Challange: You have to maintain your weight. I am at 205. So either I stay at 200+ or try to get down to 175 or 180.

I would like to race Accenture in Chicago this year and then lose some weight and drop down in 2006.

A brief top 10 "Downsides to racing Clydesdale" list, from a dyed-in-the-wool clydesdale:

10. Aid stations rarely feature milkshakes and double burgers.

9. People think the "F" age group letter on your calf stands for "Fat Bastard" (based on truth...my ex-roomate asked that).

8. Debating the merits of shaving a few grams off the weight of your bike becomes an exercise in absurditity.

7. Needing to swim faster to avoid the harpoons.

6. Sales guys start looking really nervous when you come in to bike stores, and start asking them about their test ride policy.

5. Having to conciously remind yourself that the "carbo load" dinner put on by a race should NOT be treated as a part of the competition.

4. Looking back on the bike, and realizing 28 other cyclists, 2 station wagons, a motorhome and several farm animals are drafting off you.

3. Peeling off your wetsuit, and having spectators catcall in a Fat Bastard voice "I'm deeeeed sexy...get in mah belleh!"

2. Needing to carry roughly twice the amount of gels as your competitiors.

1. ALWAYS being hungry after the post-race meal...no matter how times you went back.

ok, for me, this is an asinine question and reinforces the idea that all of these different groups should be eliminated, just have under 40 and Masters, like running races.

I weigh about 215. When I started tris, I weighed about 20 pounds more. I started for fun, and to get in better shape. I'm fairly happy where I am, but I would still like to lose some more. I think the idea that you would want to gain weight to stay over 200 is idiotic. Why? So you can get another ribbon?

OTH, the list is funny.

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------

clydes is a different catagory than age group...

last year I raced as an athena, and I can tell you that I will never do it again. not only was I embarrassed by my race photos, (not to mention my friend's photos), but it really does suck to carry the additional weight. it doesn't feel good to be slower. so if you're not a clyde now, but are trying to be (?), then, don't do it unless you prefer to drink beer and eat alot over racing well and feeling good about yourself.

i don't know what the weight is for clydes, but for some men I understand that 200 is still pretty lean...my husband, for example would be a stick at 200.

my best friend would be a stick at 160, and she is about 190 right now with only 23% bodyfat. Unreal! So, my point is, it depends on your bodymake up and ratio. she would fare well racing as an athena, but me, I'm a blob if I qualify for athena.

kc

I am stuck at 210 lbs (6' 3"). I was wondering about signing up for a race as an age-grouper vs as a clydesdale.

If I move south of 200, I would be happy to stay there.

Andy

I'm trying to lose weight not add.

But since I am close to 200 at 205 ,yes I would like to stay Clydesdale for this season only, race at the Clyde Championship in my hometown Chicago and then I will worry about loosing weight. I'll supplement with Creatine when/if I start to go under 200.

So my absurd goal is to only stay a Clyde to race at Accenture. I'll never regain my 145 Lb 5:00 mile stature I had in high school. But for now I get to enjoy reeling them in on the bike, the only real area I can compete in the top 10% with all the other AG's.

And one more thing, at age 42, there is a hell of a lot of competition you younger whipppersnappers have not had to compete against yet!!! Just you wait - Hah!!!

well, that sounds good. if you're supplementing when you get below 200, then obviously you like yourself where you're at. personally, I can't imagine a man under 200 pounds, but then again, I live in the midwest and most folks here are cornfed and paul bunyon types.

I would like myself better at 180 to 185, but no lower. But I was at 221. Way too heavy for me on 5'11" frame.

Now 210 at 6'3" I could handle that!!!

You've got your priorities wrong. If you are faster when you weigh 5 lbs less then you should be at 198. What personal value can there be in a piece of cheap metal that you have to go slower to win.

Herein lies the basic problem with weight divisions.

If you get bigger and go slower you stand a better chance of winning something.

