Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Aussie womens pro to walk marathon - shooting for 12 hours [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
turns out walking the mary might have been too much for mel.. looks like she dnf'd.

http://ironman.com/...r=2012#axzz1x25u3RfS

Coaching - Future Endurance
Quote Reply
Re: Aussie womens pro to walk marathon - shooting for 12 hours [steve_c] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
steve_c wrote:
turns out walking the mary might have been too much for mel.. looks like she dnf'd.

http://ironman.com/...r=2012#axzz1x25u3RfS

I'm pretty sure she was a DNS rather than a DNF. Maybe all the crap generated on this thread had some part in dissuading her from competing.

Hugh

Genetics load the gun, lifestyle pulls the trigger.
Quote Reply
Re: Aussie womens pro to walk marathon - shooting for 12 hours [sciguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
sciguy wrote:
steve_c wrote:
turns out walking the mary might have been too much for mel.. looks like she dnf'd.

http://ironman.com/...r=2012#axzz1x25u3RfS


I'm pretty sure she was a DNS rather than a DNF. Maybe all the crap generated on this thread had some part in dissuading her from competing.

Hugh
Yes, it's more than likely the world champion checked in with the anonymous pundits at ST to confirm what she should/shouldn't do.

---

Brian Shea
http://www.PersonalBestNutrition.com
Open-Water/Masters Swimming at the Jersey Shore:
Monmouth County NJ Ocean Swim/Masters Workouts
Quote Reply
Re: Aussie womens pro to walk marathon - shooting for 12 hours [Rappstar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You seem to be ignoring the fact that she's injured.

"However, a routine MRI scan last week revealed a lower leg injury that if not rested from running could potentially turn into a stress fracture and derail her entire season. After discussing her options she has been cleared to ‘walk’ the marathon."


I don't see anything in that article that would indicate she intended to "abuse" the system of her own volition. Nobody likes to walk--I'm sure if she had it her way she'd be running the marathon and collecting a paycheck at the end of the day. It would be very different if she planned to do the race with her husband and was with him stroke for stroke and stride for stride the entire way. The simple fact that she is a pro does not mean that she shouldn't be able to race whatever legitimate strategy will offer her the best long-term outcome. Sorry everyone can't be as good and as injury-free as you, Mr. 8%'er...


Hop off.

__________________________

I tweet!

Quote Reply
Re: Aussie womens pro to walk marathon - shooting for 12 hours [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
monty wrote:
Sounds like you are advocating getting rid of all AG'ers from Kona. Because last time i checked, the events you listed do not have an AG division along with their pro race/ event championship.

So like that 13 handicapper ruining the game of golf, you showing up at Kona ruins the pro race too? Pardon me if you are an 8;30 hawaii finisher...

That's the difficulty in trying to come up with an analogy for what is a pretty unique sport. Having said that, year after year you will see AG'ers beating some of the pro's at every IM, even Kona. Many AG'ers are quasi pros anyway. Pro's don't have to wait for AG'ers in tri (in fact they regularly get a headstart now) so no it doesn't ruin the pro race in the same way it would those events. Your analogy has similar holes to mine.

I just think those fringe types who have busted their gut, and could well have been there on any other given day, have earnt it well before a ticket. The more recent reward for multiple IM finishers, whilst I still disagree with it, at least has some rationale behind it. Then again it is one of the few (possibly only?) "WC" not run by the governing body.
Quote Reply
Re: Aussie womens pro to walk marathon - shooting for 12 hours [steve_c] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
steve_c wrote:
turns out walking the mary might have been too much for mel.. looks like she dnf'd.

http://ironman.com/...r=2012#axzz1x25u3RfS

Didn't even rack her bike beforehand. DNS'd...

I heard that there was a chance of further injury/delayed recovery even if she walked, so she did the right thing.
Quote Reply
Re: Aussie womens pro to walk marathon - shooting for 12 hours [NAB777] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
good call for her. she's got a lot of quality years in her still. hopefully she has reverted back to her plan to race kona 2013.

