Chrissie Wellington chirped in on her thoughts so far on the Kona Points System and prize money. Obviously, her being the champion lends some credibility, but I like one of her main points on how a half ironman should not weigh so heavily for the Ironman World Championships.
Here is the link:
http://www.chrissiewellington.org/blog/the-kpr-and-more-some-thoughts-comments-and-suggestions/
I read this on her blog last night. I thought it was great and wish more pro’s would speak up. She calls out WTC for trying to keep them from racing Rev3/Challenge races, notes the deficiency in their athlete tracking, and the absurdity in 70.3’s being weighted more.
But this is the WTC, so I think we’ll see them change it to something worse. I wouldn’t be surprised to see a contract that in order to race Kona as a pro, you can not race another major competitors race (Rev3/Tristar/Challenge).
wow. i didn’t know xtri.com still existed…
It’s interesting that she says the standards for racing as a pro should be better defined. I agree but we already have the problem of many races with barely 10 pro women starting… if they actually forced the women to be true Professional they would have even fewer… who wants to watch a 70.3 pro race with 4 competitors? or full Ironman with 8?
Maybe the reason you see so few women pros is that they are forced to spread themselves out at so many races to get Kona points as well as the prize money. Who wants to be a pro for the peanuts that WTC is giving out for some races. You finish 4th pro and $500, give me a break.
Yah but with how spread out things are now a “pro” that finishes 40th+ overall female but 8th pro is still collecting a pay cheque… that’s just sad
Well only 5 PRO women finished Ironman Coeur d’Alene - and the first Amateur finished 4th so she beat two “PROs”
If there are women complaining out there there was money (and points) left over at that race. If the pro fields aren’t going to take the races seriously why should WTC.
I find it interesting that xtri BORROWED that from her blog and didn’t even site the original source of the article, I wonder if they are going to pay her for the use of the article she wrote for her blog.
Obviously, her being the champion lends some credibility,…
You realize she didn’t even race last year, right?
WTC is a for profit company. The only way to create change in that environment is to hurt them in the pocket book. The only way to do that for the pros is have the top Ironman pro’s not race Kona and go and compete for a big prize purse the same month. Win, then call themselves world champion.
Here is an interesting $$ figure that I have been harping on for months:
I really like what Rappster was saying about Kona. It is dead on and something MACCA has been discussing for years. Prefer rotating world’s and have 3 “monuments” or “grand slam” events like Kona, Germany, Australia/NZ/SA (south hemisphere) but have worlds rotate just like ITU.
But, what I predict they will do is continue to open new races and put more points against those races and continue to lean heavily that their KONA show is their brand.
Was CdA a 1,000 or 2,000 point race this year? I was thinking it was only 1,000 and $25,000. I see for next year it is,
6/24/2012Ironman Coeur d’AleneP-2000$75,000
So my guess is with the higher prize money there will be more male and female pro’s racing.
She’s easily one of the “voices” that is respected within the sport, whether or not she’s the current champion or not. To think otherwise, is foolish.
Something that would be interesting is to have points for a given race depend on the field that show up. If the field is shallow, less points. If the field is deep, more points. Bias the field in the races WTC wants to promote with better prize money. Win-win.
She’s easily one of the “voices” that is respected within the sport, whether or not she’s the current champion or not. To think otherwise, is foolish.
No debate. There is also no debate that she is not the champion.
Fair enough. Thought it was funny you took him to school on that detail and not really the content of the post. The point was, CW being the champion she is, can get her voice to be heard.
Something that would be interesting is to have points for a given race depend on the field that show up. If the field is shallow, less points. If the field is deep, more points. Bias the field in the races WTC wants to promote with better prize money. Win-win.
ITU used to have a similar system - it makes perfect sense, although it’s implementation would be a little more difficult.
Ironman Frankfurt - 5th place behind a fairly solid field…$2,500
Next weekend at Syracuse, a womens pro field that is at best amatuer…$8,500
The balance is all over the show.
I stand corrected, she is just undefeated at Kona and the world record holder.
I stand corrected, she is just undefeated at Kona and the world record holder.
Yes, she is 
“WTC is a for profit company. The only way to create change in that environment is to hurt them in the pocket book.”
i don’t agree with that. there is a second way to create change, and that for stakeholders to appeal to WTC for a seat at the decision making table. if WTC resists that appeal, then, yes, you’re right.
but i don’t know that it’s clear at all that WTC is intransigent. i think WTC should be reminded that over the past couple of years its issued statement after statement of what it intends to do with very little if any input from stakeholders. but there’s a new CEO, he’s been in his chair for two months, and i think we’ll need to see what his posture is going forward. i predict - and i may be proved wrong, nevertheless i predict - we’re entering an era where stakeholders are listened to more closely.
i think it’s also fair to point out both sides of this coin. i’m just getting warmed up to my first of what i assume will become my annual jeremiad over how WTC handles the media at kona (but i can’t work myself up into too fine a lather yet, because i don’t know what this year’s kona media strategy is). on this flip side is my thanks to WTC that we have a kona at all. after 20 years of WTC management, as far as i know every prize money check has always been tendered in a reasonably timely manner; a vendor has never been stiffed; a city has always had its invoice satisfied. growth and access to the ironman experience has been steady and stable. if i’m a pro, i contrast this to my counterparts in pro cycling, most of whom never know from one year to the next whether they’ll have a job in cycling at all.
so, while i am not shy about criticizing WTC, i count my blessings, and WTC is responsible for a lot of those blessings of mine.
But give it another 4 weeks or so and it will be correct again.
**if i’m a pro, i contrast this to my counterparts in pro cycling, most of whom never know from one year to the next whether they’ll have a job in cycling at all. **
Cycling is a joke. Truly, from the UCI to my local provincial governing body. I can start a whole list on this Dan!!
But I would argue, The only group making serious $$ in cycling is ASO and submit the real comparison is actually WTC relative to ASO not WTC v. UCI/cycling. Both are for profit race organizers with a monopoly hold on market. There will always be Le Tour, Paris-Roubaix, etc. just like (I trust) there will always be Kona. but cycling’s problem rise from the UCI model and the sponsorship model forcing an antiquated way of running “a business”. ASO doesn’t have Boonen on Paris-Roubaix start list, who cares? They have 6 of him waiting in wings to make a star much like when the USA stopped winning Kona after The Grip the race still grew!
Back to your argument…I think you’re right re: CEO direction of WTC. This is what I am hearing back door as well which is great. While I am a big proponent of consensus and relationship building and rising the tide to sail more ships; in business, pain points create change OR paradigm shifts create change in short order. I hope that is NOT required but suspect it is.
Just IMO.