I agree with you on the fact that the absence of age group's markings removed some of the competition and I like your idea of a competitive wave AG start. On another note I must also have passed about 2000 (maybe a little less) on sunday and was never under the impression that the course was too crowded as most behaved while on course (apart from certain exceptions).

All in all a great venue but they should have started the waves an hour early when they learned it was supposed to be THAT hot!

From the older end of the age groups (65-69) I also was concerned about being in the 3rd AG swim wave, and the inevitability that later swim waves would not only be passing on the swim, but for the remainder of the day. Although it was nice to start early, it would have been better for all concerned if age groups started in a sequence which allowed faster age groups to start earlier, and spread out the field. The only logic I could see in my early age group start, would be that we would take longer to complete the course, and it allowed our completion earlier in the day. As much as it is not good for faster cyclists to continually need to pass so many early waves, it is also not pleasant to be regularly passed, particularly on the steep downhills on Duplessis with all of this year's congestion.

The race director explained that the 8am start was preferred by international competitors at a previous world championship event, and was just continued, but he also seemed to understand the preference for an earlier start time. Perhaps next year this will be implemented. He also mentioned that he had upgraded the aid station support to the highest level in recognition of the hot weather.

Otherwise this year's race was very well organized and the volunteers exceptional.

Ted

I noticed this at this years event, excellent aid stations, cold water and ice at almost every one, along with a bunch of other choices. I melted in the heat, bad day for me, but no fault of the organizers/volunteers, stellar event as usual in Tremblant.

100% agree on the volunteers!! And very well organized, again!

Coming from the other end (24-29) though I am a fan of the reverse sequence start. I don't mind passing people. I'd rather that than not see anyone all day.

I melted in the heat as well but that's my own fault. Not the event.

Last year I started in the 2nd wave and literally swam solo passing most of the guys in the wave before and then pretty well passed everyone from the 1st wave that I was going to pass within 2K of the bike. From then onwards, I passed 1 guy and got passed by 2 all day. This was at Tremblant 70.3. It was totally awesome. At Muskoka 70.3 I was last wave in the water and passed >1600 people and finished in the top 50. Muskoka has enough speed diffferentials that the passing was fast and relatively safe and it also has 1600 people vs 2600 people so big difference.

My thought is that these 70.3's have to move away from age group waves. They used to make sense, but they are a gong show now in 2600 person races. With people swimming over each other and major speed differentials on the bike

Instead, go to rolling start (I know some of you will hate it, but way safer for everyone) where the corral you get into is ability based with a submitted time. Have corrals for sub 30, 30-32, 32-34, 34-36 min and so on all the way to a 42+ "mass start". Start the rolling start for each group 6 min after the rolling start for the last group. To get in a corral, you'll have to show a time for that corral from a race in the last 2 years.

So it would look like this

Pro men 8 am
Pro women 8:05 am
sub 30 8:10
30-32 8:15
32-34 8:20
34-36 8:25
36-38 8:30
38-40 8:35
40-42: 8:40
42+/mass start 8:45
Relays 8:50

While I understand it is not head to head in an age group, it "kind of is" because you get the privilege of starting earlier based on submitting a time. No time, start at the mass start group. At the end of the day, your position ends up being your chip time. For those saying it takes away "pure head to head" we already lost that with multiple waves per age group. We have rolling start in IM, why not in half IM with some separation to reduce rider density on the bike course?

Count me in for this system.

---

"the trick is to keep losing weight until your friends and family ask you if you've been sick. then you know you're within 10 pounds. if they start whispering to each other, wondering if you've got cancer or aids, you're within 5. when they actually do an intervention, you're at race weight." - Slowman

You probably need increasing separation between the groups since there will be a fatter part of the bell curve as the times get slower....maybe something like this:

Pro women 8:05 am
sub 30 8:10
30-32 8:12
32-34 8:15
34-36 8:20
36-38 8:27
38-40 8:35
40-42: 8:43
42+/mass start 8:50
Relays 8:55

The problem is mostly on the bike course, not the swim waves, so you need to base the swim starts on a swim+bike estimated combined time. It's already being done on smaller courses with bike loops (sprints and Olys).

There are quite a few strong riders who are moderate swimmers, and vice versa. Basing the bike congestion on swim speed doesn't make any sense.

Do you think the IM 70.3 CDA rolling swim start was an indication that Ironman is moving toward eliminating wave starts for 70.3 races?

---

Pink? Maybe. Maybe not. You decide.