Coaching - Future Endurance
Quote Reply
Re: Aussie womens pro to walk marathon - shooting for 12 hours [mv2005] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
year after year you will see AG'ers beating some of the pro's at every IM, even Kona. //

Well if you count every pro that DNF's or cruises in as getting beat, i guess so. But to my knowledge no AG'er has never beaten a pro for any money in a time comparison in hawaii, and that is with a lot less stringent rules they get to race under. I agree thought that your analogies were not good ones. (-;
Quote Reply
Re: Aussie womens pro to walk marathon - shooting for 12 hours [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yes, actually it doesn't matter how they cross the line, beat is beat. Many still get it wrong.

Julie Moss??? :)
Quote Reply
Re: Aussie womens pro to walk marathon - shooting for 12 hours [ZackC.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ZackC. wrote:
You seem to be ignoring the fact that she's injured.

"However, a routine MRI scan last week revealed a lower leg injury that if not rested from running could potentially turn into a stress fracture and derail her entire season. After discussing her options she has been cleared to ‘walk’ the marathon."


I don't see anything in that article that would indicate she intended to "abuse" the system of her own volition. Nobody likes to walk--I'm sure if she had it her way she'd be running the marathon and collecting a paycheck at the end of the day. It would be very different if she planned to do the race with her husband and was with him stroke for stroke and stride for stride the entire way. The simple fact that she is a pro does not mean that she shouldn't be able to race whatever legitimate strategy will offer her the best long-term outcome. Sorry everyone can't be as good and as injury-free as you, Mr. 8%'er...


Hop off.

I don't understand why you seem to be taking this personally. Then again, I'm more and more baffled as to why people on the internet (including me at times) take someone's general opinion about what is clearly not an issue of right/wrong so personally. It seems to be most true with regards to Lance, as the recent surge on this forum shows, where you're either a hater or a fanboy. Likewise here, why does the fact that I have a different opinion than yours about this particular statement - "The simple fact that she is a pro does not mean that she shouldn't be able to race whatever legitimate strategy will offer her the best long-term outcome." - make me some sort of high-and-mighty "Mr. 8%er?" And believe me, I've been injured. I've just never chosen to do a race where I was injured or where I thought I might deliver a sub-par performance. Dan encouraged me to go to Kona in 2010, because he thought it would be a great story for the media, coming back and "racing" Kona so soon after my crash. But I put the word race in quotations because it wouldn't have been a race to me. I was not prepared to do an Ironman in early October of 2010. Could I have done it? I think so. Could I have finished? I think so. But that was not how I - personally - wanted to show up in Kona. Now, that's obviously not the same as this scenario, but I do think it's proof that I'm not just sitting throwing stones from some glass house of injury freedom. Of course, this is probably a larger question for the internet at large, but whatever. I'm just baffled that you seem to take this very personally, despite the fact that you have no vested interest in Ms. Rollison's performance nor are you a professional triathlete. But anyway...

To be clear, I was NOT ignoring the fact that she was injured. I also posit that it's precisely the point that "nobody likes to walk," but that doesn't mean that people would chose to run if they "could." I think what many folks would chose to do is not to race. But they are not given that option. Now, do I think that's a flaw in the system? Yes. I think it was most "exposed" by Andreas Raelert walking/jogging the marathon in Regensburg last year, though I think he deflected it reasonably well with his money to charity based on the number of folks that beat him. But still, I think that what he did wasn't necessarily a positive thing. Does that make it "wrong?" No. I just didn't agree with it. But - as I think I've said - WTC has opened that door by making a policy that requires that you simply finish an Ironman between Konas. I think that policy was poorly conceived - just like the 8% rule before it - BUT, as I said about the 8% rule, that doesn't mean I disagree with the principle of it. I think the principle of the completing an Ironman in between Kona improve the participation of the top pros at races other than Kona. And I support that. In fact, because I think it's incredibly important that Ironman expands beyond one race in October, I think it's one of the most important policies that WTC has. BUT, I think it's poorly implemented. However, like a lot of what I perceive as "loopholes," just because one exists, I don't think that means you should take advantage of it. Of course, just because I don't think someone should take advantage of it doesn't mean that they can't, or doesn't mean that they don't believe the opposite.

