Maybe it’s just me, but I have a hard time understanding the wording.
“If Julie Derron wins, she wins the series even if Kate or Lucy finish second. If Julie finishes second, Kate and Lucy must finish third, in order for Julie to win the series”.
I don’t get the last sentence. If Julie finishes second, by my calculations, Kate must not finish better than 4th and Lucy must not finish better than 3rd in order for Julie to win. But if Julie 2nd, Kate 3rd, Lucy 4th, Kate wins it.
For other scenarios, I guess we must understand every time it says “must finish Xth”, is supposed to mean “must finish Xth or worse.
Thanks for the work. I guess I’ve answered my own question, just took me some time. Just the Julie scenario seems off.
A lot of words which forced the font on the PTN slide to be smaller than necessary.
Whoever of the three wins, wins (LCB wins tiebreak)
If another (none of the three) wins:
** if Waugh finishes second, she wins;
** if Derron finishes second, she wins only if Waugh is fourth or lower;
** if LCB is second, she wins if Waugh is #4 or lower.
Other scenarios (where one of these three finish neither first nor second) are as unlikely as athletes not being able to count to 8 two races running.
Given Hayden’s track record in several high profile races/series in the past, I wonder if he will somehow not win the series. I’d love to see Jelle take the crown after back to back 70.3 champs wins. Is it possible? He’s certainly on a roll. I suppose the only scenario I can imagine, short of a crash/flat is something like Jelle, Bogen, Pearson, Hayden.
I think it’s possible. Marten can get in there too I think, as can Mika. But something has to happen to Wilde. If he is up to his standards, only Geens can beat him right now (I know some think he is unbeatable on his good day, but I don’t). I’d love to see Marten outsprint Wilde for 3rd and give his mate Jelle the win, that would be epic (also to see the reaction from Wilde, that would also be epic). Although I’ve not seen the course, but probably no elevation which doesn’t favor Jelle.
You literally could not come up with “any” course that would favor Jelle over Hayden. Other guys yes, but those two it could be a 10k swim, uphill 40 mile bike, and downhill 20 mile run. Plug in any number or grade, it is still Hayden who wins all things equal physically…
So would you just say that in Taupo Hayden was stupid and he’s been racing smarter this year? Or is it possible Jelle has done a more a better job than Hayden at approaching his season and how he plans to peak at the right races?
The only way to beat a Hayden who races smart (i.e. not what he did in Taupo) is to stick with him until the end if you can (tall order) and outsprint him. Jelle is a better ‘finisher’ than Hayden (just like I knew he would beat Kristian if it came down to the sprint).
Im a bit gutted I went on holiday, I was quite confident of Geens winning 70.3 Worlds when he’s not been a popular pick (sure most where picking Blum)
He’s one of those athletes that will continue, not to get the attention he deserves on here for whatever reason.
I think Geens can run him close, and Wilde doing something wild is always on the cards in any race, but I don’t see Geens outrunning Wilde (sure he’s got over his pacing issues)
Like being pissed and taking a corner too fast and crashing. Or being pissed and running so hard out of T2 to prove a point and blowing up. Or just riding his bike to the site the day before and crashing. Or maybe he’ll challenge some local kids to a sprint race and roll his ankle on race week. Or he might just get the only drafting penalty of the race as he moves through the field to the front.
Just poking a little fun, he seems to have some bad luck that isn’t all just random.
Kyle that’s totally great. If I may, considering there’s a lot of wording, I’d cut a couple sentence that don’t add anything to the text, e.g. “If Julie Derron wins, she wins the series. even if Kate or Lucy finish second”
