Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Iden's moral [Adman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Adman wrote:
Regarding ITU vs Kona athletes:

I think in the last 10 years ITU has evolved to the point that it is truly an elimination race. And because of this athletes tend to be more well rounded while still having the traditional strengths in the swim and run. Because everything revolves around the Olympic cycle most countries have a well funded pyramid system which identifies the most talented swim-bike-runners by the age of 18-20.

I would say the majority of Kona focused athletes are either athletes that couldn't cut the mustard at ITU, were late developers or were more suited to the non-drafting ruleset. And because of this the talent pool in ITU is much deeper.

This difference in talent pool has translated to the 70.3 distance particularly in the mens events in the last 5 year's. Of the 18 men's podium spots available since 2014, 9 were occupied by active ITU athletes and a further 6 spots by former ITU athletes. A further factor to consider is that few ITU athletes actually race 70.3. My hunch is that if they did the number of active ITU athletes in the top 10 would be higher.

Now will this current deep pool of ITU athletes come to dominate Kona in 5-10 years? I think it really depends on what age they go long. Many will stick with ITU because quite simply the money is better, with deeper prize pools and federation funding. By the time they come to Ironman they are slightly shop worn. I feel that this will be the case with AB and JG. Also I think that the nuances of the full distance does eliminate a lot of ITU athletes due to specific nutritional demands of the race. It's an 8 hour race which is like comparing the Marathon to a 100mile mountain race.

True but a version of this discussion is held every year as a new ITU superstar steps up. Neither Lessing or Smith made an impact in Kona whereas a less gifted speedster such as Peter Reid managed to nail it.
Quote Reply
Re: Iden's moral [SteveMc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
SteveMc wrote:
Adman wrote:
Regarding ITU vs Kona athletes:

I think in the last 10 years ITU has evolved to the point that it is truly an elimination race. And because of this athletes tend to be more well rounded while still having the traditional strengths in the swim and run. Because everything revolves around the Olympic cycle most countries have a well funded pyramid system which identifies the most talented swim-bike-runners by the age of 18-20.

I would say the majority of Kona focused athletes are either athletes that couldn't cut the mustard at ITU, were late developers or were more suited to the non-drafting ruleset. And because of this the talent pool in ITU is much deeper.

This difference in talent pool has translated to the 70.3 distance particularly in the mens events in the last 5 year's. Of the 18 men's podium spots available since 2014, 9 were occupied by active ITU athletes and a further 6 spots by former ITU athletes. A further factor to consider is that few ITU athletes actually race 70.3. My hunch is that if they did the number of active ITU athletes in the top 10 would be higher.

Now will this current deep pool of ITU athletes come to dominate Kona in 5-10 years? I think it really depends on what age they go long. Many will stick with ITU because quite simply the money is better, with deeper prize pools and federation funding. By the time they come to Ironman they are slightly shop worn. I feel that this will be the case with AB and JG. Also I think that the nuances of the full distance does eliminate a lot of ITU athletes due to specific nutritional demands of the race. It's an 8 hour race which is like comparing the Marathon to a 100mile mountain race.


True but a version of this discussion is held every year as a new ITU superstar steps up. Neither Lessing or Smith made an impact in Kona whereas a less gifted speedster such as Peter Reid managed to nail it.


True but this was all pre 2008. The game started to change around then. Certainly Lessing was not the biker that the current crop are. Even in the swim and run he would be behind. Consider this. Simon Lessing was seen as one of the fastest runners back in the day and had a track pb of 14:33 over 5000m. I'm sure he could have gone a good bit faster but I think in the UK alone we have 5 current athletes who can run low 14s.

