She will have company on the walk as Macca is going up there to validate his Kona spot..


====

Oh snap!

This is what is so screwed up about the qualifying process. She is 70.3 World Champ and should get an automatic invite to Kona. Just like Crowie did back in 2006. Having top caliber pros risking hurting themselves, does not help the caliber of the WTC fields and frankly Melissa walking the marathon, just makes a mockery of the WTC qualifying process. Andrew Messick should call Mellissa, give her a wildcard invite NOW and have her on the line at HyVee, Vegas and Kona. It is more important for WTC to have a healthy Mellissa on the line at these races than have her make a spectacle of the qual process and walk the marathon at Cairns.

Dev

By the way, change the title of your thread to "70.3 World Champion plans to walk IM Cairns to Validate Kona slot"

I agree that this is what's screwed up, but disagree with your conclusion about how to fix it. WTC simply should start to leverage the "code of conduct" rules for pros that they have to also apply to how you execute the race. Add some subjectivity in there. Every major sport does it, though obviously often not as much as we want - e.g., Ben Roethlisberger's suspension, but for only six bans.

If you say up front, "I'm going to walk the marathon," then I'd just deny you entry to the race. At least remove that sort of nonsense from it. And then, if the athlete does end up sandbagging on race day, I think WTC should reserve the right to disallow the performance. Heck, there was nothing illegal - that I know of anyway - about Chuckie V drinking a beer at IMH. But WTC banned him for a year for it. Why? Because it made a mockery of the event. And this sort of thing also does that.

I've actually suggested this already to the folks at WTC.

If you are going to approach an Ironman from the standpoint of, "I just want to finish," then do it like Greg Bennett at Melbourne. You definitely don't publicly say, "I'm going to sandbag." You make the effort. At some point, you take it down a notch or two. You finish "well," and you keep quiet. You make it so that people - including me - aren't even totally sure that's what you were doing. But, that's what you get when you are dealing with one of the most professional and savviest veterans of the sport - Benno. Rollison should take some notes. But WTC should require that sort of behavior since expecting pros to act like the Bennetts is not generally a safe bet.

---

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp

along the same lines our prison system wouldn't be full to the brim either if people just kept their mouth SHUT.


toe the line, put on a good show, take the finishers medal and go home. no need to bury yourself. just claim GI issues and be done with it.

Tim

p.s. Did you get a finishers medal and t-shirt when you crossed the line last weekend?

---

---

Tim

So between saying, "I'm following the rules because i have to but because of injury I'm going to not actually race." and saying yes I was racing, but i got a tummy ache and walked it in, lying is the best policy?

Not wanting to go after Rapp, but he is valued on this forum because he is so open about his racing, but was his IM race with the stomach issues really issues or was he there because he had sponser obligations and it was a training day? I have no doubt it was the former, but no fan cares if someone says they are going to be on the course for another reason rather than racing.

---

Styrrell

I think that particular issue is 'officially' considered outside assistance since (IIRC) someone handed it to him. Whether it was a beer or a cup of water didn't really matter....although the beer made for a much better story.

Now of course, the penalty for outside assistance isn't a 1yr ban, so obviously WTC got creative w/ their doling out the penalty.

---

---

Brian Shea
http://www.PersonalBestNutrition.com
Open-Water/Masters Swimming at the Jersey Shore:
Monmouth County NJ Ocean Swim/Masters Workouts

I forgot about the GI distress incident for Jordan and I assure you my comment was purely coincidental in that regards.

Is lying the best answer? No. Is requiring a "validation" race the best answer? I don't think so either.

Have you ever done a full distance and NOT had something that made you want to slow down? That wouldn't be lieing then right?

Either way I'm glad I do t have to deal with this myself.

Tim

---

---

Tim

I agree that the validation is bad, but giving WTC the benefit of the doubt, it does get the big pros to the big races. WTC had to know that requiring a guy to race a IM race that counted for nothing was going to result is guys going through the motions.

I don't have a problem with a Pro saying so ahead of time. To me making up an excuse is just silly and it bring up issues like I mentioned. If they are going to not be honest about a poor performance, their presence on the web and in interveiws is greatly devalued.

---

Styrrell

Agreed. Straight up lying does degrade ones value.

I guess I don't see it as lying, more stretching the truth. Perhaps not even stretching if you simply say something like "my legs were getting trashed so I backed off to help prevent injury". I'd venture a guess that would be a valid statement for all.

I wouldn't announce to my employer that I wasn't sick when I called in sick. But there is a good chance I could safely say "I 'think' I might be coming down with something and I am going to take the day off to get it under control"*


*says the that doesn't ever call in sick

Tim

---

---

Tim

You of all people should be saluting her, not berating her. THis is the same thing when they came out with the finish within 8% of the winner, or no prize money. Remember the athletes that waited at the finish line to make sure everyone got in so they got their check? Were they not applauded by most here and the pros themselves? I see this as the same exact thing. THe whole point of the valadation thing is just a gun to the head of the pros to come race our series for no money. It is to keep them from doing outside events as much as possible if they want to be in hawaii. This is her decleration that it is a screw up system for the pros, and look how silly it really is. The same as Chrissy waiting at the finish line for 2nd place so that 8th can get her money. You show how silly it really is enough times, then just maybe they will change it. I do not think your plan to make it even harder for the pros will sit well with them, and certainly will not help their pocket books..


