An amateur is not an amateur once he or she gets their pro card....that's it.

There are lots of retired pros who rejoin the amateur ranks; the other option would be that once a pro you can never compete again.

Here in NorCal the fields are littered with ex pros in the 35-39, 40-44, and 45-49 cats.

Everyone's situation is different, even in the amateur ranks some people have very little time to train (medical resident), while others have virtually unlimited time/resources (Dave Mirra).

I do remember Tinley (when he was an active pro) having to go in the elite wave of a mtn bike race because he was a "pro in a comparable sport."

---

ECMGN Therapy Silicon Valley:
Depression, Neurocognitive problems, Dementias (Testing and Evaluation), Trauma and PTSD, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)

Maybe give it the NCAA treatment. Once you take money in one sport, you can no longer compete as an amateur.

But where do you draw the line? Dave Mirra was a freestyle BMX pro & now he's an IM triathlete. Should he have to race as a pro since BMX is not the same as road racing? Apollo Ohno was a pro speed skater & Hines Ward was a pro football player. Should they have to race as pros? What if Phelps or Meb decided to cross over? Those two seem a bit more clear cut.

I hear what you are saying & I don't disagree. I just think it will become one of those "spirit of the sport" decisions rather than a hard fast rule.

All of the breakdowns for AG, pro vs AG, etc are just to make folks feel good. There is only one winner of a race.

Yep, as posted, we have lots of studs who race in Northern Calif. Should they have been Pro's? Or were? Or from other sports?
Who cares, they are the best, can and will always kick butt.

There is ALWAYS someone better in your AG! I just know so many top folks who cannot afford to race Tris anymore. Just too expensive.

---

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

A 50 year old who places 3rd in his age group at Kona is comparatively better versus his peers than a 30 year old who does the same. Not directly what you are asking but that is my take.

It is an interesting issue with guys like Cameron, just like it is for the guys leaving pro and still want to compete in triathlon. I raced against Cameron in Oceanside and I think he out-split Frodeno and Potts by like 5 minutes on his way to the overall amateur title. He absolutely crushed the bike. But from what I can see, Cameron has just jumped back into triathlon and I would say he has every right to go do Kona as many times as any AGer as he can. Think of all the guys that have done Kona year in and year out. Then here's a guy that from what I can see has not ever even done it yet, so why shouldn't he get to do it 3, 4, 5 etc. times like many other top AGers have been doing for years? I understand your thinking, but guys like Cameron haven't had the chance to do that yet and I don't think there should be any impediments to keep them from doing so, unless they don't qualify. So if WTC were to intervene and move up some top AGers automatically, then what is next? Cap the amount of times a guy can go to Kona? Cap the number of podium finishes? Putting limits on what an "amateur" can do is something that would create a lot more problems than just letting these guys competition figure out how to beat them (or at least come in second).

An extension of that idea is that here in Boulder, and other places for that matter, you have the same couple guys "earning their pro cards" at each eligible race, but they don't take them for any number of reasons. Yet you know they will likely be in the top 3 overall at the end of the day. At the same time, you also have guys leaving pro to come back and race AG and they just add to the competition. It's just one of those things. At any time a whole bunch of low or high level guys could drop out of the pro ranks and come back to AG and I don't think there is any good reason for them to not be allowed to do so. Certainly doing it out of interest for allowing other people to qualify for awards and championships is not a good enough reason.

"Attention racers: next wave to the swim start will be men 30-30.5 years of age, between 5'11" and 6'1", have a BMI less than 30 but greater than 20, income between $40,000-55,000, have never held a pro card nor raced at a collegiate level in any individual discipline, train fewer than 10 hours per week, do not own an aero helmet, and have invested less than $2,000 in their bikes (receipts must be verified)... please make your way to the beach... that podium is calling your name!"

What kind of bizarre twisted facade of success is it to gain your position just because you delete the people who are better than you?

If you can't podium, or KQ, or whatever-it-is-you-want based on on your current abilities, training, and equipment choices with respect to the other people who choose to show up to race against you (whoever they might be) - then you can't. Period. HTFU.

There are two winners, you sexist prick

Not in our world today, everything is equal.

---

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

take your meds and play nice rframe....

---

Randy Christofferson(http://www.rcmioga.blogspot.com

Insert Doubt. Erase Hope. Crush Dreams.

Until probably the early 2000 or maybe late 90s, pros qualified as AGers. So you'd go to Ironman Europe in Roth (now Challenge) and would race for a Kona slot against Hellriegel, Zack and Leder. Just for the record...

Could you clarify Meathead? (Oh man, there's a statement I've always wanted to use in real life.) It seems like these 2 paragraphs sort of contradict each other. Perhaps I'm not understanding what you mean.

In the NCAA, someone who is no longer defined as an amateur (by the NCAA's many definitions) in one sport can still compete in another sport. For example, someone who wins money in a golf tournament does not have eligibility to play NCAA Golf, but has eligibility to play NCAA Baseball - or any other NCAA sport except Golf. I have coached college athletes who have earned money in Cycling (not an NCAA sport) who have subsequently run XC and Ski Raced for our college team. I also coached one Nordic Skier who had received financial support (not sure if he had earned prize money) in ski jumping/Nordic combined who was declared eligible to compete in NCAA Skiing.

