I just help our pros and it seems to be working for them.
I kinda chaulk it up more to “federations acting like federations”. There’s a ton of moving parts within federations, it should be about what is best for the federation but, what does that mean? There’s no real textbook to go to sometimes to answer the tough questions, so what your 50/50 on getting it right. Add in the PTB’s are generally on “perform or else” contracts, and so I can kinda see why a federation would make that decision because they have to be short term thinking but also long term thinking, so again what is the right answer. (I noted a few weeks ago that Knibb was still on the “national team” even though she very likely will race very few races for the US within itu…is that smart or dumb? You could argue either side with some very valid points and both would probaly neither be right or wrong). So I put it more on federations being federations. It’s almost like they are destined to be wrong every single time.
When I was told how it went down almost 10 years ago, my reaction was more “someone has big cajoles to essentially fire the golden goose”.
Which is why I think the pregnancy policy basically freezes your funding/support (maybe even some of your ranking), so it sorta takes it out of the hands of everyone.
It should be noted at the timeline of the GJ decision, that funding was basically on an annual decision making basis. So if an athlete asked for a break away from the sport, it wouldn’t have been outside their purview to then pull the funding. Now of course if it’s pregancy related, the athlete has more protection (positive for the athletes especially and “good will” points for the federations so they now don’t have to be the “bad guy”).
I dont think Duffy and co, who dominated that period would let Gwen run away with every title she wanted, would have been interesting watching her try and chase them down every race.
To be fair, Gwens bike in Rio was on point, she covered Spirig trying to break multiple times. So she did for me actually show she had front pack ability (at least for the race that mattered most)
to be fair , after 2016 spiring hardly ever made the lead pack.
Leamouth Duffy zaferes gtb etc made more and more sure to break things up in the swim and drill the bike each year a bit more
1 Like
Yes, Learmonth made that swim faster and if you wasn’t close enough coming out and a weak bike you had no chance of podium!
I would not go that far given that spirig klamer still did quite well and given that. Gwen was the best runner she would have had a shot to medal but it would have been tight between her and zaferes in Tokyo.
my 2 cents and I don’t really care that much as the black and white is what matters
Jorgensen is '38, she’s taking starts, focus, and even funding from Athletes that actually need the races to develop. It’s not in the interests of the Federation to have a 38 yr old take the space. She had the opportunity to stay in the sport if she wanted, I get it, you seem to be in the know about what was offered…but she also decided to have a child. YET, Katie Zafares had a child and stayed in the sport.
Gwen became a full time runner for 5 years and did what? Made a bunch of money from Nike for sure. But now she’s back in Triathlon taking starts with no chance at qualifying for the Olympic team.
USAT may not have done what was best for the Federation then, only the Fed and her know what really happened. The rest are rumors. You clearly don’t recall what she made quite clear, she used the moniker of ‘Queen of Triathlon’ and then went onto trash Triathlon. But not point now, the Federation is not doing what’s best for the Federation now. Maybe it’s to retain the marketing value? idk. But it won’t help if someone with potential quits the sport because they can’t get world cup and conti cup starts because Jorgensen is taking them.
1 Like
Wasn’t talking about Tokyo specifically, just the Swim/bike dominated period after, chances are Gwen would have gotten better after Rio and Duffy wouldn’t have had as much success or as stated, the lack of interest in triathlon/pregnancy etc and post gold medal comedown she’d have gone backwards, we’ll never know.
FYI, KZ was never taken off the national team during any of that time away (she never left the national team until she basically retired prior to Paris). The exact opposite of how USAT was going to move forward with GJ during her “break”. So comparing the 2 is a piss poor comparison.
From a high performance standpoint, she is basically only taking away a start. But let’s just make sure we are being fair with our hate on someone. What level of athlete shouldn’t be doing this? Where’s your anger towards any of the top ranked athletes who raced this event, it wasn’t just GJ. And again the WTCS stupid schedule had everything to do with her racing this event, so you should have much more blame on ITU than her. 3 freaking months break between races is stupid as hell. You can’t blame athletes at that point, athletes are going to be athletes (IE- they want to race).
Her funding is not being taken from someone else to give to her. At that level you either “earn” it or you don’t get funding and that’s all based on performance benchmarks. Which is what you basically want for national team funding- you either achieve it or you dont, there is way less gray area. For the more “developmental” athletes they have less stringent but also less money given to them, but she isn’t really “taking” money from someone else. She’s performing to the standard that a national federation has established. It’s on the other athletes to as I always say, beat them and push them out the door. If they can’t do that, that’s not her fault, that’s “our” (development coaches / athletes / team’s) fault.
No offense but the person ranked 16th in the pipeline quits cus she can’t get a spot, all good. There’s a ton of evidence to know where athletes should be going along in their trajectory, that if an athlete leaves cus they can’t get a spot, it’s not really that big of a deal. It would likely happen anyways when said 16th rank American finished 48th in said CC race that they are upset they didn’t race in. So that’s more fanboying take your bringing up than any real high performance detriment.
and to add gwen earned the fed way more money with the gold ,than the fed invested in her .
I don’t care about anyone in the race but the Americans. WTCS is built around federation colors. You should have seen my opinions about how Mike Friday was a total failure as a National team coach and how USA 7s is reaping what it sowed by keeping him employed. USA 7s men will likely be relegated from the HSBC SVNS.
And I disagree with you, that funding can easily go to someone else. It’s called investing into the pathway of Athletes. National level triathlon won’t work if they aren’t providing a platform for these younger athletes to develop. Gwen isn’t developing, just taking starts and money that could go to someone who is fresh from the NCAA pipeline.
You are missing my point. There is a standard that an athlete achieved to then get support from a federation. That’s exactly how it should be at the highest of levels.
GJ achieved that…Full stop. So to say her funding should go to someone else, get the F out of here. No sir, I want it to go to athletes who achieve a standard set out by the federation. That’s the fairest/best way in sport. No politics.
So yeah we’ll just agree to disagree. I’m all for making it as much black and white and less “drama”, and GJ has met the standard to getting funding. You do understand that right? So she’s not “taking” funding from someone else, she’s not in the way of anyone else. She has as much of a right to it as anyone else, and she simply achieved a marker to then get funding. Why would you be against that?
No, we just view things differently.