PUBLIC STATEMENT: TOKYO PARALYMPIC GAMES
Graphic with text that writes: When a governing body writes criteria for selection and then follows the criteria for 7 out of the 8 classes and then totally abandons the criteria for one class, it makes you question the reason. When you find out that one person on the selection committee was the primary person involved in litigating against you in a legal lawsuit and didn't recuse himself, one questions the integrity of sport. There is not a more clear definition of conflict of interest than this example. The World Triathlon and Paralympic Code of Ethics was broken. Furthermore, World Triathlon refused to agree to expedite my case in the Court of Arbitration for Sport knowing that the standard process would block my participation in the Tokyo Paralympics.""
First off, I want to congratulate my fellow 17 teammates as part of the USA Paratriathlon's team, and I will be with you each step of the way as you achieve your own personal excellence in Tokyo.
My heart was crushed when I learned that I had not been selected as one of the athletes to represent Team USA at the Tokyo Games in Paratriathlon, the sport that I have been a leader in since 2002, both on the course and off being a mentor and megaphone for the para movement. The current rules that are used in the Visually Impaired category such as the factor system, leading zones on the course where guides can go in front of the blind athlete, and tether length and material are rules that I either fully or had strong input on creating. I have always believed in creating a level playing field in the sport that I have helped develop, transform and thrive, both stateside and internationally.
The selection criteria that were set forth once Covid hit jeopardized my spot on Team USA with discretionary criteria being prioritized. I was disappointed in that decision and I was left to rely upon the second method of securing a slot for the games, which is through a process called bipartite invitation.
Bipartite invitations are slots that do not count towards a country’s earned quota slots as these invitations go directly to the athlete and not to the country. These invitations are selected by a sport’s international federation (in this case World Triathlon) and the International Paralympic Committee (IPC). On July 5th, World Triathlon announced the eight bipartite invitations (one per classification competing in Tokyo) and listed the below criteria used in making these selections.
1. Performance of the athletes, according to competition results, to have the most competitive field
2. World Triathlon Paralympic Qualification Rankings
3. Specific head-to-head results of athletes applying for a slot in the same medal event
4. The most possible NPCs (country/federation) to be represented
In seven of the eight Paralympic categories, except for PTVI-Men, the bipartite selection criteria were followed and went to the athlete with the highest World and Paralympic Ranking who had not previously secured a spot in Tokyo. In the PT VI Men classification, World Triathlon coincidently side-stepped from their written criteria and gave the bipartite invitation to a Ukraine (UKR) athlete ranked 13th in the Paralympic rankings.
In breaking down each of their criteria, one can easily see that the slot should have been granted to me. First, in terms of competition results and having the most competitive field, I have been on the podium in every single World Paratriathlon event in my career except two times and this included 7 World Championships. Secondly, my Paralympic ranking of 6th and World ranking of 5th is the highest of any athlete not being selected to the Tokyo Paralympics across all categories. Whereas the UKR athlete selected had a Paralympic ranking of 13th. Thirdly, head-to-head competition results was listed in the criteria, and I had raced against the UKR athlete three times and never lost in all our competitions. Lastly, the most possible country’s to be represented was to be considered. UKR already has two other athletes that will be competing in the Tokyo paratriathlon race so including the UKR athlete does not increase the number of countries represented in the games.
After looking deeper into this, we found that there was much more to this decision. Integrity of sport and the Code of Ethics of both World Triathlon and the International Paralympic Committee were not upheld. As mentioned in the beginning, I have always stood strong to ensure fairness and reasonable humanity in sport and this meant that in 2012 I filed a lawsuit with overwhelming backing from blind/VI competitors against World Triathlon to do away with a rule which in simple terms forced all blind and visually impaired individuals to wear a blindfold during the run portion of the triathlon. This rule was put forth without any formal agreement and by parties that I have evidence of outspoken dislike and bias of the blind/VI community. Despite this, World Triathlon, proceeded to oppose a very inevitable result to the case. This included an in-person meeting with Antonio Arimany, who at the time served as World Triathlon ‘s Administration Legal and Financial Director and currently serves as their Secretary General. Mr. Arimany was very involved in the case for World Triathlon; however, at this in-person meeting disclosed no real knowledge of the case but instead specifically was only concerned with their reputation and that the media was involved. He tried to comfort me by giving me his business card and said, “We just wish you would have contacted us about this issue.” This was ironic because for over two years we had done everything, including sending direct emails to the President and Vice President of World Triathlon Marisol Casado and Sarah Springman, respectively, as well as organizing a 30-athlete protest of the “blackout glasses” rule at the 2011 New York City Triathlon.
On July 5th of this year, World Triathlon sent out an email to all governing bodies and athletes announcing their bipartite selections as well as the three-person selection committee that made the decisions on bipartite allocations. On of this three-person committee was Mr. Arimany. Based on his role in my previous litigation this posed a significant conflict of interest, and he should have known to recuse himself from selection in the Men’s VI category. Furthermore, his involvement and position on this committee directly violated both the World Triathlon and International Paralympic Clause on conflict of interest.
Further demonstrating World Triathlon’s denial and attempt to cover up their actions, they responded to a written letter from USA Triathlon with the following:
· World Triathlon stated that they acknowledge that there were criteria by which they used in selecting bipartite slots, however this criterion was NOT BINDING.
· They also tried to make the point that no country should have more than two athletes competing in a classification, but this point was made moot by the fact that they granted another US athlete, Melissa Stockwell, a bipartite invitation thereby giving the US three athletes in the PT S2 classification.
· Additionally, they stated the claim that there was conflict of interest with respect to Mr. Arimany was outrageous.
· Finally, when this case was presented to the court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), World Triathlon refused to expedite the case, a move that was directly aimed at excluding me from competing in Tokyo, as they knew the standard CAS process would merely be just beginning while the games were going on. Both parties must agree to expedite a case in the CAS and in nearly every case leading up to a games parties agree to expedite to ensure a proper resolution before the games.
Tthe above responses show that they take no accountability to withhold their own criteria or to uphold their own code of ethics.
In conclusion, the bipartite selection was misused by World Triathlon and both myself and USA Triathlon question a reasonable explanation as to why I was not given a bipartite slot, knowing fully that I qualify and met all the criteria. This marks the second games that I have been adversely affected and impacted by World Triathlon. 2016 was the debut of paratriathlon at the Rio Games, yet the visually impaired category was excluded, despite being among the most competitive classification in the sport. It also marks another incident in a long a trail of biased and discriminatory actions going back nearly 10 years by World Triathlon.
The Olympic and Paralympic mission is to promote the seven values of friendship, excellence, respect, courage, determination, inspiration and equality. Throughout my career I have remained at the top of my sport while still holding these values strong, in addition to maintaining honesty and fair play. As athletes, we are held accountable for everything that we do on and off the playing field and there must be accountability and transparency regarding selection of athletes by each governing body. As a champion of sport integrity, I will continue to be resilient and strong in order to find justice in what transpired, and I am grateful to USA Triathlon for standing up and supporting their athletes. I will continue to do my job as one of the best competitors in the sport, to represent my country when I am called upon and to be a wonderful ambassador to my unwavering sponsors like Brooks Running and Clif Bar.
Despite the disheartening news, I am excited for my fellow teammates to be named to Team USA. With the postponement of the Tokyo Games there has been an uprising of new talent and new spirit, which has been so great to watch and race against. Paratriathlon continues to develop and improve in the United States, and I plan to be part of that growth as I work with USA Triathlon to drive real tangible change at the international level. Go Team USA!"