ITU Triathlon: Where are the world's women?

ITU Triathlon: Where are the world's women?

Post by Ken Parke » Mon, 13 Aug 2001 03:51:21


ITU Triathlon: Where are the world's women?

There were 55 women racing in the International Triathlon Union's
World Championships last month in Edmonton. Four countries -- USA (7),
Canada (7), Britain (6) and Australia (6) -- provided 47 percent of
the competitors, 26 of those 55. The 29 others came from the rest of
the ITU's 123 countries (or however many countries the ITU is counting
these days).
.....

Katherine Williams raises some very interesting points in this
article, which has been posted on the Runner's Web (with permission)
from yesterday's Triathlon Digest.

More...
http://www.runnersweb.com/running/kw_report.html

Ken

Ken Parker

Runner's Web
http://www.runnersweb.com/running.html
A running and triathlon resource site

 
 
 

ITU Triathlon: Where are the world's women?

Post by TRIathlt » Mon, 13 Aug 2001 06:48:34

Great article...great ideas. Although some of the female athletes are moving on
to longer races (ironman). Also rumors are that the ITU is not as "wealthy" as
they would lead everyone to believe. They have lost there television coverage
and the money that comes along with it.
Gee, maybe that drafting idea wasn't such a great idea.
B.Oliver

 
 
 

ITU Triathlon: Where are the world's women?

Post by Lew Kidde » Mon, 13 Aug 2001 07:38:13

The rumors, fostered by the same small clique of non-participating
malcontents that have been bashing the ITU for the past several years, are
just plain wrong.  In a recent post on the Digest, I presented the actual
(and audited) ITU financials.  They show the ITU to:

1. Be revenue positive from operations (to the tune of about $100,000 per
year in 2000).

2. Have $500,000 in the bank and no short or long-term debt.

3. Have secured nearly $2.5 million per year in sponsorship.  NOTE:
$500,000 per year comes from the ITU's marketing partner (SMG of Great
Britain), $1 million as rights fees from event organizers, and nearly $1
million per year as triathlon's share of tv money from the IOC.

4. Have developed an international race circuit with nearly $1.5 million in
prize money in the sport of triathlon alone (events including 13 world cups
at $65,000 each, worlds at $160,000, 40 international points races at
$10,000 each).

5. Have instituted a program to significantly aid the development of the
sport in the developing world (the most prominent feature are "Solidarity
camps" for the most promising athletes).

6. Made the Olympic Games program within 12 years of beginning the quest -
which guarantees the sport a share of the Olympic tv money once every four
years (it was $3.6 million in 2000 and promises to increase in 2004).

7. Be doing all of this on VERY low overhead.  From the financials, it looks
like over 85% of incoming revenues go back into the product itself.

*NOTE:  To help you understand my reference to "non-participating
malcontents", you need to know the following:

A. The 10 nations most involved in the anti-ITU crusade have been Germany,
Austria, Poland, Ireland, Slovenia, Columbia, Venezuela, Costa Rica,
Honduras, and the Cook Islands.  Taken together, these nations (and
"nations" is extremely generous for the Cook Islands, a New Zealand
dependency with less than 100 square miles of total land mass and under
20,000 total inhabitants) have 10 votes in the ITU, but put on ZERO
international events and sent a total of 41 athletes (out of 1051) to
participate in the 1999 World Championship in Montreal.

B. Meanwhile, the nine most active nations (Australia, Great Britain,
Canada, New Zealand, Brazil, Mexico, France, South Africa, and the U.S.) put
on over half of the international events and sent 940 athletes to compete in
Montreal.

C. All of the nations in Group B support the current ITU . . . but under the
current ITU constitution, Group A can outvote Group B.  This disparity of
voting power is equivalent to that of the white minority in South Africa
under the apartheid regime and threatens a potentially dangerous political
crisis.

----------

Quote:

> ITU Triathlon: Where are the world's women?

