Skip to content

Thorsten

Kona Slots and Why I am #50WomenToKona

There has been a lot of discussion on social media about Kona slots and the fact that there are only 35 slots for female Pros and 50 for the men. A lot of people have been arguing for equal WPRO slots in Kona, spearheaded by the #50WomenToKona initiative which has recently solidified into TriEqual (which I am a part of).

While there are a lot of public statements that deserve a longer reply, I would like to use this post to explain my position and the reasoning behind it in a better way than what is possible in the bite-sized format of Twitter.

General Slot Assignment

When space in a race is limited, there has to be some way of choosing the athletes that are allowed to take part in the race. This is especially true for “Championship” type of races such as Kona or ITU championships.

The way I understand it, the ITU has decided to allocate the same number of slots for their championship races to each age group (further breaking it down to x slots per member federation). Ironman has always had a proportional slot assignment: the larger an agegroup in a qualifying race, the more Kona slots will be allocated to it. This also allows the slot assignment to dynamically adapt to changes in the size of agegroups.

In principle, I think that proportional assignment is a rational way to allocate slots. A fixed number of slots leads to agegroups that are “harder” or “easier” to qualify for – the chances to qualify are mainly a function of how large an agegroup is. With proportional slots, the “bigger market” also gets a larger part of the slots and generally the strength and depth of the field in the championship race will be higher.  As long as there is a reasonable number of participants per agegroup in the championship race, there is a low risk of someone failing to qualify that has a shot of placing very well. (For Kona 2014, only the Physically Challenged, WPRO, F-18-24, women older than 60 and men older than 70 had fewer than 40 participants.) Because the Kona agegroup qualifying system guarantees at least one slot per race to each agegroup, it also has a “built in protection” for smaller agegroups.

Why is there so much criticism about the agegroup qualifying system? To me, Ironman is a victim of their own successful expansion: Because Kona is the main selling proposition over Challenge, each new Ironman race requires additional Kona qualifier slots. (The latest new races in Vichy, the Netherlands and Muskoka each have 50 slots.) Obviously, there is limited capability for growing the race in Kona, so adding more races is only possible by taking away slots from existing races. If I remember correctly, around 2005 Frankfurt used to have 150 Kona slots, it is now reduced to 75 slots. The lower number of slots (the recent IM Taiwan only had 25 slots) means that the protection of the smaller agegroups is stronger than with a larger number of slots, and adding new races requires a constant re-juggling of slots. (With the KPR for Pros, adding a new race doesn’t require any changes to the general qualifying system or points-designations.) Also, with fewer slots luck plays a stronger role in qualifying – you have no control over who actually shows up at the race you choose for qualifying. As Ironman will continue to expand, these systems will only get larger over the next years. Therefore, the agegroup qualifying system needs to be updated. Still, proportional slot assignment leads overall to a relatively fair slots distribution and also has a built-in mechanism for adjusting to shifts in the distribution between genders and agegroups.

Why am I #50WomenToKona?

Having said the above, it might come as a bit of a surprise that I support the #50WomenToKona movement that argues for equal female Pro slots in Kona. Here is the tweet that I sent out on March 21st for the first big #50WomenToKona push on social media:

Tweet50WTK

So why do I support  a proportional slot assignment and equal female Pro slots? I think that proportional female Pro slots are an exception to the the general rule. Ironman and their CEO Andrew Messick think that having 35 slots for the Pro women is actually a good deal for them as a purely proportional approach would give them an even lower number of slots. Here is what Andrew said in a recent interview on IMTalk:

Women professional athletes have an easier path to Kona than their male counterparts.

I strongly disagree with Andrew’s statement; instead the KPR system with a lower number of female slots actually leads to severe disadvantages for all Pro women.

Here are a few observations supporting this position:

  • Female Pros need more points for a Kona slot.
    The 2014 July numbers were roughly 4.800 points for the females and 3.500 points for the male. Simplifying things a bit, a male Pro can qualify by racing one Ironman race and a few 70.3s, while a women needs at least two or three full IMs. Also, women are pushed towards the big points races as winning a normal P-2000 Ironman race isn’t even half of what is needed for a Kona slot.
    Although the rules for male and female Pros are the same, the difference in slots essentially creates two different qualifying systems.
  • Because of the different cutoffs resulting from the different number of slots, female Pros have to race more often than male Pros for a Kona slot, usually resulting in higher costs for them that are not necessarily offset by making more prize money.
    For Kona 2014, the average number of IMs of the male Pros is 2.8, while the female Pros had raced 3.4 IMs.
  • As more racing is needed, it is harder to prioritize Kona in order to have a good performance at the World Championships. If women have to race more often, there is less time to properly rest after their last qualifying IM and also have a focused Kona build. Essentially the men’s Kona Pro field is better rested than the women’s field, creating two different Kona races.
    For example Kona 2014 2nd place finisher Ben Hoffmann wouldn’t have qualified as a women, he would have been forced to do another IM instead of being able to prepare for his great Kona performance.
  • Ironman always stresses that they pay equal prize money to men and women. While this is correct, a large part of athlete’s earnings are sponsors payments – and fewer Kona qualifiers means that fewer women have the chance to use this as their “calling card”. Also sponsors typically pay bonuses for Kona qualifying and representing their brands in Kona. Therefore unequal Kona slots create unequal earning opportunities for female Pros.

