null-and-void wrote:
The problem is that we never had a national plan for Covid response and post-Covid return, let alone one nuanced enough to take into account regional differences in terms of the implementation of mitigation strategies, vaccine adoption, etc. I know about Lake Placid; what of it? I'm sure that there are promoters in other areas of the country who would support vaccination proof but can't because of local politics/state politics. I think that I'm missing some nuance in your response--is the Lake Placid comment pink or not? Looking at the threads in this forum suggests to me that a fair number of users who would/are feeling aggrevied that they have to demonstrate proof of vaccination to attend Lake Placid. I'm suggesting, excluding other info, that Lake Placid's requirement will be atypical as racing resumes more broadly.
I'm not sure what you're responding to; it's possible that I wasn't entirely clear.
My response was a rather cheeky way of pointing out that when it comes to resisting the anti-science bent of the unwashed masses, triathlon has certain advantages that the major sports and other large promoters do not.
Triathlon does not depend as heavily on third-party spectators - the revenue comes from the participants and the people that follow in their wake. Those participants are (a) typically more educated; (b) motivated to participate by interest; (c) further motivated by scarcity; and (d) majority from outside the venue area.
Given those factors, a private organization like Ironman can mandate vaccinations and have a reasonable degree of confidence that even with such a mandate in place, the event will be successful because (a) the average triathlete is likely to be vaccinated by affirmative choice anyway; (b) the average triathlete is motivated to race after a 19-month layoff and such motivation is likely to overcome most of the non-health/non-religious objections to being vaccinated; (c) the average triathlete knows that if they don't vaccinate, someone else will and thereby take one of the limited number of entries away from them, thus further motivating them to vaccinate; and (d) there is little cogent argument that the neighbors of a host venue can make against an influx of vaccinated people.
The political will question is a non-factor, I think. The Lake Placid local and NY State community insisted on the vaccination requirement in this case, and kudos to them for doing it. But if IM were to insist on a vaccination requirement as a condition of holding a race, I don't think that the host community would balk. You're not requiring the host community to mandate that its own citizens be vaccinated, so there's no political blowback. There's limited additional danger from an influx of vaccinated people to your area. Besides, on the list of things that IM extorts from its host communities, "a healthier population of racers" should be an easy add.
I don't disagree with you that LP's mandate will not be the norm; I'm saying that triathlon in general and IM in particular are in a very good position to normalize vaccine requirements as a condition of participation, and moreover that they should.