My beef (in alignment to) 50 women to Kona

Apr 3, 15 12:34

Post #1 of 341 (18977 views)

It is unbearable to me that "50 women to Kona" is controversial. This is a phenomenal time for leadership that will only help the sport we all love to prosper.
Leadership isn't doing what is popular, leadership isn't doing what is easy, it's setting the direction for the way things should be.

I have yet to hear a valid argument as to why we shouldn't have parity in our professional ranks. It is just. It is right. It is an OPPORTUNITY to stimulate growth.
By introducing the opportunity for more professional women to race in the (Ironman, mind you, world championships) we will see fresher racing, more opportunities go to pros and high-level amateurs alike. This move will add more influencers and role models for triathletes everywhere, Male and Female alike.

It is disgusting to me that we are not flat-out chastising WTC for their appalling lack of leadership.

Here's another take on the topic:
1. We've all heard Dan and other members of the industry talk about the very real slowdown / stall / plateau of participation in Triathlon.
2. Other participatory/endurance sports have seen significant increases in participation due in great thanks to a surge in Female interest, such as Half Marathon running which is approximately 64% Female.
2. At present Triathlon is a male-heavy sport, and staggeringly so within Iron-distance. Look at the demographics from a typical, well run, "local" triathlon:

I dunno, you do the math.

~DE

Re: My beef (in alignment to) 50 women to Kona [davidembree] [ In reply to ]

Apr 3, 15 12:39

Post #2 of 341 (18954 views)

I agree....this is all stupid. Just make it 50 women and 50 men on the pro start line in Kona. Pretty simple. Andrew Messick and WTC, please get with the times. This should not even be a debate in 2015.

Re: My beef (in alignment to) 50 women to Kona [davidembree] [ In reply to ]

Apr 3, 15 12:56

Post #3 of 341 (18887 views)

Starky ran some good statistics that shows the women pro field performance level drops off significantly before the mens pro field does. In other words the 50th best female is relatively well worse compared to the best pro female in comparison to the 50th best male compared to the best male. This is an indication that the womens pro pool is not as deep as the mens pro pool. This is a valid reason for the numbers not to be identical. I don't know if it's a good enough reason to counter the PR reason to do it, but it is a valid reason.

Re: My beef (in alignment to) 50 women to Kona [kny] [ In reply to ]

Apr 3, 15 13:06

Post #4 of 341 (18839 views)

kny wrote:

Starky ran some good statistics that shows the women pro field performance level drops off significantly before the mens pro field does. In other words the 50th best female is relatively well worse compared to the best pro female in comparison to the 50th best male compared to the best male. This is an indication that the womens pro pool is not as deep as the mens pro pool. This is a valid reason for the numbers not to be identical. I don't know if it's a good enough reason to counter the PR reason to do it, but it is a valid reason.

I disagree Kny....it should have nothing to do with the drop off/spread between men and women pros.

There are an equal number of men and women (more or less) on the planet.
This is the world championships for the top men and women on the planet
Therefore there should be equal slots

The fact that women's times drop off/more spread simply indicates that as a society, we are not offering our women peers the same access and opportunities in sport. They come from the same gene pool so in theory the spread should be equally deep if there was equal opportunity in sport. This is what most of you guys are not getting. Women have way more barriers to entry in sport than men. You and I can go bike in an unknown place or go for a run in the dark and feel safe and just explore. I was just riding on random roads in Africa....you think a pro woman would feel entirely safe riding on small rural roads on her own like that? Not most.

So if you can step back and look at the entire picture of women in sport, perhaps you can see why WTC MUST lead and offer equal access to the top 50 women on the planet...it's just that simple. Come on Messick, step up.

Re: My beef (in alignment to) 50 women to Kona [kny] [ In reply to ]

Apr 3, 15 13:08

Post #5 of 341 (18828 views)

I hear you, for sure.

My take on it is along three lines:

� Less available opportunity to participate will inspire fewer to make the "go" at being pro

� Fewer slots is also very likely to hamper the total earning potential of these pros.
� Shallow prize purse (in general, all genders)
� Less dollars available from fewer or less motivated sponsors (i'm assuming) due to the lower Female pro field and lower participatory contingent in general.