I take the point that some guys who maybe aren't as fast excel over the iron distance. But if you start getting a steady flow of faster guys going long at the right time their ceiling on average will be higher and there'll be a significant proportion of these guys dominating the podiums. I would predict that this would happen outside Kona. The fact that Kona is the venue for the world champs every year stops me from saying they would dominate there.
Last edited by: Adman: Sep 14, 19 0:08
Quote Reply
Re: Iden's moral [ericmulk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ericmulk wrote:
Ai_1 wrote:
juanillo wrote:
With all the respect, Iden has proved that equipment does not win races, but legs and arms. A 24 year old dude, no sponsor, an old TT bike and using a regular road bike has showed that some discussions are nonsense, from my POV. I am an amateur...and again with all the respect, i would invest my money in a coach, physiotherapist, feeding advice...Honestly, I dont think a 600usd neoprene vs a 200usd one will make such a difference but the training.
Ivan RaƱa, a local and former wc, said recently that triathlon has changed for the best and the worst. The sport is widespread, but some guys riding a 12000usd bike with no watts in the legs is just stupid. I would invest that money in more free time for training, smart recovery, injury prevention.
Recovering the spirit of the old ages....

I both agree and disagree with you.
I agree that equipment is not a substitute for athletic ability.
I disagree with your assumption that those buying more elaborate equipment are under the illusion it makes them a great athlete.

You seem to be saying that those talking about equipment are dismissing the importance of training, and that equipment is actually irrelevant. If that's your view, you are making the exact same error you're accuse them of making by dismissing the importance of training. For optimum performance you need to optimise both. Consideration of training and equipment are not mutually exclusive. It's foolish to talk as though they are. It's like the guys who jump into every discussion about equipment weight savings to say there's no point until you're at your optimum racing weight. Rubbish. Body weight probably offers more potential weight savings, but there's no reason you can't do both and no reason you can't make the easier equipment savings regardless of body weight. No one with half a brain thinks one replaces the other.

Also, no-one is obliged to be as fit or as fast as they are capable of becoming. Most of us do this because we enjoy it, as a hobby with health benefits. We have jobs, families, and other obligations. Time is often the most valuable commodity. Younger folks or those without a family or with a less demanding job may not appreciate the reality of this. I've been both and I never realised just how quickly and completely your free time evaporates when you have a family and full time job until that was my life. I can still train, a bit. I still thoroughly enjoy riding my bike. But I can't commit the time I'd like without making unacceptable sacrifices elsewhere in my life. So I'm respectably fast on the bike at a club level but I will never be really fast. Does that mean, in your view, that it's unjustified for me to buy a decent bike and an aero helmet, power meter, etc? Is sport without value unless it's a career? If that were the case it could never be a career in the first place. You realise that, yes?

Kind of a bad example to set for your kids though, isn't it??? Should we not all want to be "the best we can be"???
Being the best person you can be could mean a lot if things. Being the fastest triathlete you can be at the expense of anything else in your life, including family happiness, is not even on the list.

I want my kids to be balanced, have perspective and be happy. So, if you want your kids to develop obsessive and single minded ambition towards narrow goals, perhaps you would think I'm setting a bad example. I want mine to have some perspective, and no I don't think I'm setting a bad example at all.
It could be a convenient excuse to justify doing what I want with my time, but I don't for one second believe it's true.
Quote Reply
Re: Iden's moral [ericmulk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ericmulk wrote:
JasoninHalifax wrote:
ericmulk wrote:
Ai_1 wrote:
juanillo wrote:
With all the respect, Iden has proved that equipment does not win races, but legs and arms. A 24 year old dude, no sponsor, an old TT bike and using a regular road bike has showed that some discussions are nonsense, from my POV. I am an amateur...and again with all the respect, i would invest my money in a coach, physiotherapist, feeding advice...Honestly, I dont think a 600usd neoprene vs a 200usd one will make such a difference but the training.
Ivan RaƱa, a local and former wc, said recently that triathlon has changed for the best and the worst. The sport is widespread, but some guys riding a 12000usd bike with no watts in the legs is just stupid. I would invest that money in more free time for training, smart recovery, injury prevention.
Recovering the spirit of the old ages....

I both agree and disagree with you.
I agree that equipment is not a substitute for athletic ability.
I disagree with your assumption that those buying more elaborate equipment are under the illusion it makes them a great athlete.

