I was in Wave 4. Swam 57.50 last yr, 1.01 this year.

It kinda sucked. I was fighting people for most of the swim, as early as 400 meters in. The plus side is I didn't have to tread water for 20-30 minutes to get a good position.

The bike was significantly more spread out compared to last year. It got a little crowded on lap 2 when we merged with the Barlow traffic but it wasn't thick as last year.

I'd personally like to see the mass start come back but I know I am in the minority.

I was in wave 2, I swam through people from about 7 minutes in until about 35 minutes in; I imagine it would have been worse in later waves.


I would prefer a mass start or a rolling start.

thanks for the feedback guys. Kind of what I figured. You are both off the front of your wave pretty fast (assuming all the fighting is waves in front of you). Is the "starting line" the same as previous years (in terms of width) and did each wave look pretty spread out or is the start a scrum anyway?

thanks

Exactly the same layout. No fighting at the start line at all. Last year I had to fend off a lot of middle aged women that kicked their way to the front of the start.

I was Wave 5 (M 45-54 and F 45-54). I am a 1:02 - 1:03 swimmer at this event. I was 6-7 minutes slower this year. Others in my wave averaged 5 minutes slower. It sucked. About 700 meters into the swim, there was a very wide flotilla of slow swimmers. No options but to swim through groups that big and wide. Not good for anyone. It only improved slightly thereafter. Maybe some of the slower swimmers began to move off the buoy line. A test in patience.

I miss the mass swim start and appreciate that many involved with IMWI had fought to maintain it.

I understand the safety concern of a single mass start, but going to 6 waves that are 5 minutes apart in an IM with 2,400 swimmers doesn't seem like the best alternative. Maybe 2 waves separated by 15 minutes (men first, women second) - to permit more time to string things out a bit?

Wave 4. I figured I lost about 3-4 minutes for the first 2k going through traffic. I would prefer mass start or seeded/rolling start which I have done in the past.

I raced in IMWI 2014 and 2016 and volunteered in a kayak for this year's IMWI 2017. Here are my takeaways of the new staggered swim start:

Pluses:
1) I was stationed in my kayak directly across from Monona Terrace, so I couldn't see in detail the start. But it seemed like the staggered start eliminated the problem I saw in earlier mass starts, when people were still in line on shore getting into the water when the cannon went off.

Minuses:
1) The staggered swim start messed things up in terms of the race cut-off points, making things more difficult for slower participants. It led to some people thinking they finished within the overall 17hr time limit when they did not. The race organizers need to figure this out for next year. Example, a participant I knew crossed the finish line at 11:51pm, got the medal, heard the "you are an Ironman" thing and all. Thinks she is a finisher. But because her swim started at 6:45am, her overall time was 17:06. So I think she will not be considered an official finisher. I think some people will not be happy when they find this out. (And I noticed Ironman still does not have the results for the race on their site - wonder if they are trying to figure out the dq/dnf's?)

2) Staggered swim start caused cutoff issues down stream. I was at the bike finish point and staff were not sure of the correct cut-offs. They were going to have a staggered 5:30pm and 5:35pm cut-off, until I informed them there were more than two waves, and if they were going to cut people off based on start time, they better re-think things, quick! They ended up letting some people through after the 5:35pm cut-off. Not sure when they finally stopped people. But it was confusing.

3) Staggered start doesn't allow max time to get warmed up and acclimated to water and position. Personally even as an average swimmer who doesn't take tris as seriously as some persons, I prefer the prior mass start. Because I was able to get into the water maybe 20 minutes before the start, leisurely warm up swimming out to the furthest buoy past the ski ramp, and hang out floating in the field position I wanted, just back past the faster swimmers. (Figure I cut off a few pool lengths of the race compared to the swimmers starting near shore.) Then I employed my strategy of drafting off persons who were going the speed I wanted, while also using them as blockers. I finished the 2016 swim in 1:27 with only 2 weeks of pool training and a borrowed wet suit. And I was fine with that felt great.

Summary: My vote is for the mass start, because it is an awesome sight to see, and because I think it is actually easier for non elite persons like me. And seems easier for folks concerned about cutoffs. And the racer knows if she/he gets past that finish line at 11:59:59pm, then "you are an Ironman" really means you are an Ironman!

I was in wave 5. By the time I got in the water, I did not have time to get to the front. Started wide and few rows back. Traffic all the way through. I assume I was about 5 min slow. At the end it did not matter. I do understand why they do this but I prefer a mass start.

---

Looking like a color blind super hero!
Damn triathlon.

Thank you for your insight as a volunteer in the water. Do you think the wave start decreased saftey issues as intened?

In terms of your 1 plus, I respectfully disagree. If Ironman gives athletes 20-30 minutes to get in the water, where there is frankly plenty of space, & you don't have time to get in the water, then that athlete has time management issues. I get there just after 5, have time to return my pump to my car, check transition bags, take a dump, talk to a few people, & am ready to go by 6:30.

Raced WI previously in 2009 and 2011. Swam 1:03 - 1:04 those years.

