Jump to content
VeloKyniska

Kona Equal Pro spots

Recommended Posts

An article onTriathlon.com on the topic of equal Pro spots at Kona

http://triathlon.competitor.com/2015/04/features/opinion-the-last-pro-female-finisher-at-kona_115237#4mFzJrcKsKvMJwUz.99

 

 

"Right now, the men have 50 spots. The women have 35. While it seems a complete no-brainer to add 15 spots for equality, it isn’t being done. The request is being met with resistance. One of the measures of resistance is this: The last 15 women at Kona don’t matter. They are the back of the field. They don’t add much to the sport, they are not seen as contenders."
If the final 15 Pro Women don't matter/not contenders, what are the final 15 of the Pro Men's field? They too clearly mustn't be contenders or matter much so why have them there. It's ludicrous reasoning by WTC

 

 

"If we don’t value potential, we don’t have much of a future."
I like this statement, it's so true but unfortunately a corporate run event....... wellll a lot's been said over the years on that topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

If the final 15 Pro Women don't matter/not contenders, what are the final 15 of the Pro Men's field? They too clearly mustn't be contenders or matter much so why have them there. It's ludicrous reasoning by WTC

 

 

40th ranked make got 2nd last year didn't he?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

40th ranked make got 2nd last year didn't he?

Yes Nath, listening to IMTalk Ben Hoffman came 2nd and he was ranked 40+.

 

I just don't get it. Ironman will cop negative flack for not giving them the 15 spots but will they cop anything negative for including them? I don't think so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who cares really - it's a good lift for the age group females who run them down - it really doesn't hurt anyone :smile1:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The woman that came 20 th this year was 248 over all. The 50th would finish about 500th.

 

Not exactly professional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is just stupid. Sport is big enough for 50 slots for both sexes. The last 10 slots on points always seems to produce at least one smoky podium or high placed top 10 position on the day.

 

While I'm at it it is equally stupid that Kona's total prize purse isn't $1 million+ - paying down to at least 20th position for both sexes. Ironman is a tough gig, it's hard for a pro to be at their top form more than twice per year and its a long way to go (and expensive) to race at Kona - have a good race and finish 11th and not a cent. ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Last Pro Male to finish in 2014 was A Raelert in 10:49, which placed him 859th overall or 769th male.

There were 17 Pro male DNFs.

Last Pro Female to finish was L Gossage in 11:32, which placed her 1157th overall or 192 female.

There were 4 Pro female DNFs.

 

There were only 3 Female Pros who finished slower than Raelert.

32 Females (27 Pro/5 AG) went sub 10.

32 Males (29 Pro/3 AG) went sub 9. (Rinny was 9:00.55)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The percentage of pro men and women at any ironman is way more men.

 

So why should they be equal at the world champs.

 

Then again. It doesn't cost Wtc any more money to have more pros.

 

I can see both sides of the argument.

 

Basically it's up to Wtc. It's their race.

 

Or the pros can vote with their feet and all pro women boycott the world champs.

 

That would be interesting to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The percentage of pro men and women at any ironman is way more men.

 

So why should they be equal at the world champs.

 

Then again. It doesn't cost Wtc any more money to have more pros.

 

I can see both sides of the argument.

 

Basically it's up to Wtc. It's their race.

 

Or the pros can vote with their feet and all pro women boycott the world champs.

 

That would be interesting to see.

It's not a real world champs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The percentage of pro men and women at any ironman is way more men.

The world is made up of roughly 50/50 men/women.

 

There's no reason they should be happy to settle with more pro men than women. They should be proactive in trying to get their sport to represent society.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The professional division at ironman isn't made up 50/50.

 

But as I said. I can see both sides and it wouldn't cost Wtc anymore $$$ for them to race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the big controversy and push for this is a bit of a joke. On the percentage of pros starting in IM the spilt should be 50/22.

 

If women are really interested in women's rights they would be better off putting their energy to come in Islamic countries who are truly pressed.

 

Or as Ayaan Hirsi Ali (Muslim turned atheist intellectual) said:

'Feminism in the West has “won” and feminists are wasting their victory on “trivial bullshit”.'

 

This could certainly be classified as trivial bullshit and women trying to champion for women's causes because the are looking for something to feel aggrieved about. And of all the causes in the world to feel passionate about, it's for the right of 15 broke fit chicks to go and spend another 5k that they don't have.

 

More on the interview with Ayaan on feminism here - she is a very interesting lady - worth following.

