So the headline talks about Contender Rankings, but the only relevant update seems to be that the PTO rankings no longer have a payout at the end of the year and are just a way to earn entry into the T100 Tour. Did I miss anything?
1 Like
It seems like a way to keep paying for end of year rankings but not pay it to athletes that declined T100.
It seems odd to only exclude 2024 T100 contracted athletes that declined for this year and not also exclude anyone that declined for this year (like Lange or Blummenfelt).
It also seems to be cutting out those that declined contracts from future contracts as well. We now have top 10 T100 and top 5 contender rankings getting contracts. That would leave 5 spots, probably for hot shots. It seems they’re trying to avoid offering Ditlev, Laidlow, Matthews, Phillip, etc. just because they’re high in the rankings. Maybe not the smartest thing, but definitely a line in the sand for in or out of their league.
It’s a bit confusing to be honest
So there will be the usual PTO rankings as we know it but the bonus that comes with it is gone
There will be another contender rankings and my guess it will be similair to the one above but anyone that has declined a contract before will not be included. All wild cards for T100 races will come from this list
There is a 540k prize money for 80 athletes, not sure where or how this is distributed?
I don’t know what makes the PTO leadership think that approximating the ways of World Triathlon and associating with World Triathlon is the way to go if you’re trying to create a broadcast product.
Oh wait, Renouf says they already HAVE a viable broadcast product…
It takes 30 minutes to explain to someone how the four World Tri ranking systems work in short course, if you’re quick at explaining things.
The PTO have hit the 20 minute mark and are making fast “progress”.
1 Like
Besides the observations above.
" An Athlete’s 5 Best Scores using the PTO World Rankings Points System will be used to determine an athlete’s T100 Contender Ranking, with a maximum of 2 full-distance Events counting towards their total. The 5% bonus on an athlete’s single best Gold tier or lower race performance still applies for the T100 Contender Rankings."
" Athletes who . . held a T100 Contract in 2024 and declined a new contract for 2025 are ineligible for the T100 Contender Rankings."
(1) Five best scores are being used (cf PTO Rankings = 3) which means for the T100 contracted athletes they can score all five ‘diamond tier’ T100s. Those not contracted who are campaigning in the IM Pro Series can score four of their five races (plus any T100s for which they get wildcards): only two ‘full distance’ results (IM/Roth) can be scored though (can’t reward these full distance (IM Pro Series) people too much). (NB 5% retained but not for Roth this year).
(2) Current (ie 2025) T100 contracted athletes will be included in the ‘Contender Rankings’ which seems a bit awkward nomenclature. “Athletes included in these rankings will be known as ‘Contenders’”
(3) List of ineligible athletes (mine):
Matthews
Philipp
Sodaro
Haug
Laidlow
RvB
Baekkegaard
Mignon
Pierré
Jewett
They will not appear on the ‘Contender Rankings’, no PTO EoY bonus and thus appear to have no pathway back to the T100 Tour (maybe I have the second bit wrong?)
(4) But athletes who were offered a contract in either year but refused it will be included:
Lange
Blummenfelt
Iden
Sanders
Foley
Hering
Bartlett
Reischmann
Wilms
(5) The ‘injury/pregnancy’ clause also affords eligibility to:
Neumann
Moench
Lawrence
Watkinson
Am I wrong it used to be 2 million ?
$560k
Pretty sure it was $2M - and the PTO have finally paid most of the 2024 Rankings EoY bonuses out in full. In 2023 and 2024 this was for the top 50 ranked (at 31st December) and went 100 90 80 70 60 50 45 40 and descending (obv).
The PTO have ‘redirected’ $1.5M of that to fund the T100 remuneration (which is increased from 2024).
I said back in December:
So to summerize, there is a 540k bonus pool to be distributed to the top 40 men and ladies based on the traditional PTO rankings?
It’s kinda disappointing that folks that refused contracts don’t have a route back (for now)
There will be some from the Class of 2025 that will refuse contracts in Dec and you are left with a growing pool of athletes that are not allowed back
So if Magnus finishes first in the overall PTO ranking, he won’t get an invite for 2026? 
No that’s not a good summary.
$560k to be paid out to 40 men and 40 women who are in the “Contenders Rankings” NOT (based on) the (traditional) PTO Rankings.
The difference is that a chunk of athletes (I listed them above) we can expect will rank top twenty in the PTO Rankings (3 results, end of year) will not be in the ‘Contenders Rankings’ (5 results, EoY) and therefore not get a EoY bonus from the PTO.
As an aside ten+ T100 contracted athletes will be in the top twenty of these rankings and get a payout (assumed) to go alongside their T100 standings bonus, which has a prize pool of > $3.5M (which is up from $2M in 2024).
Basically PTO does not exist anymore, but in name ,and maybe like 200k a year as the rest of the of the money is effectively t100 money .
Pto is now roughly 7.8 milion for t 100 athletes and about 200 k for the non t100athletes that wear a pto logo on their suits.
Am I wrong in reading this as the wildcards will now only come from the contenders rankings (like world tri do it) and would now exclude wildcards like Mislawchuck and Stapley who don’t have the rankings.
