The problem with restricting the race to amateurs is that most triathletes, the best ones anyway, wouldn't qualify. As the NCAA defines it, things like prize money, equipment, clothing, etc. cannot be given to an athlete, or they will lose their amateur status. I'm assuming that many of these top collegiate athletes have won prize money before. If the restriction is just lifted to no sponsorships, I think USAT will have a difficult time determining who has a contract and who doesn't. Sounds like a waste of time and money to me.

A better option might be doing something like restricting the number of years that a student can compete. In other sports, a clock starts ticking from when you enroll in college. In most circumstances, a student-athlete only has 5 years to get in 4 years of competition. In some cases, athletes are granted the ability to get their 4 years of competition in 6 years. I don't know when these winners began college, but it probably was over 6 years ago for both.

---

Jason Pedersen
RunPd.com - Running as fast I can since '93
@jasonpedersen

I think it would be pretty easy. If you own a pro card you can't race, if you aren't an undergrad you can't race. There problem solved.

We want to see who the best Collegiate athlete is not the best pro athlete who happens to be in college.

Is there really that much money in triathlon that an athlete needs to "jump" at it while in college?

I don't see XC or Track runners (arguably MUCH more competitive than the current triathlon scene) currently running into lots of NCAA issues (I know there are a few)...

I like the idea of an age or years limitation... I'm probably more bothered by a 28 year old grad student than a 20-year old "pro" if that makes any sense...

---

http://wattieink.com/elite-team/
Raising funds to help wounded veterans and racing RAAM 2013 with http://team4mil.org/
"If you are gonna charge... CHARGE HARD!"

Pardon my ignorance, but what exactly does a pro card mean? That you have a sponsorship? Is this the same thing as an elite card? If it is, then all you are doing is taking about the most talented athletes.

---

Jason Pedersen
RunPd.com - Running as fast I can since '93
@jasonpedersen

Personally im more concerned with why we are having people who are doing a 3+ hour shortened olympic distance at a "nationals"

   
Puskas.

You beat me to it. I was thinking exactly the same thing.

Why not have a National U-23 Championship for everyone? Not all the fast kids are in college....

---

**All of these words finding themselves together were greatly astonished and delighted for assuredly, they had never met before**

Pro card/ elite card yeah same thing.

Sure they are the most talent athletes but I think you should be able to race pro or race collegiate not both.

I like that idea...

---

http://wattieink.com/elite-team/
Raising funds to help wounded veterans and racing RAAM 2013 with http://team4mil.org/
"If you are gonna charge... CHARGE HARD!"

I have a teammate that ran 13:25 5k a few weeks ago, should he not be able to race as a collegiate because he is good enough to be pro? Should basketball players be REQUIRED to leave the NCAA if they are draft worthy?

If you look at the criteria for an elite card, it isn't that hard. I bet there is a good chunk of athletes you are weeding out with that criteria. Who is interested in a national championship with a ceiling on the talent?

---

Jason Pedersen
RunPd.com - Running as fast I can since '93
@jasonpedersen

there already is http://www.usatriathlon.org/...thlon.org/pages/1260

Obviously you are missing my point. He doesn't HAVE to go pro, just like basketball players don't HAVE to go into the draft, however if you CHOOSE to go pro then you shouldn't be allowed to race collegiate. Just like if a basketball player chose to get drafted and go pro, he can't come back and play in the NCAA tournament.

There is always a ceiling on the talent. Age group national championship puts a ceiling on it that you have to be an amateur. US pro national championships require you to be a US citizen. I feel that if you are racing collegiate nationals you should be an amateur undergrad, not a pro who happens to be in college, or someone who is doing their master or doctorate.

I'm with you on all of this (esp. the pro thing). Would hosting a grad and undergrad race at the same event make sense? Not sure if there are enough competitors for that.

Drew

here we go again... blah, blah. The college students who are good and dedicate themselves get their elite cards (both graduate and undergraduate) to see what they can accomplish. You eliminate them, and you eliminate a good portion of the field. I raced as a grad student (not pro), and am not upset that elites race their also. They are attending school full-time, juggling class/theses/dissertations (if you think this is easy compared to undergraduate, you have not been a graduate student). And many of the grad students and/or pros that I know are more dedicated to their collegiate teams than any selfish goals. That's all I've got :)

It has nothing to do with being selfish, dedicated, time management skills. Its about if they should be contesting for the collegiate national title. I personally don't think they should.

There was actually a graduate wave in tuscaloosa 3 or 4 years ago, i think there was even an alumni wave. Why they got rid of it is beyond me. Seems like an easy way to max out the race participants and make more money. But it wouldnt be the first time USAT did something stupid...

My guess is, Stahula is a "pro," because LBS K-Man Cycle gave him a bike, or something, or maybe because K-Man helped pay for his kit?

Sponsored is different than pro. I have no problem with people being sponsored seperately from their team and racing. I have different sponsors than the Drake team for instance.

Do your research. They still separate graduate student podiums from undergrads (both count for team points). There is still an "alumni wave" of sorts--it is the sprint race that happens on the same day.

You are entitled to your opinion, of course. To me, it's not a big deal at all, especially after being a part of it last year--and none of the other people I talked with at the event cared at all (we all cared more about the after-party). They started the age limit rule last year (which is 28). And, yes, to me it is about time management skills and dedication. Those that are excellent at those and have the talent (and/or have easy-ish majors or workloads ;) ) are the ones that get good enough to become elites.

Yes i know their is a sprint race but it isn't an alumni wave. There are a lot of people that arent ready to do an olympic that are in it. I mean have a full out alumni wave at the race. there were what only 750 people in the race or something? You could easly get 200-300 more alumni to race which adds another 12-20k that the race brings in. Thats a huge amount especially when a lot of the costs are fixed no matter the number of people.

I know graduates can race. I ment what i said, they had a seperate wave, so you know who you are racing against. That makes a lot more sense to me then having them dispersed throughout the waves.

Is bottom tier pro status lucrative? On the surface it seems like college tri, with clubs that aren't even recognized by most athletic depts, isn't in the same universe as a sport like football where alumni associations would gladly pay salaries if they could.

I think there are maybe 10 pros on the planet that would consider this sport lucrative. so no.

Yeah, I agree on both ideas, actually. The wave situation is obviously a mess.

I don't know if you've ever been a medical student, but it's a hell of a lot harder to train for this sport as a medical student than as an undergrad.