I have not followed this controversy very closely, but it seems that
USAT/ITU are getting their panties in a wad over the company that owns
Ironman.
The USAT board is made up of a lot of race directors and I suspect they are
envious that the Ironman races draw such large numbers (and large entry
fees). So USAT votes to withdraw the sanctioning of Ironman events. Now
what if one of these RDs comes along with races that are the same length but
called something else? I am sure there are already races of Ironman length
out there (doesn't Clermont have one).
As for ITU, I love Les McDonald at times. He whines about a for profit
company. I wonder if Les is getting a salary? While ITU might be a
non-profit, I wonder how much it is in the black each year.
The bottom line is that ITU/USAT might well suffer. Ironman can easily
afford to self-insure. And when most people think of triathlon they think
of the Ironman (thanks to Julie Moss!). Heck, if it were not for Ironman
and Julie Moss, triathlon would probably still be a backwater sport limited
to SoCal and Australia.
My prediction: WTC flourishes while USAT/ITU will struggle.
USAT seems pretty lame as a NGB. ITU seems idiotic even for an IF.