Why does it have to be a competition? Why can’t IM PTO Clash Challenge, all be an asset for the pros instead of “X pays more than Y”.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Because when athletes only have one choice, they take what they are given. They have no bargaining power.
When competition exists it encourages growth in the market, so Ironman man can look at PTO and say "wow they are starting to steal our top athletes and are making us look bad, we need to step our game up".

Each racing org offers something a little different from the other so it isn't a clear cut apples to apples 'this org pays more so they are better' comparision, so they can all be assets to the pros in some ways,
but the more financial incentives at the top there are, the more people will strive, the more the sport will grow.

---

Dayoutsports.com.au| Australia's Newest Cycling and Tri Apparel Brand

IM isn’t going to fight for pros though. They will cut shitty prize purses more than “add money” to the pro purse they offer. They already have 2 of the biggest top 10 events in the sport, so they don’t need to compete against pto. They’ll gladly cut prize purses when top pros leave more WTC events. So be careful what you wish for if you are outside top 20 in our sport etc.

They likely create an IM elite race series and cut all $100k and under pro purses. That will be the response.

Hell No will IM “pay more” than what they already offer to keep pros.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

I also think I’M will laugh at pros and PTO with the long game angle. There is nothing at this point to showcase that pto is here to stay.

So pros better “get there’s” just hope it’s not another failed pro adventure we’ve seen many times in your sport.


Eta: that’s why I laugh when I hear people talk about completion is good in our small niche sport. Not many organizations have showcased long term sustainability…

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

I'd argue that there have been two brands that have been able to sustain success: one globally (IM), one in Europe (Challenge).

Everyone else has come and gone.

---

----------------------------------
Editor-in-Chief, Slowtwitch.com | Twitter

So if your are inside the top 30 in our sport, sure "competition" will be good on the hog for you. You'd love for IM to scrap Poland / NC / Eagleman / Oregon / Asian 70.3 $30k prize purse (cut 20 of those and suddenly you have $600k for a big name race prize purse) and put it into 3-4 $1mi + prize purses. Blu and Knibb and Laidlow and Lange, LCB will all be seeing $$$ in their sleep. That's the answer from IM if they feel like all the top names are leaving WTC minus 1 event to KQ / 70.3 Q.

But you just better be damn sure PTO is sticking around if you want to claim "competition" because the moment IM starts pulling prize purses from their events (and they have already started that), you will not get it back. So sure you can race for a few big boy pay checks, but then that would be it.

So let's make sure we are playing chess and not checkers when I hear "competition is good". You better make sure you think IM will want to increase prize purses, I dont...Or let me correct, I think they'll just scrub all they money from shitty races into a half dozen $500k-$1mi events like another PTO 2.0.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Exactly what would happen, IMO. Which eventually means that long course becomes "where most WTCS washouts go to retire to"** instead of having some random folks be able to learn their way into it, and that mid-tier pro stops taking the card whatsoever.

**unless your name is Blummenfelt or Iden, because those guys are the exception, not the rule.

---

----------------------------------
Editor-in-Chief, Slowtwitch.com | Twitter

They already are doing exactly this.
"Ironman prize money is up compared to 2019 by 35%, but that is mostly due to two World Championship events in 2022, each paying US$ 750.000. Still, the average purse per event has gone up from 77k in 2019 to 124k in 2022."


PTO just raised 30 million in seris B funding, with Warner Bros being a major investor. It sees them through till 2024, which I know isn't a long time but it's trending in the right direction, and shows some indication of sustainability.

As it stands the majority of athletes on this list got paid more from PTO races than Ironman, and I think it's great they have a choice. And especially cool to see the women get paid relatively equal at the top as well!