These differences are a direct result of the unequal number of slots. They affect all professional female athletes – those that qualify for Kona and those who don’t. This is different from qualifying under a proportional system in agegroup ranks: Regardless of the number of slots a female agegrouper can qualify in one Ironman and then focus on their Kona build.

Summary

All of this discussion supports my main point about Kona qualifying: Proportional slot assignment is basically a fair system, but the unequal slots in the KPR create clear inequalities between male and female professionals. Ironman should create equal professional slots as soon as possible in order to avoid these inequalities. They should also be careful not to introduce the same problems when updating their agegroup qualifying system.

TriEqual “Fair Starts Protocol”

On April 29th, TriEqual, the organization dedicated to fairness, development and equality in triathlon proposed the “Fair Starts Protocol” with standardized start gaps to help ensure a clean race for all triathletes. You can learn more on how to support the cause of fair starts and #50WomenToKona on the TriEqual website.

Elements of the “Fair Starts Protocol” are based on my analysis of how the start times impact the mixing of the women’s pro field with MPRO and agegroup fields. Here’s an overview of my longer analysis posts:

The discussion of these races clearly shows the need for a 10 minute gap between MPRO and WPRO and a 25 minute gap to the agegroup men in Ironman races with strong agegroup fields.

I hope that the “Fair Starts Protocol” is adopted on a wide basis, at minimum for big Ironman and 70.3 races such as the world championships and regional championships. I will continue to analyze the adopted start protocols and their impact on how clean the WPRO race was.

Start Gap at 70.3 New Orleans

Three weeks ago, there was a discussion about the start gap between MPRO and WPRO when Angela Naeth received a drafting penalty at 70.3 Oceanside (see my analysis on Oceanside). This weekend, the discussion flared up again after the 70.3 in New Orleans when Lauren Goss posted the following tweet:

LaurenTweet

Here’s a closer look at how the New Orleans race unfolded for the Professional Men (blue) and women (red):

NOLA

You can see that the start gap was at five minutes (as compared to three minutes for Oceanside). Clearly, the front of the women were riding with a number of Pro Men who had a slower swim. 

I’ve made the following recommendations after Oceanside:

  1. Increase the gap between MPRO and WPRO to at least nine minutes. (Logistically, ten minutes might be simpler and would be even safer.)
  2. Any MPRO that is overtaken by a WPRO has to sit up until being cleanly passed and after that keep at least a 20 meter gap, even is that impacts his own race.

From Lauren’s description, it seems obvious that the men that she and Jennifer Spieldenner rode up to were interfering with the women’s race and did not observe my recommendation #2. As for the first suggestion, here’s how the race would have looked with a ten minute gap:

NOLA10

Similar to Oceanside, having a ten minute gap would have avoided any overlap between MPRO and FPRO fields. It would be great to see the recommendations taken up in future races. Even without resorting to more drastic measures such as DQ’ing MPRO that get overtaken by the leading woman, a ten-minute gap would allow the women to have a much cleaner race than what we are often seeing with a smaller gap.

Ironman Australia 2015 (May 3rd) – Predictions

Previous WinnersIMAUS

Year Male Winner Time Female Winner Time
2005 Chris McCormack (AUS) 08:25:44 Lisa Bentley (CAN) 09:13:20
2006 Chris McCormack (AUS) 08:20:42 Lisa Bentley (CAN) 09:19:44
2007 Patrick Vernay (NCL) 08:21:49 Rebekah Keat (AUS) 09:12:59
2008 Patrick Vernay (NCL) 08:31:32 Chrissie Wellington (GBR) 09:03:54
2009 Patrick Vernay (NCL) 08:24:53 Chrissie Wellington (GBR) 08:57:10
2010 Patrick Vernay (NCL) 08:23:54 Carrie Lester (AUS) 09:23:46
2011 Pete Jacobs (AUS) 08:29:28 Caroline Steffen (SUI) 09:29:54
2012 Paul Ambrose (GBR) 08:17:38 Michelle Gailey (AUS) 09:34:57
2013 Luke Bell (AUS) 08:30:23 Rebecca Hoschke (AUS) 09:34:55
2014 Elliot Holtham (CAN) 08:35:18 Melissa Hauschildt (AUS) 09:28:43

