Jump to content
VeloKyniska

Kona Equal Pro spots

Recommended Posts

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 ;);)

I think the Ben Hofmann arguement is void. If males had 40 slots I can guarantee he still would have qualified. He did what he needed to do under the current conditions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FD, you are exactly right there. We don't know how changing the men back to 40 would affect how the men qualify. No extra benefit on race day qualifying first or 50th.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Ben Hofmann arguement is void. If males had 40 slots I can guarantee he still would have qualified. He did what he needed to do under the current conditions.

Agree. Potts said if there were 40 spots he would do what it takes. If there were 20 he would still make it.

 

I dare say hoffman would be the same.

 

Even robbo did what it took to get there last year. Made it too until he crashed and didnt start.

Edited by Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just another point of view - if tennis or golf has less female professionals overall should they have less chance to play through to the grand final? 50/50 what is the downside?????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point KTJ - as I'm looking at equality through equations, I did a quick look-up on the Tennis side:

 

ATP listed male pros: 2181

WTP listed female pros: 1272

 

 

WTC listed male pros: 459

WTC listed female pros: 272

 

Wimbledon (as an example) takes 128 players from each, that's 6% of the men, 10% of the women, or looked at another way, 7.41% of all Pros.

 

WTC takes 11.63% of all Pros, with 11% men, 13% women.

 

To mirror the tennis % for Kona, there'd be 27 women, and 46 men, but that's not really a fair evaluation as we need to have the same numbers competing for each gender, with the same percentage spread. As the ratio of men:women in each sport are similar (2181:1272 = 459:268) this comparison might play out.

 

So, to match the equality of tennis and have the exact same number of Pros from each gender, that follows the same percentage spread as the Tennis, we would have:

 

27 Pros from each gender: 5.88% of men Pros, 9.93% of female Pros.

 

If we wanted to play this out, given the current 2% spread, what number of Pros from each gender do we need to keep that spread? 13 of each (1.95%).

 

Could there be another question asked: what is a fair percentage spread that allows for the same number of Pros from each gender, without the proportionality become so out of kilter that qualification in one of the genders becomes too easy?

 

50 of each gives a 7.5% spread (10.9 v 18.4)

40 of each gives a 6.0% spread (8.7 v 14.7)

30 of each gives a 4.5% spread (6.5 v 11.0)

 

...I am so not focused on work today!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that maths is involved, I'm getting outa this thread!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Spot on. Using same 'logic' as the Lomborg Consensus to advocate doing nothing about Climate Change until there is a cure for Malaria or AIDs.

 

Equal treatment for male and female pros was a hot button topic back at the 1989 World Cup triathlon. 26 years ago ffs!

Edited by Andrew #1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aren't sports like tennis and golf slightly different in that in say tennis the draw needs to be filled and the draw is set at a number of competitors for it to work mathematically and similarly for golf too I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aren't sports like tennis and golf slightly different in that in say tennis the draw needs to be filled and the draw is set at a number of competitors for it to work mathematically and similarly for golf too I think.

 

If the comparable standards applied to female pros were applied to Tennis then the main draw at Wimbledon would have 128 male slots but only 64 female slots (yeah I know 30 isn't exactly half of 50, but you get my drift).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why wouldn't you want to inspire more women to step up as professionals by offering an equal amount of slots? Turning Niseko's argument on its head, it's hardly the end of civilisation if another 20 women get a pro start, is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many female pro's ranked 31 - 50 would likely get into the prizemoney at Kona? In tennis, pro's ranked 100+ can "have their day" and lop off a seeded player or 2 to get a good payday. Is that likely to happen in IM?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why wouldn't you want to inspire more women to step up as professionals by offering an equal amount of slots? Turning Niseko's argument on its head, it's hardly the end of civilisation if another 20 women get a pro start, is it?

Isn't the prizemoney equal?

 

If they are good enough, then that should inspire them to step up as professionals. Unlike tennis where the 1st round losers still get paid (probably a damn sight more than 10th place at Kona), getting a guernsey to run on the field doesn't pay your bills in IM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't the prizemoney equal?

 

If they are good enough, then that should inspire them to step up as professionals. Unlike tennis where the 1st round losers still get paid (probably a damn sight more than 10th place at Kona), getting a guernsey to run on the field doesn't pay your bills in IM.

 

Wimbledon 2014 Womens first round LOSER 27,000 pounds (sorry not sure how to do the £ symbol)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Wimbledon 2014 Womens first round LOSER 27,000 pounds (sorry not sure how to do the £ symbol)

How can you even compare the sports?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I get the argument. If we go 50/50 in the pro ranks shouldn't we also do the same for the amateurs? 60 qualifying spots at a race = 30 for men + 30 for women? Going further what about age groups? Should 60 spots be divided equally as 3 for each sex in each age group? If not why not? How is the argument any different?