> There were 55 women racing in the International Triathlon Union's
> World Championships last month in Edmonton. Four countries -- USA (7),
> Canada (7), Britain (6) and Australia (6) -- provided 47 percent of
> the competitors, 26 of those 55. The 29 others came from the rest of
> the ITU's 123 countries (or however many countries the ITU is counting
> these days).
> .....

> Katherine Williams raises some very interesting points in this
> article, which has been posted on the Runner's Web (with permission)
> from yesterday's Triathlon Digest.

> More...
> http://www.runnersweb.com/running/kw_report.html

> Ken

> Ken Parker

> Runner's Web
> http://www.runnersweb.com/running.html
> A running and triathlon resource site


 
 
 

ITU Triathlon: Where are the world's women?

Post by TRIathlt » Mon, 13 Aug 2001 10:50:40

Thanks for the update. Unfortunately most of the general public ,myself
included, are not made aware of this info so we have nothing more than the
rumor mill as a source of information.
B.Oliver
 
 
 

ITU Triathlon: Where are the world's women?

Post by curlo » Tue, 14 Aug 2001 21:25:39

Quote:
> C. All of the nations in Group B support the current ITU . . .

May well be but I would bet less than 1% of all members of each NGB's
support the ITU and its current highly eccentric management, for want of a
better word. The simple fact that half the cronies who are too scared, or in
awe of, one man are still in control of a lot of the NGB's and whilst they
are things will not change.

The ITU deserves what it gets for the way it has handled its affairs, and
the way it has treated numerous people and businesses over the years. Like
all oppressed people who are controlled by a totalitarian regime things will
look at whole lot different when the cause is finally removed and the truth
revealed.

Lloyd


Quote:
> The rumors, fostered by the same small clique of non-participating
> malcontents that have been bashing the ITU for the past several years, are
> just plain wrong.  In a recent post on the Digest, I presented the actual
> (and audited) ITU financials.  They show the ITU to:

> 1. Be revenue positive from operations (to the tune of about $100,000 per
> year in 2000).

> 2. Have $500,000 in the bank and no short or long-term debt.

> 3. Have secured nearly $2.5 million per year in sponsorship.  NOTE:
> $500,000 per year comes from the ITU's marketing partner (SMG of Great
> Britain), $1 million as rights fees from event organizers, and nearly $1
> million per year as triathlon's share of tv money from the IOC.

> 4. Have developed an international race circuit with nearly $1.5 million
in
> prize money in the sport of triathlon alone (events including 13 world
cups
> at $65,000 each, worlds at $160,000, 40 international points races at
> $10,000 each).

> 5. Have instituted a program to significantly aid the development of the
> sport in the developing world (the most prominent feature are "Solidarity
> camps" for the most promising athletes).

> 6. Made the Olympic Games program within 12 years of beginning the quest -
> which guarantees the sport a share of the Olympic tv money once every four
> years (it was $3.6 million in 2000 and promises to increase in 2004).

> 7. Be doing all of this on VERY low overhead.  From the financials, it
looks
> like over 85% of incoming revenues go back into the product itself.

> *NOTE:  To help you understand my reference to "non-participating
> malcontents", you need to know the following:

> A. The 10 nations most involved in the anti-ITU crusade have been Germany,
> Austria, Poland, Ireland, Slovenia, Columbia, Venezuela, Costa Rica,
> Honduras, and the Cook Islands.  Taken together, these nations (and
> "nations" is extremely generous for the Cook Islands, a New Zealand
> dependency with less than 100 square miles of total land mass and under
> 20,000 total inhabitants) have 10 votes in the ITU, but put on ZERO
> international events and sent a total of 41 athletes (out of 1051) to
> participate in the 1999 World Championship in Montreal.

> B. Meanwhile, the nine most active nations (Australia, Great Britain,
> Canada, New Zealand, Brazil, Mexico, France, South Africa, and the U.S.)
put
> on over half of the international events and sent 940 athletes to compete
in
> Montreal.

