http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...;;page=unread#unread

---

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

Then why would a great swimmer choose to do a current aided race?

I'd just call that bad decision making.

---

Favorite Gear: Dimond | Cadex | Desoto Sport | Hoka One One

Dev,
A tad slower than last year but not enough to make a difference. The WTC does not care about the athlete who is performance oriented like most of us who have raced for 35 years, They figure we will come anyway because we are driven to race big races. They are more interested in participants. The swim is a large factor in their decision on where to go. last year the last swim finish was 1:45. This will be more the trend than with a normal swim. It sucks, coming from a running background I was forced to learn how to swim and put the work in to accomplish improvement. The WTC mission statement is "filling dreams" The other sad thing with the WTC decision to do this is most of their participants are on what I call the 4 year plan
Year 1:sprints
Year: 2 Olympic and 1 half ironman
Year :3 : Full Ironman
Year: 4: BIKE FOR SALE!!!!!!


The real athletes are around for a lot longer. It is sad that most of these participants are more familiar with the race announcer and his tag line than who wins these things at the highest level.


futrmultisports.com

who cares. there are plenty of people who are 1 and done. doesn't bother me. not everyone is cut from the same cloth and it takes true love of the sport to be in it for many years. i'll be starting my 5th 140.6 next saturday and at least 2-3 times i've said i'm done with long course. then a few months go by and i'm back in the suck.

some people are looking for the challenge of a tough course, some people just want to say they completed the distance.

i personally feel finishing an ironman within the 17 hour time frame is not much of an accomplishment (for a majority of people). if more people knew how to train properly for this distance i would suspect times to drop by at least an hour across the board.

I agree with that for the most part 17 hours is for most people a D minus grade. That said helping the finishers case along with swims that dramatically change the dynamic for those that want to be competitive and get a Kona spot the change in the course is a huge deal. The WTC knows the limitations of their market and are catering to it rather than offering a fair challenge. Nobody says it has to be the hardest thing but there is a difference of fair and overwhelmingly easy swim courses.




futrmultisports.com

idk. you can pick and choose the course you race.

IMFL, IMAZ, IMMD are all easy bike courses, IMLP is arguably an easy swim as well.

if swimming was my strong suit and i wanted to go to kona i would pick a difficult swim, if i was a strong cyclist and kona was a priority i would pick a difficult bike course followed by a flatter run course.

wtc offers a pretty good variety of courses.

if folks truly want a balanced race they would sign up for that race that is equal times in each discipline.

If you don't like the swim, then don't do the race. Why do you need to poop in other people's cheerios?

That's crazy. I assume that a lot of peeps STILL wore the crutches...errr.....ummm.....wetsuits?

Seconded. Are we now also going to poop on people who ride flat IM bike courses? What if there's mostly a headwind in a race? I really don't understand the sentiment.

The difference between the first and last Kona qualifier is usually between 15 and 30 minutes in most age groups. This swim won't cost you a Kona slot unless you are on the razor's edge of getting one anyway. It's still the same course for everyone, hardly a "huge deal".

I was originally a one and done Ironman. That was 15 years ago and I'm doing Kona on a Legacy slot in a couple of weeks.

Duh -how is this worse than bke packs?

Good grief. Are we really going to have this post every year for Chattanooga? I did the race last year. Yes, the swim is down river so it's fast, just like the Augusta 70.3 and I'm sure there are other races with down river swims. It was non-wetsuit (wetsuit optional) last year and this year . The bike course is 116 miles so it pretty much balances out and the run is hilly and challenging. Every ironman is different. If it bothers you so much that the Chattnooga swim is is fast then don't do the race. If you think it's so easy then maybe you should do the race to see for yourself. As a wise friend of mine said, any ironman is hard if you race it.

As much as people whine and cry about the Chatt swim, my average time per hundred was actually faster at Augusta than Chattanooga. At Augusta you get wetsuits. But I guess since Augusta is not a full, people don't complain about it.

---

Proud Member of Chris McDonald's 2018 Big Sexy Race Team "That which doesn't kill me, will only make me stronger"
Blog-Twitter-Instagram-Race Reports - 2018 Races: IM Florida 70.3, IM Raleigh 70.3, IM 70.3 World Championships - South Africa, IM North Carolina 70.3

Yeah, pretty well, you'll get the same post every year about current aided swims or draft packs at Florida. People who care about overall sport fairness will tend to not like these scenarios. I'm not downplaying the overall accomplishment of anyone, because as I said in the first post, it seems like the run is pretty darn tough, but at the end of the day, there is an expectation for what should be the minimum requirements for an Ironman. If you want a current aided swim, also let's put people on treadmills on the back of pickup trucks and drive them toward the finish line. They are still covering the "distance" but from the perspective of physics, this type of run, like a down river swim is assisted by outside energy.

In any case, just to be clear, I'm not calling participants on this as they do whatever course WTC sets. I'm calling WTC on it.

I'd like to blame WTC for this one, but unless they promised that the swim course/conditions wouldn't be like 2014, folks who signed up for the race this year should have been aware this could happen again. I do feel bad for someone like Gennari, a longtime WTC customer, who couldn't take full advantage of his swim talent at the IM in his home state.

same thing happens at NYC olympic triathlon. There is a rise of downhill running races in the US also. the bar just keeps dropping. Meanwhile in europe everything goes up hill (norseman, etc) and we scratch our heads every year why the europeans dominate championship races.

I thought Bruce was in 50-54 now, but he's still in 45-49

He has come off the bike in 1st. with 42 swim + 5:09 bike. A 4 hour run gets him to sub 10 with 2 transitions. I hope that is enough to get him a KQ even if he can't use the full swim advantage. The short swim not only closes his swim advantage, but the less time EVERYONE spends in the water, the less "TSS" from the swim for everyone, and this helps less efficient swimmers more. Hope he hangs in there, but his T2 looks a bit slow for an experienced racer. Slow T2's in IM's tend to not be great indicators, but hopefully he was just slow vs fatigued.

Looking back at Brian Myrick's posts, he did say they were targeting 6000-9000 cfm for the IM, and the screen shot I saw this morning said a predicted value of 6500. So, I guess that this year's conditions are about what we should expect. Nice to know: I'll plan on less swim prep.

Bruce did the race last year. He did the 70.3. He also does the Olympic almost every year. He knows that river swims fast EVERY single time. I suspect he cared more about racing close to home than anything else.

Why would you feel sorry for him. He knew what he was signing up for.

Does anybody know if it was first come, first serve for the swim start or if they had recommended swim time ranges? The swim at Tahoe last weekend seemed to go super smoothly for both the full and half by seeding fastest to slowest. Then again, there were ~1000 in each race, so significantly less crowded.

It's a bummer that he had to sacrifice his greatest tri skill to race an IM close to home. He's been racing IM since at least '97, when he was first overall out of the water in Kona, so I'm sure he's disappointed that when they finally got an IM race in TN, the swim is what it is.

I agree with a few others. I'm a strong cyclist, so I'll prefer harder bike courses, or at least windy ones to level the playing field with the lighter "runners". I'm an average swimmer so I'll prefer a more difficult swim to again level the playing field with the fast runners.

I think finish time from every course need sot be placed in the context of the terrain and conditions. I don't however think a flat bike course is less of an IM, just a different challenge and focus.

But we're complaining about a 12' short swim course for the pointy end. Where as a flat bike course is a solid 25 minutes faster than a hillier one. 2x the difference. Run courses only seem ot add maybe 5' or so, more in that average times go up and less disciplined runner are more likely to blow up on hilly run courses.

---

TrainingBible Coaching
http://www.trainingbible.com

boo f***ing hoo.

Chatt is know for a fast swim? So no surprise there...what's you point?

Guys, it is what it is. A point to point all downriver swim is always gonna be fast. You know this signing up. Don't like it don't sign up. I will say this though, water temp was reported as 76.1 this am and I think WTC probably fudged it over 76 so no wetsuit in addition to already fast swim. I know last year it felt colder than 76 when I raced.