You seem to be saying that those talking about equipment are dismissing the importance of training, and that equipment is actually irrelevant. If that's your view, you are making the exact same error you're accuse them of making by dismissing the importance of training. For optimum performance you need to optimise both. Consideration of training and equipment are not mutually exclusive. It's foolish to talk as though they are. It's like the guys who jump into every discussion about equipment weight savings to say there's no point until you're at your optimum racing weight. Rubbish. Body weight probably offers more potential weight savings, but there's no reason you can't do both and no reason you can't make the easier equipment savings regardless of body weight. No one with half a brain thinks one replaces the other.

Also, no-one is obliged to be as fit or as fast as they are capable of becoming. Most of us do this because we enjoy it, as a hobby with health benefits. We have jobs, families, and other obligations. Time is often the most valuable commodity. Younger folks or those without a family or with a less demanding job may not appreciate the reality of this. I've been both and I never realised just how quickly and completely your free time evaporates when you have a family and full time job until that was my life. I can still train, a bit. I still thoroughly enjoy riding my bike. But I can't commit the time I'd like without making unacceptable sacrifices elsewhere in my life. So I'm respectably fast on the bike at a club level but I will never be really fast. Does that mean, in your view, that it's unjustified for me to buy a decent bike and an aero helmet, power meter, etc? Is sport without value unless it's a career? If that were the case it could never be a career in the first place. You realise that, yes?


Kind of a bad example to set for your kids though, isn't it??? Should we not all want to be "the best we can be"???


No, thatā€™s not a bad example to set for kids. Iā€™m in the same boat, I do the best I can with a very limited number of hours for training each week, and I spend the rest of my time doing things like working, spending time with the kids, carting them around to their activities, spending time with my wife and doing tasks around the home. Thatā€™s what Ai is talking about. There are some things that must take priority over my own selfish aspirations. Once those are taken care of, then I can do the training and such.

I know 3 guys with families who manage to train 20-25 hr/wk and their kids seem to be doing just fine. I think they have come fairly close to maxing their ability despite their families.
.

So? Thatā€™s them, in their particular circumstances. And maybe that works for them. There is no possible way for me to train those kinds of hours without sacrificing ā€œsomethingā€, especially not with the constraints I have on pool time and budget.

There is nothing wrong with treating a sport as a hobby. Nothing. Iā€™m just in it to keep healthy, have some fun competing and do the best I can given the constraints I have. Iā€™ve even sandbagged races because of circumstances. (Going for the 200 back provincial record in my AG, it was a slow existing record and either right before or right after another event. I did just enough to get the record by 2 seconds)

If my kids see me out there, staying healthy and having fun, and still taking the important things in life seriously, then thatā€™s a good example and is the best I can manage.

ETA. I debated whether to say this or not, but I will. The suggestion that I, or AI, or anyone else is setting a poor example for our kids because we donā€™t choose to focus on a sport at the expense of other things in our life is, quite frankly, ridiculous. Itā€™s also insulting and offensive.

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly
Last edited by: JasoninHalifax: Sep 14, 19 4:10
Quote Reply
Re: Iden's moral [Fazz] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
While I agree with a lot of your sentiment- uh, you know that we women also spend money on gear, race entry fees and the like, right? I mean, I know you do- I actually DONā€™T buy baubles, bags, shoes- my ā€œdisposableā€ income goes to training. You cannot actually think you are only addressing men in this forum, right?
Quote Reply
Re: Iden's moral [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That was funnyšŸ˜



Slowman wrote:
Once-a-miler wrote:
Remember, for armatures, this is a hobby.

i feel like you're speaking directly to me. i'm a rotating coil, ready to motor.
Quote Reply
Re: Iden's moral [Ai_1] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Ai_1 wrote:
ericmulk wrote:
Ai_1 wrote:
juanillo wrote:
With all the respect, Iden has proved that equipment does not win races, but legs and arms. A 24 year old dude, no sponsor, an old TT bike and using a regular road bike has showed that some discussions are nonsense, from my POV. I am an amateur...and again with all the respect, i would invest my money in a coach, physiotherapist, feeding advice...Honestly, I dont think a 600usd neoprene vs a 200usd one will make such a difference but the training.
Ivan RaƱa, a local and former wc, said recently that triathlon has changed for the best and the worst. The sport is widespread, but some guys riding a 12000usd bike with no watts in the legs is just stupid. I would invest that money in more free time for training, smart recovery, injury prevention.
Recovering the spirit of the old ages....

