Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: IMAZ Pro Slot Allocation? [Poon] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Poon wrote:
It seems like this system, like the old system, encourages pros to pick races with weaker fields. One of the problems with pro long course triathlon is that there is very little head to head racing. Everybody shows for Kona, but at least 1/3 of the top guys skip the 70.3 Worlds each year. How much other good head to head racing is there? You usually get two of the top Germans squaring off at IM Frankfurt. Oceanside typically has Jan and Lionel. Is there a non-Kona race where even five of the top ten guys will show?

Compare this to golf, tennis and other individual sports where there are major events where everybody posts.

The issue being how long the race is. You just cant race back to back to back IMs and be compeititve, look at WTS the best goes head to head plenty of times each year.
Quote Reply
Re: IMAZ Pro Slot Allocation? [@BW_Tri] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
@BW_Tri wrote:


No, there were only 1 slot for Men and 1 slot for Women in Cozumel, there was NOT "floating" slots in Cozumel.

IMAZ had 2 floating slots as mentioned elsewhere and those both went to the men.

I believe the system should be "hybrid" as in slots and then also the same points as previously. Then at the end of qualification period, anyone that did not receive a slot based on allocation is ranked, and 5-10 slots are given out based on those rankings. This could even be true for someone that say qualifies in November, but then is injured come the last qualification date, that slot would roll into the points category. Just my 2 cents on the topic.


Yeah I saw the paperwork...perhaps the race presenter need the sheet in front of them too...also it's not easy to find either.

Why would you use something like deductive reasoning to build a qualification system?

Washed up footy player turned Triathlete.
Last edited by: TheStroBro: Nov 19, 18 6:53
Quote Reply
Re: IMAZ Pro Slot Allocation? [ericMPro] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ericMPro wrote:
So Carrie Lester went 8:44 and didn't get a slot?

People complained about the points system, but this new system is going to be incredibly destructive.
Quote Reply
Re: IMAZ Pro Slot Allocation? [@BW_Tri] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm with something like this. They've got to address that depth of field is another important item. Having 5 top 10 athletes should matter more than having 1 of 10 but 30 more lower ranked pros (in theory, this isn't arizona's numbers FWIW)

Chasing PB Podcast Latest interview with Eli Hemming on Targeting a US MTR spot in Tokyo
Quote Reply
Re: IMAZ Pro Slot Allocation? [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Someone said it earlier.

Ironman should pick 5-8 races where pros qualify for Kona.

Maybe even just the championship events.

Then we would seem4 plus koa absolutely awesome races each years.

I think too many b and c grade pros get to Kona and be destroyed on race day.

Some guy won last weekend I’ve never heard of.

Rhymenocerus wrote:
I think everyone should consult ST before they do anything.
Quote Reply
Re: IMAZ Pro Slot Allocation? [PJC] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
PJC wrote:
Someone said it earlier.

Ironman should pick 5-8 races where pros qualify for Kona.

Maybe even just the championship events.

Then we would seem4 plus koa absolutely awesome races each years.

I think too many b and c grade pros get to Kona and be destroyed on race day.

Some guy won last weekend I’ve never heard of.

Macca has talked about this in interviews. I cite the Brick Session a lot because that is the only Triathlon podcast I listen to that seems to interview folks a lot, Purple Patch and Tower 26 don't really dig like Mark Livesy seems to...and of course that's an illusion. Basically Macca said that they need make the Regional Championships like regional championships. Would need to look at how man 140.6s there are right now...especially if you split it 50-50, you have all of those people that race...the winner gets the slot and then you need a qualifying time to participate in the European Championship/NA Championship or whatever...and your regional Championships would have 4 slots a piece of something like that.

Washed up footy player turned Triathlete.
Quote Reply
Re: IMAZ Pro Slot Allocation? [TheStroBro] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Top pros don’t really race each other much in 70.3s, so it’s not just the 2 IMs a year thing. I think it’s more about prize money. If you had four or five big money races per year (IM or 70.3), guys would post. That’s a whole other problem—where would the money come from?
Quote Reply
Re: IMAZ Pro Slot Allocation? [Poon] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Poon wrote:
Top pros don’t really race each other much in 70.3s, so it’s not just the 2 IMs a year thing. I think it’s more about prize money. If you had four or five big money races per year (IM or 70.3), guys would post. That’s a whole other problem—where would the money come from?

Well if there is no money at any other races and you just had it for 4 Ironmans. That’s a lot of money.

Rhymenocerus wrote:
I think everyone should consult ST before they do anything.
Quote Reply
Re: IMAZ Pro Slot Allocation? [Scottxs] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Scottxs wrote:
devashish_paul wrote:



Not to mention that women in general have many more barriers first to become athletes and then to become pro athletes.




What barriers would that be?

If I have to explain to you that women around the world have way more barriers entering sport than men and then practicing sport, then I can't really help you on this discussion. Bottom line there are just as many men as women on the planet. If the women's field in the pro ranks has less athletes and if the depth is not the same as men in terms of separation between the top athlete, that does not reflect the effort of women, it just reflects that as a society that women collectively did not get the same chances to race. There is no good physiological reason that in every race the relative separation between the top 5 men and top 5 women should be indifferent. The fact that they are, just shows as a sport and as societies across the world women athletes have less access to sport. This slot allocation (as was the previous one) just makes it harder for women atthletes.

