I know a couple of years ago the pros had to swim upstream a bit. But for the AG they nixed the upstream part.

No idea if that happened here but could explain it. Especially if there was strong current. Shortened swim + downstream current = PR!!

couple athlete files i saw had about 1300 yds and it was all downriver. Don't know anything for sure but doesn't look like it was 2100.

like in 2017...pro's swam the entire swim course (including upriver portion) whereas they shortened it for the AGers. Right off the dock and directly downriver. I wouldn't be doing a lot of swim comparisons between pro's and AGers today. :-)

They cut the upstream. My yardage per watch was 1369

What was the “reason” given? Or is this just turning into an annual thing?

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

I just asked my friend who raced today. She said "the current was too strong, the elites couldn't do it".

---

All I Wanted Was A Pepsi, Just One Pepsi

Team Zoot, Team Zoot Mid-Atlantic

So the swim is already the shortest - time wise - and they chop one - third off of that? Charming.

Except that wasn't true at all. The pro swim splits were perfectly normal for a non-wetsuit swim.

Ironman has a swim problem. Big time. They cancel, cut and make it easy based on any pre-text they can imagine or conjure up. This sucks.

No, they were pretty slow considering it’s like 400 upstream 1500 downstream

---

Let food be thy medicine...

Not really when you look at the downstream swim times and think how long that short upstream portion took even the pros to finish

I think 90% of triathletes have a swim problem. Fix that, and we can have legit swims.

This. People like to blame Ironman. But holy moly, I've yet to do a 70.3 and there issues at your local novice pool sprint.

---

Washed up footy player turned Triathlete.

I don't know what the current was but anytime you run into a situation where you could have the stragglers in essentially an endless pool then you are going to have a problem. The solution is to separate the field between those who are competitive and competing versus those completing. I think we really need a competitive wave for this reason.

---

---

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

They did the same at ITU World's a few weeks ago in Spain. Even Javier Gomez swam 1500 instead of the 3000...but that change was more due to the cold (58/59 F), but it was half upstream, half down. The day before, one athlete from Britain said it took him 21 minutes to swim to "whatever buoy" and 7 to come back. Nothing wrong with making sure the athletes are safe.

Also, there were 20 people pulled in the first few waves. I saw one guy not even make it to the first buoy swimming upstream, the current was so strong. He got pulled as I watched from shore.

During my wave, we were PUSHING eachother forward at the turn buoy because nobody could get around it due to the current, it bottlenecked. I can only surmise that under any conditions that could be a danger by a risk of life, that Chatanooga 70.3 or any other branded or non-branded race, has the right to alter the course, or pull the swim from being part of it. It is the responsible thing to due & I stand by the race director's decision--even if I don't like it as I enjoy the swim portion.

I haven't downloaded my swim file but comparing to last year Starky swam an 19:xx and this year fastest swim was 22:xx. Last year I swam a 22:xx and this year a 27:xx. Honestly I didn't really feel much of an issue with the current but at the pro meeting Saturday they said it was really strong and they hoped when the shut whatever flow off it would slow down. But I guess they didn't like the upstream swim times of the pros and shortened it!

But good for them for already having the alternate course set up either way and assuming they did what they said in the pro meeting they delayed the AG swim start to allow women pros same head start as they would have with a normal swim.

---

Twitter - Instagram

Agreed.

I know it's dreaming, but it would be nice to see m-DOT cater half as much to those that want drafting enforcement on the bike as they cater to those who wish it was a duathlon

ETA: and before people start in with the "it's about the SAFETY" line: B.S. - just don't start with that. This is about catering to athletes who don't want to put in the time to prepare for the course they signed up for.

^ that

---

29 years and counting

I was pretty disappointed they cut the swim... I was ready for a PR today and that went out the window when they cut the swim.

I was there 2 years ago and I remember watching several pros really struggle getting upriver. That was not the case yesterday. The problem is they are trying to please the masses... I'm sure there were 100s if not 1000s of folks that may have not made it. But, that's what you signed up for, a challenge. Come prepared.

---

USAT Level II- Ironman U Certified Coach

In these instances though, I cannot help thinking this is an issue of Ironman's creating. They chose to stage an event at this location where the river has a strong current. Isn't it inevitable?!

