..and the 8:59 was Coach Troy devastating the M40-44 AG...

---

-Of course it's 'effing hard, it's IRONMAN!
Team ZOOT
ZOOT, QR, Garmin, HED Wheels, Zealios, FormSwim, Precision Hydration, Rudy Project

Even if its 50-50 on genetic ability its still a shame not to give it 100% and realize what side you are really on. Just because you are a couch potato or asthmatic doesn't mean you can't do it.

Remember Chris McCormack (known to Aussies as Maccar) supposedly did not have the genetic build to win an Ironman.

Quote:

1. Training QUALITY (quantity alone does not cut it)
2. Nutrition
3. Rest

Neglect any one of these 3 things and you will fail. The thing that controls all 3 is the mind. If you don't have your head where it needs to be to optimize these 3 things, you will defeat yourself and fail. That is the difference between those who excel and those who don't. Genetics is an excuse almost all of the time. Sure, it comes into play at the very very tip of the pro field, but it's a non-issue for the amateur field where very few have come close to reaching their true abilities.

I've heard seen speeches like this 1000 times here on ST. I'll ask the question I asked earlier, how do you know? I've never seen compelling evidence that this is true. In fact, I know some damn fast slackers. My son is a high school swimmer. Those kids put in the same work all winter and some just improve dramatically more than others, it's talent. Why are people with talent so reluctant to admit they have it?

Thom

I think the original point is somewhat being lost.

The OP was implying taking someone, removing them from their life, and putting them in a training "experiment" to get them to KQ.

I believe that could be done with most people. If you stuck them in perfect training and resting conditions, in the middle of nowhere with perfect nutrition, I believe they could reach KQ times. Of course this is pie in the sky, but I think it could be done with "most" people. Of course there would be a few who would be physically limited for whatever reason....but most could do it. I think that's about as scientific as you can get when making a guess on something like this.

---

-------------------------------
I'm faster in Kilometers!
Wattie Ink Triathlon Team
Powered by Accelerate 3

I agree with the first statement, but then "most" IM triathletes finish in, what, 14 hours?

I also agree that Kona qualifiers aren't freaks. But I do think that more and more, they have a genetic predisposition to the demands of the sport.

I might be off track here, but I think the relatively significant, steady decrease in the needed qualifying time in a given age group over the last 20 years (call it the "need to qualify to get to Kona vs. just signing up era - also the aero-bar era, the main time drop due to equipment had already been made), as the number of people racing the distance grows, argues strongly that now, more than ever, genetic potential plays a role.

What I mean is 10-15 years ago a given combination of serious training hours and a reasonable accumulation of experience could get you a time that would qualify for Kona, and that same time today won't even come close. What changed? Not how hard the qualifiers were training, as far as I can tell. The body can only absorb so much. What changed is that many more people started training at that level, and in selecting from a larger pool, more people predisposed to do well from a physiological point of view are identified (because they go faster), and they take those qualifying spots. If genetics played no role (and I know not everyone is saying that), or a very limited role and could readily be overcome, the times would not be dropping as consistently and sharply as they have. Back then, there were genetic freaks at the pointy end of every age group. There still are - they turn pro (or were pros). The winning times haven't necessarily dropped (in some cases the opposite)....What has dropped is the slowest qualifying time. Because more of the people who respond best to training are available to fill in behind the fastest possible people.

In the top quarter of an age group, the non-qualifiers aren't uniformly training less or less well than the qualifiers.

If you quit your job and train/rest 100% of the time, sure you can crush some IM times, otherwise balancing life and family and long course training is rather difficult.

Doable, you would just have to give up a lot.

Watching IM Arizona via the internet this year where for a while the camera was stuck on AGers coming out of T1.

Body composition. It's almost like the average body fat percentage went up a couple of points for every 10 minutes the camera was running. Noticed the same thing on the run.

If you are serious about seeing what your potential is you have too train and race lean.

