Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Early Ironman Hawaii Results vs. Today
Quote | Reply
Been reading up on Ironman history today and noticed that some winning times during the 80's were significantly lower than winning times in recent years.

So what gives? All these faster bikes and fancier nutrition/training methods haven't made us any faster in 30 years?
Quote Reply
Re: Early Ironman Hawaii Results vs. Today [dlopezp51] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Dope?

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb
Quote Reply
Re: Early Ironman Hawaii Results vs. Today [dlopezp51] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Possibly some dope. But also a lot of those guys were phenomenal athletes. Great swimmers, superb runners, and strong on the bike. Sure, bikes have gotten faster, but not as much faster as people would think.

For example, Mark Allen was a strong swimmer (in college I think) and had a stand-alone marathon around 2:20.

Also wind conditions vary, and can affect times a lot.
Quote Reply
Re: Early Ironman Hawaii Results vs. Today [Whiny Will] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Whiny Will wrote:
Possibly some dope. But also a lot of those guys were phenomenal athletes. Great swimmers, superb runners, and strong on the bike. Sure, bikes have gotten faster, but not as much faster as people would think.

For example, Mark Allen was a strong swimmer (in college I think) and had a stand-alone marathon around 2:20.

Also wind conditions vary, and can affect times a lot.


Yea Mark was a great runner, but he was nowhere near ever going that fast. The 2:24 threshold for qualifying was attempted in Germany I think? Europe someone around 93-94. He blew up way early don't even think he made the half. I think I did hear about him doing something sub 2:30 at one point, but not 'around' 2:20. The dif b/t a 2:20 and 2:30 is light years.
Last edited by: tigerpaws: Oct 17, 14 4:31
Quote Reply
Re: Early Ironman Hawaii Results vs. Today [dlopezp51] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The course changed at some point so comparing times is misleading.

The bike data that Jackmott posts on this topic seems to indicate that bike times have gotten progressively faster (14min?) over the past 20 years. Running isn't technical like the bike, but has certainly been impacted by the aggressive bike tactics in recent years.

Can you provide some examples (years, splits) to illustrate what you mean?



-Andrew
Quote Reply
Re: Early Ironman Hawaii Results vs. Today [dlopezp51] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
A few observations from a veteran coach who has been to Kona 20+ times dating back to Dave, Paula, Mark, and the 80s gang, and I was in Kona again last weekend.

First the top pros of the 80s were truly exceptional athletes (Mark, Dave, Paula, Greg) and they would have stood up very very competitively today if they were still racing.

Secondly, they did not have to race as many longer races 20+ years ago, to get to Kona. So when they came to Kona, they were fresh, hungry and able to empty the tank on race day. Today, just to qualify to get into Kona, they have to go through a much tougher regime of races around the world, (which often leaves many of them tired, injured or partially worn out).

Thirdly, Dave Scott acknowledged this to me when I spoke to him about this very topic in March. The pros of his era, raced numerous SHORT OLYMPIC very fast non-drafting races in their era. The BUD LIGHT Pro Tri Series of the 80s, gave the top men / women many opportunities to work on their speed for 4-5 months, then the customary 7-8 week big pre-Kona training camp focus to up their endurance. The combination of many months of speed (early / mid year) then ultimately a big-final block of training, left many able to race Kona at a very high level.

You are obviously seeing a handful of males/females over the past 5-8 years exceed the race times of the 80s, but they are obviously not blowing those times away. I do think that unless an athlete knows they are in the real money in Kona, they often hold-back, knowing that IM Florida, or Arizona or another race is just around the corner and they save themselves. So while the podium athletes of the last decade have gone to the well for their podiums, many in the top 20, have backed off due to racing again soon after Kona (to re-qualify for the next year).

DEPTH OF FIELD

THere is no question there is more depth of field today then there was in the 80s. In 1989, when Mark beat Dave, they were nearly 5km ahead of the third place athlete. The 30th place man and woman today, is definitely a more complete athlete then the 30th place male/female was in the 80s. But, because Dave, Mark, Greg, Paula, Erin and a handful of others were SO TALENTED and did not have to race that often, their results of the 80s and early 90s, are still exceptional compared to todays race results.