But its generally men making rules for men with male biases, so that's what we get. If some men don't stand up and make a point about it to the men making these bad decisions then the pattern persists.
Quote Reply
Re: IMAZ Pro Slot Allocation? [ericlambi] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sorry to derail, but were times slower this year? I only looked closely at the male 30-34 results but a 9:34 got second place and a 10:10 got into the top 10. It could just be an outlier AG.
Quote Reply
Re: IMAZ Pro Slot Allocation? [PJC] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I've actually always liked the idea of kinda following how ncaa xc does it. They do the regular season with 5k/8k for the men and then the championship event is 10k.

So I've always felt they could create a really kick ass "league/series" by having majority of the series 70.3's (race these far more often), have a few specific IM regional "qualifiers" and then Kona. And they can still have 70.3 worlds. I just think the way the do it now, never creates much quality fields except for maybe 2-3 events a year including Kona.

Of course they'll never do it, but I like the idea of regional champs for Kona as only qualifier races. Get deeper better racing, hell make KQ 10 or 12 or 15 deep. Then you have pro's racing IM's far less, and creating far better quality for your A event- Kona.

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II
Quote Reply
Re: IMAZ Pro Slot Allocation? [TennesseeJed] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TennesseeJed wrote:
Sorry to derail, but were times slower this year? I only looked closely at the male 30-34 results but a 9:34 got second place and a 10:10 got into the top 10. It could just be an outlier AG.

The course "longer" this year (T1 was very long) but no, times were not "slower." It was actually a very, very fast day (except the swim seemed a tad slow) with near perfect conditions. Different people raced in M30-34, however.
Quote Reply
Re: IMAZ Pro Slot Allocation? [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Agreed. What really pisses me off is a lot of men haved called out WTC on this rediculous “equality formula” Messick talks up. He even did it on Lance’s podcast....and steadfast they march on despite our voices. The facts are simple: WTC doesnt care about pros. They reduced prize purses, they turned their backs when they crash in Kona (Matt Russell hinted as much on a podcast though he treaded very carefully and my friend Tara Norton 10 years ago are 2 very specific examples) And of course this bullshit reasoning re: equality.

They need pros for any semblance of mass media opportunities. I mean pro sports is pro sports. It sells stuff. Period. But they only want pros at the minimum required cost with no long term investment. And that is a short term business model. For example, Ryf had best season you can have winning Europe, 70.3 and Kona and made $210000 prize money. Katie Zafares made $177,400 racing ITU and Super League. Riddle me this? As Super League grows where do you think ITU stars go after an olympic cycle? Not Kona....direct to SL for guaranteed income (racers get a salary) in beautiful destinations with hotels paid etc. vs chasing sposnors, injuries, high expense lines for little upside chasing KONA. (Source link below re incomes).

what worries me the most is WTC will do to running what its done to triathlon. WANDA already nosed into the Abbott Majors, rock n roll series purchase etc.....

I suppose the upside in all this is WTC is for sale so lets see who buys it and what their belief system is on equality, long term growth model etc. For now i only foresee more cuts.

https://triathlonworld.com/...8-prize-money-146725

@rhyspencer
Quote Reply
Re: IMAZ Pro Slot Allocation? [rhys] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
 I mean pro sports is pro sports. It sells stuff. Period.

-------

Eh to me this is a lot like the WNBA. A few months back WNBA player all complained when the NBA G-League announced it would make some 6 figure salary for all star high school seniors who didn't want to go to college aka "one and done" players. WNBA players got all mad that like the avg salary is less than half of what the new G-League was offering, yet the WNBA players didn't want to acknowledge that their product still hasn't caught on in over 20 years of product now, it loses money regularly by most teams every year and is being anchored pretty much by the NBA now (the owners of NBA teams are forced to "invest" in it).

The way the current setup is, there really is no "pro sports" in IM. It's just a category that instead of giving out medals, it gives out cash. But it really truly is setup poorly to distinguish itself and it's only real important race is Kona. But it truly would do itself wonders if they had only 4-5 IM pro races + Kona. It would create better racing, would create more rivalries, would create better random quotes, would create buzz. But spreading what 30 pro races over 35 overall IM events really does create complete buzzkill for pros in IM.



So I think WTC can do a better job of creating an pro series, but I think the bad thing will be that it culls a ton of "pros" (it's what $750/year for a pro to race IM..if they cut out 200 that would be what $1.5 million lost). It would mean the big names make higher money and very few score any money. Maybe the pros won't want that Idk, but if IM ever wanted to make it work, it seems a "series" of sorts would be a hell of a lot better chance then this "every IM race has a pro field and a few of the races are little stronger, etc".

SL is only here and will be only here because of a billionaire footing the bill. If that billionaire tires and wants to spend that money elsewhere, SL will simply go away. Why? Because it doesn't have the standing power/money to do it on it's own.

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II
Last edited by: B_Doughtie: Nov 20, 18 10:00
Quote Reply

Prev Next