I remember the first time I saw an Ironman marathon split.

I thought: "
2:40!
World champion?
There must be at least seven 40-year old guys who can run that fast just here in town!"

(We see guys running 29:30 off the bike in Olympic distance races. Not many 40-year old guys who can do that!)

After experience and some thought, I realized that it is probably incorrect to look at an Ironman run as a thing on its' own. It might be that an Ironman run is comparable (in speed) to the last half of a 50 mile run. But the optimum pacing might not be the same.

My question is this:
Which is a better run?
2:40 after a 4:51 bike or (ie Symonds)
2:51 after a 4:31 bike? (Ie. Vanhoenacker)

There must be at least 20 pros who could run a 2:40 Ironman marathon, if they paced the bike conservatively enough.

This is, of course, not saying that Symonds' run was not truly awesome.

I am glad Marino is racing well again though.
Could we see a Starky, Van Lierde, Kienle, Mackenzie, Vanhoenacker super bike at kona?

Maybe some super runners like Rana, frodeno, bozzone, docherty, Symonds, aernots, Tim Don could chase down some of the leaders?

Ironman is boring to watch?
Kona could be the best Ironman ever this year.

QFT. That's why I consider Chrissies run the gold standard. Her 8:18 total time with a 2:44 run that day, regardless of the debate about course accuracy, is insane for a women's performance.

Which is a better run?
2:40 after a 4:51 bike or (ie Symonds)
2:51 after a 4:31 bike? (Ie. Vanhoenacker) //

This is an easy one, of course Marino's run is better. One guy ran all out start to finish, the other ran within himself, shut it down at some point, and probably high fived all they way through the finish shute. We know how fast Symonds ran , we do not know how fast Marino could have run. This is always the case when the winner has a nice margin of victory. For all we know, Marino maybe had a 2;45 in him, at the very least i would wager he had 3 to 4 minutes at the very least..

That is incorrect.

I'm with you. He was on the climb out of Pemberton when I was heading down. When I finally saw the 2nd and 3rd place guys, I was wondering if I imagined seeing the race leader that far ahead.

I had the run course at 25.73 mi and the bike at 110.01 mi, so I'm relatively sure that both are short (I usually end up with 26.4 on a certified marathon course.) What did others get?

From the other thread, last year I started a thread wondering if the old course was short as we had a few athletes who were a couple minutes faster. Long story short I think most people said that with all the turns and GPS issues the course last year was "close" this year I have only one data point which makes it a bit longer than last year by .6km.

In terms of Trev Wurtele being 8 min faster (bike), than last year. I have no idea….my only opinion is that he is a better biker or he rode harder on the day, personally I can't say it was easier

from an AG perspective last year was easy with lots of fast people (cool weather) and 500 more athletes. I was about 48'th going into Pemberton and was passed by 70 in the "packs" the whole time going 38KPH or so.

This year I was all alone, in Pemberton only being passed by 1 guy every 5-10 of minutes. Honestly there was minimal drafting, I did not see anyone working together at my speed (around 5:35 bike)

This year was either very hard or very low competition, or a bit of both…..for me after 20 IM it was the hardest for sure since '98 at IMC (Bustos only guy under 9 hours)

But Jeff's run I agree 100% epic performance, see the photo from "photo guy" that was the pain face I was talking about ;-0 just right by where he passed me (of course 1 loop ahead)

…..the best thing…no watch, all heart (lungs, legs etc)

Maurice

Thankyou!

"This year was either very hard or very low competition, or a bit of both…..for me after 20 IM it was the hardest for sure since '98 at IMC (Bustos only guy under 9 hours)"

Aah, good times! That day sucked more than a sucky truckload of suck. Nobody popped a 2:40 that day. Except in the med tent.

-bobo

---

"What's good for me ain't necessarily good for the weak-minded."

I would agree with this, but let's not take away from what jeff did on sunday................ no matter how you slice it after a bike like whistler to follow it up with a 2:40 marathon and make it look easy is impressive to say the least. Is it earth shattering no, but damn he looked so much faster than all the other guys it was truly a sight to see..............Awesome guy, awesome race..............