---

Let food be thy medicine...

exactly this

---

---------------------------------------
Fruit snacks are for winners

So if you realize it's going to be the same post every year what exactly do you hope to accomplish by starting it? There is nothing about the swim at Chattanooga that makes it unfair. It's still 2.4 miles no matter if it's with a current or not. Again, if you don't like the swim at Chattanooga then don't sign up for the race, or even better, sign up for it to see for yourself what the complete course is like. Augusta 70.3 is downriver and wetsuit legal and I don't see people freaking out and starting threads every year about it. To start a thread like this every year is a little ridiculous, the same as the drafting at Florida threads every year. I just did Tahoe, which is considered a hard race. Honestly, I didn't consider it any harder than a race like Florida or Chattanooga, it is still 140.6 miles, and different courses and different conditions involve different challenges.

I don't understand why people are complaining about the Chattanooga duathlon.

---

Founder of THE TRIATHLON COLLECTIVE (Closed Facebook Group). A SBR discussion group without the white noise/trolling!

Yeah, OK, nothing is accomplished out of these threads...or so you think. There is a lot of discussion in the public domain about sport that is worth having. If they moved the wall in by 30 ft at Yankees stadium I am sure at least some fans would have a discussion. If they juice up the ball, or if they cork the bats, same discussion. It's still a worthy discussion when something that is claimed to be something is not quite what is claimed to be. It falls into the same realm as the Iron Cowboy elliptical. It's still badass, but it's not exactly what it is claimed to be. That's really all.

What can be accomplished by this type of thread is to apply some pressure publicly so that WTC does not create too many courses that are well outside what is generally considered what one would expect at a "normal" IM. At the end of the day, in a down rive swim, a swimmer ends up swimming through less than 2.4 miles of still water. They end up moving past 2.4 miles of land thanks to the entire body of water aiding them past land.

As I said in the first post, this does not take away from what the athletes are doing on the day. It's on WTC to put down legit courses in each leg. If no one calls WTC on this type of thing it ends up being a slippery slope in terms of making the distance easier to help jack up event entries. I totally understand there is a business to be run, but at some point, there needs to be a check on what is legit simplification to attract more entries what falls outside the realm of what is the balance that we'd expect at an event.

For what it is worth, we call WTC on lack of draft patrolling at numerous races, and they listen and try to make it better. Jimmy is in constant communication with the athlete community seeking input and feedback.

Dev

PS. Mark, Bruce is still on track for a sub 10 with 9 miles left (went through in 8:30) and running 9ish miles

WTC can not control the weather. There was reports of excessive rain in the region recently. Rules/regulations might mandate a higher water flow than what WTC was hoping for or wished for.

Would it not be possible to simply have 200-250m upstream first? This would add 400-500m so the 40 min swimmers, end up swimming around 46 min (given the upstream component)...still a bit short time wise but getting close so as not to take away the full swim experience from the fish).

I was wondering about this. All the other river swims I've done have comprised of an out and back - with and against the current to even it up. Competitors went off in waves to ensure that crowding wasn't an issue.

Is there something particular about Chat that prevents this?

---

Swim. Overbike. Walk.

Ha ha. Good one.

---

clm
Nashville, TN
https://twitter.com/ironclm | http://ironclm.typepad.com

You beat me to it. It's no secret that the Chattanooga swim is heavily aided by the current. You don't get to complain about having your swim advantage taken away when you made the choice to sign up for the race. It's still a long day though. If you are relying on your swim to win an IM you might want to work on your bike/run a bit :)

That should be doable, and wouldn't it be similar to Louisville where the opening upstream portion (albeit protected by the barrier island) somewhat negates the current assistance for the downstream last 2/3 of the swim? Lou doesn't add any distance, but there should be a way to figure out the downstream current to account for the required distance upstream to level the swim leg. Maybe I am wrong about that.

Wait, so you consider a 2.4 mile downriver swim outside of the "normal" IM, but making it a 2.7 mile is a normal IM? The full swim experience is swimming the course. I'm surprised you aren't also complaining about the weaker cyclists getting screwed because of the 116 mile bike.

It does take away from the athletes. You can say you are not taking away from what the athletes are doing on the day but the fact is your post is putting an asterisk on one of the three events which puts an asterisk on the entire race. That's the reason I find these type of post before a race is even over so frustrating. This one particularly since the swim for this event is pretty well defined and known.

Wait, the bike is 116 miles and the run is super hard. It's just taking away the advantage of the strong swimmer. The entire challenge is still tough. It just penalizes the strong swimmers (I am not one of those by the way, so I don't have a skin in that game).

The swim is not defined and known (there is only a 1 year sample). It is only the second year for the race. There are opportunities to make the swim challenge fair for the strong swimmers at future editions. They make it work in Louisville.

Have to say there was zero evidence of Jimmy 'listening' at Tremblant.
Suggest this was 'ear service' only.

If WTC goes a bit long (4% long on the bike) that's better than way short (probably in the range of 16-20% short on the swim splits based on Balazs's split). Hey where is Monty when we need him to call out WTC?

Which Tremblant (there have been 12 IM events there)? He was at 70.3 WC's in 2014 and implemented several of those changes in 2015 to the better. There were still areas in the younger age groups where things did not work well, but overall, it was a far better draft free event in Austria vs Tremblant.

I would be interested to know if you have personally provided feedback to Jimmy, the local race organizer, or the execs at WTC. If so, you will find the discussion interesting. In some cases, they can do things, in other cases, they are limited by the race organizer, the city, local governments and local set ups closures etc. I am a strong WTC supporter, but also will call them on things that I don't think fit in the general spirit of the sport. I am interested in hearing what their limitations are in Chattanooga. For what it's worth, I gave them close to $4000 in entry fees this year over 7 events this year, so have a general interest seeing the events conform to reasonable standards. Don't want to walk into Starbucks in Toronto vs San Francisco and find out the Toronto Venti is way off the general standard.

I would add it is impossible for Jimmy to listen after the Tremblant 70.3 WC 2014 and implement changes at the Tremblant WC that just happened. He can only fix stuff for the future. For what it is worth, the wave spacing in Vegas was wider than Tremblant and most of the problems seen at Tremblant were not experienced in Vegas (I say most because there was indeed some drafting, but not to the same degree as Tremblant).

Here is the funny thing, you're calling WTC out on it, and you've called WTC out on drafting before and often, yet you still do many of their races per season.

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

Agreed that I do many of their races. There are many really good aspects and some I may not agree on...calling a company on a flaw in a product is not a reason to boycott. You did IM Arizona too. If one is a consumer, is it not desirable to discuss shortcomings with the supplier from whom you consume. We do this all the time in our business lives, so how is this different as triathlon consumers vs B2B consumers?

Dev

It's desirable to discuss. But at what point do you say you know what, we've discussed and discussed and you (being WTC) isn't doing much about it so you decide it's not worth it.

What amount of them not listening to you or caring what you think will get you to say F*ck it, I'll go elsewhere? Serious question for you. Dev what will it take for you to go elsewhere?

fwiw I did vineman 2010 and IMAZ 2015 as my last 2 WTC races. I wouldn't really call me a consumer of WTC products. I shop them about as often as I shop Walmart.

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

I did Wildflower half IM, Canadian half IM, Ottawa half marathon, Cornwall Olympic, Tri Gatineau Loppet 50K. That's a decent amount of racing outside WTC this year (5 races). Inside WTC I stuck to the races where I know it is going to be fair: South Africa, Whistler, Texas, Tahoe, Muskoka 70.3. Overall I think their offering is great. There are places they can do better. If I just say how awesome they are (I say that enough in other threads....check out the threads on Tremblant, Whistler, Muskoka, Tahoe. Austria WC's) but don't say anything about places where they can improve, then you're going to call me on that too. So I won't win anyway.

Personally, I wouldn't chose this race, because of the swim. Well, more exactly the time of the year, but the swim is devalued too much for my liking. I'm no great swimmer (1:04 IM swimmer), but not terrible either.

I really don't see why you see frustration in Dev's post, as the swim is ***.

People have the right to sign up for races like this and Augusta, heck have at it.

People also have the right to call out the race for what it is.

What you *seem* to be asking for is this race with a 'reduced' swim to be called as a perfectly normal IM. Anyone who questions this is a 'hater'?

Can't have your cake and eat it too...


ETA: What I really meant to say is that it, YES the swim is well known and a well defined element of this race.

