Must be the new bike

Did they shorten them amateur swim? Their swim times are 10 minutes faster than the pros.

---

https://twitter.com/mungub

I noticed that too, seemed odd. Chattanooga has a downriver swim, right? Maybe the pros had to loop up the river a bit first?

---

___________________________________
MS: Exercise Science
Your speed matters a lot, sometimes you need to be very fast, where sometimes you need to breakdown your speed.

Must be the 15:xx half IM swim for Pubes.

Fairly confident he raced the felt. Don't believe he ever plans to fly with the DB.

---

----
@adamwfurlong

Regardless that was supposed to be in pink

My understanding is that the pros had a 400 m against the current section vs the amateurs being all with the current. Bruce Gennari went 13:25. :)

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

Except it was a different course. The swim course was shortened for the amateurs.

And Kiley raced on the felt. At least that's what he was riding in the days prior.

Oh and the top 3 amateurs beat the pro winner Matt Russell.... should we make a thread for them too?

---

blog

00:41/100m, he should go to the Olympics and win every freestyle event.

Bruce Gennari lost his biggest advantage with that silly downriver swim. Next thing you know they will run the 21.1 km run on a 10 kph conveyor belt. That should cover it. while we are at it, every age grouper also gets assigned a magic motor than measures their input power at the pedals and doubles the power to the wheels. Then you have the full blow WTC cheatathlon. You get your 70.3 medal while barely doing 5i50 work....sounds awesome.

A while back my buddies and I went to Vegas for golf. One of the rules for this trip was whomever lost the Day 3 of golf had to go to a MMA gym there and fight a MMA fighter. I dominated the first two days to shit the bed on Day 3, putting me in the octagon with a MMA fighter. So, you get a membership to said gym, and you get ready to "dance". They were good sports about it, and right off the get go we made the simple rules: no kicking, and no choking me out (yeah, not really an MMA fight, but whatever). So, i get some guy who is 175lbs of muscle (I'm 220...not muscle). I'm a former high level hockey player and have enjoyed the art of fisticuffs. So I'm no slouch..but I'm no boxer or MMA fighter. So we start and do our dance and I catch the guy with a short check hook. He back up, laughs a bit while his buddies razz him. I have a new found confidence of "hey, this is just another fight. You can do this." He puts some head fakes in, and goes to side step for a hook and I deliver a BOMB down the middle. Straight right down the middle. I buckle his knees and the whole places goes "OOOOOHHHHHHH!!!!!" He takes two steps back and UNLEASHES a nasty kick that grazes the bottom of my elbow and takes out all of my internal organs. I drop, can't breath, can't move, am paralyzed and dying. As I come to I remind him of the rules and that he is a fucking cheater. He tells me we can do it again, and I say "Nope. I don't fight cheaters. And declare myself undefeated in MMA and get out of the Octagon."

Point is: it wasn't really a MMA fight, but I'm gonna take that victory. SWEET, SWEET VICTORY.

Same goes for Kiley. Lol

It would be hilarious if they had done this race with the whole thing up river.
It would take a 23:00 swimmer - 45:00
A 30:00 swimmer - 1:00
A 35:00 swimmer - 1:30
A 40:00 swimer - 3:00

 
While in the swim line I thought I over heard them say it went from a 1.2 mile swim to a .8 mile swim, it was crazy watching the pros struggle so much. Seemed like it was 10+minutes after they went in before we saw them get around the buoys and back to basically where they started, once they made that turn though, man they were gone!

Championship race is up river thank goodness.

You elitist asshole

can't wait to see Dev's thoughts on the Nike sub-7 project....

---

wovebike.com | Wove on instagram

Have you watched how they got the riders to go so fast in Roth every year? They don't have a tesla with a big clock, but they sure have a lot of motorbikes around the leaders.

So if they supposedly felt the pro's struggled too much swimming up river and that there would be AG athletes not able to make it and they delayed and adjusted course for AG, Worlds should be interesting as 800 + of it goes upstream! Curious if you hear any pros thoughts on their swim.

Myself and some of the other pro males hardly noticed a current at all either up, across, or down river. Unless the current picked up after we got out (unlikely) or we were oblivious (possible), it seemed like an overreaction to me.

---

Adam Feigh
Pianko Law, Speed Hound, Castelli, Sailfish, Base
Feighathlon.com

can't wait for the AMA thread!

I did run into pubes pre-race randomly. He had a great race and I accept my defeat. I didn't swim with a swim skin though that probably was my race right there ;)

Seriously though I know Adam chimed in but that was a tough current. You still get it for all but 300-400 but that 300-400 took forever. Usually before I know it is 2nd bouy. My experience is 3 years upstream at Louisville and one year at Chatt. I know it was going to be tough because I was warming up swimming perpendicular to shore and I was constantly landing downstream. Would be curious to know actual flow rates.

I had heard there was a pro women who wasn't making any progress. No idea what kind of a swimmer she is, but pros also didn't get wetsuits. I don't know what making progress means or whether true, but upstream swims, even if short can really lengthen the time for poor swimmers. Even with wetsuits a strong current could end a poor swimmers day.

---

---

Save: $50 on Speed Hound Recovery Boots | $20 on Air Relax| $100 on Normatec| 15% on Most Absorbable Magnesium

Blogs: Best CHEAP Zwift / Bike Trainer Desk | Theragun G3 vs $140 Bivi Percussive Massager | Normatec Pulse 2.0 vs Normatec Pulse | Speed Hound vs Normatec | Air Relax vs Normatec | Q1 2018 Blood Test Results | | Why HED JET+ Is The BEST value wheelset

What course is the Nike sub 7 on ? Kona, Roth, Frankfurt on Lanzarote? Depending on the course we will need some creativity on WTC cheatathlon (Patent Pending) race modify solutions I thought Felix was competing with the guys at Klagenfurt to perfect the fast course thing, but they have nothing on the Chattanooga swim mafia.

Dev

beach to battleship may be up in contention for a Nike sub-7 course... but what you need is a point to point tail wind course for the bike and run.

---

wovebike.com | Wove on instagram

Maybe we can make the Chinese Navy to build a 138.2 mile long Island in the South Pacific (you know, like the ones they build in the South China sea out of coral reefs and put runways on them to claim territory). Then just run this with the prevailing tailwind. Or move the new Ironman Argentina from Mar del Plata to Port Stanley in the Islas Malvinas. Get the sub 7 IM Argentina done with the prevailing tailwind before the British Navy moves in to reclaim the event as Ironman Great Britain.

Prevailing wind there is daily 31 kph to 63 kph....that should cover the assist.

This is awesome. I don't care if that's real or completely fabricated, it made for a good laugh.

---

_____________________________________________________
Instagram | Team Kiwami North America

I was there and swam with AGers. Everyone kept commenting on how long it took the pros to get upstream. It was ridiculous. Do you really think sending 2,500 AGers into that would be smart. The DNF rate would be through the roof. I know my swim time isn't representative of my average but Chat is a tougher than average HIM course with 2,218 elevation on the bike and close to 1,000 elevation on the run. The downstream swim levels this race out. IM is trying to get more people interested in triathlon not kill people.

Hey, if the issue is that age groupers won't make the swim in a fair swim, then this is not the venue for a fair triathlon just like a triathlon run on a 10 kph conveyor belt would not be a good venue for a triathlon run leg.

In the view of some of us who have done a number of WTC event (I've done 31 of their IM's and around 70 something half IM's), WTC just ends up being held to a higher bar just like MLB, NFL and NBA are. The local beer league event can do anything they want with house rules to get people into the sport. I get that the rest of the course has a bit more challenge, but then just cancel the swim and have a duathlon with a challenging course. Why even bother getting wet?

But I get that its about money and trying to keep people in the sport and not scaring them with ridiculously tough challenges. Well, how about a 100m up stream leg if you're going to do it in a river. If that takes someone 10 minutes, that's OK...the downstream was ridiculously fast.

Just so you understand, I am a runner at heart, not a swimmer at all. I would not want them to have the run course on a 10 kph conveyor belt either. If a bunch of people DNF because they can't make the swim cut off, that's just racing. Come prepared for the challenge. It's not like anyone is going to die swimming upstream into a current. It's just going to be a longer swim, that all. Nothing dangerous there.

That must be the greatest video ever posted on an icloud sharing account. nicely done

---

_____________________________________
What are you people, on dope?

—Mr. Hand

A 100m uphill stretch w a turn even if uphill would create stupid unnecessary carnage. They'd likely lose a lawsuit for creating completely unnecessary dangerous course. 100m isn't enough time for any seperation, itu won't even have that short of a turn boy and they only have 75 person max wave starts. 200+ people starting and swimming to a 100m turn? That's stupidly dangerous (thus won't happen).

Which is why you see the uphill stretch at 700 and not 200 or 300. 700 allows for much safer swim conditions then a 200 uphill swim section.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

That was actually one of their conditions: can't video it. Apparently a pro isn't supposed to "fight" some bum, hence why it had to become a "spar session" for members of the gym (that fucking membership wasn't cheap either), and they didn't want this to become a regular occurrence because of liability issues (if he'd have kicked me in the head I'd be dead). My buddies though were quick to post said results on social media.


I can, as well as my still scarred internal organs, can attest to its authenticity. Seriously, I think he bruised my soul with that kick.

FYI: haven't lost a round of golf to those shitbags again, and I'm still tempted to shank a ball at them every time they are little bit ahead of me when out on the course.

Until there is a storm the night before and they can't turn the flow of the river down as planned. That's what happened last night/today. Big storm so they had to keep the water flow really moving couldn't slow it down so the 300 yard/meter upstream section would have been near impossible for a lot of the athletes. The pros struggled with it.

My understanding is 100m upstream would have still taken a long time. In any case whatever distance such that we're talking 5-10 minutes for fast to slow swimmers to hit the turn, which should be plenty of time for a wave to thin out before. Lots of IM courses where first turn happens in 5-10 minutes.

Also use the 3-4 buoy turn with ropes connecting them (like in Kona at the far end or in St. Croix where they have the gradual turn in <50m)

I did karate and kick-boxing for 20+ years and I've never once heard "bruised my soul with that kick". I literally spat out my frosted mini wheats. Great story.



I can, as well as my still scarred internal organs, can attest to its authenticity. Seriously, I think he bruised my soul with that kick.

FYI: haven't lost a round of golf to those shitbags again, and I'm still tempted to shank a ball at them every time they are little bit ahead of me when out on the course.[/quote]

---

Don't drown. Don't crash. Don't walk.

The water was ridiculously fast the day before (described as swimming in an endless pool) and another poster explained that the dam discharge could not be lowered due to the storm the night before.

For some reason you're hell bent on the event having an upstream section, regardless of conditions. Sorry, but there'are reasons these events get adjusted based on conditions from time to time and it's safety and logistics.

They could have canceled the swim but instead everyone got a triathlon. No one went home unhappy and it wasn't just because of the fast swim times. Our race was in serious jeopardy the night before and that didn't happen.

I'm not sure why

You clearly haven't been there. An Ironman on the Falkland Islands would be the hardest thing going; firstly, you won't get close to 112 miles in one direction, second, outside Stanley (or the air base), the roads are all gravel.

---

29 years and counting

Thomas,

Is the bike course hard enough for the WC 70.3? Or will we see a large lead group working together like last year?

For the WC 70.3, in Chattanooga, the bike course is different than yesterday's course. Within five miles, on the WC course, you start climbing Ochs which is a climb up Lookout Mountain. It starts off steep with switchbacks. This is a true climb and will break the field apart very nicely. But, you better save some of your legs for the run because you get some climbing there too

For what it's worth, as a weaker female pro swimmer, I really didn't feel like I was struggling against the current yesterday. I could perceive that I was moving more quickly once we turned into the down current, but the first few hundred meters are always a sprint for position anyways, so it kind of just felt par for the course in that regard. I'm​ not saying that what was done was or wasn't right, as I can certainly understand it could have ended some days very early, which would have been unfortunate, just that I personally was surprised​ to learn that we looked like we were having a really hard time, because I didn't perceive it. I normally swim in the 30-31min range, but was a hair under 29 yesterday, so overall a bit faster than normal. I was also glad to have the upstream portion to make the race seem a bit more honest, even if it could be considered a disadvantage for me!

Thanks for your reply. So even for someone with what would be a decent age group swim time, the swim on the pro course was faster. The feedback some are giving is that age groupers would never make it to the turnaround because the current was faster than their swim speed. Do you know your turnaround split. If you are a 30 min swimmer, normally you would be swimming 30 min/19 = 1:35/100m.

Remember this swim was majority downstream even for the pros. So it makes sense that they would swim about their normal times.