I both agree and disagree with you.
I agree that equipment is not a substitute for athletic ability.
I disagree with your assumption that those buying more elaborate equipment are under the illusion it makes them a great athlete.

You seem to be saying that those talking about equipment are dismissing the importance of training, and that equipment is actually irrelevant. If that's your view, you are making the exact same error you're accuse them of making by dismissing the importance of training. For optimum performance you need to optimise both. Consideration of training and equipment are not mutually exclusive. It's foolish to talk as though they are. It's like the guys who jump into every discussion about equipment weight savings to say there's no point until you're at your optimum racing weight. Rubbish. Body weight probably offers more potential weight savings, but there's no reason you can't do both and no reason you can't make the easier equipment savings regardless of body weight. No one with half a brain thinks one replaces the other.

Also, no-one is obliged to be as fit or as fast as they are capable of becoming. Most of us do this because we enjoy it, as a hobby with health benefits. We have jobs, families, and other obligations. Time is often the most valuable commodity. Younger folks or those without a family or with a less demanding job may not appreciate the reality of this. I've been both and I never realised just how quickly and completely your free time evaporates when you have a family and full time job until that was my life. I can still train, a bit. I still thoroughly enjoy riding my bike. But I can't commit the time I'd like without making unacceptable sacrifices elsewhere in my life. So I'm respectably fast on the bike at a club level but I will never be really fast. Does that mean, in your view, that it's unjustified for me to buy a decent bike and an aero helmet, power meter, etc? Is sport without value unless it's a career? If that were the case it could never be a career in the first place. You realise that, yes?


Kind of a bad example to set for your kids though, isn't it??? Should we not all want to be "the best we can be"???

Being the best person you can be could mean a lot if things. Being the fastest triathlete you can be at the expense of anything else in your life, including family happiness, is not even on the list.

I want my kids to be balanced, have perspective and be happy. So, if you want your kids to develop obsessive and single minded ambition towards narrow goals, perhaps you would think I'm setting a bad example. I want mine to have some perspective, and no I don't think I'm setting a bad example at all.
It could be a convenient excuse to justify doing what I want with my time, but I don't for one second believe it's true.

If a kid wants to swim, run, or tri at a high level in college, and wants to go to med school, then he/she will prob have to laser-focused on getting in the workouts and studying a lot. If he/she sees Dad and Mom banging out intervals while they're playing in the free swim area, and then they see Mom/Dad running for an hour on the TM while they're playing, then they *may* think differently in the future about the use of their time than if M and D had spent that 2 hrs playing with them in the pool. OTOH, they may not as they may just not be "wired that way", e.g. may not want to spend 4 hr/day swimming, running, etc. One guy i know has 2 kids, the daughter swam D1 and Q'd for the Oly Trials in the 50/100/200 free, vs the boy who just wanted to play club water polo. Thus 20-25 hr/wk in the pool for the girl vs maybe 5 for the boy. :)


"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."
Quote Reply
Re: Iden's moral [lacticturkey] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
lacticturkey wrote:
That was funnyšŸ˜

Slowman wrote:
Once-a-miler wrote:
Remember, for armatures, this is a hobby.


i feel like you're speaking directly to me. i'm a rotating coil, ready to motor.

i suspect the OP was a victim of autocorrect, but i pounced anyway.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Iden's moral [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Hi, I started this thread and for the ones that dont share my opinion, ..you are right: spend your money in whatever you want.
Just wanted to comment an anecdote. I was in a triathlon material shop and waiting to be attended. I was checking the crazy prices of all the clothes..but I was there for other purpose for an.errand. Then , a woman, in front if me was going to buy for his kid that does triathlon, a 110eur glasses. I ignore if the kid is good or not, neither his age,... but for me , completely crazy. I dont want to think about the neoprene, the tribody, the helmet, cycling clothes, the bike, boots, shoes....
Yes, all of you who like cool and expensive bikes, nothing to say...it is your money (in fact, better spent in that than in alcohol, cigarrettes and whoppers). But,at least in Spain, there is a sort of posh thing about this, even with kids, that I really dont like....

