Kona is amazing but they should move the event to a place that will allow two days of racing in a world class venue with fully closed roads. If it’s in a rotating basis that’s not adding a second race in the same location in the same year many locations could accommodate it (ie no open registration race there two months earlier).
Just make kona a pro and AWA qualifier only race with a pre-order open that sells out in minutes of opening.
No one cares about the WC title of kona. It’s racing kona. It used to be open to anyone to signup. Let the AWA golds signup first. Then the silvers, etc etc. Call it the AWA World Championship, make tons of money, encourage IM customers to race multiple races to have the opportunity to race kona, and still have 2 days of WC racing at a stellar location that’s on contract 2 years in a row or something.
Only worry is if no one cares about the WC title, but as long as Ironman delivers on the venue and race it will get traction.
If it’s no longer a World Championship it is probably a healthyish race of around 1500. Just because of the costs involved to race there. But part of the allure of Kona is its history and continued presence as the holy land of triathlon. Qualifying for Kona and going is a pilgrimage in itself. And then there’s the Island feel a vibe that builds into that. Nice? Yeah that place will never be magical. And if that run continues to be 4 loops on the boardwalk people will hate it.
But the mysticism of Kona will fall away at some point if it is no longer the WC and you will lose “The Masters” of triathlon.
I raced WC 70.3 and the 2 day format for the men and women works best. If we accept the constraint you cannot have 2 days on Kona then 2 choices: priority is be fair to families and AG + give pro women their own runway no men interference on the course (for AG women I think the amount of interference from other women must be roughly same as having men on the course so not much different)
So my suggestion would be:
OPTION 1 - as it is now (probably the only realistic option) 1 day in Kona every year is the constraint
max participation, increase and improve Nice over time, viable alternative to Kona, bike is better anyhow in Nice
OPTION 2 - 1 year in Kona 2 days 1 year in Nice 2 days better since families etc can travel together - will Kona agree (probably not) - 2 days 1 year 0 days the next year
OPTION 1A - If we only have 1 day 1 year Kona WC then let’s double down to 1 day every 2 years, and each 2nd year 2 days in Nice WC both men and women
Kona 1 day WC means some compromise
pro women start 60min before pro open (renamed so anyone not a biological woman or wishing to race is in this group) meaning the top women pros should be finished before the top open pros
all AG start after that, finish time cut down from 17 to 16 or extend to 1am: yes the women AG get interference from male AG…but they get that now from other AGs and so do every male AG from other AG and some fast women; the focus for TV etc is for the pros only and we can have both
means we restrict entry numbers back to 1 day level: no more soft qualifying as happened for Nice and Kona this year (I’m probably one of them): maybe add the AWA gold idea so path to Kona isn’t as time based as now instead there are a few ways to get there but jack up the price even more and more for AG so you want to go to Kona, you pay through the nose. For those like me who don’t care about Kona and want to go race Nice we can, plus Nice being 2 days can handle a few more athletes is also better priced. For most AG the front of the race anyhow much the same faces
qualifying is a 2 year cycle so you can pick but the path to Kona is extremely extremely tight for AGs as is pretty much 1 slot per AG over 2 years with virtually no roll downs, and cost 2X, this would stop the defer type issues, 2nd path through AWA gold and high level of participation but hard limits in time so you can’t be a slug and still get to Kona ever
Nice 2 day WC means in the alternate year. so you have a roll down and the excitment of 1 Kona slot 2 Nice slots, and if you are 3rd then it depends on what the people in front choose…despite what some think not everyone will choose Kona
separate men and women days, solves everything, rewards different skill set…
except for the purists… “it’s not Kona”
To your list that would prioritise from most to least impt
(b) same location both genders (for families and AGers - interestingly for me means zero)
(d) best in class
(c) men women separate (sort of) at least for the pros this would be ok solution
(e) equal racing chances
(a) must be Kona for me least important since that’s outside our sport’s control if they want to kick us off the island they will eventually and it sounds like a s**tshow anyhow
IMFL would be a great championship spot. Could easily move the date back into October and weather would still be nice, ocean swim, flat bike, plenty of hotels. Nice is such a crap option for anyone with some size to them and there’s essentially only a handful of places in the continental US that one could recreate that climb. Bike course needs to be more fair for a WC IMO, not one heavily slanted towards the small climbers.
A flat bike course for an AG WC lends itself to a massive draftfest. Too many athletes of comparable ability on a course where small differentials in skill, fitness or technique won’t be amplified to spread the masses.
If a triathlete can’t climb and descend with a satisfactory level of skill and competence, they probably should be questioning whether they should be at a WC.
Sure, the Nice course will favour some athletes more than others, but that’s true of Kona and many other courses as well.
The nature of the Nice course hardly makes it less than fair.
Ironman was founded on the notion of testing its competitors. A big part of the appeal is competitors having to meet the demands of the event.