The cases where the NCAA has ruled an athlete ineligible in one sport when they were a pro in another sport have generally hinged on how that athlete was making money at their pro sport. Jeremy Bloom is the prime example, he was a freestyle skier with apparel endorsement contracts, and he wanted to play NCAA Football. The NCAA ruled him ineligible as they were unable to determine conclusively that his endorsement deals didn't hinge on his football skills. You also have to be careful when dealing with sports that are closely connected - for example you can't accept money for running in a Track meet without losing your eligibility for Cross Country, and you can't accept money for playing in a sand volleyball tournament without losing your eligibility to play NCAA (indoor) volleyball. But otherwise, accepting prize money or operating as a pro in one sport does not make an individual ineligible to compete in a different NCAA sport.

To the original question...IMO for triathletes are you a pro or an amateur should be a seasonal decision with perhaps a few year transition period when leaving the pro ranks. I play old man baseball (i.e. Senior League) and the rule up here is you have to be 35 and over to play, 45 and over to pitch, and you have to be out of pro ball for 3 seasons. We don't often get guys who played minor league ball, but if we did I think being out of the game on the pro level for 3 years isn't unreasonable. Our team has a former major leaguer, retired for 30 years but still one heck of a player. But most of the other teams still complain when he pitches for us. It is what it is. With triathlon you don't really have a unified rules situation like a baseball league has, so someone who is done racing pro will always be able to find a race to do. And "when is an amateur not am amateur" - I'd say as soon as you cash a prize money check for more than the entry fee you're no longer an amateur. Sponsorship is kind of a funny thing. I was going to say as soon as you get a sponsorship you're no longer an amateur, but I bowl on a team that is sponsored by a local business that pays our team's league fee and our individual sanctioning fees, and we're certainly nowhere near being pro bowlers.

I think there individuals racing as amateurs - guy that finished 4th i think at IM France was 30-34, he's previously won his AG at the worlds - I'm not sure how "amateurish" anyone in any AG is that is at the pointy end of one of these fields

I'm not sure that it takes materially less effort, time or dedication to train yourself to finish 4th as an AG'er in a IM as opposed to win it (though I think he was just shy of 20 minutes off the winning time)

The line is with the pro card. Just like in any other sport, there are very talented amateurs out there that have not made it to the big leagues for one reason or another, but the rest of the people still have to compete with them.

If Crowie came back, I'm sure he would earn his pro card rather quickly again.

Nonsensical. Which is understandable coming from you.

---

Twitter
Instagram

I lost 3rd place at 70.3 Worlds in 2011 to Jalabert. I wasn't mad because he was an ex-pro, I was mad because he was a doper.

---

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

I think it really boils down to how the various governing organizations choose to incentivize it. For instance, if Ironman or USAT or whomever offered a $50,000 stipend to all athletes carrying a pro (or elite) card, you can bet anyone capable of qualifying for said classification would do so (which would, in turn, probably make qualifying more difficult). As it stands, the incentives are not that great and so some of the best athletes will remain or go back to competing as AGs. At the end of the day, the Athletes will (and should) do what is best for them. So if you feel it is an issue (I personally don't beyond the fact that I like the sport so I would love for athletes to get more back for what they put in), the real issue is not the Athletes, its the incentives that exist for them to turn pro. If you don't want to be competing against the best athletes as an AGer, then the governing bodies need to make it more appealing to turn pro.

Of course, as others have pointed out, this does not really change anything for you. Your finishing time is still your finishing time regardless of who finishes ahead of or behind you. Just because some arbitrary designation means you got 3rd instead of 4th because athlete X is no longer in your division doesn't change how well you did. And if that makes a difference to you, the only reason I could thing would be you are seeking the recognition and/or prizes that come with finish higher. And in that case, you are just as guilty as the guy who competes as an AGer when he could qualify as a pro. Why are you any more deserving of a high finish as an AGer than him?

General question for the masses - If cycling can handle a class system, 5 down to 1 then pro for road, 4 down to 1 then pro for 'cross and 3 to 1 then pro for MTB, why can't USAT figure something like this out?

---

Pactimo brand ambassador, ask me about promo codes

To what end?

+1. Look at the 35-39 ag at Racine. Top 5 finished top 25 overall with a solid pro field. None of these guys are former pro's that I know of, just really fast amateurs that don't turn pro because there's no good reason to. Makes it tough to compete, but just emphasizes if you want to go to the world championships, you need to be one of the best in the world, amateur or pro

You pretty much nailed the clear as mud point I was trying to make about the NCAA. It's easy to know if you have signed an NFL/NBA/MLB contract, but where is the line drawn for olympic sports such as skiing? Your Nordic athlete & Jeremy Bloom examples are great ones. If someone competes in a cycle sport, swim sport, or running sport as a pro, should they be ruled a pro for triathlon, or should that be reserved only for those who were truly pro triathletes? And even if you define that, do you apply the NCAA rule of "Once you go pro, you can no longer compete as an amateur"? This solves the OP's question about former pros falling back down to the AG ranks & destroying us mere mortals.

