Pros have always been able to do non-pro races - the majority of triathlons in the US are non-pro races. IMWI is not an AG only race. This is a branding thing to let people know there will be no "pro" coverage and is the point of confusion that is somewhat being discussed by a few others in this thread. It doesn't mean that pros won't be in the race - to the contrary there have been quite a few pros race these races already and I suspect we will so more in the future.

BTW, this is no different than strolling down to my local olympic or sprint and racing - it just so happens Ironman Wisconsin is my local race. And I can guarantee there are quite a few age groupers who have put in more training than me for the race, especially if you just count bike/run. In addition they are more focused and more tapered for the race. And Yes, AGers could sign up for the race.

But to get back to where you are going. The majority of pros do not even finish in the money at races so what you are going to have here in the near future is really good genetic athletes returning back to the age group. This will happen because a certain pool of IM Pros saw the WTC membership as a good deal. With race selection going down this year and seemingly next, I know more athletes will opt to forgo their WTC membership because there are not as many races with reasonable travel costs. In addition, a lot of pros saw Challenge as a way to survive still but with those races being cut as well the writing is on the wall. The pros are NOT needed and some athletes will go back to racing as amateur. They are likely just as talented. Will go faster because they won't have to deal with the same pro rules or tactics and will be able to race their own race. They will break tapes, take kona slots, and ultimately piss off a small % of top age-group athletes.

Funny you should mention Thomas. I love Thomas. I talk to him nearly day at the SERF where he and I swim. What makes you so passionate that you think he would one - are my previous results dismissed?

But this get to my points. I am injured, I have been injured. I gave every opportunity for an AG to step up to beat me today. I made a huge mistake going with a sleeved wetsuit swim today. I biked 4:43 straight from out of the top ten in the swim with a couple of days of riding which started 12 days ago. In those 12 days my long ride was about 30 miles. I was so out of shape that last week at an Olympic I biked so slow then could only manage 7:07 to run my slowest 10k ever because I was so short on bike fitness. I have gone faster at Wisconsin two weeks post a high-heat 3rd place Louisville. I could have gone faster today but I didn't need to. I think one thing people forget is that I am going for the opposite of a PR. I wanted a win with the slowest time possible - not the fastest. I am not in search of a PR. My motto is just get the job done with the least amount of damage and residual fatigue as possible.

I saw Thomas on the course today as well and I said to hello to him. I would be curious to know who the other age-grouper is. And I don't personally know any Ironman athletes who said
they wouldn't race because it wasn't a pro race. I think that is a great gesture, but life is too short. Live your life. If you want to race, race.

---

---

Save: $50 on Speed Hound Recovery Boots | $20 on Air Relax| $100 on Normatec| 15% on Most Absorbable Magnesium

Blogs: Best CHEAP Zwift / Bike Trainer Desk | Theragun G3 vs $140 Bivi Percussive Massager | Normatec Pulse 2.0 vs Normatec Pulse | Speed Hound vs Normatec | Air Relax vs Normatec | Q1 2018 Blood Test Results | | Why HED JET+ Is The BEST value wheelset

I don't understand why some people (not many, but some) believe women should only race other women in female races. In this sport, women do not have access to anything (equipment, training, nutrition, coaching, etc.) that men do not. In fact, there are many women with tri budgets that exceed most of the mens' budgets. So, they don't really come to the race with any unfair advantage (unless you count genetics....but where do you draw the line there?) If it bruises egos that a 38 year female wins 35-39, get over it. She was the fastest 35-39 year old.

From WTC

PROFESSIONAL STATUS:
Any athlete holding elite/ professional status from their National Triathlon Federation or an Ironman Professional Membership (as verified by elite/ pro status of an athlete’s National Triathlon Federation) is prohibited from racing as an AGE GROUP athlete in ANY sanctioned triathlon events anywhere in the world, where there is an elite/ pro wave, within the same calendar year.
Disqualification and potential sanction from WTC events, and forfeiture of any AGE GROUP World Championship qualifying slots may result for any athlete that has not adhered to this policy.

Originally from: http://www.ironman.com/...p.aspx#ixzz3lfCF2Lne

I thought I would give you a different perspective. You are the one who seems to feel passionate about this.

I brought up Thomas as an example. As I said, I do not know him. I am not going to bring up the other in order to get more names into your fight.

Again, I thought I would try to bring a different perspective to your long and passionate thread. If you think that being a professional racer and then jumping into a race like IMWI at the last minute and riding and running around the course as the first person that the 1000's of spectators see and cheer for is the same as jumping into a local sprint so be it.

My perspective is you took that attention away from a deserving AGer.

Triathletetoth wrote:

the Clarification of pro/ age grouper is the problem.

I know age groupers that train more then pros and pros that have more going on then even busy age groupers.

The thing here is there are fast triathletes and slower triathletes every race should be pros can race and there just isn't any money at the finish line.