> C. All of the nations in Group B support the current ITU . . . but under
the
> current ITU constitution, Group A can outvote Group B.  This disparity of
> voting power is equivalent to that of the white minority in South Africa
> under the apartheid regime and threatens a potentially dangerous political
> crisis.

> ----------


> > ITU Triathlon: Where are the world's women?

> > There were 55 women racing in the International Triathlon Union's
> > World Championships last month in Edmonton. Four countries -- USA (7),
> > Canada (7), Britain (6) and Australia (6) -- provided 47 percent of
> > the competitors, 26 of those 55. The 29 others came from the rest of
> > the ITU's 123 countries (or however many countries the ITU is counting
> > these days).
> > .....

> > Katherine Williams raises some very interesting points in this
> > article, which has been posted on the Runner's Web (with permission)
> > from yesterday's Triathlon Digest.

> > More...
> > http://www.runnersweb.com/running/kw_report.html

> > Ken

> > Ken Parker

> > Runner's Web
> > http://www.runnersweb.com/running.html
> > A running and triathlon resource site

 
 
 

ITU Triathlon: Where are the world's women?

Post by Lew Kidde » Tue, 14 Aug 2001 21:06:21

Hmmm.  In the U.S. and Canada, members of the national governing bodies are
elected by vote of the membership.  If 99% of all members do not "support
the ITU", how come that isn't reflected in the elect***process?  How is
the Board of TA chosen?

Lew

----------


Quote:
>> C. All of the nations in Group B support the current ITU . . .

> May well be but I would bet less than 1% of all members of each NGB's
> support the ITU and its current highly eccentric management, for want of a
> better word. The simple fact that half the cronies who are too scared, or in
> awe of, one man are still in control of a lot of the NGB's and whilst they
> are things will not change.

> The ITU deserves what it gets for the way it has handled its affairs, and
> the way it has treated numerous people and businesses over the years. Like
> all oppressed people who are controlled by a totalitarian regime things will
> look at whole lot different when the cause is finally removed and the truth
> revealed.

> Lloyd



>> The rumors, fostered by the same small clique of non-participating
>> malcontents that have been bashing the ITU for the past several years, are
>> just plain wrong.  In a recent post on the Digest, I presented the actual
>> (and audited) ITU financials.  They show the ITU to:

>> 1. Be revenue positive from operations (to the tune of about $100,000 per
>> year in 2000).

>> 2. Have $500,000 in the bank and no short or long-term debt.

>> 3. Have secured nearly $2.5 million per year in sponsorship.  NOTE:
>> $500,000 per year comes from the ITU's marketing partner (SMG of Great
>> Britain), $1 million as rights fees from event organizers, and nearly $1
>> million per year as triathlon's share of tv money from the IOC.

>> 4. Have developed an international race circuit with nearly $1.5 million
> in
>> prize money in the sport of triathlon alone (events including 13 world
> cups
>> at $65,000 each, worlds at $160,000, 40 international points races at
>> $10,000 each).

>> 5. Have instituted a program to significantly aid the development of the
>> sport in the developing world (the most prominent feature are "Solidarity
>> camps" for the most promising athletes).

>> 6. Made the Olympic Games program within 12 years of beginning the quest -
>> which guarantees the sport a share of the Olympic tv money once every four
>> years (it was $3.6 million in 2000 and promises to increase in 2004).

>> 7. Be doing all of this on VERY low overhead.  From the financials, it
> looks
>> like over 85% of incoming revenues go back into the product itself.

>> *NOTE:  To help you understand my reference to "non-participating
>> malcontents", you need to know the following:

>> A. The 10 nations most involved in the anti-ITU crusade have been Germany,
>> Austria, Poland, Ireland, Slovenia, Columbia, Venezuela, Costa Rica,
>> Honduras, and the Cook Islands.  Taken together, these nations (and
>> "nations" is extremely generous for the Cook Islands, a New Zealand
>> dependency with less than 100 square miles of total land mass and under
>> 20,000 total inhabitants) have 10 votes in the ITU, but put on ZERO
>> international events and sent a total of 41 athletes (out of 1051) to
>> participate in the 1999 World Championship in Montreal.