I think that going in to a race like an Ironman anticipating walking the marathon is a bad thing. I think it reflects poorly on the professional race. And I think it contributes to this idea that Kona is all that matters, so much so that you'd give a subpar performance at another race just to get to Kona. Again, my opinion, and I realize that others may hold the opposite opinion. And I also think that it sets a very bad example for age-group athletes. I recall the woman in the walking cast featured in the NBC broadcast in 2010. As well as the man with the heart transplant, who failed to finish. I thought that both of those were poor choices to feature. I thought the former reflected the drive and power of Ironman taken to what I thought was an unhealthy degree. Sometimes, the more noble and brave decision is to say, "I can, but I won't." And I think that the focus on the fact that she "finished" undercuts the value of performing. I.e., she was remarkable - according to the broadcast - for finishing with the walking cast, but what about the woman who won that age-group, whose performance went unnoticed? I realize that there are way too many stories to cover, but I don't think that the idea of overcoming "anything" just to finish is always the right message. My $0.02. I recall the guy who walked in his socks the last like 10 (or more?) miles of the bike and then ran the marathon. I thought THAT was what Ironman is all about. Overcoming adversity on the day. But I thought the woman in the boot was a bit foolish, like if the fellow with the broken bike had started the race with a bike that had a huge crack in it. Somewhat the same sentiment regarding the man with the heart transplant. I think Ironman is incredible for what it has shown that people can overcome - Jon Blais being a powerful example - but I don't think that means it is the right thing for everyone. My own opinion is that if you are given the gift of someone else's heart, maybe you shouldn't abuse it. And I think it's becoming more clear that the act of Ironman itself - like most extreme endurance exercise - is likely not good for you. And may in fact actually be a bit bad for you. Now, on balance, does the training and the healthy lifestyle and the enjoyment more than offset that? I think it does. But I don't race Ironman because I think it's adding years on to my life. And there's nothing wrong with that. And I look at a total BAMF like Lou Hollander, and I think, again, THAT is what Ironman is all about. Is Lou "hurting" himself? I don't believe so. But I am not sure that you can say the same thing about that fellow with the heart transplant.

I think people are tremendously afraid to DNS or to DNF. I know people who've said, "I don't want to DNF, because I think it gets easier to quit once you've quit before." And I thought the same thing, until I finally DNFed an Ironman. And then I thought, once you quit once, quitting gets harder because you KNOW how bad you feel afterwards. I think there is already more than enough of both "finish at all costs" and "only Kona matters" without having someone noteworthy and extraordinary like Mel Rollison adding to it.

To me, I would have had incredible respect for Mel if she had said, "I'm injured, but I don't believe Kona is so important as to give a subpar performance at another race just to get there." She chose to do something different. It's not something I would have done. And I expressed that disagreement. So what? That's what makes the world go around. But the animosity on topics like this really baffles me. Like, you can't be critical without someone saying, "mind your own business," like somehow having an opinion and sharing it brands you as a self-righteous asshole.

If you want to tell someone to, "hop off," that's fine, but keep in mind that you are basically doing the exact same thing that you are getting pissed at me about - expressing a contrary opinion.

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp
Quote Reply
Re: Aussie womens pro to walk marathon - shooting for 12 hours [Rappstar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
First of all, I'm not pissed at all. I'm am disbelieving that you think that the fact that she would walk the marathon in order to get to Kona has any bearing on her level of professionalism.