---

29 years and counting

Valid point. there are certainly elements outside of control- But I promise the current wasn't that strong yesterday.

---

USAT Level II- Ironman U Certified Coach

"What was the “reason” given? Or is this just turning into an annual thing? "
---------------------
This was a very reasonable decision. If the upstream current is faster than some people can swim (they'd go backwards) then the course gets modified. I'm not quite sure why this is so hard for folks to understand. HOWEVER, I have done a number of river swim races over many years and understand that this is just what happens at times.I am good with it and actually applaud IM for having their plan B in place and ready to go.

---

David
* Ironman for Life! (Blog) * IM Everyday Hero Video * Daggett Shuler Law *
Disclaimer: I have personal and professional relationships with many athletes, vendors, and organizations in the triathlon world.

The swim course is poorly designed with an upstream section on a dam controlled section of the river. If you’re Ironman and you know that every year there will be a large number of competitors that have to be pulled out from the water due to the swim course conditions, then the issue was one they created. There’s no good fix because it’s a great venue that’s sells well and the race course is pretty much in a fixed location.

The current was not strong on Sunday. There have been no heavy rains in the Chattanooga area as of late and the river has been pretty much "normal" for several weeks. All major rivers in the southern US are damn controlled so you cannot avoid that. TVA controls the current daily and if there have been no heavy rains they can bring the flow down so that you can barely notice any current. I am puzzled as to why they modified the swim yesterday. My first half distance triathlon was a Rev3 event in this same river. We swam upstream about half the swim distance and downstream the other half. It was early May, the water was cold but we swam the distance. It was a challenge for some but Rev3 didn't modify the swim. It would have been a huge letdown if I had raced yesterday.

This was a very reasonable decision. If the upstream current is faster than some people can swim (they'd go backwards) then the course gets modified. I'm not quite sure why this is so hard for folks to understand. HOWEVER, I have done a number of river swim races over many years and understand that this is just what happens at times.I am good with it and actually applaud IM for having their plan B in place and ready to go.

------

David, first off- no need to get an attitude in your response. 2nd- If your swim venue is applauded for going to "plan b" 40% of the time, you have an swim venue problem. 3rd- As I asked was the current "extra strong" this year? Caused by recent rains, etc? Or is this just turning into an venue where nearly half the time they get applauding for going to to the lowest common denominator. 4th- I've been in this sport long enough to realize that we as a sport are getting really really soft on the swim venue/changing it. We change the swim venue many many times because we have become "soft" as a sport. But of course I understand why they do it- who the hell wants to be an RD where X percent of your racers cant finish because they didn't properly train for your event, so what do you do? You go to "plan B" which is either an very modified event or just cancel it all together. So I completely understand why RD and races change the swim any chance they can get. It's their ass on the line when people don't properly train for the event get in trouble and die. So they make these moves that is applauded by people such as yourself as "reasonable". It's only reasonable because we've become lazy in our prep and acceptance of training. Sometimes it's ok to fail when your not properly prepared, that's a far better decision than just changing it time after time for what many will say isn't a "reasonable decision". It's only a reasonable decision because we as a sport are accepting that.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

The current was not strong on Sunday. There have been no heavy rains in the Chattanooga area as of late and the river has been pretty much "normal" for several weeks. All major rivers in the southern US are damn controlled so you cannot avoid that. TVA controls the current daily and if there have been no heavy rains they can bring the flow down so that you can barely notice any current. I am puzzled as to why they modified the swim yesterday.

-----
Thx this is what I was asking and looking for as to why they actually changed it.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Why can't they just pick a spot roughly 1.2 miles from the swim exit (so that it is all downriver & current isn't a factor)? The bike for the 140.6 is 4 miles long, but everyone knows that......sign up & deal with it or don't sign up. For the 70.3, even if they have to make the swim 100 or 200 yards long or whatever (for river access), you'd know that before you sign up. And it would be all downriver so your time would be comparable or possibly still even faster than 1.2 miles.

---

Pink? Maybe. Maybe not. You decide.

Probably because the 1.2 mile start point would be in the middle of a condominium development whose back yards sit on the river. That, and there is no easy river access there. And, given the nature of the residential development, there is probably no easy way to manage a few thousand swimmers milling around on neighborhood streets and resident back yards. I'm guessing that no one in that neighborhood wants a few dozen porta potties in their front yards and a loudspeaker in their back yard blaring music and announcements at 0500 AM on a Sunday.

