Bit of a long post here on the future of Ironman…
I love endurance sports. I love pushing limits. I love the concept of doing things that seem outlandish, perhaps a bit crazy. I love fighting the odds. I love a challenge. I love the attitudes needed to do such things. Taking Ironman not as a corporation, but taking Ironman as a concept, as a race distance, it is all of those things. It is incredible. I think that Ironman and Hawaii, that Ironman and Kona are so closely bound up as to be disentanglable.
I’ve learned a little bit about the fantastic history of Ironman, and the pioneers who took it on in the early days. I said I’ve learned a “little bit” – I could never possibly have all the great names on the tip of my tongue. But, to start with, I’m talking about the people who dreamed it up. “Let’s combine the three toughest single-day sporting events on Hawaii (which would have been on a par with the three toughest single-day sporting events anywhere in the world at the time), let’s combine them into a single race and whoever finishes first, whoever survives it, shall be called the Ironman.” Born out of a sense of pushing and exploring limits, of trying to make the impossible possible.
I’m also talking about the likes of Dave Scott, who initially said an Ironman would be a tough 3 days. Dave Scott, to me, is as much a pioneer and adventurer as, for example, the astronauts. No-one knew if the human body could complete an Ironman. No-one knew if the human body could race an Ironman. Dave Scott took “completing” an Ironman and through his bloody-mindedness, showed that it could be raced – he went from “completing” in around 10 hours, to “racing” in just over 8 hours, and I would say on a par with today’s technologically enhanced performances.
Also people like Mark Allen, who fought the Ironwar with Dave Scott, capturing public imagination.
People like Julie Moss, who pushed so hard she ended up on her hands and knees, reduced to crawling desperately for the finishing line. People like John and Judy Collins, who set the race up in the spirit of endeavour, in the spirit of sport, in the spirit of exploring limits.
And where one leads, others follow. It is incredible that we, with training and discipline and the attitudes and qualities described above, can do likewise. We can complete an Ironman. We can qualify for Hawaii and follow in the footsteps of pioneering greatness.
To me, that is what Ironman is. Ironman is more than a triathlon. Ironman is the ultimate challenge. Hawaii is the ultimate destination. It is the stuff of legend. Ironman have the ultimate challenge in the ultimate destination. It’s a race, of course, but more so than any other race (any other single-day race anyway), it is a competition against oneself. I love it.
However, I am not convinced that Ironman is necessarily being run in the spirit in which it was set up. In today’s world, corporatisation, profit and monetisation are becoming more and more prevalent. Ironman seems to be following that trend. It has become a global juggernaut. Races abound. 1500 cash cows are needed to make a race viable. How much longer can such growth continue? I think there’s a growing sense that Ironman are simply a for-profit corporation, and I think they need to be careful about that.
And these races can only be held with the goodwill of a huge number of volunteers. The volunteers and communities make the races what they are. I’ve done races where third parties are paid to do the roles of volunteers. These paid third parties usually couldn’t care less about the race. I’ve finished races and gone back to jog along the course to support slower (but not lesser) athletes still out on course. The third parties are generally not interested in the race in the slightest. Not a single clap (think of the London marathon debacle of last year where they were laughing at competitors). The volunteers do it because they want to be there. They want to help. They want to encourage. They are fantastic. Ironman’s whole “business model” is based on goodwill. And I think they should remember that goodwill is a multi-directional thing.
Ironman must have something like 100 races per year. If 2000 people enter each race and pay an average of, say, £400, then Ironman are pulling in £80 million per year. Huge sums of money. They must also pull in a lot of money on merchandise. Kona 2019 merchandise and gear is now available online for a quarter of the price that it cost at the event. Yet you read of professionals who win an Ironman and for this, they get a few thousand dollars. And I think there’s a perception that, given that the “workforce” who allow them to put on their races are all volunteers, where does all the money go?
I’m a strong believer in fairness and in fair play. To get involved in Ironman, and certainly to compete in Ironman, you need to have money. You can buy speed. Equipment is constantly changing. There’s a need to keep up in the “arms war.” You read about people who qualify for Kona, but can’t afford to go.
So I have a few suggestions for things that Ironman could do differently. I’m no expert, and some of this might not be possible or feasible, but these are my observations/thoughts.
Here’s the first thing. They need more coverage of their races. And they need that coverage to be free and widely available. These are the greatest races in the world and yet they barely get any mainstream media coverage. I doubt there are many in the BBC who even know who David McNamee is. Admittedly a 9-hour Ironman is a tough race to “sell” to the average punter, but a really well-done highlights package, with knowledgeable and enthusiastic commentators, and background stories/interviews with the pros, and indeed the age-groupers, would do so much for Ironman. It would be a great showcase.