You hold this notion of "professionalism" up on a pedestal to such a great extent that probably only a few people ever measure up to it. Perhaps yourself, the Bennetts, and whatever other athletes you happen to hold in high esteem. You have a pattern of critiquing other professionals on here for things like not optimizing their business as a triathlete for making money, not helping other triathletes making money (a la Lance), and now this. There are myriad reasons why people compete at both the amateur and professional level--what I take issue with is that you seem quite willing to impose your path through professional triathlon upon others. As a true professional triathlete, it is your sport to promote and defend, but it is not yours alone to dictate how each athlete should handle him or herself. I understand why you seem to be frustrated by her decision though--she is willing to take the hit earlier in the year such that she can still compete at Kona, while you're only willing to race at Kona if you can make it jive with the rest of your year.

Believe it or not, I actually qualified for my elite license last year. I jumped on that opportunity. Not because I was the best or the fastest or had even a remote chance of winning any money. 1. I didn't start a blog, didn't seek out sponsors, didn't post smack talk on twitter, or go beat my chest at races because I had a card that set me apart (on paper only). 2. I had the worst luck last year--I had constant calf cramping in races, asthma flare-ups that haven't been an issue since my childhood (after going through years of 2-3 allergy shots per week). I think that you are entitled to criticize anything that falls under category 1 above--things like that are indicative of professionalism. Category 2, which generally encompasses things that are out of one's control are not for you to hold a microscope to, which is exactly what I believe you are doing to Ms. Rollison. No, it's not personal, but yes, I can relate completely.

__________________________

I tweet!

Quote Reply
Re: Aussie womens pro to walk marathon - shooting for 12 hours [ZackC.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I am not dictating how she should handle herself. I'm just saying that I disagree with her decision, and that I would do it differently, for a variety of reasons. She's obviously free to do what she wants. That doesn't mean I have to agree with it, and I also don't think that if I do disagree that I shouldn't be able to say, "I disagree." It also does. Of mean that I think Mel is unprofessional. I just think that decision is unprofessional. We all know that I've certainly made my share of unprofessional decisions.

The analogy regarding your number 1/number 2 is not really germane. I'm not criticizing MR for getting injured. Just like I wouldn't criticize you for having a bad race because of cramps or asthma. But I you were havin an asthma attack waiting for the gun to go off, and you decided to start a race in spite of that, then yes, I might question that decision.

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp
Quote Reply
Re: Aussie womens pro to walk marathon - shooting for 12 hours [Rappstar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
The analogy regarding your number 1/number 2 is not really germane. I'm not criticizing MR for getting injured. Just like I wouldn't criticize you for having a bad race because of cramps or asthma. But I you were havin an asthma attack waiting for the gun to go off, and you decided to start a race in spite of that, then yes, I might question that decision.

Touche.

Also, check your PM's. In light of your most recent post you can probably ignore parts of the penultimate paragraph.

__________________________

I tweet!

Quote Reply
Re: Aussie womens pro to walk marathon - shooting for 12 hours [ZackC.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The notion of "professionalism" isn't respected enough by a lot of professionals, and I don't know what "professionalism" should encompass. There aren't many pros who post here. There are quite a few pros who read here.

But, I do think that 'if' you obtain your elite/pro license and decide to race as such, you should conduct yourself in a professional manner. Again, I don't know what it means. Does it mean starting a blog, not likely. Does it mean seeking out sponsors, not likely. But, if you do start a blog or have a website, it's my opinion that you should at least put forth some sort of effort to keep it updated. If you do seek out sponsors, it's my opinion that you should at least represent them in the best way that you are able.

You can look at ITU for at least some manner of what is expected of their athletes as professionals. Is a 'dress code' like ITU has necessary? I don't think so, but you can certainly compare how ITU races look vs. other pro races and yeah they look more "professional". Should all races with pro fields have the same entry/withdrawl requirements or meeting attendance requirements as ITU races? Maybe to some degree. I've raced three races this year. We've had a sign in sheet at the pro meeting for all three. Was there anything done with it? Am I on a good list for signing in at those pre race meetings. What of the athletes who didn't go and still raced?