I am curious about objective measure of the river current. I was there 2 years ago, and I watched the pros barely swimming upstream. This weekend, a friend of mine swam almost the same time as me 2 years ago, and he is a way slower swimmer than me. So, either he turned on the jets, or the current was fast and it boosted him.

No attitude, but I don't agree with you. I've been around a long, long time. You (not you personally) don't stage (most) races and make decisions based on the pointy end. This is a business and they need to attract the numbers. All really perfectly reasonable. If they don't attract the numbers, then they won't have to numbers to allow me to do these sort of races so that I can take a shot at the pointy end. So, I want their "business" to do well.

I've been on the decision making end of event issues . . . not always as easy or straightford as some believe. Choo is a GREAT venue, the city supports the events, it is a fun place, and many enjoy racing there . . . it attracts numbers. Great choice for IM, even though they beat out my city's proposal and our swim wouldn't have been affected by river currents. But, it is a river swim which interjects an additional dynamic. Certainly, I understand that some don't like that dynamic, which is ok, so they should just pick a different race.

As far as "soft, " that is all relative. You are not soft and rightfully inform us of that. For some folks doing that race it is certainly is a "stretch" and they don't train like we do, but that's OK - I think we want them. More people adds a larger base which ultimately will be better for the sport. We've got a first time sprint race with a pool swim upcoming. We have some beginners who may walk some of the swim . . . I'm not going to call them soft; rather, I'm going to show them love like they have never seen and welcome them to our sport. Personally, I think that is in the best interest of all of us.

---

David
* Ironman for Life! (Blog) * IM Everyday Hero Video * Daggett Shuler Law *
Disclaimer: I have personal and professional relationships with many athletes, vendors, and organizations in the triathlon world.

I agree, very reasonably spoken. I love Choo and have lived in the area my entire life. The city supports these events as well if not better than any other. But, I am still confused why they altered the swim. I guess it was to just insure that everyone had a good time.

I’m going to call anyone “soft” who purposely enter races and don’t train properly for them. It’s those people who have help create
this issue and it’s your mindset that welcomes them doing it regardless if they are ready for it. And it’s your mindset that we should be more welcoming and thus create these decisions that will continue to have swims altered more and more.

But oh it’s because it’s good for business so that makes it cool.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

At the pro meeting they told us they were going to time the pro women to the turn buoy. If it took them long enough that they knew the slower AGers wouldn’t safely be able to handle the upriver stretch, they would pull the buoys and AGers all down river. It seemed to be a pretty simple calculation.

As for the river flow, the discharge rate was ~7000. For comparison, when we had our pro meeting on Saturday they told us it was ~70,000. I would say that we ended up swimming roughly 2-3 minutes faster than we would have on, say, an Eagleman type course. The current was noticeable but not crazy, and the net effect was positive given the longer downriver stretch.

Well, it sounds like you should (are?) just blame me!! That's ok, I'll turn it around and take credit!! If you have any soft people you want to send down the road to my race on June 9 - http://www.SmileySprintTri.com - please do. Not only will it be great but I'll give every one of them a great big soft hug at the finish line . . . every last one of them!!

---

David
* Ironman for Life! (Blog) * IM Everyday Hero Video * Daggett Shuler Law *
Disclaimer: I have personal and professional relationships with many athletes, vendors, and organizations in the triathlon world.

I wasn't there, and like I said earlier a good friend raced yesterday. Her dad is a professional River Boat Captain from Knoxville. He said "the current north shore was very strong, the current on the south side, not so much".

---

All I Wanted Was A Pepsi, Just One Pepsi

Team Zoot, Team Zoot Mid-Atlantic

The truth is probably somewhere in the middle. Are there some people who, with more training, would be far more adept at swimming upriver? Sure. Are there also participants who, no matter how long you put them in the pool, would still struggle and not go anywhere? Yeah.

The fact of the matter is that they have to put athlete safety of all participants first. They don't like having to cut swims. Talk to any of the OPS team about it at the next event you attend -- guarantee you they're disappointed when they can't run the full event. But it's not for lack of trying.