---

----------------------------------------------------------
"A society is defined not only by what it creates, but by what it refuses to destroy."
John Sawhill

That's my problem, I'm about the same size. I think I would be faster if I lost a significant amount of weight, but I would also look like a rail.

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------

The real downside as I see it, is usually the upside. The upside of a hill.

J

Though there are some darn fast big guys and girls. I've been in races where the #1 and #3 women's overall finishers raced Athena.

There are a lot of fast clydes down here in south florida that even beat out some of the top age groupers.

.

---

_____________________________________________

I have horrible back problems but I have zero problems staying in an aero position for 180k. Why? Because I ride steep and because I train regularly in that position. Simple as that.....Gerard

yes, but you'll stand a much better chance in a street fight with the added weight.

That very well may be the case Jill but the fact still remains, the bigger you get the slower you get.

A good small un will beat a good big un any day.

---

----------------------------------------------------------
"A society is defined not only by what it creates, but by what it refuses to destroy."
John Sawhill

The downside is you might win.

Last summer I did 2 tris. I won the clyde divison in both. Between the friends who gave me some good natured ribbing about being a clyde and the aquaintances who gushed over my "win" and thus forced be to explain that I did not really "win" a triathlon, I spent more time talking about my weight last summer than I ever had in my life. I think it psycologically scarred me. Somehow the fact that I beat 80% of my competitors never quite registered with me or my "fans", just the fact that I really do weigh more than 200 lbs. I now have a plaque and a trophy to forever remind me of all the buttered popcorn I have eaten over the years.

I'm a pretty fast big man but I think in the future I will opt for being an anonomous big man. I'll take a top 10 in my age group and then enjoy my popcorn in peace.

Just do whatever you feel comfortable doing and forget about all else.

But don't think going Clyde secures an easier victory. A couple of years ago I missed weigh-in by one pound at St. A's, so raced AG (35-39). I ended up placing higher in AG than I would have in Clydes. Florida has some very fast Clydes - big guys that are lean and mean. One of my training buddies is 6'-3" and 215, but I would guess his BF is about 6-7%. He blasts the swim, crushes the bike (mangling smaller guys), and holds on with a pretty darn good run.

Good luck.

Unless the bike course is hilly, its only the run where the clydes are at any disadvantage and many of the big guys can start the run with a decent lead over the little runners. 6' + and over 200 lbs is a fairly typical size for a swimmer so you find alot of ex swimmers in the clyde ranks. (Next time you think of clydes as fat out of shape pigs, keep in mind that Michael Phelps is only 5 pounds short of being a clyde).

In a flat time trial, being over 200 is not a problem on the bike, and some of the big guys do have a cardio vascular system that is more than adequate to overcome the additional frontal area they have.

But, gravity does take over on the run. . . . .

Blacksheep has hit the nail on the head. A couple of issues I have with the clydesdale category:

1) I could very easily race clydesdale, and expecially when I began. But I thought of it as a sort of second class. I don't want to compete against heavier people, I want to compete with the whole range.

2) Clydesdales tend to start later in the day, I like to get moving.

3) Until I get really, really good I mainly compete against myself. Forcing myself to be slower to try and get a podium spot seems rather silly.

4) Here in Nor Cal, the people who race clydesdale and thena are just as fast as age groupers.

---

----------
"...it should be swim, bike, run, cage fight." - el fuser
"I noticed that I am in your sig line! Wow! That's s first for me. Thanks." - Fleck

I compete in the PAUSATF road and XC racing series....a USATF club racing circuit for Northern California and Nevada. Its a pretty good standard of competition with former olympians, olympic trialists and the occasional aspiring olympian showing up to run.

We run a couple of 10K road races a year and if you want to score in the top 50 you generally need to run sub 35 minutes, top 25 sub 33:30 and top 10 usually goes about 31:30. I ran 33:48 a couple of years ago in a race and finished 61st man.

I know most of the guys who score regularly and none of them are remotely close to 200lbs. If a 200lb athlete finishes in the top 100 I don't think I've ever seen him. Most of the guys weigh less than 140lbs.