 

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/04/05/ayaan-to-liberals-get-your-priorities-straight.html

Edited by Niseko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Nath, listening to IMTalk Ben Hoffman came 2nd and he was ranked 40+.

 

I just don't get it. Ironman will cop negative flack for not giving them the 15 spots but will they cop anything negative for including them? I don't think so.

Actually, John on IMTalk was saying initially he'd like to see it 40/40! And they were talking about how often do you really see someone who was ranked in the 40's have an effect on the race. Not win, but an effect. Then they realised Ben was ranked in the 40's and came second, so that was a big effect. But I think they were moreso talking about say someone back in the 40's who's a gun swimmer or biker who could effect how the race plays out, rather than win or place themselves. And that they don't think any women ranked back in the 40's would have such an effect any place in the race.

 

I think they should have 50/50. But when the rankings are finalised, the person in 1st should just be named the winner, get rid of all the pro's, and then just have age groupers at the race. I mean, wasn't it just a race for everybodies to do in the first place. Send it back to it's roots ;);)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sooo ... Keeping the fields unequal in start numbers is actually feminism - as it will inspire two piece Tri suit wearing female professional triathletes get out there and show ISIS and the Saudis how it's done ...

 

Niseko. Jumped the shark. Much?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate to agree with Niseko on this one :) but the numbers in every other category in this race are worked out according to the numbers in each of those categories at the other races around the world (ie: if there are more 21-25 males than 61-65 males then they get more slots), so why should this be any different. It's a commercial enteprise, not a World Championship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The world is made up of roughly 50/50 men/women.

 

The world may be. But that's pretty irrelevant. The kona pro points register lists 459 men, and there are 272 women. So 10.9% of men will make it to Kona and 13% of women.

 

So really it's sexism against MEN! I better go write about it or something ;)

Edited by dazaau

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The world may be. But that's pretty irrelevant. The kona pro points register lists 459 men, and there are 272 women. So 10.9% of men will make it to Kona and 13% of women.

 

So really it's sexism against MEN! I better go write about it or something ;)

Why is it irrelevant?

 

I'm suggesting they try to build and replicate society not what they already have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a commercial enteprise, not a World Championship.

 

The fact it is a commercial enterprise is exactly why they should be doing it. (As if the moral obligation shouldn't be enough)

You have a potential growth area that is currently being under-represented.

One simple, low/no cost way to increase your exposure is to offer 15 more Pro Female spots in your showcase event.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The fact it is a commercial enterprise is exactly why they should be doing it. (As if the moral obligation shouldn't be enough)

You have a potential growth area that is currently being under-represented.

One simple, low/no cost way to increase your exposure is to offer 15 more Pro Female spots in your showcase event.

silly question from the peanut gallery, but other than meeting an entry requirement, do the Pros have to pay for their entry and how much?

if so, then there's no commercial restriction on the number pros of either gender.

as long as 100% of the field are paying their entry fee, there may as well be equal F/M Pro fields.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

do the Pros have to pay for their entry and how much?

 

Pros pay a yearly fee to race as many MDots as they like/can, whether 1 race or 20.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stats from the last Im and the next Ironman on the calendar

 

Port Mac this weekend
18 Pro men

11 Pro women

 

The African Championships. (Paid as much as Melb and Germany)

Pro men - 32

Pro Women - 18

 

As I said I'm getting splinters on the fence but the pro women aren't exactly supporting other races equally, so I see WTC's point.

Edited by Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

As I said I'm getting splinters on the fence but the pro women aren't exactly supporting other races equally, so I see WTC's point.

If you/they want it to stay like that, then leave it the way it is.

If they want to be part of building the sport/their brand, they need to change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My baseline: I'm all for equal treatment; I'm also for equal treatment under the applicable rules.

 

Qualification for Kona in the Age Groups is based on a participant-percentage criteria. Shouldn't qualification for the Pros be the same?

 

The equality is in the equation.

 

x = (100/y)*z

 

Where x = number of qualifiers; y = applicants; z = percent to qualify.

 

That would represent an equal slot allocation, but choosing arbitrary numbers (50/35) does not; it has to be based on a fair formula.

 

If the sport wants to skew this to increase participation from an under-represented category, then I would support that as it's good for my chosen sport. Such positive-allocation would not be fair from a participation perspective, but would be favourable to the future of the sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you/they want it to stay like that, then leave it the way it is.

If they want to be part of building the sport/their brand, they need to change.

 

How will it build the brand with more women starting Kona and they finish 1000th overall?

 

I think and have said it many times WTC could build womens racing by having Female Professional races only. For example. Only have money and points at say Port Mac for Women. Pay 15-20 deep and get big women fields at their own race and championships.

