I’m not advocating for them to all receive contracts. I was advocating previously for bigger fields and more wildcards, so that more short coursers can try their hand at T100. I provided a list of some that could do well with some preparation on the TT bikes.
I think they have all shown merit at the short draft legal distance already. And could provide great new interest to T100 races sparingly while still focusing on short course.
Yes, bigger fields of wildcards so more can get the opportunity to show what they can do in these races.
My 2c given my exposure to T100/PTO is contracts next year should …
a) weigh contract payment amounts heavily in favour of completing a race
b) weigh prize money even more
c) THEN add 5 wildcards
d) Contractually oblige contracted athletes and wildcards to naturally as possible promote PTO/T100 on social media X amount a month separate to the “copy paste / cookie cut” promo posts contracted athletes have begrungingly shared pre races this year.
The drama and essense of wildcards should, in my opinion, be that they are there to take prize money from & take rankings scores from “established types” so that all the athletes are hungry to race every race they show at because it will matter a lot for year end bonuses and 2026 contracts.
My proximity to the PTO this year has led me to feel the contracted athletes should have done FAR MORE to promote their “cash cow” (and they didn’t because it wasn’t contractually obligated) and the coasting through PTO races by some just to cash a cheque needs to be stamped out with penalty clauses in contract somehow.
There’s plenty of young talent that is chomping at the bit to get a look in at a PTO race to go up against the best and prove their talent… that needs to be nurtured and enabled for sure.
Does anyone have any idea about the amount athletes get when they sign the T100 contract? Assume it’s different depending on who you are and therefore, undisclosed but many are willing to secure “the contract”, so what does it mean in terms of fixed income apart from race prizes?
What Tilburydavis said. Seemed too many contracted athletes took the money and didn’t prioritise the races. I bet any x Itu athletes if given a start would show a lot more respect to the PTO and be on that start line ready to race. They are used to having a federation as their boss and the need to perform and give 100% or lose funding and categorisation etc.
100% agree to a), b), c) thought flow. As a spectator I want to see necessary fighting drive in the athletes, not only “fulfilling contract” motivation.
On d) - it’s difficult. You won’t name names because of your public position, but nobody’s stopping me:
I like Sam and Paula a lot, but they could try to fake it better 
There’re others that think the same, but put on a more convincing face.
Edit: I don’t want Sam or Paula to be seen as the worst examples, absolutely not. There’re others who didn’t fulfil their contracts at all…
I don’t know how this could be done effectively. People find ways to get around contract clauses. Two other solutions:
As for your a-c points, yes, definitely agree.
Given my exposure to T100/PTO, aiui the 2024 contract had three elements:
Mostly drawn from: T100 Triathlon World Tour – How The Pro Series Works | T100 Triathlon
Balanced against an obvious wish to have each race contested by the very best (contracted) needs to be the requirement to be fair to athletes who do get injured or ill or fatigued (including mentally) and to allow athletes to chase other objectives. The last because the PTO, I believe, deliberately wants to avoid exclusivity. As a beneficial result of no shows (preferably DNSs stated (to PTO) properly in advance, not with less than 10 days to go with no intent to travel let alone race) the system of race wildcards has worked very well this year, particularly in the men’s.
In 2024 the rough system for determining who would get contracts was shared at the beginning of the 2023 season so athletes knew that their rankings come December were critical. 16 (ie 32) were given contracts based on PTO World Rankings. Every woman signed (ie top 16) and in the men only IM World Champions did not (3). For the 2025 T100 contracts the awarding matrix has been clearish from January: the selection criteria for 11-16 has been tweaked to allow some PTO discretion, in particular (I suspect) to cater for 2024 contract failures, eg Haug, Sodaro.
DTD a) So of the baseline sum, less initial payment and a little more on ‘appearance fee’ then?
DTD b) The structure of the race prize purse is very spikey. Those on the podium were doubly rewarded (because of the points build to the end-of-tour bonus) and didn’t ‘need’ the prize purse as an incentive. Less spikey with a bit more for the middle order, to encourage those mid-pack athletes both before the race and during.
DTD c) The current mechanism for pulling in athletes as wildcards seemed to work. Each men’s field of 20 on average included 6 wildcards; women more. Don’t see rationale for adding ?another? 5 wildcards (not sure what you mean in practice: upping it to an average of 10 wildcards?)
DTD d) Most athletes put effort into SM anyway. Some don’t and I guess need mentoring (a firmer steer and help from PTO). I don’t look at all the contracted athletes’ SM (nerdy but not to that extreme) so I don’t know who (apart from Neumann) are the poorest ‘performers’ in this combat zone. Athletes with a professional approach surely recognise which sides their bread is buttered (some on more than one side!). Just get out there and press the buttons, for ‘partners’, PTO, T100 Challenge and IRONMAN alike. Don’t assume the lunches are free, or give the impression you think they are.
DTD e) “plenty of young talent that is chomping at the bit to get a look in at a PTO race to go up against the best and prove their talent” This talent should get out in aero (in Challenge or 70.3s) and prove their capability without wheel-sucking, first. Then a wild card offer. This is very similar to Conti Cups, World Cups to earn points proving merit to toe the line on the WTCS pontoon. Does this talent really need “nurturing and enabling” by T100 competition? The cream will rise to the top, or stay SC (which is fine). Example?
Or maybe go back to how it was in 2023. No guaranteed contracts. Just offer $100k+ purse for the winner and pay up to 20th place to allow them to at least break even. Let’s forget about the season-long narrative and focus on getting the most exciting race possible for each stop of the tour.