---

----------------------------------
Editor-in-Chief, Slowtwitch.com | Twitter

People sign up for this race because Chattanooga is a great host city and venue. Folks also sign up for this one and the Ironman there because they expect a fast swim. It was delivered.

I’m blaming the culture that we are apart of that is having to cancel more and more swims or modify them because likely we are less prepared than we should be.

But as I said I get it. It’s why I won’t RD. I’d cancel every swim because I’d be too damn afraid of someone dying. I coach swimmers on deck I see them coming to me “hey I have this open water swim race in 2 months but I can only swim 200m right now, I’ll be good right with a few coached sessions right”.

I’m all about being inclusive I’m just simply about being prepared. And I think because we’ve lost our way with that process we get more and more canceled swims.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Read your whole exchange and agree completely. Further, it's not a stretch to go so far as saying we shouldn't be encouraging, promoting, or "welcoming" participants into IM/70.3 races who aren't capable of completing the swim, or have no desire to put in the effort to be prepared for swim conditions. If you can't swim, hate swimming, and don't want to swim, don't sign up and hope that conditions will warrant a swim cancellation. Just.. don't sign up. It's triathlon. To be fair, race organizers exacerbate the problem by putting swims in rivers. Downstream? Ehh.. OK, I dislike it personally because it neutralizes swim advantage, but at least everyone can race. Upstream? Is it always logistics? If so then find another swim venue. Moving water is not predictable, and introducing people who can't swim 2 miles an hour against the current is just foolish.

See I’m not arguing that though. Of course safety has to be #1. It’s why ice said 100x RD is a hard af job. But what I’ve simply said is that when we create this “anyone” can do it matra and attitude we will continue have to play to the lowest factor. I just “fired” 3 athletes (3 best friends who all do same races) this past Dec cus they signed up for an IM when imo they are 2 years away. I told them can you finish? Maybe they can sneak in a 16:30 or maybe the can’t and my main reason was that they just weren’t ready for the training that I thought they needed with where they were. They’ve been in the sport not even 18 months and one couldn’t even swim 18 months ago. I asked them what’s the rush, to enjoy the training and process. I told them this 6 months ago when they asked about an IM. Of course they are free to do whatever they want, just like I don’t have or want to coach them for that event right now. They were stunned I let them go but after breaking down each person’s training demands they understood. Of course they went with another coach (I gave them coach contacts who I thought they would mesh with) and maybe they finish but 2 are broken already from the “training demands”. I saw that happening a mile away and knew they simply weren’t ready.

But that’s the issue we are going against. This “I can do anything” attitude that we apparently need to survive as a sport. I’m ok with telling someone no and hurting their feelings if I think it’s the right call. But again anyone can sign up for any race and train however they want. We just now are caught up with having to deal with that training philosophy in our races now; IE- cancelled/modified swims for “athlete safety”.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

I raced Chattanooga... I swam about 35 seconds per/100y faster than normal. Whatever that tells you

I don't get to bent about RD's altering the course as long as everyone is racing the same course. However, if swimming is your strong suit it does put you at a disadvantage and I would not sign up for a river swim. Just sign up for a race like Muncie. It will be full distance and not current assisted

My understanding was about 4000 athletes entered Chattanooga. 3500 of those are completers and they paid for 500 athletes to compete. If IM didn't cater to the completers, there wouldn't be a race occupying Chattanooga's waterfront for you to compete in

But Muncie got changed to approx. "Olympic" distance in 2012............

Edit: to clarify date.

---

Pink? Maybe. Maybe not. You decide.

Due to extreme heat the entire race was altered. Had nothing to do with the swim

I don't know anything about what happened at Chattanooga yesterday but I agree there has been an increased catering to 'athletes' that simply want to check Ironman off their bucket list but don't want to properly train for the swim. The constant hand-wringing that goes on in Ironman (insert event name here) Facebook groups about "What am I going to do if it's not wet suit legal?' post followed immediately by a host of 'just start after everyone else' comments is frightening. How about the notion that if you sign up for an Ironman you commit to conditioning your body to swim 2.4 miles without a wet suit on? Then come race day and it turns out that you get to wear one because of the water temperature than bonus! This is true with the 70.3 events as well. I'm sorry this won't be popular but if you know you can't swim 1.2 miles without a wet suit on or you can't swim in a lake/ocean/river or whatever venue the event is taking place in without the aid of a current, then maybe you shouldn't be signing up for these events.