Was in Wave 4 this year. Managed to get myself near front of the corral so that I was quickly into the water, and had a couple min of swimming to acclimate and get in position ( between the ski jump and the buoy line ).

Swam a 1:07 this year, and had contact with people nearly the entire swim. Especially on the long back stretch, as people in earlier waves who can't sight or swim straight ran into me on each side. Kicked in the face once when I swam up on someone doing the breast stroke.

In past years on the swim, after the first couple hundred yards the swim had sorted out pretty well. This year, just never quite got into a smooth rhythm.

The issues from the swim aside, the early portion of the bike was a lot less crowded, so that part was a positive at least.

Overall, much more of a fan of the in-water mass start at this race, due to the logistics of trying to herd swim waves into the water every 5 minutes. The narrow little boat ramp that drops off to rocks pretty quick makes it hard to move quickly, so people at the back of each group get shafted on getting any sort of warmup or positioning. I also so quite a few people who missed their swim wave and were starting late due to the crowded area they had setup for the corrals.

---

--
I ride Felt.

I was in wave 3 and only had a small section on the "back" section where I eventually caught up with some of the slower wave 2 swimmers, but overall I thought it was a lot less congested that the mass start Don't think that applied to the later waves though. I did find on the 2nd loop of the bike course there was hardly anyone out there. I felt like I was out on a solo training ride with a lot of it. I did find this course at least 20 minutes slower than the original course.

I did IMWI this year and last year. I was in Wave 2 this year (first AG wave) and I found no difference in the swim start in terms of contact and congestion. I lined up in an aggressive position both years. This year, wave 2 probably had about 700 people in it so the start of the swim at the front was about as congested as it was the year before when it was a mass start. I donno how things went for people in the subsequent waves. I would not have wanted to swim through the back of the pack swimmers from earlier waves.

Lap 2 of the bike was rough. I caught up with the back of the pack cyclists who were on their first lap and it was hoards of bikes as far as you could see. I am not sure if that would have been better with a mass start or worse. I imagine many of the people on the bike were people who started 20 minutes after me so that results in more overlap on the bike, but the waves also spread the bike out a bit. In any event, I think we need to do a better job keeping to the right on the bike. Far to many people hugging the center line in situations when they should be riding the right. It makes for a dangerous bike ride.

Isn't that just a time management issue for the individual athlete?

---

Pink? Maybe. Maybe not. You decide.

I was a spectator this year, and I fail to see how the wave starts made things substantially safer. 500-700 people in a wave is still a lot of churning for a handful of kayaks/paddle boards to watch over. If you had serious trouble, you'd probably be effed anyway. It seems like the waves spread out the area requiring observation, so you need more overall volunteers in the water or you need to spread them thinner. The latter starts to cut into the safety advantage. Everyone needs to be watched, but more focus needs to be on the struggling swimmers. Wouldn't it make sense to have those people together in a tighter group, where they can be followed around and watched by more boats, while simultaneously reducing collisions farther out along the course?

3 waves separated by 5 minutes: 1:09 and under, 1:10 to 1:20 (or 1:24), 1:25 and over. Concentrate on slowest wave for problems/safety.

Even if the #'s of thes waves aren't even it gets the slowest swimmers behind with a chance to self seed. 6:50, 6:55, 7:00. Make all cutoffs begin at 7:00

I also feel that many of those are slower swimmers who start late just because their swim is very suspect and they want to chance the least contact, knowing no one will be behind them.

I've photographed the race for many years and have done it. This year I watched from above on the rooftop and it seemed this only spread out the kayaks, etc so it could have been less safe. The one facet of a mass start is that ALL of the kayaks and boats can concentrate on the moving mass, instead of having to pass on to the next group, and then repeat. Watching from above, I saw a LOT of people who were poor swimmers and no rescue people close enough to get there fast. That said, I feel it's pretty impossible to drown in a wetsuit. My feeling would be mass start, and let it sort out as slower swimmers drop back and the field separates. The swim is the most dangerous part and it seems the only people who truly benefitted from this were the wave 2 fast swimmers right behind the pros who had smooth sailing. Everyone else had to deal with slower swimmers on the buoy line. Being on the moto on the entire loop for the bike, I really don't feel it changed any of the dynamic as far as drafting and congestion either. Go back to mass, and then all know what time is theirs and midnight is the end....

I can give you the BOP swimmer perspective, and FWIW, it's no fun for us either to have hundreds of faster swimmers from the next wave(s) overtaking us. It's quite stressful in fact.

I did IMWI in 2013 and 2014, and thought the mass start was great. I was in amongst my fellow slowpokes within minutes, and throughout the swim. It stands to reason that everyone else was surrounded by similarly-paced athletes too -- it's not like after being out there for 30 minutes you're suddenly going to encounter someone swimming significantly faster or slower than you are.

Also FWIW, I was told that in addition to improving water safety and bike course crowding/drafting, the wave start was expected to ease congestion in T1 as well. I wasn't fast enough out of the water to experience it myself, but I guess it was pretty nuts between 8:00 and 8:30. Not sure if the wave start had a positive impact here or not.