If you go make over half the swim upstream, as has been proposed for WC, and make the upstream portion twice as long as what the pros did, then you will have big issues in the age group ranks. It's a championship race and shouldn't be easy, but we should remember that in some older age groups, where swim speed of 1.5 mph may be "average" even at top level, then the half mile upstream may be unfinishable. With a 1mph current, such a swimmer would require 1 hour just for that segment.

So what happens if there's a significant current in that river come September? They won't be able to shorten/alter the swim like they did this weekend unless they move the masses upstream.

---

Coach at KonaCoach Multisport

Hey, I totally agree with your points. It's why I don't think this venue is a good one for a world championship. Because of the reasons you cited, the swim needs to be either completely downstream or largely downstream to allow for older age group swimmers to actually make the turnaround with a chance to make it back before the cut off. Let's even use your Kona swim speed, around 1:20. That's around 2 min per 100m or 3 kph. If the water current is 2 kph, then the swimmer is moving at 1 kph. It would take nearly 1 hour to reach the swim turnaround in the half IM. So you can see the problem.

If WTC wants to have an event in a venue like this with no slots to worlds or Kona and not a world championship event, then go nuts. But if they going to have a world's here, knowing full well that the swim will get largely nullified or have events there with a road to Kona on 70.3 Worlds, then that's another animal.

Also, it's differennt when there is an act of god and a swim cancellation/altering. Examples of this would IM Florida or New Zealand or Lake Placid Thunderstorms. These events have had swim alterations/cancellations only once in a few decades. A high flow river venue, you know out of the gate is problematic when it comes to the swim

I'm usually slightly above MOPer overall (crossing my fingers on that one), but for swim definitely MOP or slightly below MOP. I did HIM Chattanooga in 2015. I've heard people say Chat is tougher than average HIM bike course. Is that really true? I've done Chatt, Augusta, and Wilmington HIMs and I felt Chatt and Augusta were similar in elevation. Chatt had one short but steep climb but other than that I just felt like it was rollers and not overly tough. Not easy, but not crazy hard. Wilmington was crazy hard last year due to significant winds but it was flat. If it wasn't windy it would have been less challenging. Since I've only done 3 HIMs it might just be that I haven't done enough of that distance to realize that Chatt is tougher than average. I felt the Chatt run was definitely challenging. I remember the steep climb out of transition but then there seemed to be a fair number of medium-long climbs that were just energy sapping.

I definitely agree with you on the swim even though I wasn't there in the sense that the swim seems to be the leg where AGers come the least prepared and it sounds like it would have been dangerous for them. I'm doing IM Chattanooga this year and there's no upstream section so hoping for a little additional current for that one.

Yep. If the current is minimal then the upstream portion will lengthen the overall times for all but more so for the weaker swimmer. NBD, similar to hilly vs flat bike or run. But moderate current of 1 mph will be a game changer. Ha I remember Tuscaloosa...

Ironically I sent a message to the RD for worlds just last week regarding this, and received a reply that they understand all that and "know this river" and that my message was unnecessary, etc.

My question is that if they understand that and know this river (and know that a loop swim has never been used here for triathlon), why would they plan a majority upstream swim? I have to assume they have some assurance from TVA that there will be minimal current.

So I guess I should quit posting and messaging and start swimming!!

---

Coach at KonaCoach Multisport

Reading you and Dev's points. Didn't the 1st year at Chatt, everyone laughed so the RD/authorities said they would do everything in their power to limit the current? Dev talks about an act of god, and didn't that happen Saturday night, with a massive storm hitting Chatt area around 7-8pm. So I'd assume the authorities had to deal with that in how the dam deals with the water. So I still think unless it's bad weather, race week, it's not going to be that much of an dramatic issue. Now you can say that's an problem in itself, having to hope it doesnt rain race week or the current will be too strong uphill. Which yeah fair enough, but I also think this is going to be a very good championship level course, regardless of what Dev thinks with this potential swim issue.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Chatt is a GREAT venue and I predict wonderful things for the worlds. You just gotta do what you gotta do . . . this is an outdoor/nature event, not a domed stadium. We have lots of great races that routinely have to alter the swim OR change the bike course due to road construction or weather (hurricane in NC) OR a storm comes up OR the terrible VOG one year (many years?) in Kona OR any number of other things. This is all what happens outside . . . sometimes we don't like it but that's the way it goes. Adaptability is part of producing and racing these sorts of events.

Decisions also need to be made with the masses in mind. Remember, this is a mass participation business and not just for the elites, so the decision making processes have to accommodate the masses. Frankly, I think they do a pretty darn good job of it!

As a welcoming venue Chatt is wonderful and I fully support having events including the WC there. Anyway, no matter what happens in the swim the climb to Lookout Mountain will certainly sort things out.

---

David
* Ironman for Life! (Blog) * IM Everyday Hero Video * Daggett Shuler Law *
Disclaimer: I have personal and professional relationships with many athletes, vendors, and organizations in the triathlon world.

Great points, and they did react this weekend exactly as they should have.

And I too am extremely excited about the venue and the hills on the bike and run. It will be a great test of all abilities which is what a championship course should be

---

Coach at KonaCoach Multisport

well said David

---

Coach at KonaCoach Multisport

BIG +1!

These criticisms from people who were not even there are a bit strange. I have visited Chattanooga many times in the past for quick family trips, and this was my best visit ever. It is an amazing Ironman venue, and the community support is outstanding. I took in more of the city than I ever have before. The Ironman Village had an excellent vibe and smokes anything stuffed in a hotel conference room. The river scene is beautiful. The bikers will love the Lookout Mountain climb.

Those of us who were there watched the pros swimming upstream and wondered aloud how strong the current was. Most of the amateur racers would probably have been fine, but swimmers slower than 1:50/100 or 2:00/100 could have had a problem. I was disappointed, but the RD made the right call for the overall field of the ~2,000 amateur competitors.

I've done probably 10 different HIM courses and Chattanooga is on the easier side of the scale. Only easier ones I've done are NOLA and Miami, which are pancake flat

For faster swimmers, overall time may change very little due to the current and there will be a breakeven swim speed above which the current is advantageous to overall swim time. For slower swimmers it's a completely different story. As current speed approaches swim speed, the upstream section becomes a massive issue. Many swimmer will be unable to complete the course, nevermind within the cut-off.

Let's do a case study!!!
Do feel free to point out if my maths are incorrect.
I'm going to assume a uniform current of 2km/h. Hardly a gushing torrent by any means but very significant relative to typical swim speeds. I'm also going to assume a uniform effort.


Case 1:
Weaker Female Pro with typical time of 30mins for 1900m
Average pace (speed) = 1:35/100m (3.8km/h)

Upstream 400m @1.8km/h = 13:20
Downstream 1500m @5.8km/h = 15:31

Still water time = 30:00
Race swim leg time = 28:51

So, with a relatively short upstream leg and a reasonable swim speed you save time with a current of this magnitude. Down from 30mins to 28:51 for the same effort. So this is similar to what jlh1750 described.
All correct?



Case 2:
Weak AG swimmer
Average pace (speed) = 2:30/100m (2.4km/h)

Upstream 400m @0.4km/h = 60:00
Downstream 1500m @4.4km/h = 20:27

Still water time = 47:30
Race swim leg time = 80:27

So, a slow swimmer spends an eternity going upstream for which the downstream leg can never compensate and in this case increases their time


Break-even point
A swimmer doing a 1:44min/100m pace (1900m in about 33 minutes) would be unaffected by the current so long as they swim a constant effort. Anyone faster will benefit from the current. Anyone slower will suffer.


Impact of a 1hr cut-off
A 1hr cut-off for a still water race would require a 3:09min/100m pace.
In this current (2km/h) you would need to be a hell of a lot faster. You'd need a 2:18min/100m pace which corresponds to a time of 43:51 in still water. Not fast but I believe there's plenty swimmers around this pace in most HIMs.

If swimmers were to push harder for the upstream leg, rather than adopt a uniform effort, it would greatly benefit stronger swimmers. Weaker swimmers may benefit so long as they can pace it to reach the turnaround before they're exhausted and if they can recover sufficiently during the downstream section to carry on without further impact on their race.

Does anyone really care?

One potential fix that has not been mentioned is simply moving the swim up above Chickamauga Dam, which is the dam releasing the water resulting in the downstream swim. Before the advent of all these urban transition areas which allegedly have a "cooler vibe", most of the triathlons in Chatt had the swim out at the dam. You could easily set up a 1.2 mile or 2.4 mi swim with minimal current. The dam is about 10 miles out from downtown so you could finish the bike at the dam, then run down the river to finish downtown, if the "dramatic downtown finish" is so important in an alleged "outdoor/nature event". Personally, I say just take over the recreation area at the dam for one day and have the whole race start and finish there. The rec area is much more natural than downtown.

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

The bike course is going to be arguably the hardest course to police IMHO. In reality this isn't the fault of the riders or refs, it is simply the nature of the constantly rolling profile of Chattanooga. While the rollers are more subtle than many rolling courses, the entire course is rolling. I spent the first 28 miles at the back of the back yo-yoing off the back with the accordion effect, in the last 28 miles I decided to maintain a more middle position with less surging / soft pedals.

I did talk to one of the officials after the race yesterday. My personal suggestion is we still need a 20 meter draft zone and we need 1-minute yellow card drafting penalties. The 1-minutes need to be unintentional drafting cards that the refs are willing to hand out loosely. 5 minutes for intentional or blatant drafting. As it stands this will be a joke of a bike ride and all about the run. It took Matt Russell about an hour to catch up to my group yesterday on the bike. He sat behind to recover for a bit and then he put in a big effort to make a break. It was futile IMHO, he just wasn't going to get away. Although ultimately he won, he also burnt some matches in the process that were unnecessary. Had he been with us for the 1st hour it should have been pretty evident that he wasn't going to get away.

---

---

Save: $50 on Speed Hound Recovery Boots | $20 on Air Relax| $100 on Normatec| 15% on Most Absorbable Magnesium

Blogs: Best CHEAP Zwift / Bike Trainer Desk | Theragun G3 vs $140 Bivi Percussive Massager | Normatec Pulse 2.0 vs Normatec Pulse | Speed Hound vs Normatec | Air Relax vs Normatec | Q1 2018 Blood Test Results | | Why HED JET+ Is The BEST value wheelset

This. I got a lame 5 minute penalty, and I am not really sure what the official keyed into. I thought I was legal. Meanwhile, I intentionally avoided participating in the draft packs that passed me. A friend of a friend got a penalty too, and he averaged well under 17 MPH on the bike. He was so slow and so far back that it is hard to imagine he was remotely trying to draft. That was just mean to him, IMHO.

What's kind of interesting is that it looks like TVA lowered the flow from the dam for a period starting at about 2 am race day and picking back up at 11 am. Not knowing the river mechanics at all (width and depth), it seems like cutting the flow by 80% would have at least helped quite a bit versus the day before; probably cutting the velocity in half with the reduced stream depth shown. At any rate, I am not looking forward to the WC swimming a portion upstream as a 60-64AG 1:40/100 guy, no matter how little the flow. Oh well.
https://www.tva.gov/...Chickamauga/48-Hours

AI - Very nice analysis, looks like some of the calcs I used to do on ST. I suggested in a prior post that this problem could be solved by moving the swim above the dam, but another solution would to simply make the swim longer, say 2.4-2.5 km, to compensate for the downstream effect.

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

That's interesting to see.

I wonder if the faster moving water down stream from the race venue could have kept the water moving at the venue faster that the inflow would predict. Suction? haha we need an engineer input

---

Coach at KonaCoach Multisport

Kudos for saying this, very honorable of you; most people want every advantage they can get, honest or not.

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

Unfortunately, I didn't have a Garmin going for the swim, so I'm really not sure what I was at when hitting the turn. I did manage to inhale more water than normal in there, but that might just have been from my first swim start of the season!

Overall, though, it sounds like they made the right decision, looking at the calculations some have provided. Heck, I raced the full the year the plastic bag, or whatever it was, made the swim cutoff, so obviously that water can move more quickly than one has to be able to swim in normal conditions to make the cutoff. Couple that with nerves, no warm up in the water, etc, and probably more than a couple would have been in trouble. Nature happens, and sometimes there's no perfect decision, especially when it comes to the swim. Most of my AG strong swimmer friends there were just happy to have any swim, based on the weather forecast heading in. As for worlds, hopefully the current will be at a happy medium for the race to go on as planned, because it would be a shame to hold such an important race in a great venue and not have it regarded as "fair" for all!

Nah, there is no "suction effect" in a river of this size but rather it is a classic case of open channel flow, espec since the dam (Chickamauga) is only about 8-9 mi upstream from the swim start. The TVA data simply shows that they did indeed reduce the flow a lot compared to what it would have been, e.g. about 9000 cubic feet per second (cfs) at 6-9 am vs 47,000 cfs at 1-2 am on race day (5/21).