Almost forgot, pros should not have to be pretending to race and then sandbagging, they are not actors, they are athletes. IT is a horrible system that forces them to become athlete actors..

Since you brought the NFL up, should we ban teams that don't start their best players on the last two weeks of the season after they have clinched a playoff spot and home field advantage? Why punish someone for being better than everyone else earlier on. If she has qualified through her superior past performances, then she has every right to compete at what ever level she feels necessary. Establishing a "code of conduct" is ridiculous in a sport with too many intangibles to efficiently enforce any of them. If I am a bad swimmer, can I just float through the swim, or do I need to go hard the whole time? And, what is worse, drafting in a non draft legal race (i.e. cheating) or not giving your all in a run? People need to worry more about themselves, than about what others are doing.

---

Go Faster

I *also* disagree with the idea of allowing the 70.3 WC - and even more the 5i50 champ - automatic entry into Kona with "validation." I didn't say validation was the best system. But if you are going to require "validation," i think there should be some performance requirements.

I think Kona should be filled with the best IRONMAN triathletes. I think there should be a performance bar for Ironman that athletes have to meet. Look at the previous champions - Normann, Faris, Macca, Crowie, Natascha, & Chrissie. ALL of them WON Ironman races both before AND AFTER the won Kona. The only recent Kona champ yet to win an Ironman outside of Kona is Mirinda Carfrae, who came 2nd last year in NZ and 3rd this year in Melbourne.

Personally, I do not care what Ms. Rollison does. She's allowed to walk the marathon, so she's going to. But I don't think she should be allowed to walk the marathon. That's my opinion. And I also think that it's poor form to announce ahead of time that you are going to walk because you are simply there because you have to be. I think that's an insult fans, sponsors, everyone. Again, that's just my opinion. I'm not going to lose sleep over her doing it. But that doesn't mean I can't or shouldn't say, "I don't agree with that."

Monty - you seem to be forgetting that I was in favor of the 8% rule. And nobody is saying that athletes need to be actors. They just need to recognize that they are "personalities," and - as such - need to recognize that how their actions are perceived is important. You don't need to look any further than Lance Armstrong to see the impact that being cognizant of that can have. Or, strictly within triathlon, just look at Macca. Those guys understand that they are more than just their performance/presence out on the race course. And I can assure you that neither of them would - in advance - openly admit to phoning it in, even if they did. Now, some people may dislike that about them. And that's fine. Differences of opinion are what make the world go 'round.

---

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp

Monty, that's why I think they should just give her a wildcard entry to Kona and call it done.

She can provide medical evidence wrt to why she cannot "run" the IM Cairns run leg, she has proven her value to WTC by winning WTC's 70.3 worlds (and I believe also WTC Asia Pacific 70.3 Championship). She fully intended to (and still intends) to participate in Cairns, meeting what they want her to do. But it is not in WTC's interest to "break her" before their very own "A" events this fall, and it is not in WTC's best interest for her to have to "walk" the Cairns run course. Imagine the NHL forcing Sydney Crosby to play regular season games for the Pittsburgh Penguins when he is still suffering from a concussion and thereby putting him out of commission for the playoffs. No, they'd rather have him on form for the prime time of the playoffs.

Now in fairness, she does not "need" to validate at Cairns....there are several IM events in August where she can validate by just jogging slowly....Regensburg, NYC, Tremblant, IMC, Louisville. Granted, participation in these would reduce her performance at HyVee and Vegas, and I think WTC really should be more worried about her performing in their A events at the highest level, rather than shuffling through an IM In August, or walking one in June. Neither serves a superior business/marketing purpose to having her in "A shape" for WTC "A events".

WTC has already made a mockery or so many races... Why should Sopranoman be worth 4000 points and so many others worth 1000.

Basically WTC is saying a 13th place at Sopranoman is worth more than a win at more than half their races.

Should a 7th place finish at IMAZ really be worth more than a win at IMSG

In fact, under the current system, you can have a person WIN 3 IM races and have it be worth less than someone who comes in 3rd at another race.

Perhaps baseball and football should do something similar... beat the Yankees and get the equivalent of 3 wins, beat the Pittsburgh Pirates and get half a win.

The validation rule is bogus. If you have the points or the ranking, especially after a top Kona finish, then having to complete a race just to complete a race is stupid. The points system is more about blocking territory and locking up pros than anything else

Monty - you seem to be forgetting that I was in favor of the 8% rule. And nobody is saying that athletes need to be actors.\\

No i did not forget, you were just wrong on that issue. Well maybe wrong is too strong, let us say the the majority of opinions were contrary to yours, and the pressure from most the pros got the rule changed. That is how i look at Melissa's statement here, she is making her point in the only way that ironman hears, by overt action against a rule that i would guess that most the pros are against. Perhaps you are going against the tide once again.

