Misconceptions about new Ironman swim and start changes

Triathlon Forum
94

Very good description. The rants about said changes are much ado about nothing IMO.
As a race director, my #1 worst nightmare is having to explain to a widow or child that their spouse didn’t make it. That something I did or didn’t do somehow contributed to their demise. Until the rest of you complainers take on that responsibilty, I’d STFU. If you don’t want to use the gdamn mat, then don’t. And if you’re all that a piece of cheese, you’ll be way out ahead of these BOP’ers anyway.

I’ve done Florida, was it bad? Nope, beach was plenty wide. I’ve Louisville. Was it bad? Nope, TT start. I’ve done CDA, was it bad. Hells yeah. It was the most horrible 1/4 mile I’ve ever swum and I’ve oft thought that it borderlined on gross negligence. I’d NEVER design a swim start like CDA. So, guess what? WTC fixed the ones that were broke. BFD.

Safety trumps ego.

95

Scott, this sucks for you. As a sub 52 minute IM swimmer you’ll be crashing through the “pikers” on your 2nd loop and they won’t even see you coming.

96

“Honestly - I’d say it depends on the width of the starting line.”

i think you’re probably right.

“I can easily see this causing some false excitement celebrations”

the person engaging in a false celebration is the person who started some time ahead of a competitor. reasonably, there are 2 places i can see lining up. i can either line up where i SHOULD line up. or i can line up well in front of that. i can line up on the front line even tho i really have no business lining up there.

the people who have the most to gain by keeping it at gun time are those who’re lining up in front, instead of in their rightful place on the start line. they want to take advantage of the 2min, or 4min, “head start” they get over their competitors who lined up according to their proper seeds.

there will be 2 kinds of surprises at the finish line if we move to chip times: those you describe above, who’ll have an unhappy surprise; and those who lined up according to their proper seed, who’ll have a happy surprise.

it seems to me intuitive that those who are chafing hardest against chip times aren’t asking for fairness; they’re hoping to keep unfairness enshrined in the rules. i’m not saying you’re that person, because you seem to me pretty reasonable. just, i would think if somebody lines up according to his proper seed, it seems to me more fair that they are awarded a time consistent with how they actually raced, rather than demoted in favor of some guy (or gal) who lined up in a spot he or she had no business inhabiting.

i can see it both ways, but on balance i think it’s fairer, safer, and a better experience getting the benefits of a chip mat time, while accepting and acknowledging the downside of not knowing with absolute precision whether you’ve got a chip time a minute or 2 faster or slower than someone in your AG.

97

In my opinion, the ONLY viable solution to the problem(s) that WTC is trying to address would be to have three staggered, mass starts, to include pros, then competitive AG, then “friendly” AG. This allows competitors to compete and allows for a more effective, natural seeding of talent - especially among those that are less experienced and in need of the additional peace of mind.

I would even propose that each start not only wear distinct color caps, but distinct color wristbands so that you have a chance to identify those with whom you’re competing out on the course.

That’s not viable at all. Just because someone might be a mediocre swimmer, we limit their ability to compete? And, if you have a loop course, how does lumping all the “friendly” AG’ers into one wave prevent them from being there when faster swimmers come through? Plus, you can still have a range of abilities in each wave, all you’re doing by this proposal is making 3 smaller groups with the same problems.

John

How are you limiting one’s ability to compete by separating them into two distinct groups? They either go competitive or they don’t. If you’re a mediocre swimmer that wants to compete, then wouldn’t there be an advantage to starting 5’ ahead of the other mediocre swimmers, with whom you would have to contend otherwise? You will also have the benefit of starting head-to-head, which is integral to competitive groupings. At IMLP '11, people had to make a conscious decision prior to the race if they were going to be competing for awards/KQ or they weren’t (due to wetsuit eligiblity). How would the athlete’s decision between a competitive wave and a friendly wave be any different? The failure in that case was that they classified athletes, but then forced them to start together, imparting a huge disadvantage to the competitive, mediocre swimmers.

Further, if the three starts are staggered by 5 minutes, then you have the slowest swimmers starting 10-12 minutes behind the fastest swimmers. Given the proposed rolling start, the fastest swimmers could - theoretically - be coming in for lap two before the corral is even emptied for the first loop. (At the very least, they will hit the BOP 100-200 yards into the second loop - far earlier than before.) Unless there’s a plan for segregating the two loops, they will be spending the majority of their second loop swimming through the pack.

Forgive me if I’m missing your point, but I don’t see a scenario where three staggered starts present the same degree of complication, much less greater complication (relative to a mass or rolling start).

