Bruce,

You're talking about swim drafting of relatively compatible swimmers. This scenario was quite a bit different. You've got Matt, who swam 40:50 at IMCHOO (compared to your 42:23) yet followed that up with 61 minutes at Kona. Needless to say if he had been swimming honestly he'd have been in the low 50s at Kona. But he wasn't swimming honestly; he had agreed to pace Lionel at Kona and paced him to a 61. Swimming out of the pro wave, it is probably unlikely that Lionel would have found other feet to draft at that speed, so Matt was certainly planned assistance so that he would not be abandoned out there all alone while the front pack swimmers all benefited from the typical racing draft. Maybe that's cool and good strategy and good planning to seek out a domestique ahead of time. I think most find that it goes against the spirit of individual competition, if not the rules (though it seems pretty clear to be against the rules too).

RowToTri wrote:

The ones who voted that it is not illegal I would bet have not followed this issue closely enough to find the rule about subordinating your race ambitions to assist another racer.

RowToTri wrote:

The ones who voted that it is not illegal I would bet have not followed this issue closely enough to find the rule about subordinating your race ambitions to assist another racer.

The whole individual vs team things often gets dragged up.

I think when addressing whether a sport is individual you might have to look at the alternative, which would be a team sport. In my opinion there is nothing in between. Either everyone wants to win themselves, or there is a willingness for some to lay down their performance on behalf of a greater good. What happens in between in the pursuit of one of those two options does not grey the area, it's the intended outcome that defines.

Regardless of whether swim drafting is legal or not the leading athletes should all be wanting to beat those drafting. If everyone wants to win the sport is clearly individual, if two or more people work together to clearly gain an ultimate advantage for an individual then they are acting as a team.

However, if tactics come into play whereby aiding someone at the start in order that this benefits you later on then this is still clearly an individual pursuit. If you can convince other people to help you win [within the rules] then fair play to you.

Cases in point.

1.
Domestiques clearly form part of a team. They forego their chances, to aid another. They are in a team.

2.
Macca at Kona. He put forward the idea of a way of racing that he felt absolutely benefitted him and would allow him the best chance of winning. By telling people to ride hard it was not a team effort, everyone would have happily seen every other athlete blow up. It was within the rules. He absolutely wanted to win. Everyone else absolutely wanted to win. It was an individual decision in an individual sport. He was acting utterly individually, with his own beneficial outcome in mind.


I agree that there is a difference between time trial races and pack races, but the lack of time trial format and the subsequent race dynamics does not a team sport make. Andy Potts does not work the front of the swim for the ultimate benefit of anyone else. Whether Chrabot did or not would dictate whether this became a team act or was an individual act, which I think is key when establishing whether [rules or no rules] this was in the spirit of the sport.

Dan underlines an 'abandoned ambitions' ruling. I read Matt's initial post which clearly indicated he had abandoned ambitions to win prior to the race ("How ambitious can I get if I just want to do the honor of finishing Kona while still sore and tired?") and also clearly indicated that he would assist Lionel if, at least, it was just to keep him straight in the swim ("yeah, sure. It'll be good for you since I'll swim straighter anyways")

Ambitions abandoned, yep. Athlete assisted? Arguable based on that quote alone. Matt indicated it would benefit but didn't indicate he would be doing anything different to what he intended to do anyway.

All just my opinion obviously. I am not sure there was any particular intention to break rules but, clearly, checking with the ref to see if it was legal to 'swim next to someone' meant that they knew they were doing something a bit cheeky.

the reality in tri is, if you swim and/or cycle alone, you are more likely than not, at an disatvantage against the majority of the atheles you compete against in a sport that is supposed to be individual.