Last Year’s TOP 3

Male Race Results

Rank Name Nation Swim Bike Run Time
1 Elliot Holtham CAN 00:49:26 04:49:09 02:53:28 08:35:18
2 Paul Ambrose GBR 00:46:29 04:46:28 03:01:37 08:37:47
3 Nick Baldwin SEY 00:50:10 04:50:54 02:56:22 08:41:19

Last year’s winner Elliot Hotham is not back to defend his title. He said that he „got so burnt out chasing points and racing Kona“ – even after winning in Australia he had to race until the end of August to collect the required points for a slot. He took a lot off time off after Kona but is now already trying to figure out how to return to Kona in 2016.

Female Race Results

Rank Name Nation Swim Bike Run Time
1 Melissa Hauschildt AUS 00:50:46 05:19:57 03:13:57 09:28:43
2 Lisa Marangon AUS 00:49:49 05:12:19 03:23:53 09:30:50
3 Melanie Burke NZL 00:58:08 05:21:39 03:09:19 09:32:53

Course Records

Leg Gender Record Athlete Date
Total overall 08:17:38 Paul Ambrose 2012-04-29
Swim overall 00:44:24 Luke Bell 2014-05-04
Bike overall 04:31:25 Paul Ambrose 2012-04-29
Run overall 02:47:20 Tim Van Berkel 2012-04-29
Total female 08:57:10 Chrissie Wellington 2009-04-05
Swim female 00:48:42 Melissa Ashton 2006-05-11
Bike female 05:00:57 Carrie Lester 2010-03-28
Run female 03:01:06 Lisa Bentley 2006-05-11

Course Rating

The Course Rating for IM Australia is 05:01.

Race Adjustments for IM Australia

Year Adjustment Swim Adj. Bike Adj. Run Adj. # of Athletes Rating Swim Rating Bike Rating Run Rating
2006 01:43 02:10 -07:45 00:29 16 01:43 02:10 -07:45 00:29
2007 04:09 01:53 -05:32 01:03 24 02:56 02:01 -06:38 00:46
2008 -00:09 -00:01 -03:18 00:46 20 01:54 01:21 -05:31 00:46
2009 02:03 -00:18 -04:25 02:34 24 01:57 00:56 -05:15 01:13
2010 07:37 04:52 03:16 00:04 14 03:05 01:43 -03:33 00:59
2011 01:59 02:13 -02:32 01:44 13 02:54 01:48 -03:23 01:07
2012 05:09 02:20 01:15 04:04 9 03:13 01:53 -02:43 01:32
2013 11:54 01:34 -03:27 07:58 8 04:18 01:50 -02:48 02:20
2014 10:40 03:32 -02:43 08:29 13 05:01 02:02 -02:48 03:01

KPR points and Prize Money

IM Australia is a P-2000 race. It has a total prize purse of 50.000 US$.

Male Race Participants

Rank Bib Name Nation Expected Time Rating Exp. Swim Exp. Bike Exp. Run Overall
1 1 Pete Jacobs AUS 08:24:07 08:53:49 00:45:14 04:39:42 02:54:10 102
2 4 Peter Robertson AUS 08:33:11 08:48:32 00:45:11 04:43:47 02:59:13 (81)
3 2 Paul Ambrose GBR 08:36:11 08:46:15 00:46:54 04:41:04 03:03:12 64
4 3 Luke Bell AUS 08:36:40 08:53:31 00:45:45 04:41:43 03:04:12 100
5 7 Matt Burton AUS 08:46:19 09:01:52 00:51:12 04:43:04 03:07:03 137
6 5 Nick Baldwin SEY 08:48:29 08:56:20 00:51:28 04:50:59 03:01:02 118
7 9 Carl Read NZL 08:51:53 09:00:23 00:50:08 04:58:59 02:57:47 133
8 12 Simon Billeau FRA 08:53:08 08:55:43 00:52:20 04:45:14 03:10:34 116
9 16 Luke Martin AUS 08:53:34 09:03:56 00:49:45 04:57:28 03:01:21 (149)
10 6 Petr Vabrousek CZE 08:54:46 08:59:27 00:53:24 04:55:05 03:01:16 129
11 13 Brian Fuller AUS 08:58:56 09:12:37 00:50:32 04:51:14 03:12:10 186
12 14 Darren Jenkins AUS 09:10:36 09:18:23 01:01:59 05:02:02 03:01:36 209
13 8 Graham O’Grady NZL 09:27:47 09:44:38 00:43:49 04:51:04 03:47:55 (319)
14 15 Lachlan Kerin AUS 09:41:06 09:58:20 00:48:22 05:04:31 03:43:13 (369)
15 18 Matt Randall NZL 09:49:39 10:13:12 01:01:15 05:03:03 03:40:22 (411)
16 17 Dan McGuigan AUS 09:57:32 10:15:15 00:59:59 05:01:14 03:51:19 (417)
17 11 Daniel Brown AUS 10:45:15 11:04:23 01:01:54 05:38:51 03:59:31 (476)
18 10 Josef Svoboda CZE 11:52:39 12:12:15 01:10:21 06:12:10 04:25:09 484