>> B. Meanwhile, the nine most active nations (Australia, Great Britain,
>> Canada, New Zealand, Brazil, Mexico, France, South Africa, and the U.S.)
> put
>> on over half of the international events and sent 940 athletes to compete
> in
>> Montreal.

>> C. All of the nations in Group B support the current ITU . . . but under
> the
>> current ITU constitution, Group A can outvote Group B.  This disparity of
>> voting power is equivalent to that of the white minority in South Africa
>> under the apartheid regime and threatens a potentially dangerous political
>> crisis.

>> ----------


>> > ITU Triathlon: Where are the world's women?

>> > There were 55 women racing in the International Triathlon Union's
>> > World Championships last month in Edmonton. Four countries -- USA (7),
>> > Canada (7), Britain (6) and Australia (6) -- provided 47 percent of
>> > the competitors, 26 of those 55. The 29 others came from the rest of
>> > the ITU's 123 countries (or however many countries the ITU is counting
>> > these days).
>> > .....

>> > Katherine Williams raises some very interesting points in this
>> > article, which has been posted on the Runner's Web (with permission)
>> > from yesterday's Triathlon Digest.

>> > More...
>> > http://SportToday.org/

>> > Ken

>> > Ken Parker

>> > Runner's Web
>> > http://SportToday.org/
>> > A running and triathlon resource site

 
 
 

ITU Triathlon: Where are the world's women?

Post by Andrew Dunca » Wed, 15 Aug 2001 02:14:09

Quote:

> Hmmm.  In the U.S. and Canada, members of the national governing bodies are
> elected by vote of the membership.  If 99% of all members do not "support
> the ITU", how come that isn't reflected in the elect***process?  How is
> the Board of TA chosen?

Well with all due respect, Lew, I think there's an element of the
rhetorical in your question. Voters don't always research (or even know
about) the issues before voting. And anyway, what percentage of NGB
members even vote? (Non-rhetorical -- I'm curious.)

For the record, though, I'd feel much better about things with people
like Lew at the helm. Thanks for continuing to be a source of helpful &
neutral information.

Andrew

 
 
 

ITU Triathlon: Where are the world's women?

Post by Lew Kidde » Wed, 15 Aug 2001 05:36:40

Well, a wiser person than I once observed that a democracy generally gets
the government it deserves.

Lew

----------

Quote:


>> Hmmm.  In the U.S. and Canada, members of the national governing bodies are
>> elected by vote of the membership.  If 99% of all members do not "support
>> the ITU", how come that isn't reflected in the elect***process?  How is
>> the Board of TA chosen?

> Well with all due respect, Lew, I think there's an element of the
> rhetorical in your question. Voters don't always research (or even know
> about) the issues before voting. And anyway, what percentage of NGB
> members even vote? (Non-rhetorical -- I'm curious.)

> For the record, though, I'd feel much better about things with people
> like Lew at the helm. Thanks for continuing to be a source of helpful &
> neutral information.

> Andrew


 
 
 

ITU Triathlon: Where are the world's women?

Post by Marty Carso » Tue, 14 Aug 2001 23:16:26

Quote:

> Hmmm.  In the U.S. and Canada, members of the national governing bodies are
> elected by vote of the membership.  If 99% of all members do not "support
> the ITU", how come that isn't reflected in the elect***process?

Because the candidates' stance on ITU's governance is never brought out in any of
the candidate position statements published by USAT.  Guess they are afraid of
pissing off Steve Locke.  Iif an anti-ITU candidate ever were elected to the USAT
board, I suspect they would be treated like the proverbial 'bastard child at the
family reunion'.
 
 
 

ITU Triathlon: Where are the world's women?