And I did not say that athletes should become actors, just that the system in place forces them to that extreme, or do what Melissa is doing here and take the heat for it. My hope is that more pros would come out and support her, just like with the 8% rule and the other rules ironman just forced down the pros throats without any consulting of the actual people those rules affect.

I respect that you have a different opinion, I just do not agree at all with that position. Bennett may or may have not sandbagged, if he did i would have respected him more if he had come out like Melissa and just said how silly this paper valadation really is.

Lastly, I think it is ok to let in the 1/2 and 515o champions, we have so few real big names in the sport, i think it is good to get them all together at one venue. It used to be that pros did all the distances all year long, and it was good for the sport i believe. Just look at all the hype already associated with Bennett and other champions doing hawaii for the 1st time. I'm sure WHitfield would get the same hype if he were to validate too. Personally i will enjoy seeing them at hawaii and what they can do. With this crazy qualifying process they have in place now, things like them racing would never happen.

The baseball and football analogy is a poor one. In terms of Kona Pro Rankings, a better comparison might be in tennis or golf. Different tournaments are absolutely worth different numbers of maximum points. Why shouldn't WImbledon or the Masters be worth more possible points than a lesser event?

This is just my opinion... I think that allowing the winners of Hy-Vee and 70.3 WC easy access is great for the sport. Most Ironman races generally have fairly weak fields, guys (or gals) that would have no shot to win or even be competitive in Kona can qualify by doing a bunch of IMs and coming top 10.

I would rather see what the Hy-Vee winner and the 70.3 winner can do in the big dance. If Rollison shows up and comes top 10 in Kona, that will validate her presence for me.

Look back to 2007, I don't think that Sam McGlone did an Ironman distance race before doing Kona and came 2nd to some girl named Chrissie. Should she have been there? I think so.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Reading the article, she had an MRI and is hurt. So, that is totally different than she just wants to save herself. And I totally agree, if the WTC process is she has to complete a race, not "race" a race, she is following the rules.
But here we go again, folks throw in their "opinion", rather than just follow the darn rules. Great, if you do not like the rules, keep quiet, and go work on trying to change them.

I saw nothing in the article that would say she is turning her nose at WTC. There is a rule, she is hurt, but she can meet the rule by walking the run as she is working on getting healthy. Why do some make things into stuff that is NOT what she said. Why do some spend so much time basically saying the rules have to be the way they want, and call it an opinion.

Rules are rules, she is following them, is hurt, and will be on the start line in Kona. We should be saying great job of not hurting herself more and being stupid.

---

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep

That is however about impossible to enforce. Could YOU for instance say that you are going to walk a run? Sure you could. Would you do it is such a public forum? Um, I think that you are too politically correct to do that. Would it have been more wise for the woman who is referenced in the OP to just "do it" and not talk about it? Maybe - then again, she is shining a light on one of the many issues with getting into Kona for the people who DESERVE to be there.

Simple solution - get rid of the lottery. Open those slots up to people who have earned their slots. If you WIN a 70.0, I say that is an entry - cut and dry. Top 5 at any other IM race (MP-WP) - entry. Win and IM - Free entry.

Oh wait - but how much money does WTC make in selling all those damn lotto spots.....

---

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

What if the Hokey Pokey is what it is all about?

I disagree.

This is about "making it" to the Championship

So if you race Sopranoman and win you get 4000 points. It takes 4 wins of Ironman Regensberg, Tremblant, Louisville and Wisconsin to equally get as many point.

In baseball, you play more games against teams in your division and a division winner automatically makes the playoffs. So while Texas may be a decent team, Oakland is mediocre, Seattle and LA are not so good. Texas also is the only team in their division with a winning record. Take a look at the East. All teams are even or better. These teams not only beat each other up, it happens frequently that a team is fighting for a wild card spot that would comfortably have one if it was in another division.

In Football, there are "easy schedules" and "tough schedules". Should Denver, a team that was 8-8 and no team had a better than even record in that division really gone to the playoffs, when Tennessee at least had a winning record and did not?

Should teams in the AFC South really had their wins against Indianapolis count, a team that won only 2 games a season? Those teams got two games each against a team that almost went winless, while teams in the AFC WEST all were close to even. Ironically Houston and Tennessee were the two Indy wins, but I believe Houston at that point had clinched and was pretty much resting players by that point.

R10,

While I agree that making people pay to be in the lottery is bogus, I do like the concept. Leave some spots available to the everyman. Kona should be open to everyone, not just those who have good genes.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

After reading the article I don't understand your view on this. She didn't have anything bad to say about WTC or the fact that she had to finish an IM to validate her spot. She simply said she is injured and will only be able to walk the run. She is following the rules so I see this as being a professional. Similar to other sports that have injury reports before competitions she is stating she has an injury and will not be able to compete at 100%.

Would you suggest that she wait to race another IM later in the season instead of sticking to her planned race schedule?

I think Jordan was merely saying that he disagrees with the rule that allows her to do this.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Or work hard..