My point is that it gets really murky if you try to find a hard fast way to take away someone's amateur status. The NCAA does a terrible job managing amateur collegiate athletics, but that's because it's a fluid world & as soon as you write the rules, something else changes that makes them obsolete.

To the end that you can remain competitive in your class, starting from Cat 5 "begining racer" to Cat 1 "seasoned and trained racer." Eventually you hit your genetic potential and you are stuck in that Cat. As you age and can't keep up that or have a life event and lose a year of training, you can petition to be downgraded. If you come straight out of college or some other pro athletics, straight to cat 3, not straight to owning souls in your AG.

---

Pactimo brand ambassador, ask me about promo codes

I understand how the classification system works, I just don't understand the point of it as it related to triathlon beyond having a simple way to quantify how good someone is.

It would sure clean up start waves or seeding a mass start.

---

Pactimo brand ambassador, ask me about promo codes

Yeah that is actually a good point. I hadn't though of that. In that regard it would definitely be useful.

Road cycling does not distinguish by age, just cats, then they have a masters 50+ and maybe a masters 40+

---

Pactimo brand ambassador, ask me about promo codes

There's almost no incentive to race pro in triathlon, so there's always going to be sandbaggers.

The fact that its so much easier to get to Kona (or 70.3 worlds) as ager than as a pro just exacerbates that effect.

---

___________________
Twitter | Kancman | Blog

In many countries you do not have swimming and running pros. The pro status is mostly a US title due to NCAA.
In many sports you are elite if you are fast and you start in the first wave. Your result will also be in your age group.

Good example on this list 40-44 from Birkerbeinrerrennet
http://www.langrenn.com/....5721332-117466.html

Again, that's why I said it is clear as mud & difficult, if not impossible, to define someone as a pro vs amateur.

For most of us in NorCal in M50-54, if someone like Tim Sheeper shows up, you're racing for 2nd. :-) Though there was the ONE sprint duathlon that ONE time...

But just because he was once a pro doesn't mean he shouldn't be able to race AG now. Until triathlon gets the equivalent of a "seniors" or "legends" tour...

Ian

So we have a women's category so the girls don't feel bad about losing to men?

I understand the feeling, I have felt it myself when I see names I used to read about in triathlon magazines ahead of me (usually far ahead!) in my AG standings. The thought passes in my mind that a 'Master Pro' category would be a nice way to recognize some of the people who helped grow the sport as well as pump my ego up just a bit more.

Then I remember that most races already have about 12 or 16 'winners' and we don't need to make awards ceremonies any longer...
.

---

" I take my gear out of my car and put my bike together. Tourists and locals are watching from sidewalk cafes. Non-racers. The emptiness of of their lives shocks me. "
(opening lines from Tim Krabbe's The Rider , 1978

Either way, I would rather race a bunch of people of my experience/talent vs a random mix of people that the only common thing between us that we were born within a few years of each other. If you look at the mountain bike nations, cat 3 riders from the 20-24 and 45-49 all finished within minutes of each other. In the interest of competition, categories give a much more equal playing field.

---

Pactimo brand ambassador, ask me about promo codes

Bingo.... and done.

I think a graded field would be cool too, seems to work for most other sports.

Screw Nats, they show up every weekend at my local crit. HTFU and deal with it.

Unless of course you are a celebrity.

In IM CDA, I had Dr. Tom Evans who raced in my AG one year...he won the OA as a pro a year or two before. Think that didn't s*ck knowing he was capable of doing 8-whatever he wanted? Had I blown up worse than what I did, I wouldn't have KQ'd that year (barely made it as it was), but would have been much easier had he not raced--but had Cam Brown or Reid raced, I wouldn't have made that goal. That said, he raced faster & easily won the AG. If he meets the standards for AG racing, by all means, race AG.

If Tim DeBoom, Peter Reid, Crowie, Cam Brown and who knows how many others stopped racing pro (as well as any other number of 2nd & 3rd tier pros) and raced AG, I'd have to take my medicine like a big boy & be pushed way further down the results list than I am now. They have had a different unique opportunity to get where they are I may or may not have had, but it is what it is. We make our own choices in life & go with it. I did not call a "Whaaambulance" or dial "Whine-1-1" if these guys showed up in my AG racing. I just put my head down & hammer the best I can. At the end of the day, the chips fall where they fall & that is my result. Former pro racing AG or not. If we concern ourselves with what other's have done in life on the start line, we are missing out on the most important part of racing...the fun and participation in giving the best we can milk out of ourselves at that moment. I used to have a different opinion about x-pros racing AG, but re-thought my position & why can't they?