98

“You seem extremely closed minded”

you must have the patience of a coal miner trying to pry my extremely closed mind open :wink:

“History is not a very practical argument.”

i’m just about double your age, travis. just a guess, but you may attach greater appreciation for history and tradition as you age.

99

Having no idea where you stand against your competition makes it feel more like a really long training day and less like a race.

Studies have proven that athletes can and do alter their physical performance and effort based on their perceived position, relative to their “competition.”

100

“As a race director, my #1 worst nightmare is having to explain to a widow or child that their spouse didn’t make it. That something I did or didn’t do somehow contributed to their demise.”

apparently, this is not your concern, according to some slowtwitchers. it’s all the responsibility of the entrant. until somebody dies. then all of a sudden responsibility DOES somehow flow to you, based on what you did or didn’t do or plan in order to mitigate risk. probably according to those same slowtwitchers :wink:

101

I say good on it. It will be fun to revisit this thread a year from now to see exactly how the changes had an “effect” on the swim and how the Ironman swim became “easier” and the guaranteed BOP swimmers were hop-scotching from raft to raft. It’s not like they are installing couches at the aid stations on the run, and queen beds for naps at Special Needs on the bike, they are simply trying to make the swim a bit safer. The media has been pouncing on the swim deaths, and I’m not suggesting that WTC is being reactive to what has been going on. Regardless the reason, it’s a good thing IMHO.

Too often events occur and then we either adjust, or are forced to adjust. It’s tough to live in a proactive world, and the legal system to some point is the cause to a reactive system.

Case in point, and it’s a sad one: Formerly I worked for a large corporation with numerous sales reps across the nation. A sales rep in the Northeast was carjacked (company car) and eventually murdered. Devastating. Turns out she was abducted by her ex-boyfriend, murdered and stuffed in the trunk. One week later we all had mandatory safety training about being aware of our surroundings, etc. 55 minutes of computer training. The corp was being reactive to the occurrence. I don’t think the safety training would have stopped what had happened, but that’s just my opinion.

Will this new system decrease the chances of more swim deaths occurring, I can’t say, but it’s worth a try.

102

i forgot michellie. you can add mark allen.

Mark Allen was the original…sorry I missed him…and I think the first to win ITU World’s and Kona in the same year (89 Avignon, and 89 Hawaii). Also forgot Karen Smyers: 1995 Cancun World’s and 1995 Kona…and we forgot Erin Baker, 1989 ITU World’s, 1987 and 1990 Kona.

So I guess that makes 6 who have done the double. Now we’ll have to wait for Brownlee…

103

“Having no idea where you stand against your competition makes it feel more like a really long training day and less like a race.”

you really think you’re going to have no idea where you are relative to those in your competitive set? if there’s somebody you’re really concerned about - who’s the top predator in your AG - why don’t you just line up next to him or her?

104

Maybe one day I will care about all this, but given my current race times, I just race myself. Get me in the water as fast as I can. Swim my plan, bike my plan and run my plan. I haven’t been doing this long enough to have any type of change really affect me. It is interesting reading some of your opinions on this.

105

not if they narrowed the swim entry “chute” to a reasonable width, much like a marathon. This would compliment the self-seeding efforts and the chip time concept.

there is going to be ZERO difference in what the swim start itself looks like.

106

yup, you’re right. 3 men, 3 women. and i think could’ve been 4, had simon lessing done starting doing kona about the same time he was winning nice.

107

“You seem extremely closed minded”

you must have the patience of a coal miner trying to pry my extremely closed mind open :wink:

“History is not a very practical argument.”

i’m just about double your age, travis. just a guess, but you may attach greater appreciation for history and tradition as you age.

Oh I’m patient :slight_smile: I still don’t see an answer though. We all want the swim to be as safe as possible and the idiots talking about running over people in the water can be ignored. The water temp thing makes sense as well as the rafts or whatever they are. I don’t think the start really makes a difference though. You yourself said that the 2 loop swim is pretty much going to be the same with people still getting run over. There are a lot of people who invest a substantial amount of their life and time into being as fast as possible and not allowing them to know or taking away any chance of them knowing where they stand in the race is doing the racing aspect of the event a great disservice. IMTX was able to overcome their swim issues for the most part with the split swim between people who were trying to KQ and those who didn’t care. There was got to be a way to maintain the integrity of the actual racing where the first to the line wins aspect of the event and protecting those who are there to enjoy and complete the event.