 

No male pros at all.

 

Start the pro women 60 minutes in front of age groupers so the winner can't get caught by ag males.

 

Promote the hell out of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

How will it build the brand with more women starting Kona and they finish 1000th overall?

 

 

 

I know it's a direct comparison, but it builds the brand by providing lottery, legacy, paid-for, challenged and celebrity spots. Also by providing minimum spots for all participating age groups, even though they may be highly under-represented in the total numbers participating. Many of these folks could be late finishers.

 

Increases the profile by providing media and "regular person" appeal. So could be argued that this increases the number of participants at other IM and 70.3 races.

 

If they increase the number of pro women at Kona the effect may trickle down to more pro women going to other events, and more fast AG women turning pro. Create the opportunity and the women may fill it.

 

if-you-build-it-they-will-come-1.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

This could certainly be classified as trivial bullshit and women trying to champion for women's causes because the are looking for something to feel aggrieved about. And of all the causes in the world to feel passionate about, it's for the right of 15 broke fit chicks to go and spend another 5k that they don't have.

 

I don't often agree with Niesko - but he has certainly nailed it this time - some people are just looking for something to be pissed about :sleepy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the big controversy and push for this is a bit of a joke. On the percentage of pros starting in IM the spilt should be 50/22.

 

If women are really interested in women's rights they would be better off putting their energy to come in Islamic countries who are truly pressed.

 

Or as Ayaan Hirsi Ali (Muslim turned atheist intellectual) said:

'Feminism in the West has “won” and feminists are wasting their victory on “trivial bullshit”.'

 

This could certainly be classified as trivial bullshit and women trying to champion for women's causes because the are looking for something to feel aggrieved about. And of all the causes in the world to feel passionate about, it's for the right of 15 broke fit chicks to go and spend another 5k that they don't have.

 

More on the interview with Ayaan on feminism here - she is a very interesting lady - worth following.

 

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/04/05/ayaan-to-liberals-get-your-priorities-straight.html

 

Good point. At Ironman New Zealand there were 8 pro women in a race that paid 10 deep where from memory there were over 20 men. Theres a lot of other male pro's that look at that and think thats unfair but its just accepted as the norm. Im definitely all for increasing women participation in tri's but the number of women on the pier has no bearing as they already have an opportunity to qualify. The current split of 50/35 is also already in the women favour on a pro participation ratio.

 

In my eyes the biggest issue and the one that affects both sexes is a World Championship that costs more than $5k to attend in fields of either 50 or 35 starters that only pay 10 deep when it should be at least Top 20.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a surprise Witsup are behind this in a big way. I reckon it's pretty embarrassing that some people are fighting passionately for this issue.

 

There are millions of chicks in Islamic countries having their genitals mutilated, being raped then jailed, stoned or forced to marry their rapists, barred from driving, 'honour' killed by their own family members legally and on and on. Far worse treatment than the blacks in South Africa under apartheid. And there is a real shortage of people speaking out or acting in any way against it.

 

Yet they decide that these overly-priveleged professional triathlete women's rights are really worth fighting for in this lame duck of a cause.

 

:sleep1::nopity:

Edited by Niseko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I knocked back a pay rise a work because there are people earning less than me!

 

That'll teach em!

 

Crazy talk Niseko just crazy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's always different ways to look at issues, and most tend to get their opinions spoon fed to them and stick with the 'righteous' majority.

 

And if it is such crazy talk, I am siding with one of the leading female intellectuals on the planet, but she is 'Crazy, just crazy' too?

 

Does anyone think that this #50womentokona movement has nothing to do with 'women's lib/rights' and that it's just a movement for something that is inherently unfair and needs to be corrected, and has no base in gender equality?

 

Because if you believe that - well that is the crazy shit right there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a surprise Witsup are behind this in a big way. I reckon it's pretty embarrassing that some people are fighting passionately for this issue.

 

You're bringing some serious out of context crap into this.

It's a triathlon issue, being discussed in a triathlon site.

No one is proclaiming it to be the biggest issue facing the world today.

It is, however, a fairly sizable issue for Pro women in IM at the very least.

There's absolutely no need for you to toss that other crap into the discussion.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's as a big an issue that it's made out to be either. I just think you can't say it's a non issue because of how bad other women's issues are.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still needs to come down to percentage not equality.

Given women 50 spots isn't equality.

How many pro men are there vs women

 

I feel sometimes this search for equality is going the other direction.