Barrie Shepley
Voice of the ITU Commentary & Lover of All Things Triathlon
Quote Reply
Re: Early Ironman Hawaii Results vs. Today [tigerpaws] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yea Mark was a great runner, but he was nowhere near ever going that fast. The 2:24 threshold for qualifying was attempted in Germany I think? Europe someone around 93-94. He blew up way early don't even think he made the half. I think I did hear about him doing something sub 2:30 at one point, but not 'around' 2:20. The dif b/t a 2:20 and 2:30 is light years. //

You guys have to stop using Mark's on attempt at the olympic standard as some indication of his running prowess. As i remember it, he was sick that day and had to pull the plug. How many of you run PR's when you wake up sick in the morning? What you can do is take his legit sub 30 10k run, about 1;05 or better 1/2 marathon speed, or his countless runs against super fast guys in triathlon, who usually ended up on the bottom end of the race and run split. He ran a legit 2;38 in Hawaii, and in all these years, no one has come within minutes of that, except for Dave of course. 2;42 seems to be the high gold standard that really fast guys shoot for these days at hawaii, and that is from some very talented and fast runners. People forget that Mark went " 4 minutes faster" than that. He certainly was at the very least a 2;20 marathon guy, i believe with his other run times he had a 2;18 in him, just never got to hit it on his day. He had a lot of other things going on that made him his living, running races were just a lark, like bike racing and OW swim races were for me.


Back then we all enjoyed racing out of triathlon in the 3 individual sports, but it was not super serious most the time. I did focus on the marathon for 6 weeks once running 40 to 45 miles a week. Went pretty well averaging under 6 min pace, but Mark would have beaten me by at least 15 minutes, probably more like 20. A couple guys he would beat running in tris did run 1;04 1/2 marathons during the off season. It was not the different course( although some argue that course was harder, not easier than todays), it was not drugs( keep in mind that his times are pre EPO and since then, many modern pros have been popped for that exact sport changing drug), it was just a hell of a talented, hard working guy, who was smart about racing and how to plan a season around a peak in hawaii in oct...
Quote Reply
Re: Early Ironman Hawaii Results vs. Today [AMT04] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
AMT04 wrote:
The course changed at some point so comparing times is misleading.

The bike data that Jackmott posts on this topic seems to indicate that bike times have gotten progressively faster (14min?) over the past 20 years. Running isn't technical like the bike, but has certainly been impacted by the aggressive bike tactics in recent years.

Can you provide some examples (years, splits) to illustrate what you mean?


His bike data doesn't account for the transitions that were lumped into the bike split in those early years.

Badig| Strava


Last edited by: tjfry: Oct 17, 14 9:48
Quote Reply
Re: Early Ironman Hawaii Results vs. Today [dlopezp51] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The other thing that you always hear is the different drafting rules that are in existence now and the fact that to pass one person, you have to pass the whole group. Makes for a much different bike ride that is not as 'steady' as years prior, which then slows down run times. I obviously have no first hand experience that the bike is much different than the 80's, but you often hear about it. Macca discussed it on an IM Talk interview last week
Quote Reply
Re: Early Ironman Hawaii Results vs. Today [dlopezp51] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Every time I post this people argue that you need to slice the data this way or that way but every way you slice it, you get the same result.

The pros have been trending faster.

Please at least open excel before arguing about it, thank you.

http://austintriathlonstore.blogspot.com/...nman-bike-stats.html



Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter
Quote Reply
Re: Early Ironman Hawaii Results vs. Today [tjfry] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
tjfry wrote:
His bike data doesn't account for the transitions that were lumped into the bike split in those early years.

What year did they stop doing that?



Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter
Quote Reply
Re: Early Ironman Hawaii Results vs. Today [dlopezp51] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Overall winning times haven't changed all that much but the average times have dropped dramatically. I saw a statistic that the average finish time in 2013 was faster than the winning time in 1978.

