How does one go about getting a pro card?
Thanks a lot Brian. This is very helpful. Much appreciated.
Slightly off topic, but rather than start a new thread I figured I’d piggy back here:
Let’s say you qualify for a pro card, is there any reason why one would NOT get one? I see many jokes about AGers being faster than Pros, but other than embarrassing yourself for being slow, I can’t think of any reason NOT to get it?
Unless you wanted to race in races that have both Pro and Amateur prize purse (aren’t these **very **few???)
Slightly off topic, but rather than start a new thread I figured I’d piggy back here:
Let’s say you qualify for a pro card, is there any reason why one would NOT get one? I see many jokes about AGers being faster than Pros, but other than embarrassing yourself for being slow, I can’t think of any reason NOT to get it?
Unless you wanted to race in races that have both Pro and Amateur prize purse (aren’t these **very **few???)
Back in the day the requirements for a pro card were much less you pretty much just signed up for it.
I know a couple of folks in memphis signed up week of memphis in may because they found out none of the pros competing were going to take the kona slot(back when olympic races had kona slots
1992,1993 to be exact in this case.
One finished 10th in the pros but probably 10 to 20 minutes back both got kona spots so yea that was an advantage back then but now I guess advantage might be
getting in full races(ironman in particular) and getting prime spot in transition and seperate wave start or early start in races so I’d figure if you were good enough to qualify for a pro card(no easy task) then no reason not to get one I guess.
Though I’ve come close but have yet to qualify, I can say that, from a sponsorship point of view, I find it easier to sell myself as a very good age grouper (and since I have set to attain pro standards, I’m not sandbagging…) It’s great for companies to know you’re going to be hanging with the ‘regular’ folks who buy their stuff. Reporting to a sponsor that you were 19th out of 20 in a pro field is kind of a bummer… Winning an Age Group field puts you in front of a lot more people who might be interested in what you have to say. If you supplement results with a positive attitude at races and a willingness to talk to people about your sponsors gear, I think you actually become more appealing as top amateur than a BOP pro. Though, if I did qualify, I’d probably still think about getting the card. For a former fat guy, calling myself a pro athlete would be pretty cool…
Interesting. I’ve been asked from local, somewhat newbie triathletes in my area if I’m going race pro next year due to winning several races and getting second at a couple.
Yes, I qualified to race as a pro, but I personally feel the requirements should be more rigorous, like in cycling, to become a pro triathlete. Actually, having a performance based categorized system that you can move up in would be far more exciting than age based categories.
There are some amateurs that should definitely go pro and a categorized system would at least force them to do so, so they could no longer cherry pick in the amateur races. (see Providence 70.3)
I won a recent half ironman with a 4:26. Sure, it was a tough course with 806 feet of climbing on the run, but the course record is 4:10. Looking at Clearwater last year, the winning age group time was 3:53 and I would wager that this athlete would have been under 4:09 on the course that I won last week.
Yes, this amateur should move up to pro next year. But should I go pro after being an estimated 18 minutes behind what a true entry level pro is capable of doing? No, that would be embarrassing and would typify why triathlon gets a watered down appearance, with every age group winner being sponsored and a “professional” coach. When I break 4 hours for a half at Clearwater (by far the easiest place to do so, so my time standard is reasonable), I’ll go pro.
(edit: I do support the type of age group “sponsorships” Hammer Nutrition and others give to amateur athletes and I feel it is a wise marketing decision)
Actually, having a performance based categorized system that you can move up in would be far more exciting than age based categories.
There are some amateurs that should definitely go pro and a categorized system would at least force them to do so, so they could no longer cherry pick in the amateur races. (see Providence 70.3)
I just started doing tris this year and come from a cycling background and do find it weird that there is only age group and not a categorized system. I can only see a categorized system helping triathlon grow. Why should someone who is a beginner have to “compete” against someone who is a 15 year veteran of the sport placing top 5 in AG every race? Instead the beginner could race the “Cat 4” field and base their performance off similiar ability people.
whats up with providence 70.3, does it have amateur prize money or something?
I think the difference is that it’s a time based sport. If you start having categories and age groups and whatnot everyone will be winning something. In tris you can compare yourself against everyone since you race under virtually the same conditions on the same course. Not so in cycling where tactics play a bigger role and time elapsed is not indicative of the competitors’ skill.
The sport is an individual pursuit, but it is also a tactical race.
I personally would rather race others, regardless of age, who have broke 2 hours for an Olympic or 4:30 for a half or have races themselves graded and determine categories based on overall placement in a race, with some races being weighted heavier (ex. in my area Musselman would be weighted heavier than the local Tri for the Y)
My original point was that while this format would make racing more exciting and goal oriented (moving up in categories being the goal), it would also serve to strengthen the requirements for being a pro athlete and do away with amateurs beating pros in most races.
…and maybe such a system would legitimize USATriathlon, giving it a leg to stand on and become the voice in the sport it once was, if that’s a good thing.
I would say get ride of age group entirely except for Jr, 35+, and 45+. Then everyone would race as 4, 3, 2,1, or Pro (no need for a cat 5 in my opinion). You could even do 4, 3, 1/2 races like most race in cycling. Mtn bike is done the same way as cycling and while tactics can play a small part there it is still more you against the clock just like triathlon. I think you could actually get away with giving out less prizes. If you take a big race where the split age groups in 5 year increments that can be 14-19, 20-24, 25-29, 30-34, 35-39, 40-44, 45-49, 50-54…and so on. I think it could help people monitor their progression better to compare themselves to people of similiar ability instead of saying “Wow, I got beat by 45 minutes again.” in a sprint distance race. Maybe I spent too long in the cycling world, but to me it just makes more sense.
… or you get the hammer heads who say, “I’ve aged up to a new age group, now I can dominate and qualify for Hawaii or Clearwater without being faster.”
Where’s the merit in that?
Though I’ve come close but have yet to qualify, I can say that, from a sponsorship point of view, I find it easier to sell myself as a very good age grouper (and since I have set to attain pro standards, I’m not sandbagging…) It’s great for companies to know you’re going to be hanging with the ‘regular’ folks who buy their stuff. Reporting to a sponsor that you were 19th out of 20 in a pro field is kind of a bummer… Winning an Age Group field puts you in front of a lot more people who might be interested in what you have to say. If you supplement results with a positive attitude at races and a willingness to talk to people about your sponsors gear, I think you actually become more appealing as top amateur than a BOP pro. Though, if I did qualify, I’d probably still think about getting the card. For a former fat guy, calling myself a pro athlete would be pretty cool…
That’s just sad and another reason to get rid of AGs below 45 or 50 entirely.
I think the merit would be that you are still competing as you get old! For me aging up won’t help me a bit, as it seems the 35-39 year olds locally are often faster than the 30-34.
So if you were a very strong AGer, which races would you cherry pick and why? what is the deal with providence? Great amateur purse?
Are there races that make it MORE worth it for an front of pack AGer over back or middle of pack “elite”?
you make great points, except I think you are missing one thing: there is a difference between “pro” and “elite”. There’s nothing wrong with an amateur beating a pro in that context. It happens all the time in golf and tennis at the smaller tournaments, even The Masters.
In the end it does beg for a qualification system like cycling, but if we’re going to categorize people, there needs to be incentive, like small prizes, also like USCF. It also begs for a half Ironman and Ironman world championship governing body that does not use it’s world championship races as media events and marketing tools.
When I say Elite, and Pro, I mean them interchangeably (as per USAT).
Which part is ‘sad’?