Just glanced at the latest issue of USA Triathlon Life, and came across the letter from the Executive Director, Skip Gilbert (I still miss Steve Locke).
So toward the bottom of the first column, while congratulating WTC & Ben Fertic on their efforts this year, he throws in “This was my first Ironman experience…”
Whoa! Stop right there…don’t need to read anymore. One segment of our sport still combines the pros with the amateurs (a few minutes apart in some cases, but at least on the same day), still has rules against drafting (with the pros wanting stricter, not more lax parameters), and is still selling out races so fast it makes your head spin. And it ain’t the segment that is ruled with an iron fist by our world governing body.
Oh yeah, and when’s the last time you watched an ITU-athon on a major network, and had your friends and cohorts at work actually notice?
USAT bet on the wrong horse. Do enjoy Beijing, and maybe even come back to Kona some future October. I hear that Ironman thing’s gonna be real big someday…
Why would you be surprised that it’s Skip Gilbert’s first Kona experience? He doesn’t come from a triathlon background, which may, or may not, be a good thing, and during last year’s race, WTC and USAT were still having their spat.
USAT bet on the wrong horse. Do enjoy Beijing, and maybe even come back to Kona some future October. I hear that Ironman thing’s gonna be real big someday…
-Mike
USAT doesn’t have the option to choose anything over the Olympics. Although age groupers are by far the majority of the membership, the core function of the organization was always to act as the National Governing Board for the sport. That’s really all that makes USAT unique. Other organizations can offer a competitive structure, insurance, etc. but USAT has the exclusive right to act in the interest of the USA regarding ITU and Olympic sport. The age group component is strong in USAT but if push came to shove, it’s the age groupers that would take the back seat.
I think the “wrong horse” the original poster was refering to was the drafting vs. non-drafting issue. USAT strongly backed the ITU, and when push came to shove, the age groupers and the pro were shoved out in hopes of higher revenue generation, particularly during the olympics.
I am always a little confused by some people stance against “for profit” groups that organize WC events. The IOC, while organized as a non-profit, is clearly focused on revenue generation. Now they do not have shareholders to whom they distribute profits, but they strongly operate on a profit motive. In this case, the WTC kept the sport the athletes wanted, while the non-profit ITU changed the sport strictly with a for-profit motive.
My first boss after college was worth about $850MM (at the time).
How’d he get there? He started his own company and felt SO CONVINCED that it was a great idea…he bought stock in most of his competitors. He won either way. While we were trending around $50MM/year with extremely high profits, our competitors grew fasters (with debt). They were knocked off one at a time through leveraged buy-outs which ended up netting him around $750MM when all was said and done…
Make friends with your competition and grow your industry…
Why would you be surprised that it’s Skip Gilbert’s first Kona experience? He doesn’t come from a triathlon background, which may, or may not, be a good thing, and during last year’s race, WTC and USAT were still having their spat.
A friend who was a USAT Cat-1 Offical transitioned over to ITU racing. Several years ago, he said that the sport should be governed and controlled by people who weren’t directly involved in the sport. I was shocked at the time but didn’t expect it would actually come to be. However, this is starts the trend and it might just continue. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the BOD gradually replaced and the bylaws modified to eliminate membership voting. On one hand, I’d like to see USAT as a total democracy. On the other hand, it appears that only a small segment of the membership is at all interested in the workings of the organization and wouldn’t notice the difference between a democratically elected BOD of their peers or a panel of businessmen.
I think the “wrong horse” the original poster was refering to was the drafting vs. non-drafting issue. USAT strongly backed the ITU, and when push came to shove, the age groupers and the pro were shoved out in hopes of higher revenue generation, particularly during the olympics.
USAT differed strongly with the ITU on the drafting issue. However, the ITU had enough votes from several European countries to crush any opposition from the USA. When the votes were cast, the USAT delegates yielded to the pressure to support the ITU rather than place the USA at a disadvantage in the global triathlon community. Along with the vote, they issued a statement that USAT was steadfastly opposed to draft legal triathlon and was compromising that postion under duress.
And yes, I do think USAT is irrelevant.
So do most people. When will the AG’ers unite to throw out the bums?