I think there many people who work hard do the right things and are genetically better than others. You may be able to do it BUT you may be able to work hard and win a marathon , probably not. Remember this is the world championships.

Genetics does play a roll... You'll never get there if you're born with your head up your ass.

---

_______________________
Powered by Demons.

I know but I was trying to be nice and provoke thought :)

jaretj

The question is did you think your PR of 11.40 was possible when you started in the sport? Probably not.

Lots of people love to hide behind the whole genetic differences thing when really they're training is not what it should be (intensity, volume, consistency or specificity) or their body composition wont allow them to see results they desire.(sometimes both).

"If you have two arms and two legs your an athlete, what you do with them is up to you." (Brett Sutton, i think).

Brett certainly used his two arms...

Depends on what AG you are now. If you are going mid 11's and in your 60's, no problem. I don't think this is the case however. See the other post on the likliehood of qualifying as you get in to the older AG's.

In all honesty, if you do not posess above average physical (specifically endurance racing) talents AND apply dedicated and consistent training to it, you are not going to get to Kona.

Sorry, but it's the cold reality. Just too many highly gifted and dedicated athletes from around the globe.

$0.02 from me:

Damian Angus won his age group at Kona last year (30-35 I think) based on 10 hrs/week of training. However, he had 15+ years experience and his job is an exercise physiologist so he really maximised his outcomes.

To speak from personal experience, I was an average high school/college swimmer who has just come back to ocean swimming and tri in the last 2 years ( I'm 42). With 1-2 swim sessions per week over the past six months, my swim times are <30m for the 70.3 and <60m for the full distance. However, I know this is because I definitely have a swimmers build/technique and my run and bike are still very slow. Very. Its at the point where I only train in the pool 1 x week and am just solely working on the other disciplines. Will I get to Kona? I'd like to and I've got a 2 year plan ahead of me but its going to be tough. However, I'm not quitting my job or divorcing my family to do it; just really simplifying my life. Minimal alcohol (perhaps the first step the original poster could take), different diet, accepting that there will be lots of training in the dark, wind-trainer set up permanently so that even if I get home at 8pm from work I can still get a session in (instead of watching TV for instance) ... it goes on. All of this has to be done in balance with a demanding job and without ignoring my family or friends or becoming a tri-zombie . Much as I'd love to get to Kona and am giving it my best shot, I'll acklowledge if I get to the limits of what I'm prepared to do. My goal for this year is based on Olympic distance races and then I'll re-assess about IM next year. Its not a religion but its giving me a great goal and my life is changing for the better as a result. Who knows where it will end up - probably focusssing on ocean swim races but I'm going to give the tri's a couple of years work first.

However, I will say that some people definitely have a better physique than others for IM length races. You really need to be a whippet - or at least do a good impression of one. The whippets I race hate me in the swim but its all their way after that.

Ok, the 11:40 PR was probably beyond the OP's original expectations. We're still talking about taking 2 hours off of that time. I have no idea about his training, body composition, etc. but 11:40 to 9:40 is huge.

I agree, the curve could be shifted if everyone prepared optimally, but I doubt we could agree on what optimal is. Even if the curve shifts, it's still going to be a bell shaped curve. It's called the pointy end for a reason. Qualifying for Kona is an elite accomplishment, more so than it ever has been. No matter how well people prepare, most will never be elite.

I think if you're not obese, are healthy, are under say 45 years old and are training over say 12hrs a week (and have been for at least a couple of years) and have not broken 11hrs (on a course where the winner overall goes sub-8:30).. then you need to stop, sit back and take a good look at what's holding you back... you could probably redirect all that time investment alot better than how you're spending it now.

Address your weaknesses. Maybe think about "stepping down" to middle distance for a season or even olympic distance. Get faster at these and the long course speed will come.

So someone meets all of your criteria and has a PR of 10:30. 45 minutes is still a lot of time to cut to KQ.