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

Eric,

You seem to be a local and I've not gone to the actual event but have had athletes + friends do the various IM Chatt events. I've heard the downtown vibe is great w bars/restaurants all near the finishing venue. If it's anything like Raleigh 70.3 tjay finishes downtown (and along various pubs), that's a hell of a selling point than some finish in the park (that is same area as other local races).

So I think what I'm finding out is that Chatt is one hell of a venue/place to race. I've heard nothing but great reviews. I can't see how they move the venue.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

It's funny-I finished my season at Austin last year, where the swim cancellation benefited me more than anyone in the women's pro field (at least 4 spots, more than likely), quite obviously. But, afterwards, although I was pretty darn happy with my finish place, I still just felt like I had gotten lucky, and there was some element of guilt there-like I definitely hadn't fully earned it. So, it was a total asterisk. I know I wasn't alone in my thoughts before the race (from several conversations) in hoping that we would be able to swim yesterday, just because we all signed up for three sports, and put effort into balancing training for them all, so it's nice on race day to be able to put that to the test!

Hey look. The weather pattern is different in the spring vs. the fall (or end of Summer). Spring months in Chattanooga are the wettest while the end of summer and fall months are the driest.

So rainfall and river currents will be different in September.

Ya, I lived in Chatt for 10 yrs and did my first tri there, which did have the swim at the dam. I guess I'm diff from most b/c i just go to do the race and don't really care what "the vibe" is after the race b/c I'm always too tired to want to drink or do anything other than rehydrate with non-booze, rest, and maybe just jump back in the water to cool down. Not swim but just splash around. Further, I've never done an IM-branded race b/c I just don't see the point in paying 2-3 times the normal fee just b/c it is a trademark IM.

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

You are a stand up and be counted kind of girl, JLH. You go girl, I'll be rooting for you. :)

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

Ummm, actually I've lived in the Chatt/Knoxville corridor for about 39 yrs so I am somewhat familiar with the weather patterns. Also, I did not say anything about the WC swim but rather was talking about this most recent event.

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

Those are the reasons I chose Chattanooga for my first IM. I did the HIM there and the downtown area is awesome. And getting a hotel downtown and being able to walk to transition is incredibly convenient.

Yea. You were the last person in the thread. :-)

can you tell me if there will be another heat wave this year in chattanooga in september?

I raced Chattanooga 70.3 yesterday and here are my thoughts on the shortened swim. It was totally lame and unnecessary. This sport is supposed to be hard. It was only 300 meters and most, if not all of those jumping in the water, would have made it. Yes, I know I'm a good swimmer but I'm also a smart swimmer. The closer you swim towards the shoreline the less of a current you get. And yes, there would have been people who wouldn't have been able to handle the swim. For those individuals it would have been a learning experience. Next time don't chose a race that has an upriver swim.

In my opinion cutting the swim is pandering to those that didn't prepare for the conditions that were present on race day. I'm getting a bit sick and tired of my specialty being eliminated or shortened during a race because everyone needs to get a participation medal for finishing the race. Yeah, I know that sounds elitist but it's how I feel. Gulf Coast 70.3 had the swim totally cancelled. I saw the race conditions and was again astounded. I remember back "in the day" going in and starting the swim with double overhead waves. The swim wasn't cancelled that day and everyone that finished the swim survived. Yes, some didn't make it to T2 but that's how it goes some days. Bottom line is those that are marginal to good swimmers are being penalized just because of "tough" swimming conditions.
Also, by shortening the swim and making it all downstream, the race organizers caused epic pack drafting on the bike course. Saw a ton of bike splits that made me raise my eyebrows. Again, it's called a triathlon for a reason and again, it's supposed to be HARD!

I mean, I totally and completely agree with your sentiments, but Ironman doesn't give a F*** about fixing the "issue."

Thanks Bruce, I was think about you and hoping you would post. Thanks for your perspctive.

More thought.

Yes, there are cut offs
Yes, there are weaker swimmers

Solution

• If you are racing for podiums and slots, you race the "podium race"
• If you are entering in the gran fondo/participation category, then you get to do the participation event course

In some races this means no wetsuits. In river swims, the full upstream leg that the pros do. This would eliminate the need to "right size" the format to a a participation focused event while trying to run a full blown competition. Separating out a competitive event, would take care of the all fronts. Then right size the participation focused event as much as is needed.

Question for you: at what point and under what conditions is it okay to shorten or cancel the swim? The point at which you yourself are no longer able to complete it? The point at which more than 1/3rd of the field is unable to finish the swim? Or the point at which an athlete drowns? Do you think IRONMAN made the right decision at St. George in 2012? I sure as hell don't.

I'm not saying yesterday was one of those cases -- in fact, I do not think yesterday was such a case -- but having watched the back half of the female pro field flounder, whether they perceived it or not, I understand why they made the decision they did and I respect it. The reality is that this is an issue where there are shades of grey, and they have to draw the line somewhere, and the place to draw it is not the the place that best suits Bruce Gennari...it's not about you. Your comments remind me a lot of Lionel Sanders' and Josh Amberger's tantrums during draftgate 2016. Step outside yourself and look at the broader athlete populace.

Anyways, I agree with the sentiment that the race directors in general and IRONMAN races in particular pander to the lowest common denominator rather than the highest, but that seems to me the right way to err on this particular issue.

Just for the record. I was at IMSG 2012. Hardest swim ever. Most insane race I ever did. Loved every minute of it. They did say if the race started 10 minutes later the swim and/or race would have been cancelled.

---

---

Save: $50 on Speed Hound Recovery Boots | $20 on Air Relax| $100 on Normatec| 15% on Most Absorbable Magnesium

Blogs: Best CHEAP Zwift / Bike Trainer Desk | Theragun G3 vs $140 Bivi Percussive Massager | Normatec Pulse 2.0 vs Normatec Pulse | Speed Hound vs Normatec | Air Relax vs Normatec | Q1 2018 Blood Test Results | | Why HED JET+ Is The BEST value wheelset

You are on the verge of losing your elitest prick image. Can you pull some pubes characteristics out of retirement for this thread at least?

To no one in particular....

I was there. We all saw the upstream portion of the pro race. I figured it was going to take me a while (until they cancelled that section).

On the IM FB page, I saw a post where some ladies were talking about being 2:50/100 swimmers....and how they were going to get in line, first, so that they would have more time to finish. Now, that doesn't make any sense (everyone gets the same amount of time, no matter when you jump in), but that's some of the mentality out there. In a normal situation, at least these folks would be moving in the right direction (during the swim). In yesterday's conditions, anyone not swimming faster than the current was pushing them the other way would be PUMMELED by a continuous (2750 strong) line of swimmers. I don't even know how kayaks could get to the ones in trouble (if you're too weak to swim against the current.....what are you supposed to do?.....just float backwards into the paths of those starting behind you? NO WAY they could get to a kayak). I don't think there were enough kayaks to get all the ones who would have gotten in trouble out there yesterday.

It would have been a tough swim for me (my two previous HIM swims have been 36' (lake) and 29' (Augusta). It was nearly a cluster-F at the first turn buoy, even after they changed the course (until people learned that they had to aim left to go right).

Just my .02

Yep I was at St. George as well! Didn't break 1:30 but finished and yeah it's great to have war stories. But if you remember it was about 5 minutes late starting, which I heard was because someone had spotted "dust cloud" in the distance...but alas the decision was made to mass start and off we went.

But this "back in the day" mentality really has no place in our sport or any other for that matter (not aimed at you)

---

Coach at KonaCoach Multisport

Was it height adjusted?

---

https://www.pbandjcoaching.com
https://www.thisbigroadtrip.com

I didn't race but would have preferred the upstream portion have been included.

Regarding GC70.3....I think that is a completely different story. There were rips...which is why it was cancelled. Red Flags on the beach. You think they should have allowed a swim with red flags on the beach?

Mehhh, your first post on this thread was supposed to be how you didn't really beat Thomas, not an attack on a guy 20 years older than you who you might not have beaten had they not cut the swim.

I like this solution. :)

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

Hey ajthomas,

I am sorry that you construed this as an attack on Bruce, whom I could not respect more as a top swimmer and triathlete. Whether I would have beat him or not with a difficult swim, I don't know and I don't care in terms of answering the question of what is just.

With my comments, I only meant to defend those without his or my or your capabilities -- those who want to enjoy the sport and all its beneficence -- the same folks I do not think should be endangered or disenfranchised on account of acts of God, like weather.

Participation numbers in triathlon are dwindling, and we can debate the reasons why and whether we, on slowtwitch, agree or care, but the answer is surely not to make those individuals, who are new to the sport and who trying to succeed in the sport, swim upstream. I mean this both literally and figuratively here!

I did this race alone. On the bus to the swim start I sat with an older man in his late 60s. This was his second triathlon, which he admitted shamefacedly was not actually his second triathlon but his second triathlon attempt. His first was also a 70.3, and he did not make the swim cutoff, having learned to swim at the age of 66. In one sense, I wanted to smash him over his head for being so stupid as to attempt a 70.3 as his first (and second) triathlon, but in another sense I understood that he only wanted to complete a triathlon that triathlon cares about, which is IRONMAN, and IRONMAN 70.3. There are so many reasons for that, but he is not the person we ought to shame. He is the person we ought to glorify. I don't know whether he made it or not, but I do know this: had Bruce Gennari had his way, this old man would have gone home crushed once again.

They shortened the swim because the current was so strong that day that the majority of the amateurs would have not been able to swim upstream.Thus they did this for safety reasons. As a first time participant I was disappointed that I could no do the full 1.2 miles but as a ER doctor I understand fully their reasons for wanting to keep the participants safe. No athletic event is worth losing a life over.
Thanks

No, sorry. I see why you're upset but you're only seeing it from your own perspective and I believe you're coming out with entirely the wrong answer.
This is your speciality so you wan it to count. Others are poor swimmers but great cyclists, runners or both. You're okay with them not even getting on their bike if they don't meet your swim expectations? So your speciality matters but theirs doesn't?

The remark about participation medals is gratuitous. I really don't think most most people care much about getting a medal. They do care about finishing. That does not make them deserving of less consideration than the (much smaller) group at the front.

^^^Likewise

This could also be used to eliminate the gripes between front runners about rolling starts preventing head to head racing, while still having a rolling start for everyone else.

See my proposal above for a "competition race" and a "participation event". I think you guys are being too hard on Bruce (I believe he's earned a few free passes over his career and contributor to age group racing). Bruce's points apply 1000% to a competition race. So let's have one. There is another set of conditions that are needed for the less prepared to do a participation event. So let's have that too. No need to throw out the baby with the bathwater. The competition race should still be hard and fair and should not be toned down for participation oriented right sizing. If you want to be in the competition (even if you are 80-84) and can't beat the upstream, then you just go in the participation event. Thus we can have events for everyone. I see no good reason why the competition event for 1000ish athletes needs to be right sized for the few older racers who won't make cutoffs. I'm all for older guys and girls racing (I am 52 already), but I don't want to see the racing for the young guys diluted on account of older racers. I am certain that when I am 70+, I am going to say, "don't dilute the race for me, I want to do the same bloody event as you 25 year old guys, or I'm not racing at all".....I'll go in the participation event.

No, sorry. I see why you're upset but you're only seeing it from your own perspective and I believe you're coming out with entirely the wrong answer.
This is your speciality so you wan it to count. Others are poor swimmers but great cyclists, runners or both. You're okay with them not even getting on their bike if they don't meet your swim expectations? So your speciality matters but theirs doesn't?

-------

Where I think you are wrong is in not seeing that this whole thing isn't about about swim/bike/run specialities...it's about completing the prescribed course and the dumbing down of venues every single time there is a concern in the swim. People are frustrated that more and more it's not simply about showing and adapting to the conditions to race. But that's because we live in an cover your ass society. So it's not about being swim specialities as it is simply frustration about not being able to complete said course if *any* adverse condition is seen in the swim.

And I get it. We live in a sue friendly world now, so the move is to cover your ass all the time now.


You couldnt pay me full time wage to be an RD. F that....you mean to tell me if I cut the course I have "old timers" btching about the wussification of the sport at me but then if I do have the swim in those conditions and someone dies I'm going to be sued by the family??? I'll take listening to "back in the day" athletes bitch for $1000, Alex. We have enough swim deaths in "normal" swims now that it's par for course to modify the swim. But with every single modification we become "softer" and as a sport. But that's ok because it's being done to save the sport and itself at the same time in a weird way.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

If you expand your reading comprehension a bit instead of just taking personal shots, you'll see I have proposed two groups in the event. If you sign up for the competitive event and have trouble, well that's what you signed up for. If you don't want to take additional risk, go in the participation event. You might want to beat me down, but I worked closely with WTC to separate wetsuit and non wetsuit starters to make the racing safer while still having a competitive event. I don't see why the competitive event needs to be thrown out. As Bruce said, triathlon is inherently supposed to be hard and a challenge in all three events. When a paper bag floating down the river can make the cutoff, it kind of devalues the competitive event. If you want to have an event so the paper bag can make the swim cutoff, get on a bike with a motor and make the bike cutoff and then get on Segway to get the run course done, then go for it. Just keep an option for a competitive category.