---

Dayoutsports.com.au| Australia's Newest Cycling and Tri Apparel Brand

I hope it works out I just take a much different viewpoint on this. I don’t see it as a IM vs PTO vs Challenge. Like of course the PTO is going to win with the money they are offering. And no way IM tries to compete against that, they would be stupid to do that, see their biz plan of cutting pros from races at AG only events. But I’ve been in this sport long enough to see many ideas/brands come in with a pro focus and it fizzle out. I think PTO would do well to get out of the “race production” biz and just add pro events to already established events (Ie- 2023 US open at usat Nats). That will be a big move to help and of course I think Collins Cup needs a total revamp. That format isn’t going to catch and keep eye balls. Too many moving parts, that format would do well over 2 days to drum up more drama over matchups and results etc. but I understand LC is limited by road shut downs etc.

So as I said I see the counter move to pull shitty $15k-$30k prize purses and IM handing out less pro purses but having bigger stake races. That is how you still keep the top names in the sport. You cut out development though when you suddenly only offer 10 pro purses instead of 50.

Like they give out almost 50 events with prize purses and we are worried about who’s paying more? It’s 2 completely different business strategies,

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

I tend to agree. IM hasn't flinch for a second this year in upping their prize money significantly or at all to counter PTO and as it stands more and more pros are stating that they are aiming for Nice or Kona as their prime race for 2023, Brownlee and Laura P are the two latest.

As you said, IM will just cut pro events. Think most of the sponsor bonuses as it stands are around world champs so most top pros will do one IM and world champs and maybe a 70.3. It's good enough to keep IM going from a pros perspective!

I mostly agree with what you're saying. I like PTO but it's not putting the kind of pressure on IM that will benefit all professional athletes. IM isn't looking at what PTO is doing & upping their $30k races & paying 15 or 20 deep instead of 10. They already have a monopoly on age group racing. They have no problem cutting the development prize purses, and that's exactly what they'll do. It's a good time to be a top-end pro. I just hope PTO is thinking about development for the rest.

WTC slashed prize money in Rock and Roll races a while back. They never paid huge amounts of money and never really attracted top pro fields. It was more if you were a decent local runner you should do your local Rock and Roll race and pick up a few hundred bucks. That money was going to people who likely had full time jobs but were trying to live out the dream. Those weren't the runners getting invited to marathon majors. But WTC knew they would keep more money without having those prize purses. They weren't getting big name pros to the race so they didn't see the value. Take 70.3 Oregon. That race is already sold out -- people like a fast course. Big Metz and Heather Jackson were two big name pros who competed in the $30k race last year. Them being there doesn't impact the race selling out. IM is happy to tell those athletes to go to one of their bigger races or to a PTO race. The problem? Whoever finished in the last few prize purse slots. They're not getting end of year PTO money or invited to PTO Opens. What does the sport look like for that group moving forward?

IMO, if PTO is as athlete-focused as they say they are, that's where they should be investing money in -- creating that development opportunity and/or continuing to partner with certain events to deliver their combined pro / age-group event experience.

IRONMAN has, for better or for worse, figured out that pro fields don't provide a ton of value to their events at the majority of their races. There are exceptions to this; of course, the World Championships, but also some long-standing races of theirs (e.g., Lake Placid was *furious* when they had no pro field / part of the single gender only pro fields).

Like Brooks, I agree that if pushed, IRONMAN will wind up either a.) moving back to a points model for World Championship starting slots, forcing pros back to their events, or b.) will concentrate prize purses at selected events and cut significantly back on the "lower tier" races.

---

----------------------------------
Editor-in-Chief, Slowtwitch.com | Twitter

I think the smart move is B- to cut prize purses and consilodate it into half a dozen WTC events worth ~750k + .

The "strong hold" move that IM did previously against the Rev3 pro movement was because even though they were high paying races, they werent THIS amount of money. So if IM actually went route A like they did in the pass, they are going to lose; or atleast they'll lose the "top names" in our sport. So the smart move is going to be to consilidate prize money and what do you know you still get the top names racing Kona, etc. But IM sometimes like to behave in an "strong hold" manner, I just dont think even they want to go up against the top names because they aren't going to be able to compete against 5 $1mi races.

