This is where your naive. WTC thinks they are NASCAR, where the tail does wag the dog.
Triathlon Forum
Login required to started new threads
Login required to post replies
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [Joe M]
[ In reply to ]
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [centermiddy]
[ In reply to ]
I have to weight in on this. While I think Lance is considerably faster than the top triathletes on the bike, I dont think its as big of a margin as everyone thinks. Did anyone see the Tour of California time trial. Lieto, McCormick and even Wellington were in it. McCormick finished 56th which is pretty damn respectable, and Lieto flatted with a couple of miles to go. At the half way point he was up with the top 10. Even Chrissie finished in 50 minutes which was only 9 minutes behind the leader.
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [ngordonmd]
[ In reply to ]
ngordonmd wrote:
I have to weight in on this. While I think Lance is considerably faster than the top triathletes on the bike, I dont think its as big of a margin as everyone thinks. Did anyone see the Tour of California time trial. Lieto, McCormick and even Wellington were in it. McCormick finished 56th which is pretty damn respectable, and Lieto flatted with a couple of miles to go. At the half way point he was up with the top 10. Even Chrissie finished in 50 minutes which was only 9 minutes behind the leader.You forget that the Pro Tour riders have ridden 700 hard miles prior to that final time trial. I don't think Chrissie, Macca or Lieto would even be in the same time zone had they raced 6 days and 700+ miles prior to that final TT.
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [ngordonmd]
[ In reply to ]
Macca lost 5 minutes in 20 miles......while you can't extrapolate that directly to 112 miles (duh...completely different intensity level), to me that is a pretty big time gap over a longer distance.
Chicago Cubs - 2016 WORLD SERIES Champions!!!!
"If ever the time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." - Samuel Adams
Chicago Cubs - 2016 WORLD SERIES Champions!!!!
"If ever the time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." - Samuel Adams
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [Acsp34]
[ In reply to ]
Lieto sometimes stage races in the off season. regardless, pro triathletes are pro triathletes and pro cyclists are pro cyclists. There's a reason why each group is better at what they do. No doubt Lance Armstrong will have one of the best rides ever at Kona, a la Steve Larsen. I also think however, that some of the uber bikers could stay on his wheel, so if he races it will be a game changer.
Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting
“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”
Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting
“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [centermiddy]
[ In reply to ]
centermiddy wrote:
This is where your naive. WTC thinks they are NASCAR, where the tail does wag the dog.
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [ericM35-39]
[ In reply to ]
I think lance wants to stay relevant so he can continue to bring attention to Livestrong. Once he stops competing at "something" interest in Livestrong drops off pretty quickly. I don't think he is doing 2.4mi OW swim races to stay fit, he has a purpose. WTC would be making a huge mistake by not letting him race from the front, however they categorize his entry. Hell, Versus may even get live coverage if Lance races. I know I will be glued to ironman.com along with 95% of ST'ers
John
John
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [Joe M]
[ In reply to ]
Lance is not a sustainable asset. He'll be there one year, two at most, and then gone. His sponsors will leave with him. WTC has no trouble selling out their races, hawking you there goods, pawning you off on their vendors. They don't need Lance to make money. In fact, the way Lance works he will make money of himself, but you won't -- that's the price he extracts. However, as many here suggest they will torch all the goodwill they have with their athletes. How is this good for WTC? Explain the quality of earnings to me. Don't try too hard because the math does not work.
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [centermiddy]
[ In reply to ]
Lance will not help to sell merchandise. He will sell TV time. There is a reason that the purse at Kona is 1.5 million and Arizona is $50,000, and that kind of money does not come from entry fees. Its because its covered by NBC and with a major network spot comes sponsors like Ford and K-swiss and Timex. If Lance competes in Kona the number of people that watch NBCs coverage will probably triple, and so will the money that WTC will get for selling the rights to NBC to cover the event.
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [centermiddy]
[ In reply to ]
explain what? the obvious... hmmmm.... I think I will just stick with... sometimes, you just can't fix stupid
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [ngordonmd]
[ In reply to ]
There is a reason that the purse at Kona is 1.5 million //
Really? Are we talking Pesos here??
Really? Are we talking Pesos here??
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [ngordonmd]
[ In reply to ]
I'd be curious if Lance raced, if they actually charge for any and all coverage (even the online continous feed) the years he is doing it. (I assume it's free currently).
------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com
------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [Joe M]
[ In reply to ]
Then you have no real business sense. You just want Lance to race so you all your buddies at work/the gym/your church/whatever can identify with what you do. Lance does nothing economically for WTC, so there can't be any other explanation. If Lance costs WTC money, I don't see how being ambivalent about his participation is, in your words, "stupid".
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [ngordonmd]
[ In reply to ]
ngordonmd wrote:
I have to weight in on this. While I think Lance is considerably faster than the top triathletes on the bike, I dont think its as big of a margin as everyone thinks.
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [centermiddy]
[ In reply to ]
centermiddy wrote:
Then you have no real business sense. You just want Lance to race so you all your buddies at work/the gym/your church/whatever can identify with what you do. Lance does nothing economically for WTC, so there can't be any other explanation. If Lance costs WTC money, I don't see how being ambivalent about his participation is, in your words, "stupid".Are you really saying that Lance racing in Kona wont give WTC a huge opportunity with marketing/advertising/media coverage (and they wont take advantage of that)? Edit: That is where I think we differ. I think WTC will simply "do what it has to do", to take advantage of having Lance in the race, while you seem to suggest that Lance Armstrong will just be "racer # 456 and thats it.