There might be some relatively fast 200lbers out there, but they are never going to be able to compete with equally talented smaller athletes. Physics just gets in the way.

---

----------------------------------------------------------
"A society is defined not only by what it creates, but by what it refuses to destroy."
John Sawhill

thanks for calling us second class!

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------

I really don't mean it THAT way. Just think about the race starts: Elites, Age Groupers, oh yah, now the clydesdales can go. Trust me, I am right in that class, just don't register to race in it!

---

----------
"...it should be swim, bike, run, cage fight." - el fuser
"I noticed that I am in your sig line! Wow! That's s first for me. Thanks." - Fleck

I look at it this way,

The swim- I can keep up with the front of the pack and I usually find you weenies drafting of me in the swim, ha.

The Bike- I hammer it on the short courses and very few people pass me

The Run- Well this is where I throw the white flag, your right, being heavier makes it harder on the run so I just pick on you guys as you pass me, ha

But the way I see it is that I beat you in 2 out of 3 events thus making ME the winner, hahahhhahahaha

.

---

_____________________________________________

I have horrible back problems but I have zero problems staying in an aero position for 180k. Why? Because I ride steep and because I train regularly in that position. Simple as that.....Gerard

I can't imagine stopping weight loss for the possibility of placing and getting some hardware. WTF.

I am doing everything in my power to get out from under clyde ranks. I am 6'0 250lbs I have lost 115 lbs since starting sprints a few years ago and plan to race imlp'05 at 199.

The life implications of staying heavy are way to great. Just think of the savings in pain and agony later in life after the knee replacements.

Here is a lesson to take from the animal kingdom

Great dane life span 8 years----peikanese(sp) 18-20years

I'll take the ag loss instead of the clyde win any day.

kevin

6'2
233 lbs...

Clyde here, but I don't race in the clyde category. Why? Well, I really don't know. I think part of me feels that racing against fellow Clydes is cool but my goal is to drive the weight down to where I'm competitive against my age group. My goal is to be down to 210 by April 1. I'm actually down 60 lbs but have put 30 of it back on as muscle....Pretty cool.

Then again, the only person that I'm racing against is myself. Actually I'm racing against the me who would devour a whole pizza, feel like a fool doing anything athletic and would stare at the ceiling at night hoping I could turn my train wreck of a body around....the good news is that that has happened.

Bottom line for me - race where you want to race....it really doesn't matter, right?

PS - I love smoking skinny fit looking guys. It's fun to see there reaction when you pass them. Sort of like breaking their will (in a geeky amateur racer sort of way)...

B.
Ridgewood, NJ

---

-------------------------------------------------
http://www.teamorganicnyc.com
Sponsored by: TBA

"Here is a lesson to take from the animal kingdom

Great dane life span 8 years----peikanese(sp) 18-20years

I'll take the ag loss instead of the clyde win any day."

Hummingbird: 3 years

California Condor: 50 Years

Dude!! You're going to get down to 199 by IMLP?! That's an aggressive goal and I wish you the best. Make sure you post a race report.

---

**All of these words finding themselves together were greatly astonished and delighted for assuredly, they had never met before**

excellent come back

2 lbs a week 28 weeks all steam ahead at this point I have done the 115 whats another 50 among friends.

k

That was a good one, good luck to you in your weight loss, im jealous, but im actually happy at my weight I just wish I was a tad bit leaner, that will come soon enough.

-

---

_____________________________________________

I have horrible back problems but I have zero problems staying in an aero position for 180k. Why? Because I ride steep and because I train regularly in that position. Simple as that.....Gerard

Clydesdale means you're either fat or ridiculously tall.

I'm not tall :-(

---

TriDork

"Happiness is a myth. All you can hope for is to get laid once in a while, drunk once in a while and to eat chocolate every day"

Maybe...we don't seem to have it here (I would love to race that category!), but anyway the goal this year is to go from 93 - 88kgs...5000grams, 12 months, around 400gms per month, or 100 per week.
So no more Clydes for me baby!!