 But back to my original question what environmental factors led to the decision? Like was this a fast moving current? From accounts in this thread that doesn’t sound to be the case.

I can understand if the river is moving 6 mph or 6 ft breakers. But from all accounts this was “normal” conditions for the river. No rain last few days or week where they had to open the dam a bunch. It seemed we just have too many athletes who can’t handle “normal” conditions.

But anytime you insert the buzzword “athlete safety” you can’t really argue it. No one wants to endanger athletes, I’m just asking were conditions there really adverse. Or is this just unprepared athletes helping contribute to the problem?

To me that’s the issue. That we aren’t even talking extreme conditions that now we are modifying at almost any adversity.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Ummm, actually, they could have the swim in the lake above the dam, where there is essentially zero current. The dam is about 9 miles away from downtown though, so to finish the race downtown, you have a two transition, point to point race. The original Chatt tri known as the Riverbend Triathlon/Chattanooga's DAM Triathlon did exactly this from circa 1983-2006, with a 1000 to 1500 m swim at the dam, 40 - 48 K bike finishing about 3 mi from the dam (such that the race did not interfere with other users of the dam recreation area all morning), then the 10K run to finish downtown.

---

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

This is not an athlete safety issue, it was just a pure and simple athlete DNF issue. Whatever the current was, there would have been some that could not do the upward leg, thus a DNF. It doesnt cause people to drown, it just causes them not to finish. I think this is the issue now, why does everyone have to finish? I remember swim starts in the old days, there would be 20 to 30 rescues in the first 2 to 6 minutes of the swim, all back to shore for a DNF. Usually if you made it 6 minutes in, you were fine to finish the swimm.

Guessing there was some time per 100 you had to do to be able to go upstream in this race, that a good portion could not do. Any other race they would make the cutoffs for swim time, but this is an added wrinkle, having to be able to do 2;00 100's upstream(or whatever it was). So instead of having just a few DNF's at the swim cutoff, missing the total time, they were going to have many more, and not at the finish, but more like a rescue.

And it would be a mix of folks, old people that just swim slow, and new AOS athletes that are just starting out, and a few unprepared folks, the ones that show up to every single race ever put on..

To me, if most of the people are going to finish a proper swim, then just have it. DNF the ones that couldn't make it, and let that be a known thing about your race going forward. Since it fills anyway, that would just up the level of swimming ability, instead of doing the exact opposite by shortening, or swimming downstream every year. People notice these things, and enter accordingly. For me as a RD, I would want a higher level of swimmer if I had the choice, and they do have that choice...

Here's the thing, Monty -- it wouldn't sell out if you had a mass of people that needed to either be pulled out of the water or DNF'd. You'd be lucky to reach 75% capacity the following year.

For myself, I wouldn't choose to do this race -- because unless we can guarantee the upstream part of the swim happening, I lose my advantage from all the swim work I've been doing. I'd rather go do a race that is almost guaranteed to go off -- and perhaps even with some chop on the ocean while we're at it.

---

----------------------------------
Editor-in-Chief, Slowtwitch.com | Twitter

Yes you pretty much nailed it!

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Here's the thing, let's say that...

• The current is fast enough that a chunk of swimmers would either go backwards or take so long to swim the first leg that they have no shot at the cutoff
• People will start the race regardless of their common sense assessment of ability to finish
• The number of weak swimmers will be a few hundred
• The race director & team will not be able to identify the week swimmers until they need rescue
  
• The rescues will need to occur in the first couple hundred yards of the swim, including some who are going backwards from the start
  

If those assumptions are valid, then the race would need to have a major percentage of its water safety volunteers stationed in a cluster at the first 100 yards of the start. That is not viable. So, if the conditions are even on the bubble, then the RD would have to shorten the swim.

But what if the RD would offer a short swim for those on the bubble, kind of like the wetsuit optional option when the water temperature is just a little over? They could do the race, but they would not be considered for awards or placing stuff. And, the threat/carrot is that if someone opts for the full swim and cannot make it, they DNF and are out. Seems like a cool out-of-box approach that could make everyone happy.

