Curious as to what others think in regards to age group Hawaii slot allocation. I was looking at 2003 KKT male age group results and noted two slots M65-69, one slot for 70-74, and one slot for 75-79 (for both international and island). However, there was only one finisher in each of these age groups! This ratio, of course, got a little lower when the age groups went down in age. It has always appeared to me that as you get older, the better chance you have in regards to gaining a slot. My question is this, should slots be handed out at every IM qualifier for age group athletes over, say, 65?
Nope. I say give one to each AG in each sex, then divvy up the rest. If there’s no one in that AG to take it, it falls back to one of the more overpopulated AGs anyway.
And, I say, count the numbers on the number of ACTUAL entries, NOT on how many people say they are going for the Kona spot. What happens is, the men get a much larger proportion, as many women don’t “check the box”, so their numbers aren’t counted.
I agree. If qualifying slots are to be handed out and there are more slots than age/gender groups, then each group should get at least one slot. Even if there is only one competitor in that age group. Sure the ratios get out of whack, but it’s not the fault of the lone competitor that he’s the only person in his age group.
or she for that matter
Hey I’m stoked that there are folks still competing and striving for a kona finish at that age and you should be stoked about it too.
As I understand the way KKT and Ironman NA slot distribution works is as follows:
Every sex/age group in which at least 1 person registers and starts gets 1 slot regardless of the number of compeitors in that age group. What remains out of the pool is then distributed pro-rata to each age group in proportion to the number of participants. Thus, those groups with more participants will recive a higher % of the remaining slots. Now, in the event that an age group only has one or two starters and for some reason no finishers, I believe that slot is then re-allocated the the age group with the most participants (but I can be mistaken here).
see: http://www.keauhoutriathlon.com/info.shtml#IM
and http://www.ironmannorthamerica.com/konaslots.html
I personally believe that this is the most fair method. If everyone say over 65 was lumped into one age group, it would place those 70 and 75 year olds at a disadvantage.
Looking at the numbers at: http://www.ironmannorthamerica.com/konaslots.html
The pro numbers are clearly off, and the other numbers will change with the actual number of entries, but it is pretty interesting.
there are:
11,541 entries and 505 slots 4.48% get slots
8,786 men, 2,755 women 76%/24%
359 male slots, 141 female slots 71%/28%
4.09% of men get slots, 5.12% of women
By Age Group:
Age Group Entries Slots %
MPRO 15 23 153.33
WPRO 8 23 287.50
M18-24 191 12 6.28
M25-29 872 29 3.33
M30-34 1959 60 3.06
M35-39 2018 63 3.12
M40-44 1619 52 3.21
M45-49 1009 36 3.57
M50-54 607 23 3.79
M55-59 319 15 4.70
M60-64 116 10 8.62
M65-69 31 7 22.58
M70-74 21 5 23.81
M80+ 1 1 100.00
Men 8786 359 4.09
W18-24 103 9 8.74
W25-29 455 17 3.74
W30-34 712 25 3.51
W35-39 602 24 3.99
W40-44 438 21 4.79
W45-49 265 13 4.91
W50-54 119 11 9.24
W55-59 34 7 20.59
W60-64 20 7 35.00
W65-69 3 3 100.00
W70-74 4 4 100.00
CEO 0 5
Women 2755 141 5.12
Total 11541 505 4.38
Thanks for the data from IM vs. KKT which I looked at. I think that if on average ~4.5% of total entrants are getting slots then there is something wrong with the allocation when an age groups allocation is greater than one standard deviation from the mean. However, that’s just my opinion. Everyone pays the same $200-350 entry fee and deserves an equal chance, age aside.