Crowie can't race as fast when he is 50 as when he was 35, so is he supposed to keep racing pro with the young guys & not make any $$?? What is the point of racing pro then aside from just saying you're racing pro...which in itself just doesn't seem that impressive to me anyhow. It's like saying, "I'm an amateur." It's just a classification as to if you're trying to earn a paycheck or not at sport. Soap box over.

Based on the amount of money and opportunity for money available in the sport, most pros are pretty much really fast amateurs anyway. They have their reasons for paying money to get their pro card, not that I'll understand most of them. I'd love for the "Pro" system to be done away with and let whoever takes the money spot to get the money. I have a hard time mentally justifying the idea that an amateur beat a card carrier but can't collect any money for the effort.

---

---

---

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

I'd kick his ass or be happy to have lost to him. One of the two.

---

https://www.pbandjcoaching.com
https://www.thisbigroadtrip.com

OK, well I am going to correct a few misconceptions here first, and take a stab at why hypothetically some athletes might be required to race 'pro' in Ironman specifically.

Firstly, Cameron's presence made absolutely no difference to me, the only reason I highlighted him was because it was noticeable he outsplit the entire pro field on the bike by a margin.

Secondly, I am advocating no stance or solutions here per se, although I would not argue for current or former pro athletes of any sport being deprived the opportunity to compete in triathlon. The question for me is whether the pro field is a more appropriate home for certain athletes given their histories, rather than the amateur field. For what it is worth, I think the current AG/pro classifications are perfectly functional.

Thirdly, this is not just about being fast and drawing a line at a certain level of speed. The point is as a professional athlete, your full-time job is conditioning for competitive sport. Whether that is cycling, running, swimming or anything else, your exclusive focus is making yourself a better machine. That is a background and opportunity a true amateur simply doesn't have. I have nothing but respect for the fastest amateurs and I agree there should be no compulsion for guys like e.g. Sami Inkinen or Sam Gyde to have to race pro just because they are awesome.

This question is not one of toughness, but one of fairness. This is not a manliness competition. The guys in my opinion that stand to lose out here are some marginal Kona qualifiers, yes, but more importantly those that stand a chance of podiuming at the WC events (Kona and 70.3), and I am certainly not a podium contender. So please do not think the reason I am posting this is out of self-interest, bitterness or softness. It is not.

The reason Ironman is different from your average NorCal triathlon is that IM has Kona slots as the 'prize money', not simply bragging rights. Pros have every opportunity to get to Kona in the pro ranks. The question is simply whether Kona slots and podium places should be available to those who, by most sensible criteria, would be defined as professional athletes (i.e. having a full time big-money contract with a World Tour team, in this specific example).

Plenty of pro triathletes are not pro triathletes because of the big money available in races. We all know that is rubbish. There are many other reasons to race in the pro field, e.g. opportunity to race on clearer roads, less frantic swim starts, better sponsorship opportunities, marketing for coaching businesses etc. The list of pros that fit this profile is practically endless.

I don't profess to know the right answer, but simply because this is a grey area does not mean a line should not be drawn somewhere. Toughening up is not an answer to unfairness. I'd hate to be the lady who is deprived of her dream slot at Kona simply because Marianne Vos decides one day to give IM a fling. She could practically breatstroke the swim, walk the run and still qualify. That, to me, just doesn't feel right.

You forgot the VO2max classifications

Which is, as usual, twice as obvious in the women's ranks. F35-45 is littered with ex-pros, could've-been-pros, and others who finish top-10 at regional championships (IM Frankfurt, for example) and maintain a website full of sponsors, race results and images from their winter camps in Mallorca. They're pro in everything but the official status.

But it's the same way in every sport. Cycling has categories, but there's a guy who's racing in my category who trains as many hours as he likes (which is more than 20 a week), is now on a two-week altitude camp in the Alps, fully sponsored head to toe and even if he weren't, he has enough money to buy top-end equipment - and he's as powerful as some local Elite category riders, but because he doesn't race often he doesn't want to upgrade. Meanwhile, I'm a university student with a three-digit account balance, an alu frame and have to think twice about whether I can afford two gels on this ride. Tough, but nothing to be done about it.

---

ZONE3 - We Last Longer

Big talk. I am sure that's exactly how you'd feel if you'd missed out on a slot or a podium place to a guy who has made his living out of being the best in the business of pro triathlon. :)

the point I made - Tim Van Houtem finished 4th at Nice, I'm guessing that in spite of finishing 20 minutes behind the winner that didn't require half the training time, he won his AG worlds at 70.3 2 years ago and I think he's had comparable results elsewhere - he's M30-34 and as far as I know not lost his AG in the last 2 years

he's obviously giving up cash to race as an AG'er and it seems that he'd be fine racing either pro or AG'er but from a purely training perspective, he has to be training like a pro, he has to be doing the volume and getting the appropriate rest and recovery required to race at that level which I suspect is difficult if you're holding down a 40+ hour a week job