---

-Of course it's 'effing hard, it's IRONMAN!
Team ZOOT
ZOOT, QR, Garmin, HED Wheels, Zealios, FormSwim, Precision Hydration, Rudy Project

Here is what he stated above in the post I was responding to,

"Personally, I do not care what Ms. Rollison does. She's allowed to walk the marathon, so she's going to. But I don't think she should be allowed to walk the marathon. That's my opinion."

The discussion about whether or not you need to validate a spot is really another topic.

Why should it be available for every man? You get to enter a lotto for the Super Bowl? How about the World Series? You cant even lotto into the World Series of Poker. IT is hight time we make it what it is - a Championship Race. I am so sick and damn tired of the NBC news crew finding some whoa is me slob in the crowd to do a pitty party feel good overcome the odds story. I know that means I will never get to "Kona" but I sure could go to many of the other races on the islands and not dilute the efforts of the people who have earned their spots.

---

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

What if the Hokey Pokey is what it is all about?

My opinion...

Kona was started as an event for anyone to enter. It should continue as such with the lottery, I would just eliminate charging people to enter the lottery. There are many spots available to those with good genes and those that work hard (with the necessary genes) (to BryanCD, if I quit my job and hired a coach and worked full time on Ironman training I would still never manage a time good enough to qualify for Kona. So, yeah, genes count)

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

I don't think it makes a mockery of the event to walk the marathon if you're injured. Lots of competitors walk part of the IM marathon, even pros. Anyone who has anything beyond a very casual interest in Ironman racing understands why she is walking the marathon. I don't think Chuckie V drinking a beer in the IM made a mockery of the event either. So what if a guy drinks one beer in 8+ hours of racing when he's having a rough day? I was on the course with him that day and never questioned his status as an elite or that he was mocking the race.

I tend to agree with Blep. I have no issues with the lottery. I work very hard (check ST log) and have just good enough genes that with a half decent finish and the really fast guys not showing up and with a fairly decent roll down, I have been able to go. But guys in this category (on the bubble) are still in the minority. The bulk of participants, no matter how hard they work will never get a whiff of the Kona start line, but like a guy like me would never get a whiff of the NFL or NBA....just have the wrong parents.

Unlike the NFL or NBA, our sport CAN provide access to the championship event for those with parents who gave them genes that are not ideal for long course triathlon. I do think the lottery is valid. To appease those who want the purity of the sport, they could just have a citizen wave that leaves 5 min after the "qualifier wave". In fact, beef up the size of the "citizen wave" and put the transition for that behind the King Kam. More access to the show for regular folks who don't have the right starting genetics to get to Kona qual shape. Moving all of this to the Kim Kam would also provide 200 more spots on the pier for the "qualifer wave"...win win win.

To Bryancd, I know what you mean by "work harder". I think for guys from a half decent genetic starting point for Long Course tri, that certainly applies. But that won't get most people to Kona. Many don't have a chance in hell even if they average 17 hours a week of training all year and get down to 6% body fat. It's just the way it is. Some of us can't be linemen, some of us can't be gymnasts, some of us can't be jockeys. Nothing wrong in admitting that there are some body types that just don't work for some sports.

I think the penalty was harsh but the beer thing was a bit of mockery. Its either a top level race or an social event. I'd hate to see Kona turn into one of the rolling party events like Bay to Breakers.

---

Styrrell

The biggest joke about the Chuckie V thing is that WTC claimed that he put the safety of others at risk. Yeah, one guy walking along drinking one beer put others safety at risk. Chuckie was suspended because he did an interview and joked about drinking a beer during the race. WTC was embarrassed and came up with excuses for their stupid suspension.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Don't forget that the Hawaii Ironman was created by guys drinking beers, that runner-up John Dunbar drank two beers during the marathon in the inaugural race, and that the race probably won't still be around if it wasn't for the sponsorship of Bud Light in the early years. :)

I have no problem with the lottery, I think it should remain as is. I just felt to characterize qualifiers as limited to those genetically gifted fails to acknowledge the work put in as well.

---

-Of course it's 'effing hard, it's IRONMAN!
Team ZOOT
ZOOT, QR, Garmin, HED Wheels, Zealios, FormSwim, Precision Hydration, Rudy Project

I have nothing against beer, but is Kona really a race where it needs to be on the course? It the only race other than the OG that gets TV coverage for the masses. I can live with Joe average not thinking a IM race is athletic frat party.

Bob ; I'm going to Kona this year and doing the IM race.

Joe: Dude thats sweet you going to get hammered, do you have costume all picked out? You should totally rock one of those Pee Wee Herman bikes

---

Styrrell

It was definitely a mockery and I don't even care what the length of the suspension was. My problem with it is the BS that WTC spouted about Chuckie endangering other competitors. They suspended him for the mockery, nothing else. Don't $h!t in my mouth and tell me it's chocolate.

hijacked thread...