---

kiwipat

per ardua ad astra

the real downsides.



you knees and ankles take one hell of a beating...all that extra weight pounding on your joints isn't healthy.

climbing hills is a frigging bitch...no matter how much power you're putting out.

if you're like me...you've got lots of muscle in the legs...you don't float so well...therefore swimming is tough (need some killer abs to compensate...again...being clydesdale, somewhat tougher)

increased surface area on the bike...cannot get lower drag numbers compared to smaller guys (article on this a while ago...trimag i think?)

increased caloritic intake, taking in more food during the race can lead to additional GI problems due to stomach needing to process more stuff.

overheating? i know i have a huge problem with heat management...but that might just be me?



on the plus side...it's one hell of a rush coming down the hills...i've topped out at almost 95km/h (55-60mph). Most of the lighter guys i know couldn't hit 2/3 of that. If you can hold your own on the uphills, you can make up some good time on the downhills and the flats (increased power output?)



as for gaining weight to race clydes...if you do that, you should be shot.

i cannot stand for the life of me these guys that are taller (6+ft) and BARELY 200lbs who race clydes...you ARE NOT A CLYDESDALE. take a look at the horse that the category was named after...then compare to a stallion or race horse...get the picture?

---

---

"Anyone can work hard when they want to; Champions do it when they don't."

Benefits or not the division exists. I always have a smile at the chuckleheads who sprout the usual crap about the division and how it should not be there. I started at 108kgs and am now 91 kgs and a good shit away from not being of correct weight to enter the division. These people are usually the middle of the road types who feel for some reason that they are an expert on what is best for the sport.

I think these people are experts on making people quit the sport. Usually they are also the guys giving someone shit for having 105 components or for buying a bike at wallmart (I don't even live in the USA and the amount of times I have seen this amazes me). What the sport can do without is all these pretenders who feel that it is their duty to pass judgement and tell others what they can and can't do.

My advice to them is save the energy and put in some extra training sessions so that you may just stop being average to the point that you have to try and 'beat' people through personal attack.

I place these 'judges' right up there with the gym junkie hammer pants and fanny pack wearing meat head. For some reason they think they have the goods but the rest of us just cringe.

Thanks for your time.

Clydesdale means you're either fat or ridiculously tall.

My mom says I am just "big-boned"

---

-----------------------------------------------
maylene jackson, cscs
http://www.kidsintraining.org

Clydesdales....my dearest friends are CLydesdales. I am an 'athena' and could qualify as one when I was annorexic way back in college when I swam. It is what it is, and I adore the Clydes. I really enjoyed lining up to the line WITH the Clydes for the swim (eye candy on the bike!). Hated hated hated having to start with all women. I can't tell you how many nails would scratch me in the swim .... but with Clydes either I can get a really good draft or they get out of my way.

The category enabled me to talk other friends into doing tris, and most will never get below the cut-offs (I have lots of tall and freaky strong guy/girl friends). ANytime you can get ANYONE into doing ANYTHING athletic is a GOOD thing, who cares why.

When those cats are out there racing..I don't see divisions, I see triathletes.

Clydes/Athena is many areas are VERY competative. I can't tell you how many times I have seen 1st place overall to a clyde/athena. The only downside is how you perceive it. I had one of my competitors move out of Athena bc she didn't like the stigma and wanted more competition. Ironically the girls that always beat her in Athena kept beating her in AG when you compared the results, but it made her feel better to be racing AG. To each their own, whatever drives you.

If you can gain enough weight to hit Clydesdale while training hard then good for you, you are a true Clydesdale. (I find it impossible to gain in the summer yet surprisingly easy in the winter. Hence, the conundrum of what weight to put down in January when you are signing up for an event taking place in August.)

Anyway, what's wrong with racing Clydesdale when one is tall? Talk about increased surface area. Being six feet or more with your weight spread out over all that distance is clearly a handicap when racing against all those compact type guys with their weight nicely centred.