I'm not sure that really it matters that much, pro or AG'er in almost every sport at the pointy end of the fields there is little that differentiates the two, its a matter of degree's and so you remove "ex-pro's" all that happens is there is still some fast sub-set of those remaining who still clean up whenever they race

This is indeed a fascinating topic which deserves to be discussed regularly as the sport progresses. It touches on issues of fairness which I think we mostly all agree with. A race involves covering a certain distance for all participants and the first male and female over the lines are the winners. We now have two kinds of participants, those who race as professionals and those who race as amateurs. We've even divided the amateur category into many age related sub categories to ensure 'fairness'. However even these constructs can seem crude and ineffectual at times. Seeing ex-pros grab age group slots for Hawaii might seem to go against the spirit of age-group slots for 'average' folk but I tend to agree that we cannot blame, and thus castigate, pros for being genetically gifted and having had the chance to race at a high level in a *previous* life.

However I believe the 'fairness' issue has all to do with what one does in the *current* life. There is a huge difference between an ex-pro who now does a '9 to 5' desk job, versus one who spends their time running early season training camps in Lanzarote and then qualifies at IM Lanza. Why? Because we're in a training heavy sport. The more time you can train as an amateur the better your chances are at qualifying for Hawaii. It's obviously not quite as simple as that but it does have an undeniable impact. In other aspects of life this discrepancy wouldn't necessarily be rewarded. If I had two job applicants on my desk for a junior position fresh out of uni, one had completed his or her degree in the normal time with good grades, yet the other had taken twice as long (possibly even with slightly better grades) but had no extenuating circumstances (i.e. they just took their time), I would choose the former. It is rare that we incentivise effort for efforts sake, yet long distance triathlon training is quite biased towards this so there is a shift from our normal appraisal reward system and I think some of these 'fairness' issues are because they don't fit within this sphere.

SteveMc

It seems a bit silly to me when people have disdain for very fast individuals racing in the AG ranks. Just because someone has altered their lifestyle to have an advantage doesn't mean that they are suddenly a different athlete. If one is mad that they are beaten by someone who lives and breathes triathlon, then perhaps a life few sacrifices are in order to prevent this from happening next time. Or, they simply got beaten and accept the loss, and such is sport.

Dedication to the sport falls along a broad continuum, so there is no clear line where someone should be considered pro. Additionally, prize money is offered at lots of races that aren't very hard to win, so earning money is also not a valid distinction either. I don't think that anyone should be expected to race pro; that is a personal decision and if they decide not to then so be it.

IM Kona is a world championship, so a very high level of competition should be readily accepted. People are getting faster every day as the sport expands, and it is becoming more and more difficult to place well in seemingly all races. So, we have a choice of either holding contempt for those freakishly fast people in our age group, or swallowing our pride and getting to work on being faster.

Can I just suggest that there is never a reason to spend money on gels in training, whether you are a starving university student or rolling in an 7-8 figure bank account after you took your startup to a NASDAQ IPO. It makes no sense to spend money on pre packaged foods as there are cheaper ways to get 10x the calories at 1/10th the price from the local grocery store.

As for the topic at hand realistically everyone under 45 is racing artificial age groups. The best guys in your age group all race pro. The top 40-44 year old in the world is Cam Brown. Frodo and Kienle in the 30's and so on. Only after you get to 45-49 are all the top guys in the world actually racing in your age group (provided they are racing). In my age group, we have guys like Ken Glah and Jurgen Zack, the one above me has Scott Molina. In the W45-49, the fastest women in the world is still racing pro too so the top age grouper is not the fastest either.

As H2OFun said, the age groups are there to keep us all entertained. I know it truly sucks that some people have better genetics or more money or more flexibility or all of the above, but that's just life. It works the same way in other domains of professional life too. The faster we all figure that out the better. The only one we can control is ourselves and what we get out of our own circumstances.

WRT to being a university student and having a 3 digit account balance, it is just money. Your acccount balance will get bigger in due course. This is the time in life to enjoy a bunch of things that you will not be able to do later in life. You can have money later, but you can have youth only once (and I know that the guys in 70-74 will tell me that I can only be 50-54 once, so just go do stuff that I can and don't worry about what goes on around me and what others may or may not be able to do). In my age group there are plenty of guys who are retired/semi retired and also sport tans in March from their 6 weeks camps in Florida or Lanzarote, while I get it done on the trainer around work obligations. Plenty of guys with big bank balances with freedom to train even better than most pros because they have no financial constraints. I say "more power to you boys.....you worked hard and earned it". Life is not fair. Just about to get on the bike for my commute to work. That's generally going to be my training against the guys training all day in Thanyapura with Macca, but that's fine.

Hopefully I will see you in Austria this year!

I would say that aside from the extremely genetically gifted, pretty well anyone getting a Kona slot or near miss is training close to as much as a pro would at least in some key weeks of the year. Many age groupers train more than pros. The main difference is genetics and recovery time and in fairness, pros don't sit around on the couch all day after training....well at least the smart ones are not. They are hussling in the business world trying to monetize their speed into biz relationships and sponsor revenue. Well, at least the smart ones are. Most of the others hold down a full time job or run a business. Pro triathlon does not pay enough to live off race winnings and support a family, so all the amateurs whining about pros is misplaced....most have to work as hard outside sport as pros.