I did Gulf Coast 70.3 last week, and I am very thankful that the RD made the decision to let us swim. That race has fantastic water volunteer support, but the FB page said it had record DNF because of the swim.

Realistically, the Chattanooga 70.3 scenario is a fringe case. How many races have an upstream river swim? Is this the only one?
And second, how many times in its history has it been shortened (just 2017 and 2019, or more)?

Here's the thing, Monty -- it wouldn't sell out if you had a mass of people that needed to either be pulled out of the water or DNF'd. You'd be lucky to reach 75% capacity the following year. //


We dont know that, maybe there are a lot more like you skipping the race because it caters to the BOP swimmers. It really is a thing that cant be known unless you actually implement it. And from the sounds of it, perhaps it was just going to be 100 to 200 that were going to be left off, that could be easily be replaced in a heartbeat from the waiting lists that accrue on sold out races...

We had a few athletes there -- I'd call them solidly MOP in terms of swim performance -- I think they would have been borderline, given the description of the conditions I was given.

To borrow the phrase, it's an unknown unknown. If they wind up having to pull 600 people out of the water, we kill them for endangering athletes. If they lean towards cancelling a swim, we kill them for making the sport "soft." For me, I wouldn't ever choose to race in Chattanooga because I don't care for the possibility of a swim getting cut short. It's too bad, because the bike and run are more my style.

---

----------------------------------
Editor-in-Chief, Slowtwitch.com | Twitter

Realistically, the Chattanooga 70.3 scenario is a fringe case. How many races have an upstream river swim? Is this the only one?
And second, how many times in its history has it been shortened (just 2017 and 2019, or more)?

------


Some other races have a upsteam and downstream that are both IM branded and non-brand events (just a weekend ago in NC the half/full Crystal Coast had a upsteam and downstream "tidal" swim.




Yes 2 years of shortened swims in a 5 year race history. That's not good stats for such a young race.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

 For me, I wouldn't ever choose to race in Chattanooga because I don't care for the possibility of a swim getting cut short. It's too bad, because the bike and run are more my style.

-----

Funny note- I coached an D1 runner who was part of the CRP program few years back. Her 1st 4 triathlons she swam once. Races in Florida, NC and Alabama all had cancelled swims (NC- water quality; Florida- water quality post hurricane; Alabama- "athlete safety" due to recent rains and currents too fast at a National Championship event no less). I half joked, half seriously suggested maybe full time duathlon was her calling.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

I'd like to add that Ironman knows their customer a lot better than any of us. But there is also a safety issue. At best, with the safety assets involved at a typical race (about 150-200), you can get roughly a couple hundred athletes out of the water safely in a short period of time. The last thing you want is to overwhelm the safety assets. It makes every athlete less safe. There was a reason that Cozumel changed the course the year after the current changed and 400 athletes couldn't finish. It was both a safety and a marketing decision. Ironman knows its customers and wants to keep them safe.

---

http://www.magnoliamasters.com
http://www.snappingtortuga.com
http://www.swimeasyspeed.com

I agree with your thoughts but man does it not suck. It’s like they get “excused” cus they have 4K people so they HAVE to do this process more and more when *any* adversity in the swim occurs *it seems* over the last few years.

It just seems like it’s to the point where any wind or any current or any wave action in the water and you have to check to make sure the swim occurs. I guess it’s more aggravation. And again I’m not saying in *obvious* dangerous swim situations, but it just seems like “meh” rough conditions will result in automatic swim change.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Is this description for the opposite bank of the river from the finish? Why is the start currently on the opposite river bank? I just checked Google maps and on the same side of the river as Ross Landing Park, there is a building with a dock named "Rowing Center". It is approx. 1.38 miles from Ross Landing Park. Why not line everyone up on the Riverwalk and let them enter at this spot. Yes it is 0.2 miles long but the current would make up for it. You know it is long before you sign up. No surprises.

---

Pink? Maybe. Maybe not. You decide.

That seems like a great idea. That rowing center is right next to where the run course enters the river walk. You ought to reach out to Brian Myrick, the Race Director, with the idea. I would not mind at all doing a little extra swimming in that race to preserve the whole course.

