Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
[actively crowdsourcing] - 70.3s sorted by bike elevation gain
Quote | Reply
Hey!

Does anyone have a list of all the 70.3's sorted by elevation gain on the bike?

Right now I'm just clicking through the races one by one and looking at the bike course elevation profile. Hoping someone already has a list. If not, and I end up actually going through all the races, I'll post it here.

Thanks.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*CROWD SOURCING TIME*

I've made a google spreadsheet that lists all the races that I've found or had people submit in this forum. I've also made a google form that anyone can use to add to the spreadsheet. Everyone should have access to read the spreadsheet, and add comments, but to not directly edit the data. Everyone should also have access to submit a form, which will add another entry. If the race you want to enter information about is already on the list, but your number is different, that's fine. Just submit it anyway, and I'll move that number into the 'other submitted numbers' column, and I'll consider changing the main number for that race.

Feel free to add any race at or around the 70.3 distance. Maybe in the future I'll make more tabs for the other distances (or someone else could!). I also added a non-mandatory column for when the race is typically held. That way, if someone is using this to find a good race based on their bike elevation gain preference (alas, *the purpose*), they can quickly see what month the race is typically held in.

Anyway, I have absolutely no idea how this is going to end up working, so just have at it! I did a little bit of testing with another google account, but if it's not working as intended, I'll try to fix it. Hopefully this will be helpful and/or fun to someone besides me.

**FORM LINK**

click here to access to form and add an entry

**SPREADSHEET LINK**

click here to access to the spreadsheet and view all the races
Last edited by: duffy-san: Apr 11, 15 21:57
Quote Reply
Re: request - 70.3s sorted by bike elevation gain [duffy-san] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Not a very useful reply but for a large gain check out IM 70.3 UK Wimbleball.

Regarded as one of the tougher if I remember rightly.


Blog: http://www.coopstriblog.wordpress.com
Latest blog: Setting Goals. With or Without Gin.
Date: 10/31/2017
Quote Reply
Re: request - 70.3s sorted by bike elevation gain [jac2689] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
[post removed; it was the list I made before the google docs. please now follow the links on the first post instead]
Last edited by: duffy-san: Apr 11, 15 22:02
Quote Reply
Re: request - 70.3s sorted by bike elevation gain [duffy-san] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
duffy-san : Calgary 70.3?
Quote Reply
Re: request - 70.3s sorted by bike elevation gain [arca_tern] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
calgary's elevation gain isn't listed in the normal place, so I moved on. There's actually a number of NA races not on here, including almost all of the challenge/rev3 races.
Quote Reply
Re: request - 70.3s sorted by bike elevation gain [duffy-san] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Lake Stevens is closer to 3500'-3700'.
Quote Reply
Re: request - 70.3s sorted by bike elevation gain [PeteDin206] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
http://www.ironman.com/~/media/40e8df8f1d7a4afeb9e75d0f53605667/lakestevens70%203%20bikeelevation%2020121.pdf
(edit: apparently you have to actually click on the hyperlink button to make what is clearly a url into a clickable link)

the only places I pulled numbers from were the bike profile pages like that, on the ironman or challenge website. i have no idea how right the numbers are, but they're the ones being published.
Last edited by: duffy-san: Apr 7, 15 21:56
Quote Reply
Re: request - 70.3s sorted by bike elevation gain [duffy-san] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
duffy-san wrote:
http://www.ironman.com/~/media/40e8df8f1d7a4afeb9e75d0f53605667/lakestevens70%203%20bikeelevation%2020121.pdf
(edit: apparently you have to actually click on the hyperlink button to make what is clearly a url into a clickable link)

the only places I pulled numbers from were the bike profile pages like that, on the ironman or challenge website. i have no idea how right the numbers are, but they're the ones being published.

That is the point... Unless someone has access to multiple Garmin files from each race, there would be no way to measure this correctly. Having ridden Lake Stevens 3 times and ridden it 4-5 times, I can tell you it is significantly more than the listed value. I'm sure it would be acquired with a little work but it would take multiple people posting Garmin files for each race to get a good data set.
Quote Reply
Re: request - 70.3s sorted by bike elevation gain [duffy-san] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The elevation for Muskoka is over 3000 ft. Maybe you have it listed in meters.
Quote Reply
Re: request - 70.3s sorted by bike elevation gain [Scott_B] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Scott_B wrote:
The elevation for Muskoka is over 3000 ft. Maybe you have it listed in meters.

Exactly. Muskoka 70.3 should be near the bottom of the list.

