I think while we are more and more in a PC correct world, ultimately the pto is at the point where they have to make decisions that make this marketable still. Could that be from “racing only” matchups? Or could it be from an combination of the best athletes + best “stories” that ultimately drive people to making this work from an investment opportunity.

I think they are still at a point where they have to manufacture some hot takes into this and it not just be the “best of the best” racing only. That’s what this decision tells me.

So as I said I think this hurts the current crop of athlete who are trying to lay the foundation but if it sticks and wealth suddenly comes into the sport, this will have been only a speed bump and the next generation will benefit off the backs of those who “sacrificed” for the greater good.

40 years ago NBA was on tape delay tv broadcasts of their final championship round, and you had top 10 all time athletes routinely making the nba finals. Suddenly the next crop of athletes who have some swagger and appeal (along with superstar talent) get the sport major tv product and the rest is history where “average” players suddenly in 1 4 year window make more money than those superstars who were the trailblazers made in an whole career.

Tiger Woods made a boring ole “white male” sport so popular and profitable that tour members today make more in a handful of years than those same pro caliber athletes just 25 years ago. All because of marketability and investment into the sport.

So there’s all kinds of angles you likely have to factor in when your trying to grow something.


8 years ago when ncaa triathlon became a sport, one of the coaches wanted a rule that recruits could race and count for the school in the initial ncaa tri champs. I laughed and said this was a “college race” meaning current college athletes should be the athletes that count. Now I know why the coach suggested it (it helped him win) but it was also reasoned that it’ll help showcase the race. The coaches association agreed and suddenly current college athletes + committed recruits scored for your uni. That was a “unfair” setup that hurt some teams at the time, but the greater good was it was all part of the ups and downs to move ncaa tri forward.

Sometimes there truly is an 2 steps forward. 1 step back that has to take place in order for the overall greater good to win in the end. This story still hasn’t been finished so we’ll see what these types of sacrifices does for the pro sport side of triathlon.

---

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

If there is no one at the bus stop the bus drives right on past. It doesn’t actually say it at the bus stop but common sense says that the bus doesn’t have to stop!!!!!

The same that common sense says if you are advertising a championship and selling the event as bringing the best athletes together to race one another you would expect the best athletes to be on the start line. No BS, no marketing, no politics and certainly not picking someone because they are “hot”.

The Ryder Cup example was a legitimate comparison. If you need that explaining just google the Captains picks for all the events and see how influential they are. I really don’t recall anyone being picked for anything but ability to win.

Let’s start calling it for what it is, an exhibition or a pageant when your looks appear to be more influential than your results.

Totally agree with the majority of what you are saying. For Island House there was an expectation that it was by invitation and that rankings might not lead to an invitation.

With the pro org they have always marketed this about bringing the best in the world together for a Herculean type gladiatorial battle. They continually update their rankings and continually follow that up by saying who is going to be on the start line. There was an expectation amongst the pros that if you had a high enough ranking and a good enough performance you would be picked.

It isn’t about certain athletes were picked and certain athletes weren’t. It is the bad management of expectations.

You are correct in that Ryder Cup captains’ picks are typically the people the captains think are most likely to help them win, but the picks are not necessarily the highest ranked players that failed to qualify automatically. Experience, team chemistry, Ryder Cup history, and intangibles influence the choice. I don’t know if that is the case with the choice of HL and NS over EPB, but it is possible. I wouldn’t conclude that a single controversial captain’s pick means the event is a pageant rather than a genuine competition/ championship.

But I think an important point. This is still a “private organization” that is essentially making up the rules as it goes….FOR NOW. (With how they fill their races and how they allow for exemptions to make the races etc). Essentially they have gray area rules and not black/white rules.

But that imo they are doing this for the betterment of elite triathletes down the road. I don’t think this is just a cool kids club. I think they truly want the elite side of the sport to thrive. I just think they are having to make some sideway decisions in order to move it forward, again *for now*.

So I think it’s just growing pains. So yes they are still in the “showcase” phase of their marketability and not necessarily 100% “championship” level.

Of course they’ll publicly say this is a battle of the best and that’s just marketing 101 approach, they have to say that.

---

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

For what it's worth and not wanting to derail the thread I think EPB looks as good as Lawrence racing!

The top 4 on each team qualified, so it's a championship.

Should we call Kona a pageant because of the non-qualifying slots?

That's right. You work your ass off to win and excel in several races but you don't get picked? This is about the principal and it can be discouraging for other athletes. They need solid/better system that most people can agree with. Out of 100 people, if 51 people agree, that's still fine. But in this case, I would say majority of people don't agree which is a pretty bad decision.

Which majority? PTO members or the ST hivemind?

If the athletes don't like this system, they will likely get it changed. But imo, the athletes pics system is fine. 4 of 6 athletes still qualify by ranking. The selection process makes things interesting (we wouldn't be talking about it if simply athletes #5 and #6 qualified). And it allows for fan favorites (e.g. Holly) to race, which increases viewership. PTO need eyeballs.

