World Triathlon Corporation, of Ironman fame, struck first by setting up the Global Tri Group, a pseudo sanctioning body for its own races. USA Triathlon, America's official governing body for triathlon, responded by saying We aren't going to sanction your races. (WTC having already refused USAT's sanctioning is just a detail of chronology).

Neither organizations' statements ought to be considered declarations of divorce. Far from it. Neither party can afford to leave the other for good. No, this is more like Ralph Kramden threatening to send Alice to the moon. By the end of the show Ralph proclaimed, Baby, you're the greatest, and such will be the case with USAT and WTC—probably by next Spring.

Why? Because there's too much at stake for both parties. First, here's what USAT stands to lose.

If it was just a matter of the estimated $100,000 USAT will forfeit in direct revenue from WTC and Ironman North America, no matter. That just means USAT will have $300,000 in before-tax profit (and there are no taxes). No, this is not the biggie. The question is, are we just looking at the tip of the iceberg? Big race directors, like Maggie Sullivan of Danskin, Jan Caille of the Accenture Triathlon in Chicago, Terry Davis of Wildflower and Alcatraz, and others have variously sent letters of concern to, or voiced disapproval with, USAT in recent years. And, they have all been bitten by having to explain to their customers the genesis of silly and inexcusable penalties given out. What if WTC's Global Tri Group becomes a rival sanctioning organization? What if the lost revenue extends to include that of many of these large and powerful race directors?

Then, of course, what if WTC turns out to be right? What if its new rules and environment of enforcement is arguably an improvement over the justice USAT has been meting out at races? The loss of prestige, leadership and revenue can happen overnight. USAT might find itself bleeding, and badly, within two years.

That established, and with virtually nothing to lose, the smart money is on WTC, right? Not so fast. Yes, USAT has been at odds with the world governing body for triathlon, the ITU, for years—mostly over the ITU's insistence that USAT not grant a sanction to the Life Time Fitness Triathlon, and the USAT's Go to hell response. And let us not forget America's public backing of Les McDonald's foe in the most recent ITU election, which McDonald won.

However, if there is one organization with which the ITU has had more historical enmity than USAT, it's the WTC. This issue will throw USAT and the ITU together, and relegate Life Time Fitness to the back burner. This is exactly the sort of fight McDonald relishes, and within a week pressure is likely to be placed on governing bodies all over the World, in every country in which an Ironman race is staged. No, the Ironman is not in danger of getting shut down in America if no sanction is granted. But that is not necessarily the case in other countries. Just as USAT might find itself sanctioning Life Time Fitness, the Springfield run/bike/paddle, and 380 other races across the country (as opposed to the 1500 races it now sanctions), WTC might also find itself putting on Ironman races only in America, Bangladesh and the Ivory Coast.

In other words, yes, this is the sort of nuclear bomb that could cripple both organizations. Just as USAT's membership would not countenance such a breathtaking blunder perpetrated by an organization that has an unfair monopoly legally granted it by the U.S. Congress, WTC's licensees—both product and event license buyers—would not take kindly to the dismantling of Ironman's global presence.

Why did it come to this? One must again look to the ITU. For all this sport has, the problem is what it doesn't have. When one considers a reasonably large cycling race—let us consider the just finished Dauphine Libere—look at how that race ended. Two Khazaks, two Spaniards, a gaggle of Americans, Colombians, and a pair of Belgians in the top dozen. Somewhere in there was a lone Frenchman. The UCI (cycling's world governing body) at some point declared that such races belong to the World, and the Dauphine's final GC standings obviously bear that out. The fact that such races might be contested on French soil was a detail of geography. So, a set of global rules were set up for races of global importance, and these rules supercede any provincial rules a country sets up for other, lesser races.

The problem in triathlon is that the ITU barely recognizes the legitimacy of ultra distance races, and spends as little time talking about them as possible, because such races simply detract from its World Cup circuit, the apple of the ITU's eye. Of course the last thing on the ITU's plate is anything that might actually aid long course racing, such as a set of global rules.

But in the absence of such rules, pro athletes from Europe come to America to race under a set of rules entirely unfamiliar to them, absent their having raced in America before. When Americans travel oversees, they don't know whether their Dura Ace bar-end shifters will cause them to be disqualified or not. It's rather chaotic out there.

The two things USAT and the WTC can agree upon is the need for global rules for long distance racing at the international level. What ought to be occurring now is precisely that discussion. But tempers and turf got the better of both organizations before that discussion could take place.

The issues are not that complex, which means it's personalities that will stand in the way of a rapproachment. There are four personalities that matter in this. There is WTC's talented, smart, pragmatic Ben Fertic. As a '96 Ironman finisher he's not alien to the issues.

Then there is USAT's Skip Gilbert. He's the consumate deal maker. He's a lover, not a fighter, but he does not lack for backbone. He's a grown-up. He's willing to cut the right deal, and he does not hold a grudge. But he's new to triathlon, and he's going to take the counsel of those in his office. He would do well also to listen to the points of view of the old timers (Riccitello, Newby, Welchy, Huddle) as well as the current domestic and international long course competitors.

Charlie Crawford is USAT's tough, capable, head of officials. He's pretty much had his own way in recent years, because in heading up this program he's basically agreed to empty out USAT's septic tanks around the country, and who's going to stand in his way? He's the right guy for a nationwide officials program. But the time has come to rethink policies and the approach to officiating. Is Charlie too big a ship to turn? If so, Charlie will be the one to know, and will make the right and honorable decision for his sport and his organization.

Les McDonald, ITU's chief, did not win his most recent election by a lot of votes, and one reason why is that if reelected in 2000 he promised to step down in 2004. He went back on his promise, and a lot of countries didn't like that. This has somewhat weakened the old warrier but, win he did, and he still wields a lot of power. What will he do? Will he see this as an opportunity to make mischief for the WTC, which is another way of making mischief for the sport in general? Or will he honor himself and his organization by stepping in to help heal the split, and by heading up a set of global long distance rules, as is his organization's charge in any case? One element lending credence to his doing the right thing: his World Cup circuit is doing fine, largely due to McDonald's tenacity. He might feel less threatened by Ironman than he once did, and he might want to add a bit of high-road statesmanship to his legacy.

That said, I give no odds on what the ITU will do. But I'll lay money that Fertic and Gilbert work things out, and that these two organizations are back together by this Winter.

Here's food for thought, for any of the parties who might be listening. When one considers what a truly "international" ultradistance race might look like, and how many of these might exist in the World, it's all the Ironman races, plus the ITU Long Distance Worlds, and then the list runs quite thin. Were one to "beta test" a set of long and ultra distance global rules only at "A list" ultra-distance races, the remaining Ironman schedule for 2005 almost exhausts that list. These Ironman races are going to beta test this set of rules anyway.

The reality on the ground is that we have this beta test going on at the appropriate races for the balance of 2005. Were WTC to agree to join forces with USAT and perhaps with the ITU in making its Ironman races the testing ground for a set of global rules for next year—assuming all sides were willing to enter this agreement with a spirit of cooperation and bona fide negotiation—this ought to be an easy problem to solve.