---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I know three people who had a debut Ironman time of around 11:45 and went on to post sub 8:40 Ironman pr's.Hard,smart,consistant work helped them take three hours off their original Ironman time,two of them realised that they probrably didn't have what it takes to be at the very top of the heap.I would say that was the point that genetics started playing a significant role.It remains to be seen what the third one does.

I have a very,very healthy respect for all three of them.

Just so you know where I came from I also had an original Ironman of 11:44 and managed to get to 9:52 and I was the slow guy in my group.I know my lifestyle,lazyness and then illness have stopped me from going faster.Right now I'm getting healthy again and am looking at around the 10:30 mark as a goal.

.

.

Perhaps KQ'ing is a lot easier than qualifying for the olympic trials, I've come to realize this through this thread. You still haven't answered the question, however.

Sorry for the shoulder injury....I've had a few myself.

I think maybe either you worked up too fast or had a poor coach, or both. Why were you training 15 hours a week, and what was the breadown, including intensity? Nagging injuries are usually a sign of improper training (I know from experience).

FYI - I 1st race sbr in 1982, but have never taken off. I have had years where I have "ramped it up" but now just have a 10 hour/wk max training. At 51 I feel I'm still pretty healthy and fit, although I did tweak a hammy playing basketball with my son - he's 7.
-

---

David
* Ironman for Life! (Blog) * IM Everyday Hero Video * Daggett Shuler Law *
Disclaimer: I have personal and professional relationships with many athletes, vendors, and organizations in the triathlon world.

I think there is a flaw in the argument that says anyone can qualify, when the field is limited to the top 2-5%

Dan E has posted some interesting stories in the past about how almost all the pros wear the exact same size of wetsuit,
becuase a particular body-type is what excels in this race configuration.

If the races were reconfigured to favor my skills & body type (say 50% swim, 30% bike and 10% run) I'd probably go from
the 15% range to the top few percent and I'd qualify for 'Floaty Kona' . I would say that ' it is really not that hard to qualify' and
'You just need to apply yourself' .

I'm not discounting the work that KQ racers put in - I think most of them have stretched their performance potential to a tremendous degree
, more than I would even if the 'distractions' of career & family were removed. But I don't think 'anyone' has the ability to close an IM
with a 3:30 marathon...I think that is a pretty select group.

---

" I take my gear out of my car and put my bike together. Tourists and locals are watching from sidewalk cafes. Non-racers. The emptiness of of their lives shocks me. "
(opening lines from Tim Krabbe's The Rider , 1978

As I said earlier, as the distance grows, I think the hard work becomes more of a factor. The hours that athletes are willing to (and physically able to) put in obviously makes a huge difference. I just don't think there's as much room at the pointy end of the curve as some here believe.

I was hoping some near misses would chime in with their experiences. If they almost all qualify once they make the commitment, I'd be convinced. If a bunch say I kept missing by this much, maybe it would open their eyes.

I've heard so many stories of runners trying repeatedly to BQ (and we're talking about similar speeds at the end of IM), I don't think it's as sure of a thing as others seem to. Maybe not as mystical as I previously thought either.

and you still cant wrap your head around two different concepts.

I get the difference. My point is that maybe you have given up on yourself too early. But you are a triathlete, if you wanted to be a runner, you would. Never mind, sorry I tried.

To really get an idea of the difference between the level of athlete one has to be to succeed at Kona vs. the Olympic Trials, it would be good if we could find someone who had done both.

Luckily we do have such an example.

Desiree Ficker got 2nd overall at Kona.

She was 76th out of 161 at the Olympic Trials.

Is it two different concepts. When reading this whole thread, I see a belief in in a philosophy. Those at the top want to say there hard work got them there and not any gifts in genetics, so others just need to htfu. People at 30 who are millionares will say, if you work hard you can do it to. How many times have you heard a basketball or football player who gets drafted say " I did not quit on my dream, if you work hard you can do it to". Sadly there are thousands who have worked that hard for a dream and do not get there. I would be curious to see the age next to all the people who post the average guy can get here.
As one poster said, his body cannot handle the volume. Immediatly someone chimed in referring that he was improperly training. Some people handle the volume, some DO recover faster. Some people are more gifted. That doesnot mean they do not work extremely hard.
With that said there is only one way to find your limits. ...................Try believing you can. When your past 50, you have found some of these limiters. I know I will never KQ. Why...................I have rbs with all kind of athletes for years. I just have not been able to get to those times. However, put a 80lb pack on my back and I can hump hills longer and faster than any of those athletes. We all have different gifts. I respectfully disagree with you though. Cheers Kenney

How much do you weight?