With this, then Ironman could go after big sponsors more aggressively, in the same manner as their aggressive growth strategy over the past decade since I’ve been involved. This would bring more money into the sport (when I say “sport”, I mean into Ironman – I almost see Ironman as a separate sport to triathlon). This would then allow them to pay their professionals more, and look after them better, and build loyalty among them. And it would make Ironman a viable career for more of them.
There seems to be a lot of unrest along the professionals, which has led to the formation of the professional triathletes organisation. They’ve got Ironman, they’ve got Challenge, they’ve got the ITU races, they’ve got all sorts, but they don’t have a lot of coherency as far as I can see, and it’s tough to make a living for all but the very top pros. And yet Ironman pros are among the nicest and most approachable people you can ever meet, I’ve met a few of them and they’ve all been great.
I think Ironman should be run by people who know Ironman as a sport, as a concept, rather than as a corporate business. To me it would have been a great idea for the professional triathletes’ organisation to have taken over the reins. To me it somehow seems wrong that the pros didn’t get to buy it but some glossy venture capitalist did. Again, not really being run in the spirit in which it is set up. It’s like people managing (for example) teachers and doctors, who have never taught nor been on the medical front line. The pros would “get” Ironman and the spirit. They’d have been ideal custodians (to my mind).
I realise it might be difficult, but I think they should go all-out to make the world championships a 2-day race. The half-worlds in South Africa 2018 did this, and it worked really well. Nice 2019 was the same I believe. You got to watch a race, and then compete in a race. The world championships is becoming more and more difficult to qualify for, with fewer slots per race and the standard of athletes getting higher and higher. (I can only hope there is no mechanical or pharmaceutical assistance). Having a 2-day race would mean more people could qualify and it wouldn’t become quite so impossible (I do realise I probably got a bit lucky). This is all assuming that after the Coronavirus outbreak passes, the world that emerges will be one in which we can still travel internationally...
There is so much drafting at Kona. I saw a lot of drafting in 2019, even with the new wave starts. So they could break up the age-groups. M18-24, M30-34, M40-44, M50-54 on one day and all other males plus females on the other day. And have strict drafting penalties. I’d also say there needs to be much more of a chance you could be drug tested or your bike tested, with big penalties that will actually deter people. You can’t just act on tip-offs. If someone is doping, they aren’t going to tell many people about it!
It could be a Friday/Saturday race, or a Friday/Sunday race, to allow a day of normality between races and to allow re-stocking of aid stations etc. Then you could have 1.5 to 2 times the number of competitors there, and so the world championship dreamers would actually stand a much better chance of being able to qualify against the uber-age-groupers who are now dominating.
I think they should rotate the world championships to allow everyone a better chance of being able to afford the trip to a more local world championships. They could still hold a Kona race every year. In the non-world championship years, they could have it (possibly) as a 1-day event, open for entry via a variety of means: general entries, a ballot, legacy/commitment entries, and possibly a number of funded spots for people who have qualified in previous years but who have had to decline their spot because they couldn’t afford it. In the world championship year, it could be a 2-day affair. The world championship could then rotate around some of the other iconic courses on the different continents as a 2-day event. Kona favours an athlete who can go well in the heat and who is a big powerhouse on the bike. Somewhere like Wales would favour a climber who likes cooler conditions. It would make things interesting.
I do think that there should be some “pre-requisites” which you have to meet before entering an Ironman. I believe for various hill and mountain races, you have to show that you have completed “less extreme” races successfully. So possibly there’s an argument to say that you have to have done an Olympic triathlon including an open water swim within the previous 2-3 years before you enter an Ironman.
I also do think that they need to make a distinction between “fast” competitors and people who just want to get round. I am not at all belittling anyone – anyone who finishes an Ironman is worthy of high praise. But the big running races often have elite or “good for age” entry, and separate starts etc. But then how would Ironman do that? They shouldn’t do it by virtue of All World Athlete status, because I think that’s just a way to keep people coming back and coming back – if you don’t race, you lose your status. I was very disheartened when I missed Kona by one place at Wales 2014 to receive an email from Ironman immediately afterwards saying I was so close, my dreams were almost a reality, “you have the fitness, all you need is the race” and why not take the next opportunity to qualify… at Ironman Melbourne? I’m not made of money…! Nor do I have the ability to race continuously…
Maybe some sort of proof of recent results, watts per kilo held, swim time, half marathon or marathon time etc could help with this, and then you get to start in a mass start (I say mass start, but maybe this would only be the top 300-400 per race, which wouldn’t be too massive), and then it’s a true race to the finish line, without worrying about time deltas.
