mathematics wrote:
dcpinsonn wrote:
Where is the outrage for the # of pros or is it just when it's primarily US based pros? . . . I think some thought should be given to the # of start line spots reserved for men & women. Seems like it's just first come first serve so we get a race with a ton more men. There are more MPros so idk what the breakdown should be but probably not 90-30. & idk if more women wanted to race. I think the system is fair now where you can see if races are filling up far enough out. It's on you to plan your races & sign up.
Either way limiting the field because they didn't buy enough race rangers is another example of IM . . . .
2. Who (@mathematics) is arguing for equal numbers of starts for men and women in these races? You are making it up and getting your logic in the twist you desired.
3. On the number of pros, any outrage (@dcpinsonn) should perhaps focus not on numbers but on standard. If an MPro is finishing more than 30 minutes behind the winner in a 70.3, they need to have a little think, perhaps when the leading women cycle or run past (not making this a chick thing, but the normal delta between M & W for a 70.3 is 25.
Let's check back on this wrt Valencia in 12 hours (1100 CEST).
As a(n 'outrage') benchmark:
- at Oceanside 27 of the 70 starters (38%) were more than 30 minutes behind Sanders (+14%)
- at 2023 Oceanside 20 of the 56 starters (36%) were more than 30 minutes behind Bergere (+14%)
- at 2022 Oceanside 17 of the 46 starters (37%) were more than 30 minutes behind Laundry (+14%).
Today (Gran Canaria) MPros > 30 mins behind Harrett/Hoegenhaug = 0 (+4 DNFs of 26 starters).
Someone mentioned 70.3 Lanza (as the 'opening event' of the European season, cf Oceanside):
- in 2023 MPros > 30 mins behind Nieschlag = 3 (+6 DNFs of 43 starters)
- in 2022 MPros > 30 mins behind Bergere = 5 (+6 DNFs of 45 starters).