Yeah, I thought about Bonness when I posed the question. I know a guy in the 50-54 AG who wins sprints by 10 or 15 minutes. He could win in the 20-something age groups. Don’t know his background though. There are definitely a lot of age groupers who could shred some of the pros of lesser stature and slug it out with the big ones.
Larry
I’d like to see the letter and the reply. That’s just the sort of thing I was thinking about. There have got to be plenty of people who get absolutely fried over this in the same way as those who dislike the IMH lottery, celebrity, and charity slots.
It’s true that most ex-pros now have jobs or businesses that eat up their time but they also have advantages that the rest of us don’t have. Maybe access to coaching or equipment or comped entries to races. If one’s aim is to complain the there’s plenty to go after. The question is one of relative importance. So far the response seems to be the benefits of pros merging into the age groups far greater than the disadvantages.
Larry
“I would much rather see the old pro’s still competing rather than hanging it up for good.”
There is an ex NHL star in our area. He played on teams that won the Stanley Cup and represented Canada in the international matches. He plays pick up hockey with the local league and goes out for a beer with the guys afterwards.
From a runner’s standpoint, if I want to win an award, I’ll pick a smaller race with less competition. That’s great for an ego boost and all. However, if I want to push myself and go after a PR, I’ll go to the biggest race I can find, with the most competition. For me, it’s not about winning awards, it’s about going fast.
Zeke
<< It’s true that most ex-pros now have jobs or businesses that eat up their time but they also have advantages that the rest of us don’t have. Maybe access to coaching or equipment or comped entries to races.
not sure who any of this adds up to an advantage? Most of the things you mention are available to anyone and just require money. Coaching, equipment, it just takes money to get that. Comped entries? How does that equate to why they may be faster than others?
I seriously doubt that every age grouper has access to the same resources that Dan or Emillio have. That gives them an advantage. Any controversy would center around the significance that others attribute to it. So far, no one is overly concerned about it. I see that as a good thing. Their presence in our midst makes us all stronger. Maybe not strong enough to kick their butts but stronger none-the-less.
Larry
<< I seriously doubt that every age grouper has access to the same resources that Dan or Emillio have. That gives them an advantage.
I’m not neccessarily disagreeing with you, but I still don’t see what their advantage is that you are talking about? Sure Emilio gets first pick of his own wetsuits, but they aren’t any different from the one’s that you or I can buy off the rack. Dan knows how to position people on bikes and has a great place to train, but that is not something that was given to him based on who he is. He learned/invented/bought that. Still not anything that you or I can’t do. If there is something else that is giving them an unfair advantage other than work ethic, genes and hard training, let me know. I want it too because I have to race against Emilio all the time and I have to take Dan’s crap when he beats me, which is getting a bit to regular for my liking 
I think I accidently poted to you Mike when I meant to do so generally. That said,I find this interesting. I am a newbee and after training for a couple years I had to realize I will never catch up to those who have been training for years (even moderatly).No matter how hard I try,work,spend more hours a week training I can not catch up. Example:I did a local Tri where I have worked literally three time as hard as two guys my age. The difference,they both have biked for 20 to 25 years. They beat me. It was humbling,however I have come to accept that is just the way it is. Over the years they put in the time and I did not.They are now benfitting from their hard work. Even this is a newbees perspective of competing with the top MOPers is it not the same principle that you top of the MOPers are dealing with the Pro"s. Believe me I am not critisizing anyone,just trying to give a different perspective. Thanks Ken
. For me, it’s not about winning awards, it’s about going fast.
Zeke
Amen brother!
Brett
Folks, this is a great thread.
The whole concept of what to do with age-group riders is also pretty big in cycling these days - if a bit off most people’s radar. There was a move afoot in Oregon earlier this year to seriously limit the category level at which you could participate in master’s racing.
( In USCF cycling they have 5 levels of “proficiency” grading, 1 being top level amateur > 5 being beginner, plus “masters” categories beginning at age 30 and going up in 5 year increments.)
The idea that got floated around was to limit Master’s racing to cat 3, or maybe cat 2, and lesser riders. Yuck. Bogus. The argument (from my completely biased perspective) seemed to boil down to “Hey - we keep getting our a##es kicked by these fast Cat 1 and 2 guys, let’s just force them to race their category.”
Some people REALLY want to win - and if the only way they can do that is to find a way to disqualify the fast folks, then so be it. Yuck.
I really like the idea of racing against my age-group peers. It’s fun, and it’s different than doing the elite races. I also think the whole age-group “thang” is a big part of what makes tri so inviting to beginners and people who are competing “for the experience,” which raises issues in and of itself, but is in general a good thing, IMHOP.
MH - Cat 1 on the road, but also in my late thirties, damnit.
I thought about this. some one started another TNT thread else where and this is one thing that I think should be explored.
Seeding and waves are based upon your USAT ranking i.e. higher your ranking the faster you are in theory and therefore the more forward your wave.
Lower the ranking the further back, this would go someone way to correcting this issue.