Or as Scott Molina once said on this topic of ex pros racing age grouper, "How about I'll stop racing triathlon if you guys hand in your MBAs and medical degrees and I get to work in your profession just for fun." That kind of puts it in perspective. Let's not take the knife out towards guys with better tri genetics because ours are inferior. Elsewhere in life, others don't get to compete with us at what we are pros in that easily.

Totally agreed. I was a cat 1 college student who slept 6-8 to a hotel room racing for primes for gas money who would smuggle bagels out of the cafeteria to use on training rides (and weekend race breakfasts). It's crazy to waste money on gels on training rides. I would only ever use a gel for the last 10 miles of a road race and even then would evaluate whether or not I needed it! Even now I get boxes of gels from a sponsor and I will only ever carry them on group training rides to give to other people. Bang for the buck: poptarts. 400 calories x 4 for $1-2 dollars. And delicious.

Enjoy the time now, worry about the money later (but don't waste money on silly things like gels on training rides when there are higher-priority things).

Hey, hey, that was just a comparison thing! I'd never use a gel on a training ride, except for once-twice in key sessions before a big race to make sure it agrees with me. Usually I carry rice-cakes or other home-made food that's cheaper. That specific guy I compared to, however, gets a crate of those things shipped to him monthly.

I accept this situation and I'm not bitter about it. On top of that, I think the amount of age-groups is getting a bit ridiculous, and 5-year intervals are a bit much especially in local races where you can have only a handful of competitors in an age group. Every disadvantage is relative, and I know one day I'll be racing M40-44 and there's going to be a guy complaining that 20 years in sports is an unfair advantage over him, or that I chose a partner that competes herself instead of one that resents the sport and restricts his resources. The paths our lives take are down to our decisions, and I consciously made the decision to chase a more challenging and interesting degree, and opted for a top-notch training environment over an opportunity to get some free equipment that won't make a difference in five year's time.

My path will lead me to Austria in about a month's time, so see you there!

---

ZONE3 - We Last Longer

Yeah but you can't really blame them, they're just making the best of this idiotic system we have in place.

As far as I'm concerned, there should only be open and masters with x qualifying spots or x dollars x deep - basically the way running works. Distinguishing between pros and amateurs, and allowing more folks to qualify for Kona/70.3 worlds through their age groups and making it virtually impossible for many of the fastest folks to qualify is absurd.

---

___________________
Twitter | Kancman | Blog

This whole thread is ridiculous.

Pro - you race for money.

Amateur - you don't race for money

Kona slots are not money.

It doesn't matter if you previously raced for money, or you are fast enough to race for money in the future. Whatever race category you enter today is your status.

In every sport, there are people who the best combination of being younger, more talented, more adequately trained and have better equipment. In every race, of any kind, in any sport, everyone gets beat except for one guy.

Anyone who is in favor of gaming the system to manufacture a way so they, with less of any or all of those factors, can "win" is a true amateur ;-) Pros just want to race and are not afraid to lose.

So you're a pro if you win 50$ at some Podunk tri or 5k? Running is nice because there's no pros, just elites. If you run fast enough you are never excluded from money or the OA win.

Well there are pros in running. Unless you are speaking of outside of track and field and the Olympics.

Yeah, I'm thinking about road racing. T&F is a lot like ITU in the handling of progression and development. The Olympic marathon is a great example of the one field idea in road running, run an OTQ time, get top 3 at the trials and go represent the usa

Living in Boulder, I completely understand this topic. There are tons of Age Groupers who are as good if not better than Pros. A number of Age groupers stay as AGs so they can go to Kona. They would not be able to qualify for Kona as a Pro, but can win their age group.

I think, if you meet the criteria to qualify as a Pro per USAT rules, then you should have to get a pro card and be considered Pro.

On the flip side, I think that prize money should just be Top 7 overall. If an AG is sixth, just cause they are not a Pro doesnt mean they arent due the money. Of course then they probably qualify and should have to become a Pro.

---

Jeff Abbott - @run1fast
jabbott@headsweats.com
Headsweats - Custom Team singlets $8 / Cycling Jerseys $25
Abbott Event Solutions - Brand Rep and Event Manager

you mean something like a foreced "cat up?"

---

Pactimo brand ambassador, ask me about promo codes

Yes. Otherwise you have age groupers taking the top spots. Maybe this is only an issue you see in So Cal or Boulder or a few other hotbeds of triathletes. I know people that wont turn Pro because they like going to Kona and know they can only get there as an Age Grouper winning their slot.

Maybe that needs to be more fuel to my fire to train harder.