I get that I'm cynical and we have significantly different views on what the PTO is and who it represents. It spent the better part of what, 5 years just pestering Ironman on Social erstwhile the Athletes who it claimed to represent still willingly raced at Kona. What has facilitated them to do anything has been Moritz and his money. We'll see how long that lasts. It's also not really "maternity leave" either, it's more of a guaranteed stipend for mothers, which is great. (Leave is granted by an employer, PTO is now a race promoter, and all the athletes are on 1099s) But do we even know how you can apply for that? Does it apply to all members? Or is it only for those ranked somewhere? Remember, the athletes are not funding this organization.

---

Washed up footy player turned Triathlete.

Remember, the athletes are not funding this organization.

------

This is the biggest factor at the current time. The athletes need PTO to work much more than PTO "needs" the athletes. IE- if this doesn't work, PTO just folds, some millionaire will only have lost a few million, and he'll go to another sand box to play in. But if this doesn't work for the athletes, it's back to square one for the umpteenth time of thinking they'll be in the money only to lose it 3 years into the project.

---

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

i would think we are actually not far off what we think about pto
the only difference is you see only see the bad and i also see grey areas and the good .

It's not really maternity leave. If you get pregnant and you're in the top 100 your ranking gets frozen so you still get the year end bonus you would have gotten. I forget how long the freeze is off the top of my head.

Edit: my memory was bad. See below post for correction.

---

Benjamin Deal - Professional - Instagram - TriRig - Lodi Cyclery
Deals on Wheels - Results, schedule, videos, sponsors

"At the time of her pregnancy, the athlete’s PTO World Ranking will be fixed, and during her maternity leave she will be paid monthly payments based on 100% of the PTO Annual Bonus Plan in effect at the time."

It's for 15 months.

ST will argue anything on semantics. Call it maternity leave or call it something else. It's safe to assume the point of bringing it up wasn't to discuss what it's called, but that it's something the PTO does for the athletes. They pay you while you take time off to become a parent. If that isn't maternity leave, it's something analogous and benefits athletes.

Ah woops. Totally my bad. Misremembered how it worked. I thought it just locked them for their bonus, forgot about it essentially doubling the bonus plus some.

---

Benjamin Deal - Professional - Instagram - TriRig - Lodi Cyclery
Deals on Wheels - Results, schedule, videos, sponsors

You started a thread on it. Lol

yes but if you are 51 to 100 in the world ranking , i think most people would agree 2.5 k or whatever it is is not going to do much and yet 2.5 k is better than than 0 and for 21 to 50 it works out 6.25 k i think .

If you are 51-100, the PTO parental support is probably more than you're making from Ironman-branded prize purses by continuing to race

2,5 k paternal support out of a yearly 2 million pto pot does not sound great i think we would agree. thats -more greenwashing than really a benefit . and they use it a lot to promote themselves with this fact . we agree its better than nothing but we should not get the pto that easily away with self marketing.

if i pick number 54 i would say price money is about 9 to 20 grand. i think husky tri is pretty good price money and challenge samorin was also good than likely there is bonuses for top 3 places , so 2.5 k would really not do much .
i guess where the big issue in pto is it that it rewards the big earners way too much . if you would cut the 1 prize at each race and year end bonuses by 25 percent that would be 100 k pto could redistribute if you would do similar with 2nd and 3rd price it would be another 100k or so if you spread this from 20 to 100 that would be 2,5k on top of what 21 to 100th get . ryf and and blummefeld et all would not miss that money for the other 80 that would be mostly valuable.
and of course the best need to make money as with out them its not going to work but they get so much more tv time with pto now , which works for their sponsors and likely allows them to get better sponsorship deals .

It only looks like "not much" because there is even more money going elsewhere.

I'm not saying the distribution is perfect. I'm saying all the athletes are better off with PTO than without. Whether by a little or by a lot. $2500 vs $0 is significant for people on very tight budgets. Calling it "getting away" with "self marketing" is just a bad take when this money means a lot to people.

PTO is a win for athletes and spectators.

International got some solid picks in Hayden and Flora. Really looking forward to this race

Or just split out GB as separate team, women especially very strong

As a Brit, I quite like the idea of us going it alone as a separate team, give the Brownlees a bit more of an insensitive to get their acts together.

just in case i did not suggest that you say pto is perfect

i totally agree PTO is a win BUT mainly for the ones that already doing well , the ones it would not hurt too much to distribute to the ones where it would make more of a difference.

we agree that 5 k instead of 2.5k would be much better for people on a tight budget and for the top 5 athletes in the rankings it would not hurt to distribute 10 percent of the yearly pto budget to the the not haves 21 to 100th
and i would argue the increased visibility for the big athletes is much more important to increase their income . this is what their sponsors should value being more visible more often thanks to PTO.

Go to Instagram and read some comments. You will get the idea.