Actually, that is a perfect example of the counterpoint. Pros are the Senate, Age groupers are the House. Both are fine, coexisting. The Senate having equality doesn't make the House lose proportionality. Thanks!

---

----------------------------------------------------------
Zen and the Art of Triathlon. Strava Workout Log
Interviews with Chris McCormack, Helle Frederikson, Angela Naeth, and many more.
http://www.zentriathlon.com

That's why I said that the primary issue is really "how many pros should be in Kona." You have to figure out how big (or small) that number can be before you open yourself up to striking down one double standard simply to enforce a different one.

JR,

Great post and great summary at the end.

I think many age-groupers have a very poor understanding of the money situation in the sport at the professional level. You are absolutely right, in what you said. If you are 6 - 10 at Kona, its' pretty much a wash, and the 10th and below, clearly you are loosing money on the trip to Kona.


There's another web site that lists the incomes of many of the top Pros to date this year, and it's pretty meagre!


Ironically as you point out, some AG'ers who run coaching businesses and who are also top AG athletes themselves stand to benefit more from Kona than most of the Pros - nice feather in the cap. I qualified for Kona and I can help you to!


Also, with the average income for most age-groupers $150,00+ from the surveys I've seen, most AG'ers who go to Hawaii can well afford the trip - over 2/3rds of the Pros cannot! Something's upside down here!


As I have said many times in this debate, I'm all for equality, but there are some much bigger and more fundamental issues with regards to the current situation for Professional Triathletes that need to be addressed. 15 more bikes on the pier or some other equal number, will not help solve those issues.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

I actually still disagree with you. Pros get sponsor bonuses and visibility for going to Kona. It's awesome for their careers - which has tangible monetary benefits. This is why they do Ironman races and don't show up for Challenge ones when Challenge still has better prize money. For age groupers, going to Kona is fantastic, but it doesn't make you better off at what your primary income is all about.

By doing proportions for age groupers, you're not denying anybody a better life/career. But non-equality at Kona gives 15 male pros more appearance bonuses and career advancement than women.

---

----------------------------------------------------------
Zen and the Art of Triathlon. Strava Workout Log
Interviews with Chris McCormack, Helle Frederikson, Angela Naeth, and many more.
http://www.zentriathlon.com

You could probably have a pretty complete pro field with 20-25 entrants for each gender, so why are the numbers 50/35?

I think that WTC's calculus on how many pros are in Kona actually has very little to do with Kona. The KPR system is designed to force the top talent to race extensively (if not exclusively) at WTC events. They are taking some of the value of Kona and leveraging it across their wider portfolio. The number of Kona slots up for grabs is what WTC deems necessary to suck up enough oxygen from the pros that other races have a hard time getting good fields.

---

ECMGN Therapy Silicon Valley:
Depression, Neurocognitive problems, Dementias (Testing and Evaluation), Trauma and PTSD, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)

I think that WTC's calculus on how many pros are in Kona actually has very little to do with Kona. The KPR system is designed to force the top talent to race extensively (if not exclusively) at WTC events. They are taking some of the value of Kona and leveraging it across their wider portfolio. The number of Kona slots up for grabs is what WTC deems necessary to suck up enough oxygen from the pros that other races have a hard time getting good fields. //

THIS^^^^

I have said this ad nauseum, throws water on the dozens of arguments people like to make in defense of this theory or that one. Pretty simple really, and effective.

Man....those are some impressive mental gymnastics.

Let's think for a second and see if we can spot the difference between LA winning 7 TdF's or Tiger Woods winning buckets of tournaments (including a near Grand Slam) and 15 women filling out places 36-50 in Kona and getting zero coverage while doing it (not to mention being beaten by some AG'ers).

Seriously.....your argument is simply absurd.

---

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

I've never seen nor heard of - for all that is and isn't worth - of any pro getting a sponsor bonus for "going to Kona." That was true at every level.

I have heard of sponsors helping to offset the cost of Kona for some of their athletes, but that's not really a bonus. That's just helping to mitigate the very high cost of the trip; this was pretty much exclusive to European pros, where the cost is much higher.

I'll admit that my own perspective of pro financials is limited to my own experience and what I know from friends. But still, I think you discount how much - even for pros - the drive to go to Kona is purely emotional and totally irrational.

When you look at the all the races that going to Kona precludes, I don't honestly see how it makes sense for many of the pros who go. There are plenty of pros who, if they are being honest with themselves, are never going to finish in the money in Kona. And yet they still choose to fly to Kona, pay ridiculous rates to stay, etc. And they choose this over racing the multitude of half-Ironman races (and few Ironman races) available to them.

There is no world that I can imagine where simply going to Kona and coming, for example 25th - a good but not great placing - is better for your career than winning - or being on the podium - at a race like Silverman, or Princeton, or any of the other 70.3s that surrounded Kona last year.

I'm sorry, I just don't buy the career advancement opportunity angle.

I once had a sponsor say to me that unless I was on the podium in Kona, I should go win another Ironman. The basic calculus I've heard from pretty much every sponsor is top-5 at a minimum and top-3 more likely for a sponsor to actually perceive a real value.

