Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Would be KQ'er DQ'ed for ... chapstick!! [ffips] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ffips wrote:
Why didn't he put it in his special needs bag and/or fuel belt?

I'm willing to bet that, next time, he will...
Quote Reply
Re: Would be KQ'er DQ'ed for ... chapstick!! [Terra-Man] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Who the hell gets chapped lips in 80% humidity or whatever it was?
Quote Reply
Re: Would be KQ'er DQ'ed for ... chapstick!! [sp1ke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
For the spf?







Take a short break from ST and read my blog:
http://tri-banter.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Would be KQ'er DQ'ed for ... chapstick!! [Terra-Man] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Terra-Man wrote:
Or why not just run with chapped lips??!!

Maybe he planned on applying it to other sensitive parts if the body...
Quote Reply
Re: Would be KQ'er DQ'ed for ... chapstick!! [ChrisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Even the leapfrogging doesn't sound like the whole story. At Chattanooga and many other IM courses it is easy to leapfrog and see someone ~8 times during a two loop run. How much leapfrogging is too much?
Quote Reply
Re: Would be KQ'er DQ'ed for ... chapstick!! [mdm81] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
mdm81 wrote:
Even the leapfrogging doesn't sound like the whole story. At Chattanooga and many other IM courses it is easy to leapfrog and see someone ~8 times during a two loop run. How much leapfrogging is too much?

Yeah, I don't think the "full story" headline is accurate either LOL Leapfrogging is fine, pacing or OA is not.
Quote Reply
Re: Would be KQ'er DQ'ed for ... chapstick!! [stevej] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
stevej wrote:
davejustdave wrote:
TriTamp wrote:
davejustdave wrote:
TH3_FRB wrote:
From the news report - "I don't think it has anything performance enhancing in it, other than making me feel good," said Smith.

I don't know about you guys, but anything that helps me feel good/better during a race is a welcome advantage, as small as it might be. Did it make the difference between KQ and not? Unlikely, but where do you draw the line?


I agree!

It should TOTALLY be illegal for you to be allowed to even see your wife/hubs/child/pet alongside the course, as that might give you an emotional boost and unfair advantage!

And cheering? Don't even get me started on cheering. Cheering is cheating unless the cheerers are fellow racers.

Bike packs are ok though.

enforcement of outside assistance and drafting are not mutually exclusive. This athlete knew what he was doing was against the rules but did it anyway.

So do people who draft, yet soooo many STers don't come down on drafters nearly as hard or even call it "strategic racing" or "a tactics choice". Others even say you have to do it to be competitive....

All the shades of grey on one type of cheating make the black and white on this topic somewhat comical.

Have you seen all the threads on drafting recently? Or all the threads after every single IM brazil and florida about drafting?

You do know there is a such thing as legal drafting? It is completely within the rules and what you are probably referring to.

Nope, and please don't assume you know what I am referring to. I am referring to ILLEGAL drafting, not 10m out (or 12), not slingshotting during a legal pass, none of that. I'm referring to the peletons of 20+ blatantly sitting on wheels that are becoming the norm and that so many people just shrug and say "what can you do?" about, yet chapstick???!?!?!?!?!? "Now THAT. THAT is just TOO much!".

Classic ST moral relativism.

Im guilty of it too, but, FFS, chapstick? Of all the things to take a stand on the rules being rules, chapstick is about the worst Ive ever heard
Quote Reply
Re: Would be KQ'er DQ'ed for ... chapstick!! [Terra-Man] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
i saw his wife pacing him on the run course. the first thing i thought of was.... well, that's not allowed. but i didn't really care.

giving splits is one thing, cycling along and cheering is one thing. but doing them both, with riding along side at times can be seen as pacing...

i mean, don't some coaches sit on the course and give splits from time to time?

john
Quote Reply
Re: Would be KQ'er DQ'ed for ... chapstick!! [mdm81] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
mdm81 wrote:
Even the leapfrogging doesn't sound like the whole story. At Chattanooga and many other IM courses it is easy to leapfrog and see someone ~8 times during a two loop run. How much leapfrogging is too much?