Just to provide you guys with some context, Bruce Gennari has finished first age grouper out of the water in Kona multiple times, so his comments are not from any stupid idiot with no racinig experience. He's the Andy Potts/Wolgang Dietrich of age group racing.

I know athletes who choose CHOO, Augusta, and NC 70.3 specifically because the swim is with the current. They are selecting races based on their strengths and weaknesses, obviously, which is very intelligent.

Why a great swimmer would choose one of those races is beyond me. That's just poor race selection. There are other options that would have been better.


Yes, we know.

This right here.

---

blog

I'm a former PGA Professional. If you give everyone the choice to either "Play the tips" or "Play the white tees"......and you distinguish between them at the end............you're going to have a lot of 28 handicappers playing WAY more course than their abilities should have them playing. No one wants to feel like they didn't compete on THE course.

I don't what they were supposed to do, Sunday. If they had your categories, my guess is they'd have to have several minutes lag between that wave and the start of the "completer" group......to scoop up all the pretenders (who thought they were contenders....or, just wanted to say they did THE course).

It wasn't used as a personal shot but taking what you have said in this and every swim modification thread. But I did edit my post to showcase its more of an old timers mindset. And yes I think you have a great idea. I do think it's added work on the RD but it's great to please all parties- those that are willing to adapt to race day situation and those that just want to complete.

So I apologize if you took it as an offense, it was more to showcase just how hard RDing is. People always complain about a RD decision. Your added classifications doesn't take out the danger and that is the whole reason swim courses get changed (again- cover your ass life we live and race in). So there is that element that isn't accounted for and the whole reason we are discussing this....athlete/race safety.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Here is the problem. Chattanooga is 70.3 World's this year. If you are a front of pack racer like Bruce, you don't get to decide where that WC race is going to be. You have to go to that race, assuming WTC will put on a fair event. The regular 70.3 events at that venue becomes a big prep event. When we had Tremblant 70.3 + Tremblant 70.3 WC, lots of guys came for the regular event to check out the race (and qualify) for worlds.

On the last part, not everyone knows.

Yea but...then you don't really get to argue or complain. You are doing WC simply because it is a WC race, not because it plays to your strengths or weaknesses. Whether the course is easy or hard or something in between is not in your control, but you wanna do it anyway just because it is a WC race...

Why you would assume WTC cares about putting on a "fair event" is - again - beyond me. You know what "assuming" does, right? It makes an ASS out of U and ME.

I can agree with the sentiment to create an 'elite' amateur wave that does the same course as the pros even in adverse weather conditions, like a lot of non-Ironman events already do - that could also be good for development in the sport.

But, it could also be argued that the WC's already serve that purpose. With that, say the same exact river conditions prevailed in September at the WC's. Would it be fair to adopt Bruce's sentiment that 'the sport is meant to be tough' in a WC atmosphere for all age groups?

---

wovebike.com | Wove on instagram

This whole debate is kind of funny to read, so I could not resist adding some more comedy. The positions can generally be summed up in two camps:

1. I was there, and I was a little disappointed, but I understand the decision
2. I was not there, and back when I was a kid, no right thinking RD or athlete would have done that, and the integrity of the sport is at stake and the WC will be a total disaster because of this

I don't see the extrapolation of this race into a WC debacle. The WC swim, bike, and run courses are totally different. Relating this to that is downright silly! Strong swimmers should revel in the WC: it is a rectangle with about 1/2 upstream, so it plays well to their advantages. Similarly, the bike and run both have some meaty hills, so athletes strong in those events should also be excited about the WC.

And back to the regular Choo 70.3, this is a young race, and the course change probably is not an every-year occurrence, but people are debating it as if it is. However, if it becomes a regular thing, I would not be surprised if the RD looks at an alternate course. Though, that might be a challenge, if one of the principle design elements is to have the home base at Ross's Landing to be anchored in the city rather than up at the dam or some other remote location. The whole experience is outstanding, and I will definitely go back.

Yet it's been discussed several times and for quite some time that 70.3 CHOO and 2017 70.3 worlds are not the same course.

---

blog

Yes, I think that's fair. World's is a different ball game.

But that doesn't affect the swim, does it? different swim course?

to Gerlach's comment on the rolling hills making near impossible to avoid drafting at WC's, will the new course be better with regard to preventing packs from forming?

link to WC course map/profile? thanks

---

wovebike.com | Wove on instagram

Different courses..... yes

http://www.ironman.com/...ace-info/course.aspx

---

blog

Yes, all three are totally different courses. (The run shares some of the hills, but is different.) They are posted on the Ironman website.

With that, say the same exact river conditions prevailed in September at the WC's. Would it be fair to adopt Bruce's sentiment that 'the sport is meant to be tough' in a WC atmosphere for all age groups?

I would say, for my age group 55-59, probably not. Dev referenced my 1:20 Kona swim mad skills. But he left out that on that day I ran 3:25 and finished 25th. Not a podium performance but I'm glad I got to "compete" even if I would have been considered by Bruce to be obviously unprepared for the swim.

For female 70-74, most certainly not.

But it really depends on the amount of current. And I'm not sure how easy that is to measure.

---

Coach at KonaCoach Multisport

Maybe they can let Lionel and Seb swim a shortened course at WC's...

---

wovebike.com | Wove on instagram

I left out the most important part about you smoking Hines Ward. For the rest of your life you can claim that you were more studly than a hall of famer. This is the most important part of this thread

With a 50% upstream no wetsuit swim, rather than the 3.5 min gap Lionel had at St. George, it will be closer to 6 minutes. I think he is crazy to focus his year on this race versus his better chance at Kona. I am not sure Lionel has done the math on an "against current" swim.

I think if we are concerned with course safety, start with closing off the roads to cars on race day.

http://newschannel9.com/news/local/car-hits-cyclist-during-ironman-703


While the athlete was at fault, this course needs to have the roads close in the direction of the bike traffic. I about saw a wreck occur descending out of Chickamauga where one athlete went around a car that had turned onto the course and and on coming car came around the curve.

---

Coach at KonaCoach Multisport

Did it in 2016 and I agree. Accident waiting to happen (and I know it already did, I mean a really bad one) on that two lane open course contributed by impatient drivers and racers in "race" mode trying to place 53d instead of 54th and taking stupid chances

The decision to swim or not to swim is up to the individual racer. If they don't feel like they can handle the situation then don't start the race. Everyone on race morning saw the conditions. Boats were floating in the water and were barely moving downriver when sitting still. Taking part in this sport is a choice. If you feel that you're putting your life in danger by jumping in the water......then don't. The back of the pack women professionals were not very good swimmers. The men had no issues and only a couple of the weaker professional women had an issue. Also, most if not all of the age groupers were wearing wetsuits, so the probability that someone would have drown was slim to none. Another point is that the swim was very close to the shoreline. If you felt like quitting, you could have bailed easily to the left and stood up. Don't sit there and make this about me. This is about a snap decision that wasn't thought out very well, plain and simple. Again, this sport is supposed to be hard. The bike and run had some good hills associated with it, they were hard but you didn't see any of them being taken out of the race because of it. Some of the downhills were tricky because of turns and also because of a lot of potholes in the road. Did you see them take them out of the bike course? Of course not. Triathlon is a voluntary sport. If you're not prepared to tackle what's in store for you during a swim, bike and run, then don't start the race. Be smart.

And the reason why I chose to race in Chattanooga is pretty simple. It's a 2 hour drive away from my house in Nashville and I don't have to break down my bike to race.

Also, WTC 70.3 World Championships are in Chattanooga. The swim is set up to have even more swimming done against the current. The course set up is on the Ironman website now. So, should I not compete in this race because part of the swim will be aided by a current?

Ya, closing the roads would be a great idea but then you'd see how truly "welcoming" the majority of Chattanoogans are to triathlon and cycling. While Chatt has changed some over the past 25 yrs, at its heart Chatt is still a traditional town of the South (as most prob know, Chickamauga was the site of one of the most famous battles of the Civil War), and the majority of the residents are still Sunday church-goers who think that doing anything outside of church on a Sunday is sinful. You could change date to a Saturday but still, those same people would complain b/c can't get to the grocery store, kids' activities, etc. I base this opinion on visiting there 2/yr throughout my youth and living there 10 yrs when first out of grad school. My Dad's family has lived in the Chatt area since at least 1850, and possibly before then.

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

That sounds very reasonable until you put it in context:

Many people below the pro and competitive AGer levels will do one or two events a year. This is something they have focused on and trained towards for months and they don't have a contingency plan. They will have spent a significant amount of money on the entry fee. They will have set up family holidays to coincide with the event. They really, really, really don't want to quit before they even start. Now, given that this may be their first event or maybe they've done a handful before - are they likely to be able to accurately assess the risk of participating? In my opinion the answer is no.
Most will give it a go. Any having doubts will likely see everyone else lining up and tell themselves off for being irrational and having cold feet and they'll join in. Those who bail out (the minority) and those take part and fail (the majority in my opinion) due entirely to an unexpectedly strong current (i.e. they were good enough if conditions were typical) will go away very disappointed and embarrassed. I don't think that's a price worth paying to preserve the "hardness" of IM70.3 and IM distance triathlon. Especially when IM is sold as an achievable challenge for the inexperienced enthusiast - which it typically is - when conditions cooperate.

Do you agree with the above? Isn't this how people will typically look at things and react when faced with something like this? Do you maintain they should be put in that position?
At the very least, if compromises were not going to be made to cater for conditions, it should be spelled out emphatically in race information that conditions may require a considerably higher standard than that needed simply to achieve the cut-off in still water.

I agree with devashish_paul's suggestion that the competitive ranks need to be separated in order to preserve difficulty for those capable of tackling unexpected conditions without thrashing the less experienced and less capable.

I didn't "construe" anything, Kiley. You attacked him. If you want to apologize, then do it. If you don't, that is fine too. But to say I was the one who misconstrued, nah, that is just BS.

As it turns out, I agree with your sentiments in general. But the way that you just cannot allow yourself to comment without going personal is baffling.

Bruce,

But here is the issue. Because you know who's responsible for the athletes' decisions, whether they are prepared or not? The race and RD.

So when you are telling the athletes to be prepared and be smart.....all we are seeing is now that in 2017 and beyond RD's are "being smart" too. This isn't 1987 where athletes are swimming in double overhead breakers because well that's the swim course. We are in 2017 where "responsibility" is taken very liberally but yet when shit hits the fan someone is going to be held responsible.

So the reality is that it's athletes of your similar mindset that have to change, not the other way around. ETA: And I say that because "we" as a society has eroded away individual accountability more and more. So it's easy to say athletes have to be smart and know their limits, and yet you are talking about an event that costs what $350-$800 + travel.....so you start to add in all these variables and you are looking at the situation we are in. That may mean you have less love for the sport, and it may mean that our sport is cheapening itself (all of which I can probaly agree with). But the reality is if there are any type of conditions in the swim, expect a modification. That is now the norm, whether it should be, we can agree shouldn't be, but this is now the norm. It's now up to the athletes to accept/understand that as the race expectation.

What is it at Oceanside where there is an dangerous downhill section that has a "speed trap", and you have guys every year complaining about it "not being a race now"...but then do you realize without that speed trap, said race has to change the course because without that speed trap, that permit isn't being given.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

I'm not boiling it down to specialities. I think you got my point backwards. That was a response to Bruce's complaint that his speciality was the one effected. I was simply pointing out that if that was a legitimate complaint it would IMO somewhat legitimise, complaints of poor swimmers unable to complete a brutal swim course. However, it is also true that for less competitive athletes there are much greater differences in competence between disciplines. A pro who's a poor swimmer will still be a decent swimmer by general standards. Many participants capable of a reasonable time overall, will be terrible in the water and may be completely unable to participate on a course with an upstream swim into a strong current. Fine if this risk is pointed out and the expectation is never set that such eventualities will be mitigated. But once that president is set, the situation is very different.

Regarding the section in bold: which people?
I suspect those in the competitive ranks feel this way and mutually reinforce the idea that this is a widespread opinion. I suspect "people" is actually "some people".
Is that fair to say?