BUT, it is also a well-defined element that there will be some legitimate questioning of the race by some.

Both are known elements of this race. If you don't care about this criticism, then do the race. If you share this concern, then don't do the race.

Pretty simple...

---

Founder of THE TRIATHLON COLLECTIVE (Closed Facebook Group). A SBR discussion group without the white noise/trolling!

Possibly not. I remember seeing a video from IM Cozumel 2012 where a swimmer couldn't swim against the current and was stuck at the start line. If the current is strong enough you could have some slow swimmers that would make the cutoff in a lake unable to swim upstream.

Every course offers different challenges. It is what it is.

Dev I just wanted to know if you had a point where you were going to be done with WTC races bc of short swims or drafting or whatever.

Maybe the answer is No I have no breaking point or maybe the answer is If one more person drafts off me.

I just wanted to know your breaking point or if you even have one.

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

Hi Brian, basically my breaking point iss doing WTC races that will be fair in all three sports. This is why I did the recent events I have done which offer a fair shot in all: South Africa, Tahoe, Whistler, Texas. I would actually like to do some less difficult courses as long as they are more fair. IM Arizona with the rolling start is looking more attractive than in the past (for example). I'5 do Chattanooga at some point with a more balanced swim, but not with this one...that's the breaking point

You keep saying fair and I don't understand how you are arguing that it isn't fair. Is Texas "fair" to those that have been training in a northern winter all year? Is Tahoe "fair" to the 200+ lb diesels that can put out huge watts? Was Florida "fair" to the poorer swimmers the year the swells rolled in?

Different courses favor different strengths, that doesn't mean they aren't fair. Everyone does the same course.

well said Fred D. Exactly how I feel about it. It would seem that some people on this forum would rather we don't debate courses at all, which I really don't get. For me, I will probably never do Chattanooga for the simple fact that I don't think I would really be doing an IM distance swim, and I want that to be part of the equation. The swim at Chattanooga to me would be akin to having a bike that was entirely downhill. Others disagree with that, and that's fine, but what I don't understand is why some on this forum can't seem to wrap their brains around the fact that there may differing opinions on this, both of which are perfectly valid.

---

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.

That would be unfair as well, the flow rate of the river changes constantly and it is a first come, first in the water event. If an elite swimmer shows up to the line and it takes awhile to get in the water they will face a stronger current up river, while the front of line folks get a weaker current to swim against. If they line the athletes up by predicted finish time, isn't it unfair for the slower swimmers having to be at the end of the line and jumping into a stronger current to swim against?? The TVA flows water based on the demands on the power grid and rainfall, WTC loves the fast current, brings in more first timers!

The frustration is the comment stating he is not taking away from what the athlete's are doing on the day. Kind of like when people say "I am just keeping it real or speaking the truth" as a justification for being an asshole.

To clarify, I was not asking for that in my reply but do classify Chattanooga as an IM. I am not really sure what a 'normal' IM is. What other IMs are not normal? As for people questioning, that's great if people want to question. When you champion questioning it every year or time the race is brought up, it does start to gravitate towards the 'hater' criteria.

Well, "it is what it is" is equally applicable if the swim were all upstream. Some folks would make it, and some would not. It would just be a unique challenge of the IM Choo course. It could be announced well in advance to allow folks time to train more on their swim. "It is what it is" works both ways, Dude:)

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

Fair enough, I'm not here enough to know how often this topic has been brought up. Personally, I don't like the courses with downhill swims and don't do them as a rule, although I'm doing Alcatraz next year, ha! If Dev is bringing this up over and over, then it's his issue I guess, but it would seem logical to accept the possibility of some criticism on this swim course if you sign up. I don't really care enough what others think of my racing to make it the reason I won't sign up for Chattanooga, I just like the full swim experience. I also don't like doing an Ironman in September for family reasons, which is by far the bigger reason. Cheers

---

Founder of THE TRIATHLON COLLECTIVE (Closed Facebook Group). A SBR discussion group without the white noise/trolling!

Imagine the outcry if the swim was 2.4 miles upstream and the fastest pro was around 90 minutes. Now that would be a fun thread.

---

---

---

Take a short break from ST and read my blog:
http://tri-banter.blogspot.com/

So pick another race. One that plays to your strengths. No one forced anyone to race at chattanooga today.

---

----------------------------
Jason
None of the secrets of success will work unless you do.

Earlier in this thread I said that Bruce would need a 4 hour run to go sub 10 and perhaps hang onto a KQ slot. Great to see he did exactly that for a 9:59 and squeeked out 3rd in his age group by less than a minute. Congrats.

Now we can carry on with this thread.

Dev

This would be awesome!!! They could increase the swim cutoff to 4 or even 5 hours and total race cutoff to 19 or 20 hrs, and maybe stock 3 or 4 aid stations out on the swim course, with rafts to rest on. The swim would really be a big part of the race for everyone, not just for those at the extreme "pointy end":)

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

It's interesting how much some people cry like a biatch here. If a current, gives the typical swimmer a 20 percent faster swim, making a 60 minute swimmer, a 48 minute swimmer, and a stud 53 minute 42.5 minute swimmer, the differential goes from a 7 minute lead by the stud swimmer, to a 5.5 minute lead by the stud swimmer. Or a loss of 1.5 minutes over a 9 or 10 hr KQ competitor. It's time to HTFU. By the way, Gennari was 10 minutes out of 2nd, so a shorter swim was a mute point in his case.

I will say this. I prepared differently for this race specifically because of the swim, I prepared for wildflower differently specifically in regards to the run. A little variation is great IMO as it rewards people who do their homework. To dev I think logistics dictate the swim start at IM Choo, just as they do at Louisville at tumbleweeds

---

---

Save: $50 on Speed Hound Recovery Boots | $20 on Air Relax| $100 on Normatec| 15% on Most Absorbable Magnesium

Blogs: Best CHEAP Zwift / Bike Trainer Desk | Theragun G3 vs $140 Bivi Percussive Massager | Normatec Pulse 2.0 vs Normatec Pulse | Speed Hound vs Normatec | Air Relax vs Normatec | Q1 2018 Blood Test Results | | Why HED JET+ Is The BEST value wheelset

While I think it is reasonable to debate courses, I think that the flip side of this view also needs to be weighed. I raced IMChoo yesterday, somewhat of a last minute decision after Whistler didn't go well, and I found the course both fun and challenging.

I am one of those weak swimmers you speak of, and while my swim time was faster than normal, the distance behind my competition was the same as in a regular swim. So the only real advantage a non-swimmer gets here is in terms of time saved, and not distance to the front of the race. That being said, everyone gets the same advantage, so the super swimmers also benefit.

As you have noted, the run course is extremely challenging, and the bike course is also long. I would say this course most benefits runners.

The current yesterday was not running fast, and my guess is that the advantage may have been 5-10 minutes at most. Part of the speed of this swim course is also due to its simplicity - a straight line from point to point.

Having never previously considered racing Choo, I was pleasantly surprised. The city is fantastic, friendly people, easy to navigate and lots of great food choices. The race was very well run, and all of the volunteers and spectators were very spirited. It reminded me in a way of Penticton.

I agree with the general points of your post, my response is more a clarification for accuracy.

The current aided swim will not benefit everybody to the same degree. The faster swimmers will gain less time due to being in the water for a shorter period so receiving less total "push".
It should increase everybody's speed the same amount, but following that logic the faster swimmers will gain less time.
It's sort of similar to how slower riders gain more time through improved aerodynamics due to being out on course longer.

But anyway, the difference in gains between FOP and BOP swimmers would have likely only been a few minutes. So like you said, not a major impact on the day as a whole.

Thanks for your info first hand. With Tahoe now gone from the fall calendar, this sounds like a fun fall event, certainly on the bike and run and if, as you say the deltas on the swim are what they would normally be in a "full duration" swim. Like you I did a fall event (Tahoe) because Whistler, was basically a waste of my summer training build given the really cold rain in which I fair really badly. I will be watching Louisville to see how it plays out as a fall event too.

How can you blame WTC for selecting a city with one of the best settings for an Ironman race in North America. The overall course is challenging and the City of Chattanooga embraces the event. Great job in Chattanooga WTC!