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

If i wasn't at work........ I'd drink a beer to that!

what does it matter? this is supposed to all be FUN

lets not miss that point. a rolling frat party would be FUN. slogging through a marathon in 90+ heat and humidity isn't "fun" anymore, give me an ice cold beer!

for the big guys getting paid, sorry, you are going to have to gut it out while you are "on the clock" looking for a paycheck.

the rest of us? we are just paying to play!

Carry on

Tim

---

---

Tim

Well, the poop in the pants answers that question for me..........

---

Pink? Maybe. Maybe not. You decide.

Here you go guys, you can stop hyjacking this thread now, it's all about beer!!


http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...;;page=unread#unread

http://www.stripes.com/...icer-in-1978-1.83982
Retired U.S. Navy officer John Collins says he had no idea that someday the Ironman triathlon he helped found in 1978 would be an international phenomenon. After all, it was a taxi driver who won the first Ironman. And Collins admits he consumed beer and chili while competing in the inaugural Ironman, according to his biography found on Ironman.com.
...
According to a USA Today Web article, runner-up John Dunbar, a Navy SEAL, had the opportunity to win the first Ironman, but toward the end of the race he ran out of water. His supporters gave him beer instead.


Y'all think we should kick John Collins and John Dunbar out of the sport.

---

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TriRaceBook.com
.
Hawaii Qualification Analysis

I went to Kona through a lottery spot (first and only try). It was fun. It took me 12:07 to finish. Not really that fast.

I trained for it and did my best. I know most of those there got in because they worked hard and went fast. They deserved my respect. I showed that respect by taking my training seriously.

Nobody who was there or has been there had a problem with me being there. Those who haven't been there seem to be the bitter ones.

BTW, I beat a lot of people who qualified. Some of them were in my age group. And my marathon time was the same as Chris Lieto's.

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

Ok, now say something to impress us


:)

---

I agree and in my opinion the pro ranks could do with some more funny characters like Chukie V.Some us actually enjoy following athletes with a little individuality.That call to ban him was lame.

---

How's that ;)

---

************************
#WeAreTheForge #BlackGunsMatter

"Look, will you guys at leats accept that you are a bunch of dumb asses and just trust me on this one? Please?" BarryP 7/30/2012

I don't disagree with letting them in because "they don't deserve to be there." I disagree with it because it's post hoc validation. I.e., they do well, so clearly they deserved to be there. Certainly the track record of 70.3 champs in Kona has been good. No denying that. It's just my opinion that Kona qualifying should be based on Ironman performance. That's just my $0.02. I don't have a problem with people having the opposite opinion because - as you said - they've proven they can do well. Different takes on the subject. Both valid, I think.

---

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp

Sorry to drag up a two-week old post, but just stumbled across it searching for something else...

Can't really understand why you think lotteries are a good idea for a WC. Do you believe the Superbowl or AllStars event would be better if they allowed people to drop some cash and play in the games? Not the greatest comparison because obviously in a team sport environment they would interfere with the other players. A better one might be the Masters. Do you think that the spectacle of a 13 handicapper teeing up at Augusta National would be good for the game? No, that's what they have Pro-Ams for.

You don't have to be genetically "blessed" to get there. I agree with Bryan that it's more about the hard work. I suspect those that claim to train as hard are more limited by a lack of ability to hurt and train hard. Then there's the dialing in of nutrition. Let's remember the speeds some people are swimming, biking and running are not actually that fast.

There are so many IM's around the world these days that no one is stopping these lotteries from ticking their 'bucket list', but a WC is a WC. I think Duffy hit the nail on the head when he said the majority who have the issue are the fringe athletes. I was one of those and at the time I do recall this bugging me. But then there's also the CEO passes, armed forces etc to get worked up over. Though perhaps the biggest beef was that my efforts (I won't use times because that's course dependent) would have been good enough in most North American races. Many are limited by geography, not genetics, and shouldn't have to be flush with cash to travel across the globe for equity, particularly when it involves training through winters for anything other than the main act. Scales may have started balancing a bit more in recent years mind you but still have ways to go.

Back OT ... Jordan's views are somewhat baffling. MR said she expected to be on the run course after 6 hours, so that's not sandbagging the first two legs for a female pro, that's pretty darn good for all but CW. She can't run and to do so later in the year would impede on her priority races as Dev said. Based on the views of many that I've read recently it sounds like they think Rapp is being more 'disrespectful' to the sport by not showing up at Kona and instead putting sponsors first. At least MR is trying as best as she can to get there given the circumstances and wanting to race the best.

Back on this again... This is my problem with the current KPR rankings. Look at the men #s 19 and 20. Jason Shortis and Aaron Farlow. Now maybe I am just ignorant and maybe these guys will contend but I doubt it. I see two guys racking up KPR points by doing a bunch of IM events with placings that aren't that great. I don't see them being contenders at Kona. Even if they could possibly contend, they will be so wiped out by then that they have no chance. I'd rather watch the 70.3 champ than these guys.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Do you believe the Superbowl or AllStars event would be better if they allowed people to drop some cash and play in the games? Not the greatest comparison because obviously in a team sport environment they would interfere with the other players. A better one might be the Masters. Do you think that the spectacle of a 13 handicapper teeing up at Augusta National would be good for the game? No, that's what they have Pro-Ams for. //

Sounds like you are advocating getting rid of all AG'ers from Kona. Because last time i checked, the events you listed do not have an AG division along with their pro race/ event championship.