I agree it ain't gonna happen. And honestly I don't think it's really fair to residents to close the road. The issues I'm talking about are really down in the GA parts of the course, I think, but there are parts of TN that have access issues (around the "chicane")

I just think it's a recipe for disaster. Last year I was out of the water early enough that I really didn't see any cars, and didn't know it was open, until about 2 miles from the Andrews turn when a big ol' caddy passed me. After the left turn and before Chickamauga was when the issues arose, and it was still early. It's compounded by drafting and (IMO) poor riding etiquette, as cars can't or won't try to get around people riding in the traffic lane (which is a good thing I guess)

I can't imagine what it was like later on with 2000 riders and Sunday church going traffic. All those open driveways, cross streets, etc.

I thought the same thing about Silverman (RIP), started in an early wave so avoided the huge bike crowds mixing with duallies pulling huge boats on trailers, coming at you at 50 mph in your lane....

If you mean that there are people happy to do a 70.3 on a modified downhill swim instead of doing the prescribed course, then yes my "people" wanting to race the course on the day should be "some people". My point is and what I just said to Bruce. Adaptability is being removed from the sport. Not saying it's right or wrong, I get why it's being done. And like I said, that's the reality we are now in. If there is likely *any* adversity with the swim, it will be modified.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

The more I think about it -- they already have two separate races.

That is your choice to race this race but you should know that you are taking a risk. And you have to own that risk like the rest of strong swimmers do.

It's not the fact that you raced, its the fact that you came on here and complained about how the race didn't cater to YOU. Every race is a risk..... some more than others. Choose wisely or suck it up.

I'm signed up for IMFL later this year. I know there's a chance the swim could get cancelled again. I'm willing to take the risk and if it is cancelled, I won't be happy but I'll get over it. This is one of those things you don't have any control over. No sense getting all worked up about it.

---

blog

....wait, I think his timing chip hit the wire before you!!!! Did Hines out stud you at Kona after 4 months with Paula on the chocolate milk program?

He outswam me but appeared to have some difficulty with his swim skin...and I was much faster up the steps! so got him by 1 sec. 1:20:00 vs 1:20:01

---

Coach at KonaCoach Multisport

A great swimmer would absolutely WANT to race Chattanooga 70.3 as advertised and as shown on the course map because there would be a challenging up-river portion of the swim. But, that was taken away from the good swimmers on race morning -- which is far too often the case. If you aren't a good swimmer and can't handle the swim course as advertised pre-race, there is an easy solution: Duathlon

Unfortunately, a large enough portion of the triathlete community isn't up to par on the swim compared to bike/run and 98% of the time there is a race change, it is the good swimmers who suffer . . . and often NOT because the swim course is necessarily perilous, but because a significant number of poor swimmers might not get the race they wanted. Instead, the triathlon community has decided the good swimmers end up not getting the race they wanted.

---

____________________
Rock Chalk!

1 second at NFL all pro hall of famer wide receiver speed is around 9.5 yards (you know for the 4.2 second 40 yard NFL combines benchmark)...clearly you are a stud!

Is it feasible to completely close off roads? Sometimes it is. When I previously did HIM Chattanooga there were definitely lots of areas not closed to traffic. And per usual, I saw many impatient idiot racers who would not obey the traffic laws and go passing on the right side of cars because they refused to be held up by traffic.

I can see having the opposite side being open, but on the side the race is taking place it should be closed to traffic if there is just one lane. I know it's an inconvenience to the people in the town, but that's the luxury I expect when I pay $300 to RACE. If the roads are open to the public and i'm going to have to sit behind a car for 5 mins until they turn off because a slower rider is in front of me then I want to pay $60 or whatever the going rate is for a group ride metric century.

This is the course from 70.3 Chatt....
http://www.ironman.com/...202017%20web%202.pdf

No matter how strong the current is, that is not a swim course I desire. 4/5 of that course is with the current. I honestly don't believe the 1/5 part is long enough to make up for the lost advantage on the downstream part.

---

blog

I disagree. I'm normally a 35-37 min wetsuit half iron swimmer (yeah I suck). I swam 32 min at 2016 Chattanooga 70.3 (my fasted half swim other than Augusta 70.3). You most definitely get an advantage with the wetsuit and the current.

If you are a great swimmer, you want no wetsuits and no current aiding you. But I know a great swimmer who tried to Q at Augusta and Chatt. 0 for 2. SMH.

---

Proud Member of Chris McDonald's 2018 Big Sexy Race Team "That which doesn't kill me, will only make me stronger"
Blog-Twitter-Instagram-Race Reports - 2018 Races: IM Florida 70.3, IM Raleigh 70.3, IM 70.3 World Championships - South Africa, IM North Carolina 70.3

So if only 1/5 is upstream and the rest is downstream, both swimmers will be faster overall, but the advantage gained by a faster swimmer will be slightly more than that gained by the slower swimmer. For instance:

One swimmer maintains a speed through the water (or speed through still water) of 1:20/100m. The other 1:35.

On a 1900m course with no current, the faster swimmer completes the course in 25:20, the slower in 30:05. A difference of 4:45.

with a current of 0.5 m/s and 1/5 being upstream, the rest being down, the faster simmer completes the course in 22:55, the slower in 27:47. A difference of 4:52 - an advantage 7 seconds larger than in the no current swim.

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

Why even bother responding...the argument from these folks is built on sand. Because they're assumptions about why WTC exists are wildly incorrect.

---

"One Line Robert"

Are you crying right now?

Who are you to say what his first post should or shouldnt be? Seems to me like you started the personal attacks by attempting to tell him how to respond. And now you're crying more about how he responded. Why are you so infatuated with him?

---

"One Line Robert"

Bro. Congrats on leading out of the water in Kona and all that.

But you actually PAY money to do this race. You're volunteering your own money to race the race as defined by the organizers. Your money (and opinion) is no more valuable than the others who forfeit the same amount and line up next to you. Your position on this matter is baffling to be quite frank.

People don't die from running up steep hills Bruce (your opinion on the probability of people drowning is exactly that - an opinion. Probably a good thing you're not a race director). When people die, thats a liability. Liability means lawsuits. Lawsuits lead to bankruptcy. Bankruptcy leads to no more WTC. No more WTC leads to no more people making everything about them on internet forums. So maybe lawsuits are good?

More seriously, its a for profit company. Why in the absolute shit do you think WTC would ever do anything to jeopardize making more money? You don't make them money. The masses do.

---

"One Line Robert"

As an alternative view- I was also at ST. George in 2012, it was my first triathlon (not just first Ironman), and it was brutal. It took me over two hours to finish the swim, but in no way did I think it was necessarily dangerous. Hard, yes. Ridiculously hard. Yes. Humbling. Yes. Dangerous. No. And I'm not sure it's about war stories in this instance. Ironman races are supposed to be hard. You are tasked with finishing on the course based on what the course presents that day. But, it is not asking much, I don't think, to expect some semblance of standard. If you have to swim upstream, swim upstream. Personally, I'd feel cheated if I was given an easier course because I was slow (and trust me, I am very, very slow). I'd expect most others who are BOP are not looking for a easier ride either.

---

"There are two ways to slide easily through life- to believe everything and to doubt everything- both ways save us from thinking "- Korzbyski

Current and ridiculously rough water or conditions are 2 different animals. And congrats on finishing that swim!

Swimming against (a certain amount of) current isn't necessarily hard, dangerous, or even humbling...until you see that you are making no headway to land, that is.

It would be like putting a golf hole in a tournament for all ages and sexes where the forced carry over a water hazard is 210 yards. Any decent golfer should be able to do that right? Oh, except the older participants, that are damn good golfers but just don't have the required distance to complete the hole.

---

Coach at KonaCoach Multisport

are you in 4th grade?

Now you're attacking me!

If you want to apologize, then do it. If you don't then thats fine too.

---

"One Line Robert"

Hey Steve, you know how many times the swim has been altered since the Chattanooga event was added to the WTC lineup? Yep, that's right, zero. There wasn't any risk that the swim could be altered from past experience as far as I was concerned. Again, we were allowed to wear wetsuits on Sunday so the chance of someone drowning was minimized. Also, the shoreline was readily available to the left of the swim course. If anyone felt they couldn't go on, they had the option not to do so. Choices, choices, choices. I teach my son's everyday about being accountable with regards to the choices they make. This same line of thinking can be applied to racing a triathlon.

Again, the sport of triathlon is being wussified. I get that we live in a litigious society and that people are "sue-happy" but don't we sign a waiver before we even start the race? Doesn't that waiver cover the race director and WTC? If it doesn't, then why the hell is it the first thing that we sign when we go to packet pick-up. This whole issue of altering race courses because it's too difficult is ridiculous. Doesn't matter if it's the swim, bike or run. So, what happens if it's too hot in Kona this coming year, do you think race officials are going to shorten the run there? Winds too high? Cancel biking up to Hawi, it's too tough! Swells are too big during the swim, looks like we'll have to shorten it! I highly doubt it. Look at the Olympic road race course during this past Olympics. The organizers knew full well that the course was inherently dangerous (especially on some of the downhills), did they alter the course? Nope. Wonder why not? Whether you agree with it or not this is what's happening to our nation as a whole. We're making things easy so everyone can get a trophy. The KIA commercial where the Dad scratches off his son's trophy and puts Champs instead of participant is a perfect summation of where we're heading as a society and it's just wrong. Where does it end?

Robert, so, what are the waivers for that we signed at check in?

Those waivers don't relinquish WTC from being (liable) stupid and sending people, knowingly, into a hazardous situation.

I'm not saying that's what Sunday was. I'm saying they could still be found to be negligent.

Oh, and ajthomas, I totally took that as a shot at me. No worries though. I'm a big boy with tough skin. I appreciate your post. It's more than likely not the first time I've been attacked for my views of cancelling or altering a swim and it certainly won't be the last. Again, appreciate the posts!

That's a great learning. Kind of like the choices you're empowered to make as it relates to what races and race companies you'd like to spend your money on.


I could be wrong, but it sounds like you just compared age group triathlon racing to the olympics. Feel free to clarify.


Hey Dev - how long has WTC been handing out finishers medals? Seems possible this has been going on much longer than Bruce is aware.

---

"One Line Robert"

It wasn't the situation on Sunday. That's easy to answer. The fact of the matter is some people "might" not have been able to complete their race because they couldn't make it to the first turn buoy. There was NOTHING, and I mean NOTHING dangerous about that swim. I heard from some of the back of the pack professional women, who supposedly struggled with the upstream part of the swim, that it wasn't that bad. They were baffled at why the swim was altered.

Anyone who was at the swim start on Sunday saw that. As a matter of fact, I'm 100 percent certain everyone was ready to jump into the river and give the course a go. It wasn't until we saw them moving a red buoy that anyone saw or thought something was up. But up until that point everyone was mentally prepared to swim upstream for 300 meters and complete the entire swim course.

So, if the WTC waiver doesn't cover them in a situation like this, what good are they? Why are we signing them? I'm not being flippant, I'd really like to know why I'm signing the document.

Yep, that's correct Robert. And people who are mediocre swimmers can also choose not to race where there is an upstream section to the swim. Choices, choices, choices!

And yes, I'm comparing an Olympic race to a WTC event. It has to do with the course, not the talent level of the participants. I noticed you didn't comment on the Kona scenarios I put out there. Why not?

And as far as participation medals go, yep, I'm totally aware of how long they've been handing those out. No need to involve Dev!

if you think that the waivers will literally incapacitate someone from suing WTC, or that the waiver alone will get a case thrown out of court, you're an idiot.

the waiver does it's job, which is to discourage people from filing lawsuits. but enough money and good arguing will get those tossed out.

---

----
@adamwfurlong

I'll help.

Those statements of yours, those opinions, can be argued. And litigated. Much like anything. Waiver or not. Prove negligence and theres a lawsuit in the making.

Question though - did you really talk to every single participant prior to starting the swim? I'd imagine you'd need to be focused on your race at that point. Never mind how exhausting that'd be.

---

"One Line Robert"

Good Lord. Lots going on here.

WTC is a for profit company. By definition, their goal is to make as much money as possible putting on triathlons. Given the option between having more people race and compete and finish, or less, which one might they choose? Here's a hint: yes, I know that the revenue has been paid up front. But you know what the best kind of revenue is? Repeatable revenue. Oops, sorry, that was a pretty big hint. Hope you can still figure it out.

So, you, one of the best AG swimmers in LC triathlon, and a few female pros you spoke to, collectively agree that it was not dangerous from your perspectives? Glad to see you are familiar with the concept of random sampling.

I would LOVE to know how you are "100 percent certain". Please elaborate. I can't say I've ever seen a company get that kind of return on their exit polls... if only you had been around to tell us how the election would play out!

---

----
@adamwfurlong

... I am aware that Bruce has a rock solid race resume and has been around for a long time in the sport, and has a decorated history that includes his races at Kona.