I think they could do better with their deferrals and refunds etc. People generally don’t take an Ironman on lightly and it dominates the best part of 6-12 months. To me it seems harsh that not only is a year of work wasted, but all the money as well, if you get injured in the run-up to a race. I’m not sure how it could work but surely developing some sort of system where you get all your money back up to, say, 3 or 4 months beforehand, and then a deferral option into a non-sold out later race or the same race next year.
Or if it’s a popular race, then why not have a waiting list where you could transfer your entry to someone on the waiting list. You could get all sorts of stats on it – you might get 10% of entrants looking money back with 3-4 months to go, in which case Ironman can still accept new entries. Then you might get another 10% looking to defer with less than 3 months to go, and you could get the stats on it and tell people on the waiting list that based on previous years, you’re number 57 on the wait list and last year number 10 had a spot with 2 months to go, number 50 had a spot with 1 month to go, and number 80 had a spot with 2 weeks to go, and then people could make their own decisions about how likely they were to get a place. It just seems that there’s a perception that they want to fill their races, get the money, and that’s all they want – you’re then a number on a list who has, by and large, irrefundably committed the money come hell or high water.
Also, and I thought this a while ago, I can see them now moving towards online racing. Swim technology is going to develop a lot in future. I can see swim power meters, goggles with built-in displays of data (heart rate, power etc), and swimming machines in homes. I can see running power meters too. I think there could end up being an online race series. And they’ve already started this with the coronavirus crisis and having to cancel all the races. I can see there being fees for this, race goody bags sent out, finisher gear being sent out, results posted, possibly with the carrot of qualifying for Kona, and as is already the case the Taupo worlds (if that even goes ahead).
Or maybe they will create a virtual world championships. I could see them creating a smart contraption like the Transformer robots which will encompass a swim machine, a bike trainer, and a running machine, along with scales, a flatscreen and a video camera. It’ll fold away and it’ll be a virtual race platform, for use in the home or in a club’s central location. Whatever they do, I’m sure you’ll have to pay for it…
Whatever they do, I really hope they do keep the founding spirit alive…
I love endurance sports. I love pushing limits. I love the concept of doing things that seem outlandish, perhaps a bit crazy. I love fighting the odds. I love a challenge. I love the attitudes needed to do such things. Taking Ironman not as a corporation, but taking Ironman as a concept, as a race distance, it is all of those things. It is incredible. I think that Ironman and Hawaii, that Ironman and Kona are so closely bound up as to be disentanglable.
I’ve learned a little bit about the fantastic history of Ironman, and the pioneers who took it on in the early days. I said I’ve learned a “little bit” – I could never possibly have all the great names on the tip of my tongue. But, to start with, I’m talking about the people who dreamed it up. “Let’s combine the three toughest single-day sporting events on Hawaii (which would have been on a par with the three toughest single-day sporting events anywhere in the world at the time), let’s combine them into a single race and whoever finishes first, whoever survives it, shall be called the Ironman.” Born out of a sense of pushing and exploring limits, of trying to make the impossible possible.
I’m also talking about the likes of Dave Scott, who initially said an Ironman would be a tough 3 days. Dave Scott, to me, is as much a pioneer and adventurer as, for example, the astronauts. No-one knew if the human body could complete an Ironman. No-one knew if the human body could race an Ironman. Dave Scott took “completing” an Ironman and through his bloody-mindedness, showed that it could be raced – he went from “completing” in around 10 hours, to “racing” in just over 8 hours, and I would say on a par with today’s technologically enhanced performances.
Nicknamed "the Man". He was the man. He is the man.
I met him and liked him, he had time for everyone.
Also people like Mark Allen, who fought the Ironwar with Dave Scott, capturing public imagination.
Surely one of the most iconic sports photographs ever
People like Julie Moss, who pushed so hard she ended up on her hands and knees, reduced to crawling desperately for the finishing line. People like John and Judy Collins, who set the race up in the spirit of endeavour, in the spirit of sport, in the spirit of exploring limits.
And where one leads, others follow. It is incredible that we, with training and discipline and the attitudes and qualities described above, can do likewise. We can complete an Ironman. We can qualify for Hawaii and follow in the footsteps of pioneering greatness.
To me, that is what Ironman is. Ironman is more than a triathlon. Ironman is the ultimate challenge. Hawaii is the ultimate destination. It is the stuff of legend. Ironman have the ultimate challenge in the ultimate destination. It’s a race, of course, but more so than any other race (any other single-day race anyway), it is a competition against oneself. I love it.
