full, like 30-40 individuals. Your cat 5 races down in the southwest will pull 40+, not to mention you're gonna hit that in your 4',s and your combined 1/2/3/ will have 40+ too, a total of at least 120+ individuals signed up, and that doesn't include masters either. Food for thought when we look at "competitive" categories where it's highly focused upon racing other individuals rather than racing the clock.

I definitely remember that and I always thought it was a great idea...always thought it could work as a school sport as well. It could be done without leaving school property for many institutions. It received coverage in "Winning" magazine and then all of a sudden was never heard from again...I'd pay to watch it...