He appears to neither be a lawyer, or a race director, or on the BOD of WTC. So, despite his background, his opinion carries no more weight than anyone else on this forum.

To reinforce this, do some reading up on this.

---

----
@adamwfurlong

Guess we'll never know what would have happened because we were never given the chance to try. Oh, and calling me an idiot, I now see what you're all about. It's good though, let's me know who I'm dealing with. The waiver has to cover WTC for instances such as this or they wouldn't make us sign them. Looking at the waiver I think they'd be covered:

READ THIS DOCUMENT CAREFULLY BEFORE SIGNING, THIS DOCUMENT HAS LEGAL CONSEQUENCES AND WILL AFFECT YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS, AND WILL LIMIT OR ELIMINATE YOUR ABILITY TO BRING FUTURE LEGAL ACTIONS. YOU MAY WISH TO TAKE INDEPENDENT LEGAL ADVICE. In consideration of being permitted by World Triathlon Corporation (“WTC”) to participate in the Event, I understand and acknowledge that by signing below I am legally agreeing to the statements in the following WTC Event Registration, Release and Waiver of Liability, and Assumption of Risk and Indemnity Agreement (“Agreement”) and that these statements are being accepted and relied upon by the Released Parties, as defined below. I hereby freely and voluntarily acknowledge and/or take action for myself, and on behalf of my spouse, children, parents, guardians, heirs, next of kin, and any legal or personal representatives, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, or anyone else who might claim or sue on my behalf, as follows: 1. I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE AND ASSUME ALL OF THE RISKS OF PARTICIPATING IN THIS EVENT. I acknowledge running, bicycling, swimming, and/or other portions of this Event are inherently dangerous and are an extreme test of my physical and mental limits that carries with them the potential for serious bodily injury, permanent disability, paralysis and death, and property damage or loss. I acknowledge and agree that it is my responsibility to determine whether I am sufficiently fit and healthy enough to safely participate in the Event, to take out and maintain suitable insurance cover against any injury I might sustain due to my participation and I attest and certify that I am or will be sufficiently fit and physically trained to participate in the Event, which I elect to enter. I certify that I have not been advised against participation in the Event by any healthcare provider. I have no physical or mental condition that would endanger myself or others if I participate in the Event, or would interfere with my ability to safely participate in the Event. I accept responsibility for the condition and adequacy of my competition equipment and my conduct in connection with the Event. I understand and acknowledge that there may be vehicle or pedestrian traffic on the course route, and I assume the risk of running, biking, swimming and/or other portions of this Event and participating under these circumstances. I also assume any and all other risk associated with participating in this Event, including but not limited to the following: falls, dangers of collisions with vehicles, pedestrians, other participants, and fixed objects; the dangers arising from surface hazards, equipment failure, inadequate safety equipment; and hazard that may be posed by spectators or volunteers; and weather conditions. I further acknowledge that these risks include risks that may be the result of negligent acts, omissions, and/or carelessness of the Released Parties, as defined herein. I understand that I will be participating in the Event at my own risk, that I am responsible for the risk of participation in the Event.

Looks pretty stout to me. Not saying that a lawsuit still wouldn't be attempted but I would believe if they signed the document, well, WTC would be covered.

to be clear, the "you're an idiot" statement followed a conditional clause.

ETA: given your last statement at the end of the waiver, the conditional clause is false, and you are not an idiot!

---

----
@adamwfurlong

Guess I'm an idiot then because after reading what I posted concerning the waiver, I do believe lawsuits would be thrown out if that was signed. So, nice shot!

I wonder if I could chime in here with a possible alternative. When I was in grad. school I got stuck taking a course in Systems Theory. Not really my cup of tea, but one thing I took from the course was the idea of how many systems break down because of unintended consequences. WTC is a for profit company- true. And, if I'm reading you correctly, you are saying that in order to have repeating participants, the company's best bet would be to allow as many people who sign up for their first race to complete it so they want to do it again. This seems reasonable. But (and this is a big "but"), the theory I just refered to might say to do the complete opposite. Make the races harder. The harder they are, the more they will stand out to the purchasing public as an event that seems near impossible to complete. Between adventure races, races with fire pits, etc., we are inundated with choices- so many that the typical IM is not seen today as as hard and as impossible as it once was back when you'd watch it on Wide World of Sports. Make them hard/keep them hard, and the desensitized public may come back around. That, or continue to make it "new" for the public in the towns they are held in until the town also gets desensitized, is tired of the traffic impact, and then when they do move the race to another "new" environment (seems to be their business plan now-a-days). Just my two cents...

---

"There are two ways to slide easily through life- to believe everything and to doubt everything- both ways save us from thinking "- Korzbyski

Thats really great Bruce. What skin do you have in the game? Again, good thing you arent a race director. Obviously WTC felt there was risk keeping the course as originally intended.

Have you read any of the messages above? Some key words: for profit, liability, negligence, lost revenue, etc.

As a for profit company (one that exists to make money), none of us should expect WTC to make a decision that jeopardizes that. And they certainly don't exist to stroke your ego. Why is this so hard to understand? I really dont see why you, a multi time Kona participant, has a problem with an altered swim at a random 70.3. What exactly were you not able to prove out there to yourself or others? We know you don't like finishers medals. Are you upset that even more people got them this weekend?

---

"One Line Robert"

that's an interesting theory, and i completely see your point (Spartan Races, Ninja whatever, etc).

However, I think the barriers for entry (bike + travel to the location, at bare minimum), make it harder to attract people out of a crowd for once off participation. I also, personally, believe that the races you reference have an aura of them being really hard, but in practice, are made to be quite reasonable (sound familiar??).

I did a Warrior something or other several years ago on a whim. Almost all of the obstacles have bail out options. Sure, there are some people who fly around the course as fast as possible, but clearly the marketing of this particular event was - come with all your friends, roll around in mud, finish, have a ton of fun, drink some beer and eat turkey legs, and then convince your friends to come and do the race again!

---

----
@adamwfurlong

Except those races arent even close to hard. They're marketed as being such to...wait for it...the masses. Because it makes a great instagram photo - mud, fire, oh my.

Ya know what happens when you make triathlons hard? Nobody signs up. Savageman 70 (2015) - 215 total participants (down from 218 the year before). Bet thats super profitable.

---

"One Line Robert"

I fully understand what you are saying here- and I think that is exactly my point- those Spartan Races aren't hard- but they are participatory with a lower financial entry level- many in my generation got involved in IM's because of two reasons- we watched it as a kid on TV and were enralled and said, "one day!" and then we met someone who had actually done one and learned about it. We learned it was possible. And we made it a priority to work towards purchasing the required materials. I think WTC is running out of suitable venue sites in the U.S. and they realize that each race site has a shelf life of five years if they are lucky. If they want growth in the U.S., one way to do it would be to inspire the next generation the same way we were- allowing them to see one, and allowing them to watch the struggle of the participants- not like yesterday when we saw it on TV, but in person in their town. They then catch the "some day" bug.

---

"There are two ways to slide easily through life- to believe everything and to doubt everything- both ways save us from thinking "- Korzbyski

The only company making a profit now is WTC- and only because they are a monopoly. And this is short term- not long term. All monopolies eventually fail- I think they know this, and they know their next "growth opportunity" is the Far East- a new market- because their business model is not as sustainable as it might have once been. People don't see them as any harder than the local Spartan Race.

---

"There are two ways to slide easily through life- to believe everything and to doubt everything- both ways save us from thinking "- Korzbyski

I don't disagree. Plus they have much higher overhead than those races.

---

"One Line Robert"

this isn't legal advice, and I don't know TN law, and neither agreeing with nor defending the decision (although the RD is sort of damned if they do damned if they don't....), but in general (or at least in California) a properly written waiver of liability will provide an assumption of the risk defense to a personal injury/wrongful death lawsuit (although it will still cost a lot of money to get there), unless the operator increased the risks inherent in the sport. Drowning is an inherent risk. Does having folks swim into that current increase that inherent risk? That's going to be a question (and you look at the average person, not you specifically, the standard is an objective one) that you'd have experts and hydrologists and... to try to answer. If something were to have happened, court may or may not enforce the waiver depending on the evidence submitted with the motion (which would have to be something more than the fact of the signed waiver)

Sometimes it's easy - Scuba operator provides tanks with C02 in them, ski instructor takes beginner student off double black diamond run. Sometimes it's more difficult.

Here are a couple of solutions:

1. Race as a pro
2. Quit crying and don't pay WTC anymore
3. Come back down to Earth

You're welcome.

Hey Robert, the race director never mentioned when the swim was shortened that it was risky. They specifically said that some of the professionals women struggled getting to the first turn buoy. There's a huge difference between risk and something being difficult to do. They indicated that getting to the buoy was difficult.

As for what skin do I have in the game. That's easy, I've said it before and I'll say it again, this sport is supposed to be hard. Don't we always say, if triathlon were easy it would be called football. Not so much when, at the first instance of one of the disciplines being difficult things are shortened or cut altogether. I've been doing this sport for 26 plus . Racing in those early years there were races that were damn hard. Guess what? Nobody every complained. Sure, they'd make comments that the race was difficult but we never complained about how the course was too difficult and it should be changed. If that were the case then Shannon Kurek needs to just shut down Triple T because that's one of the hardest race weekends I've ever encountered. I'm glad he hasn't and the race has flourished.

And don't give me this crap about WTC being a for profit entity and that they'd suffer dearly if the participation in one race took a hit. All they'd do, and have done before, is close down that race and create another one somewhere else. I'm not at all worried about WTC and their bottom line. They're making money hand over fist and we all know it.

And what do I have to prove? Well, I race against myself. That's it, end of story. But, when I race, I want to race the entire course that I signed up to do, no matter how hard it's going to be. I don't want the race to be 69.9 miles long, I want the race to be 70.3. I want the race to be as advertised and not shortened due to the difficulty (not risk) being too hard.

I'm speaking up for Bruce here, as I think his viewpoint is relatively simple but the thread is becoming very convoluted in theory about decision making.

There is an inherent risk in every race, and that's a known fact. There are ones that are known and we can prepare for (distance, hills, terrain) or ones that we are unable to prepare for - currents in a river, waves in the ocean, rain, lightning, humidity, high winds.

But it's all subjective and up to the RD to determine if any of these factors jeopardize human life.

Part of the allure of IM or the 70.3 races is that it's special...why? Because you have to prepare for it and it's hard. And if you can't handle it, you can opt out. At any point you can put your hand up on a swim, lay on your back with your wetsuit or swim back to the swim start and decide today's not the day. You can also do that on the bike and run. We've seen the DNF a million times. Live to fight another day...

Gone are the days when you had 200 guys/gals line up despite the conditions, bike set up, race flats, nutrition, and volunteer support and said - "I'm going to beat this course today no matter the conditions, known or unknown."

Now we are talking about different waves of competitors and participants. Why? Because people want the intimate feeling that they belong and are validated with a finisher's medal for doing so.

For some reason, I would find it hard to believe that the older AG athletes want a change to the race course. Most of those guys/gals enter with one mindset - I can beat the course...not the person beside me, behind me or in front of me...just the course that throws the known and unknown my way.

I wish more of us could take on that spirit on race day. Just be better than the course, on that day, with those conditions. The rest, is social media fodder.

Before you go leacturing someone it might help to have a clue if where they stand. Post 114 I said I generally agree with the decision.

I owned a race series. We had just under 10,000 participants the year I owned it. So I guess I have the most success of anyone on the forum in race directing (that is 99% a joke). The reason I sold was because - in part - this very issue. I did not see how we could sustain a quality race series AND appeal to the masses.

We all remember that someone died there last year. During the swim. I doubt any race director would want to take a risk of that happening again if they think the swim was too hard for some of the pros. I'm sure that was a factor in the decision to shorten the swim.

---

Don't drown. Don't crash. Don't walk.

This thread is going in circles and apologies for being a contributor to the thread chasing its own tail....but here we are:

1. Gerlach beat Pubes at Chattanooga 70.3...let's not fool ourselves
2. Terra-man beat NFL Hall of Famer Hines Ward by a solid 9.5 virtual yards at the swim at Kona 2013 (you rock Larkin now get in the bloody pool for Chattanooga 70.3 Worlds or my buddy Tony O'Keeffe will kick your butt in 55-59, forget about Hines)
3. Bruce Gennari and myself are elitest pricks (Bruce for actually being a top amateur athlete, me for supporting top amateurs having a balanced challenge in all sports).
4. Everyone is calling each other names. Can we just focus on debating/attacking the other person's position rather than the person?
5. WTC is wussifying the sport in the name of revenue. Growth is good though. Wussification is bad for some, acceptable for others if we get more into the sport
6. Sport has to evolve with the times and technology. So let's use it!