Dream on. In the Southwest Region, we had one candidate for the National Board. For the Regional Board, we didn’t even have enough candidates to make up the 7 member board required in the bylaws. I think voting membership was somewhere around 10% in spite of the ballots being mailed to our houses with postage paid return envelopes. Most people don’t care one way or the other.
Several years ago, he said that the sport should be governed and controlled by people who weren’t directly involved in the sport.
That may be all well and good for most Olympic sports, where their primary funding comes from the IOC/USOC, and is dependent on winning medals to garner high TV ratings. As Dan has mentioned before, USAT and triathlon is unique in that it is a membership (well) funded organization, and isn’t dependent on the USOC and could/would survive quite nicely without any Olympic involvement. I hope that most members would be opposed to the USOC/IOC/ITU taking control of the organization (and bank account) that was built and funded with ‘our’ money.
It was interesting during swimming today I was talking to a new person. He has done a few IM’,s and will do half a dozen HIM’s this year. We somehow got into drafting and he commented how bad it was and how it made the bike a non issue, etc. I asked him if he had ever done a draft legal race and he said no. So, I then went on to tell him about the 5 draft legal races I have done and why, in my experience, drafting does not totally take away the bike. I still could not keep up with the draft packs from the strong bikers.
Am always interested how some folks have such strong opinions about a draft legal race and have never done one.
Am always interested how some folks have such strong opinions about a draft legal race and have never done one.
Dave
Well, there’s the point that triathlon in the USA devloped as non-drafting and that it should remain that way. Another point is that triathletes, for the most part, aren’t skilled cyclists making drafting hazardous. Equipment is another factor - drafting on aerobars is unsafe. In general, it makes the bike leg riskier and more complex.
A quick check of the USAT website showed they had 1398 events listed for 2006. Now I’m sure each of those events did not sell out to the tune of 2500 a la WTC - but with IMNA running 6 Ironman events and there being 7 70.3 events in the US I’m pretty sure USAT touched more athletes then Ironman did.
I think many people seem to forget that the bread and butter of triathlon isn’t the 10:30 Ironman athletes, it’s the 35 to 55 year olds doing sprint triathlons and Olympic distance races and many of these races wouldn’t happen without USAT insurance help.
Just becuase the Pewalkee Sprint Triathlon isn’t on the cover of InsideTri doesn’t mean it isn’t important to the growth of the sport. Ironman may get more press and more exposure, but it isn’t the be all and end all of triathlon and in fact Ironman athletes represent a small minority of USAT members and of triathletes as a whole.
Just for reference, I have done the Golden state tri for the last 5 years from TBFracing. Its a draft legal sprint race. There have never been the issues you stated, which is why I asked if you had any first hand experience. I have, and its a lot of fun. You should give it a try. Big difference between a race that is marketed as draft legal, vs one the RD’s get lazy and dont enforce, in my experience, and I have dont both types. :o)
What I really enjoyed in the draft legal race were the different strategies I had to consider. Getting out of the swim strong. Trying not to lose a draft group. And then going full tilt in the run. It was a lot of fun, and the best race I have ever done.
What I really enjoyed in the draft legal race were the different strategies I had to consider. Getting out of the swim strong. Trying not to lose a draft group. And then going full tilt in the run. It was a lot of fun, and the best race I have ever done.
Dave
I get out of the swim behind the sick and wounded. I spend my bike ride passing them and during the run I work my way up to MOP. Drafting wouldn’t work to my advantage. I have no problem with drafting races being available to those who want them but that seems to be a small market in the U.S. Many race directors see it as a potential liability and opt to ignore or prohibit it. My personal preference is for the dominant format in age group racing to remain non-drafting.
The issue is not whether you “love draft legal races” or not. The fact is that a draft legal triathlon is a completely different pursuit that has no relevance in the world of triathlon as it was intended. You can love those races all you want, but anyone who remembers what happened in the pro ranks when the ITU sold its soul for an Olympic credential knows that the change was for the worse. Personally, I simply don’t care about that sport. At all.
And to have a board that is lead by folks who have never even been to Kona before 2006? How in the world can they expect to be in tune with their membership?
On the one hand, I hear folks saying that USAT is obligated to fulfill its charter as a NGB for the ITU and IOC, yada yada yada. On the other hand, they scratch their heads over why I don’t give a $hit about their issues, while they clearly don’t understand mine.