108

the ONLY difference between a mass start the way it’s run now, a seeded mass start the way it’s contemplated in florida, and a seeded mass start the way it’s contemplated in CDA, is:

  1. there will be more obvious attention - attention, not a requirement - placed on the notion of lining up according to your swim ability;
  2. your time starts when you cross the mat, rather than with the gun.

i don’t see how this changes anything materially on lap-2, that is, if you were going to get swum over this year on lap-2, you were going to get swum over last year on lap-2.

as to the mats, different mats, i have no 411 on that.

At IMLP, the first length was expected to be rough. Once you came back on the first lap, things settled down a bit and everybody got in their pace line. I’ve lapped people on the swim. But, it was always on the back end of the second lap. Now that they are reducing the size of the start gate, I don’t see how this will thin the herd on the 2nd lap. It’s going to take significantly longer for people to get through to the starting mat and begin their race. The FOP swimmers and going to have full congestion the entire way around on the 2nd lap. MOP swimmers will have a shot at that congestion too. The BOP swimmers are going to experience turbulence most of the way, up until they are roughly 1/2 to 3/4 of the way done with their 2nd lap.

I’m all for the mass/ rolling start. But, what’s the point of narrowing the entry arch so that it will take significantly longer to get going? It actually seems worse, IMO.

109

“not if they narrowed the swim entry “chute” to a reasonable width, much like a marathon. This would compliment the self-seeding efforts and the chip time concept.”

they may seek to narrow the chute, and i can see why they would. it makes competitors more accessible to lifeguards and emergency watercraft. esp if you ascribe to the idea that most of these problems occur fairly early on in the swim. yes, if they did this it would change the time it takes to get everybody into the water. it isn’t chip v gun timing that would change anything, just the size of the chute. yes, this may change, i don’t know. i haven’t spoken to them if this is part of what they’re contemplating, but, what they have told me is that the only major change that attaches to chip v gun time is just that: the point at which a person’s time starts.

110

the way this sport is going, regarding safety and death in the water, i can see DUATHLON making a come back, in 20 years nobody will be allowed to swim anymore, because the weak are ruining the sport.

“You seem extremely closed minded”

you must have the patience of a coal miner trying to pry my extremely closed mind open :wink:

“History is not a very practical argument.”

i’m just about double your age, travis. just a guess, but you may attach greater appreciation for history and tradition as you age.

Oh I’m patient :slight_smile: I still don’t see an answer though. We all want the swim to be as safe as possible and the idiots talking about running over people in the water can be ignored. The water temp thing makes sense as well as the rafts or whatever they are. I don’t think the start really makes a difference though. You yourself said that the 2 loop swim is pretty much going to be the same with people still getting run over. There are a lot of people who invest a substantial amount of their life and time into being as fast as possible and not allowing them to know or taking away any chance of them knowing where they stand in the race is doing the racing aspect of the event a great disservice. IMTX was able to overcome their swim issues for the most part with the split swim between people who were trying to KQ and those who didn’t care. There was got to be a way to maintain the integrity of the actual racing where the first to the line wins aspect of the event and protecting those who are there to enjoy and complete the event.

111

“what’s the point of narrowing the entry arch so that it will take significantly longer to get going?”

access to people in trouble. one problem with all the recent swim deaths over the past couple of years has been getting to a person in trouble with watercraft. you kill too many additional people driving the boat over their backs. (one thing worse than having somebody swim over your back is a watercraft swimming over your back.) so, the boats just don’t get to the swimmers in trouble. they don’t try. not even paddleboards. you just can’t get there.

seems to me, tho, you’d be less likely to run into conjestion while lapping a swimmer if you had a stream of those swimmers instead of a swarm of swimmers. but i don’t know, i don’t know that we’ll know until we see it.

112

I don’t mind the change if its safer, but it does change the race aspect for FOP racers. My last IM (nonWTC) I figured I was pretty close to a podium spot. With about 400m to go I caught a guy who looked to be my age and his number was smeared. So I made sure not to pass him until about 200 meters to go and then sprinted .

As it happened he wasn’t in my AG and didn’t contest the sprint but he did make sure I was in a different AG before deciding not to sprint.

Its not a big deal but a TT type race is different mentally than a mass start. I’d much prefer that they do waves starts with AG as it seems like that would give the safety aspects and preserve the competitive aspect.

113

So the swim 2:20 cutoff is not needed? How does that impact the midnight cutoff if you start at 6:30am? Mike calls you an Ironman, you get a medal and hat. Results show DNF because you are time was 17:00+?

How about WTC just reduce the number of partipants? Get it back down to a manageable field and stop chasing the $.

Sweet…so IMs could sellout in 30 seconds instead of a minute? Or they could just raise prices really high to price people out of the market (Econ 101).