I’m not sure that’s a reliable barometer for the WC - the verbiage has changed a few times and they’ve added similar verbiage to all their races.
I suppose you could argue that the 5 week turnaround means that whatever they put in 2026 probably won’t be in September, but you could argue the same thing about 2027 - whether it’s one short cycle or two (one per gender) probably doesn’t make a difference.
Either way, the fact that they’ve kept the short turn around likely means that they’re thinking “not September” for what ever they’ve got cooking. Which, in my mind means unified WC down the line
They should just head back to Lahti, or Marbella, or Tremblant or Penticton. Most of these places the course will be moderate but not insane like Nice and at all of them the place can handle 6000 racers (well St. George can too).
I assume Frankfurt can easily handle 6000 racers the questions is if you can close the place down twice in three days. The two days of racing in three days is also insane for volunteers over 2x 17 hrs vs 2x8 hrs.
If they are going to put on a two day, same weekend event every year, they’ll have to rotate location every time or it will grate on the locals too much.
I still think they’ll keep something in Europe. Better roads, better attitudes of locals towards bike racing, and more growth in the sport over there.
It would also mean that this year’s trip to Kona for men and next year for women would be the last rounds at Kona for a championship assuming 2026 both championships are on a single weekend and I assume kona would be some kind of non championship general entry “premium one day event” . But they should not have a pro field in Kona if not the 2 day championship will never work as the pros will skip the 2 day championship and still head over to Kona for the non championship Kona win
I’m really interested in why you keep this position. The data doesn’t support moving the IMWC from Kona, Nice works for Men because well…there are more men in this sport by some margin so it ends up being Euro centric. I’m sure Kona is more North American and Oceania centric, but I bet you it’s fare more balanced than Nice was. Maybe it will be different in two years time, but most of things I read say women aren’t into Nice. Also, one thing that seems to be annoying many people is that those Iron Couples can’t qualify for the World Championship together so they continue to give up their slots.
You know what would get me motivated if it was Europe and it probably wouldn’t work at all? Calvie en Corse.
I am responding to BryanCd who said they are looking for a 2026 location that can host two days of racing. The assumption is this is not Kona and I doubt Ironman would totally move out of Kona and they would have some kind of a general entry race in Kona like they did back in the 1980’s. But if they have a pro field at that general entry Kona race, no pros will go to the worlds (wherever they have it).
As for Kona as a worlds moving forward, there is really not that much special about the course other than there is a history of championship racing there. Once you have just have a general entry race there, in 2-3 years, it become an uninteresting venue if it is not the place to be . That course (other than the swim) does not make it a place to be.
I am guessing that you have not raced elsewhere in the world, so you may not have exposure to how big the sport is all around the world on much better courses in communities that are not “sick of triathlon”. No point trying to be wanted by a community where your welcome is worn out.
But Kona is not the only community that is sick of triathlon. It is one of many places that embraced tri and after a while rejected us. It’s OK, in that this sport has a time frame where it can be big in a community and eventually we’re no longer a novelty and we’re not really wanted there. Then time to go elsewhere
I don’t really agree with this part. The pro’s will go to the WC because that’s where the money is especially sponsor bonuses.
Unless of course sponsors stopped valuing the IMWC and valued IM Hawaii or some other race other than the IMWC. But then if that happened, the IMWC would be dead in short order. And then we would be back to IM Hawaii being the IMWC.
I have raced in North America. Racing outside of this continent is outside of my tax bracket. I’m not even sure Kona would fit my current tax bracket if I qualified. Doing the things I would need to do for a European race or an Australian race? That’s money I don’t have. So my big races have been local. I think I might try to do Muskoka 70.3 or IM Cozumel for out of country races.
I think the locals would probably be into a regular Ironman, Because it would only have half the registrants. The Nostalgia will not draw 2500/yr. Maybe the first and then it will be pretty meh, because getting there will be as hard for most as getting to Perth. Busso is probably the only all the way across race I’d want to do…because I love Perth!
“In a split-venue WC, Kona is generally preferred to Nice in the first cycle of each gender’s 2-year cycle.”
What we don’t know is a lot of things:
-Demand for a rotated 70.3 style IMWC without Kona
-Demand for an IMWC hosted in another permanent location
-How demand for the above will progress in 10-15 years.
The big question is the 10-15 year question. Anyone saying that it should stay only in Kona because more people want Kona over Nice when both are available (now) is missing the long-term equation.
Is an IMWC in Kona in more demand than an IMWC in Nice now? Likely
Will an IMWC elsewhere/rotated be more in demand over the long term, once it has had a chance to establish itself? This is the question we should be asking
I personally don’t think that the sport should be tying itself so closely to a small island in the Pacific - if we really want to be a global sport, then let’s globalize the IMWC. (And I’m saying this as someone whose tri goal for the past 10 years has been to qualify for Kona - not Nice)
I get this mindset and somewhat agree but we have to keep in mind that this is a business. IM can’t really afford to do trial and errors and lose money. This isn’t the NFL where they can afford to gamble and take losses with trying new things like they do with the europe and south american games they have recently had.
Right, and Nice is a money losing proposition today and that is not likely to change. They either find allocation that can accommodate a two day, or three, WC event or go back to a single day in Kona. By having two separate race locations and dates is doubling their cost.
I suppose as a business there’s two ways to play the game
Keep milking the goose with the golden egg (Kona) as far as you can. We may or may not be capped at what our natural ceiling would be
Expand to new horizons. The ceiling here is higher, but comes with some risk, obviously.
The next question is then - what share of athletes (and frequency of those athletes) are subscribed to IM racing as a result of WC format and location? Its probably a very small percentage.
I don’t think I’d stop racing IM branded events even if they got rid of the WC. I might do more 70.3s and do an IM every few years instead of every other year like I do now, but I don’t think I’d quit the sport.