The race is a race and first one across is the winner no matter the title. if an age grouper won an Ironman against a pro field damn right they would announce him or her the winner, he just gets no money because he didn't check the box on registration.

I pro doing a local race can do a lot more of them then going to Wales this weekend and finishing top 5. It is better locally in the tri community ,with sponsors, and you come out with more $$$ then 5 th in wales after you put in travel $$$.

I know you want the win because before they removed the pro field it was a goal likely so you did it Thomas.

I do believe there were IM fund spots open, hence my question.

Maybe a simpler way to put it. Without a purse, pros effectively become amateurs for that event. However because of their pro status, they are still ineligible for age group awards and WC qualifying slots.

However, it seems like they should be required to follow that same registration requirements and limitations. I'm curious is a foundation slot was used or a pro slot was used.

IM has really created an ugly situation with having non-pro races. I'm OK with tiered points and purses, but having an event that large and collecting $2MM+ in entry fees, seems to me like you ought to still have an elite field.

Maybe USAT needs to come up with a new rule. USAT sanctioned events with lets say 1500+ entrants must have a elite wave and a purse =< $5000.

I don't understand why some people (not many, but some) believe pros should only race other pros in pro races. In this sport, pros do not have access to anything (equipment, training, nutrition, coaching, etc.) that age groupers do not. In fact, there are many age groupers with tri budgets that exceed most of the pros' budgets. So, they don't really come to the race with any unfair advantage (unless you count genetics....but where do you draw the line there?) If it bruises egos that a 38 year pro wins 35-39, get over it. He was the fastest 35-39 year old.

Revised...




Does your logic still hold?

There is a reason there are some classifications.....

@ TG - IMWI has been sold out for nearly a year. how could an AG'er have signed up in Friday?

Solid win yesterday.....the kit change confused me. I wasn't tracking any results online and when I saw you on the run, it was only your number that clued me in!

kny wrote:

WTC has grown races in past decade far faster than top-end talent has developed, so naturally it makes sense that they limit the races that they pay out for. That makes sense.

What does not make sense is to call an event an "AG only race". That's not the case. What is the case is that an event has no pro purse. So, a pro can enter and pay the $800 entry fee (on top of their annual WTC pro membership) and a pro can race. But, a pro cannot win money and a pro cannot win an AG. However, a pro certainly should exist in the results and the pro should certainly be considered the race winner. A pro, for whom WTC accepted into the race and collected an additional $800 entry fee from, should not be eliminated from the results as if they were a bandit or DQed for course cutting. It's pretty simple. The pro races for overall win only, and the absolutely zero money that comes with said victory.

I get that we want to say that Thomas won the event, but what happens if he wants to put "2015 IMWI Winner" on his resume or collect sponsorship incentives from the win? Obviously that's not what he did the race for, but if you open up the possibility, then some pros will try to race the "non pro" races for the win. Obviously sponsors will wisen up to the game if this kind of behavior becomes widespread (ie: payout now contingent on it being a pro race), but the big risk is that WTC will lose some of the value (however defined) it hopes to gain by consolidating the pro races.

Hmmm.....Thomas, your results are up, but you're missing some run splits. Are you sure you didn't "lose" your chip for a while?

First, don't quote me and change what I wrote. Bad etiquette.

Second, I really don't understand what you're trying to say. Do women want to race against men? If you're trying to argue that the difference between a pro triathlete and an amateur triathlete is comparable to the difference between a man and a woman, then I just don't agree with your analogy.

This world is filled with people that are better than we are, and the scale is mostly continuous. Drawing a line at some arbitrary level and saying someone is too good to compete with average people makes no sense. The reality is, Keinle doesn't want to come out to my local race, but if he did, I'd gladly "race" him.

Again, I do see a distinction where the pro has access to different means than the average athlete. If Thomas indeed got an entry to a sold out race with no pro field because he was a pro, then I argue he had an unfair advantage. I'll wait for him to weigh in on that issue.

Why not? As I clearly showed in my revision, it applies equally to women vs. men as Pros vs. AG. The only difference is the same, really....genetics. Why not just have an overall race, no age groups, classifications or divisions based on gender?

And the question is not "do women want to race against men" (although some do, I'm sure), or more accurately in this case "Do AG want to race against Pros:, the question should be "why would Pros (or men) want to race against AG'ers (or women)?



See above....why not have a single race devoid of any distinctions? Every classification is an "arbitrary" line, it would seem.

The difference between a man and a woman is not arbitrary, it's specifically defined by the presence of a Y chromosome, different anatomy, and (perhaps most importantly for athletic performance), different sex hormones. Apples and oranges.

And as I said, if Thomas' pro status got him into a sold out race that had no pro field (that I could not have registered for last-minute as an amateur) then I do have an issue. Not an issue with Thomas, but with WTC / race director.