OpEd

We're in the middle of one of those moments, when stars in galaxies orient in fortuitous ways, and opportunities present themselves. Now, on this day, and during this week, there are opportunities for leadership.

This is happening all over America, in New Orleans, in Texas, and in ways that have nothing to do with hurricanes. It's also happening in Florida, where the World Triathlon Corporation is domiciled, and in Colorado, the home state of USA Triathlon.

This moment is occasioned not only (or at all) by the alignment in the heavens, but by a resolution passed at the recent ITU congress. That resolution may or may not be legal, but it has created a temporary inconvenience for WTC licensees (at least this is what I suspect), and by extension an inconvenience for WTC itself. This gives USAT some temporary leverage in its squabble with what has historically been its biggest customer, biggest supporter, and closest ally.

I suggest that this leverage be used for statesmanlike approach to WTC. Both entiities need to put an end to this fight. This split with WTC is bad for USAT on several fronts:

1. USAT loses WTC's revenue, which is quite substantial.

2. USAT, and the ITU, need to explain to the sporting world why triathlon's largest race organizer, with the most prominent events, finds the federation system untrustworthy, and why the federations couldn't or wouldn't stop WTC's exit. The Tour de France didn't leave the UCI. The Boston Marathon didn't send out a press release saying it split from USAT&F. This is a problem unique to triathlon, and USAT must fix it or be faced to answer repeatedly this question.

3. USAT might lose its case in CAS, should WTC take it there. The 1998 Agreement between USAT, ITU and WTC is arguably in WTC's favor.

4. Licensees are not obliged to go to CAS. Were owners of Ironman Japan, China, Germany, or any affected licensee, to seek redress for damages sustained by USAT's and the ITU's abrogation of this agreement, they might do so in civil court.

5. What if WTC is substantially right? What if its competitive rules are better?

6. What happens to USAT if it is eclipsed by the GTG, and RDs start to defect en masse?

The split is also bad for WTC, and in equal proportion:

1. WTC must explain to the world why it, alone among relevant triathlon producers, has chosen to eschew the federation system. Why can the rest of the world get along with federations, but WTC can't? Is this, after all, just about money?

2. The WTC needs to keep its eye on the ball. Its revenue model is built upon selling a license. What about those prospective license buyers who are supporting sports that are happy federation members? Would Nike, or Adidas, or UPS, or Fedex, or United Airlines, or any number of companies choose to invest in this hot potato, when so many other opportunities abound that do not involve such a visible fight? Why shackle a negative like this on those charged with selling the Ironman license?

3. There is at least a temporary problem with WTC's international events. Why not put that to rest, and allow the owners of the Japan Ironman license to breathe easier? Why have the ITU, and USAT, constantly in a state of enmity with you, if there's a way available to you to enjoy peace inside what is an upbeat, lifestyle sport?

4. Is running a federation going to be profitable? Most federations aren't, absent government money. Is the WTC sure it can produce safe, fair, insured, events around the world, and do so without bleeding money, or producing substandard governance? Is sports governance WTC's mission?

5. WTC might lose in court, or in CAS (should it so-challenge the ITU resolution). What if WTC loses more than simply its right to sanction in far-off countries? What if the other heretofore uncontested elements of this agreement are thrust into question?

6. Up until now, whenever anyone has complained about officiating at an Ironman event, WTC has always been able to point at USAT and say, "Don't blame us, talk to them." Not anymore. WTC just bought officiating. Whenever packs form on the course, it's WTC that owns this problem. Unless officiating goes off without a hitch, WTC is in the crosshairs, and its WTC's own customers who'll be taking aim.

This fight is about principles, and it shouldn't be. A decade and more ago WTC's president was David Yates, and he was all about brand enhancement at the user level. WTC's next president was Lew Friedland, and he was all about brand leveraging. Friedland took Yates' stellar headbadge and sold it, enhancing WTC's license revenue, taking advantage of one of the strongest trademarks in sport.

Now Ben Fertic is WTC's president. Yates built the brand, Friedland built the revenue, and Fertic was, as far as I can tell, brought forward to build the technology. Fertic is equipped to take Ironman places that neither former president could. Fertic is executing this strategy nearly to perfection, and as a result WTC owns and sells not just licenses, but home-grown, proprietary technologies (what other events in any sport can match Ironmanlive's online coverage?).

But something happened that I don't think anyone could foretell, maybe not even Fertic himself. He's a throwback, and appears in ways much like David Yates. Yates was about principle. What was right sometimes may have taken precedence over what was expedient. Fertic is cut from the same cloth. Who knew?

USAT's leaders are likewise wedded to an attachment to righteousness. I'm wondering if our federation's leaders will doom USAT to the fate of that infamous Vietnamese village: In order to save the federation we had to destroy it.

The problem is, all sides in this seem to be interested so much in principle that the big picture is in danger of being eclipsed. Throughout history people were tortured, wars were fought, over the precise definition of a religious sub-theme. Standing on principle is good, but being right has its downside. Stand-downs versus penalties given on-the-fly are now separating both sides from the obvious truth: that WTC and USAT have the same enemy, and it is not each other.

Both organizations are fighting against what continues to be the status quo: a man sitting in a Lay-Z-Boy, eating Pringles, and watching a Popeil Pocket Fisherman infomercial. That man needs to do a triathlon. After his first sprint race, he needs to aspire to do an Ironman. Both USAT and WTC have the same goal. There is now an opportunity for both sides to remember why they were formed, and the basis for which each continues to gain end-user members.