So like that 13 handicapper ruining the game of golf, you showing up at Kona ruins the pro race too? Pardon me if you are an 8;30 hawaii finisher...

turns out walking the mary might have been too much for mel.. looks like she dnf'd.

http://ironman.com/...r=2012#axzz1x25u3RfS

---

Coaching - Future Endurance

I'm pretty sure she was a DNS rather than a DNF. Maybe all the crap generated on this thread had some part in dissuading her from competing.

Hugh

---

Genetics load the gun, lifestyle pulls the trigger.

Yes, it's more than likely the world champion checked in with the anonymous pundits at ST to confirm what she should/shouldn't do.

---

---

Brian Shea
http://www.PersonalBestNutrition.com
Open-Water/Masters Swimming at the Jersey Shore:
Monmouth County NJ Ocean Swim/Masters Workouts

You seem to be ignoring the fact that she's injured.

"However, a routine MRI scan last week revealed a lower leg injury that if not rested from running could potentially turn into a stress fracture and derail her entire season. After discussing her options she has been cleared to ‘walk’ the marathon."


I don't see anything in that article that would indicate she intended to "abuse" the system of her own volition. Nobody likes to walk--I'm sure if she had it her way she'd be running the marathon and collecting a paycheck at the end of the day. It would be very different if she planned to do the race with her husband and was with him stroke for stroke and stride for stride the entire way. The simple fact that she is a pro does not mean that she shouldn't be able to race whatever legitimate strategy will offer her the best long-term outcome. Sorry everyone can't be as good and as injury-free as you, Mr. 8%'er...


Hop off.

---

__________________________

I tweet!

That's the difficulty in trying to come up with an analogy for what is a pretty unique sport. Having said that, year after year you will see AG'ers beating some of the pro's at every IM, even Kona. Many AG'ers are quasi pros anyway. Pro's don't have to wait for AG'ers in tri (in fact they regularly get a headstart now) so no it doesn't ruin the pro race in the same way it would those events. Your analogy has similar holes to mine.

I just think those fringe types who have busted their gut, and could well have been there on any other given day, have earnt it well before a ticket. The more recent reward for multiple IM finishers, whilst I still disagree with it, at least has some rationale behind it. Then again it is one of the few (possibly only?) "WC" not run by the governing body.

Didn't even rack her bike beforehand. DNS'd...

I heard that there was a chance of further injury/delayed recovery even if she walked, so she did the right thing.

good call for her. she's got a lot of quality years in her still. hopefully she has reverted back to her plan to race kona 2013.

---

Coaching - Future Endurance

year after year you will see AG'ers beating some of the pro's at every IM, even Kona. //

Well if you count every pro that DNF's or cruises in as getting beat, i guess so. But to my knowledge no AG'er has never beaten a pro for any money in a time comparison in hawaii, and that is with a lot less stringent rules they get to race under. I agree thought that your analogies were not good ones. (-;

Yes, actually it doesn't matter how they cross the line, beat is beat. Many still get it wrong.

Julie Moss??? :)

I don't understand why you seem to be taking this personally. Then again, I'm more and more baffled as to why people on the internet (including me at times) take someone's general opinion about what is clearly not an issue of right/wrong so personally. It seems to be most true with regards to Lance, as the recent surge on this forum shows, where you're either a hater or a fanboy. Likewise here, why does the fact that I have a different opinion than yours about this particular statement - "The simple fact that she is a pro does not mean that she shouldn't be able to race whatever legitimate strategy will offer her the best long-term outcome." - make me some sort of high-and-mighty "Mr. 8%er?" And believe me, I've been injured. I've just never chosen to do a race where I was injured or where I thought I might deliver a sub-par performance. Dan encouraged me to go to Kona in 2010, because he thought it would be a great story for the media, coming back and "racing" Kona so soon after my crash. But I put the word race in quotations because it wouldn't have been a race to me. I was not prepared to do an Ironman in early October of 2010. Could I have done it? I think so. Could I have finished? I think so. But that was not how I - personally - wanted to show up in Kona. Now, that's obviously not the same as this scenario, but I do think it's proof that I'm not just sitting throwing stones from some glass house of injury freedom. Of course, this is probably a larger question for the internet at large, but whatever. I'm just baffled that you seem to take this very personally, despite the fact that you have no vested interest in Ms. Rollison's performance nor are you a professional triathlete. But anyway...

