I'm good at math, but not so good at knowing much of anything about tri.......but it always has felt to me skewed towards the run being most important.
The distances seem to try to equalize the three. But, to me the math doesn't work out.
A strong cyclist bad runner is going to always come in second do a weak cyclist good runner.
The watts per mph on the bike leg with today's tech is just so good that people can get to decent bike speeds on piddly amounts of power. People averaging like 160w doing darn near 19 to 20mph on bike legs.
Maybe more equitable if the entire bike leg is into the wind or if the bike course is really really hilly.
At least then ain't nobody doing 20mph for the bike leg on like 160w in an illegal draft-fest.
I'm kind of interest in finding and trying out some gravel/trail duathlon or tri stuff. Make the bike about the fitness instead of the technology and wallet.