Rhys, I know the course length is legit, and it is a tougher run course than Kona and certainly tougher than Roth. I was on loop 1 when Jeff passed me on loop 2. I said, "Jeff, that looks like sub 2:45 pace', to which he replied, 'Don't know, i feel good".

After the race, when i spoke to him, I said that might be one of the most dominating runs since the Mark Allen Dave Scott 2:40.xx in 1989 which included T2. One day we'll see Jeff in Kona and only then people will believe how fast this guy runs. He ran 2:47 on a crashed hip last year at Penticton with nothing to prove. He ran up to 3rd at 2011 70.3 WC's, so he is no run slouch. When he is on, he's one of the best around. He's going to need to do something like this in Kona, Frankfurt or Melbourne to get true credit and for people to believe. Those of us who have seen it multiple times, know it is the real deal.

I crossed the line with my Garmin showing 26.16 miles.

---

Hans Bielat
TorHans LLC Co-Founder, Owner, Chief Innovation Officer
http://www.torhans.com

the funny part about his run is...

first half marathon ~ 1:20:35

Second half marathon ~ 1:19:59

and the second half was run with no pressure....game was over, he was in second with a big lead and no hope of catching first..... i told him to shut it down... but he never listen to my advice so ;)

---

Jonathan Caron / Professional Coach / ironman champions / age group world champions
Jonnyo Coaching
Instargram

awesome.... pretty close to call it legit ;)

---

Jonathan Caron / Professional Coach / ironman champions / age group world champions
Jonnyo Coaching
Instargram

That is mind blowing to throw down that kind of run and negative split the whole thing even though MV was out of reach. Kuddos to Jeff!

I can use an IM run as a qualifier and seeder for Comrades so I'd say small-l legit. Not BQ+Big L Legit. But still counts in some parts of the world.

AP

---

------------------------
"How bad could it be?" - SimpleS

LOL...maybe 1:19:59 was shutting it down and he had a 1;18 in there :-).

Didn't know Port Philip Bay was sloping :-). I may be able to do water skiing without a boat then.

Maurice, first of all, congrats on number 20 and for briefly keeping me company. I said the same to my wife. That was the hardest IM I did outside of Nice 2010. I actually sat on a low power number too than any previous IM. i have a very decent aero tuck (sit on the top tube) and get a lot out of my zero watts coasting and Whistler provides many breaks, so it was not hard caused i overbiked. I think it was the run. One of the guys who i met from Germany had Garmin reporting that the total run elevation was 600m. i tend to believe it. it felt like that. You were always on an up or down. I think this hurts the lower Vdot age grouper more than the pro athlete.

I have roughly 1133m for Roth and 1137m for Whistler?

There seems to be a misconception that Roth is flat.

1100m is flat.

The old IMCis about 4300 feet or 1300m.

The new one in Whistler is about 1800m-2000m depending on which file you look at.

Maurice

not having done Roth or checked the elevation, isn't the Roth course fast because of short steep climbs followed by gradual descents?

that's not the case in Whistler.

---

_____________________________________
What are you people, on dope?

—Mr. Hand

Wait, you forgot to mention Norseman in your post!

Oh, my bad.

---

_____________________________________
What are you people, on dope?

—Mr. Hand

Whistler is closer to 2050m, Roth is about half that. I would kill for a course like Roth given the fact that I'm 190lbs. I was blowing by people on the downhills at Whistler (Top speed of 51 and I wasn't even pedaling at that point). On the flip side there were also plenty of periods where I was in the 6-9mph range going up long hills.

I have files from 2 camps last year and 1 this year, plus both races and they range from 1800-2366m so I would say 2050m or about 6600 feet is close, or somewhere right in the middle/average.

Very tough course especially on that day, which makes both Jeff's run and MV's 4:31 bike pretty special. Great RR BTW.

Maurice