� Competition for fewer spots leads to more all-season racing and more worn out competitors come "big day".

~DE

Re: My beef (in alignment to) 50 women to Kona [kny] [ In reply to ]

Apr 3, 15 13:12

Post #6 of 341 (18807 views)

kny wrote:

Starky ran some good statistics that shows the women pro field performance level drops off significantly before the mens pro field does. In other words the 50th best female is relatively well worse compared to the best pro female in comparison to the 50th best male compared to the best male. This is an indication that the womens pro pool is not as deep as the mens pro pool. This is a valid reason for the numbers not to be identical. I don't know if it's a good enough reason to counter the PR reason to do it, but it is a valid reason.

And I would have less of problem with WTC if they then followed it up with, "Here is what we are doing to get the female pro pool deeper." They are in some ways, like giving the female more time between the pro men start and the first age group start, so that slow pro men and fast age groupers affect the pro women race less.

Of course people will say that increasing the female Kona slots will add depth to the field, because now more people will aim for those slots, because there are more slots. I am not totally sold on that logic. Are there people now either not pros or a pro not training as hard as they can because there are only 35 slots at Kona. I just do not see women getting faster because more slots are opened up.

Personally if I was in charge I would probably just make it 45 slots for both men and women. I think the men's field could stand to lose 5 slots and the it just looks better to have equal slots.

Re: My beef (in alignment to) 50 women to Kona [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]

Apr 3, 15 13:16

Post #7 of 341 (18789 views)

So, following that line of thinking you believe AG slots should be split 50/50 between men and women even though participation is more like 80/20?

Re: My beef (in alignment to) 50 women to Kona [davidembree] [ In reply to ]

Apr 3, 15 13:16

Post #8 of 341 (18788 views)

Are there 50 competitive pro ironman women?

Re: My beef (in alignment to) 50 women to Kona [jaretj] [ In reply to ]

Apr 3, 15 13:23

Post #9 of 341 (18752 views)

jaretj wrote:

Are there 50 competitive pro ironman women?

I guess that is a part of the problem, the term 'competitive' is so subjective. What you see certainly depends on where you sit in this argument.

Re: My beef (in alignment to) 50 women to Kona [jaretj] [ In reply to ]

Apr 3, 15 13:24

Post #10 of 341 (18741 views)

Exactly.

How about 35 men and 35 women? I think Carfrae suggested that.

Re: My beef (in alignment to) 50 women to Kona [Salmon Steve] [ In reply to ]

Apr 3, 15 13:29

Post #11 of 341 (18722 views)

What is the total count of men vs women in the WTC pro pool? Note this has nothing to do with the relative competitive depth of each; I'm just curious of the total pool size of each.

Re: My beef (in alignment to) 50 women to Kona [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]

Apr 3, 15 13:30

Post #12 of 341 (18714 views)

devashish_paul wrote:

kny wrote:

Starky ran some good statistics that shows the women pro field performance level drops off significantly before the mens pro field does. In other words the 50th best female is relatively well worse compared to the best pro female in comparison to the 50th best male compared to the best male. This is an indication that the womens pro pool is not as deep as the mens pro pool. This is a valid reason for the numbers not to be identical. I don't know if it's a good enough reason to counter the PR reason to do it, but it is a valid reason.

I disagree Kny....it should have nothing to do with the drop off/spread between men and women pros.

There are an equal number of men and women (more or less) on the planet.
This is the world championships for the top men and women on the planet
Therefore there should be equal slots

The fact that women's times drop off/more spread simply indicates that as a society, we are not offering our women peers the same access and opportunities in sport. They come from the same gene pool so in theory the spread should be equally deep if there was equal opportunity in sport. This is what most of you guys are not getting. Women have way more barriers to entry in sport than men. You and I can go bike in an unknown place or go for a run in the dark and feel safe and just explore. I was just riding on random roads in Africa....you think a pro woman would feel entirely safe riding on small rural roads on her own like that? Not most.

So if you can step back and look at the entire picture of women in sport, perhaps you can see why WTC MUST lead and offer equal access to the top 50 women on the planet...it's just that simple. Come on Messick, step up.

I don't get how adding more women to Kona is going to make cycling as a whole safer for women worldwide. That's putting a bit more value into Kona than it's worth.