Spaniard. Sorry for my english for the sensitive ones :P
Quote Reply
Re: Iden's moral [juanillo] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
juanillo wrote:
Hi, I started this thread and for the ones that dont share my opinion, ..you are right: spend your money in whatever you want.
Just wanted to comment an anecdote. I was in a triathlon material shop and waiting to be attended. I was checking the crazy prices of all the clothes..but I was there for other purpose for an.errand. Then , a woman, in front if me was going to buy for his kid that does triathlon, a 110eur glasses. I ignore if the kid is good or not, neither his age,... but for me , completely crazy. I dont want to think about the neoprene, the tribody, the helmet, cycling clothes, the bike, boots, shoes....
Yes, all of you who like cool and expensive bikes, nothing to say...it is your money (in fact, better spent in that than in alcohol, cigarrettes and whoppers). But,at least in Spain, there is a sort of posh thing about this, even with kids, that I really dont like....

I hear ya. When I was starting ice hockey in the mid 70's, we didn't have pro level gear. we had shitty gloves, shitty skates, shitty...well you get the picture. Nowadays, kids expect to have the same gear that their favorite NHL star is using.

No reason for this, whatsoever. There seems to be a successful effort by marketer , that has convinced amateurs that they can and should have what the pros use. I mean, how many people have a commercial grade range and refrigerator in their designer kitchen, but eat out 6 days a week?

But getting back to the kids...I agree with you, its getting out of hand. No closing Pandora's box, now. New generation, new expectations.

Not everything is as it seems -Mr. Miyagi
Quote Reply
Re: Iden's moral [Adman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Adman wrote:
Regarding ITU vs Kona athletes:

I think in the last 10 years ITU has evolved to the point that it is truly an elimination race. And because of this athletes tend to be more well rounded while still having the traditional strengths in the swim and run. Because everything revolves around the Olympic cycle most countries have a well funded pyramid system which identifies the most talented swim-bike-runners by the age of 18-20.

I would say the majority of Kona focused athletes are either athletes that couldn't cut the mustard at ITU, were late developers or were more suited to the non-drafting ruleset. And because of this the talent pool in ITU is much deeper.

This difference in talent pool has translated to the 70.3 distance particularly in the mens events in the last 5 year's. Of the 18 men's podium spots available since 2014, 9 were occupied by active ITU athletes and a further 6 spots by former ITU athletes. A further factor to consider is that few ITU athletes actually race 70.3. My hunch is that if they did the number of active ITU athletes in the top 10 would be higher.

Now will this current deep pool of ITU athletes come to dominate Kona in 5-10 years? I think it really depends on what age they go long. Many will stick with ITU because quite simply the money is better, with deeper prize pools and federation funding. By the time they come to Ironman they are slightly shop worn. I feel that this will be the case with AB and JG. Also I think that the nuances of the full distance does eliminate a lot of ITU athletes due to specific nutritional demands of the race. It's an 8 hour race which is like comparing the Marathon to a 100mile mountain race.

If the sport actually grows, then no, this crop of athletes would not be on the ITU circuit much longer because their federations will push them out for younger athletes. And they'll move on to long course.

Washed up footy player turned Triathlete.
Quote Reply
Re: Iden's moral [juanillo] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
His bike with a power meter is over 13k MSRP and that course was far from a regular triathlon course. Like others have said a lot of people have maxed there time out, so honestly who gives a shit if someone wants to buy a 8-12k bike.... if it makes you happy buy it ride it and enjoy.