Certainly Brian is following this thread. He is known as endurothonrd on this forum. He is/was the RD for Muncie 70.3 (formerly known as Muncie Endurothon) as well as the original RD for Raleigh 70.3 (i did that race 4x). Super cool dude...i talked to him in person at the banquet at IM Florida in 2013.

---

Pink? Maybe. Maybe not. You decide.

You ought to ping him. He hasn't logged on in over a month.

I would not mind at all doing a little extra swimming in that race to preserve the whole course. //

It is only added swimming if it results in longer times than normal in the water. Its possible to swim 2+ miles and be short for a 70.3 course. Sounds like they have plenty of room with the current to add a proper amount of distance, so that the pros are doing around 23+ at the front end, that is the real measure of a swim course that is moving..

I haven't made it through all the comments, but I will say thanks in advance for the feedback. Its never an easy decision to alter any part of the race. I thought I had this one. The fine folks at TVA did more than I asked for up at the dam, but we can't do anything about the creeks that dumped into the river once we lowered the water level. Mother nature wins. Im going to revisit a different start location for next year. If you think my math sucks for the IMChoo bike course, this might be another shining example of that...

Great having 3000 of you race with us in Chattanooga. Look forward to seeing some of you in Muncie in a month or so.

Brian

I raced but didn't see the pros tackle the upstream part. I didn't feel like the current was crazy but I obviously didn't get a chance to swim upstream so not really sure. Looking at the TVA website you can see where they slowed the discharge rate down a lot for the race. I'm just curious what criteria IM is using to determine it's unsafe for age groupers. Did the pros struggle that much during the upstream part? Doesn't sound like it.

The rowing center has been used for years as the start dock for the Chattanooga Waterfront Tri (Olympic distance), until this year the Waterfront Tri is starting from the Tennis Club's new dock. I would guess that the rowing center could be utilized for the 70.3 race. The participants for the olympic distance rode in a bus to the start of the swim. The UTC practice football field was used to stage the start.

Thanks Brian. Loved the race. 2nd time I've done it. Obviously disappointed not getting to do full 1.2 miles on the swim but didn't ruin my day. Glad you're looking at a different start location for next year.

Brian,

Just wanted to say thanks for the comments. It is great having you, Tom Z & others on the forum who can give us insights from the other side.

Alan

---

Pink? Maybe. Maybe not. You decide.

Except it was a wetsuit swim. I watched them the men looked slow upstream, the women looked even slower. They started pulling the buoys a couple minutes after the pro women went off. I heard the pro men averaged more than 2 min/100 upstream. I’m a 2min/100scy swimmer and I averaged about 1:30/100 and that’s stopping and having to make right turns multiple times because people stopped right in front of me.

Brian, thanks for putting on such a great race. This was my third year in a row at the Chattanooga 70.3 and I will keep going back even though swimming is my strongest event and mother nature won 2 of the last 3 years because overall it's been a great experience despite my disappointment when the river doesn't cooperate.

Nope, water temp was 72.0 and it was a non-wetsuit swim for the pros.

Pros were non wetsuit. Here is my Garmin file. I know they aren't that accurate but looks like I was 1:48 on the upstream then 1:12 downstream. The current didn't feel that bad but it's all relative since we were all swimming in it.

http://home.trainingpeaks.com/...PKGLJ7FKFF6Y3LXA5D4A

---

Twitter - Instagram

i swam in the river on Friday and on Sunday during the race. My fastest 500 yard free is ball park 4:35 (albeit 20 years ago) -- i'd consider myself a strong swimmer among triathletes. The current in the river on Friday would have been very dangerous for swimming for the masses. I swam the uphill portion of the swim when the current was high and it was tough and at one point i was not making progress at all in teh river until i moved location towards the shore. On sunday the current was much much slower. it did take some of the bragging rights out of the race for me (i'm squarely mid-pack overall) but i was ok with it. i do think though that the current really couldn't get much safer than Sunday, and that they should probably just either change the starting location to make an all down-hill swim, or just agree ahead of the time to shorten the swim so there isn't a bait and switch at the end.

This is what I have been trying to say this entire thread. I still see no valid reason that the swim was changed (other than to make it easy for the age-groupers).

sweet jesus, cue the "why is Chatty swim so looooong at 1.5 miles?????" complaints. At least it'll be downhill

Did your race in 2016, great venue (except for the car traffic ...)