However, I am not convinced that Ironman is necessarily being run in the spirit in which it was set up. In today’s world, corporatisation, profit and monetisation are becoming more and more prevalent. Ironman seems to be following that trend. It has become a global juggernaut. Races abound. 1500 cash cows are needed to make a race viable. How much longer can such growth continue? I think there’s a growing sense that Ironman are simply a for-profit corporation, and I think they need to be careful about that.
And these races can only be held with the goodwill of a huge number of volunteers. The volunteers and communities make the races what they are. I’ve done races where third parties are paid to do the roles of volunteers. These paid third parties usually couldn’t care less about the race. I’ve finished races and gone back to jog along the course to support slower (but not lesser) athletes still out on course. The third parties are generally not interested in the race in the slightest. Not a single clap (think of the London marathon debacle of last year where they were laughing at competitors). The volunteers do it because they want to be there. They want to help. They want to encourage. They are fantastic. Ironman’s whole “business model” is based on goodwill. And I think they should remember that goodwill is a multi-directional thing.
Ironman must have something like 100 races per year. If 2000 people enter each race and pay an average of, say, £400, then Ironman are pulling in £80 million per year. Huge sums of money. They must also pull in a lot of money on merchandise. Kona 2019 merchandise and gear is now available online for a quarter of the price that it cost at the event. Yet you read of professionals who win an Ironman and for this, they get a few thousand dollars. And I think there’s a perception that, given that the “workforce” who allow them to put on their races are all volunteers, where does all the money go?
I’m a strong believer in fairness and in fair play. To get involved in Ironman, and certainly to compete in Ironman, you need to have money. You can buy speed. Equipment is constantly changing. There’s a need to keep up in the “arms war.” You read about people who qualify for Kona, but can’t afford to go.
So I have a few suggestions for things that Ironman could do differently. I’m no expert, and some of this might not be possible or feasible, but these are my observations/thoughts.
Here’s the first thing. They need more coverage of their races. And they need that coverage to be free and widely available. These are the greatest races in the world and yet they barely get any mainstream media coverage. I doubt there are many in the BBC who even know who David McNamee is. Admittedly a 9-hour Ironman is a tough race to “sell” to the average punter, but a really well-done highlights package, with knowledgeable and enthusiastic commentators, and background stories/interviews with the pros, and indeed the age-groupers, would do so much for Ironman. It would be a great showcase.
With this, then Ironman could go after big sponsors more aggressively, in the same manner as their aggressive growth strategy over the past decade since I’ve been involved. This would bring more money into the sport (when I say “sport”, I mean into Ironman – I almost see Ironman as a separate sport to triathlon). This would then allow them to pay their professionals more, and look after them better, and build loyalty among them. And it would make Ironman a viable career for more of them.
There seems to be a lot of unrest along the professionals, which has led to the formation of the professional triathletes organisation. They’ve got Ironman, they’ve got Challenge, they’ve got the ITU races, they’ve got all sorts, but they don’t have a lot of coherency as far as I can see, and it’s tough to make a living for all but the very top pros. And yet Ironman pros are among the nicest and most approachable people you can ever meet, I’ve met a few of them and they’ve all been great.
I think Ironman should be run by people who know Ironman as a sport, as a concept, rather than as a corporate business. To me it would have been a great idea for the professional triathletes’ organisation to have taken over the reins. To me it somehow seems wrong that the pros didn’t get to buy it but some glossy venture capitalist did. Again, not really being run in the spirit in which it is set up. It’s like people managing (for example) teachers and doctors, who have never taught nor been on the medical front line. The pros would “get” Ironman and the spirit. They’d have been ideal custodians (to my mind).
I realise it might be difficult, but I think they should go all-out to make the world championships a 2-day race. The half-worlds in South Africa 2018 did this, and it worked really well. Nice 2019 was the same I believe. You got to watch a race, and then compete in a race. The world championships is becoming more and more difficult to qualify for, with fewer slots per race and the standard of athletes getting higher and higher. (I can only hope there is no mechanical or pharmaceutical assistance). Having a 2-day race would mean more people could qualify and it wouldn’t become quite so impossible (I do realise I probably got a bit lucky). This is all assuming that after the Coronavirus outbreak passes, the world that emerges will be one in which we can still travel internationally...
There is so much drafting at Kona. I saw a lot of drafting in 2019, even with the new wave starts. So they could break up the age-groups. M18-24, M30-34, M40-44, M50-54 on one day and all other males plus females on the other day. And have strict drafting penalties. I’d also say there needs to be much more of a chance you could be drug tested or your bike tested, with big penalties that will actually deter people. You can’t just act on tip-offs. If someone is doping, they aren’t going to tell many people about it!