Dev - do the race and then see what you think. Yes, it's current assisted on the swim, but the bike course is 4 miles long and the back half of the run (which you do twice) is probably one of the hardest runs on the IM circuit.

I did the race yesterday as well and think you summed up the race very well. All the insinuation that this is somehow a lesser race because of the river current are ridiculous. This was IM #4 for me, and the run course was by far the hardest I've seen, not to mention the extra 4 miles on the bike. WTC and the city of Chattanooga put together a very good and challenging race yesterday.

Dev - it is still an IM course. Chill out. Florida is pancake flat but I don't see you complaining about that. Louisville is a downriver swim (minus the first 800 yards). Each course has something. Chattanooga is a great city with a great race atmosphere. It is one of the best. Please stop complaining.

I was glad to see him grab a spot as well. He had a similar swim / bike last year, but heard he had running injuries that prevented him from closing the deal.

It doesn't sound possible to have a legit swim at this venue (and no, 2.4 miles with a current is not 2.4 miles...that has been debated ad nauseam, see last years' thread.) With entry / exit position where they are and little control over the weather and therefore flow, it sounds like it will always be fast.

But before you whine about my whining, though, ask yourself if the run or bike was 10% short, would you call it a legit course? Is 23.6 miles a marathon? What about a 101 mi bike course?

I am a bit jet lagged right now having just come across to Europe, but I am quite certain that very early in this thread, I said that the race is plenty challenging (based on first hand accounts from friends who raced last year) and tough with the longer bike and the hard run. I was pointing out that the race just penalizes stronger swimmers (I am not one of them) and rewards those whose race really starts once on land. No one is downplaying the achievement at the end of the day of participants, at least I am not. The challenge is there, it is just divided up somewhat differently from what we would expect at other IM races where things conform a bit more closely to the generally accepted expectations for the breakdown between sports.

For those who said, I have not complained about Florida, sure I have not started a thread on it, but I have pointed out and discussed (along with many others) the packs at that event, and have avoided entering that race for this reason alone.

Congrats to the event finishers and as I said a bit earlier, excited that Bruce hung on to a KQ even with the compressed swim.

Edit: I added a clarification to the thread title for you guys who feel I was not respecting the degree of difficulty on the bike and run. I do and I had already said so a few times early in the thread, but probably better to have that mentioned in the thread title to avoid confusion and people feeling like their achievement is being discredited which is not in question and never was. The point of the thread was to point out the disadvantage to the fish crowd.

Dev

I think it is reasonable to gripe about a current-assisted swim, especially when it is possible and reasonable to make it a 1/3 upstream, 2/3 downstream or similar option to mitigate it. If WTC were to create a race with a point-to-point massively downhill marathon that reduced times by ~20% as the swim has done, it would also be reasonable to gripe about that.

Let it go, man.

Let. It. Go.

---

Proud Member of Chris McDonald's 2018 Big Sexy Race Team "That which doesn't kill me, will only make me stronger"
Blog-Twitter-Instagram-Race Reports - 2018 Races: IM Florida 70.3, IM Raleigh 70.3, IM 70.3 World Championships - South Africa, IM North Carolina 70.3

Why Kyle, I am surprised you have that attitude given that you designed the Savageman course in a way that will massively disadvantage anyone who does not climb well on the bike (or run for that matter.) :)

I guess I am in the minority, but I like races that are not always a "standard" distance. After all, those standard distances are all arbitrary. I rather like the fact that different courses will emphasize different skill sets.

If someone wants to KQ, they can just target races that suit them best. I think that is better than having races that always favor the same type of athlete.

After all, even Kona with its high heat and humidity tends to disadvantage athletes with higher body mass who might do much better in a cooler climate.

I feel there is a minimum bar to be met for Ironman. The distances should be close to standard. And the course should be no easier than flat.

Would it be ok to gripe if the run were held on a moving sidewalk like they have in airports?

Sign up for Choo. I think you will be challenged plenty.

I appreciate your saying this, espec since my impression is that you are mainly a biker/runner, and since you are the designer of the massively hilly Savageman race. This speaks highly of your ability to see things clearly; the analogies to the downhill mary and the moving sidewalk are excellent. The moving sidewalk is in essence exactly what swimming with the current is. It seems to me that, if you're going to have a bike and run with lots of up and down, you should have a swim with up and down also:)

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

Well then they're stupid for signing up for that race if they want to race to their strengths.



Which is every Ironman, regardless of course.

I don't have an issue with IMCHOO's swim. Variety in the different races makes it more interesting.

My first thought when I saw your post, Kyle, was if there were a suitable stream at Deep Creek, we'd have a swim at Savageman that was entirely upstream instead of in flat lake water. lol!

---

____________________________________________
Don Larkin
Reach For More
http://www.reachformore.fit/
USAT Lvl1 Coach, NSCA-CPT, NASM-CPT, BS Exercise Science

though that analogy might sound great at first, it's actually dumb.

water CAN flow in certain directions. you're not creating that (though in choo's case, you kinda sorta are a bit with the water release). regardless, if the damn was not there, flow will still be there.

on a bike course a course could be setup where the wind will be at your back more often than not.

the closest thing you can do on a run is make it flat/shady or downhill shady.

i know plenty of weak cyclist etc that chose FL, MD etc because it's a flat bike course. why can't i chose CHoo because it's an easier/assisted swim course?

my team is sending 25+ to IMMD this weekend. most of them are first timers and MD was chosen because of the flat bike/run. i sure hope they can handle the swim if it's a rough day.

did i bitch and moan that they are not going to get the "full" (pun intended) experience? nope. i personally chose IMLP for my first full because it was:
1) close by
2) awesome bike course (i hurt, but it love riding up hill)
3) MIRROR lake (at the time it was probably the easiest ironman swim, 2011).

john

Those in the know...
Just how tough Is the run tough at Chatt?
In Men 50-54 the top seven dudes were under 3:40, with two of em at 3:24.
Just great runners?

Yes.

Impressive performance in male 50-54...especially as compared to male 40-44...unusual lack of talent for that age group

---

Coach at KonaCoach Multisport

OK to gripe because Boston is a net downhill and point to point?

Yes. Though clearly the Boston net downhill does not reduce times by 20% like the downstream IMChoo swim. I would say Boston is more like the 1/3 upstream, 2/3 downstream IMCHOO proposal, as it is net downhill but includes plenty of uphill along the way.

All the whiners about the swim course need to be posting in the cry like a bitch thread.

Also, WTC is probably laughing at all this whining and how some think they can change the course setup with threads like this. The bottom line is WTC will sellout this race/course fast. No changes needed.

If you don't like the course, stay away. Rockfish like me (meaning I swim like a rock) are licking our chops to race next year.

Float on!

Bottom line is there are different courses for different horses. I like the variety and don't care about a uniform layout.

I certainly wasn't bitching when I did France last year as it was short of the 112!

I still fail to see what you are trying to accomplish other than to beat a dead horse and sound elitist. How is it your place to determine what a "normal" IM is? I'd say a normal IM is 140.6 miles with a 2.4 mile swim, 112 mile bike, and a 26.2 mile run. Period. If anything, the distance for IM Chattanooga is longer than a "normal" due to a 116 mile bike. And by that logic, Tahoe was not a "normal" IM since the bike was only ~110 miles (my Garmin has 109.?? miles for the bike). Again, you haven't done this race so you really can't speak to how easy or not easy the total course is. I did it last year, and while the swim is faster than usual, the overall course is not "easy"... and it ended up being 144.6 miles and not 140.6 miles.

You have failed to convince me that the analogy to a moving sidewalk is dumb.

If you stand on a moving sidewalk and make no attempt to make forward progress, you will make forward progress nonetheless.
If you tread water at IMCHOO and make no attempt to make forward progress, you will make forward progress nonetheless.

My personal threshold for gripe worthiness is if a course is excessively short or easier than the baseline of flat. Mirror Lake is an "easy" swim, but starts and finishes in same location, so no gripes from me. I raced IM Austria one time and the last 800m or 1000m was down a little stream and all the athletes packed in there made quite the current. It is my IM swim PR by 4 minutes. That would be gripe worthy (as was the 3 mile short bike course). A point-to-point bike with a guaranteed tailwind every year would be gripe worthy. The St. George Marathon as the run course for IM St. George would have been gripe worthy (google it).