As for the horse analogy, I don't think "clydesdale" means horses bred to be fat nor does Athena refer to chubby goddesses. A cutoff weight can be just as arbitrary as age. Just don't get me started about those fast fifty year olds racing by me. YOU ARE NOT THAT OLD. I know what an old person looks like....

I think we're getting away from the crux of the debate. wether Clydelsdale divisions should be allowed is neither here nor there; the point we are debating is wether an athlete should aspire to remain a clydesdale/athena if he/she has the ability to drop a few lbs and race faster as an age grouper....albeit with less chance of picking up some hardware.

I don't think anyone has a problem with clydesdale divisions being an opportunity for larger athletes to compete against eachother, what is a little more contentious are the guys who are right on the weight bubble and choose to put on weight and therefore race slower so they can remain a clydesdale. That goes against just about everything that sport and competition is about.

---

----------------------------------------------------------
"A society is defined not only by what it creates, but by what it refuses to destroy."
John Sawhill

ok...point taken. i for one gain weight (usually a LOT) while i'm training, i cannot explain the phenomenom (almost 40lbs from football to ironman!?!?)

as for the tall thing...if you're 6'5", and have a weight of 205lbs, you're most likely a VERY LOW bodyfat and muscular/lean. this presents a real 'competitive' advantage over a guy who is 5'10" and 220 or so...i highly doubt that most at that weight have similar phenotypic makeup, and are more likely 'chunky' or 'a bit on the heavy side'...since the 'ideal' weight for 5'10" is somewhere around 177ish. it's easier to minimize surface area on a tall person by having them get low on the bike...especially when they are not as wide as the shorter racers.

as for the horse analogy, i was not saying they were bred to be fat...rather strong, large and husky. whereas race horses (especially long distance ones) were built to be long and lean...possibly a useless analogy.

and yes...the weight is an arbitary cutoff...perhaps a bodyfat % would be better, but then again, due to problems associated with measurement, blah blah blah, etc.

---

---

"Anyone can work hard when they want to; Champions do it when they don't."

The origins of the clydesdale movement are witha guy in Baltimore whose name escapes me that did actual studies to show that run race times are inversely proportional to weight. Not bady mass, not % bodyfat, to weight.

In fact many people see a 6'4" athlete who weighs 205 and say that eh shouldn't ba allowed to race clydesdale. That he should race in his age group. Those folks have missed the point. The 6'4" guy who weighs 210 is actually who the division is FOR.

It's not for fat guys like me slogging at the back of the pack. I know what is holding me back and so does everyone else, we are lugging around 30 pounds of gut. The division is for the guy who is 6'4", in good shape, trains regularly, watches what he eats and still only comes through with a 2:15 olympic. Good performance, nonetheless he will never have a chance to win a competitive race.

My friend Lance in Delaware is a good example. Owns a 17 minute 5k at 235 pounds. At his size, that speed is pretty freaky. He worked very hard ot get there, but he'll never be competitive with the regular runners. So let the guy race with others his size, let the big guys do their own thing.

Yes. Someone 6'5" and with a weight of 205 lbs presents a real 'competitive' advantage over a guy who is 5'10" and 220: fifteen pounds of advantage. I suppose it is possible that a shorter, rounder object would be less aerodynamic than a longer, flatter object. I would think it the other way around but I don’t see it being a significant difference either way.

The Clydesdale category came about from weight being a disadvantage in the sport. I don’t see that it matters much how you manage to qualify for the category. Your downside list applies to someone tall as well. Are your knees and ankles going to know any difference in where the weight comes from? Does it take fewer watts per unit weight to climb a hill when you are taller? Is there some advantage to having really long muscular legs over short muscular legs?