I think this is wrong there is still the 4 wildcards which are not ranking based .
See the NEW text below.
Filling the start list used to go (2024, simplifying):
- Contracted athletes (who are required to tell PTO well in advance if they will not be starting)#.
https://cms.triathlon.org/assets/25c8d4cb-4523-4fcd-ab7b-7673af87f7c8/T100%20Qualification%20Criteria%20-%202025.pdf - Wild cards to athletes selected by a combined PTO/World Tri panel (no specific criteria but currently PTO ranking for estb LC athletes is significant) (Mislawchuk and Stapley got starts this way.) (Also recent wins: another factor eg Pohle last year after her double Tallinn/Zell wins.)
- Subsequently, wild card invites offered to athletes on the World Tri published Waiting List, and currently and iaw World Tri Rules, this is ordered by PTO Rankings. Late additions to that Waiting List are ordered in submission (by National Feds) date order. (McDonald has a start in Singapore through that route.)
All the pertinent World Tri rules and appendices/supporting docs have just been amended!!! In plenty of time for the T100 SF start list to be published in late April.
3.3. All athletes entered in the waiting list will be sorted as follows:
- a) First by Athletes offered permanent qualification slots;
- b) Then up to 3 athletes without permanent qualification slots but ranked in the top 10 in the T100 Race to Qatar Standings [if space];
- c) If not all 3 slots are filled with 3.3.b), the remaining qualification slots go to athletes without permanent qualification slots who are ranked in the T100 Contender Rankings and in rankings order until all slots are filled.
- d) If not all 3 slots are filled from 3.3.b. & 3.3.c., then remaining slots will be filled by athletes without permanent qualification slots and not ranked according to the T100 Contender Rankings. They are sorted as one per National Federation in alphabetical order of the IOC country code, starting with the host National Federation. Once one athlete (from this group of athletes without PTO ranking points) of every National Federation is on the Waiting List, a second one is included to the Waiting List, with the same principles as above [ and ] so on.
Comments:
This makes pretty sure that wild cards in Singapore who finish top 10 get a start next time.
Edit: In the last hour (since I drafted the above) World Tri have been mucking around with their documents list, removing and replacing some!
There’s been chat about a ‘Contender Series’ but this wheeze is just a combo of excluding refusees and replacing the defunct PTO EoY Bonus with a pale version (and 40 not 50).
.# This is why Knibb delaying till 9 days before is naughty, unless of course she told 'em ages ago and PTO have deliberately colluded/obfuscated (included her on start list) and then Knibb went with the ‘personal reasons’ card. It also could be that Knibb specifically negotiated with the PTO NOT to attend/race Singapore before she signed a contract: which would be fine, but the optics are poor/confused.
This would be my uninformed guess as to how things played out.
If so part of the deal was that Knibb would take the *hit for withdrawing late for no apparent reason, and apparently failing to honour the contract every other athlete signed.
Anyway, in other ‘news’ World Tri T100 rules on drafting have been amended further:
- Drafting
11.3. Any drafting penalties during the bike section will be served at the next bike penalty box (was “the athletes’ spot in the transition area 2”). Comment: this makes sure the athlete loses the group that they drafted in)
11.4. The drafting penalty is 1 [was 3] minute.
All below deleted:
Images
For cameras and video cameras, in addition to requiring approval from the TD, all the images and footage taken during the Competition are the property of the PTO. The use of those images for commercial purposes is subject to approval by PTO. Images will be shared with World Triathlon and participant athletes for non-commercial use.
I’ve found another rule change, minor tweak to the points athletes get in each race and the GF to the T100 Tour Standings:
No obvious rationale.
I suspect its to keep things marginally closer for series. Last year Knibb only needed 4th for the GF in order to clinch the whole series, and MvR had enough points that the finale was never in doubt.
By giving 2nd-4th more points along the way, and having smaller gaps in the GF, it keeps everything slightly closer together until the end
1 Like
I don’t know, seems pretty obvious to me. The gap to 1st was very top heavy and the way many of the races shook out, was an obvious fix. When you have 2 to 3 folks sprinting to the line and a second separates them, pretty harsh to lose so many points based on tenths of a second.
And on the other hand if you are like Knibb winning by 10 minutes, not really needed such a big point gap, and as someone else pointed out, makes the grand final at least somewhat open at the end. I mean they do a nice progression with prize money, now the points line up more with that dynamic.
And it also makes sense that their paying more to athletes who race their series. I never thought it was a great idea to pay someone at the end of the year that only did Ironman races for ranking points. They are not an NGB, and for their survival they need to target their $$ more to support pros that support them. Now not to say those other highly ranked athletes should not have a path in if they choose, and I believe they do if ranking is high enough going into the next years draft…
It was 2M when they paid out to the Top 100. Essentially tossed out the bottom 50 and then tossed the 41-50 later on. The remuneration for top 40 stayed the same but the rest of the purse distribution went away. Some rationale in that I think was the contracts. But again contracts go to “top” athletes and not the ones who may need it to stay in the sport.