My criteria of what should be expected from an Ironman course are my criteria and nothing more. I just feel like Ironman should be close to the standard distances one expects from Ironman and that none of the legs should be easier than the baseline of flat. Getting carried downstream by a current is easier than flat.

Actually, the moving sidewalk is a perfect analogy since in a downstream swim the water is moving with you just as the moving sidewalk is. At a minimum, the swim should be at least half up and half downstream. Or, since the swim is proportionately MUCH shorter than than the bike and run, make the swim all upstream. You say that, even if the dam were not upstream, the flow would still be there, and that is true but, by the same token people can swim upstream, if they really work at it. Swim times might double to triple but that would just make it a tougher race:)

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

Good luck trying to change the Boston marathon course.

Why would I do that?

Well its a net downhill and point to point for Pete's sake. It can't be legitimate, neither can the IM Chatty swim course. Let's discuss enough so that WTC will alter the course to make it harder. Let's do the same regarding Boston.

Just my twisted line of reasoning maybe.

I'm pretty sure you're trolling. But, just in case you're not.

1. Just because an internet conversation is happening does not mean the goal is to get WTC to change. People share their opinions on internet forums simply because they can and for no reason more.
2. You can't seriously be comparing Boston to the IMCHOO swim. Boston is nearly always an exceptionally slow course, due to it's hills. It has been proven to be a fast course only when there is a strong tailwind. And, yes, it is ineligible for records. IMCHOO, with times at 80% of "fair" swims, would be equivalent to the Boston Marathon yielding 1:38 times.
3. Seriously, get a better example than Boston for point-to-point downhill races. Let me lead you to some: Mt. Nebo Half Marathon. St. George Marathon.

Ok so IM Choo isn't legit because of the swim. IM Texas and AZ we can eliminate because they are flat. Florida surely is flat and they don't even swim there at all when the waves are a little rough. IM Lou used to get a pass because of the heat, but now it's in October so lets add that one to the illegitimate list. IM MD is flat so we have to add it to the bastardized list. Someone said Tahoe had a short bike course so it is illegitimate as well. How many IM courses out there meet your definition of a "standard" course?

I believe I said my criteria was that a course should not be easier than flat. So, the only courses on my list are IMCHOO and the old IM Austria that had a short bike course and a downstream swim.

Why do people take such offense to this?

1. Pretty sure I read in the beginning that the OP wants to call out WTC to change. Maybe its just him that wants the change.
2. Comparison is still valid, though I recognize the differences in extremes.
3. Trolling? IDK ...You trolling?

Yeah this entire discussion about the Choo swim is beyond stupid. Trust me, the extra four miles on the bike more than make up for any added current on the swim.

In addition, no one complains when their Garmin reads "110 miles" for a bike course. So I assume any course with less than 112 miles is not a legit IM? That means a lot of folks have been fooled into believing they have completed an IM

Another thing is IMCHOO is an absolutely fabulous race. Brian Myrick, the RD, does a really good job with this one. I've done 12 IMs now and Chatt has become my favorite because of the well organized race, the volunteers, great course (ALL of it), and the city itself

"If it's legit, that means he gets to have the same tattoo I have".

Someone's going below the hard deck with that one, before it's all said and done.

The standard distances are not arbitrary.

---

Pink? Maybe. Maybe not. You decide.

Just a sidebar thought here. If someone grabs onto a kayak in this race, would they get a DQ? As you pointed out, they would indeed be making forward progress.

Really? It was my understanding that the standard IM distances were based on an individual swimming, biking and running event, none of which were designed to be part of a combined event. Rather, the distances were picked as part of what was essentially a drunken bar bet. About as arbitrary as you can get.

On the other hand, if you can point me to any studies that show the "Iron Distance" is somehow the optimal balance of distances to make a fair contest involving swimming, biking and running, I will happily stand corrected.

A race is a race and that's doing your homework for the course. Right now I'm just able to start swimming again after fracturing my clavicle this summer and having a hook plate put in. The doctor thinks it's going to annoy me when swimming but won't take the plate out for at least a year. Instead of waiting an extra year to get the plate out and signing up for races with "real" swims in 2017, I've planned out my races to try minimize the injury showing itself on the course so I can still try to be competitive. Right now 3 out of my 4 races in 2016 are going to involve swimming down the Tennessee to put myself in the best position possible heading to the bike and the run.

I would say that it is NOT a valid comparison. Tahoe was a net downhill, a very slow net downhill. Don't confuse net and continual. I have no horse in the race, but the swim would be comparable to a continual downhill.

Ill throw in my quick response to some of this...
We nailed the flow at the Chickamauga dam yesterday! TVA did exactly what we wanted and held the flow right just under 10,000 cfs. That being said, it did rain two inches in the days before the event, making the actual flow rate of the river higher. I cant control that! Pro times were a few minutes slower than last year and that difference was even greater with age groupers. Its always going to be a river and have a current. I don't think its possible for me to get pro swim times into that 49 minute range with all the different logistical constraints I work within.

Ive had a lot of fun in Chattanooga and am glad folks have seemed to enjoy the races. The 70.3 should sell out any day and Im curious to see how day 1 reg numbers look when I take a moment to sit down later tonight.

I hope those that joined us in Chatt the last few days enjoyed it!

Brian Myrick

keep the flow rate nice and high. in fact, i would love to see it at 15k cfu's next year. cus i signed up. plus, it'll be fun to watch ST blow up over it.

john

Brian - I thought everything about the race was great. You and all the WTC staff and volunteers did an excellent job. The course was fun and challenging. I'm definitely feeling the effort from yesterday. The city and support for the race were great. In fact, I'm thinking of adding the 70.3 to my calendar for next year after yesterday. Thanks for putting on such a class event.

---

_____________________________________________________
Instagram | Team Kiwami North America

  
Really? It was my understanding that the standard IM distances were based on an individual swimming, biking and running event, none of which were designed to be part of a combined event. Rather, the distances were picked as part of what was essentially a drunken bar bet. About as arbitrary as you can get.

The fact that the guys decided to create a triathlon out of the Waikiki Rough Water Swim, The Around Oahu Bike Ride and the Honolulu Marathon is the exact reason the distances are not arbitrary. The distances of those events were already well established (although the Around Oahu Bike Ride was not 112 miles. If you're interested you can research the actual distance). Just like the Olympic distance is made up of 3 distinct & established individual events: 1500m swim, 40k TT and 10k run.

ETA: If the original IRONMEN sat down and said "lets swim 2.4, ride 112 and run 26.2" then yes, that would have been completely arbitrary.

On the other hand, if you can point me to any studies that show the "Iron Distance" is somehow the optimal balance of distances to make a fair contest involving swimming, biking and running, I will happily stand corrected.

The question of optimal distances is not the topic of this thread.

---

Pink? Maybe. Maybe not. You decide.

By all accounts, IMCHOO sounds like a premier race. A friend of mine, who happens to be a relatively poor swimmer and an uberbiker, crushed it and KQed. All feedback I hear is that it is one of the good ones. Good course, good weather, good host city, honest bike, hard run.

Assuming you have control over the course design and that the dam flow was as expected on Sunday, are you happy with the fact that the swim times are 80% of normal? And, if not, why do you not do something about it? If people were throwing down 2:12 marathons on your run course, which would be similarly fast to their swims, would you modify it to be more inline?

Those who think my criticism of a downstream swim is a claim that the race is not legit or that it compromises any one persons IM accomplishment are misinterpreting. It appears the course is plenty challenging and the extra 4 miles makes up time and effort-wise for the 10-20 minutes they are saving on the swim. The individual accomplishments are not compromised and the MDot tattoos can be inked with pride. However, this is also a qualifying race for people to qualify for Kona, with it's difficult ocean swim. You now have poor swimmers and strong bikers targeting this race because of its minimized swim. I guess that's fine; Boston has a time-based qualification and plenty of people target fast courses because of it. All qualifying races need not be equal. But, as the course designer, it just seems like the scenario should be avoided if it can be avoided, and my understanding is that it could be, so I'm curious why it isn't.