Apparently any.
Quote Reply
Re: Would be KQ'er DQ'ed for ... chapstick!! [Power13] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Power13 wrote:
ChrisM wrote:
And as one would expect.... not the whole story. Whole thing sounds fishy to me....

http://303triathlon.com/...ed-kona-slot-due-dq/


This guy is so full of schitt.....He clearly got what he deserved.
The irony! I can barely stand it!
Quote Reply
Re: Would be KQ'er DQ'ed for ... chapstick!! [ahhchon] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ahhchon wrote:
i saw his wife pacing him on the run course. the first thing i thought of was.... well, that's not allowed. but i didn't really care.

giving splits is one thing, cycling along and cheering is one thing. but doing them both, with riding along side at times can be seen as pacing...

i mean, don't some coaches sit on the course and give splits from time to time?

john

I actually see coaches riding near their athletes quite frequently in Ironmans. It blows my mind that they don't understand this is illegal.
Quote Reply
Re: Would be KQ'er DQ'ed for ... chapstick!! [ahhchon] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ahhchon wrote:
i saw his wife pacing him on the run course. the first thing i thought of was.... well, that's not allowed. but i didn't really care.

giving splits is one thing, cycling along and cheering is one thing. but doing them both, with riding along side at times can be seen as pacing...

i mean, don't some coaches sit on the course and give splits from time to time?

john

yes. I can see why many would see all of that as pacing. so I can understand if an official is seeing these different things and issues penalties/DQs. Seems he (or his wife did by leapfrogging and then pacing him on the run) put them in a difficult position to make a call.

I was in a marathon once and part was on a multi-use path and a guy had his wife riding along side him on her bike and providing him water and food along the way. This wasn't a BQ marathon and he was in my range of 3:45 marathon time so nobody cared and their were no officials on course to care anyway.
Quote Reply
Re: Would be KQ'er DQ'ed for ... chapstick!! [T-wrecks] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
T-wrecks wrote:
Power13 wrote:
ChrisM wrote:
And as one would expect.... not the whole story. Whole thing sounds fishy to me....

http://303triathlon.com/...ed-kona-slot-due-dq/


This guy is so full of schitt.....He clearly got what he deserved.

The irony! I can barely stand it!

What is it that you find ironic?

Chicago Cubs - 2016 WORLD SERIES Champions!!!!

"If ever the time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." - Samuel Adams
Quote Reply
Re: Would be KQ'er DQ'ed for ... chapstick!! [Trispoke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Trispoke wrote:
ahhchon wrote:
i saw his wife pacing him on the run course. the first thing i thought of was.... well, that's not allowed. but i didn't really care.

giving splits is one thing, cycling along and cheering is one thing. but doing them both, with riding along side at times can be seen as pacing...

i mean, don't some coaches sit on the course and give splits from time to time?

john


I actually see coaches riding near their athletes quite frequently in Ironmans. It blows my mind that they don't understand this is illegal.

Or do they understand and not care?
Quote Reply
Re: Would be KQ'er DQ'ed for ... chapstick!! [davejustdave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
davejustdave wrote:
stevej wrote:
davejustdave wrote:
TriTamp wrote:
davejustdave wrote:
TH3_FRB wrote:
From the news report - "I don't think it has anything performance enhancing in it, other than making me feel good," said Smith.

I don't know about you guys, but anything that helps me feel good/better during a race is a welcome advantage, as small as it might be. Did it make the difference between KQ and not? Unlikely, but where do you draw the line?


I agree!

It should TOTALLY be illegal for you to be allowed to even see your wife/hubs/child/pet alongside the course, as that might give you an emotional boost and unfair advantage!

And cheering? Don't even get me started on cheering. Cheering is cheating unless the cheerers are fellow racers.

Bike packs are ok though.

enforcement of outside assistance and drafting are not mutually exclusive. This athlete knew what he was doing was against the rules but did it anyway.

So do people who draft, yet soooo many STers don't come down on drafters nearly as hard or even call it "strategic racing" or "a tactics choice". Others even say you have to do it to be competitive....

All the shades of grey on one type of cheating make the black and white on this topic somewhat comical.

Have you seen all the threads on drafting recently? Or all the threads after every single IM brazil and florida about drafting?

