What would be the point?

"O Sport, delight of the Gods, distillation of lift! In the grey dingle of modern existence, restless with barren toil, you suddently appeared like the shining messenger of vanished ages, those ages when humanity could smile."
https://www.kmbc.com/...o-sport-poem/3671629

This is why we do it. Nothing in the poem about wetsuits, I checked!

PS. If seriously, how can a race with KQ slots will be easy? If it's all downstream and downhill, the required time will be like 8:30 and it will still destroy you.

I tend to seek out tougher courses now but 20 years ago when I started out and didn't know I could go that distance, an easier course was a priority. Now I understand they are just different challenges. I won't judge people looking for an easier course, especially first timers.

Quote:

In summary: a very easy IM..

Maybe for you. My definition of tough/easy depends far more on the competition than the course. So the course would factor in only in how it plays to my strengths and weaknesses vs. the competition. Maybe it's like 8 hours of brutalizing yourself to beat someone vs. 10 hours. But that just means you can push yourself that much harder for the 8 hours, which might be more physically painful.

There's no free lunch when your goal is place well vs. other people.

Hell yes, easiest as possible for me for my 1st IM.

An IM on an easy course is already a tough enough challenge for me to get my fix.

After I do more than a handful of these, and feel that I can race for performance, then I'll start looking at the tougher courses that play to my advantages.

If it's a sprint/oly though, I've done a lot of those so finishing is never in question and they usually go well enough, so for me, the tougher the better - gives me more time to beat my AG competition!

sure. why not? but that's not realistic and even for "easy" IM weather can throw a giant curveball for any course. how hard a course is, for me, is further down on the list of things to consider when choosing a half or full distance. If norseman was in my backyard I don't know if I would do it. I might want to but I know it's just another level of craziness. I think there's a place for "easy" full distance triathlons as well as super challenging.IM has brought back IM St. George at least for a couple go rounds

Oh, so you are saying that my first full IM shouldn't be Ironman Canada with 8,000 ft of climbing on the bike?

It never gets easier, you just go faster

..

I have always disputed that quote as I used to be fit and fast and now I am fat and slow.Fit and fast was much easier in every way,not only in races but in everyday life. Now if you are already a pro cyclists like Lemond who was credited with that quote then maybe yes.

Hell do whatever you want but these days I look to people who I know and ask myself questions like....
What would Andre do? :-)
.
https://www.andrekajlich.com/about-me-20

I have yet to do a full IM, but for my first, I would not want it to be quite like that. Flat, yes, but not like what you describe.

---

"The first virtue in a soldier is endurance of fatigue; courage is only the second virtue."
- Napoleon Bonaparte

Ha! Go for it. Sounds perfect. :)

Depends on your goals. If you're worried about making the cut off then an easy course is attractive. Or if it's a bucket list item that you just want to tick off and say you did it. Or if you think that you're a "one and done" Ironman and want to record the best time you can. Nothing wrong with any of those scenarios I don't think.

If you're confident of finishing and are targeting a place (KQ, top quartile of AG, top half overall, etc) not a time, then you're more likely to choose a course that plays to your strengths. If you could arrange a race with your proposed swim and run but a bike course with lots of rolling hills and headwinds, I'll sign up right away!