Re: My beef (in alignment to) 50 women to Kona [davidembree] [ In reply to ]

Apr 3, 15 13:31

Post #13 of 341 (18708 views)

Triathlon is often talking about being a young sport that has embraced innovations and pushed.for changed. The sport has had equal distance of racing since the start. Something most endurance sports do not have today.

But when it comes to participation of the elite or pros as it is called in triathlon WTC/Ironman is on the wrong side of history. At a time where UFC is stacking their fight cards with women, WTC/Ironman is doing the opposite. Not only is it hard for the elite women to get a fair race and have their race disrupted by AG men, due to lack of respect from WTC/Ironman (this would never happen to the male pros), the women only get 35 spots.

It is embarrassing for the sport.

Re: My beef (in alignment to) 50 women to Kona [kny] [ In reply to ]

Apr 3, 15 13:33

Post #14 of 341 (18701 views)

kny wrote:

What is the total count of men vs women in the WTC pro pool? Note this has nothing to do with the relative competitive depth of each; I'm just curious of the total pool size of each.

438 Males with at least 1 KPR point as opposed to 256 women.

Maybe that indicates something, maybe nothing, maybe it just shows women are smarter than men and not willing to part with their $750 US for the sake of a handful of points.

I don't know.....

Re: My beef (in alignment to) 50 women to Kona [Salmon Steve] [ In reply to ]

Apr 3, 15 13:33

Post #15 of 341 (18698 views)

I think that this highlights something pretty big. The cutoff for male points needed to punch a ticket is typically way lower than women in the kpr. The points for men and women are the same. This forces women to race more in order to get to the island.

It could be argued this hurts the performance of the woman in kona (I think it does). Overall the system is flawed with the points chasing really hurting the women.

However, it could be argued the fields aren't as deep and it is easier to get more points. But you still have yo race more to get those points.

Re: My beef (in alignment to) 50 women to Kona [davidembree] [ In reply to ]

Apr 3, 15 13:41

Post #16 of 341 (18654 views)

If they can't add 15 more pros to the race why not have 42 men and 42 women?

Re: My beef (in alignment to) 50 women to Kona [Dilbert] [ In reply to ]

Apr 3, 15 13:49

Post #17 of 341 (18619 views)

It's not about the space on the pier. Even if they say it is, it isn't.

WTC is going for performance equality rather than numeric equality. They deem the top 35 women to be the performance bar above which is not Kona worthy, while for men it is the top 50. This can be justified by statistical analysis of depth of performances. Numeric equality can also be justified, even though there are near 2x as many pro men as pro women.

Both approaches are justifiable. WTC is just getting lambasted because many people think there should be numeric equality rather than performance equality.

Remember the 8% rule to get paid? Men had no problem with that because never would men be in the money and outside 8% of the winner. Women had problem with it because that was a regular occurrence. That policy got shelved pretty quick, but was another example of WTC going for performance equality.

Last edited by: kny: Apr 3, 15 13:50

Re: My beef (in alignment to) 50 women to Kona [zachboring] [ In reply to ]

Apr 3, 15 13:50

Post #18 of 341 (18616 views)

I think that they should give the pro women 50 slots, and the biggest reason is, why not? It cannot do any harm. It won't require removing AG slots. It won't cause course crowding. It will be a great PR move for WTC.

Will it encourage more women to become pros? More amateur women to race? Will pro women's performance increase? Will more women world-wide be inspired? Will sponsor money start to flow? I have absolutely no idea. But there is no reason not to try.

I will say that trying to use performance statistics or kpr points will always be a losing argument on this topic. The field is less deep. The fact that the 35th woman needs more points than the 50th man is a red herring precisely because the fields are less deep, the kpr points are easier to get.

Stick with the argument that it can do no harm, and it may just do a bunch of good!

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

Re: My beef (in alignment to) 50 women to Kona [matt_cycles] [ In reply to ]

Apr 3, 15 13:57

Post #19 of 341 (18582 views)

matt_cycles wrote:

devashish_paul wrote:

kny wrote:

Starky ran some good statistics that shows the women pro field performance level drops off significantly before the mens pro field does. In other words the 50th best female is relatively well worse compared to the best pro female in comparison to the 50th best male compared to the best male. This is an indication that the womens pro pool is not as deep as the mens pro pool. This is a valid reason for the numbers not to be identical. I don't know if it's a good enough reason to counter the PR reason to do it, but it is a valid reason.