2024: Bevoman, Galveston, Alcatraz, Marble Falls, Santa Cruz
Quote Reply
Re: Iden's moral [juanillo] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
juanillo wrote:
With all the respect, Iden has proved that equipment does not win races, but legs and arms. A 24 year old dude, no sponsor, an old TT bike and using a regular road bike has showed that some discussions are nonsense, from my POV. I am an amateur...and again with all the respect, i would invest my money in a coach, physiotherapist, feeding advice...Honestly, I dont think a 600usd neoprene vs a 200usd one will make such a difference but the training.
Ivan RaƱa, a local and former wc, said recently that triathlon has changed for the best and the worst. The sport is widespread, but some guys riding a 12000usd bike with no watts in the legs is just stupid. I would invest that money in more free time for training, smart recovery, injury prevention.
Recovering the spirit of the old ages....

What is wrong with getting a fast bike, AND training? I think the only bad bike choices are buying a tri bike or similar, then leaving the sport and hardly using it.

Are there rules for ftp thresholds that determine what value of bike is appropriate to own? Oh wait... yes there are... because i wrote them!

https://forum.slowtwitch.com/...F_P7015271/#p7015271
Quote Reply
Re: Iden's moral [juanillo] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
juanillo wrote:
Hi, I started this thread and for the ones that dont share my opinion, ..you are right: spend your money in whatever you want.
Just wanted to comment an anecdote. I was in a triathlon material shop and waiting to be attended. I was checking the crazy prices of all the clothes..but I was there for other purpose for an.errand. Then , a woman, in front if me was going to buy for his kid that does triathlon, a 110eur glasses. I ignore if the kid is good or not, neither his age,... but for me , completely crazy. I dont want to think about the neoprene, the tribody, the helmet, cycling clothes, the bike, boots, shoes....
Yes, all of you who like cool and expensive bikes, nothing to say...it is your money (in fact, better spent in that than in alcohol, cigarrettes and whoppers). But,at least in Spain, there is a sort of posh thing about this, even with kids, that I really dont like....

I just bought a bike that costs about as much as smoking one pack of cigarettes a day (in canada, i did the math... 8500$).
Quote Reply
Re: Iden's moral [juanillo] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
juanillo wrote:
some guys riding a 12000usd bike with no watts in the legs is just stupid.

Not if you're that guy who has money to spend, wants a cool bike, is ENJOYING what he is doing with that cool bike, and it expands the sport.

What's stupid is being judgmental on how someone spends their money. Sounds socialist.
Quote Reply
Re: Iden's moral [Scottxs] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Scottxs wrote:
juanillo wrote:
some guys riding a 12000usd bike with no watts in the legs is just stupid.


Not if you're that guy who has money to spend, wants a cool bike, is ENJOYING what he is doing with that cool bike, and it expands the sport.

What's stupid is being judgmental on how someone spends their money. Sounds socialist.

Do people judge somebody driving a Porsche or Ferrari, instead of a less expensive car, even if they're not a particularly good driver??

Hacker golfers buy shiny new expensive clubs all the time, hoping for improvement - do they get judged for that?

If somebody can afford the best equipment for their hobby, and it's not negatively impacting their finances otherwise - why not??

My buddy owns a high-end LBS in Westchester.
He sells expensive bikes to enthusiasts, and to noobs alike.
I laughed when he once said "sometimes you just have to let a Fred, be a Fred."


float , hammer , and jog

Quote Reply
Re: Iden's moral [Scottxs] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Scottxs wrote:
juanillo wrote:
some guys riding a 12000usd bike with no watts in the legs is just stupid.


Not if you're that guy who has money to spend, wants a cool bike, is ENJOYING what he is doing with that cool bike, and it expands the sport.

What's stupid is being judgmental on how someone spends their money. Sounds socialist.

Nah, triathlon would be socialist only if everyone was required to pay a very high license fee that increased on a sliding % scale with your annual income, and then everyone would be required to race on a WTC-issued P2. That would make racing super fair. /pink

Strava
Quote Reply
Re: Iden's moral [B_Doughtie] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
B_Doughtie wrote:
I mean there's not a person out there that won't be on their bike for a min of 2 hrs anytime they touch their bike.

There is a person out there. Blummenfelt did it in Bahrain @ 1:56:52

https://www.strava.com/...tes/zachary_mckinney
Quote Reply

Prev Next