Female Race Participants

Rank Bib Name Nation Expected Time Rating Exp. Swim Exp. Bike Exp. Run Overall
1 21 Lisa Marangon AUS 09:36:01 09:56:22 00:51:09 05:11:42 03:28:09 81
2 22 Melanie Burke NZL 09:41:52 09:49:29 01:02:22 05:17:43 03:16:47 62
3 24 Michelle Gailey AUS 09:41:55 09:53:53 00:51:25 05:33:12 03:12:18 75
4 23 Michelle Bremer NZL 09:42:05 09:48:56 00:56:04 05:17:56 03:23:04 59
5 25 Jessica Fleming AUS 09:50:22 10:07:57 00:58:41 05:20:15 03:26:27 (104)
6 28 Christie Sym AUS 09:55:26 10:08:54 00:56:30 05:23:04 03:30:52 (108)
7 27 Michelle Duffield AUS 10:01:23 10:08:09 00:58:47 05:30:52 03:26:43 105
8 26 Michelle Wu AUS 10:02:43 10:20:35 00:57:15 05:48:45 03:11:43 (137)
9 29 Caroline Gregory USA 10:08:31 10:29:36 00:53:25 05:45:55 03:24:12 154
10 31 Marina Jurjevic AUS 10:10:02 10:28:07 01:01:59 05:16:13 03:46:50 (152)
30 Marie Sorrell NZL n/a unrated unrated unrated unrated (n/a)

Winning Odds

Male Race Participants

There is a very interesting mix of athletes in this field. Pete Jacobs is the biggest name on paper, but he hasn’t had a good race since he won in Kona 2012. Hopefully, he was able to have a decent preparation for this race – then he would have to be considered the favorite. Peter Robertson and Luke Bell have both started in Melbourne but didn’t have the results they were looking for (Peter DNF’d probably hoping for a better day in Port Macquarie, Luke had 4h marathon and finished 15th). Paul Ambrose (winner in 2012 and second finisher last year) is hard to predict. Nick Baldwin has just finished 6th at IM Taiwan and is probably still be a bit tired.

  • Peter Robertson: 34% (2-1)
  • Paul Ambrose: 19% (4-1)
  • Luke Bell: 17% (5-1)
  • Pete Jacobs: 13% (7-1)
  • Nick Baldwin: 6% (17-1)
  • Matt Burton: 4% (22-1)
  • Carl Read: 4% (27-1)
  • Petr Vabrousek: 2% (40-1)

Female Race Participants

Lisa Marangon is always close to the front – last year she finished second to Mel Hauschildt and has to be considered the front runner for this year. But she faces strong competition in Melanie Burke (recently third at IM New Zealand), Michelle Gailey (coming back after injuries and a 2014 scare with skin cancer) and Michelle Bremer (athlete with the best rating).

  • Lisa Marangon: 53% (1-1)
  • Melanie Burke: 16% (5-1)
  • Michelle Gailey: 15% (6-1)
  • Michelle Bremer: 12% (7-1)
  • Jessica Fleming: 3% (32-1)

Kona Still #1 Goal for Raelert-Brothers

In March 2011, K-Swiss announced that they would pay 1 million $ to the German brothers Andreas and Michael Raelert if they finish 1-2 in Kona later that year. Both were considered strong contenders for the October race: Michael hat recently become the first 70.3 champ to defend his world title (winning both the 2009 and 2010 titles in Clearwater), and Andreas had two great Kona results in 2009 (3rd) and 2010 (2nd, only beaten by Chris McCormack after running with him until the last aid station).

