This argument falls flat to me with the assumption that triathlon should be like the "other sports". So many times, we tout how amazing it is that we all perform on the same day, in the same conditions as one of the unique things that we love about this sport but celebrating someone with a career, family and winning a WC is now not up to the standards of "other professional sports"? Additionally, your presumption that they are choosing the "easier competition" is laughable. It says more about your motivations in the sport than theirs.

Celebrating great AG performers doesn't mean you think pro BOPs are crap. There is enough admiration (free btw) to go around. Unless you want to continue to support the snobbish triathlon stereotype for decades...

The headline made no sense to me either.

Your last comment is all about "some" and "some", which means that "some" others don't fall into that category, regardless of the anecdotal claims made by Dev.

It's not about being like the other sports. It's cool that we compete on the same course (although you can play the same golf courses as pros, for example).

The point is more about celebrating someone for winning 30-35 when there are 20 faster guys in that age group, but they chose to race pro and you stayed behind to be a "winner."

Celebrating unique AGers (e.g. Nikic, Hoyt) is also cool. Not sure simply being fastest non-pro qualifies for that, since doing so just means avoiding competition.

Obviously the line has to be drawn somewhere and someone has to be the fastest AGer. But I can see where Dev is coming from.

You cannot play the same course as the pros in golf unless you play the day before they play (and that is even a stretch). That is like saying you drive through the same tunnel in Monaco as the F1 drivers so you drive the same course.

Your (and Dev’s) issue is that you assume that 1) speed or 2) severe handicap are the only categories to celebrate.

 
I agree with you Dev. Some of the top European AGers are racing as pros in non-IM branded races (from Challenge to Alpe D'Huez, Embrunman, 140.6 TradeInn, etc.) and most of them have a PTO ranking, sponsors' aid and equipment. I guess for them it's better to be the head of a dog than the tail of a lion, but I agree they shouldn't be that celebrated.

If you take a look at their Strava or Instangram profiles, it's hard to see the differences with MOP pros. From training hours to sponsored posts or race reports with excuses.

There will be exceptions, of course. It's remarkable those that manage training with a job and a family and can still be very fast

Isn't speed what is being celebrated on the podium? If not, what is "top AG" celebrating?

Just a general reply… I can weigh in with a bit of perspective on the issue being discussed, even though the thread has completely come off the rails.

I raced pro for seven years, with a few podium finishes at IM and 70.3 races, but nothing of substance. It certainly didn’t pay any bills, but it was fun to line up and race against some of the best in the sport. The entire time I raced with an elite license, I would read threads about how “if you aren’t winning races or making a living from it, you should race AG because you and just pack fodder.” Being a high school principal paid my bills during those years, so it wasn’t like I was able to put all my focus on training and recovering, but I still enjoyed challenging myself in this way.

This year I returned to AG racing and won my first 70.3 AG race by over 16 minutes and went sub-4. So then people say stuff about how I shouldn’t be racing AG. It’s a lose-lose situation.

As someone said earlier, you can’t have it both ways. At the end of the day, I don’t care what others have to say about where I should be racing, because I’m not doing it to make them happy. I race triathlon because I love the sport and the experiences it has provided me. Racing pro gave me some amazing moments. Racing AG has too.

Now I’m trying to tick off new, bucket list experiences while I still have a bit of speed left in my legs. This summer I was able to race Norseman and it was the most incredible racing experience in my 12 years of triathlon. Perhaps we should worry less about what category people are racing in, celebrate the successes of others, and enjoy being part of a like-minded community rather than try to point out “these people aren’t as good as this article makes them out to be.” Everyone has their own reasons for what category they choose to race in. We should be careful when sharing unsolicited input without knowing all the circumstances.

---

_____________________________________________________
Instagram | Team Kiwami North America

Thanks Herbert

Sorry the thread went to shit but that’s par for the course here

You are very welcome

Thanks for posting this. It sounds like I am in the position you were a few years back.
Having just won my AG (M25-29) at the 70.3 WC & hoping the next step will be moving into the pro ranks but fully aware I will most probably end up being mid pack. At least in the begin. I work a 37.5hr Monday-Friday job & unless things go much better than expected can’t see that changing.
I guess I would view myself as racing elite. Pro to me is someone who makes a living from sport. Realistically only the top 50 or so in this sport do that. I just want the chance to compare myself against the best on the same start line, without that questoin of different race dynamics. If I could get to the stage that my hobby/racing founds it self that would be amazing.

For what it’s worth & maybe not making friends with my option. But I do think triathlon should drop the 5 year age groups between 18-40 & just have one senior class. Then maybe 10 year bands after. This from some how can now say I am a AG 25-29 WC but wouldn’t have been in my proposed senior class.