/

Gary Mc
Did I mention I did Kona
Quote Reply
Re: Early Ironman Hawaii Results vs. Today [jackmott] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jackmott wrote:
tjfry wrote:

His bike data doesn't account for the transitions that were lumped into the bike split in those early years.


What year did they stop doing that?

Sometime around 1998. Not sure exactly. I'll look into it.

Badig| Strava


Quote Reply
Re: Early Ironman Hawaii Results vs. Today [Gary Mc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Gary Mc wrote:
Overall winning times haven't changed all that much but the average times have dropped dramatically. I saw a statistic that the average finish time in 2013 was faster than the winning time in 1978.

/

The winning time was 11:46:58.
Quote Reply
Re: Early Ironman Hawaii Results vs. Today [jackmott] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Both T1 and T2 were still included in the bike split in 1993. Not sure about 1994- I would have to dig through old results.
Cheers,
John
Quote Reply
Re: Early Ironman Hawaii Results vs. Today [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
monty wrote:
Yea Mark was a great runner, but he was nowhere near ever going that fast. The 2:24 threshold for qualifying was attempted in Germany I think? Europe someone around 93-94. He blew up way early don't even think he made the half. I think I did hear about him doing something sub 2:30 at one point, but not 'around' 2:20. The dif b/t a 2:20 and 2:30 is light years. //

You guys have to stop using Mark's on attempt at the olympic standard as some indication of his running prowess. As i remember it, he was sick that day and had to pull the plug. How many of you run PR's when you wake up sick in the morning? What you can do is take his legit sub 30 10k run, about 1;05 or better 1/2 marathon speed, or his countless runs against super fast guys in triathlon, who usually ended up on the bottom end of the race and run split. He ran a legit 2;38 in Hawaii, and in all these years, no one has come within minutes of that, except for Dave of course. 2;42 seems to be the high gold standard that really fast guys shoot for these days at hawaii, and that is from some very talented and fast runners. People forget that Mark went " 4 minutes faster" than that. He certainly was at the very least a 2;20 marathon guy, i believe with his other run times he had a 2;18 in him, just never got to hit it on his day. He had a lot of other things going on that made him his living, running races were just a lark, like bike racing and OW swim races were for me.


Back then we all enjoyed racing out of triathlon in the 3 individual sports, but it was not super serious most the time. I did focus on the marathon for 6 weeks once running 40 to 45 miles a week. Went pretty well averaging under 6 min pace, but Mark would have beaten me by at least 15 minutes, probably more like 20. A couple guys he would beat running in tris did run 1;04 1/2 marathons during the off season. It was not the different course( although some argue that course was harder, not easier than todays), it was not drugs( keep in mind that his times are pre EPO and since then, many modern pros have been popped for that exact sport changing drug), it was just a hell of a talented, hard working guy, who was smart about racing and how to plan a season around a peak in hawaii in oct...


Take it easy I never said Mark wasn't a fantastic runner, nor did I say he couldn't pull that type of run off. I was merely pointing out he didn't do it as someone was alluding to the fact he went 'around 2:20' as in actually ran 26.2 miles in 'around 2:20', not could have run 2:20ish. Everyone has a coulda, woulda and shoulda sports story. I'm have no doubts had Mark tried a few more times and was healthy he could have pulled off a time like that, doesn't change the fact he didn't. If we are going to give people the benefit of the doubt that 'oh well they would have done this' then why run the race to see if they can? We just do hypothetical races then?
Last edited by: tigerpaws: Oct 18, 14 6:55
Quote Reply
Re: Early Ironman Hawaii Results vs. Today [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Monty, wasn't the run a tougher course in those days with the "Pit"?

Gary Geiger
http://www.geigerphoto.com Professional photographer

TEAM KiWAMi NORTH AMERICA http://www.kiwamitri.com, Rudy Project http://www.rudyprojectusa.com, GU https://guenergy.com/shop/ ; Salming World Ambassador; https://www.shopsalming.com
Quote Reply
Re: Early Ironman Hawaii Results vs. Today [ggeiger] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I thought so...the 'Pit" was REALLY bad, and then running out past the airport.

