Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: 70.3 is not IRONman [phog] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
phog wrote:
Fortunately I am at an age where complete is often enough to compete.

Lets face it, a 70.3 is barely more than a short swim session, an easy ride and something less than a long run.
Besides, I have a marathon in 4 weeks and a BQ in my AG is an NB.


I'd say someone who races a 70.3 and goes sub 5 hours has a lot more bragging rights then some cow who crossed the 140.6 finish line seconds before the run cutoff.

Edit: added "140.6" for clarity
Last edited by: TheMallard: Sep 14, 16 8:54
Quote Reply
Re: 70.3 is not IRONman [happyscientist] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
happyscientist wrote:
The general public thinks the local sprint and an Ironman (140.6) are the same. They also think that a marathon and a 5k are the same. It is just like my view that all car racing is driving fast and turning left--that really pisses car racing fans off, but I don't care about their sport anymore than they care about mine.

*ding* *ding* *ding* *ding*

I have spent countless seconds of my life explaining to family (think aunts, uncles, 3rd cousins) and acquaintances that no, I've never done that "Hawaii type thing". Same idea. Just lots shorter.
In fact, I've done exactly one 70.3. Just one. I will (proudly, IDGAF what anyone here might think) tell them I've done that, but that's half the "Hawaii thing". And they'll still say "But, it is half." and I still say "Yah, but it's the way easier half."

Frankly, I think the corporation does a pretty good job branding 70.3
Like 5150, it's 70.3
Ironman is the brand AND the race. It sounds cooler than "the Hawaii thing" It's not 140.6. That's just a sticker some people put on their car. When you have your picture taken in front of the picture board at one, it just says "Ironman" not "Ironman 140.6"
When you do the same at 70.3, it says "Ironman 70.3" And you can't crop out the 70.3 for your Facebook profile. I tried it as an exercise to see if you could. FTR, my FB profile pic clearly shows the 70.3 part of the artwork. I just initially tried it out of curiosity to see if you could do it if you wanted to be one of "those people" and try to fool the general public into thinking you are something you aren't.

So, yah, like happyscientist says, the general public doesn't make a distinction anyway any more than happyscientist and I do for the left turn circuit.
And, yes, there are "those people". They exist in every endeavor. And they make great fodder for message boards. We should actually embrace and encourage them. Fodder like them can really keep a board moving.
Quote Reply
Re: 70.3 is not IRONman [TheMallard] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I will let Gwen Jorgensen know that her Olympic gold has been revoked by Slowtwitch since she did not complete a real triathlon.
Quote Reply
Re: 70.3 is not IRONman [TheMallard] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
you have issues.....
Quote Reply
Re: 70.3 is not IRONman [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
AKA - the Nautilus International Triathlon. Got it, but not relevant. Nor is it relevant that the marathon distance was not settled until the 1908 London Olympics. It floated around +/- 24 miles previously. What matters is that these distances and names for these distances are settled now. WTC has a trademark registration for long course = "Ironman" and half-distance = "Ironman 70.3". Although many triathletes use them inconsistently, WTC is consistent with their trademark usage. So your quip that I'm making up my own definitions is outright BS.
Quote Reply
Re: 70.3 is not IRONman [phog] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
What if I show up to race a 140.6 but the course is cut short because of the weather? Can I still call myself an Ironman? Dying to get your take on this, please let me know as the only official Ironman branded race ive ever done had a shorter swim because of the weather. Wouldn't want to be incorrectly identifying myself as an Ironman.

2x Deca-Ironman World Cup (10 Ironmans in 10 days), 2x Quintuple Ironman World Cup (5 Ironmans in 5 days), Ultraman, Ultra Marathoner, and I once did an Ironman.
Quote Reply
Re: 70.3 is not IRONman [chuy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Oh yeah and also on that note, I'm doing IMLOU for my first full and two thirds or so of the swim is assisted by some river current so am I really an Ironman if I complete that course....
Quote Reply
Re: 70.3 is not IRONman [chuy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
chuy wrote:
What if I show up to race a 140.6 but the course is cut short because of the weather? Can I still call myself an Ironman? Dying to get your take on this, please let me know as the only official Ironman branded race ive ever done had a shorter swim because of the weather. Wouldn't want to be incorrectly identifying myself as an Ironman.

If you run a "marathon" and the Garmin measures it at 25.8 (and everyone agrees it was short) but you PR, do you count it as a PR time?
Quote Reply
Re: 70.3 is not IRONman [TheMallard] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TheMallard wrote:
phog wrote:
Fortunately I am at an age where complete is often enough to compete.

Lets face it, a 70.3 is barely more than a short swim session, an easy ride and something less than a long run.
Besides, I have a marathon in 4 weeks and a BQ in my AG is an NB.


I'd say someone who races a 70.3 and goes sub 5 hours has a lot more bragging rights then some cow who crossed the 140.6 finish line seconds before the run cutoff.

Edit: added "140.6" for clarity

More so than Sister Buder or Lou Hollander?
Quote Reply
Re: 70.3 is not IRONman [HuffNPuff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
More so than Sister Buder

Now you have gone and done it. Yes everyones accomplishments are above the aforementioned.
Quote Reply
Re: 70.3 is not IRONman [jsmith82] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jsmith82 wrote:
ChrisM wrote:
HuffNPuff wrote:
jsmith82 wrote:
I feel saying "I am an Ironman" comes with completing the 140.6 distance regardless of the branding on the races, or regardless what WTC "deems" the definition. A very bland definition: Those who know, know. Today, I am not an Ironman. In 3 weeks I hope to earn that title but until then, nope.

Side note I did talk my buddy out of a 70.3 tattoo, if we want to open this can of worms. I said dude, your body, you get whatever the hell you want tattooed on it, but the general community "respect" of branding yourself an Ironman be it an i dot or some cool self drawn distance recognition design, is at the 140.6 distance.


Good on you, because while many on ST dislike the Mdot tat, many more respect it, and consider a Mdot for a 70.3 to be the mark of a poseur. Several years ago, a guy in my club got an elaborate Mdot tat for a 70.3, posted a photo of it on the forum, and gushed about how hard he had worked for it, etc. No one called him out, but instead of compliments, all you heard were crickets. He soon left the club.


I think anyone that says "I am an ironman" (whatever the distance) is lame. I do ironmans. I ain't one. The only person that should get to say that is Mike R (or whoever is announcing).


Well done backdoor, waited a sufficient time then dropped the Kona mic!! :)

Doh. Didn't mean this in such a literal meaning and should work on my internet grammar, so I will clarify now: I have no intentions of walking around letting people know "I am an Ironman" lol. That would be pretty douchey .

I meant to express reaching that level, crossing the 140.6 line. You say you are not an Ironman, you just do them (side joke, I HAVE seen this phrase on a couple T-shirts around local races, peoples better half wearing them). But you have crossed the line at the distance and earned the respect that comes with it in the community, you have conquered "Ironman" distance.

I wish Mike was announcing my race. Pesky Kona.
Quote Reply
Re: 70.3 is not IRONman [HuffNPuff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
HuffNPuff wrote:
TheMallard wrote:
phog wrote:
Fortunately I am at an age where complete is often enough to compete.

Lets face it, a 70.3 is barely more than a short swim session, an easy ride and something less than a long run.
Besides, I have a marathon in 4 weeks and a BQ in my AG is an NB.


I'd say someone who races a 70.3 and goes sub 5 hours has a lot more bragging rights then some cow who crossed the 140.6 finish line seconds before the run cutoff.

Edit: added "140.6" for clarity

More so than Sister Buder or Lou Hollander?

Are you calling Sister Buder or Lou Hollander a cow?? No way I would.
Quote Reply
Re: 70.3 is not IRONman [phog] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
phog wrote:

The difference between doing a half and a whole is that today I can not only walk but I was back in the gym.
IMs don't give you that option, it's another world of effort and some git wearing an Ironman 70.3 shirt gets up my nose.

Rant over.

I was in the gym the day after Vineman full. So...also not true
Quote Reply
Re: 70.3 is not IRONman [ChrisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ChrisM wrote:
jsmith82 wrote:
ChrisM wrote:
HuffNPuff wrote:
jsmith82 wrote:
I feel saying "I am an Ironman" comes with completing the 140.6 distance regardless of the branding on the races, or regardless what WTC "deems" the definition. A very bland definition: Those who know, know. Today, I am not an Ironman. In 3 weeks I hope to earn that title but until then, nope.

Side note I did talk my buddy out of a 70.3 tattoo, if we want to open this can of worms. I said dude, your body, you get whatever the hell you want tattooed on it, but the general community "respect" of branding yourself an Ironman be it an i dot or some cool self drawn distance recognition design, is at the 140.6 distance.


Good on you, because while many on ST dislike the Mdot tat, many more respect it, and consider a Mdot for a 70.3 to be the mark of a poseur. Several years ago, a guy in my club got an elaborate Mdot tat for a 70.3, posted a photo of it on the forum, and gushed about how hard he had worked for it, etc. No one called him out, but instead of compliments, all you heard were crickets. He soon left the club.


I think anyone that says "I am an ironman" (whatever the distance) is lame. I do ironmans. I ain't one. The only person that should get to say that is Mike R (or whoever is announcing).


Well done backdoor, waited a sufficient time then dropped the Kona mic!! :)

Doh. Didn't mean this in such a literal meaning and should work on my internet grammar, so I will clarify now: I have no intentions of walking around letting people know "I am an Ironman" lol. That would be pretty douchey .

I meant to express reaching that level, crossing the 140.6 line. You say you are not an Ironman, you just do them (side joke, I HAVE seen this phrase on a couple T-shirts around local races, peoples better half wearing them). But you have crossed the line at the distance and earned the respect that comes with it in the community, you have conquered "Ironman" distance.

