Okay, so cycling has drama and intrigue:
http://www.velonews.com/race/int/articles/11201.0.html
Conspiracies, hackers, mysterious twins, intrigue… they all surround the soap-opera that is professional cycling. Also, the news sites give these stories merit.
What do we have in triathlon? Stadler and McCormack bickering and talking smack is seen as revolutionary. Our news sources, such as InsideTri and Triathletemag produce puff piece after puff piece, afraid that “bad publicity” could hurt their endorsement revenue.
I say screw that-lets see the behind the scenes dirty that happens. Who’s going to start slinging mud. Who do the pros actually think are on drugs? What really happens during the after party? What gets said in an ITU pack when the runners are hanging out at the back of a pack and Andy Potts keeps gaining time on the chase group? who intentionally cut the buoys in NZ? what do people think of Les McDonald and his reign?
Why don’t the magazines call out all of the drafting at the IM and 70.3 races? Why are there 7 plus World Champions in the sport (WC, ITULC, IM, 70.3, duathlon, Xterra…) does this diminish the feat? Why do we need a yearly world championship. All the power to the people at 70.3 and particularly to the winners, but the pro field was hardly representative of the “best in the sport”-there was no real depth of field.
I want to read an article that is an expose-I want the drama and the intrigue-these titles are great for the races and even better for the organizations that sell the title, but come on-ITU World’s and Hawaii are competitive, but even that is suspect. Why doesn’t the IM World champ move around and allow a different sort of athlete the chance to win (I realize that this may happen).
Anyway, just my rant-I just want the sport to get a bit edgy