It could be a Friday/Saturday race, or a Friday/Sunday race, to allow a day of normality between races and to allow re-stocking of aid stations etc. Then you could have 1.5 to 2 times the number of competitors there, and so the world championship dreamers would actually stand a much better chance of being able to qualify against the uber-age-groupers who are now dominating.
I think they should rotate the world championships to allow everyone a better chance of being able to afford the trip to a more local world championships. They could still hold a Kona race every year. In the non-world championship years, they could have it (possibly) as a 1-day event, open for entry via a variety of means: general entries, a ballot, legacy/commitment entries, and possibly a number of funded spots for people who have qualified in previous years but who have had to decline their spot because they couldn’t afford it. In the world championship year, it could be a 2-day affair. The world championship could then rotate around some of the other iconic courses on the different continents as a 2-day event. Kona favours an athlete who can go well in the heat and who is a big powerhouse on the bike. Somewhere like Wales would favour a climber who likes cooler conditions. It would make things interesting.
I do think that there should be some “pre-requisites” which you have to meet before entering an Ironman. I believe for various hill and mountain races, you have to show that you have completed “less extreme” races successfully. So possibly there’s an argument to say that you have to have done an Olympic triathlon including an open water swim within the previous 2-3 years before you enter an Ironman.
I also do think that they need to make a distinction between “fast” competitors and people who just want to get round. I am not at all belittling anyone – anyone who finishes an Ironman is worthy of high praise. But the big running races often have elite or “good for age” entry, and separate starts etc. But then how would Ironman do that? They shouldn’t do it by virtue of All World Athlete status, because I think that’s just a way to keep people coming back and coming back – if you don’t race, you lose your status. I was very disheartened when I missed Kona by one place at Wales 2014 to receive an email from Ironman immediately afterwards saying I was so close, my dreams were almost a reality, “you have the fitness, all you need is the race” and why not take the next opportunity to qualify… at Ironman Melbourne? I’m not made of money…! Nor do I have the ability to race continuously…
Maybe some sort of proof of recent results, watts per kilo held, swim time, half marathon or marathon time etc could help with this, and then you get to start in a mass start (I say mass start, but maybe this would only be the top 300-400 per race, which wouldn’t be too massive), and then it’s a true race to the finish line, without worrying about time deltas.
I think they could do better with their deferrals and refunds etc. People generally don’t take an Ironman on lightly and it dominates the best part of 6-12 months. To me it seems harsh that not only is a year of work wasted, but all the money as well, if you get injured in the run-up to a race. I’m not sure how it could work but surely developing some sort of system where you get all your money back up to, say, 3 or 4 months beforehand, and then a deferral option into a non-sold out later race or the same race next year.
Or if it’s a popular race, then why not have a waiting list where you could transfer your entry to someone on the waiting list. You could get all sorts of stats on it – you might get 10% of entrants looking money back with 3-4 months to go, in which case Ironman can still accept new entries. Then you might get another 10% looking to defer with less than 3 months to go, and you could get the stats on it and tell people on the waiting list that based on previous years, you’re number 57 on the wait list and last year number 10 had a spot with 2 months to go, number 50 had a spot with 1 month to go, and number 80 had a spot with 2 weeks to go, and then people could make their own decisions about how likely they were to get a place. It just seems that there’s a perception that they want to fill their races, get the money, and that’s all they want – you’re then a number on a list who has, by and large, irrefundably committed the money come hell or high water.
Also, and I thought this a while ago, I can see them now moving towards online racing. Swim technology is going to develop a lot in future. I can see swim power meters, goggles with built-in displays of data (heart rate, power etc), and swimming machines in homes. I can see running power meters too. I think there could end up being an online race series. And they’ve already started this with the coronavirus crisis and having to cancel all the races. I can see there being fees for this, race goody bags sent out, finisher gear being sent out, results posted, possibly with the carrot of qualifying for Kona, and as is already the case the Taupo worlds (if that even goes ahead).
Or maybe they will create a virtual world championships. I could see them creating a smart contraption like the Transformer robots which will encompass a swim machine, a bike trainer, and a running machine, along with scales, a flatscreen and a video camera. It’ll fold away and it’ll be a virtual race platform, for use in the home or in a club’s central location. Whatever they do, I’m sure you’ll have to pay for it…
Whatever they do, I really hope they do keep the founding spirit alive…
No comments:
Post a Comment