Why do we publish UTMB and ITRA results of this race as 3 separate results rather than 1 stage race result?

Firstly, the UTMB and ITRA index forces us to make a choice between uploading the results as a combined total stage race, or as individual events. We cannot upload 1 person to all four events as they clash. They basically consider it impossible to compete in the Grand Slam and the 10k because they have the same start time.

This has been a question we have debated a lot and we decided upon uploading our multi race events such as Buffalo Stampede Grand Slams, Hounslow Monster and Roller Coaster Full Throttle and Beast Mode as individual race results, not as a stage race. 

Why? Because when we upload it as a combined stage race, it deletes all the Grand Slam runners from the 10k, 100k and 42k results. We don't feel this is right as the Grand Slam runners start at the same time as the 10k, 100k and 42k and are racing in those respective fields. They are changing the outcome of the races and fighting for each place on each race.

I understand that there are runners who may completely disregard their results in either one of the races and only focus on their result in the combined total. However we have to choose one or the other, and we can't please everyone unfortunately. So we will continue to upload our results to the individual races and not as a "stage race". 

Note the exemption to the rule here is the GPT100 Stage Race as we truly consider this a stage race as opposed to 4 individual races. 

Why do we not allocate Prize Money to the Grand Slams?

This is another ongoing conversation that we are having internally.

We certainly don't have to give any prize money out at all. Some of our events we don't give any to any of the races. There is also no substantial evidence that prize money even boosts the participation levels of a race. The only benefit that can be seen from offering prize money is drawing a more competitive field.

In some ways not offering prize money is a smarter move financially and administratively. We get no one question the fact that we don't give prize money when we don't, but when we do give prize money, people want to ask why it is distributed the way it is, or why we should even give it out since they see trail running as a participation sport and it should just be given out at random or not at all.

So why do we give prize money?

Our current answer is that it contributes to professionalisation of the sport. Even though we are not offering much prize money, it is a start, and by giving out a little on big fake cheques it goes a long way. It makes the top performing runners in the sport feel appreciated and makes them want to continue to work hard, perform well and be recognised. This also brings the attention of brands, who see the exposure these athletes get and want to use this to promote their products. Take Jess Jason for example, she won the Hounslow marathon, got heaps of attention, won a little prize money and ASICS are backing her with free kit and a bonus. 

Now this might not be seen as a good thing to some people, that we are celebrating the faster runners because they're fast. But that is the reality of sport. People don't put up posters of me or any random trail runner on their walls, they put up posters of Courtney Dauwalter. Similar to other sports and their heroes like Serena Williams and Eliud Kipchoge. The faster runners become professional, they work hard, they win races and then their stories are shared and followed and that's how heroes are made. This then elevates the status of the sport and then ultimately inspires people to get out onto the trails. 

So in some small way, by offering prize money, we are trying to elevate the profiles of Australian trail runners. Currently there are no full time trail runners in Oz, and all the heroes of the sport are from US and Europe. But there are some Aussies who are starting to change this and we think that we are playing a small role in this. 

By boosting the profile of the sport, sharing athlete storylines and tying them to our events, we are not only growing the sport as a whole, but hopefully growing our events. 

This of course doesn't cover off why we don't give prize money to the Grand Slams. Firstly, it is because that would mean that the Grand Slam runners would be eligible for three prize purses. At most of our events we have someone win a multi race event and also podium at least one of the individual races.  

Secondly, we have to strategically decide how we allocate prize money so that it is impactful, falls within a budget, and is ultimately doing what its purpose is, which is to promote the professionalism of the sport (ie, going to the runners who are at the top of the sport). So for each event that is a decision we have to make and for us we decided the most competitive fields would be the 20k, 100k and 42k. If there is a runner in the Grand Slam who is especially talented, then we back them to the podium in the one of the individual races regardless.

How do we decide the prize money distribution btw races?

We decide to allocate equal prize money to the races we want to encourage a more competitive field.

One could make the argument that the more expensive races should win more prize money.

One could make the counter argument that prize money for each event should just be proportionate to the profit of each race. We have seen that the longer the event, the more we lose. Yes, the cost of a ticket is higher, yet the costs for us to put it on are higher and the participation rate is generally lower. Our staff and medical at the race weekend adds up a huge cost as well as the planning, logistical, equipment and supplies costs of the longer races. It seems to be that 20k distance is the most profitable. So if we took that argument we would offer more prize money to the 20k. 

However, again the allocation of prize money doesn't come down to the profit of the race or the cost of the ticket, for us it comes down to trying to support the athletes who perform at the highest level and directing the top athletes into our premier events.