Tsunami wrote:
I can't think anyone will find this a popular idea, but just to throw it out there, what if races alternated between years they offered slots for each gender? I'm certain the money isn't there to run 2 days of racing, one for each gender, but what if - I mean how much would crowding be reduced - if there were no worlds slots for men one year? Sure lots of guys would still race, but would the tenor of the bike interactions change? I may be wrong and am prepared to be flamed for this, but maybe the women's slot year would draw more newbies but a smaller crowd overall, and the guy slot year would be heavy with type A's and fewer cycling novices?
Actually I don't think this is a terrible idea at all. Let's pull on this thread a little. A few thoughts on this proposal:
How many people showed up to the race on Sunday looking for a slot to worlds? I certainly did. But is that a large percentage? How many of those wouldn't show up if it wasn't "their turn" to get slots that year? If Worlds is in a popular location like it is for 2019, I personally wouldn't have raced there and would have chosen a different 70.3 (excepting the fact that this race is in my backyard, so maybe I would have anyway). But if Worlds is in a less popular, or less accessible location (like SA, or 2020 when it's likely to be New Zealand), I probably would have still come to race simply because it is the local 70.3.
Actually on that note there might be some level of fairness that we lose when sometimes Worlds in in a popular location alternating with less popular locations and possibly never offering slots to the popular location for one gender or another just by pure bad luck.
Edit: That said, I am not sure it would solve the problem you are trying to solve. I am guessing the percentage of people that would sit this one out if it wasn't "their turn" is small enough to not make a huge difference. If I am remembering right, the top two or three overall didn't take slots. So clearly they showed up just to race.