To be clear, I was NOT ignoring the fact that she was injured. I also posit that it's precisely the point that "nobody likes to walk," but that doesn't mean that people would chose to run if they "could." I think what many folks would chose to do is not to race. But they are not given that option. Now, do I think that's a flaw in the system? Yes. I think it was most "exposed" by Andreas Raelert walking/jogging the marathon in Regensburg last year, though I think he deflected it reasonably well with his money to charity based on the number of folks that beat him. But still, I think that what he did wasn't necessarily a positive thing. Does that make it "wrong?" No. I just didn't agree with it. But - as I think I've said - WTC has opened that door by making a policy that requires that you simply finish an Ironman between Konas. I think that policy was poorly conceived - just like the 8% rule before it - BUT, as I said about the 8% rule, that doesn't mean I disagree with the principle of it. I think the principle of the completing an Ironman in between Kona improve the participation of the top pros at races other than Kona. And I support that. In fact, because I think it's incredibly important that Ironman expands beyond one race in October, I think it's one of the most important policies that WTC has. BUT, I think it's poorly implemented. However, like a lot of what I perceive as "loopholes," just because one exists, I don't think that means you should take advantage of it. Of course, just because I don't think someone should take advantage of it doesn't mean that they can't, or doesn't mean that they don't believe the opposite.

I think that going in to a race like an Ironman anticipating walking the marathon is a bad thing. I think it reflects poorly on the professional race. And I think it contributes to this idea that Kona is all that matters, so much so that you'd give a subpar performance at another race just to get to Kona. Again, my opinion, and I realize that others may hold the opposite opinion. And I also think that it sets a very bad example for age-group athletes. I recall the woman in the walking cast featured in the NBC broadcast in 2010. As well as the man with the heart transplant, who failed to finish. I thought that both of those were poor choices to feature. I thought the former reflected the drive and power of Ironman taken to what I thought was an unhealthy degree. Sometimes, the more noble and brave decision is to say, "I can, but I won't." And I think that the focus on the fact that she "finished" undercuts the value of performing. I.e., she was remarkable - according to the broadcast - for finishing with the walking cast, but what about the woman who won that age-group, whose performance went unnoticed? I realize that there are way too many stories to cover, but I don't think that the idea of overcoming "anything" just to finish is always the right message. My $0.02. I recall the guy who walked in his socks the last like 10 (or more?) miles of the bike and then ran the marathon. I thought THAT was what Ironman is all about. Overcoming adversity on the day. But I thought the woman in the boot was a bit foolish, like if the fellow with the broken bike had started the race with a bike that had a huge crack in it. Somewhat the same sentiment regarding the man with the heart transplant. I think Ironman is incredible for what it has shown that people can overcome - Jon Blais being a powerful example - but I don't think that means it is the right thing for everyone. My own opinion is that if you are given the gift of someone else's heart, maybe you shouldn't abuse it. And I think it's becoming more clear that the act of Ironman itself - like most extreme endurance exercise - is likely not good for you. And may in fact actually be a bit bad for you. Now, on balance, does the training and the healthy lifestyle and the enjoyment more than offset that? I think it does. But I don't race Ironman because I think it's adding years on to my life. And there's nothing wrong with that. And I look at a total BAMF like Lou Hollander, and I think, again, THAT is what Ironman is all about. Is Lou "hurting" himself? I don't believe so. But I am not sure that you can say the same thing about that fellow with the heart transplant.

I think people are tremendously afraid to DNS or to DNF. I know people who've said, "I don't want to DNF, because I think it gets easier to quit once you've quit before." And I thought the same thing, until I finally DNFed an Ironman. And then I thought, once you quit once, quitting gets harder because you KNOW how bad you feel afterwards. I think there is already more than enough of both "finish at all costs" and "only Kona matters" without having someone noteworthy and extraordinary like Mel Rollison adding to it.

To me, I would have had incredible respect for Mel if she had said, "I'm injured, but I don't believe Kona is so important as to give a subpar performance at another race just to get there." She chose to do something different. It's not something I would have done. And I expressed that disagreement. So what? That's what makes the world go around. But the animosity on topics like this really baffles me. Like, you can't be critical without someone saying, "mind your own business," like somehow having an opinion and sharing it brands you as a self-righteous asshole.

If you want to tell someone to, "hop off," that's fine, but keep in mind that you are basically doing the exact same thing that you are getting pissed at me about - expressing a contrary opinion.

---

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp

First of all, I'm not pissed at all. I'm am disbelieving that you think that the fact that she would walk the marathon in order to get to Kona has any bearing on her level of professionalism.

You hold this notion of "professionalism" up on a pedestal to such a great extent that probably only a few people ever measure up to it. Perhaps yourself, the Bennetts, and whatever other athletes you happen to hold in high esteem. You have a pattern of critiquing other professionals on here for things like not optimizing their business as a triathlete for making money, not helping other triathletes making money (a la Lance), and now this. There are myriad reasons why people compete at both the amateur and professional level--what I take issue with is that you seem quite willing to impose your path through professional triathlon upon others. As a true professional triathlete, it is your sport to promote and defend, but it is not yours alone to dictate how each athlete should handle him or herself. I understand why you seem to be frustrated by her decision though--she is willing to take the hit earlier in the year such that she can still compete at Kona, while you're only willing to race at Kona if you can make it jive with the rest of your year.