I have always found the Clydesdale category intriguing. I have competed at weights between 190 and 210 lbs. There is lot of difference between 190 and 210 and I see how debilitating weight is in triathlon. I think the category is valid but I have never bothered to register as a Clydesdale. I don’t see anything wrong with the category except that it seems to breed categorization. If you have Clydesdales you should have Masters Clydesdales. Tall Clydesdales aren’t really Clydesdales. What about the guy who weighs 190? Isn’t he at a disadvantage to the guys weighing 160? Yes and the guys weighing 250 can’t possibly compete with those guys at 200. I am still waiting for the ex-smoker, Masters Clydesdale, over 6'6", married, nerd category.

I'l give you your category when they have the
200# 30y/o w/wife, 2 kids, 40 hr/wk job category.

Call it the JoeBob class.

Maybe they need a questionaire to fill out with hundreds of questions. Your answers will give you your "theoretical" performance, and you race against that. You would lose time for having a nice bike and time for training, and have time added for life's interruptions and restrictions. We could all get participant ribbons and be winners.

I'm no threat to win any hardware, and at 6'3" and 210 pounds I nicely fit into the Tall Slow White Boy division. If I dropped 10 or 15 pounds and raced in the 50-54 age group, I would be in with a bunch of very competitive guys who are really NOT having the same amount of fun as the beer-drinking "heck I'm fat but I doin' this for fun" group. So I don't see any downside.

---

Live long and surf!

Pros and Cons to Racing Clydes:

Pros: Its a fun laid back group. Definately more laid back than the AG ranks. It gives larger folk a benchmark or stepping stone in their personal tri achievements.

Cons: All the criticism and abuse from the little guys. If your overweight your slower than your potential and possible health issues.

Its usually a fun group and good spirited competition. I race clydes when its offered but dont limit my races based on clyde inclusion. I dont think anyone does or should try to gain weight to race clydes, I would assume that it is unhealthy. Ive been trying to get below 200 for years but it aint happening, maybe this year. I like clydes but Id rather be faster at 199lbs. They also do multiple divisions in cycling, sailing, running, it just makes it more fun and competitive for the masses rather than just the overall top 5 in a race.

---

-----------------------:)
SUPPORT OPERATION REBOUND:
http://www.operationreboundcalifornia.kintera.org/ejs3

Kestrel Syndicate
Macca Fan Club

OR muscular! Muscle weighs more than fat.

---

-----------------------:)
SUPPORT OPERATION REBOUND:
http://www.operationreboundcalifornia.kintera.org/ejs3

Kestrel Syndicate
Macca Fan Club

I'm not tall :-(

I'm not muscular either :-(

---

TriDork

"Happiness is a myth. All you can hope for is to get laid once in a while, drunk once in a while and to eat chocolate every day"

Your you and thats all that counts! :)

---

-----------------------:)
SUPPORT OPERATION REBOUND:
http://www.operationreboundcalifornia.kintera.org/ejs3

Kestrel Syndicate
Macca Fan Club

[reply]There might be some relatively fast 200lbers out there, but they are never going to be able to compete with equally talented smaller athletes. Physics just gets in the way.[/reply]

True for running, not so for tri. The extra weight/size is:
- an advantage in the swim
- a slight advantage on the bike on everything except very hilly courses
- a disadvantage on the run. However triathletes don't run fast, so this is not that significant.

In my AG at Boulder last year, only 9 of 110 went under 40min for the 10k. The guy who beat me into 9th place could have competed as a Clyde - he was 2min slower on the run but whupped me comprehensively on the swim/bike.

---

"It is a good feeling for old men who have begun to fear failure, any sort of failure, to set a schedule for exercise and stick to it. If an aging man can run a distance of three miles, for instance, he knows that whatever his other failures may be, he is not completely wasted away." Romain Gary, SI interview

That's so wrong I don't know where to start. Most of the heavier guys are heavy because of muscle and/or a big belly. That's not going to help them in the swim because they'll sink more. If you look at how swimmers are built, they are lean and tall. If you're 6'5 and weight 210 then you're probably going to be a good swimmer, but if you're the average clyde that isn't sporting a swimmer-like build you're at a disadvantage. Also distance swimmers tend to be skinnier than other swimmers.