If they had an existing swim entry point that would make it 1.5 miles I’d say do it. It’s already an easy swim with the current and typically wetsuit legal so that extra .3 miles wouldn’t mean much. But you’d have plenty of people just seeing 1.2 vs 1.5 and not sign up.

I know, kidding. 1.5 in that river would be faster than 1.2

agree. It’s a fast swim for sure. 1.5 in that swim wouldn’t be a problem in my opinion. Hope they can find an all downstream section whether it’s 1.2 or 1.5 just so they don’t have to worry as much about cancelling.

Why not have the swim out at Chickamauga Dam??? You could arrange the bike course such that it ended downtown, and then the usual run. Don't know if you were in Chatt in the 80s and 90s but the original Chatt triathlon did exactly this from around 1982 or '83 through about 2005 or so. The race was approx Oly distance. We swam 1500 m in the lake above the dam, ran up the hill in the rec area to hop on our bikes, rode out to Sequoyah NP and back (25-30 mi, depending on where they set up the turnaround, which varied across the years), then ran down Amnicola Hwy to finish downtown (about 6.2 mi). No current at all above the dam. :)

---

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

---

_________________________________________________
When all is said and done. More is usually said than done
Ba Ba Booey

There were heavy rains leading up to the week before the race and the volume from many miles upstream kept the current flowing pretty strong up to wednesday of race week. It started coming down thursday and friday, but was still running around 45,000-55,000 cfs. Sure they can manage it with the dam by opening or closing the gates. I saw that they had started closing down gates on saturday and saw it drop to 20,000cfs. Last I checked sunday morning it was down to 15,000 cfs, which is doable. What TVA cannot control is runoff from the tributaries feeding into the river. 2 years ago there was heavy rains the evening/night before the race and while TVA had the gates shut down, the runoff (surface water) was pushing the flow higher and they had to change the course. This year there was no rain leading up to the race, so my only guess is TVA couldn't lower the flow as much as the RD desired.

I would really be curious what the flow rate was on race day. It sounded like RD made decision after the pros struggled or at least weren't as fast against the current as he would have liked. I really like the river swim. I think swimming under 3 bridges is nice and is pretty cool for the spectators. So I hope they can get an entry point a bit further upstream to allow for an all with current swim.

So it's IMs fault that some percentage of the athlete's are unprepared and cannot swim well enough to complete the course?

Maybe it's a generational thing, but I would place the blame solely on the athletes. Letting them suffer for their own lack of preparation sounds like the kind of race (life) experience they need.

So it's IMs fault that some percentage of the athlete's are unprepared and cannot swim well enough to complete the course? //

Actually, yes it is. If you cancel or alter swims most years, then folks come to expect that. If you keep the swims hard, then folks will notice that too, and unprepared or just very slow swimmers will not even enter the event, moving onto something known to be easier. I think there are plenty of good enough swimmers to do the swim up and down river the way it was this year, but you have to show that your are serious about holding your swim first. And its not a safety issue, people will just realize that are not making any headway anymore, and they get to turn around and self rescue with the current, all at different times as to not overwhelm the volunteers...

So, I talked to the guys in charge of the swim and, after they explained to me why they shortened the swim; splits were too long for the pros (not sure male or female) but they thought the splits were too long, they mentioned there is a spot they're looking at so they don't have to worry about shortening the swim. They said it was about .2 miles longer than 1.2 miles so I'm guessing this is the spot. Their concern is that people would be mad because they would have to swim longer than 1.2 miles.

Their concern is that people would be mad because they would have to swim longer than 1.2 miles. //

Why would people be mad to swim 1.4 if they go 3 to 5 minutes faster than normal?? IT is not distance swam, it is time spent in the water. I did a 1. 3 mile swim in 10 minutes once, pretty sure I was pissed about the "long swim"... (-;

I said the same thing. Look I hate passing along he said she said type stuff, but what one poster said kinda confirmed what they were talking about. I'm be completely happy if they change the course. Kinda tired of one year swimming 24 minutes and another year swimming 16 minutes.

One person on my team swam 13 minutes (she swam at UT) and was initially disqualified because their system throws out outliers and that was definitely an outlier. lol