To Whom it may concern
Thank you for taking the time to consider my opinion on an issue that directly affects my livelihood! I applaud WTC on the attempt to have athlete input on this very important matter. In general I like the framework with the proposed ranking system and it definitely leads to having top athletes racing for the World Championship in Kona but there are certainly flaws in the points table and the amount of points at certain events (Please consider we are qualifying for the "IRONMAN WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS" and must keep that in mind).
A few things I would personally like to see addressed:
1) TIME DEADLINE - The current date of September 1st is FAR too late to give a Professional athletes notice of their qualification in the lead up to the World Championships. Please maybe consider at least the following:
a) Consider July 1 (or the date after the European Championships in Frankfurt) as the deadline to accumulate points for that year.
b) Announcing a preliminary start list (maybe 25 men and 15 women) earlier in the year (guaranteed) after several major events (half the season).
c) Or create a points threshold to achieve (say 4,000 points for argument sake) meaning these athletes have qualified leaving the remaining slots up for grabs through till IM European Championships. This allows the athletes that have performed from Kona through till this date the ability to focus on their best efforts at Kona and not having to "defend" their position come late July/August. It also allows them to arrange travel etc. without having to wait till September when a lot of Kona accommodation is taken not to mention more expensive flights.
2) POITNS RATIO - I believe the 70.3 points should be offset further from the Ironman points so (2) 70.3 results does not equal (1) Ironman result. Otherwise we are potentially allowing pure 70.3 athletes the opportunity to qualify for Hawaii if they are able to have 3 outstanding 70.3 results and underperform at an Ironman (just competing to chalk up the 1 required Ironman result). I believe a 3:1 ratio if not a 4:1 ratio is fairer in this case. After all, don't we have the World Ironman 70.3 Championships to cater to the distance?
3) DETERMINING THE STATUS OF EACH IRONMAN - We need to see what races qualify as Championship IM, Ironman $75,000 and Ironman $25,000. I applaud WTC's effort to increase prize money at events but what race are going to be $75,000 and what races are going to be $25,000? I think the athletes would like to see this outlined BEFORE this new pro policy is announced. I would definitely like to see more Ironman's awarding the $75,000 over a reduced $25,000.
4) POINTS TABLE - Given the table below a $75,000 Ironman win is worth 1000 points and a $50,000 70.3 win is worth 500 points. I personally would like to see the $75,000 Ironman win be worth 1000 but the $50,000 70.3 win only worth 250 so that we are rewarding strong Ironman results over outstanding 70.3 results This also allows pure Ironman distance athletes that don't compete in 70.3 events the ability to still be in contention to qualify for Hawaii. Again, we are talking about qualifying for the "IRONMAN WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS" and we need to hold true to having athletes specializing in that distance given the preference over 70.3 athletes remembering they have the option to race the "IRONMAN 70.3 WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS" in Clearwater.
The current points table model states that 5th place at the IM 70.3 World Championships and an IM Championship event receives 1000 points yet the winner of an Ironman event ($75,000) also recieves 1000 points. That doesn't seem in proportion!?! Most of all a 10th placing at Kona also equals 1000 points. In any case, any Ironman result HAS TO outweigh an IM 70.3 result and a top 10 result in Kona needs to awarded with far more points to separate it from the other events.
IN SHORT:
A "CHAMPIONSHIP" 70.3 result CAN NOT be regarded as "EQUIVALENT to an "IRONMAN ($75,000) result!
A WORLD IM 70.3 CAN NOT be consider 1.5 times more points than winning a $75,000 Ironman!
HAWAII top 10 results need to be rewarded with far more points!
All the above points indicate that qualifying for Hawaii is attainable for top 70.3 performances rather than Ironman victories or top results. This policy is basically going to lead to pro's targeting highly ranked 70.3 events to attain Hawaii slots rather than racing the events true distance "IRONMAN". Coming back to my original point. We are trying to qualify for the "IRONMAN WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP" and the system needs to be weighted towards the "IRONMAN" distance.
THE CURRENT PROPOSED POINTS TABLE:
5) ICONS OF OUR SPORT - We need to continue the tradition of awarding past Ironman Champions entry to the event. To reduce this to ONLY 3 years is harsh on an athlete that has devoted their life to winning this event. The media interest surrounding returning champions whether they be recent or past is import for the growth of our sport.
6) HAWAII RESULT - The policy seems to imply that ranking in the top 10 at Hawaii is no longer valued and athletes must still follow a tough qualification procedure meaning they could potentially not race the following year. I believe a top 10 result is more deserving than ever to return the following year to Hawaii! unless the points are adjusted here this is no a good change to the policy!
5) DATABASE FOR ATHLETES - Is a fully operational database accessible to the athletes going to be available with updated pointscore standings? This is going to be a HUGE undertaking for whoever takes it on with a lot of responsibility!
6) RACE ENRTY - Entry deadlines will now have to be removed altogether to make the system fair to all. An athlete can NOT be refused entry to event in their attempt to qualify for Hawaii.
7) PRIZE MONEY POLICY - A prize money payment policy needs to be addresses in order for athletes to receive their winnings in a timely fashion as soon as all drug tests have been returned.
8) WILDCARD - If the wildcard isn't for illness or injury then what is it for? No doubt the inclusion of an athlete like Lance Armstrong would be massive for our sport but where does this "Wildcard" stop? Very unfair on the majority of pro's that do the right thing and follow the qualification procedures.
9) OTHER ISSUES - Both drug testing and a new and improved drafting policy need to be addressed ASAP.
10) FAIR RACING - A split pro men and women swim start is needed with a 5 minute gap from the men back to the women. 25 minutes from the pro women till the age group start. This policy is needed at ALL ironman events. The same policy but 1/2 needs to apply for 70.3 events.
11) ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING - I would like to see an annual general meeting held in Kona so athletes and WTC can voice their opinions and have the ability to raise issues. After all if we can work together we can continue the rapid growth of our sport.
12) Lastly, If it is possible I would propose we see some adjustments to the current policy before it is written in stone. If the deadline date of July 9 can be moved to August 1 I think that gives us all enough time to think this policy through and make it fair for everyone.
Thanks for taking the time to consider my opinion and I hope we can trust in WTC to continue to listen to the professional athletes
Regards
Luke McKenzie
Australia
5 x Ironman Champion
No comments:
Post a Comment