In tennis equality means the women get equal pay despite not performing at the same level or for the same duration

However back to Ironman if we made it simply winner gets in and then a percentage within winners time I can't see why it is so difficult

I do think however if it was done on a time percentage we would see more women at the start line as they don't tend to blow up to the same extent as the men

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is it irrelevant?

 

I'm suggesting they try to build and replicate society not what they already have.

If there's a buck in it I'm sure WTC will be interested. But why should this corporate entity try to get women to participate in something they are not interested in so that the numbers can be 50/50? I imagine ironman appeals proportionately less to women. Possibly because their brains develop faster!

 

Equality is good, but equality doesn't mean the same number of men and women in all interests. It just means low barriers to participation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's as a big an issue that it's made out to be either. I just think you can't say it's a non issue because of how bad other women's issues are.

 

I'm saying it's only become an issue because of people passionate about women's rights.

 

And my point is that if these people are so passionate about women's rights maybe their energies would be better directed elsewhere.

 

Because what they are fighting for is pretty baseless IMO. Use TenPints model and they will lose almost half their slots and be down to around 20.

 

Those 15 chicks would be better off saving their flights, accom and car hire and spending 5k on a 1BR apartment in a kick ass training location for 3 months. Will be a better investment in their athletic development than getting their ass handed to them in Kona.

 

You're bringing some serious out of context crap into this.

It's a triathlon issue, being discussed in a triathlon site.

No one is proclaiming it to be the biggest issue facing the world today.

It is, however, a fairly sizable issue for Pro women in IM at the very least.

There's absolutely no need for you to toss that other crap into the discussion.

 

I fail to see how illustrating these serious issues with women's rights that may or may not be more deserving of making an effort to change than the #50womentoKona is out of context at all.

 

Very relevant IMHO.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Niseko
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fail to see how illustrating these serious issues with women's rights that may or may not be more deserving of making an effort to change than the #50womentoKona is out of context at all.

 

Very relevant IMHO.

 

 

 

Your chosen topics may be relevant to a broad discussion of gender equity or women's rights, but have little to do with this particular discussion.

 

The desire for equal pro starting spots at the IM World champs is a very relevant issue for female pros.

Your own belief that it isn't a worthy cause doesn't negate that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Equality is equal opportunity not equal result.

 

Tenpints theory is the one that presents both sexes with equal opportunity to qualify.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Equality is equal opportunity not equal result.

 

Tenpints theory is the one that presents both sexes with equal opportunity to qualify.

That's fine for maintaining the status quo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As this debate continues the real minority is suppressed. The fat middle aged white male.

 

Will someone please think of the fat middle aged white male?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As this debate continues the real minority is suppressed. The fat middle aged white heterosexual male.

 

Will someone please think of the fat middle aged white male?

Unfortunately that's not a minority. It's a downtrodden majority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tyno, apologies, but it doesn't. The status quo is to continue selecting qualifiers on arbitrary numbers, and not on a fair formula.

 

The other factor to bear in mind for this argument, is that there are qualifying criteria, and using an arbitrary number of qualifying places, doesn't align to this criteria very well. I'll try and explain my thinking through an example.

 

To qualify as a Pro for Kona, you must have raced an IM - not everyone in the top-50/35 does this, and so the window slips further down the list. Just as an example, looking at the current qualifying list of female Pros, and considering the requirement of the top-50 qualifying, the person in 70th position would go to Kona, because there are not enough Pros above her who have not completed an IM [note: I know this will change, but I'm using it as an example].

 

Thinking hypothetically, could this mean that in some cases it would be easier to qualify as a Pro (smash points in 70.3, just finish an IM), than as an Age Grouper (finish first in your IM AG)?

 

As I've said, I'm all for equality, but I want to hear an argument as to why an actual number is fair and not a fair formula. I've read the article Tyno referenced, and it doesn't make any sort of argument - I see Niseko's comments as more appropriate to this thread, if some of the points made in that article are taken as part of the argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Those 15 chicks would be better off saving their flights, accom and car hire and spending 5k on a 1BR apartment in a kick ass training location for 3 months. Will be a better investment in their athletic development than getting their ass handed to them in Kona.

 

Right on :smile1:

 

I say give them a hundred spots - they only pay down to tenth and they have their own wave - it won't make any difference to anyone - the top age groupers will still run a large percentage of them down - it's just a non issue :sleepy: but here we are debating it (what a waste of our lives) :shy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tyno, apologies, but it doesn't. The status quo is to continue selecting qualifiers on arbitrary numbers, and not on a fair formula.

 

Like Niseko, you're changing the discussion.

I understand what you're saying though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...