------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [gregf83]
[ In reply to ]
gregf83 wrote:
ngordonmd wrote:
I have to weight in on this. While I think Lance is considerably faster than the top triathletes on the bike, I dont think its as big of a margin as everyone thinks.I wasnt trying to say that Lance would easily have the fastest bike split, I was saying that I dont think it will be as big of a landslide as some people think. How many minutes did Lieto finish ahead of Macca in Kona last year. I know it wasnt 10% but it was likely close to 4 or 5. While I dont think Lieto will hang with Lance, I think he may give him a run for his money. Especially if he puts a few minutes on him in the swim.
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [ngordonmd]
[ In reply to ]
This is the point to take home. Selling all spots and merchandise doesn't matter, selling TV-rights does. How much does a network have to pay to broadcast the superbowl? How much for Kona? Not that I know, but I assume there's quite a difference.
I would also assume that "selling" Kona to the American public is easier than the TdF. Instead of three weeks of delayed broadcasts, you can have a quick summary of the swim and first half of the bike and then have quite a nice evening of TV.
That's for you in America of course. For us in Europe it will still suck.
I would also assume that "selling" Kona to the American public is easier than the TdF. Instead of three weeks of delayed broadcasts, you can have a quick summary of the swim and first half of the bike and then have quite a nice evening of TV.
That's for you in America of course. For us in Europe it will still suck.
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [earnstrom]
[ In reply to ]
Come on folks. TV is how the world of big sports function. Lance+Kona=ratings! When he wins, our sport just might join the big time.
STIndiana
America Multi-Sport, Inc.
America's Half June 10, 2017
USAT RD Century Club
http://www.americamultisport.com
STIndiana
America Multi-Sport, Inc.
America's Half June 10, 2017
USAT RD Century Club
http://www.americamultisport.com
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [Stindiana]
[ In reply to ]
Stindiana wrote:
Come on folks. TV is how the world of big sports function. Lance+Kona=ratings! When he wins, our sport just might join the big time.If he rocks up and wins, what does it say to Joe Public about the quality of the MPRO field? I think it takes a step back in the public eye before it takes a step forward.
However, he still has to qualify doesn't he? WTC stated outright that there would be no wildcards to bypass the points system and I'm sure they said specifically that there would be no LAS in the MPRO field unless he signed up and scored the points like everyone else. I assume they keep AG spots for personalities and hard-luck stories; they could give him one of those, but he starts with us. Still gets him off the bike with some decent MPRO triathletes he can run with.
Personally, I hope the WTC have the nuts to tell him he isn't welcome to any special treatment and he has to sit by his PC on active.com a year in advance like the rest of us. Mind you, for the record, I also hope Novitsky nails him and he won't have access to active.com where they send him.
Ratings:
[ In reply to ]
My point taken and one thing is CERTAIN. Judging by the Slowtwitch Threads Popularity, LANCE's ratings are off the roof. His Tweets have more hits then everyone on the net.
Love em or Hate em...YOUR GONNA BE TUNED IN! The TV and cable industry knows this. You can not deny that America wants to see him look back one more time!
Lance is paid BIG money to speek at different types of events. My question, will "Versus" or "NBC" pay him to compete and do some interviews? I would think so...
Love em or Hate em...YOUR GONNA BE TUNED IN! The TV and cable industry knows this. You can not deny that America wants to see him look back one more time!
Lance is paid BIG money to speek at different types of events. My question, will "Versus" or "NBC" pay him to compete and do some interviews? I would think so...
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [Stindiana]
[ In reply to ]
Stindiana wrote:
When he wins, our sport just might join the big time.I just threw up in my mouth. Just a little.
Re: Ratings: [Tri or Die]
[ In reply to ]
Tri or Die wrote:
You can not deny that America wants to see him look back one more time!Damn. Just threw up in my mouth again. Just a little more this time.
Please stop...
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [centermiddy]
[ In reply to ]
centermiddy wrote:
Lance is not a sustainable asset. He'll be there one year, two at most, and then gone. His sponsors will leave with him. WTC has no trouble selling out their races, hawking you there goods, pawning you off on their vendors. They don't need Lance to make money. In fact, the way Lance works he will make money of himself, but you won't -- that's the price he extracts. However, as many here suggest they will torch all the goodwill they have with their athletes. How is this good for WTC? Explain the quality of earnings to me. Don't try too hard because the math does not work.I'm confused. I thought the WTC was a business, in the business of making money....more money....forever. I am trying to think of a business that doesn't want to expand it's customer base to have higher profits...I am having problems thinking of one, maybe ytu can help me out?
Re: 2.4 mi. swim - Lance Armstrong [M~]
[ In reply to ]
Apparently I'm a real idiot because I don't understand how letting someone race Kona as a pro who has not earned his spot, and who will be fighting drug charges, is good for our sport, especially if he is later found guilty. If that happens, even the fanboys here will see him as one of the biggest sporting pariahs in history. Yeah, folks and money will then flood to triathlon if he is associated with it....
Green Barf wrote:
Apparently I'm a real idiot because I don't understand how letting someone race Kona as a pro who has not earned his spot, and who will be fighting drug charges, is good for our sport, especially if he is later found guilty. If that happens, even the fanboys here will see him as one of the biggest sporting pariahs in history. Yeah, folks and money will then flood to triathlon if he is associated with it....Lots of ifs and buts in that little tirade.