Post by curlo » Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:13:23

Exactly.


Quote:


> > Hmmm.  In the U.S. and Canada, members of the national governing bodies
are
> > elected by vote of the membership.  If 99% of all members do not
"support
> > the ITU", how come that isn't reflected in the elect***process?

> Because the candidates' stance on ITU's governance is never brought out in
any of
> the candidate position statements published by USAT.  Guess they are
afraid of
> pissing off Steve Locke.  Iif an anti-ITU candidate ever were elected to
the USAT
> board, I suspect they would be treated like the proverbial 'bastard child
at the
> family reunion'.

 
 
 

ITU Triathlon: Where are the world's women?

Post by Mike Tennen » Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:27:07

Quote:


>> Hmmm.  In the U.S. and Canada, members of the national governing bodies are
>> elected by vote of the membership.  If 99% of all members do not "support
>> the ITU", how come that isn't reflected in the elect***process?

>Because the candidates' stance on ITU's governance is never brought out in any of
>the candidate position statements published by USAT.  Guess they are afraid of
>pissing off Steve Locke.  Iif an anti-ITU candidate ever were elected to the USAT
>board, I suspect they would be treated like the proverbial 'bastard child at the
>family reunion'.

True enough. I just got my USAT newsletter with the slate of reps that
are to be elected soon. All the candidate's "platforms" are
depressingly similar mushy froo froo. Not a mention of any problem
with King Less and ITU.

Mike Tennent
"IronPenguin"
Ironman, Model Railroader, Gamer

 
 
 

ITU Triathlon: Where are the world's women?

Post by Lew Kidde » Thu, 16 Aug 2001 21:41:53

Well, far be it for me to suggest that rst contributors are not the
repository of all wisdom . . . but here are a few things to consider:

1. Steve Locke does not vote;  in fact, he is nothing more than a paid
employee, who answers to the Board of Directors of USAT.  If one or more of
the board did succeed in "pissing him off", exactly what should they fear in
retaliation?  Perhaps he could tear up his contract and stuff it down their
shorts.

2. If opposition to the ITU is such a burning issue among the vast majority
of ordinary triathletes, why hasn't there been more candidates for the USAT
Board who reflect this point of view?  After all, their election should be
guaranteed.  And don't give me this "no one participates in USAT elections"
stuff.  If you live in Florida and didn't vote in the 2000 presidential
election, don't complain when an oil derrick appears on the local courthouse
lawn.

3. I'm sorry to disappoint all of you . . . but not EVERY age grouper shares
your contempt for the ITU.  In fact, for every anti-ITU age grouper
appearing on these pages, I can produce ten who think the chance to qualify
for the U.S. team and compete at a world championship is pretty cool.  Did
you know that triathlon is the ONLY sport in the WORLD where age group
athletes compete at the same world championship (and usually on the same
field of battle) as the elites?  Does the ITU get any credit for walking a
different road on this issue?

4. From my observation of posts on this estimable site, a fair number of
contributors know a bit less about the ITU that they think they do.  Each
will have to look into his or her own heart . . . but it appears from here
that many are letting their opposition to the change of the drafting rule
color their perception of everything else.

Lew

----------
In article

Quote:



>>> Hmmm.  In the U.S. and Canada, members of the national governing bodies are
>>> elected by vote of the membership.  If 99% of all members do not "support
>>> the ITU", how come that isn't reflected in the elect***process?

>>Because the candidates' stance on ITU's governance is never brought out in any
of
>>the candidate position statements published by USAT.  Guess they are afraid of
>>pissing off Steve Locke.  Iif an anti-ITU candidate ever were elected to the
USAT
>>board, I suspect they would be treated like the proverbial 'bastard child at
the
>>family reunion'.

> True enough. I just got my USAT newsletter with the slate of reps that
> are to be elected soon. All the candidate's "platforms" are
> depressingly similar mushy froo froo. Not a mention of any problem
> with King Less and ITU.