2. It's not an advantage on the bike either. Maybe on downhills. If you're a bigger guy you're going to be less aerodynamic. You'll probably be able to produce more watts, though. I haven't looked at any research, but I would assume the aerodynamic/power trade-off is in favor of the lighter guys.

3. The fact most triathletes don't run super fast doesn't mean they can't be going faster. To run fast you need to be lighter (there are some exceptions such as Clas). I bet most clydes wish they were 50 pounds lighter during those last 10k of the marathon in an IM. Also if you look at the bigger races, people do run fast, and I bet the top 20% of those times aren't by clydes.

Just to clear something up before people like IronDad start tackling me here. I don't really support the idea of a clyde division, but I understand where these people are coming from. You can't expect 200+ pound guys to race the 140 guys. The thing is, if you weigh this much because of 30% bodyfat, you can stand to lose some weight and race as a normal person. If you're overly muscular because of swimming or football then you deserve to be in this category.

-- Quote ---
The thing is, if you weigh this much because of 30% bodyfat, you can stand to lose some weight and race as a normal person. If you're overly muscular because of swimming or football then you deserve to be in this category.
-----------------------------

So I am not a normal person? ;) And on top of that I am not overly muscular.

Andy

IF the swim distance was actually proportionate to the bike and run distances, tries would be won by clydes.

Check this out:

Michael Phelps is 6'5" and weighs 195. Ian Thorpe is 6'5" and weighs 221. Grant Hacket, the 1500 m record holder is 6'6" 212 lbs. Peter Vanderkaay, one of the top distance freestylers in the US is 6'4" and 198.

Thorpe and Hacket are already clydes and Phelps and Vanderkaay will gain at least 6 pounds once they grow up. All 4 of these guys have the the VO2 capacity to get in shape to put in a killer bike split on a flat course.

Give us swimmers a 1 hour swim to start a sprint tri and these big guys could walk the run and still win.

I could usually enter the clydesdale division if I want to, but I made the decision a couple years ago to just enter age group. I just looked at it as more of a challenge...and I still manage to medal in my age group at a lot of olympic distance races...big OD races I'm pretty close...half's I'm a ways off. My run at the 1 IM I've done was a complete disaster. My personal feeling is that a clydesdale can be fast, maybe not world class, but very fast up to the olympic distance and probably even a half. For the full ironman, I think they'd have a hard time putting up a fast time for the run.

If I could put up the kind of swim time that the guys mentioned by stp do, I'd be breaking the 2:00 mark for an olympic distance race in the clydesdale division. Unfortunately, they are a good 8-10 minutes faster than me on the swim, so I've got my work cut out for me. Granted, no triathlete's swim as fast as them...but even if I could break 20 minutes, I'd be a lot closer to my goal...I think my PR is 2:08 or 2:09.

BTW...Phelps is one skinny dude for his height...even at 195. That should clue a lot of smaller guys on to something. I know a lot of guys on the plus side of 6'4", and they'd be hard pressed to get much below 210 pounds. I wouldn't consider them overly muscular...but they aren't weaklings either.

I'm not saying there aren't really tall skinny guys, but if you're that tall with any kind of muscles you're just going to weigh a lot more than the average triathlete. You'll get no arguement from me about the run being unkind to clydesdales, but it's a rare day that I get passed on the bike, and I can usually put up one of the faster times in my age group at the olympic distance on the bike. too bad I suck at swimming (relatively speaking). That said, I have noticed an increase in speed if I'm disciplined enough to get my weight down to the low to mid 190's. But, it's very hard for me to do that...and I look extremely gaunt when I do.

I don't see a problem with the clydesdale division. It's not meant for fatass's to get medals, it's meant for the big fit guys. I also don't see much difference between age group and clydesdale divisions...they are both catering to people who aren't fast enough to compete for the overall win.