Personally, I think it is a bit tough to compare then to now. One of my favorite quotes "Nothing is ever the same as it used to seem to be." I think that applies well here.

David
* Ironman for Life! (Blog) * IM Everyday Hero Video * Daggett Shuler Law *
Disclaimer: I have personal and professional relationships with many athletes, vendors, and organizations in the triathlon world.
Quote Reply
Re: Early Ironman Hawaii Results vs. Today [david] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Here is the deal on all the different hawaii ironman run courses, same for the bike too. The worst part, i would say 95%, is just the distance( being accurate of course) and the always horrible conditions they are raced in. The bike is more variable because of winds, but the run is just about the same year after year. It starts in the heat of the day, and even if you get a tiny bit of cloud cover(which is very intermittent) it does not help much. Yes, some of the different courses were a little hillier, but really, it is of no real consequence in the overall time. Good runners go up slight inclines well, and then make up for them on the gradual declines.

I would just say that the pit years were that extra 5% worse because not only was a bit hillier, but it seemed like an oven down there. That little open pond just held in the heat, and it would not get any wind down there whatsoever. It was early in the race, so most of the good guys could shrug it off and just move onto the rest of the course. If it came at 20 miles, it would have been way worse..I think it is fair to compare all the running times over the years, except the first one of course. It was long and you had to stop to weigh in several times. And even with all that, one guy broke 3 hours back in 81..
Quote Reply
Re: Early Ironman Hawaii Results vs. Today [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The pit wasn't part of the course in 81...I think 1st year was 89 so that the turn-a-round could be moved to the kona side of the airport entrance...does that seem right?

David
* Ironman for Life! (Blog) * IM Everyday Hero Video * Daggett Shuler Law *
Disclaimer: I have personal and professional relationships with many athletes, vendors, and organizations in the triathlon world.
Quote Reply
Re: Early Ironman Hawaii Results vs. Today [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Agree with your run course summary, Monty. That said, I'm a fly-weight hill runner and still hated the pit. After dropping off the bike, the change tent was just hot as hell. Anyone running out from the drop-off ( many walked the steep hill) hit a really high HR due to both the climb & heat. Runners then pounded a relatively long & steep drop into hell(the pit) and then climb back out. Seemed to really make it tougher having to recover & perform from that initial extra heat & climbing / pounding.
While the pit course was my least favorite, the 1981 weigh-in course was my favorite. Just thought it was funny that I gained weight! Everything about 1981 was fun because it was a new sport, new course and meeting characters like you, Cowman, John Howard, etc. Fun times!
Quote Reply
Re: Early Ironman Hawaii Results vs. Today [dlopezp51] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I raced in 91 and 94 and agree with Monty - the heat and winds are the number one factor affecting finish times. Comparing times from year to year is interesting -but no conclusions can be drawn regarding who is faster. All I can say is that Kona is always tough!

Michael Hay - helped on the journey by the great folks at ZiZU Optics, (for the custom fit), and Bialkowlski's TRYSPORT
Quote Reply
Re: Early Ironman Hawaii Results vs. Today [jackmott] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jackmott wrote:
tjfry wrote:

His bike data doesn't account for the transitions that were lumped into the bike split in those early years.


What year did they stop doing that?

Looks like 1998 was the first year that transitions were recorded.

Badig| Strava


Quote Reply
Re: Early Ironman Hawaii Results vs. Today [tjfry] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I will confirm and make adjustments

tjfry wrote:
jackmott wrote:
tjfry wrote:

His bike data doesn't account for the transitions that were lumped into the bike split in those early years.


What year did they stop doing that?

Looks like 1998 was the first year that transitions were recorded.



Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter
Quote Reply
Re: Early Ironman Hawaii Results vs. Today [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Mark-

All due respect you saying Mark Allen could have run a 2:18 stand alone marathon? Maybe in Berlin with a tail wind with Allen training all year specifically for the marathon with Dennis Kimetto as a pacer.
Quote Reply