 

If this is proposed as a measure to improve the perception of equality or increase female participation (both valid goals) then let's call it what it is, positive discrimination. Justified affirmative action. Why the need to pretend that it's something that it certainly isn't?

 

And as others have pointed out the high cost and minimal chance of reward for those not fast enough to qualify in the existing 35, is the cause really about allowing the pros with a shot to take their season a little easier and still qualify? Given that we already see some of the men do it why don't WTC just say "We've heard you and we agree, equal representation. From now on 35 men and 35 women pros plus 15 more spots to auction to the highest bidder"?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ironman isnt tennis.

Using the tennis anology which has equal reprepresentation then females would only do 2/3rds of the course....

 

Im not supporting or suggesting that to occur but pointing it out as no one else has. I do think femalesfemale tennis players should have matches reqiring 3 sets won instead of 2. Heck the female ironman example that they do the same course as males should debunk any endurance concerns (if that's what it is).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, as some have pointed out, the blokes that are good enough to do any good on the day do what they need to do to qualify to get there.

 

The women would be the same, no matter 35 or 50 spots. If ur good enough, ul do what u need to do to qualify in that 35.

 

Im all for womens equality, but sometimes equality isnt equal numbers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok maybe tennis was the best sport to pick! But if we look at sport across the board at a professional level there are very few where both genders are stuck in together in the same race/game/match. Are the women and men racing each other- I don't think so (but I know men don't like to be chicked!) so why can't the top 50 in each gender regardless of the initial pool this is drawn from race at the world championship??? I still haven't heard any salient arguments for why not? Why does it have anything to do with the men??? We don't race you, we race in our own gender, so what's the problem?????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty sure if they add 15 pro women they have to take away 15 spots from age groupers or at least I thought that's what an article I read said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet they let chefs, American football players, ebay spots, lottery, legacy - are they any worthier than professional women????

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok maybe tennis was the best sport to pick! But if we look at sport across the board at a professional level there are very few where both genders are stuck in together in the same race/game/match. Are the women and men racing each other- I don't think so (but I know men don't like to be chicked!) so why can't the top 50 in each gender regardless of the initial pool this is drawn from race at the world championship??? I still haven't heard any salient arguments for why not? Why does it have anything to do with the men??? We don't race you, we race in our own gender, so what's the problem?????

Without deviating too much from the topic, there is often the praise that IM is great because age groupers get to race the same race as the pros and evenfemales racing with males (sorry KTJ not having a go at you or anyone). But really its not by choice it's by necessity of not having the course tied up for 2 days. Just look at ITU which is different races. Heck even IM nowhave done the next best thing by having 3 starts (yes one rolling) for males, females and then age groupers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Why wouldn't you want to inspire more women to step up as professionals by offering an equal amount of slots? Turning Niseko's argument on its head, it's hardly the end of civilisation if another 20 women get a pro start, is it?

 

so what's the problem?????

 

Because it doesn't make sense. And just as the #50womentoKona are doing WTC should stand up for what they think is right.

 

And for mine WTC are correct and I can not see how having 50 women racing in Kona would help attract more women to the sport or develop the athletes, or be of much good for anything at all really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't make sense????? That's as explanatory as "because I said so" !!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question is simple. Do you want equality or do you want positive discrimination?

 

FWIW I can't see why WTC is resisting. It's not worth the grief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kind of thought it had been explained enough already without having to repeat but here you go:

 

As a ratio of competitiors female pros should not even be getting 35 > ergo > does not make sense.

 

Is that better?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even without the added spots for the females the maths speaks for itself.
Racing as a pro female or competing as a pro in another sport like tennis is easier then as a male

Time for me to go Bruce Jenner and race as a female

Its too bloody hard and unfair as a male

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using the tennis anology which has equal reprepresentation then females would only do 2/3rds of the course....

 

Im not supporting or suggesting that to occur but pointing it out as no one else has. I do think femalesfemale tennis players should have matches reqiring 3 sets won instead of 2. Heck the female ironman example that they do the same course as males should debunk any endurance concerns (if that's what it is).

 

Its not a case of endurance but simply that people tend to not watch the females play

Despite females being paid the same the tickets to see the womens play is much cheaper then the mens matches

When there is a womens or mens match both being played on the same court

Majority of people are going to see the mens game and might arrive a little early to see some of the womens match or stay for a bit after the mens match if they play ladies after the mens but this doesn't tend to happen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not a case of endurance but simply that people tend to not watch the females play

Despite females being paid the same the tickets to see the womens play is much cheaper then the mens matches

When there is a womens or mens match both being played on the same court

Majority of people are going to see the mens game and might arrive a little early to see some of the womens match or stay for a bit after the mens match if they play ladies after the mens but this doesn't tend to happen

Woah - that's harsh. Maybe we should just get back in the kitchen

Niseko - I totally get the ratio and I agree at an age group level this is how it should work. But I disagree that by increasing the quota at the professional level will encourage up and coming age groupers to have a crack. Agree to disagree?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the race is given the label of World Championships, I wonder why the ones who are negative to equal numbers of Pro Women to Pro Men think the way they do.