I'm just rambling on. Honestly though, I think that we all suffer when less than professional choices are made. Had MR gone through and walked the marathon in a compromised state to validate her spot for a race that she wasn't planning on racing earlier in the year...then I too think that reflects poorly on the professional field, especially when the athlete in question is a World Champion. That's not a comment made to dis-respect the non-WC athletes since there are 'only' 3 per gender per year in WTC events, but the higher the profile athlete, the more scrutinized they will be. Which is why there are umpteen LA threads on the front forum page and which is why JR gets his balls routinely busted on ST for not racing Kona. Same reason AR had a thread when he was just going through the motions on the run last year to validate his spot despite uncorking a super performance at a non-WTC event.


Brandon Marsh - Website | @BrandonMarshTX | RokaSports | 1stEndurance | ATC Bikeshop |
Quote Reply
Re: Aussie womens pro to walk marathon - shooting for 12 hours [-BrandonMarshTX] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Brandon, I still see this as a process issues, not the racers issue. Meaning, you measure folks a certain way, and they will behave to maximize what is best for them. Nothing wrong with that.

So, if folks do not like the behaviors, go after the organizations that basically make folks behave in ways they might not otherwise do.

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: Aussie womens pro to walk marathon - shooting for 12 hours [-BrandonMarshTX] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Macca "cruised" through his validation and settled in a comfortable 9:00 IM & 10th Place (which blows me away that you guys can cruise through 9:XX IMs), but still shows he put forth a full race and didnt act unprofessional in any way.

"Only those who risk going too far truly know how far one can go"
Quote Reply
Re: Aussie womens pro to walk marathon - shooting for 12 hours [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yes agreed. And that is the age old question of getting the pros together. Or at least finding some kind of common ground or platform between pros and WTC/ITU/USAT/Whatever so that all are on at least a similar page.


Brandon Marsh - Website | @BrandonMarshTX | RokaSports | 1stEndurance | ATC Bikeshop |
Quote Reply
Re: Aussie womens pro to walk marathon - shooting for 12 hours [scmcmanu] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
scmcmanu wrote:
Macca "cruised" through his validation and settled in a comfortable 9:00 IM & 10th Place (which blows me away that you guys can cruise through 9:XX IMs), but still shows he put forth a full race and didnt act unprofessional in any way.


Exactly.


ETA. By exactly I mean that Macca didn't seem to imply that he didn't agree with the rule. He essentially said I've been training short course, but if that door closes, this is a good way for me to open another one in October.


Brandon Marsh - Website | @BrandonMarshTX | RokaSports | 1stEndurance | ATC Bikeshop |
Last edited by: -BrandonMarshTX: Jun 7, 12 15:41
Quote Reply
Re: Aussie womens pro to walk marathon - shooting for 12 hours [-BrandonMarshTX] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
-BrandonMarshTX wrote:
Yes agreed. And that is the age old question of getting the pros together. Or at least finding some kind of common ground or platform between pros and WTC/ITU/USAT/Whatever so that all are on at least a similar page.

All get on the same page, now that would be a first. Cannot even seem to get the pros all on the same page about Lance, etc. It must be the personality type that does IM. It is me me rather than we we. Most do not seem to understand the politics of sport if more money is going to be brought in. Just look at some of the junk on TV. They only do that and give out big money because they make it exciting.

Oh well, love our posts. You seem very well grounded.

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: Aussie womens pro to walk marathon - shooting for 12 hours [Rappstar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Rappstar wrote:
ZackC. wrote:

I think that going in to a race like an Ironman anticipating walking the marathon is a bad thing. I think it reflects poorly on the professional race. And I think it contributes to this idea that Kona is all that matters, so much so that you'd give a subpar performance at another race just to get to Kona.

I agree with most of what you wrote on that reply, but in reality, for Melissa, as a long distance female Australian triathlete, Kona is pretty much all that matters.

Outside of triathlon fans in this country (and not even all of them), the only people who would know who Melissa is are hard core athletics fans. For all of her success recently, her mainstream profile would be zero.
Quote Reply

Prev Next