---

Jeff Abbott - @run1fast
jabbott@headsweats.com
Headsweats - Custom Team singlets $8 / Cycling Jerseys $25
Abbott Event Solutions - Brand Rep and Event Manager

This isn't limited to IMs it is at every distance of triathlon. In the sprint distance race I did last weekend the winner of my AG (M25-29) beat second by 2 minutes, the gap to third from second was 7 minutes, that is a wide margin over a 1.25 hour race. In amateur mountain biking (cat 3 to Cat1/pro) they say Cat 2 is the bread and butter of amateur racing. It is full of people dedicated to the sport but still have a life. Cat 3s are testing the waters and Cat1/pro are guys that are genetically gifted with some real time to train.

You could plot finish times and end up with a bell curve, fastest 25% are cat 1, middle 50% are cat 2 and the slowest 25% are cat 3. Winning or doing really well as a cat 3 incentivizes people staying in the sport vs getting pummeled on you first go round and saying, nope never gunna be competitive at that. If you were a college swimmer, runner or cyclist you could self cat up to cat 2 and try racing a more competitive class.

In the race this weekend here are the AGs for the top 10, distances were 400m, 22 miles, 5k
1st - M25-29, finished in 1:16:04
2nd - M40-44
3rd - M25-29
4th - M35-39
5th - M45-49
6th - M35-39
7th - M45-49
8th - F25-29
9th - M40-44
10th - M30-34, finished in 1:21:44.4

This shows breaking things up by AG is dumb and having real classes. Everyone on this list is an amateur, you are an amateur until you are racing elite ITU level.

This thread really demonstrates the participant driven aspect of triathlon. It astonishes me that so many people are fine with just racing themselves. Break this damn sport up and let me compete in a field of equally talented people. Not people that were born within a few years of me.

---

Pactimo brand ambassador, ask me about promo codes

I think it more shows that AG distinctions don't necessarily have to be in discrete 5 year buckets. While there is a substantive difference between a 50 year old and a 65 year old, there's no reason that everyone under 40 or 45 of the same gender couldn't just be lumped into one large category.

There is a difference between competing FOR money, and competing and winning money.

The real issue here is people getting pissed that some ex-pro is taking their KQ slot. That ex-pro wasn't eligible for prize money in the same race.

Yeah. I see the flip side of being upset by being beaten by a sandbagger (which is the ultimate complaint here) , but that's gonna be an issue that is not easily mediated in any sport. Which is why i take the road racing stance where there's one field and you're gonna have to race whomever showed. The best way to beat a sandbagger is to be a good cherry picker. But splitting the field so you don't get beat by a former pro is in the everyone gets a throphy realm of thinking.

No, finisher medals for a sprint tri is everyone gets a trophy realm.

---

Pactimo brand ambassador, ask me about promo codes

Perhaps we should get rid of age groups all together. Sort like other sports, e.g. USATF, and have Elite, Masters, and Grand Masters . . . that's it. Kind of sad for me at a recent race I was a bit old to be competitive in Grand Masters :-)!

---

David
* Ironman for Life! (Blog) * IM Everyday Hero Video * Daggett Shuler Law *
Disclaimer: I have personal and professional relationships with many athletes, vendors, and organizations in the triathlon world.

Why would we stop at 2? There should be 22 winners, when you count ag wins........ There is only 1 REAL winner, and that's who crosses the finish line first

Men and women are in a seperate race.

Same race, different division

[quote abbottj123There are tons of Age Groupers who are as good if not better than Pros.[/quote]

Familiar with Steve, but can you provide some other names for me. I try to research my peers if they are within +-8% of my ability level, I feel this can be important if racing paths ever cross regardless of whether they hold an elite card or not.

---

---

Save: $50 on Speed Hound Recovery Boots | $20 on Air Relax| $100 on Normatec| 15% on Most Absorbable Magnesium

Blogs: Best CHEAP Zwift / Bike Trainer Desk | Theragun G3 vs $140 Bivi Percussive Massager | Normatec Pulse 2.0 vs Normatec Pulse | Speed Hound vs Normatec | Air Relax vs Normatec | Q1 2018 Blood Test Results | | Why HED JET+ Is The BEST value wheelset

You're a hypocrite. First, you called a guy a sexist prick for saying there was only one winner of a race. You claimed there were 2 winners. Now you say they are in separate races. If they are separate races, wouldn't there only be one winner per race?

Mic drop

I don't see how that's much different than introducing separate competitive groups so you don't have to race against someone that is significantly better than you. You showed up and you think you deserve a better shot at winning by the eliminating of your strongest competition

Just make draft legal triathlons the norm.. Everyone racing everyone, if you're fast at the sport of triathlon *being that a good swimmer, biker and runner* then you can be competitive. If you don't then there shouldn't be an argument and you should be focused on racing the clock in a non draft race.

there is a very large grey area in this one for sure.

regardless, sensible rules should be discussed and agreed, and then people should race by those rules. if you don't like the rules, don't whinge about it (not saying you are), but do something about it. argue your point with the rule makers.

In this case, if you race pro tri, then there should be say a 2 year stand down period before you can race amateur. If you're a pro in a comparable sport then maybe a 1 year stand down. If you're a pro in a no comparable sport, say a darts player and switch to tri, no stand down period.