IMFL would be a great championship spot. Could easily move the date back into October and weather would still be nice, ocean swim, flat bike, plenty of hotels. Nice is such a crap option for anyone with some size to them and there’s essentially only a handful of places in the continental US that one could recreate that climb. Bike course needs to be more fair for a WC IMO, not one heavily slanted towards the small climbers.
See Clearwater when it was the 70.3 WC the first few years. Nobody liked it because it was a draft and snooze fest.
as a perspective first time WC qualifier having been in the sport for 4 years now I would order them this way
(a) WC must be in Kona. I am not interested in spending big bucks on an ironman WC elsewhere in the world. Especially Nice that I could race a few months earlier for half the price.
(c) WC must allow men & women to race separately. I was on the fence before the split on this one but it was clear to me after watching the women’s race this past weekend Women deserve their own day.
all other concerns to me are secondary and I don’t care how they fall out.
b) WC must be in the same time & location for men & women (doesn’t mean it must be the same day),
d) WC must have the potentially best-in-world participants,
e) WC must provide equal racing chances to all athletes (at least on a rotating basis)?
You say, “women deserve their own day.” Doesn’t that mean that men also deserve their own day? Rhetorical question.
I am a man and I am all for equal rights. I also like doing things with woman. I would have no interest in doing an all men Ironman (or any all man race). I love travelling to a race and talking with men and woman from all over. Woman add to the experience. If “women deserve their own day” at the IMWC, don’t they also deserve their own day at every Ironman race? If not, why not?
as a perspective first time WC qualifier having been in the sport for 4 years now I would order them this way
(a) WC must be in Kona. I am not interested in spending big bucks on an ironman WC elsewhere in the world. Especially Nice that I could race a few months earlier for half the price.
(c) WC must allow men & women to race separately. I was on the fence before the split on this one but it was clear to me after watching the women’s race this past weekend Women deserve their own day.
all other concerns to me are secondary and I don’t care how they fall out.
b) WC must be in the same time & location for men & women (doesn’t mean it must be the same day),
d) WC must have the potentially best-in-world participants,
e) WC must provide equal racing chances to all athletes (at least on a rotating basis)?
You say, “women deserve their own day.” Doesn’t that mean that men also deserve their own day? Rhetorical question.
I am a man and I am all for equal rights. I also like doing things with woman. I would have no interest in doing an all men Ironman (or any all man race). I love travelling to a race and talking with men and woman from all over. Woman add to the experience. If “women deserve their own day” at the IMWC, don’t they also deserve their own day at every Ironman race? If not, why not?
to answer your last question (bc it seems the others are rhetorical)
I’m all for women pros to go off an hour before pro men at all pro races so that AG men and pros don’t interfere with their race. That seems like a fair medium but I’m open to other options if they make sense.
Logistically speaking, I’m not a race director, but having a separate women day at every race doesn’t seem possible even if you could argue it’s fair. I’d happily accept I’m wrong if that’s off
Kona is amazing but they should move the event to a place that will allow two days of racing in a world class venue with fully closed roads. If it’s in a rotating basis that’s not adding a second race in the same location in the same year many locations could accommodate it (ie no open registration race there two months earlier).
Just make kona a pro and AWA qualifier only race with a pre-order open that sells out in minutes of opening.
No one cares about the WC title of kona. It’s racing kona. It used to be open to anyone to signup. Let the AWA golds signup first. Then the silvers, etc etc. Call it the AWA World Championship, make tons of money, encourage IM customers to race multiple races to have the opportunity to race kona, and still have 2 days of WC racing at a stellar location that’s on contract 2 years in a row or something.
Only worry is if no one cares about the WC title, but as long as Ironman delivers on the venue and race it will get traction.
I actually think the WC needs move away from Kona to rotate around the world with two days of racing for men and women. Kona should become the new “Boston” of triathlon. Kona would then have an AG time-qualification system and a selection system just like Boston. You can do that or just have a lottery for entry, with better entries for people who are AWA. I see this as a huge opportunity for Ironman to have two huge and lucrative events in one year for AG’ers. One for the truly elites and Kona for the rest of us. Like you said, most AG’ers don’t care as much about racing the WC as much as they care about racing Kona.
BTW, I have been to Kona as a tourist and I would much rather race in Nice or St. George than race in Kona. Aside from the swim the Kona course is the definition of “meh”.
b) WC must be in the same time & location for men & women (doesn’t mean it must be the same day),
c) WC must allow men & women to race separately,
a) WC must be in Kona (or Hawaii in general, if it were an option)
d) WC must have the potentially best-in-world participants,
e) WC must provide equal racing chances to all athletes (at least on a rotating basis)
**WC should be same location, but I would prefer different days. **
For most athletes the magic is in Kona not in WC. The demonstration is that to reach same number of participants, the rolldown in Nice was much bigger (now for Kona 2024 almost any rolldown). So rolling venues means different level of participation.
I would think that Legacy is a good thing. Being an Ironman is not only related to be a good at performance, but also a way of living… But I think that roll down is a bad thing (not because the people who take the slot, but the people who reject theirs).