Believe it or not, I actually qualified for my elite license last year. I jumped on that opportunity. Not because I was the best or the fastest or had even a remote chance of winning any money. 1. I didn't start a blog, didn't seek out sponsors, didn't post smack talk on twitter, or go beat my chest at races because I had a card that set me apart (on paper only). 2. I had the worst luck last year--I had constant calf cramping in races, asthma flare-ups that haven't been an issue since my childhood (after going through years of 2-3 allergy shots per week). I think that you are entitled to criticize anything that falls under category 1 above--things like that are indicative of professionalism. Category 2, which generally encompasses things that are out of one's control are not for you to hold a microscope to, which is exactly what I believe you are doing to Ms. Rollison. No, it's not personal, but yes, I can relate completely.

---

__________________________

I tweet!

I am not dictating how she should handle herself. I'm just saying that I disagree with her decision, and that I would do it differently, for a variety of reasons. She's obviously free to do what she wants. That doesn't mean I have to agree with it, and I also don't think that if I do disagree that I shouldn't be able to say, "I disagree." It also does. Of mean that I think Mel is unprofessional. I just think that decision is unprofessional. We all know that I've certainly made my share of unprofessional decisions.

The analogy regarding your number 1/number 2 is not really germane. I'm not criticizing MR for getting injured. Just like I wouldn't criticize you for having a bad race because of cramps or asthma. But I you were havin an asthma attack waiting for the gun to go off, and you decided to start a race in spite of that, then yes, I might question that decision.

---

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp

Touche.

Also, check your PM's. In light of your most recent post you can probably ignore parts of the penultimate paragraph.

---

__________________________

I tweet!

The notion of "professionalism" isn't respected enough by a lot of professionals, and I don't know what "professionalism" should encompass. There aren't many pros who post here. There are quite a few pros who read here.

But, I do think that 'if' you obtain your elite/pro license and decide to race as such, you should conduct yourself in a professional manner. Again, I don't know what it means. Does it mean starting a blog, not likely. Does it mean seeking out sponsors, not likely. But, if you do start a blog or have a website, it's my opinion that you should at least put forth some sort of effort to keep it updated. If you do seek out sponsors, it's my opinion that you should at least represent them in the best way that you are able.

You can look at ITU for at least some manner of what is expected of their athletes as professionals. Is a 'dress code' like ITU has necessary? I don't think so, but you can certainly compare how ITU races look vs. other pro races and yeah they look more "professional". Should all races with pro fields have the same entry/withdrawl requirements or meeting attendance requirements as ITU races? Maybe to some degree. I've raced three races this year. We've had a sign in sheet at the pro meeting for all three. Was there anything done with it? Am I on a good list for signing in at those pre race meetings. What of the athletes who didn't go and still raced?

I'm just rambling on. Honestly though, I think that we all suffer when less than professional choices are made. Had MR gone through and walked the marathon in a compromised state to validate her spot for a race that she wasn't planning on racing earlier in the year...then I too think that reflects poorly on the professional field, especially when the athlete in question is a World Champion. That's not a comment made to dis-respect the non-WC athletes since there are 'only' 3 per gender per year in WTC events, but the higher the profile athlete, the more scrutinized they will be. Which is why there are umpteen LA threads on the front forum page and which is why JR gets his balls routinely busted on ST for not racing Kona. Same reason AR had a thread when he was just going through the motions on the run last year to validate his spot despite uncorking a super performance at a non-WTC event.

---

Brandon Marsh - Website | @BrandonMarshTX | RokaSports | 1stEndurance | ATC Bikeshop |

Brandon, I still see this as a process issues, not the racers issue. Meaning, you measure folks a certain way, and they will behave to maximize what is best for them. Nothing wrong with that.

So, if folks do not like the behaviors, go after the organizations that basically make folks behave in ways they might not otherwise do.

---

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep

Macca "cruised" through his validation and settled in a comfortable 9:00 IM & 10th Place (which blows me away that you guys can cruise through 9:XX IMs), but still shows he put forth a full race and didnt act unprofessional in any way.

---

"Only those who risk going too far truly know how far one can go"

Yes agreed. And that is the age old question of getting the pros together. Or at least finding some kind of common ground or platform between pros and WTC/ITU/USAT/Whatever so that all are on at least a similar page.

---

Brandon Marsh - Website | @BrandonMarshTX | RokaSports | 1stEndurance | ATC Bikeshop |

Exactly.


ETA. By exactly I mean that Macca didn't seem to imply that he didn't agree with the rule. He essentially said I've been training short course, but if that door closes, this is a good way for me to open another one in October.

---

Brandon Marsh - Website | @BrandonMarshTX | RokaSports | 1stEndurance | ATC Bikeshop |

All get on the same page, now that would be a first. Cannot even seem to get the pros all on the same page about Lance, etc. It must be the personality type that does IM. It is me me rather than we we. Most do not seem to understand the politics of sport if more money is going to be brought in. Just look at some of the junk on TV. They only do that and give out big money because they make it exciting.

Oh well, love our posts. You seem very well grounded.

---

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep