I've seen this discussed tangentially before on this board, but I'd like to gauge the support for taking action.
In 2013, Ironman started the SwimStart initiatives with several pilots of different ways of starting the races rather thjan the mass starts of previous years. I support any pilot on the assumption that there will be a report issued at the end of the pilot period and recommendations made for permanent improvements. I have seen no such report and the Ironman website has no article on SwimStart beyond "how tos" since the announcement last year.
For 2013, the pilot at IMMT was gender and age waves, with the women divided into two (<40, 40+) waves, the men into about 5, with the waves going off about 3 minutes apart starting before 7am. The older women started last at 7am The cutoff for the swim was as it always has been - at 9:20, 2:20 after the last athlete is in the water. Consequently, all men got at least 6 minutes longer to complete the distance than the older women and at least 3 minutes longer than all the women.
In 2013, three men completed the swim with 2:20+ times (but before 9:20am), one with 2:35. All three men went out on the bike, and two completed the race within 17 hours. There is no DNF next to their name.
In 2014, one man completed the swim in 2:25, but before 9:20am. He went out on the bike and completed the race within 17 hours. There is no DNF next to his name.
The swim cutoff information in the athlete guide is consistent:
p 9: Swim Cut-Off: 2 hour and 20 minutes after the Age Group start. 9:20 am
p11: The swim course will be CLOSED two hours and twenty minutes after the start of the last wave (7 am start, 9:20 am). ... Contestants still in the water after this time will be disqualified and will not be permitted to continue in the event.
All these men were allowed on the bike course under the rules of the event. All women were (appropriately) pulled if they came in over 2:20 and have DNF next to their names.
I would like to write an open letter to WTC, signed by you and as many others I can persuade, asking them to:
a) Publish the results of their SwimStart pilots including analysis of gender pace and DNF rates, or release race data so analysis of swim times before and after the pilots can be made, so that discussion can be held and decisions can be made based on data rather than anecdotes.
b) Clarify the 2:20 vs 9:20am swim cutoff contradiction.
c) If 2:20 is the primary cutoff, develop, publish and implement a procedure to ensure that all ages and genders have the same opportunity to continue only if they have met the cutoff time and the same rules are applied to all ages and genders.
d) If 9:20 is the primary cutoff and there is in fact more than 2:20 to complete the race for some athletes, eliminate age and gender-based wave starts in current and any future Ironman races due to its inherent biased in favor of both younger athletes and men.
e) If the concern is about slower swimmers self seeding to early in a rolling start, see a).
The last time this was discussed, someone said that women needed to stand up and demand equal treatment. I countered, saying that we _all_ need to stand up and demand equal treatment for women. I'm asking you - men and women alike, but especially the men who have wives, sisters, daughters, girlfriends who are athletes of any kind - to help me put this together and see if we can't bring back some kind of even playing field to Ironman.
Thoughts?
In 2013, Ironman started the SwimStart initiatives with several pilots of different ways of starting the races rather thjan the mass starts of previous years. I support any pilot on the assumption that there will be a report issued at the end of the pilot period and recommendations made for permanent improvements. I have seen no such report and the Ironman website has no article on SwimStart beyond "how tos" since the announcement last year.
For 2013, the pilot at IMMT was gender and age waves, with the women divided into two (<40, 40+) waves, the men into about 5, with the waves going off about 3 minutes apart starting before 7am. The older women started last at 7am The cutoff for the swim was as it always has been - at 9:20, 2:20 after the last athlete is in the water. Consequently, all men got at least 6 minutes longer to complete the distance than the older women and at least 3 minutes longer than all the women.
In 2013, three men completed the swim with 2:20+ times (but before 9:20am), one with 2:35. All three men went out on the bike, and two completed the race within 17 hours. There is no DNF next to their name.
In 2014, one man completed the swim in 2:25, but before 9:20am. He went out on the bike and completed the race within 17 hours. There is no DNF next to his name.
The swim cutoff information in the athlete guide is consistent:
p 9: Swim Cut-Off: 2 hour and 20 minutes after the Age Group start. 9:20 am
p11: The swim course will be CLOSED two hours and twenty minutes after the start of the last wave (7 am start, 9:20 am). ... Contestants still in the water after this time will be disqualified and will not be permitted to continue in the event.
All these men were allowed on the bike course under the rules of the event. All women were (appropriately) pulled if they came in over 2:20 and have DNF next to their names.
I would like to write an open letter to WTC, signed by you and as many others I can persuade, asking them to:
a) Publish the results of their SwimStart pilots including analysis of gender pace and DNF rates, or release race data so analysis of swim times before and after the pilots can be made, so that discussion can be held and decisions can be made based on data rather than anecdotes.
b) Clarify the 2:20 vs 9:20am swim cutoff contradiction.
c) If 2:20 is the primary cutoff, develop, publish and implement a procedure to ensure that all ages and genders have the same opportunity to continue only if they have met the cutoff time and the same rules are applied to all ages and genders.
d) If 9:20 is the primary cutoff and there is in fact more than 2:20 to complete the race for some athletes, eliminate age and gender-based wave starts in current and any future Ironman races due to its inherent biased in favor of both younger athletes and men.
e) If the concern is about slower swimmers self seeding to early in a rolling start, see a).
The last time this was discussed, someone said that women needed to stand up and demand equal treatment. I countered, saying that we _all_ need to stand up and demand equal treatment for women. I'm asking you - men and women alike, but especially the men who have wives, sisters, daughters, girlfriends who are athletes of any kind - to help me put this together and see if we can't bring back some kind of even playing field to Ironman.
Thoughts?