CodyBeals.com | Instagram | TikTok
ASICS | Ventum | Martin's | HED | VARLO | Shimano | 4iiii | Keystone Communications
Quote Reply
Re: request - 70.3s sorted by bike elevation gain [Scott_B] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
yea good call. i mustve actually grabbed the augusta elevation gain for both races somehow; that wasn't even the right number of meters.
Quote Reply
Re: request - 70.3s sorted by bike elevation gain [duffy-san] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The Ironman site gives an elevation gain of 1265 m (= 4217 feet) for Muskoka 70.3. That seems about right.
Quote Reply
Re: request - 70.3s sorted by bike elevation gain [duffy-san] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In a real quick search, my garmin files have the following:

Timberman: 2500ft
Buffalo Springs: 1600ft
Oilman: 2000ft

Can't find the others.



-Andrew
Quote Reply
Re: request - 70.3s sorted by bike elevation gain [duffy-san] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Try searching ridewithgps.com or strava maybe.

Chances are people have done the course and you might be able to pull them off there. Probably more accurate than the ironman website.

Of the 70.3's I've done, I pulled this off garmin connect (in feet):
Challenge New Brunswick: 2499
Surf City Santa Cruz: 1959
Eagleman: 89
Mt Tremblant Worlds: 2644
Timberman: 2936
Pilgrimman: 1657
Pumpkinman: 1778
Montauk: 1978

___________________
Twitter | Kancman | Blog
Quote Reply
Re: request - 70.3s sorted by bike elevation gain [duffy-san] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I raced Lake Stevens last year, 910xt reported 3,323ft and Fenix2 reported 3,228ft. 910xt was used as a bike comp.
Quote Reply
Re: request - 70.3s sorted by bike elevation gain [arca_tern] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Calgary is point to point. According to my Garmin, the new course (new as of 2014) is:
630 m
Elev Gain

567 m
Elev Loss

It's a tad short, though, at 87.35km.

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp
Quote Reply
Re: request - 70.3s sorted by bike elevation gain [duffy-san] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
For what it's worth, my Garmin files show:

Barrelman (Welland/Niagara, ON) - 66m, 216ft

If that race doesn't count as a big name race, it should.

Cheers!

Munq
Quote Reply
Re: request - 70.3s sorted by bike elevation gain [AMT04] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I had last years buffalo at ~1,744 on Edge 500 without ele correction and ~1,472 with ele correction.

2016:
IMFL #12
http://www.bestbikesplit.com
Quote Reply
Re: request - 70.3s sorted by bike elevation gain [DFWTri] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Mine was from 2011, and I think the bike course has been adjusted some. I can't imagine it had a significant impact, but 1500-1700 seems about right.



-Andrew
Quote Reply
Re: request - 70.3s sorted by bike elevation gain [AMT04] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Last year it went back to an older course from what i recall, seemed to have one more big hill added. Surprised it not higher than Oceanside overall.

2016:
IMFL #12
http://www.bestbikesplit.com
Quote Reply
Re: request - 70.3s sorted by bike elevation gain [duffy-san] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
duffy-san wrote:
I started to make a list, and then got bored and stopped. I'll just post what I have incase anyone else is interested. It's most of the North American races whose bike elevation gain was easily found in under 5 clicks. Anything more, and I moved on. I got what I needed out of it.



(edit: Muskoka)

cool chart. Surprising how much climbing that many events have. Makes the times that guys do all the more impressive (and humbling).

FYI I have Wildflower @ ~3,500ft and Auburn Worlds Toughest @ ~5,460 (both are awesome events!)

I saw this on a white board in a window box at my daughters middle school...
List of what life owes you:
1. __________
2. __________
3. __________
Quote Reply
Re: request - 70.3s sorted by bike elevation gain [duffy-san] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
San Juan 70.3 - 833ft

2016:
IMFL #12
http://www.bestbikesplit.com
Quote Reply
Re: request - 70.3s sorted by bike elevation gain [DFWTri] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
My Strava says that Raleigh was 2,543ft.

What I do: http://app.strava.com/athletes/345699
Quote Reply
Re: request - 70.3s sorted by bike elevation gain [duffy-san] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Kind of embarrassing that Boulder 70.3 has less gain than the Boulder Peak Olympic. It would nice to showcase more climb in the gateway to the Rockies.
Quote Reply
Re: request - 70.3s sorted by bike elevation gain [TomTriesTri] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TomTriesTri wrote:
Kind of embarrassing that Boulder 70.3 has less gain than the Boulder Peak Olympic. It would nice to showcase more climb in the gateway to the Rockies.

I had to do a quadruple take when I saw the elevation gain for boulder. I had that on my short-ish list of races for the next few years and was very disappointed in how little climbing there claims to be. The elevation is above 5000' though, so it's still probably not an *easy* bike course :)
Quote Reply

Prev Next