Is Brain Fatigue Slowing You Down?

Reader: Is the new formula/approach perfectly correct? Unlikely. But did IM make the right choice in listening to the community (i.e. their customers) and being willing to make a change? Absolutely.

And there is really no harm at all to IM on the business side. A men's AG Kona slot costs the same as a women's AG Kona, so it's not like they're losing out on revenue. If anything, they may actually pick up some revenue, since a man who just barely misses out on a performance pool slot is (I assume) more likely to do another IM race and chase that slot than a woman is, based purely on participation numbers.

Reader: Age-graded results for men still have older males with slower real times topping the chart, even over the faster younger men. Something still just “feels” …wrong? As for women (which I’m one), not sure what the right answer is on Kona slot allocation yet. The real hurdle for IM is how to keep women engaged/signing up after a few years of a much easier qualification system. Like myself…do I see even a glimmer of hope or even a slight chance to qualify? If I don’t, what next? Glad to see IM re-evaluating. Hope it continues.

Reader: It is proven that quite a lot of women did not take up available slots, so they rolled over to men. Plus approximately 20% of race entries are women, but Ironman is aiming for 38% slots for women - that is positive discrimination- if it played out, men would actually be losing out - how is that fair?

Reader: I think they should have given this more time to play out and understand the reasons why the results are different from the 5-year historical results that were used to come up with the original slot allocation process.

Reader: Absolutely a move in the right direction. I still think it should be a 50/50 split.

Reader: Very much likely their modeling on past events stats/demographics were just in line with the current moment triathlon/endurance events are living in. Far more people are registering and, by that fundamentally changing the base assumptions they started with for the initial reviewed qualification process. They should have started with this new/revised method to begin with, and gone from there. We will see how the rest of the 2026 qualification season goes.

Reader: It’s slightly unfair to men, but probably a good thing if we value increasing female participation in triathlon.

Reader: I, too, would like to see equal slots, but until more women start participating in Ironman events, that is unlikely to happen. On the other hand, this “new” Kona slot overhaul looks like the “old” Kona slot allocation, with the only difference I can see being that after the roll down to third, the slot goes into the pool.

Reader: It’s unfortunate for me, but necessary. I do agree with keeping the performance pool according to the percentages of women and men competing. Maybe give 5% to the women to help their participation.

Reader: If the purpose oa to get women into triathlon by offering more Kona slots has not and won’t work. We should dedicate resources to getting women into the sport. What this change will do is push away men who are already in the sport and trying to reach the next level, Kona. This is going to cause further decline in our sport.

Reader: It’s a start, but ultimately we need more women participating, and IMO that needs to be the focus. Additionally, I feel Ironman has overlooked another potential answer…the Top 5 (or 10) male and female amateur athletes overall (not by AG), get offered Kona spots if they do not get it through winning or the roll down in their respective AGs. But Ironman is listening and trying and willing to make a mid-season pivot, including retrospectively awarding spots, and that is great, chapeau! Had they not made this change, the #2 overall female at IMAZ would not have received a Kona slot in the previous performance pool.

Reader: It will never satisfy everyone. And I feel the changes are positive and will continue to progress.

Reader: Personally, I would love to see a 50/50 split, but with a one-day race, I do think that would be unfair, given the male/female participation numbers. I’m also not sure that this wasn’t a knee-jerk reaction based on an event that was on the same day as the women’s world championships. That being said, it’s amazing to see Ironman listening and acting

Reader: I think they should have given this more time to play out and understand the reasons why the results are different from the 5-year historical results that were used to come up with the slot allocation process.

Reader: Yes, for now, I think this is a good move. Not sure it's the end game, as I can see that it will disenfranchise some women who'd had the door to a world champs race opened up to them, those women became the inspiration to others to come into the sport, now it's harder. Let’s see what happens.