Is this a trick question?

There are two schools of thought and I want to know what people think is most fair:

1) Divide evenly in thirds. Swimmer, cyclist and runner pay the same amount.

2) Divide proportionally. Should a swimmer who's event is 10% of the overall time be on the hook for the same as a cyclist who's event is ~ 50% of the total time.

Not a trick question. Just want to see how most Slowtwitchers would break this down.

Are you the swimmer?

Just go super slow and you'll get your money's worth.

Actually, the traditional way is the swimmer pays half, since they go first, then the cyclist a third (assuming they go second), and the runner one sixth.

---

http://www.jt10000.com/

In the past, my teammates and I have split the entry fee evenly.

I'd most likely just decide to stay home if someone suggested we split costs proportionally based on time spent on the course.

This. Presumably each person is playing to his / her strengths so it shouldn't matter. What you should actually do is incentivize it by setting a goal time for each person and then flex payments based on relative performance haha.

If splitting the cost according to length on the course and I was a part of the relay, I'd tell whoever made the suggestion to do it all by themselves. Problem solved! ;) Splitting the cost evenly is what I would expect to do.

I would never pay $100 to swim 1.2 Miles, so swimmer pays less.

I do a lot of relays. I always do the bike. I willingly pay half and let the swimmer and runner divide the remainder. That's 'cuz I get to have about half the fun.

---

Stay aero my friends.

I was going to also say something along these lines. The swimmer usually shouldn't have to pay 1/3 the price, unless maybe if the race was their idea.

No kidding!

And for those complaining about being a swimmer and paying 1/3 - do you plan to only get less than 1/3 of any swag or medal?

---

clm
Nashville, TN
https://twitter.com/ironclm | http://ironclm.typepad.com

Incorrect. The swimmer is the commodity similar to a goalie in hockey. Swimmer pays less.

As for the original question. The few I’ve done , even split.

ETA - unless I was asked to do someone a favor because they couldn’t find someone to swim. Then back to my original point

---

"I think I've cracked the code. double letters are cheaters except for perfect squares (a, d, i, p and y). So Leddy isn't a cheater... "

Personally, I dont give an f about the swag or medals. As was stated above, fast swimmers are commodity. Most triathletes are Runners and bikers who suck at swimming, and typically do a relay because they are desperately trying to avoid getting wet.

I've only been a few relays in my life, and every single one of them I've been the guy stuck with the swim leg because: A) I'm fast (compared to triathletes), and B) because nobody else wants to do it. If someone asks me to be the swim leg on their relay because they can't find somebody else, I look at it as me doing them a favor, and I'm not going to pay for it. Instead I look at it as an opportunity for me to do a free 1.2 or 2.4 mile time trial.

My objection to splitting up the fee based on time spent on the course or whatever is... I can't imagine telling someone I wanted to pay less because I was just doing the swim. Unless I wanted to piss him off, of course. But then why am I teaming with him in the first place. I look at it as paying 1/3 of the fee for the chance to race and be part of a team. Whether or not the swim "is worth $100" is kinda irrelevant.

Also, this is a fairly expensive sport. I'm probably spending a lot more than $100 on it, so quibbling over the entry fee to save $20 or $50 or whatever is kind of silly.

the runner and cyclist should split it 50-50, and in addition each PAY the swimmer to participate, because who in their right mind would want to swim a mile.

I've only done one and we agreed before hand to split it 10-50-40 if I remember. However, there was prize money available so we also decided that we would split any prize money that we won in the same percentage. If you look at it from the swimmers point of view, $100 to swim for 20 minutes doesn't seem like much of a good deal!

1/3 each unless you recruit a ringer and then they pay zero.

---

___________________________________________
http://en.wikipedia.org/...eoesophageal_fistula
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerebral_palsy
2020 National Masters Champion - M40-44 - 400m IM
Canadian Record Holder 35-39M & 40-44M - 200 m Butterfly (LCM)

end of thread.

---

_____________________________________
What are you people, on dope?

—Mr. Hand

fast swimmers are gold, and should be treated accordingly.

The only right answer is "it depends"... there are a few scenarios I've seen play out in my own experience:

1. If it's a collaborative effort and nobody was specifically recruited, we all split evenly.
2. If you've had to actively track down and/or beg somebody to take part, they could take part for free with the cost being split between the other two competitors.
3. If it's your younger sister who is broke af and can only afford $25 and you want her to take part, she pays $25 and you bear the rest.

Yeah, I guess it depends on the situation. A swimmer who organizes a relay probably should expect to pay 1/3. But, if you want to recruit a good swimmer to your relay, you probably ought to offer to make their share less than that. Open Water races are cheap, and pool meets even cheaper. Want to swim the "mile*" at the USMS National Championships? It'll cost you $59. Want to swim more events since you're there? They're just $4 each.


*1500M or 1650Y

---

"They're made of latex, not nitroglycerin"

You are the one that counts nacho chips eaten by each person when calculating dinner tab aren’t you??

When asked to compete as part of a relay or duo, I always ask myself one question: Do I think we can win?
My answer to the former is almost always the same as my answer to the latter.

That said, +1 on fast swimmers are gold. If you're trying to put a strong relay together the other two should be paying the fish.