They should also think about a time standard for the Oly trials as in T&F instead of this ITU series because you might not put up the strongest athletes.
TNT’ers that are not serious or dont have a ranking and other newbies automatically are relegated to waves further back so they’d be behind slower people with rankings who at least have experience this might go some way to correcting some of these issues along with the compulsory meeting attendance I had in that other thread and Dan reiterated or someone else did here.
There is no difference between fast AG’ers and slower pro’s none so trying to seperate them would be pointless.
I think 2 good ideas have been posted, well several good ideas actually, but 2 that stick in my mind. One is going to 23&Under, 23-40 (Open) and 40+ masters. The other is having a point system like bike racing to move from beginner to novice to expert to pro to whipping everyone’s butt pro.
I personally like racing against the top guys in my area, pro or AG. For me it is just about doing my best, be it first overall or 117th overall. I’m happy to finish 3114th OV if I know I put forth my best effort. Some of my best memories of races are not the ones I won but the ones that I went as fast as I possibly could have on that day or set new PR’s.
If racing the retired pro’s makes me faster, then lets get it on.
The only thing at stake seems to be an IMH slot. Surely the slots should go to the best in the age group, what they’ve done with their lives prior to the race is irrelevant. There have been threads that suggest that any age grouper with the right attitude can qualify for Kona. Well the ex pros have that attitude, they devoted their life to it, a choice we all have.
Pros? It has never come up in Ski Racing that I know of. For master's racing you have 3 years (maybe it's 5) then you are eligible for age group masters. Everyone is eager to race against you, be friendly, and beat the living crap out of you if possible. It's all friendly.
Rick Swanger
Do you think the pros will be poed when an Age Grouper wins Kona after retiring from bicycle racing?
Bob Sigerson
Who, or what, do we race against?
And, why?
Will the L.A. Times, or Sports Illustrated be putting Dan or Emilio on the front page any time soon? Will Harold Bloom-Sterling Professor of Humanities at Yale-be writing of the deep cultural impact the two have had on life in America? If not, why have Dan and Emilio dedicated so much of their lives to this sport? To beat Mike Plumb? :),
This is a great thread because it raises the ultimate question:
"Why train and race this hard?"
To win, or to bring the joy of participation to our lives?
-Robert
If the numbers were there, there could be a separate competition sort of like the “legends” division that crops up occasionally. Handicapping is a possibility as well.
Actually wasn’t there supposed to be some special “Master’s Pro” races or something at one time? All the old guys like Tinley, Molina, Scott and such could then race against each other even more. Sort of like Golf’s Senior Tour. I’d like to see that, and then throw Bonness in to stir them up.
I think you have nailed it. Another poster referenced the “everyone’s a winner” societal trend. I find it interesting that on this forum, in regard to this thread and others, there is a split over the categorization of competitors.
I stand firmly in the “Less is More” camp. Junior, Open, Masters, Pro. End it there. It all comes down to perspective. There will always be athletes with more time to train than me. I have more opportunity to train more than some. I come from a strong running background, while some have no competitive background. I don’t care.
I don’t need to know how I stack up against a field of athletes between the ages of 35 and forty, that weigh between 190 and 200 lbs, can still dunk a basketball, are divorced, but happily re-married, who have had compartment-release surgery on their left (NOT RIGHT) calf within the last 3 years, and spent between $1750 and 1925 on their bike, not disc wheel, do not have a second “training” bike, average 6 hours of sleep a night, and work between 50-60 hours per week at a desk job (NOT MANUAL LABOR), blah blah blah.
I want to know how I do against my own limitations and the course within the confines of that day and the two or three disciplines required. I understand the need for defined competitors, but you start with a bunch of them at every event.
Less is more.
Nothing to be proud of Rusty. It’s a cruel joke that when you want to cycle faster over the course of one hundred odd miles you hold on to more than enough fast twitch fun to make it painful.
I disagree. Age groups allow athletes to compete, (not just participate), well past a normal retirement age. My 73 year old father will bo going to the Edmonton ITU race in July. It is also the Canadian qualifer for the worlds in Queenstown in 2003, and Madiera in 2004. There are twelve spots available in each age group. If there were only three age groups, then instead of 12 spots available in each 5 year cohort, there would be 120 spots available to the 40+ age group. This event is open, so there will be thousands of AG athletes. The chance of a 73 year old finishing in the top 120 of all athletes 40 years and up is slim.
Triathlon is the only sport I can think of where the AG athletes and the Pro/Elite athletes contest their sports world championship at the same event. It is extremely cool that my father will be at the same event, and wearing the same colours, as Simon Whitfield, Jill Savege, et al.
As a Masters swimmer, my father has competed in several world championships. Many times he has been in the same event, (and been soundly thumped), by former Olympians. If former pro’s decide to continue as AG athletes, then good on them. It’s just one more example that athletics are not the exclusive domain of the young and beautiful. Five year age groups are a very small price to pay to give meaningful competition to athletes of all ages. Without them, we’d never see Norton Davey, Bill Bell, of Sister Madonna Buder.
My tuppence.
Paul