---

Full-time Engineer / Part-time Pro Triathlete
Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/benwgoodfellow/
Strava - https://www.strava.com/athletes/3085032
Website - https://benwgoodfellow.wixsite.com/bengoodfellow

Tom is 150 pounds. he is probably back to 160 by now since Kona after all the Belgian beer lol

Thanks for this!

FWIW, I've always enjoyed these pieces about AGers.

Thank you saying that. I agree with you btw.

---

http://www.sfuelsgolonger.com

The term this thread is tip-toeing around is sandbagging. Having the ability and qualification to step up to pro races, but refusing to do so in order to keep winning AG races.

Level of prestige:

FOP pro
MOP pro
FOP age grouper
BOP pro
MOP age grouper
Barely a pro
BOP age grouper

Thanks. I feel like I'm in some alternate reality with most of the posts around this topic on here.

And honestly, we're not even talking about 20th in Kona. 20th in Kona is right below the cream of the cream of the crop in triathlon. Any pro racing Kona is the cream of the crop. There are many many more professional triathletes who don't qualify for Kona. Even those people are generally better triathletes than the top age groupers and most are likely working full-time non-triathlon jobs.

Yes, there is this huge misconception that there is some magical difference between the top age groupers and the bottom half of the professional field. On average, people in both groups are really good at triathlon and also work full time non-triathlon jobs. There are exceptions both ways of course, but they are mostly on a level playing field in terms of triathlon talent and work/triathlon/life balance.

This is sort of the point though. Nobody is coming out and directly saying (at least in slowtwitch front page articles) that BOP professionals are crap. However, there aren't front page articles about these BOP professionals. There are front page articles about great performing age groupers. WHY? To me this indicates that triathlon culture and media values top age groupers over BOP professionals. WHY? I think I know what some answers would be. I believe that if we had an equal number of articles about both groups, then some of the widely held misconceptions about the differences between the two groups would be dispelled.

It is a little more broad than that. International sports media attention generally goes to 1) the best of the best, 2) up-and-coming young athletes who have the potential to be best of the best, 3) athletes of any ability who have really interesting life stories.

The winner of a 35-39 amateur age group category does not fall into any of those buckets. That's why it is odd.

A major difference is that in other sports, people who consume the media are mostly fans or at least not trying to get to the professionals' level. Here, many are trying to get to Kona or the 70.3 Worlds and thus articles on how a non-professional trains and thinks about racing are not just interesting from a "they are amazing" perspective but also from a "I can learn" or "That could be me" perspective. You ask most (not all, of course) high-performing AGers and they are not trying to be pros. They are trying to qualify for Kona.

This is bullshit. There are a load of reasons why ssomeone would not turn pro. The guy in this story had a seemingly fairly decent career, why give that up to scrape through being a pro and getting no money? He may not want the lifestyle, the travel, the pressure to perform or simply no desire to turn a hobby into a career just because he is good at it.

From someone in his age group, with a demanding life, who takes triathlon seriously and wants to improve/be as good as I can be, I am far more interested in fop age grouper stories than some random pro who came 23rd. It's relatable and potentially educational.

Please continue to do these sort of interviews!

Herbert, write an article about this guy in a year. Write an article about Sbradley11 and their experience over their 7 year professional career while also working a different job.

Or write about any of these people I mentioned in the other thread on this topic: https://forum.slowtwitch.com/...ost=7845190#p7845190

If these stories aren't worthy of front page articles, but Kona age group podiums are, then that is a problem and is being perpetuated by who you are choosing to profile in articles.

I see your point. If that's the case, write about the guy who got 378th in his age group at Kona. He still accomplished the goal and probably has a more relatable experience for those trying to qualify.

This article was written about this guy mainly because he was first in his age group.

Totally agree that this should NOT be a sandbagging conversation. It's not about the individuals choosing to race professional or not. It is a conversation about who the media chooses to cover and why.

I think what you don't realize is that a story on a BOP professional would be just as relatable and educational. These people aren't giving up their careers. The lifestyle likely isn't different.

That is a fair point. I think I was thinking of a young pro being financed by their parents or someone working 1or2 days a week where they can essentially train full time. I stand corrected and would say I would be equally interested in the BOP Pro who works 35hour weeks as the FOP age groupers.

I can't argue what's relatable and what isn't, but most the winners of young AG's at Kona are absolutely living the same lifestyle as most of the bottom-half pro's. I'm not sure why one is relatable and the other isn't. This guy would absolutely be a random pro who came 23rd if he took the license. Honestly after reading this thread it seem like most non-top pros would be better off turning in their pro cards and being 'inspirational' AG'ers.