Am I happy that the swim is fast? No. If I was why would I try and slow it down? I believe I've done everything I can to make it as fair as possible and get it as close to "normal" as possible. I cannot move the start location to add as up river section. I cannot control the weather. I have worked with the TVA to control the current.

The long bike course has nothing to do with the quick swim. I'd love to get that to 112 but again, there are a ton of factors involved. To shorten it and keep a similar course would require us to remove what I consider the best part of the course and more importantly it would require us to close a road for an out and back. That is not an option for us right now with regards to permitting.

The run, well... it's hard but at least I got the distance right!

Brian

Thanks for the response. My impression was that an upstream leg was feasible; if not then it is moot and you work with what you've got.

Clearly you have a good team. When I put on SavageMan for years the last thing I was doing the day after the event was messing around on slowtwitch.

Brian, don't listen to all these folks complaining about anything regarding this race. This is a GREAT race. The people in Georgia come out and sit in their chairs to watch us go by on the bike. The swim, regardless of current, is in a nice body of water with a well controlled time trial start, and the run has all the people lining the Veteran's Bridge, the pedestrian bridge, and the hills on the North side. I love it and the community.

As a friend of mine says, some people would complain if their ice cream was cold

Brian thanks for your clarification and coming on here. As Kyle has said, no one is diminishing the accomplishment of the athletes. I think a small minority who Kyle has nicely represented feel an IM should have each leg no easier than a pancake flat IM, thus the discussion about the swim leg at your event. It sounds like an upstream leg given the flow would be almost impossible as less strong swimmers would literally swim in place on days the water flow is high enough and many would not make the cut off even with a short upriver leg. Can you confirm if this might indeed be the case (for example in Louisville, the short upriver neutralizes the overall current effect, but the current is viewed as being weak enough that all swimmers can make it to the upstream turn).

In the worse case if the current is moving at 2.4 miles per 2:20 or 1.03 mph, the swimmer who is swimming right at the cut off speed (1.03 mph) would not make any forward progress).

Thanks for listening and discussing and congrats on what all who have done say is a great event.

No more than in the same situation with no current flow. The rule says: "Excluding the bottom, a participant shall not use any inanimate object to gain forward progress" (emphasis added.) You would only be gaining additional forward progress if the kayaker is paddling at the same time.

Don't backpedal! Stand your ground! Damn the CHOO swim! It's so fake!

Also, Louisville is DEFINITELY a current aided swim.

Swim does not need to be 50% up current 50% down current to be equivalent to a flat race no current swim. In fact, depending on the current, this could make it dramatically longer than a no current lake swim or no tide ocean swim. If Louisville was 50/50 up and down current it would end up being ridiculously long. The main discussion was to add whatever is needed to a swim to bring it in line with no current swims. It seems to date, Louisville has done that. It sounds like this is not possible in Chattanooga, but maybe Brian will confirm that the flow is too high to add any up stream segment without dramatically hurting middle to later in the pack swimmers.

Nah

What's up with this crusade against the Chattanooga swim? Why don't you do the race first? Until then you really just sound like a sore loser because swim times are faster. Guess what, the bike times are slower. Brian and team put on a great event this weekend. There is no need to change the current set up. In fact, I hope this is the site for 70.3 worlds in 2017.

Reminds me of the 2012 Cozumel swim. 20+ minutes slower for me. Many never made it. Put this into Chatty and there's the possibility of a huge CF if TVA calls for a big release at showtime. See video link below for 2012 IM Coz swim footage.


https://vimeo.com/55015129


Kudos to the RD. Sounds like a great course and really looking forward to next year. Secretly hoping for a big release mainly because I'm a MOP swimmer but also so that ST will have something to cry about. Seriously, if there is nothing to whine about, ST will whine about the fact that there is nothing to whine about.

Let's try a little experiment. If you can, assume that you know absolutely nothing about a given 3-sport event but you meet someone who is an avid three-sport guy. So you ask about how much of the race is involved in each sport, and the guy responds that sport #1 took 1 hr, sport #2 took 5 and 1/2 hrs, and sport 3 took 4 hrs. Maybe you, with no knowledge of the three sports, would think is a normal time distribution but i think it is really, really out of any semblance of symmetry. The swim in a half or full iron race should be longer period, and when we make it even shorter as in a current-aided swim, it just makes it seem even more ridiculous. And, just b/c the bike is 4 miles longer, and b/c the run is very hilly, does NOT make up for the swim being shorter, since we are talking about different parts of the race.

Just for the record, I don't even do half or full iron races specifically for the reason that the swim is too short. I only do Oly dist races b/c at least there the swim has more influence:)

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

I totally get it, especially because I'm a swimmer. Olympic distance races suit me best because the swim is a larger percentage of the race. There is even still a bit of an advantage in the half. But for someone, especially someone who hasn't done Chattanooga, to attempt to devalue the swim because it is perceived as short is ridiculous. I've never done Lake Placid, for example, but I'm not complaining about a swim that is basically a long lap pool, minus the flip turn at the wall. I actually think that's great! All races have their own intricacies. We should embrace those intricacies, otherwise maybe all IMs should be done in a pool, on a trainer, and then on a treadmill. Those controlled environments would seemingly satisfy those who think everything must be exactly the same in order to be a true IM.

That sums it well. I don't see anyone posting proposed time savings for sting bikes vs week for the extra 4 miles.
I respect Dev, he's a better athlete than me and been around longer than me but seems he's stuck with this choo swim. Ironman is not a custom product, it's built and sold as advertised, you either buy it or dont. There's nothing stopping you from doing your own version of choo with a different swim and as a bonus there's no entry fee!

OK, well, since you are a swimmer, I will admit that variety is the spice and all that. I will even agree that in a half iron being a good swimmer does provide a small advantage, but only b/c you too are a swimmer. OTOH, I do like the pool/trainer/treadmill idea:)

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

Just so I've got this straight, we're focusing on the swim where the final #1 and #2 finishers were 4 minutes apart instead of the end where they were separated by (a generous timing of) 2 seconds? Kthxbye.

I am pretty sure one of the Canadian IM races has or had a short bike and plenty of people complained on this board.

Trying to get some idea about the current. Normally fast people do an IM swim in 50 minutes - 2.88 miles per hour. At the race they finished in 40 minutes - 3.6 miles per hour. So the current was 3.6 - 2.88 = 0.71 miles per hour.

Problem is, a slow swimmer goes 1:30 for the IM swim (or slower obviously) = 1.6 miles per hour. That slow swimmer's net upstream speed would be 1.6 - 0.71 = 0.9 miles per hour.

So their 0.8 miles upstream swim would take 53 minutes by itself. A 2 hour swimmer would need 1:36 just to do the upstream part.

Actually, being a swimmer, I'm all for it. But I don't think many race directors would go for it.

I wish it were the case that triathletes as a whole would see it as a ig challenge and work our tails off and relish the challenge, but that's not the way it is.

Actually the Ironman swim rule per the IMChoo athlete guide reads " Any assistance required during the swim will result in disqualification if forward progress was made. Athletes are permitted to use kayaks and boats as aid, as long as forward progress is not made." I suspect that they would not penalize anyone in this situation, but the current wording would seem to indicate that they could.

I can't change the start location or I would do an up river portion of the swim. If you are familiar with the section of river where we start you know that anything downstream is out of the picture. It's a huge, steep rocky embankment with no way of getting athletes down to the water. Ive looked at building a crazy structure, using barges, starting off a river boat, etc, nothing worked. I just got lucky that when I scouted out Chatt that I found this little cut in the woods that was the perfect distance. We just built a structure to get us down there.

Ok, trailer doors are closed and they are off to IMLou, time for some sleep.

There are opportunities on the bike to start f'ing up your run. Then the first 1/2 of the run loop is flat so it can easily get away from you and then it's too late. I think the toughest part is that it's 2 laps with the last 6 miles being the hard part of the loop. I'm a fairly strong runner but I suffered pretty good the last ~8 miles off good bike pacing and I knew the course well.

So I guess you're not going to do 70.3 Worlds in 2017 if you qualify?

http://m.ironman.com/...p.aspx#axzz3n9D3FEG7

Brian, great event, well run and Chattanooga is a hell of a small big city with some awesome folks.