I wish Mike was announcing my race. Pesky Kona.

ChrisM - oh I wish that was a backdoor brag. I'll be in Louisville. Mike will be at Kona. :)

Regards,
J. Smith
Quote Reply
Re: 70.3 is not IRONman [phog] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Some people just need to chill out.

You go to a race (any distance) and everyone is so supportive.

You get on Slowtwitch and all anyone does is tell the other person why they are wrong!

Maybe if you just worried about yourself there would not be an issue?
Quote Reply
Re: 70.3 is not IRONman [Fleck] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Fleck wrote:
I'm sure this thread has been on here before, but it needs to be said again.


Yes - old news.

I first experienced this phenomenon perhaps 10 years ago. Riding a shuttle bus back to the parking lot at an early 70.3 race after it was over. Dude, sitting behind me was going, on and on and on to his seat-mate and others, that he had just finished "an IRONMAN". I was about to turn around and ask a few questions when he then launched into his life-story of being 100lbs overweight, smoking, etc . . and that this race had turned his life around. I bit my tongue and just sat there!

What should be REALLY worrying to IRONMAN die-hards and purists, are the comments last year from key WANDA exec Jack Gao, who was completely open and honest, about the fact that in Asia, IRONMAN will be used as a brand for the promotion of all manner of endurance sports!!

this. Everything else is feeding the trolls. Do not feed the trolls.


---------------------------------------------------------
The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits. -- A fake Albert Einstein "quote"
Quote Reply
Re: 70.3 is not IRONman [TheMallard] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I got the implication that you were calling anyone who finished just before 17 hours a cow. Not everyone racing an IM is in their 30s/40s.
Quote Reply
Re: 70.3 is not IRONman [HuffNPuff] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Well you implicated wrong.
Quote Reply
Re: 70.3 is not IRONman [TheMallard] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TheMallard wrote:
Well you implicated wrong.

Indeed I did ... as a result of your sloppily written inference.
Quote Reply
Re: 70.3 is not IRONman [gshtrisport] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gshtrisport wrote:
Some people just need to chill out.

You go to a race (any distance) and everyone is so supportive.

You get on Slowtwitch and all anyone does is tell the other person why they are wrong!

Maybe if you just worried about yourself there would not be an issue?

I am still waiting for Strava to include a "self-satisfaction score" as one of their metrics. I'm pretty sure everyone on ST would be killing it.
Quote Reply
Re: 70.3 is not IRONman [Styil] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
There's a poster on here who says if you did, you didn't "Tri" hard enough. (but not me)

Me I would say you finished an Ironman race, with a little to spare.
You did finish? Because I have to admit I haven't always finished.
And the one I didn't, I was back in the gym pretty quick.
Quote Reply
Re: 70.3 is not IRONman [ctbrian] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ctbrian wrote:
I just beat the crap out of some loser wearing a half marathon shirt. Poser.

I think you meant Hoser
Quote Reply
Re: 70.3 is not IRONman [DJRed] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
DJRed wrote:
chuy wrote:
What if I show up to race a 140.6 but the course is cut short because of the weather? Can I still call myself an Ironman? Dying to get your take on this, please let me know as the only official Ironman branded race ive ever done had a shorter swim because of the weather. Wouldn't want to be incorrectly identifying myself as an Ironman.


If you run a "marathon" and the Garmin measures it at 25.8 (and everyone agrees it was short) but you PR, do you count it as a PR time?

I wouldn't count it as a PR however I would say I ran a marathon.

2x Deca-Ironman World Cup (10 Ironmans in 10 days), 2x Quintuple Ironman World Cup (5 Ironmans in 5 days), Ultraman, Ultra Marathoner, and I once did an Ironman.
Quote Reply
Re: 70.3 is not IRONman [chuy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
chuy wrote:
What if I show up to race a 140.6 but the course is cut short because of the weather? Can I still call myself an Ironman? Dying to get your take on this, please let me know as the only official Ironman branded race ive ever done had a shorter swim because of the weather. Wouldn't want to be incorrectly identifying myself as an Ironman.
Deca-Ironman World Cup (10 Ironmans in 10 days), Ultraman, Ultra Marathoner (100+miles), and I once did an Ironman.


Henry VI,'' Part II, act IV, Scene II, Line 73
Quote Reply
Re: 70.3 is not IRONman [phog] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Failing to comprehend how this community became the judge and jury on what is considered "hard" for an individual. I was proud as hell when I crossed the finish line to my first 70.3 last year. It was a massive accomplishment. I didn't feel like a lesser person because it wasn't a 140.6.

Again - Ironman is a brand. Ironman 70.3 is a race that specifies a distance. I'll be on the boardwalk wearing mine in AC this weekend with tons of others after they finish. Feel free to come punch us all in the mouth for being poseurs.
Quote Reply

Prev Next