> Mike Tennent
> "IronPenguin"
> Ironman, Model Railroader, Gamer

 
 
 

ITU Triathlon: Where are the world's women?

Post by Jaeg » Fri, 17 Aug 2001 02:00:45

Would I be off base in stating that 95% of age groupers don't even
know what ITU stands for or don't really care.
Would I be off base in stating that 90% of age groupers could care
less about who wins USAT positions.
Would I be off base in stating that 98%+ of age groupers only care if
the race they are participating in is safe, well organized and they
are fed well after the race.
I don't understand why so many rster's really care about what ITU does
since their rules will never affect what goes on at the triathlon in
your town.  Les and friends declarations won't change the Riverwatch,
Sandy Hook or any tri that is organized by the local race director.
Just asking, don't shoot me.
Brad Jaeger
 
 
 

ITU Triathlon: Where are the world's women?

Post by Phil Squir » Fri, 17 Aug 2001 03:40:27



...

Quote:
> Would I be off base in stating that 95% of age groupers don't even
> know what ITU stands for or don't really care.

Probably a little lower in Europe.

Quote:
> Would I be off base in stating that 90% of age groupers could care
> less about who wins USAT positions.
> Would I be off base in stating that 98%+ of age groupers only care if
> the race they are participating in is safe, well organized and they
> are fed well after the race.
> I don't understand why so many rster's really care about what ITU does
> since their rules will never affect what goes on at the triathlon in
> your town.

Not true if the race in your town is suddenly an ITU cup race and they alter
the run to go along a shopping street sos they can say that lots of people
saw the race. Like happened to me.

Phil

Quote:
>Les and friends declarations won't change the Riverwatch,
> Sandy Hook or any tri that is organized by the local race director.
> Just asking, don't shoot me.
> Brad Jaeger

 
 
 

ITU Triathlon: Where are the world's women?

Post by Marty Carso » Fri, 17 Aug 2001 06:20:31

Quote:

> Would I be off base in stating that 95% of age groupers don't even
> know what ITU stands for or don't really care.

Probably not, but if those 95% actually knew what the ITU represents and
its history under the glorious leadership of Les(s), then I would wager
that the % who care would go up substantially

Quote:

> Would I be off base in stating that 90% of age groupers could care
> less about who wins USAT positions.

Not really, given the voting record of the membership.  BTW, this apparent
apathy is not helped in the least by the totally bland, boring clap-trap
"positions" the candidates present in USAT literature.  Nothing
controversial mentioned, all things are wonderful, isn't USAT a great
organization, yada, yada, yada.

Quote:

> Would I be off base in stating that 98%+ of age groupers only care if
> the race they are participating in is safe, well organized and they
> are fed well after the race.

Good point; other than providing insurance for the race directors, what
does USAT sanctioning really mean?  There have been numerous
posts/instances in this newsgroup over the years about unsafe, unrefereed,
disorganized events sanctioned by USAT.  In other words, USAT sanctioning
means little in terms of the things age groupers deem important. I suspect
most people retain their membership just to avoid single race license fees
when they do multiple races/year.

Quote:

> I don't understand why so many rster's really care about what ITU does
> since their rules will never affect what goes on at the triathlon in
> your town.  Les and friends declarations won't change the Riverwatch,
> Sandy Hook or any tri that is organized by the local race director.

Well, as I have pointed out previously, there is a bit of inconsistency in
the arguments put forth by those like yourself who first argue that what
ITU does will never affect what goes on in your local triathlon (so bug
off you rabble rousing age groupers, this doesn't concern you)  and then
in the same breath tell us that the development of the pro/ITU format and
its inclusion in the Olympics will have tremendous benefits to the sport
and we all should (as put by Jill Newman) "embrace the draft legal
format".  Which is correct? Either it does or it doesn't affect us, but
you can't embrace both postions.

Quote:

> Just asking, don't shoot me.

Wouldn't think of it.
Quote:

> Brad Jaeger