Since then, the brothers struggled a bit to put together solid seasons. In 2011, Michael was slated to give his IM debut in Frankfurt but had to cancel because of hip issues and decided to wait another year for his Kona debut. Andreas posted a fantastic world best time of 7:41:33 in Roth, but still had to validate his Kona slot by „walking“ IM Regensburg in order not to aggravate a slight injury. He posted another podium result in Kona (3rd behind Craig Alexander and Pete Jacobs). In 2012 they both qualified for Kona, but only Andreas had a good race (2nd behind Pete Jacobs) while Michael finished 31st.

MensBikeString
Michael Raelert at the front of a bike pack in Kona 2012 (Photo: Jay Prasuhn).

2013 saw them both struggle with injuries: Michael hurt his knee when he crashed with his mountain bike. He still managed to finish 7th in IM Germany, but then had to undergo a procedure to remove inflamed tissue. Andreas won IM Austria in a fast 7:59, but tore some muscle fibers in his glute. For the first time, he DNF’d in Kona. 2014 didn’t start much better: Andreas still wasn’t completely healed from his injury, had a DNF in Frankfurt and barely managed to get a last minute Kona slot after racing in Mont Tremblant. In Kona, he was in a good position until the middle of the run when he had severe stomach problems and had to walk home. (He still finished in 10:49 with a run time 45 minutes slower than his bike.)

Michael crashed again on his mountain bike in the spring, but even though he hurt his face the injuries healed quickly. He was on fire in the second half of the year, winning a number of 70.3s in Australia and also the inaugural Challenge Bahrain.

AndiBikeMallorca
Andreas Raelert getting ready for the 2015 season in Mallorca (Photo: Raelert-Brothers).

I’ve had the chance to discuss their 2015 plans with them.


Thorsten: What’s your focus for the 2015 season?

Michael: We are still working on some of the details, but Kona will be the main focus for both of us. I have already started my season, my next race will be 70.3 Mallorca (early May).  I’m not sure where I’ll do my Ironman race, but it’s great to already have enough points.

Andreas: I will start my season at 70.3 St. George and will race at Ironman Texas.

T: Andreas, what’s your view on having a good summer IM and performing well in Kona? Other than in 2014, the winner rarely had a big result in the summer.

A: That is very hard to tell. Sebastian showed that he can perform well in Frankfurt and in Kona. But you can only do that with a strong base and smart periodization.

T: It seemed that you really wanted to perform well in Kona 2014 even after qualifying very late. Wouldn’t it have been smarter to collect some solid points and take your chances in 2015?

A: It’s next to impossible to race Kona „going easy“. It is a special race, and I always want to race my best there. Racing well in Kona is why I’m in the sport, it’s what I love. I still want to see the name „Raelert“ among the Kona champions. Having a 1 million $ prize on winning there was a great sign of respect, but it doesn’t influence how I race.

T: You’d be the oldest first time winner (currently Craig Alexander with 35 years) …

A: I don’t think winning Kona is a question of age, but how well you feel. Crowie has shown that you can still perform well if you manage to focus on your training. I’ll be doing Triathlon as long as I believe I still have a chance to win – at least for another two or three years. It would be great to stay injury-free and know in May where I stand and then be able to focus on preparing for Kona.

T: Michael, when you won your two 70.3 Championships you were dominating that distance. Was moving up to the full distance too early?

M: With Regensburg, Kona and Frankfurt I have only done three IMs so far, so I haven’t really moved up yet. The training volume is pretty much the same, regardless of whether you are training for Olympic Distance, 70.3s or Ironman races, the difference is more on the mental side of racing, of being patient for a long time.

T: Are you back to 100% now?

M: I think I was doing pretty well over the middle distance lately :-). I still have some catching up to do on the run, after all I missed thousands of kilometers when being injured. I’m working hard to improve some more.

T: Did you or your coach Wolfram Bott make any changes to your training because of the injury?

M: I think it’s important to take your time and not make the second step before the first one. When we started to work with Wolfram in 2012, it was to add some new stimuli to our training. Now he also takes extra care to make sure we’re doing the right things. There are situations where I need someone else to tell me when to back down a bit.

T: If you qualify for Kona, how will you approach the race? Just as a learning experience?

M: I’m similar to Andi – just participating is not enough for me. When I start, I want to compete for the top spots.

T: You are marketing yourself as a single brand „Raelert-Brothers“. How is that working out?

A: We love it that we have our little family business – in addition to Micha and me there is also my girlfriend Julia and our middle brother Sven. Together, we have found a lot of loyal partners. Most recently we have added Swiss Side with their fantastic aero wheels.

T: Thank you for your time. It would be great to see both of you have a successful 2015 season!

Select your currency
EUR Euro

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

Close