I agree with the underlying theme of trying to achieve your potential, but to the OP, an average IMer isn't going to KQ, an average HS XC runner isn't going to be all state, an average NBA 3 point shooter isn't going to lead the league, an average MLB batter isn't going to compete for a batting crown...

There is no friggin' way an average IMer can KQ.

For those who have already KQ'd, it seems 'easy' and everyone can do it. But let's be realistic now - KQ times now are so fast that they often exceed what qualified elite (pre-pro) class triathletes can do.

From having seen what a few local KQers achieved early on, you should be dominating your age group within a 1-2 years of serious training. If you're only training <12hrs per week, you should still be contending for your AG 1-2-3 in every race you do. Talent is definitely necessary now - maybe not before in certain age brackets, but definitely is now.

I consider myself very average in terms of physical ability, and have placed as high as on average top 2% overall in running races by running up to 100 miles per week. Even at that speed, I cannot compete against KQ qualifiers who are tri-training and running 1/3rd my volume - it's not even close in a standalone marathon, like a 10-15 minute differential in the M35 AG.

If you're familiar with the LA TriClub, one of the leaders of the bike groups has KQ'd before, but I recall was bumped out by a slot at Wildflower either last year or the year before. He's fast on all three sports, and runs a 2:35 or 2:40 standalone marathon, and bikes comparably fast and is no slouch on the swim. That's the type of guy you have to beat to KQ - talent is absolutely necessary to beat someone like that.

If you haven't trained 18+ hrs a week or run 100 miles a week, or comparable training in any of the single disciplines, you might think you can get amazingly better. But having done that, I can say with certainty that unless you have genetic gifts, and clear ones that manifest in the 1st 1-2 years of training (if not right out the door - I could crush Cat4 cyclists on my very first time on a bicycle yet I can't touch a KQ guy on a bike even with max training), it's not going to happen. Most KQ participants have awesome genetics AND are throwing down 15-20 hrs per week of training.

Coach Troy is on the very fast side of the KQ and was an ex-pro, but as an example, he came from a football background, and within 1-2 years was running pure 10ks around 32:00 even before he was a pro endurance athlete.

Fixed it for you. They do the same workouts - that doesn't mean they do the same work.

I'm missing your point. Are you suggesting that finish time is directly proportional to "work"? I know at least one of the slower kids is consistenly praised by the coach for being the hardest worker on the team and one of the all-state swimmers constantly takes grief for slacking in workouts. I'm suprised you're that familiar with the workout habits of my son's swim team.

possible, yes. kona is still about slots and not qualifying times, so don't underestimate the importance of choosing your qualifier carefully. plus, IM is not a young man's game - there's no reason your times can't improve well into your 40s.

my advice would be to start really blasting the bike.

-mike

---

____________________________________
https://lshtm.academia.edu/MikeCallaghan

http://howtobeswiss.blogspot.ch/

Just as you are suggesting that talent is a key piece of the component to success by citing the example of your son's high school swim team, I'm using that same example to suggest that it's not about the workout and possibly not even about the talent.

Perhaps that all state slacker is talented, or perhaps the training load provided by the coach is exactly the right stimulus for him to excel.

Perhaps that hard working slug should not work so hard so not to be overtrained? Or perhaps the coach should focus less on giving the fast "slacker" grief and focus on providing technique guidance for the slow, but hard working swimmer, or notice that the hard working swimmer is under performing in his races and figure out why he is underperforming?


I don't have a lot of context on the specifics of your son's team - so i can't say that my ideas are applicable, but thinking back to my HS and College swim team - I can think of many indivuduals who could have benefitted from some combination of more or less attention from the coach.

cant really get to the point of the question: you can expect a split answers; but even if overwhelming majority chose one - would it make you try for KQ or demotivate you?

unless it's just for mental masturbation purposes...

Why are people with talent so reluctant to admit they have it?

I'm just too humble.