But again as I say, let's be careful what we wish for, etc because there is still a lot of uncertanity and I would hate for PTO to go away in 5 years and IM is looking at the pro's with "suckers" at the negoiating table. So when I hear "competition" is good, let's just make sure we've looked at all angles before we truly want to push out mr bad guy in our sport- IM.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

I think this chart shows Ironman is already better run then PTO. Money paid vs exposure.

They got Kristen to come win 1 IM worlds, 1 70.3 worlds and a third place IM for $170,000.
PTO had to pay him $260,000 and the only race I remember he did for PTO last year was Edmonton finishing second.

Good for Kristen and a win for IM.

Same with Ryf, IM paid less and got more exposure. The only PTO I think she did was Collins cup??? that event sucks, pros like it for the pay out. Everyone I know never watches it.

You could keep going , magnus , LCB, Laidlaw. ironman paid less and got more then PTO out of them.

---

Technique will always last longer then energy production. Improve biomechanics, improve performance.
http://Www.anthonytoth.ca, triathletetoth@twitter

I was curious how much phoenix - sub 7 paid out

So if I hear you right, the PTO is creating unsustainable waves that will ultimately leave the pro landscape worse off. Supporting hypothesis to that idea:

* The alleged bottomless pit billionaire is already having to sell some ownership to a sinking ship legacy media content company. That money will require a return.

* The PTO couldn't even pull off back to back years for its marquee N.America events. You might say, by leaving Dallas and going to Milwaukee, that was a good move, but it still shows poor vision/organization to do Dallas in the first place. Really it just seems they are grasping at any venue that someone else has the equipment already in place. Maybe.... but that's not necessarily a recipe for sustainability to be dependant on someone else running your show.

It's far more likely that:
* Pto goes under in a few years
* Ironman goes under (or is sold and) in a few years or drastically scales back races leaving it a shadow of itself.

Let's not forget this company has been continually passed around. In aggregate, I assume it makes good money, but it needs to pull off a massive amount of global events to do it. It seems more likely to me that there are many ways to break such a complex operation, and maybe we (who enjoy racing them)should be grateful such an unlikely thing exists.

In nature, confrontations between two alphas can often leave both irreparably weakened. I've seen similar things in business. It's not a forgone conclusion things get better as a result of devastating competition.

How much did blum win in 2021 with wtcs, Olympics and IM?

What I'm saying is I keep hearing that PTO being the big alpha dog on the block is good to put pressure on IM to then force them to "support" pro's better. Guess what, IM doesn't want to "support" the pros like the PTO does. They want to use them in their business model no different than the IM merch expo cog in the wheel. IM needs/wants pro's at their big boy events, but IM doesn't need pros at IM NC 70.3 when it already sells out. So they can afford to "treat" the pro's with indifference *at times* that seems to chap our asses with that behavior. Every time "prize money" comes up, it seems people are bull headed on this idea that it has to be about "competition" now and that it's good that PTO is going "heads up" against IM / Challenge / Clash, etc.

So I'm not saying PTO will fail. They may revolutionize pro racing and have 20 PTO events in 5 years racing for $15 million dollars, etc. I'm saying let's ease the brakes on this idea that PTO coming in and "improving" the overall pro structure of our sport, because I don't think it's going to cause this new wave of "pro development". I think like all things that happen in our niche sport, it's going to help the top 100 pro's tremendously. Which does it really matter what happens to the non top 100, that's a question each person has to answer. But I dont think IM just keeps the same biz plan with the potential mass exodus of the top names beyond their key events. IM will certainly make a new business plan if all these top names leave WTC events, they'd be stupid not too.

So I just want to uncover every potential "side affect" of this idea that seee IM sucks at paying pros because PTO now does it better, so now IM is going to be forced to do better....IMO no they aint. They'll likely pay the top names better and cut out the non top 100 type of athlete all together.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II