OK, now that we got all that off the table, we can keep shooting away at each other, or we can go to WTC with solutions. As in any case in life, it's basically pointless after a while to just complain and not offer a path to make things better. And contrary to what some of you think, WTC is not only in this for money. The top of the WTC food chain are all athletes, and many quite competitive athletes (need I remind of the name Paula Newby Fraser etc). Heck Andrew Messick was an 11.xx IM at 45-49. How many CEOs of $1B market cap companies are in that range? Almost none.


WTC will listen to "us" (I use us collectively), we just have to go with solution that help them make a better product on all fronts. There is no reason why WTC wants to throw out the baby with the bathwater. I am almost certain that they would be happy to have a "competitive for awards group"' and a "rec category" at evey race. They already do this at no wetsuit/wetsuit race. This is nothing new. It's already being done. We can have our cake and eat it too (both us hard core elitest pricks and WTC and first timers. Everyone can win).


WTC can easily have a "competitiive for awards group" on the pro course, with elite amateur rules, tougher rule enforcement, maybe even a higher entry free for all of that and more stringent waiver. Those who don't want to step up to that category can go in the "rec category". Same finisher medal for everyone, different results list.


For the record, I got a finisher medal at Ironman Canada 1991, and I got a finisher medal at the 1986 Green Mountain Steel man half IM that was a Kona qualifier back then....so to my best knowledge, I have been collecting them for 30+ years and love all of them. I look forward to collecting my next finisher medal, but I have been out of commission with a spine/disc issue from which my neurologist says a 100% recovery is possible, and when that happens, I don't want any wussified shortcut course. Give me the full thing and I have friends in 65-69 and 70+ who want nothing less than the full challenge.

Okay Dev, you make it sound so easy. Apparently you had an impact on getting the wetsuit swimmers separated from the rest at one point, kudos to you.

So why haven't you gotten WTC to make this change yet?

I say that partially in pink.

I believe a modified version of your proposal which has been suggested numerous times before is move to a Cat system similar to biking.
Cat 1 = < 4:30 HIM
Cat 2 = < 5:00 HIM
Cat 3 = < 5:30 HIM
And so on. If/when you move up to IM, you can appeal based on your HIM history.

Now, this presents several more logical issues involving the swim start, the order in which you send people off, and all the headaches around getting slow people off the courses as quickly as possible to reduce operating costs. I don't know how to resolve all those, but that's why I don't run a 1bn dollar company.

---

----
@adamwfurlong

You don't need a cat system like cycling. That is overly complex (and kind of elitest) to administer.

Just have waves by age group or rolling start by age group in a competitive race and then a mass or rolling start for the rec category. Its has basically already been done for wetsuit/non wetsuit groups racing for awards. This requires zero admin and a voluntary "opt in". Guys like Bruce (or guys like myself who want to get pummelled by Bruce) get the competitive race without any watering down, new athletes, have a more friendly environment, WTC gets their revenue, they grow the sport, while keeping a pointy end competition going....both the participation event and the pointy end race are integral to the WTC brand. They do want to be seen as one of the world's premium endurance competition brands and over wussification does not help that branding. So they actually don't want too much wussification.

As for "why haven't I gotten WTC to make that change yet?. Well volunteer labor only goes so far and takes a lot of time and follow up and influencing. Influencing is better done in person, and I've been unable to make it to any WTC events where I can directly influence key players for almost 2 years due to professional stuff and health limitations. But yes, I can pick up the phone and start with that. People will listen, you just have to pick up the phone or preferably sit down with them in person...and don't propose things that they can't easily implement within current infrastructure. Just propose small changes that do not require a major lift.

There's too much money involved in the age group system. All of the national federations would never support it (or at least usat wouldn't) because there's far too much money involved in milking the idea of an "age group national championship" for all the money it's worth. I say this as someone who would love it to happen, but I don't think it will. Also, I know itu and wtc are two separate entities, but it would get too confusing if one had a category system and the other an age group system

The answer is so obvious! the ALL WORLD ATHLETES are the only ones included in the competitive race. The rest of us are just participants.

Now maybe the BRONZE level athletes shouldn't have been required to swim the entire uphill leg, but that's debatable I guess..

hahaha, ok. so in theory the division idea does have some attraction Dev. It wouldn't affect me I don't guess (so long as I get back to Alligator Wallet Athlete status). But seriously, I do think there is more of a serious "racing" mentality going on at the non pointy end than you may think. And the whole participant status thing is a bit condescending. Just my opinion

---

Coach at KonaCoach Multisport

This would be attractive to WTC. To race Competitive Wave you must be AWA Status. To be AWA status you must race more in order to get an AWA status or keep your AWA status or advance your AWA status. All others race in their standard waves.

---

http://www.sfuelsgolonger.com

But but but, if you are NFL Hall of famer and don't have All World Alligator Status, you don't get to race Terra-man for a rematch. I would vote for an "opt in" to the Competitive race or "opt out". I suppose you would have to opt into the competitive event to get Gold, Silver and Bronze Alligator Status points, because in theory points have to be measured against something and you can't race with a bunch of different alligators under different rules and get the same points.

Many would say there's already an "opt in" to the competitive race.

That's all fine as long as they don't dilute the competitive event. That's Bruce Gennari's very point. They are diluting the competitive race to accommodate the recreational event. You're not getting an option to do the full blown course when the pros are. If the conditions are safe enough for pros, then they are safe enough for competitive age groupers with skill and training and ability to take on the challenge. If you don't feel you can take on the challenge, that's fine, there would be a less challenging recreational event option to pick from. It's just the same as opting to not use a wetsuit for awards or going with your wetsuit. WTC allows for this provided temp is not well above 80F (I think the cutoff is 85F when no one can wear a wetsuit).

I'm positive you didn't get what I was saying.

How again would the divisions be determined? By the AGers themselves? Pros have a standards to produce to be in pro field.

If it's self selecting...it'll never really work to the satisfaction of RD.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

There's a huge difference between risk and something being difficult to do.

----

Yes but they aren't mutually exclusive either. swimming upstream for people has already been proven in this thread to add time and did someone double their swim time based on a 750m uphill swim. That is how it can turn from "difficult" to "risky". Again in most times this goes back to the lowest common athlete where that type of difficulty then puts risk to lifeguards, emergency personal, other swimmers.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

I find it ironic that in the same breath and post that you feel the need to clarify whether or not I beat Thomas Gerlach -- news flash to you and ajthomas: any person who looks closely at the results or reads to the fifth post in this thread can see that I did not beat him by any measure -- you are proposing a structure that would introduce even more confusion as to who beat whom. Is there a whole different slate of results for those with the "60% swim course"? Separate AWA ranking system for the exact demographic that ranking system is for? What about swim and bike cut offs -- would you have separate requirements for those people? What if a 60% swim athlete beat both Thomas and Bruce Gennari -- how would that be noted in Iron Tracker and would we all be okay with it? How would officials have executed the ad hoc 60% swim decision on Sunday while all of us were already in the corral?

You can't just Monday morning quarterback this issue and congratulate yourself for thinking of such an inventive solution without putting any thought into how that solution would be implemented. ericmulk, ajthomas, and the rest of the fish mafia are already upset that it looks like Matt Russell was bested by three amateurs in the results. Hell hath no fury like an elite swimmer scorned!

I wonder what dirtymangos thinks about all this.

I'm also positive he didn't.

---

"One Line Robert"

It's unfortunate if the [much] higher rates of death on the swim in triathlon is what is driving race directors to make the swims easier and easier. Bruce is exactly right: there was nothing dangerous about the original swim course with a current: any reasonable swimmer could have made it to a kayak or shore if they weren't progressing upstream or got too tired. I don't believe that swim deaths have much to do with the actual difficulty of the swim courses, nor necessarily the swimming ability of the athlete.

If race directors are making swim courses easier because of safety and not attracting more athletes, then they really should look at some of the dangerous bike courses (with downhills, corners, wind, traffic, rain, etc.) and crazy temperatures on the run (a marathon in the afternoon sun with temps sometimes > 90 F). Fortunately, that doesn't seem to be the case. Unfortunately, the swim difficulty is getting a lot of scrutiny.

To me, it seems that the unfortunate reality of why the swim has become easier is to attract more athletes to the sport. I don't think safety is the primary driver. There would have been more complaints at Chattanooga from poor swimmers that couldn't make it to the first upstream buoy than they actually got from strong swimmers who lost some of their advantage from the easier course.

Most triathletes I know love to run and bike and hate to swim. They'll run and bike every week of the year, but won't start in the pool until 3-4 weeks before the race. But duathlon just doesn't sound as cool as a sport as triathlon.

Except the primary issue in the water is always safety related when talking about these issues- rough swims, uphill swims, swimming in fog etc. So whether it's to keep customers happy or not, within the swim it's always centered on how the race can handle the athletes within the swim.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

There are two major differences between difficult swims and difficult cycles/runs:

1. There is an easy solution that athlete's can apply to resolve nearly all the issues you mention on the bike/run. Simply slow down and manage the risk. However, an upstream swim doesn't offer this option. Slowing down doesn't allow you to pace yourself or reduce the risk, on the contrary, it means you have to swim longer or may never get there.
2. If someone does get in difficulty mid swim, there is no simple and immediate way to just stop. On the bike or run, you can reduce your effort to zero at a moment's notice. On the bike you may have to brake before dismounting but this is still pretty quick even on most steep descents. You don't have to do any significant further work should an issue arise. On the swim you may be able to roll over and float if it's a wetsuit swim but you have to reach dry land or a kayak before you can truly be out of danger.

But that's just it: Chattanooga is an incredibly safe swimming venue. The shore is never that far away. If you can't make it to the shore in that river even with a raging current, you just can't swim. So again, I don't see what the danger was that forced a course change. It seems to me that the issue wasn't safety but rather ability for [very] slow swimmers to finish.

[full disclosure, I didn't race last weekend. I did the race in 2015 when the current was minimal and we did the full course. Also full disclosure, it was raining, and I crashed on the bike turning back onto 193 and screwed up my shoulder. See, the bike was more dangerous! And I didn't sue them!]

I agree with most of your points. And I'm not saying the the decision to shorten the swim was right or wrong. I was just pointing out that the RD won't be able to ignore a recent swim death, even if it had nothing to do with the course. People seemed to be forgetting that. Conditions for last year's race were just about perfect IMO. I think Choo is great and safe course. But you can't honestly believe that the bike course was dangerous simply because you crashed. I hope that was supposed to be pink.

---

Don't drown. Don't crash. Don't walk.

Definitely pink. Slightly too fast around the corner. My fault too: the Zipp Tangente tires even came with a warning "for use on dry roads only." And I work in tire research and development! In general, low rolling resistance = no wet grip. I should know much better than that.

Hey Pubes....it's simple. Separate set of results, separate entry on tracker (two different hyperlinks to access results from 2 different events going on at the same venue). Sportstats would be able to support that at the back end by basically setting up 2 different events. Based on your start time, you just end up in event 1 or event 2. Cutoffs would simple be based on start times, as is the case for wave or rolling starts. We have the technology to do all this pretty easily. Just keep the results separate and the who beat whom is clear. They won't be mixed up together. Let's say everyone in the rec event started after 7:30 am (just picking a number), they get entered into the second event.

In terms of AWA points that's another animal for discussion but can be resolved with some derating factor where event 1 winner gets 100% of the points and event 2 winner gets x% of event 1 winner based on their time and the derating to the "easier event" (It might only be 5% derating etc....factors could be pre established based on wetsuit no wetsuit, reduced swim, no swim etc....right now if you go wetsuit in a no wetsuit swim, you still get points as a straight out percent of the winner who likely did not wear a wetsuit.

In any case, with the timing systems and data bases in the back end it would be really easy to have two discrete events in the results. No mixing needed. If you did this you could actually also pull out the pro race into a separate set of results since they compete under different rules to age groupers (anti doping, draft zone, wetsuit cut offs etc).

But that's just it: Chattanooga is an incredibly safe swimming venue. The shore is never that far away. If you can't make it to the shore in that river even with a raging current, you just can't swim.

-----

How far from shore is it and how deep of water are you in? If you can't stand, there is going to always be some issues especially if your saying they should "just swim to shore".

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Absolutely no comparison in terms of safety to say, IM Florida, where you're half a mile out at sea. Again, everyone has to have a minimum swimming ability to even consider any open water swim, and that ability should be more than enough to get you to shore at any point along in the river. Doesn't matter if you're going with or against the current. And among all the swims out there with WTC events, Chattanooga must be one of the safest even with a strong current. I'm just saying that it looks to me like they modified the course to minimize or avoid any swim DNF's, not for any legitimate safety concern. Although as several have pointed out: recent deaths have probably brought extreme caution to race direction for the swims.

Whether the decision was for safety or to reduce DNF's it was successful.