One thing; please get some port-o-sinks. I have never been at a race of any length without them and its nice to wash off occasionally.

Thanks again for a great IM!

I will attempt to qualify for 70.3 World's in Chattanooga. The Swim in the 70.3 seems to have been fair and the race organizer is promising a hard bike course that uses more of the local climbs. Should be a good race and probably much better than the flat bike course on deck for Australia (I am reluctant to spend money to qual for that and vacation and travel time for potentially a Tour De France style group ride unless we get more info from WTC saying the course will be improved). World's in Chattanooga should be really good. It will be hard for me to qualify as I'll be getting older in the age group and slots will be competitive.

Did Louisville last year, Chattanooga this year.

The current in Louisville was a LOT faster for the downriver portion of the swim in 2014 than Chattanooga was a few days ago. I would say that those two races swam the same for someone who would be a 55min - 1hr swimmer. No coincidence that I enjoyed those two swims more than any other IM swims I have done.

---

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Training/Racing Log - http://www.earthdaykid.com/blog --- Old Training/Racing Log - http://colinlaughery.blogspot.com

I am glad to see you write this. The swim is Cozumel is with a current, Louisville has a current once you turn the corner, and Augusta 70.3 probably beats them all with its super fast current. Who cares. If you don't like it then don't sign up and don't bitch about it endlessly. People on here are taking away from this great race and its simply a stupid, stupid argument. This is an awesome race!!!

Dev, do you think the 2 day format will open up more spots than we are accustomed to see?

What exactly are we taking away by debating current-assisted swims? Are you (and everyone else that is so offended) so insecure in your race result that you can't accept the criticism of the course or the fact that you didn't really swim 2.4 miles? Get over it.

This kind of debate is vital, as it provides the input to race directors and promotors of what our priorities are. I would like to see more challenging courses: swim, bike and run. So for us, it's important to speak up when we see venues like St. George and Tahoe disappear. If you want easier swim course, fine, express your opinion.

And for the record, I'm a FOP swimmer and have done numerous current-assisted swims (B2B, Cozumel, Augusta) and non-assisted swims (most notably 2012 St. George which was the exact opposite.) I take the course I'm given and make the most of it. I've signed up for Chattanooga in 2016 with full knowledge that the swim will be fast. But, I want my opinion heard that the swim is already disproportionally easy, and I'd like to see more challenging swim courses in the future.

If I drive 60 miles one day at 60mph and then, the next day, drive 60 miles at 100 mph, am I driving a different distance each day because I drove faster one day than the other? The first day, I really drove 60 miles but the second day, no matter what my odometer says, I only drove 40-50 miles? That is the argument being made here.

The race director has already stated numerous times the swim venue is what it is and he can do zero to change that. He has thought of many different options and none are feasible. He has been on here several times to explain this. So, you can criticize all you want but it does absolutely no good when the course cannot be altered. Knowing that the course cannot be altered, but continuing to bitch about the swim course, is complaining just to be complaining. but, that is human nature and everyone loves to complain about something (like I am doing here, for instance).

You are in the minority wanting a "challenging" swim, bike, and run. If the majority of IM racers wanted a challenge, Lake Tahoe would have sold out in one day and Arizona would still be open looking for athletes to fill the slots. Its not like that so WTC has no incentive to develop these venues.

I really don't understand your driving analogy.

Why is it so hard for people to understand that your swim effort and distance is relative to the speed of the water, not the shore? If the water is moving at 0.4 miles per hour relative to the shore and you swim 2.4 miles relative to the shore, you effectively only swam 2.0 miles at 2.0 mi/h relative to the water. This is high school physics. If it's easier to visualize, would you consider a marathon run on an airport sidewalk 26.2 miles?

I don't argue that the majority of Ironman participants want easy courses. And they have plenty of them.

But you could argue the same thing about downhills on the bike where you don't have to pedal to gain ground. Or wind assistance. The courses are what they are. Select the races that fit your preferences and let others do the same.

Ugh. No you can't. Bike courses usually start and finish at the same point, so net elevation is zero. Even when they don't, the total elevation change is miniscule compared to the distance. Wind speed is random and variable. And none of these effects equals the 10-20% advantage of the currents we're talking about.

As I said, I've raced all of these courses, and I'm choosing to race Chattanooga in 2016. Just don't pretend that it's a 2.4 mile swim.

Maybe Neil deGrasse Tyson will chime in on this one. Pretty sure he'd be on my side.

Your driving analogy is completely wrong. In basic high school physics we learned that velocity vectors in the same direction are additive, i.e. if the water is moving at 0.7 mph as has been estimated, and you are swimming at 1.0 mph, then your total speed is 1.7 mph. If you're swimming 3.0 mph, then your speed is 3.7 mph. Everyone gets the same added push from the current, but it helps the weaker swimmers more than the better swimmers, since the 1.0 mph swimmer's speed increases by 70% vs the faster swimmer's increase of only 23.3%.

Also, the RD could make the current a non-issue by making the swim above the dam, which is only about 10 miles north of downtown Chattanooga. I lived in Chatt for about 10 yrs and that is where the swim was for the oly dist race for many years, and we still had a downtown finish. Some people have said this would "hurt the vibe" of the race b/c the swim finish would be at a diff location from the bike and run finish, but it could be done.

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

Your driving analogy is completely wrong. In basic high school physics we learned that velocity vectors in the same direction are additive, i.e. if the water is moving at 0.7 mph as has been estimated, and you are swimming at 1.0 mph, then your total speed is 1.7 mph. If you're swimming 3.0 mph, then your speed is 3.7 mph. Everyone gets the same added push from the current, but it helps the weaker swimmers more than the better swimmers, since the 1.0 mph swimmer's speed increases by 70% vs the faster swimmer's increase of only 23.3%.

Also, the RD could make the current a non-issue by making the swim above the dam, which is only about 10 miles north of downtown Chattanooga. I lived in Chatt for about 10 yrs and that is where the swim was for the oly dist race for many years, and we still had a downtown finish. Some people have said this would "hurt the vibe" of the race b/c the swim finish would be at a diff location from the bike and run finish, but it could be done.[/quote]

Velocity vectors have nothing to do with the distance actually traveled. Its the rate of change (velocity) and direction (vector).

As you can see above, the remark was we did NOT swim 2.4 miles. We did swim 2.4 miles. No matter how fast or slow it was done. If you run a mile on the road at a 7:00 pace and then I get on a treadmill and run it at a 5:00 pace, with the belt helping my turnover (and speed), we both ran a mile. Same analogy with running a marathon on the moving sidewalk. As long as the moving sidewalk stretches for 26.2 miles, you covered the distance whether the moving sidewalk was turned on or you did it yourself. How about running a 100% downhill marathon? Is that not 26.2 miles since gravity pulled you downhill the entire time? Your quads, and your watch, would sure remind you it was 26.2 miles.

Relative to the water (which is what matters regarding your effort), you did not swim 2.4 miles. Relative to the earth, your body moved 2.4 miles. You swam 2.0 miles of that distance and the river carried you 0.4 miles of that distance.

To your moving sidewalk example: if you just stood there and let the sidewalk carry you 26.2 miles, did you run a marathon?

I give up. This is like week 2 of high school physics.

I think you are arguing with a medical doctor, not a physicist. I am just a dumb CPA. But I am smart enough to know that every IM course cant't require the same amount of effort in all 3 events and I am glad for the variety. I am a stronger biker but I am not going to bash a single course that may have an easy bike course. Variety adds interest In my opinion.

Don't give up, this is good.

No I did not RUN a marathon, because I just stood there and let the sidewalk move me. But, I did move from point A to point B and that distance was 26.2 miles. Take effort out of the equation. Just like Velocity Vectors should not be in this conversation. We are talking distance covered. Use the Dorito bag from last year's swim, that floated down the river. It did not swim at all. But, if you put a Garmin on that Dorito bag, let the satellites track the Dorito bag, and then check it when it is pulled from the water at the exit, it will be 2.4 miles.

