yeah its a pain in the ass having to swim past way slower people right in front of u. thats why it can be quite good to go pretty hard first 100m, you can usually drop most people in about 30 m of that. hah

they do down here in oz and it works fine

so no wave start in OZ, just seeded all starting the same time?? might make sense no???

I think the Muncie Endurathon (half-IM) did that in the 1980's. You supplied an accurate estimate of your swim time on your race app, and then you were gieven a certain color swim cap. Fast color up front at the start, slow colors towards the back. Of course, when I did that race, they started in a wide cove, so no one was more than 3 deep. But, OTOH, few people seem to seed themselves properly at marathons anymore now that the entrants number in the thousands. It can be equally frustrating in those races.

---

Behold the turtle! He makes progess only when he sticks his neck out. (James Bryant Conant)
GET OFF THE F*%KING WALL!!!!!!! (Doug Stern)
Brevity is the soul of wit. (William Shakespeare)

I love the idea for ALL races.

Back in the late '70s and early '80s, it was fairly common for runners to self seed based on pacing. At the bigger races (Mayor Daly Marthon, for example) there'd be signs along the start area for 6:00, 6:30, 7:00, etc., per mile pace. It worked pretty well. Some runs asked you to supply a finish time, and your race number reflected where you were expected to finish.

At IMs, maybe they could ask sub 1 hour people to move up front and somehow bump the others back by 5 or 10 minute expected swim time. Hard to enforce, unless they gave out different colored swim caps.

I hate wave starts more than mass starts. I'm 50+, so I'm usually pretty far back (wave 11 at San Jose) so I have to swim over three waves of slow pokes and bike through all the recreational nitwits. I don't mind them doing the events, but why put them ahead of me? I gave the first wave a 40 minute head start, and passed some of them.

The real challenge comes on technical courses, where I want to take a downhill curve at 40, and some slug on a mountain bike is using the whole road - starting low and drifting out high - at 20, or a few of the social riders are three abreast...

---

Cousin Elwood - Team Over-the-hill Racing
Brought to you by the good folks at Metamucil and Geritol...

The Peterborough 1/2 IM that I did last year did this. You placed yourself according to your expected finish time for the swim and chose a swim cap color based on that time. It worked out very well. There were 400+ people starting and us slowbies started towards the back. Didn't get run over at all except for the guy swimming at a 90 degree angle to me. Don't know where he was going, but I was going the right way!

Dawn

At any triathlon I try to seed myself accordingly (I'm a pretty slow swimmer) and as a result rarely have had problems with people passing or passing other people. I think it might be a nice idea to seed it by expected times also...it would put my mind at ease knowing I have less chance of being pummeled.

yep, different colour caps and corresponding markers to these colours about ten metres apart going back from the start. This year had around 1600 in the race and it is way better than when there was only 700 and no seeding. It is a fairly narrow start also.

how's this for a different idea.

Time trial start, two swimmers go off every 3 seconds. 2000 starters are off and swimming in 50 minutes. You could start all of the pro's together first, then clump everyone else by age group.

The real advantage of the mass start is that the first one across the line is the winner and this would no longer always be true.

Sure there are a lot of potential problems/drawbacks to this system, but maybe one of the smaller iron distance races could try it out for a test run.

I spent a lot of years racing in the deep south and time trial starts are common there and seem to work very well. Memphis in May has similar numbers to an Ironman as far as entrants and they pull it off very well.

---

Mike Plumb, TriPower MultiSports
Professional Running, Cycling and Multisport Coaching, F.I.S.T. Certified
http://www.tripower.org

I can understand an "honor system"...which is basically what most marathons are. If it's mandatory, it's kinda silly... Just too many factors involved in a 2.4 mile swim. All the hot heads will still be up front slowing everybody else down after 500m...perhaps just making things worse.

I got a nice cut lip at IMFL in 2002 and visions of "JAWS" were dancin in my head. I'm over that now......must have been the rain storm or my bad run.

I like the current jockeying sitation as my strategy has been working well....

I'd tell ya, but my battery is running low.

;o)

it's not really an honour system. If you've raced there before it's based on your time - if not what you've nominated. Because it is very narrow it can be intimidating and the my experience (eleven races there) is that it works well. everyone stays in the zone corresponding with their cap.

LOL.....sounds like a totalitarian approach to race management. Why race if you 're going to lumped into your same time? You need to start higher than your ability in order to make the draft.

IMO, the problem with IM starts is simply the 1st 500m dash....the newbies think they can get ahead and the vets want to avoid the rookies. It's simply a testosterone fest. It doesn't matter where you start!!!!!! People naturally panic at IM starts, especially in open water.....

I can't relate to OZ as mine have all been NA, but I've done several TT tri starts and found it totally ridiculous as I guess I enjoy pack swimming....it's part of the race.

People are already supposed to self-seed themselves. IMHO, if you are getting pummeled, you seeded yourself poorly. Everyone thinks that the 10, 15, 20 feet back from the start line is going to be the difference between a 9 hour IM and a 15 hr IM. Even the fast swimmers right at the front always 'creep' forward because someone else down the line is a foot ahead of them.

I do think that proper course design/layout would help. In Kona, it's 1.2 miles straight out and back, you can start 100 yds. to the left and swim in perfectly clear water the whole way.

i consider myself a fairly good swimmer. i'm usually in the top 5-10% for most of the tri's I've done. But, I've never had to deal with a mass swim start. I've done lots of sprints and 2 half IM's... and, they were all wave starts. I'm doing IMF this year and I have to say... even though I don't think I have anything to worry about... the thought of racing 2000 people to the first buoy does not sit well with me. If they could split it up into 2 waves... or 4... I would feel much safer. Better to fight 1000 or 500 people... rather than 2000.

I think that is an excellent idea...if people make realistic estimates and are willing to seed honestly.

I still like my idea about seeding based on previous, documented, Ironman swim times. If you have never raced an ironman you start in the back. If you think you are a better swimmer than that or think you have improved since your last Ironman race, you can show up at the lake during the week for a "swim test". Someone from the event times you for a 1000yd open water swim and based on that you can improve your seed time. You cannot leave it up to people to provide an accurate time on their own. It is the same problem with the current self seeding system. Everyone naturally wants to be up front because " today might be the miracle day where I go from 1:20 swimmer to :58 minute man! I just need to find the right feet" I did a race a few years ago where they asked for an accurate time in order to seed you. I gave a real time and was seeded in the second group. The two prior races that year, I was first out of the water so i was shocked that there were that many fast swimmers in this race. 200 meters into the swim I was swimming over and around these "fast" guys. Some of whom were breast stroking already!