You do know there is a such thing as legal drafting? It is completely within the rules and what you are probably referring to.

Nope, and please don't assume you know what I am referring to. I am referring to ILLEGAL drafting, not 10m out (or 12), not slingshotting during a legal pass, none of that. I'm referring to the peletons of 20+ blatantly sitting on wheels that are becoming the norm and that so many people just shrug and say "what can you do?" about, yet chapstick???!?!?!?!?!? "Now THAT. THAT is just TOO much!".

Classic ST moral relativism.

Im guilty of it too, but, FFS, chapstick? Of all the things to take a stand on the rules being rules, chapstick is about the worst Ive ever heard

Ok show me where on this forum someone said it was acceptable to blantantly draft (illegally) and not one person interjected in.

I'm with you that it's a bit much it being chapstick, but where do you draw the line? Like my other post stated, this just leads to more and more things. Oh it's just a gel.... 1 gel isn't going to give him and advantage......

blog
Quote Reply
Re: Would be KQ'er DQ'ed for ... chapstick!! [davejustdave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
davejustdave wrote:
mdm81 wrote:
Even the leapfrogging doesn't sound like the whole story. At Chattanooga and many other IM courses it is easy to leapfrog and see someone ~8 times during a two loop run. How much leapfrogging is too much?


Apparently any.



So having someone give you splits (between you and the guy ahead of you) at multiple places during an IM run is illegal?

Do the pros not get splits from people associated with the race during the race?
Last edited by: zilla: Sep 30, 16 14:55
Quote Reply
Re: Would be KQ'er DQ'ed for ... chapstick!! [Trispoke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Trispoke wrote:
ahhchon wrote:
i saw his wife pacing him on the run course. the first thing i thought of was.... well, that's not allowed. but i didn't really care.

giving splits is one thing, cycling along and cheering is one thing. but doing them both, with riding along side at times can be seen as pacing...

i mean, don't some coaches sit on the course and give splits from time to time?

john


I actually see coaches riding near their athletes quite frequently in Ironmans. It blows my mind that they don't understand this is illegal.
This was BY FAR more prevalent at IMChoo than drafting, from my perspective. I saw one case of drafting. I saw 8-10 cases of somebody (coach, SO, friend, etc.) running or biking along side a runner for 100+ yards, giving encouragement, splits, placing, etc.
Quote Reply
Re: Would be KQ'er DQ'ed for ... chapstick!! [ChrisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Well according to the rule book, you get DQd after three penalties. So there were likely two prior occurrences of other rule violations throughout the race for him before the Chap Stick incident. So yeah, there's likely more information being left out of the story.

_________________________________
Steve Johnson
DARK HORSE TRIATHLON |
Quote Reply
Re: Would be KQ'er DQ'ed for ... chapstick!! [Terra-Man] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules.
https://video.search.yahoo.com/...562&action=click
Quote Reply
Re: Would be KQ'er DQ'ed for ... chapstick!! [TriTamp] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Perhaps I'm the only person in the world who owns a Garmin watch and uses that watch to help pacing? What the hell do I need my wife to run beside me for?
Quote Reply
Re: Would be KQ'er DQ'ed for ... chapstick!! [DJRed] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Imagine she may have been tracking the others in his age group and letting him know splits.

Or more?
Quote Reply
Re: Would be KQ'er DQ'ed for ... chapstick!! [Terra-Man] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
What's the difference between this action, and having a local resident spray runners down with a garden hose as they pass? In 94 degree heat, that's certainly "outside assistance." If the latter is an offense, half of last week's Augusta field would be DQ'ed.
Quote Reply
Re: Would be KQ'er DQ'ed for ... chapstick!! [teetopkram] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Available to everyone
Quote Reply
Re: Would be KQ'er DQ'ed for ... chapstick!! [TrekRider68] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Aha...
Quote Reply
Re: Would be KQ'er DQ'ed for ... chapstick!! [TrekRider68] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TrekRider68 wrote:
Imagine she may have been tracking the others in his age group and letting him know splits.

Or more?

I hope that's not illegal. I do that for my wife all the time. In races that end with an out-and-back run, I always count the women and tell her what place she's in and how far back/ahead she is.
Quote Reply

Prev Next