Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Kona x Norseman
Quote | Reply
I know comparing Kona and Norseman is like apple to oranges, but it would be nice to hear from people who raced both.
Conditions are extreme on both, but on the opposites sides. I always thought of Kona as more of a "race" (some people go fast, a lot of people blow up, etc) and Norseman more of an "experience" and a bigger challenge.
Thoughts?
Quote Reply
Re: Kona x Norseman [vittorio] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Lots of Kona folks (especially 1st timers) treat it like a Xmas vacation or a victory lap. An experience race they've earned via placement in AG or lots of entries (legacy). Still, a good number of attendees do over-race and melt in the heat. All of them have some level of a competitive nature.

Many Norseman folks know they'll never win or crack the top-10, but still want to race well (at or above the threshold 160 black t-shirt or weather limit). A good number are also at some level of a competitive nature, over-race and blow up on the hill climbs or freeze on the descents.

I wouldn't be surprised that if you took a survey of the 2,500 Kona racers and the 250 Norseman racers that the same "percentages" align between those attempting to podium (or AG podium at Kona -- there are no AG podiums at Norseman). Or at least similar percentages between podium, hope to do really well, and just finish crowds.

Absolute pointy-end racers, think those that have a realistic shot at winning Kona, won't race Norseman at their peak as there are no $ payouts so why bother? Save it for a victory lap race (Bjorn, Tim DeBoom, Jordan, etc.).

So, Norseman is a "race" between the podium candidates for maybe the top 5% of the field. Wouldn't you say the same is true, or maybe even slightly smaller % for Kona (really, just a % of pros only)?
Quote Reply
Re: Kona x Norseman [vittorio] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Ask lpstormo on this board. He’s won both!

Scott
Quote Reply
Re: Kona x Norseman [GreatScott] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
GreatScott wrote:
Ask lpstormo on this board. He’s won both!

Scott

Yes, I have done both (6 times NXTRI and 2 times Kona), but did not win Kona (came 2nd in AG overall this year).
My perspective is from one who race to win, so it may not be the same as for one who participates just to finish or to get the black shirt.

Both are extreme in their own way.

Swim:
If you look away from the cold waters, the swimming in the Norseman is quite easy (plenty of space, relatively quiet water and easy sighting). But of course the cold water makes it harder.
In Kona the swim is much more fighting and more crowded. Since it also is non-wetsuit it is harder for many people to swim fast here I think.
Conclusion: for me the swim in Kona is harder and more difficult. But at the same time so nice :-)

Bike:
The bike course in Norseman is super hard and the cold temperatures, wind and rain makes it even harder. The good thing is that you have your own support with food, clothes etc.that helpes. All the hills/mountains (especially the second half) is hard but also makes it easier mentally and the time goes by faster. The last 30 km is very easy and fast wich makes it easier to start the run.
In Kona the bike is more of a "waiting-game" and you have to be patient on the way to Hawi. In my mind this should feel pretty easy. The way back can be very hard, and especially the last 40 km drains the legs for power and is hard to keep the pace. This also makes the transition to the run harder since the legs are more tired after the last part of the bike.
Conclusion: The bike on Norseman is harder but it feels like the time goes faster and it's easier mentally as it's easy to split in to smaller segments (one climb at a time). If you overbike the first part of the bike in Kona you have a very hard time on your way home, but if you get it right on the way to Hawi yoy should be ok. That being said I think it's easier to put together a good bike segment on Norseman because it's all up to you and how you pace yourself. In Kona it is so easy to get carried away by the situations, alle the othe athletes etc. So to sum it up I would say the bike on Norseman is harder but Kona is more diffucult to pace right.

Run:
This one is pretty easy I would say: Norseman is easier than Kona. In Norseman the temperature often is very good for running and the legs are pretty good after an easy end to the bike. The run is also just 25 km flat before it all changes up zombie hill the last 17 km. Most people also walk up here. The change after 25 km makes it easier mentally and allows you to use different muscles groupes. The last 17 km is super hard mantally to keep pushing, but at the same time the steep hill limits how much harder you can go.
In Kona the temperature is a huge factor and at the same time the legs are more tired after a harder last part of the bike. Ali'i drive is hard, but the race does not really start before Queen K and from there it is super hard. Rolling wide roads, wind and the heat makes it a grueling place to run! The hardest part of a marathon is the last 20 km and this is where Kona is so brutal. How fast you can run here is all about how smart you have ran the first half, how good you have done the eating and drinking all day, and especially how good you can tolerate the pain. I think the last hour of my race in Kona this year is the most painfull thing I have ever done because I pushed through the pain to go faster then my head wanted me to. In Kona you can always run a little faster the you think you can, as for in Norseman I think the steep hill in the end limits how fast you can go.

All in all: both are super hard races and pretty extreme. For me (and I think most people) Kona is much more difficult to manage. The last part is always the hardest part of an Ironman and here Kona is sooo hard while Norseman is more of a "hike". (don't get me wrong: Norseman is very hard, but for me it's harder and more painfull to run fast on a flat marathon then the last hill in Norseman).

Instagram and Strava: @lpstormo
Quote Reply
Re: Kona x Norseman [Stormo] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks a lot for the inputs, Stormo!
Very, very insightful.
Quote Reply
Re: Kona x Norseman [Stormo] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Stormo wrote:
GreatScott wrote:
Ask lpstormo on this board. He’s won both!

Scott
All in all: both are super hard races and pretty extreme. For me (and I think most people) Kona is much more difficult to manage. The last part is always the hardest part of an Ironman and here Kona is sooo hard while Norseman is more of a "hike". (don't get me wrong: Norseman is very hard, but for me it's harder and more painfull to run fast on a flat marathon then the last hill in Norseman).


It was amazing and crushing at the same time how fast, especially the Norwegians, walked up the last 5k. We (my support and I) were walking too, but everybody was so much faster. It was crazy. I come from a place where the highest hill is 109m high, so that´s that. We went up Gaustatoppen two days later again and all the families with their little kids made us look like we were walking backwards.


Norseman is great fun. Weather is mostly shit, but that is ok, if you don´t go into the race thinking that weather will be nice. For me, it was an adventure, I knew pretty early on that I will reach the checkpoint for the black shirt, so I was able to enjoy the landscape and all that. It was still hard, but I didn´t have to push super hard. I will go back one day, to race against the clock.
Quote Reply
Re: Kona x Norseman [Stormo] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks for the awesome review and comparison. Some of the subtle things you brought up were very informative.
Quote Reply