ericmulk wrote:
lightheir wrote:
ericmulk wrote:
The question i've always wondered about is if the original iron swim distance had been 7 miles, would ironman have caught on the way it has??? For the purpose of my thought experiment, i assume that the first few years would've been somewhat similar, e.g. Julie Moss, or some other attractive girl, crawls to the finish line on national TV, which spurs a huge increase in interest. If the swim had been 7 miles from the beginning, would people have responded in the same numbers as they did from '83 onward, or would most have said, "Hell, I'll never be able to swim 7 miles..."??? Is a 7-mi swim all that different from 2.4 miles???Clear obvious answer here - NOOOOOO.
IM would have died a brief, early, unknown death if it were a 7 mile swim to lead it in as the standard distance. I'm probably a good mainstream AG example, and in my non-swimming days, a 7 mile swim would = literally impossible (and still very, very hard for me now given I never swim that far!)
I think you're over-estimating the difficulty. When i did my first 10K swim in the pool, i had "only" been swimming 4000 yd/day, 6 days/wk, but yet with good pacing i was able to swim 11,000 yd (did it in a 25-yd pool) negative splitting every 1000, i.e. each 1000 was faster than the last one. So, if a person could do 6 x 4000 yd/day each week (and for you, i think you could sub 4 Vasa workouts and just do 2 actual swims per week), then he/she could swim 7 miles (12,320 yd) w/o too much problem. The 24,000 yd would take around 6-8 hours if swum as 6 x 4000 yd straight, aiming of course to swim each 1000 faster than the last.
For some people that swim training load may serm reasonable but for many it's utterly absurd. I have done most half IM and my one full IM race on about 8-12hrs per week for all 3 disciplines. Swimming is the most time costly for almost everyone since on top of training time there's getting to and from the pool.
Your prescribed 24000yd/wk would take me 10hrs in the pool and including travel for 6 sessions I would be way over the time that currently has me adequately prepared in all 3 disciplines to do a relatively slow IM time by ST standards (12hrs+).
It would require a huge increase in training time for me to do a triathlon with a long swim leg if the training time you suggest were required for the swim.
If swim distances significantly increased, I and a huge proportion of others, would no longer be able to safely compete. It's okay to be slow on the swim. It's reckless to enter if you expect to struggle just to cover the distance.
A long swim leg would see me ditch triathlon in favour of run and bike events.
So the swim has to be somewhat conservative or numbers will plummet and for good reason.