I recall a bunch of years ago, a friend came 2nd in her AG in an IM race and was awarded a Kona slot (only 2 slots for her AG). Then a female with a pro card, who had raced, but hadn't qualified as a pro in that race, successfully argued that she had ticked the wrong box on the entry form, and was then awarded an amateur slot. Thankfully the RD did not take back the Kona slot for my friend as there were only 2 slots, but she'd already been advised she'd KQ'd. (that example was over 10 years ago. I'm not sure what the rules currently are)

I don't think a current pro triathlete should be able to race amateur in any tri while they are a pro, simply by ticking a box.

---

TriDork

"Happiness is a myth. All you can hope for is to get laid once in a while, drunk once in a while and to eat chocolate every day"

I'm afraid you are fabricating things and have incorrectly labeled someone a hypocrite. You added the 'per race' qualifier, not ajthomas. If there is a men's race and women's race, that is two winners in separate races. If we count the AG races as separate races, then the number of winners goes up.

How is the two year rule going to change anything. Anyone who has been a pro will still come back and beat most AG. The fact of the matter is triathlon is more popular and there are more very good people, Kona is basically out of reach for most.

Retired pros who come back and race AG will most likely win slots, we also have some very good AG who don't race pro who win year after year and go.

Retired pros and pointy end AG tend to give back a lot to the sport so we should welcome them. Lots of people get worked up about this issue when it's pretty much a moot point. Maybe people need to look at things other than KQ as a reward for doing this sport.

I am so glad there is much more to life, for most folks, than KQ.

Let the best race there, seems pretty simple.

---

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

Like Team USA and ITU Worlds!!

Familiar with Steve, but can you provide some other names for me. I try to research my peers if they are within +-8% of my ability level, I feel this can be important if racing paths ever cross regardless of whether they hold an elite card or not.[/quote]


Josh Beck & Rick Fesler.

---

____________________________________________
Don Larkin
Reach For More
http://www.reachformore.fit/
USAT Lvl1 Coach, NSCA-CPT, NASM-CPT, BS Exercise Science

Nobody brought up ex-varsity athletes? I know a number of ex-swimmers & runners from university who are quite successful at tri. Maybe not overall pro level times, but in a small pro field race, can place in the top 10/20 overall. They're at a completely different level than most of us normal people, but they juggle full time jobs and train hard. To be honest, I would say some of them love the sport incredibly in order to train as hard as they do after years of 5am practices.

I did a local road race this spring. Peter Reid was in my category. I'm a woman and only a Cat 2 cyclist, so not pro.

It's fun as hell racing against fast people, regardless of their age, gender or status.

Just to repeat- I don't think there is any issue with the best AGers taking Kona slots, that's what it is all about after all! The issue as I see it is competitors who make a living out of triathlon or similar sports (eg cycling) racing as AGers. If you are super talented and race as a hobby on the side of your regular job, awesome and more power to you. The issue for me is when pros, as defined by sensible criteria (ie it is their job, like a pro cyclist!), compete against weekend warriors.

Again, I don't think anyone would deny we all have different limiters. I am 170cm, you won't find me arguing for a handicap for those over 190cm given their natural swim stroke length advantage, or means-tested bike splits etc.

The question is simply one of appropriate categorisation. It may be imperfect but there is a pro category for a reason. If you are a full time athlete and that is your primary source of income, surely it is a natural question to ask if the pro category is the best place for you.

To reiterate as well, I ask the question not because I am personally feeling hard done by (I am nowhere near gifted enough to ever approach the podium of a WC event, although I CAN generally qualify for these events), but more because if we are going to have AG racing, genuine AGers should stand a shot at winning. Otherwise, we will see Kona and 70.3 WC podiums entirely populated by former and present pro triathletes, cyclists etc. That, I think, is not in the spirit of AG racing.

I don't think how you make a living should really be the criteria which designates who races as elite and who races as an AGer. What about someone whose spouse is the main bread winner in the family, and they are a stay at home mom/dad (regardless of whether they actually have kids at home to tend to). Should they race as elite since they have more time to train and a more flexible workout schedule than the rest of us? What if they aren't even all that fast? What about on the other end, I think Matt Hanson still has a full time job and Daniela Ryf is still a full time student. Do you want them racing against you because they are technically "weekend warriors". Although most people refer to them as "pros", many elite triathletes and runners actually still have other jobs to make a living, they are just way better at being weekend warriors than the rest of us.

---

http://trainingwheelsrequired.wordpress.com
@KellyNCollier

I agree plenty of pros have other sources of income, but it is their choice to race pro not AG and they obviously have their own motivations for doing so.

The people that concern me are those that DO make a living out of competitive sport and race as amateurs. Those that do not- wives or husbands of other halves that work, trust fund kids, independently wealthy folk- and just have more time to train are just lucky. Good for them.

So, should someone that monetized their training/racing blog (for example) into their main income source be forced to race pro despite them being MOP? They are living Via competing, just competing at a low level