It did not swim at all. But, if you put a Garmin on that Dorito bag, let the satellites track the Dorito bag, and then check it when it is pulled from the water at the exit, it will be 2.4 miles. //

I think his point is that yes, you could take that dorito bag out of the water, but it will be the same exact water it started in, so in essence it did not move one inch in the water. You can confuse the situation measuring the bottom of the river or lake, but water is what you swim in, so this is what should be measured.

well i was going to sign up and have this be my first IM, but now it seems like I should be embarrassed to do IM Chattanooga

Thus my point. The dorito bag didn't swim 2.4 miles, it floated 2.4 miles. No offense to Chattanooga competitors, but they swam somewhere between 1.7 and 2.0 miles and the river carried them between 0.4 and 0.7 miles respectively (faster swimmers swam further and floated less.) I don't argue that they moved 2.4 miles while in the water.

[NB: I'm guessing 2.0 miles max since the male pros seemed to be ~7 min fast, so the current was on the order of 0.24 m/s. At this rate, it would take the dorito bag ~ 4.5 hours to cover 2.4 miles. In simpler terms, the pros swam a 1:02 per 100 m pace with the current and would have swum 1:13 without.

Something else to consider: the pro averaging a 1:13 pace gained 7 minutes. The swimmer at a 2:00 pace gained 17 minues and the swimmer at a 2:30 pace gained 37 minutes.]

Now I'm really done.

The guilt of thinking I swam 2.4 miles, and really just being placed 2.4 miles up the river, is a bit overwhelming.

I am seeing my therapist today. As soon as I'm done here, I am going straight over to the physics department.

At least you can find solace in the fact that the .40 to .70 of a mile you didn't swim you gained back with the 116 mile bike. Does 4 miles of cycling require more or less exertion or force than .40-.70 of a mile of swimming? IM is tough science.

I would propose a ratio of 1:5:25 S:R:B. So no, you are not an Ironman.

Damn.

I will have my wife remove a portion of my medal tonight and will mail it back to WTC.


Hopefully, everyone who is getting an M-Dot tattoo, after completing the pseudo-IM this weekend in Chattanooga, is having an asterick tattooed on their calf

Did the race....
Swim ~ 11' faster than normal.
Bike ~ 13' "extra" after passing 112-mile mark.
Run: see Barton Ave front and back side after Riverwalk climb.

Maybe, but Heraclitus says that the Dorito bag you pulled out of the river would have changed.

Remove the part where it displays the bike as 112, just to keep it all honest... (edit, color blind-have no idea what color this is)

Dev,

Thanks for keeping up with me in the race. As for all the banter going back and forth about down river swims, it really doesn't matter to me one bit. I have done Chattanooga for the past two (2) years because of it's location. I don't have to break down my bike and fly with it. Chattanooga is an easy 2 hour drive from my house. I know what I'm getting into with the swim. Yes, some of my advantage is taken away from me with the current aided swim. But, I look at it this way, in this years swim I was just cruising along at about 70 percent effort. To me the swim was effortless. To others, even though the swim was current aided, I'm betting they used a bit more energy than I did on the swim. It all evens out. I can attack the bike from the "get go" and maybe others have to recover a bit before they can do so. It is what it is! I can't wait to actually race the 70.3 World Championships there in 2017. Yes, the swim will be down river again. Yes, I'll be losing some of my advantage. Looks like I'll have to work harder on my bike and run!

Hope to see you all at the races.

For those heading to Kona this year, light it up! I'll see you there in 2016!

Bruce Gennari

Years ago, the Chattanooga Dam Triathlon in the late 1990s used to do an out and back, basically about 300 yards away from and parallel to a big bridge there. The Olympic distance race was 750 meters out and 750 meters back, the swim lined with a rope that had milk jugs tied on it. super easy to spot, and no current assistance. That race, had two different transition zones, if memory serves me correctly. I loved the swim, since it used zero energy to spot.

Why not that for the 70.3 and make it rectangular?

Ya, this is what I proposed up in post 142, could be done for both the half and full races. Also, IIRC, Bruce G. won at least 3 or 4 of those late 90s/early 00s Chatt races:)

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

I'm not even sure I went 116 miles on the bike anymore. The wind may have assisted me, and moved me forward, so I probably only did a 100 mile ride (even though my Garmin said 116). Love how this physics stuff works. Point A to Point B measurements are no longer a concern when providing distance.

Perhaps I have a suggestion that could quiet all the doubters and haters. I understand your point about not being able to start the swim further down the river to allow a short upstream section, so why not add a 0.1 mile upstream section from where the swim already starts and thus make the swim 2.6 miles? I doubt that little of an upstream section would prevent weaker swimmers from meeting the cut-off, especially since so many of them chose to wear wetsuits anyway these past two years, and it should get the finish times closer to the "normal" range. Or make it 0.2 mile upstream for a total of 2.8 miles -- I still think everyone should be able to finish. The bike is already long and a great, enjoyable ride with plenty of elevation, and the run is a great challenge (the most elevation change of any IM that I've looked up). That takes the 144.6 miles up to 145 miles and everyone worried about their "M-Dot*" tattoos can get an "M-Dot+" or "Ultra M-Dot" tattoo with pride. (Oh yeah, remind everyone again about my 16 hour and 17 minute deadline instead of the 17 hours every other first-timer gets down at flat IM Florida.)

And for everyone complaining that the course should be "no easier than flat" -- I think 145 miles should count as "no easier than" 140.6 miles. Chattanooga is already a great race and a great location and the course is already a little different, just embrace it!

And for everyone else who will still complain about part of the swim being assisted, please, give me your superbike and aerowheels and aerohelmet and skinsuit, your swimskin, your $500 Garmin, your Hokas and your Newtons, your personally-curated carb-electrolyte solution, and your NormaTec boots. Now go get yourself some Speedo briefs, Nike waffle trainers, and a round-tubed lugged-steel road bike and go do your Ironman using only McDonald's and convenience stores as aid stations like the real Ironmen back in the 1970s. And stop pretending you're interested in everything being "fair."

Well said.

So, I guess you'll be fine if next year the swim is all upstream. No difference, since it is still a 2.4 mi swim.

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

Are we playing the "what if game" now?

According to the "physics" logic on here, since the river would be working against me, instead of moving me forward, I would really be swimming 3.2 miles if going upstream. The Point A to Point B distance is irrelevant. The true distance is measured by how much current is assisting (or, in this case, working against). You can decide if that should be pink font or not

Ok, ok, this is beating a dead horse now. Well, probably long before now. This is like a conservative and a liberal having a debate. No matter how much evidence you present from your side, you are not going to convince the other person to change ideology.

As an engineer, I would definitely agree with the physics-based assertion that, if the current were 0.7 mph against you, then you would be swimming further to overcome the current. A 48:00 swimmer (3.0 mph) would take 1:02:36 (e.g., net speed = 3.0 - 0.7 = 2.3 mph) to swim the 2.4 against the 0.7 mph current, and thus would swim about 3.13 miles (i.e., if he/she swam for 1:02:36 at 3.0 mph, they'd go 3.13 mi). A 1:00 swimmer (2.4 mph) would take 1:25 to swim against the current and would swim about 3.4 miles. A 1:30 swimmer (1.6 mph) would take 2:40 to do it, swimming about 4.3 mi in the process. And finally, the 2:00 swimmer (1.2 mph) would take 4:48 for this swim, and would go about 5.8 mi in the deal, assuming he/she could maintain the 1.2 mph effort for almost 5 hours.

BUT, since you seem to reject the physics-based viewpoint but rather take the straight point to point measurement, then it should not, in theory, matter to you whether the swim is up or downstream. However, I suspect that you and about 90% of the field would prob strongly protest if the swim were truly all upstream. In sum, it seems to me that half up and half downstream would be the truly fair way to do it. The swim cut-off time could be adjusted to make it comparable to the current 2:20, and the 17 hr total time increased as well if needed.

Actually, the more I analyze this, the more I think all IM swims should be in rivers so that we can have some "hills" on the swim. This innovation would make the swim truly a full third of the average competitor's race, rather than simply a warm-up as it is now:)

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

Yep, kind of like Rick Santorum debating Neil deGrasse Tyson on climate change.

IM Florida is not pancake flat, there are some rolling hills out in the back side of the course that added a bit of interest to the course. I was in the 2014 race and there were pretty significant headwinds on top of those hills that caused a few people to have a tough time making it up that "pancake" hill!