In my world, there would be junior, open and masters divisions. Maybe (probably) within the junior and masters ranks, you'd have age groups. It would certainly cut down on the never ending awards ceremony, where at small races virtually every one is a winner. To me, there is no point in having age groups when you are potentially in your physical prime (18 - 40ish??). I know there's a lot of 40+ year olds that can still kick most people's asses.

That's about all I have to say on this subject. it's bound to come up every 3-6 months...Just like the whole "lightweight" division in the rowing community...and they have olympic events for that (which I think is a good thing).

I used to be very cynical about the Clydesdale division, but I finally realized that it's not a big deal. Some of you in this thread have thrown some darts at people for wanting to place in their age group/weight division. To some people, winning a trophy isn't important. To others, it is. Neither of these two groups is more right or more wrong than the other.

The Clyde/Athena division gets people involved, makes the sport more accessible to a wider group of people, and rewards performance for people whose accomplishments would otherwise go unrewarded. Sometimes, these weight divisions may inadvertently encourage people to gain a couple of pounds or to not lose weight in order to stay competitive in the Clyde/Athena division. That's not a big deal, either. It's better to be big and active than it is to be big and inactive.

Some of you may earn quite a bit of hardware in races you enter. I don't. I may occasionally pick up an odd trophy here or there at a local 5K if it's a really small race, but when it comes to triathlon, my chances are basically nil of winning anything. If I could pick up a trophy once in a while, it would be nice. It wouldn't inflate my ego, it wouldn't give me illusions of multisport greatness. But it would be kind of nice. I imagine a lot of Clydes and Athenas are like me, and they enjoy the recognition.

And they are a great bunch of guys. Two guys in my local club are Clydes, and they are pretty funny people. When we do races together, they always hang out with the other Clydes afterwards and cut up and have fun. There seems to be a comraderie among the Clydes/Athenas that isn't there in the AG's. They don't bother anybody, so let them be. And remember, don't make them mad -- they're bigger than you.

I could race Clyde if I wanted to. I hover around 200. In fact, I get mistaken for a Clyde quite a bit. Right now, I'm 200 on the nose. As a former weight lifter who stands 6'2", I'm not fat. I usually don't race Clyde, but I might a time or two this year, especially if I'm still 200 when tri's start and I race with my two buddies. It would be fun to race against them in the same division (we're in different age groups). But if I was an ounce under 200, I wouldn't race Clyde.

The Clyde/Athena division is a good thing. For those of you who don't think it is, relax and take a deep breath. You take this stuff too seriously.

RP

I used to row a bit, and rowing also has weight divisions, up to 185lbs and over 185lbs, IIRC, even in the Olympics. They had to put those in as the light guys weren't winning anything, anywhere, as long limbs have big advantage. So if you're a Clyde looking for an off season sport, rowing could be a good choice.

Someone mentioned dog life spans, Great Dane ~ 8 years, Pekinese 18-20?
I'd rather live five years as a Great Dane than twenty as a little yuppy Pekinese always yapping around on the floor , sweeping dust, trying to prove something. I imagine Pekinese get stepped on a lot as well.

---

http://www.optruth.org/

[quote] I used to row a bit, and rowing also has weight divisions, up to 185lbs and over 185lbs, IIRC, even in the Olympics.[/quote]

Might be a typo on your part, but your numbers are a bit off. The maximum weight for lightweight rowers is 160 for men with a boat average of 155...though they are talking about changing that to max weight of 155, with no boat average.

I rowed for over 10 years as a heavyweight...it was a tough pill to swallow going from an aerobic sport where being bigger is (generally) an advantage, to basically the opposite in triathlons.

No, wasn't a typo, wasn't sure and was too lazy to look it up. I didn't too much rowing, switched to paddling.
Now I'm struggling with the same weight issues the rest of "big boys" seem to be. At less than 10% body fat and 205-210lbs, do I lose muscle to be faster runner?

---

http://www.optruth.org/

I meant normal AGs =)

No one needs to chime in and make fun of you... to our amusement you take care of that yourself ;-)