---

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp

I reckon that is about the best summation of the situation.

---

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

I'm also not particularly engaged in this debate. I can see both sides. I can see some hyperbole on the pro 50 slot advocates. But I also think this argument that increasing the women pro field will lead to AG women demanding equal Kona slot representation obfuscating the issue a great deal and is a straw man argument. I hardly see AG women clambering for that.

---

-Of course it's 'effing hard, it's IRONMAN!
Team ZOOT
ZOOT, QR, Garmin, HED Wheels, Zealios, FormSwim, Precision Hydration, Rudy Project

I think the list over brands that support TriEqual is going to grow http://www.triequal.com/#!brads/cf2k

You already find Ironman sponsors like Newton and Roka there. Also high level coaches. Guess they are sending a signal.

Challenge is also supporting TriEqual.

Sorry. Not buying that in my bubble of reality. Lake Placid was not built around pros, nor was Wisconsin or Timberman or Boise or Augusta or Austin. They are all AG driven and as I see it the Pros are lucky to race with AGers who drive the business model they make a living out of. So adding more pros will not impact many, except a few extra pros that will not get a paycheck. Same thing goes for road racing - does NY or Boston need an elite field? No, but runners flock to these races for the event vs. which pro is racing or the fact that they have a pro filed. Were these marathons started by elites? No, just plain old folks. Was Kona started by pros?

Your logic is faulty but works well in your bubble of delusion.

Does this not all come back to "why do we need the Pros?" What do they bring to the show? If Pro women 36-50 bring nothing to the show, what do pro women 11-35 bring? What do Pro men 11-50 bring? Wouldn't 85 more spots sold to AGers be more profitable? And it would also allow AGers to fight for the overall win and a nice plastic trophy!

At some point WTC must believe that the Pros offer something. Right? So what do they get from pro men and women 11-???? or frankly anyone after 1 and 2.

---

Ian

andrew, and his team, believes in proportional representation, while maintaining equal prize money, and he favors a bottom-up rather than a top-down approach when looking at ways to increase participation in ironman among women.


And they are absolutely correct.

"My out of box idea is run the pros Sunday. Voila. No issues. Re the race. Maybe from a town perspective. But out of box is what started all this way back.... Eliminates the bigger issue of top women pros interfered with by fast AG men and slow male pros. Can start races an hour a part and give 10 hrs to finish for men, 11hr for women. Done before dinner.

ITU long course does this. Or at least when I raced in 2004...."

An even better idea is to run run the men's race on one day and the women's race on another. Solve all the problems.

Your logic is faulty but works well in your bubble of delusion. //

Just like your lack of knowledge about triathlon and its history, you have the same basic misconceptions about big running events too. You seem bent on your own take on things, so done wasting my time trying to get you to see outside your own little world. But i would stop trying to argue points that you have no clue about, unless you just like to argue, or look foolish.

Given the impact on the towns in the region, as well as logistical issues like the supply of volunteers, turnover of transition racks, and restocking of aid stations, I think any thoughts of back-to-back Ironman length races in Kona is a pipe dream.

So the only beneficiaries of fifty slots would be fifteen low level female pros who would be beaten by age groupers. I am not seeing the injustice here.

So I assume Challenge had equal slots at the Triple Crown races?

Challenge doesn't have slots.

Agree with comments like Jackmotts. I also think that AGers will eventually hear about it because it's not going to die down. I'll wager we'll start to see more pressure from sponsors and if nothing is done, sooner or later people will start to boycott be it individually, or collectively. Personally, I'm bummed I signed up for Sydney 70.3 a few weeks ago. After hearing that interview I'm so pissed off Ill be looking to enter Challenge races for anything above local Olympics. Will get the 50 woman Tatts ordered before Sydney though!

Slowman - not sure how you or Messick think Tri-equal is not communicating well. I'd suggest you DO sound like you are on the wrong side of history on this and unfortunately you do sound like dinosaurs. Don't take that as nasty uncalled for criticism. Just how I think many people will see it.

This comment really changed my position. I agree, difference between representatives and customers. More reps to attract more customers, because that's what you aim for. Unless WTC has other tactics of increasing the customer base for women.

The only issue I have is setting a quota, and will people in general cry 'unfair' is the quota was set?

Answer the question then. If there should be equal slots for pros, despite the proportion of participation, then why should there not be equal slots for age groupers. If it is okay for age groupers then why is it not okay for pros?


Simple. Equal slots for pros doesn't impact him.

Run pro's on a different day...really. When was the last time you volunteered or organized a Triathlon. Ignorant is the best word...where the hell are you going to get all the logistical support, roads closed with security, volunteers and on and on and on. Wow

---

STIndiana
America Multi-Sport, Inc.
America's Half June 10, 2017
USAT RD Century Club
http://www.americamultisport.com

I would love to hear your take on triathlon history and how the pros created a wealth of racing opportunities for the common man. But, you are right, don't waste your time. I am just ignorant and close minded. You are so easy to dismiss when you didn't come back with real valid points, just a cute little one liner because I called you delusional.

So the extra 15 Pro Men spots are currently filled by Pros that get beaten by age groupers. They should be there because?

---

Ian