TheStroBro wrote:
Ajax Bay wrote:
"There are many other ways to spend money to develop athletes" Perhaps you could suggest some? Take a pro licence and get a $20k handout?Is there more money in the ecosystem? I'd argue no. Sponsor money is drying up with a lot of brands sponsoring athletes less and less. First it was shoes, and now it's bikes. Sponsorship is pretty concentrated and even then how much are athletes getting from "The Feed" is up for debate.
The top end is still getting paid if not PAID. But money has fallen out of the bottom. So you want the sport to grow? That means there needs to be money in the lower tier. Olympic Distance non-draft no longer exists for pros.
So, yeah Development pros needed the 20k handout during the pandemic. Instead the Frodeno's of the world got 100k.
You could say that development of the professional game is not their responsibility and that it should fall on a federation and I'd argue against that. The mission of the federation is to grow the entire ecosystem. Not just professionals.
You are consistent. You constantly reach back to the PTO of yesteryear and say they should've kept to their last decade objectives. We have moved on: recommend you do too.
"more money in the ecosystem? I'd argue no. Sponsor money is drying up"
The $7M invested in LC triathlon is hard cash. Its introduction (and NB $2M increase in 2024) and its catalytic effect on IM: getting them to stump up a completely 'new money' $1.7M can be added to that. I suggest you have no quantative insight into any reduction in partnership support but is the reduction anyway even remotely $8M? Perhaps you have an insight? Do share.
You reference an 'ecosystem'. We are saddled with one where there is no 'forced exit' strategy (back to amateur status) for wannabe pros who, after giving it a go, don't make it. After a couple of years and not making the top 200 (with 3 event scores): you're not a 'pro'. Not going sub-4 (sub 4:25 for WPro) or sub-8:15/9:30 at least once in a season . . .
Have scan of some of these: https://stats.protriathletes.org/rankings/men?nation=US
https://stats.protriathletes.org/...ings/women?nation=US
Other nations are available but it seems to me the USA licence handout is profligate and then sclerotic with an ineffective annual validation mechanism. Please disabuse me.
You "argue that" "development of the professional game is [the PTO's] responsibility"
I think PTO would argue that that responsibility (to the extent it exists) is shared with others and by their organisation of athletes and the construction of a lucrative top tier forcing (effectively) the best athletes to race one another more than bi-annually and thus opening the next level of events to the second tier pros to win money, they (the PTO) have executed their part to full effect. Rising tides and floating boats (but including flotsam) and all that.
Responsibility? Have a read of Dan's great 'open letter' to IRONMAN's new CEO:
https://www.slowtwitch.com/...gal_Status_8897.html