It did reduce the competitive advantage of some swimming "specialists" but alas they did get to swim, unlike at Gulf Coast. And I know of at least one who still won his age group, with a kickass run of all things.

As for the "wussification" argument, let's admit it. The world has changed a lot since we rode in cars without wearing seatbelts, rode our bikes without helmets, piled in the back of pickups with 10 other teenagers going way too fast through city streets. Just because we survived all those shenanigans doesn't mean it was wise.

Honestly I don't see what the problem is. We have an incredible gamut of races of all distances in great venues, way more than "back in the day." We have great support from cities, families, volunteers, etc. Creating more divisions to appease the pointy end of the field for the occasional course change related to weather is not necessary.

Keep training, move on to the next race, and be thankful.

---

Coach at KonaCoach Multisport

Creating more divisions to appease the pointy end of the field for the occasional course change related to weather is not necessary.

------

Every RD in triathlon just gave you a golf clap.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

You raise great points, and indeed, I am grateful for the diversity of events that I've been able to do. Some from small Indie's like Setup Events, some from WTC. But, that doesn't mean that we should rollover and accept said "wussification" if it's for no real reason. I just don't see why we can't have a halfway difficult swim (current, chop, temperature, whatever) when we have difficult bike courses and hilly and sometimes super hot runs. They didn't shorten the IM CdA marathon when it was well into the 90's. No doubt there were DNF's and no doubt it was probably dangerous. But that's what we sign up for. Let's face it: at the Ironman and 70.3 distances, the swim is already disproportionally short. But less than 15 minutes when the bike takes 2+ hours?

This is so true.

Dev....I tried to spell it out for you before........to no avail. So, I'll make it clear this time.

The pros went off before the "Rec Event", Sunday.

 But, that doesn't mean that we should rollover and accept said "wussification" if it's for no real reason.

----------
The problem is, that you think it was changed for no real reason, and the race made the change after evaluating the swim during the pro start. These RD's aren't just waiting til race morning to shorten the swim and make it easy for everyone without justification. Now you simply don't think it was justified, but every instance of a swim being modified, there is a reason for it. And I don't even think it's as so much to make it "easy" as it is simply to make it manageable for everyone. That's the most important aspect of the swim....the race support has to be able to manage and control it as best as possible. It's been said that the RD made the call after watching the BOP pros struggle, yes? So he (or it may be a she...i have no clue) took that information and likely said, "if *pros* are struggling, this may be a real struggle for the race to be completed and everyone make it safely through the swim". So I think it's unfair to say they are doing these modifications w/o real reasoning. You just don't accept the reasoning, which is ok, you just more disagree with it.

And in regards to the dangers of the bike/run in heat, etc, it's already been discussed by previous person on the different dynamics of safety within each s/b/r.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Yes, it is PevDaul.

See the post here where Terra-Man ended the thread.

---

"One Line Robert"

The "success" of races like Isoman or IM lake tahoe, etc that are legit hard - begs to differ. We are basically living in the Hadrian like era if I was to compare the present day 'murica to the Roman empire - the populace is fat and lazy and doing "hard" races is just not a part of the zeitgest.

---

Next races on the schedule: none at the moment

nothing with you is ever simple.

I think those examples you've given were not given enough of a chance- they were cancelled quite quickly, weren't they? Seriously, do you think if they brought back the IM St. George that it wouldn't do well? I seriously think it would- it has a mystique and aura about it now. How long was the original Hawaii race put on before it got "popular"? It takes a while IMO.

---

"There are two ways to slide easily through life- to believe everything and to doubt everything- both ways save us from thinking "- Korzbyski

I kind of got that about the pros but prefer not to infer and tell you what you are thinking but not typing (see my response to pubes about separating out the pros too in the results anyway, so I addressed that).....but within the age group event there is a race for awards and there is an event focused around finishing. Best to break those two out.

And thanks for spelling it out though. It's the internet, and I don't want to explicitly read an anonymous person's mind and assume what I guess is what the person happen to be thinking. Once you spell it out, then we can have a proper discussion on the sub topic. Definitely, pull pros out of the overall results. Have 2 sets of results under the current structure, and if WTC were to adopt another division with less stringent requirements (ex: wetsuit athletes in a not wetsuit event today), then have that one in another grouping too.

Hey James, I should have called Kiley by his name (vs the Pubes label that was stuck on his former handle), so I guess once I didn't call him by that wording its open season for everyone to take cheap shots at each other. All fair if you want to lay in on cheap shots now. Likewise wsrobert's last post. I'll try to be more respectful in how I address others.

okay now...has everyone had his say? i like to let you all opine, but i don't like seeing calumnies hurled on both sides.

so if there are any opinions left, can you express it quickly? i think i'll close down this thread.

?? You were banned from ST under your other name, and then return under your real name as a Mod??

My guess is that he is making a "joke"

You'll notice, to reinforce the parody, he has declined to use capital letters.

Did slowman hack kileyay's account this afternoon?

I am such a 1:50 swimmer and really got caught up in such a crazy upriver swim. To me it seemed that the buoy was drifting away as I attempted to reach it.

H

Just for the record, I probably would have been another minute slower but two pro guys decided they wanted to out sprint me for 7th down the homestretch. Can't people just let me have the 7th I earned fair and square. Does everything have to be such a struggle? I mean come on, 7th is the worst spot as it is the first spot out of the money, did those guys really want the emotional/psychological baggage that comes with it? Regardless, there was no way I was losing that title which I have held so many times, so I dropped the hammer and maintained that 7th place I had held for the prior couple miles. Too bad there was no TRS IMLP stunt. On to the next one.


But to Dev's point. This thread has certainly had a few tangents. Seeing the title everyday is a great reminder to do work. Carry on.

---

---

Save: $50 on Speed Hound Recovery Boots | $20 on Air Relax| $100 on Normatec| 15% on Most Absorbable Magnesium

Blogs: Best CHEAP Zwift / Bike Trainer Desk | Theragun G3 vs $140 Bivi Percussive Massager | Normatec Pulse 2.0 vs Normatec Pulse | Speed Hound vs Normatec | Air Relax vs Normatec | Q1 2018 Blood Test Results | | Why HED JET+ Is The BEST value wheelset

But there is a real reason. The problem is that it's not quite black and white which leaves some people agreeing with it and others upset. Typically those who'd like a tough swim, will be difficult to convince of the rationale to modify a swim. It's considered reasonable that a large proportion of the entrants will be unable to take part in the race on the basis that they should have known this could happen, or they should be better swimmers. I disagree. If the course becomes massively more challenging than would have been reasonably expected by a large proportion of entrants, then it's reasonable to try and mitigate that. If a venue leads itself to a high risk of such a change it should be flagged in promotional material and upon entry so people know what they're in for (e.g. "This swim venue is prone to occassional strong currents which may make the swim very challenging for weaker swimmers" or "This swim venue is prone to occassional strong currents and the route will be modified at the disgression of the RD should strong currents be present for the race").
To argue that a significant proportion of entrants should be put in a position where they will likely fail to complete the swim is absurd unless you're also arguing that too many people are allowed to take part in races and they should be reserved for the more capable athletes. As I mentioned earlier, the argument that there are tough run and bike conditions/routes are not legitimate. If you can't run you can walk. You can ride slower or even get off and walk if the hills are too steep. Of course some people may not be able to get to the end but those numbers will almost always be small and everyone will at least be able to make forward progress until they can go no further. A swim in a strong current is quite different. And this is aside from any safety aspects.

This thread has certainly had a few tangents. Seeing the title everyday is a great reminder to do work. Carry on.


My wife, who has won more wooden bowls than I ever will, asked me today what was the point of all the stuff "you boys" write on this forum. Haha I didn't have much of an answer, but I do plan to use some of the comments that I strongly disagree with as motivation to train hard heading into WC, whatever the race day conditions

---

Coach at KonaCoach Multisport

What would you think about making the swim all downstream for everyone but making it longer to compensate for the current assist, e.g. a 40 min swimmer would still come out around 40-ish min but after swimming say 2.5 or 2.6 K, depending on the predicted current strength. The needed extra length would of course be estimated and results would vary a lot based on a swimmer's speed but at least you'd have an approximation of a 1900-m no current swim.

Also, the best solution is simply to move the swim out to above the dam where there is essentially zero current, but that appears to be unpopular b/c it would harm the overall "vibe" of the event. Apparently, the "vibe" is more important than the actual race itself.

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

What would you think about making the swim all downstream for everyone but making it longer to compensate for the current assist, e.g. a 40 min swimmer would still come out around 40-ish min but after swimming say 2.5 or 2.6 K, depending on the predicted current strength. The needed extra length would of course be estimated and results would vary a lot based on a swimmer's speed but at least you'd have an approximation of a 1900-m no current swim. //

The only problem with that is time is not a good equalizer in this case. Swimming downstream in itself is a "HUGE" advantage to weaker swimmers, more so than wearing wetsuits even. It is just so hard for a lead pack swimmer to even drop a 3rd pack swimmer, and if done it is only by seconds rather than minutes. To use a downstream course and make it fair you would have to do something like a 40 minute swim for the leaders, time enough to spit the barnacles off and then put some normal time into them.


But you are right in that it would be better than nothing, at least make everyone be in the water more time than swimming the GPS distance downstream the entire time.


I guess my solution would be to maybe swim upstream as much as a BOP could handle, then make the turn and swim a bit further than the GPS distance downstream. Or really try and get the currents as minimal as possible for race day, get with the people that let the water out and let them know how important it really is..

Using this approach, if the run was on a 10 kph conveyor belt and they made the run 31.1K, I'd be fine with that. Just don't put the run on a 10 kph conveyor belt and ask people to only cover 21.1k with conveyor belt assist. The nice thing about the conveyor belt on the run with its hard "contact" to the human, is everyone gets the same 10 kph assist. With the water conveyor belt and the humans immersed inside this belt in 3D and slipping around and creating turbulence inside the belt, there is a varying degree of assist....FOP swimmer gets the least hindrance against the belt, but the least benefit with th belt.

Monty, I believe the issue with making the upstream short enough so that BOP can still cover it, is that at some point if the current is strong enough, the BOP may never leave the starting point (endless pool at your swim speed), or move backwards, (endless pool moving at Wolfgang's swim speed so only he stays stationary, Dave Scott, you and everyone else get blown backwards).

That's been my main issue with river venues if they are going to have either Kona slots or host championships. You can never get it "right" and thus fraught with uncertainty and unfair outcomes. It kind of sucks that a worlds will be held in such a swim venue when there were plenty of more fair options to go with (Port Elizabeth and Nice in subsequent years will be good). It could be a complete disaster for weak swimmers if the upstream leg at world's is against a stiff current (the game will be over for Lionel at T1, so then he can refer back to this thread and see we told him so and he should just focus on Kona), or let's say the current is so strong that it ends up being all downstream even for pros, then Frodo and Brownlee gets the short end of it. And inside every age group, the same will happen. Either guys like Bruce G will get short changed, or guys like Terra-man will get short changed. If they had this race at Lake Placid it would at least be a fair scenario for all. You get the swim split commensurate with your ability and training relative to your peers.

 (the game will be over for Lionel at T1, so then he can refer back to this thread and see we told him so and he should just focus on Kona),//

Actually this is not true and Lionel will probably crush it in a pro swim up and down current. My take on it was in regards to the MOP/BOP Ag swimmers, the ones that don't know how to draft or sight well. Now good swimmers of which Lionel is(anyone that does 100's on the 1;15 is a good swimmer) will benefit both ways in a up/down current swim. Going up it is immensely easier to draft of a much faster swimmer, just like in a huge headwind on the bike. Then you flip downstream and the Lionels of the world will be clinging onto the lead group, the one they never would be near otherwise. If he swims it smart, it could be the swim of his life(in comparison to the leaders)


As for the BOP Agers, it just all depends on how fast the current is. Like I said earlier, best case is they can get the water slowed or stopped for the race and all will be good. Otherwise hope it is slow enough for at least 95% to get to the upstream buoy, and then you can call it good. It is a fucking world champs after all, you shouldn't have the normal 2;20 ironman swimmers there in the first place, and gutting 5% at the swim cutoff is no big deal. Should be some that don't make every race, otherwise there is no weeding out process, and the harsh reality that you do have to swim a bit to do a triathlon.

Dev, as the guy that originally bestowed Kiley his "Pubes" nickname, I'd prefer you use a verb such as "bestowed", "blessed with" or "gifted" rather than "stuck".

I feel like hearing Ben call him that on the podcast was the zenith of my time on Slowtwitch, and everything to follow will be mundane and disappointing...

---

Aaron Bales
Lansing Triathlon Team

Ya, the rest of your life will be all downhill from here on out, now that you've had your 15 min of fame. :)

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."