 

It's not an Age group scenario of user percentage, it's supposed to be the race for outright honours of best male and female IM athlete in the world.

 

In this case they currently have 50 men and 35 women's. This is the plain and simple reason why it's unfair, it's supposed to be the "World Championships" and there should be equal numbers.

 

There are more than enough Pro Women on the rankings list and if you notice the 50th ranked female has virtually the same amount of ranking points as the 50th place Male.

So as far as the yearly points earned they are of equal status in more ways than just 50th place.

 

Women's Ranking :- http://www.ironman.com/triathlon/triathlon-rankings/kpr-women.aspx#axzz3YfTCjbkP

Men's Ranking :- http://www.ironman.com/triathlon/triathlon-rankings/kpr-men.aspx#axzz3YfTCjbkP

 

 

Points table :- http://www.ironman.com/triathlon/organizations/pro-membership/event-registration.aspx#axzz3F5NFbgfw

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edit, stopped caring soon after posting.

 

 

haha I think thats the same for most including Messick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the race is given the label of World Championships, I wonder why the ones who are negative to equal numbers of Pro Women to Pro Men think the way they do.

 

It's not an Age group scenario of user percentage, it's supposed to be the race for outright honours of best male and female IM athlete in the world.

 

In this case they currently have 50 men and 35 women's. This is the plain and simple reason why it's unfair, it's supposed to be the "World Championships" and there should be equal numbers.

 

There are more than enough Pro Women on the rankings list and if you notice the 50th ranked female has virtually the same amount of ranking points as the 50th place Male.

So as far as the yearly points earned they are of equal status in more ways than just 50th place.

 

Women's Ranking :- http://www.ironman.com/triathlon/triathlon-rankings/kpr-women.aspx#axzz3YfTCjbkP

Men's Ranking :- http://www.ironman.com/triathlon/triathlon-rankings/kpr-men.aspx#axzz3YfTCjbkP

 

 

Points table :- http://www.ironman.com/triathlon/organizations/pro-membership/event-registration.aspx#axzz3F5NFbgfw

The points are easier to get when you have less competition..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The points are easier to get when you have less competition..

The men target races that best provide points as the women will do also.

Likewise some age groupers go to races that provide better qualifying opportunities.

 

It's still supposed to be a "World Championships" isn't it?

Were the top X in the rankings are eligible, so that makes no reasoning to have differing numbers between Male & Female Pro's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The points are easier to get when you have less competition..

Yep Messick was saying despite paying the same amount of prize money to both Men and Women at all events, they have at times not been able disperse all the Female prize money as they.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The men target races that best provide points as the women will do also.

Likewise some age groupers go to races that provide better qualifying opportunities.

 

It's still supposed to be a "World Championships" isn't it?

Were the top X in the rankings are eligible, so that makes no reasoning to have differing numbers between Male & Female Pro's.

 

VK, have you considered how much easier it is for female Pros to target points?

 

Look at IM Wales as an example, 5 female Pros competed (3 x DNF), 18 men (5 x DNF) - easier points for the female field.

 

With fewer female Pros, and it being easier for female Pros to claim points at races, having equal places puts qualifying very much in favour of female Pros. Based on the maths, it's easier already.

 

Looking at the two people in 50th place: the male has raced 2 x IM, the female 3 x 70.3. Let's say this plays out through to the end, it could mean that by performing in 70.3 races, and then strolling around an IM in16:59:59, someone could get to Kona - is that really qualifying for an IM World Championship?

 

I have no issue with it being equal numbers, but as Sitkman says, it would need to be recognised for what it is; claiming that not having equal places is 'discriminatory' is perhaps what brought in Niseko's 'get real' perspective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VK, have you considered how much easier it is for female Pros to target points?

 

Look at IM Wales as an example, 5 female Pros competed (3 x DNF), 18 men (5 x DNF) - easier points for the female field.

 

 

I really could have done without seeing that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really could have done without seeing that!

Pros are soft FP! Not made of the good stuff like us AG plodders :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's keep this thread on topic.

 

If you feel the need to take this topic into an area that you can't seem to help but post about in every topic - don't

 

If you feel you need to post the same posts back to that person, inflaming the situation - don't.

 

We've all read it enough and are getting sick of it on both fronts.

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...