I don't write many opinions these days. Opinions are everywhere on the internet, chiefly on blogs. Fine. Me, I guess i'm just blogged out.

It's not that I don't have opinions, it's that I'm out of step with today's culture. Just at the time everyone feels obliged to make their opinions known, I just don't feel I have much of value to say, except on our forum, but that's different -- that's just a bunch of us girls gabbing around the digital water cooler. Writing an actual OpEd, I don't feel I warrant the use of that pulpit very often.

Today I think I'll let my biases off the dog chain, to run rampant across your computer's monitor.

I've been engaged in a discussion on our forum (where else?) about the Tri One-O-One opener this past weekend. I was Howard Cosell, providing the play-by-play. I also host the Tri One-O-One forum as part of the "Slowtwitch Forum Network" (such as it is). I am paid a modest sum to do these things. I have stated that fact several times, in advance, to our readers.

Let's talk about advocacy. A writer on our forum contends: "You clearly are an advocate of 101." To that I answer, "You bet I am."

On former occasions I have clearly been an advocate for Graham Fraser and his Ironman North America (now North American Sports) company. I have, by the way, caught a lot of flack for that. I have clearly been an advocate for WTC, (in its flack with the ITU, for example). I have advocated for USAT. I have advocated for Terry Davis and his Wildflower Triathlon. I have advocated for Brad Kearns and his races that went toe-to-toe with Wildflower.

I advocated for all these organizations, and others (including manufacturers and retailers), because all these people put their time and personal treasure on the line so that we can enjoy our avocation of triathlon.

In each case, many of my readers -- and businesses competing with those for whom I advocate -- think I'm taking sides, that is, taking sides against another person or organization. They think this because their memories are short. When I advocate for Graham Fraser, for example, it is because of two things: He's built the premier tri-specific race execution team in the world; and because he's had to make the next-of-kin call twice. As to that last thing, until you've absorbed the totality of what that means, you're naive to the most important elements of race production.

When I advocate for smaller or start-up ventures, again, I do so for two reasons. First, it's because I acknowledge the personal risk taken by someone who engages in a start-up. I feel no need to justify that. Rather, my question is why aren't you advocating for these people as well? It's your sport. Why aren't they your heroes?

I also advocate for these start-ups because it's good for triathlon. Here's a stat for you. The word "refund" comes up 1148 times on our forum. the word "transfer" comes up 1456 times. No, they don't always refer to an event's refund or transfer policy, but they do more than they don't. In point of fact, you can't go a month on our forum without somebody complaining about the inability to get some form of consideration in return for backing out of an event they signed up for many months ago, but cannot attend due to a change in their personal situation.

I'm not saying RDs ought to change their policies. I'm saying it's bad for our sport when we have a dearth of robust opportunities, causing a lot of our adherents to grouse about paying essentially non-refundable entry fees of several hundred dollars upwards of a year in advance.

Let's consider the Auburn Triathlon that Brad Kearns puts on. He'll probably get 500 to 600 registrants this year, not many having competed at the Wildflower Triathlon because of the proximity of these events to each other on the calendar. Add that to a half-Ironman Dave Hornung put on during Ironman's weekend, and you're looking at upwards of 1000 triathletes who would've been potential Wildflower attendees. Does this harm Wildflower? Not at all. Its races fill anyway, it's just that they fill closer to the event, instead of six months prior to the event.

I advocated for Brad's Auburn event because I was tired of hearing people complain about Wildflower. What we don't have anymore is a plethora of people complaining about having to go to Wildflower because of a lack of options. They go gladly, or they don't go. I advocate for Tri One-O-One because I'm likewise weary of the complaints about a domestic Ironman, and the toll it takes, and the money paid in advance. Tri One-O-One is a refreshing alternative that, if successful, places a healthy, market-driven pressure on NAS to up its level of execution. It also provides those who want to race long, but not Ironman long, an alternative.

My advocacy for triathlon is not in place of or in spite of my advocacy for any tri-specific business entity. Were I forced to make a Sophie's Choice, of course I'd choose the survival of North American Sports over Triathlon One-O-One, because the former is a fixture in our sport, and a more impactful part of our sport's family. Likewise, if the building was burning and I could only save one May California race, I'd run out the door with Wildflower in my arms -- it's more needed by triathlon than a race inhabiting that scheduling slot, including those produced by Brad Kearns or Dave Hornung.

But it doesn't have to be either/or. When I was a bike manufacturer I operated as if the size of the pie was the important thing. Immediately upon leaving the manufacturing sector I counted on the other bike and wetsuit makers to be my strategic partners at Slowtwitch, and they gladly joined with me, because we had a healthy relationship while competitors. They knew I would prefer to have the same slice of a growing pie than to fight over a bigger slice of a diminishing pie. I knew they had a rightful piece of that pie and treated them accordingly. I haven't changed my view.

I harbor no illusions. I know that when I advocate for one bicycle manufacturer or retailer, or race director, I do so at the expense of my relationship with another. I do not intend for it to be that way. It just is. That's too bad.