So to respond to your replies …
Caveat… T100 is middle distance racing.
a) yup agree with your take
b) yup agree …make racing for top ten more worthwhile to some of athletes
c) I did mean take total to 25 (you’ll see why in my e) point
d) Agree on the mentoring but athletes on SM front should need to pull their finger out a bit with some quid pro quo (or have someone do it for them)
e) Actually there is somewhat of a false ceiling what with the diamond, Platinum, Gold etc… tiering If you look at the womens top 30 PTO ranking for example…
Exclusively T100 scores - 5 people
T100 scores & Ironmans - 8 people
T100 scores & 70.3 scores - 7 people
IM & 70.3 - 3 people
All three - 1 person
IM Only - 2 people
70.3 Only - 4 people
So I somewhat disagree that the cream will rise to the top, something needs to change with the weighting structure of races because at moment it is still a little of a “In the in club”
Of the four athletes whose ranking is on 70.3 merit only (Pohle #15, Madsen #18, Salthouse #19, Thek #23), Thek has had 4 T100 starts, Madsen 3 starts, Ellie 1 start and Pohle none.
So as things stand Caroline Pohle (I have no affliation) unlikely to get a contract (Dubai GF will influence rankings).
So what the above tells me is it is nigh on impossible to get yourself into a contract position without at least one but ideally three T100 wildcard starts and entirely impossible to do if you are gunning for a gold contract and don’t get wildcards.
Hopefully this is where PTO discretion on hotshots can be appropriately applied but I still think the excess weighting of points in T100 races needs to be tweaked. Then as sport matures we will have enabled a clearer pathway to success and racing spectacle for everyone to benefit from pros and fans alike.
i do think that overall the cream still can rise to the top
pohle is an intersing case she did have a place for a pto race and then got injured
and she can still get a place doing well in new zealand.
so yes i do agree that she should have a contract next year based on her performances this year but its still in her hands.
so in a way if there is a change needed its rather small.
and to add while for the year end pto bonuse iornman races should be counted as they do.
for a middle distance race series that t 100 is the ironmans should score less
So then shouldn’t 70.3 races score more than fulls?
This is all kinda dumb.
The contracts were bad attempts and didn’t remotely pay the bills. To do what they want to achieve they need to put money on the table that motivates athletes to not work for someone else…yet these contracts are still set up as 1099. These aren’t employees and they don’t have the W-2 like benefits. This is not a team sport so I understand how.
But the contracts in '24 and '25 aren’t going to set up for this. The figure for base is very simple 200k+Travel+Healthcare. That gives that person a liveable wage and incentivizes them not to chase their sponsor contractual bonuses that are likely set to Ironman races as T100 will be fleeting.
Now, add real prize money on top of the contracts I’ve proposed. Let’s say 50k for fist place in every race and 10k for 5th or something like that.
However, I’d disagree somewhat on the promotion, many of the athletes have naturally promoted T100.
But again, Moritz Triathlon and T100 is fleeting, this will never be a popular enough broadcast to sustain itself. I’m interested in how long WBD as a public company will continue to sink dollars. Moritz seems not to care about his end, but it’s also been “cheaper” than owning an actual sports team.
let me start like this for the t 100 sereis the very least you should not be able to bing in an ironman score with 5 percent bonus points added to that score .
and while patrick lange is smart enough not to take a t100 contract he should absolutely not be in the running for a t 100 contract
further on i dont really want to go as i dont know, but it you were to take away langes texas bonus he goes down to 22md place so that could already be enough
I don’t know if you have been following the news
a) they apparently got more money
b) they have said “events” is where they are going
So I am not sure how “fleeting” they are. Time will tell.
Slowtwitch is my number one stop for Triathlon business news, so if it wasn’t posted here, I don’t see it. It definitely wasn’t in SBJ or Sportico (I have subscriptions, they’re expensive!) so this is the first time I’ve heard. Having been in a company that has gone to market, I’m very interested in the fundamentals that they’re showing potential investors.
First time reading about Cordillera is right now: US investor looks to join the sports race with triathlon deal - Private Equity News
I am not sure what the rules are on linking to other articles so I have no problems of it disappearing.
Move into AG events:
Pulling this across from the auto generated thread by Ryan’s front page article.
Gold T100 2025 contract offers to:
Knibb, Gentle, Derron, Matthews, Duffy, Byram, Philipp, Lee, Simmonds, Findlay.
11-16 contracts (my guess; current (post Dubai) PTO Ranking in ( )) to: LCB (11), Spivey (19), Pohle (16), EPB (13, but I fear for her health if she has to race in the heat), Haug (12, despite contract fail, may not sign)
In the balance: Sodaro (14) (because of 2024 contract failure: started 2 finished one), Jewett (15) (because of inability consistently to finish a full 100km though she did start 6 out of 7)
Leaves 5 slots for hot shot / ‘stand out performances’ with a taste of PTO, so maybe: Pierre (26, #4 in IMWC), ex-SC top tier x 3 (GTB and who else?), Salthouse (21),
So I read this, it’s pretty interesting. More important information about their pivot to mass participation and how that seems to have been driven through their Series B Investors one of which was Divergent who is quoted. They’re not “new” money in one sense because they started their investment in 2022 when Series B was held.
The “new” money in part at least comes from a new PE Group. However it’s incredibly interesting to see how everyone keeps plugging along.