Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Was IM Boulder more difficult this year?
Quote | Reply
I was just looking at the results in M40-44 at IM Boulder and was surprised that a 10:17 would have gotten you a Kona slot this year. Is that much slower than previous years? Non wetsuit swim this year?

Let food be thy medicine...
Quote Reply
Re: Was IM Boulder more difficult this year? [JackStraw13] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
No answer for me...
I posted this in the other thread, but it's a related question.

Looking through the results, the DNF rate for AG seems incredibly high. For example, M40-44 has only 36 finishers listed from 157 registered. Anybody know if there is a problem with the reporting, or did something strange happen at the race?

http://www.ironman.com/...;ps=20#axzz4jo9v964h
Quote Reply
Re: Was IM Boulder more difficult this year? [noahman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
No idea as to the overall but Justin Daerr was DQ'd for missing a timing mat on the run course.... and my friend is likely getting DQ'd as well for the same thing.

Maybe this mat was a super common thing? Just speculating.


But I'm with you, I was shocked at how slow the run times were for M30-34. A 3:28 got a KQ and it doesn't appear anyone at the front of the bike was DQ'd on the run.
Quote Reply
Re: Was IM Boulder more difficult this year? [noahman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I have a friend who is listed as DNF on the athlete tracker but has pictures on Facebook with a finisher's medal and a blanket. So I think there might be something up with the results. I'll let him sleep it off a bit before I bug him for details.
Quote Reply
Re: Was IM Boulder more difficult this year? [BrentwoodTriGuy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
i'm sure there's a problem with reporting. Otherwise, the last finisher completed the race in 12:07 and no one after them. And I know that wasn't the case.
Quote Reply
Re: Was IM Boulder more difficult this year? [noahman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
noahman wrote:
No answer for me...
I posted this in the other thread, but it's a related question.

Looking through the results, the DNF rate for AG seems incredibly high. For example, M40-44 has only 36 finishers listed from 157 registered. Anybody know if there is a problem with the reporting, or did something strange happen at the race?

http://theobsessedtriathlete.com/...ulder&div=M45-49

--------------------------------------------
TEAM F3 Undurance
Quote Reply
Re: Was IM Boulder more difficult this year? [Emilyk318] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Currently a major malfunction at IRONMAN. Hopefully resolved soon.

Results here for now: https://www.sportstats.us/...s.xhtml?raceid=45756

Sylvan Smyth | http://www.sportstats.asia | sylvan@sportstats.asia | Starvas
Quote Reply
Re: Was IM Boulder more difficult this year? [JackStraw13] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JackStraw13 wrote:
Non wetsuit swim this year?
Water was barely 70.

Sylvan Smyth | http://www.sportstats.asia | sylvan@sportstats.asia | Starvas
Quote Reply
Re: Was IM Boulder more difficult this year? [JackStraw13] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It was hot!
Quote Reply
Re: Was IM Boulder more difficult this year? [JackStraw13] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I unfort cant see this race surviving. Only 1170 started this year abut 1400 signed up....

Andy Mullen
Team Zoot
Quote Reply
Re: Was IM Boulder more difficult this year? [JackStraw13] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It was a legit and honest course. I raced in 2014, but was a fairly different athlete then. The swim is a swim. The bike was 2 miles long (114), and not too forgiving - Biking at altitude gives faster speeds though. The run is probably one of the tougher courses in NA as an Ironman.

Im going to say it is a fairly tough course. Also, the registration numbers were low, thus Kona slots/placement/etc might seem off.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Training/Racing Log - http://www.earthdaykid.com/blog --- Old Training/Racing Log - http://colinlaughery.blogspot.com
Quote Reply
Re: Was IM Boulder more difficult this year? [JackStraw13] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm not a local but I was spectating and thought the weather was beautiful.
Quote Reply
Re: Was IM Boulder more difficult this year? [JackStraw13] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
look at 30-34 and 35-39. Also factor in the bike was almost 4 miles longer this year.

Some years an AG might be really tough, the next not as much.

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook
Quote Reply
Re: Was IM Boulder more difficult this year? [JackStraw13] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The 50-54 years old were as fast as the 40-44 years old.

They constantly try to escape from the darkness outside and within
Dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good T.S. Eliot

Quote Reply
Re: Was IM Boulder more difficult this year? [JackStraw13] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
With the band in town, I never would have made it to the start line :)
Quote Reply
Re: Was IM Boulder more difficult this year? [BrentwoodTriGuy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BrentwoodTriGuy wrote:
No idea as to the overall but Justin Daerr was DQ'd for missing a timing mat on the run course.... and my friend is likely getting DQ'd as well for the same thing.

Maybe this mat was a super common thing? Just speculating.


But I'm with you, I was shocked at how slow the run times were for M30-34. A 3:28 got a KQ and it doesn't appear anyone at the front of the bike was DQ'd on the run.

a few pros were also DQed for this. Im assuming there was some type of confusion where a turnaround was.

USAT Level II- Ironman U Certified Coach
Quote Reply
Re: Was IM Boulder more difficult this year? [JackStraw13] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I found it to be about the easiest conditions ever for an Ironman I've done. Bike was 58-60's entirely. Perfect, breeze...swim was a little slow but that could just be me not trying as hard. I was 1:01 & 1:01 the first two times I did it, 1:02 yesterday. Garmin said the bike was 113 miles--previous courses have been short about 2-3 miles. Talked to another who had 114 miles on their mileage (EDIT: after reading above it was Colin Laughery I talked to in the massage tent after who had 114 miles). So the bike was long. Maybe the swim was too, I didn't measure that with a Garmin. The run was the same. Overall, for me anyhow, it was the easiest Ironman conditions I've been in but that is just me. Some were seriously hurting. Unfortunately, pulled out 13.1 miles into the run (friends said I was 1st in the AG by a lot & 4th amateur OA when I pulled out)...due to a hip stress "reaction" (like a fracture but no line showing up on MRI) & hamstring tear (found out MRI results the day before the race so said f-it (not the smartest move I've made but...) I'll go as long as I can until the pain tells me I should stop so not to end up with permanent damage). Now as for conditions I'd say if it ended up being 90 F like they predicted, it would have been a BEAR and lots of fallout. The wind was actually odd...it was at your back going UP Nelson Rd which is really unusual. Congrats to all those who finished!

I think the timing results had issues because wifey finished comfortably in the cut off time but they show her as a DNF.
Last edited by: Rocky M: Jun 12, 17 14:24
Quote Reply