I disagree Kny....it should have nothing to do with the drop off/spread between men and women pros.

There are an equal number of men and women (more or less) on the planet.
This is the world championships for the top men and women on the planet
Therefore there should be equal slots

The fact that women's times drop off/more spread simply indicates that as a society, we are not offering our women peers the same access and opportunities in sport. They come from the same gene pool so in theory the spread should be equally deep if there was equal opportunity in sport. This is what most of you guys are not getting. Women have way more barriers to entry in sport than men. You and I can go bike in an unknown place or go for a run in the dark and feel safe and just explore. I was just riding on random roads in Africa....you think a pro woman would feel entirely safe riding on small rural roads on her own like that? Not most.

So if you can step back and look at the entire picture of women in sport, perhaps you can see why WTC MUST lead and offer equal access to the top 50 women on the planet...it's just that simple. Come on Messick, step up.

I don't get how adding more women to Kona is going to make cycling as a whole safer for women worldwide. That's putting a bit more value into Kona than it's worth.

I was just using an example about how society has roadblocks towards women doing sport. That's all. WTC should fall in line with other sporting organizations and have equal number of women on the start line at the championships.

Check out Olympic track and swimming finals. Same number of women as men at the start line and arguably the spread in the women is much great. The spread being large is not a reason to reduce the numbers. This being a 95% men's forum run by a bunch of middle age men, I don't expect much so I am likely barking up the wrong tree pushing for equal women's opportunity in triathlon, but if men can't see the inequalities well, they will just remain this way forever. I don't even have a daughter, so I have zero skin in this game either.

Re: My beef (in alignment to) 50 women to Kona [kny] [ In reply to ]

Apr 3, 15 13:58

Post #20 of 341 (18575 views)

kny wrote:

So, following that line of thinking you believe AG slots should be split 50/50 between men and women even though participation is more like 80/20?

I would be OK with 50/50 age group slots if they went that way. This is what ITU does.

Re: My beef (in alignment to) 50 women to Kona [RowToTri] [ In reply to ]

Apr 3, 15 13:58

Post #21 of 341 (18573 views)

It's not necessarily a red hearing as the number of races women need is Higher. That hurts the women. I'm generally of the opinion that it should be equal because why not. Good pr and may help encourage participation.

Re: My beef (in alignment to) 50 women to Kona [calcio20] [ In reply to ]

Apr 3, 15 13:59

Post #22 of 341 (18568 views)

I really don't follow pro Ironman too closely so I really don't know, that is why I'm asking.

I do know that the Kona qualification slots are not even among AG men and women, should that argument extend to them as well?

Re: My beef (in alignment to) 50 women to Kona [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]

Apr 3, 15 14:02

Post #23 of 341 (18558 views)

The Olympics have time standards to even be allowed in. Effectively that is what WTC is doing with the 35 vs 50. Trying to set a constant equivalent performance bar in a sport where time standards are not an option.

Re: My beef (in alignment to) 50 women to Kona [davidembree] [ In reply to ]

Apr 3, 15 14:03

Post #24 of 341 (18555 views)

WTC=$, which translates to AGers, not whether there are 35 or 50 pro women on the pier.

I don't have an opinion but WTC has nothing to gain by keeping it at 35 women, only bad PR.

Do pros really have much of an impact on whether you do a race or not. Even if there were no pros, I would still race. Has a pro endorsement ever effected my buying decision, no.

Face it, triathlon is not a great sport to make a pro living at and I don't think that is going to change going forward.

Last edited by: summitt: Apr 3, 15 14:04

Re: My beef (in alignment to) 50 women to Kona [RowToTri] [ In reply to ]

Apr 3, 15 14:05

Post #25 of 341 (18550 views)

There must be room on the pier,more than 15 people DNS at kona,

Our Partners

transition-DOT-area-AT-slowtwitch-DOT-com

Advertise with us

©1999-2024 Slowtwitch, Inc., and Slowtwitch.com
Reproduction of material from any Slowtwitch.com page
without written permission is strictly prohibited.