Halvard wrote:
-BrandonMarshTX wrote:
Halvard wrote:
In other endurance sports the event organizer has to provide hotel, food and transportation at the race location (not to the location). I know that in cross country skiing the organizer has to provide room with three meals at a rate of USD 100 per day, also the top 30 get their room for free. Same with Swix Ski Classics.
What do you get of support from WTC?
I'm glad Brooks chimed in as I had a post about my short ITU career and support. Basically none from USAT outside of a uniform for a World Cup. And maybe some hotel help from ITU at 2 of the World Cups I races. That was 8 years ago, my memory is fuzzy. When Amy and I raced Long Course worlds in 2007, a small travel stipend was offered by USAT. For non-draft ITU World championship events now the only USAT funding is performance (podium) based...Long course, winter tri, cross tri, etc.
With WTC and support, Amy and I ask. It is that simple. Whether you call it support or compensation we ask for it when we register and if we are asked to participate in a non-mandatory WTC race weekend event. Hotel/travel support, there isn't really any official policy to my knowledge. At one time there was some support for the top-10 ranked athletes racing in Kona. I don't know if it was a set amount per athlete or if it was graduated based on ranking. If there is a policy it is 'case by case' or rather 'race by race' basis. The short answer to your question is that there is no support for the largest majority of the pro field.
Rev3 was kind of the same. You have to ask.
Per Jordan's post way up in this thread relating to the 'volunteer' requirement of pros. I haven't yet developed my opinion on the additional requirements placed on 'World Championship' athletes. On one hand, I believe that the opportunity for combined marketing by the professionals and WTC is a good step in the right direction...something that maybe should have been done long ago. On the other hand, I think that if these are truly the 'World Championship' athletes then the athletes 'time' should be compensated.
Thanks for answer.
I know founding to endurance sports are quite differently in different countries, but triathlon as all other sports are global so we have to look at more than the USA.
What I struggle to see in long distance triathlon, that I see in other endurance sports are an attempt to bring the sport up to date.
Other sports have world cups started in the early 80s. They have a media present. But most of all a structure, a platform making it easy to build a sport around.
This is a problem for long distance triathlon. But I also think this is a result of what long distance triathlon and people around it have wanted. They always wanted to be different and they are. Now you have a sport that has not developed on the top level when it come to structure and media. While all other endurance sports have.
Halvard, you keep trying to lump in long distance triathlon with XC skiing and keep saying how awesome a job they do in XC skiing. What I will say is that there are a lot more athletes able to make a living worldwide off long distance triathlon than XC skiing. And imagine if there was a worldwide XC ski series that was 75K skate followed by 75K classic. That should be around 8 hours for the top guys, maybe 9 hours. Now go ahead and package that up under the FIS umbrella and let's see how much TV interest that garners. No one would watch that race, because somwhere into the the classic leg, the final results will be firmed up 2-3 hours before he finish line. Then it will be a race of attrition. Sound famliar? Well, that's pretty well what happens in an Ironman...somewhere between 6-7 hours in, we pretty well know the final results. In rare cases the podium materialized early in the 8th hour.
Other sports are more easily able to package up their story for live media. For now, the "audience" for long distance triathlon are age groupers that are in the race. The "tickets" for the stadium are our entry fees. The live coverage is only watched by eyeballs who can't be in the race today, but will be in another race tomorrow, but overall the general sporting audience does not care to follow these live. I "THINK" the angle is packaging up the entire story in snippets for the media, showcasing the superhuman feats and the awesomeness of the pros...and that every man can be a part of the show, and aspire to be like the pros. How do we convert this into getting Credit Suisse, Goldman Sach's, Apple or Mercedes Benz to hope into our game? There are very deep pockets outside of the tri world that we collectively need to access to grow this sport. 100 pros chasing sponsorship from Cervelo or Specialized is just a bunch of guys fighting over the crumbs of a tiny pie. How do our pros get access to the large pie if we bring Apple, or Vodaphone into this game. Our sport is performance, oriented. We're about as PerformancexEndurance as you can get. In the electronics field, we're always trying for better endurance and superior performance. Triathlon delivers on that. So how do we get access to Lenovo or Reliance's marketing budgets?
Long course triathlon has all the attributes that performance oriented corporations want for their products and their employees. There has to be a better way to align our sport to the missions of these big companies. The pros are a key part of that packaging. Age groupers are in lots of positions of power to help open budgets. How do we connect the dotted lines. I THINK this is the nut that both WTC and Pros would benefit by cracking. Bless the guys at GoPro for being title sponsor of Kona, But I'd rather have Intel sponsoring Kona.