---

"One Line Robert"

Five years with the right training and consistency yes i do believe they can do it.

---

__________________________________________________
Official Polar Ambassador
http://www.google.com/...P7RiWyEVwpunlsc2JtQQ

Easiest way to Kona is cancer or cutting off a limb. :P

And none of us are exceptional athletes. Good athletes, yes. Exceptional, not even close. We have Ford Mustang engines, not Ferrari engines.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzP-etuL6Y8

enuff said

---

----------------------------------------

Absolutely. I went from 11:18 in 2008 to 9:44 in 2010 and QK'ed. All it took was proper training.

---

Like T says, "Remember it is all about the Bike because it is all about the Run!"

One could interpret (as one possibility) that Desiree is much better at long course, individual efforts than shorter course, drafting events.... doesn't really say much about which one is harder to Q for...

---

Colorado Triathlon Company, CO2UT 2021, Crooked Gravel 2022, Steamboat Gravel 2022

Part of the question also has to be: Where do you live and where do you plan to qualifiy?
There is an enormous difference between having to go 9:50 to make Kona and having to go closer to 9.
This is the difference between many races, and by and large (with some exceptions) the harder races to qualify from in terms of athlete quality and depth are in Europe and Australia/New Zealand.
The 9:21 required from NZ this year in the 35-39 age group is a case in point as NZ is not a fast course. From memory, IMWA needed an 8:5x to make it 35-39 last year.
In response to the original question, I personally think that if a male ~ 30 years goes into their first ironman trained appropriately and they don't go around 10:30 to begin with they will struggle to get the times needed. They could go 10% faster over time, but 30%? That's massive improvement.
A bike shop owner I know who races, and has done 4 ironman races and is yet to break 12 hours, talks about going sub 9:30 this year. I can't see it.
In my case, my first IM was 10:18 and a struggle, but my best over my career is 9:02.
I do, however, come from a decent running background so never really had to make myself into an athlete to begin with, I just had to make myself into a triathlete. I think that I am above average in terms of genetics as I won races as a kid in school without training for them.

If you think you can...you can

If you think you can't....you definitly can't.

It's funny how the harder you work the more talent you seem to uncover.

Very well said.

"All it took was proper training. "
-------
I'd love to hear th ebasics of your program.

Thanks,

---

David
* Ironman for Life! (Blog) * IM Everyday Hero Video * Daggett Shuler Law *
Disclaimer: I have personal and professional relationships with many athletes, vendors, and organizations in the triathlon world.

If I remember right there were 341 people in my age group last year at WI, 8 of them qualified. It turns out that this, "proper training" thing is a rather exclusive piece of information. If he gives out that information then everyone will qualify.

No, because 300+ of them will not not have the desire and or time to do the proper training.

If proper training were easy, then getting to Kona might actually be based on talent.

But it's not.

For which age groups? I'm pushing 50, and actually looking forward to it as an opportunity to get my spot.

What people often forget is that it takes anywhere from 5 - 7 years to even begin to unlock their potential in endurance athletics. The difference between the genetically "gifted" and those that are less endowed is that the gifted are on the lower side of the timeline.

My example:
I ran in high school for two seasons. I was not that remarkable at all with a best 5k time well over 20. I started riding while stationed in Germany with the Army. Loved it and it just felt natural. Ran with the Naval Academy Prep School while I was there. Able to get into the high 18's for a 5k race for a PR. Got out of the military and focused 100% on cycling. Got up to Cat. 3 and was a decent finisher but undergrad. school took over my training time until I stopped riding. Got married, had kids, gained 50 pounds with zero exercise for 5 years. I got back onto a bike and rode again finally in '03. In '04 I changed firms and decided, "What the hell, I can run a marathon." On zero run training in 13 years. I barely made it to the half mark before dropping out. Next year actually trained and even walking the last 5 miles ran a 3:58. A year later I BQ'ed with a 3:12. So I thought I'd have a decent shot at being a triathlete and maybe even KQ'ing down the road.

Flash forward to my first attempt and even with consistent 10 - 15 hour weeks for months, a 2:12 olympic time (even with a 30+ minute swim), another 3:15 marathon and a 5:10 IM distance aqua-velo bike split and I had a disaster of a race at IMFL finishing in 12:35. The next year I went 12:20 at LP on only 6 weeks of training. I knew then that while I may have the "potential" (especially based on my riding and running skills) I simply did not have the training discipline or time to take the steps I needed to go for a KQ.

What gives me the ability to turn a switch and get serious about training for a bit and then to be able to finish top 10% in running and tri events (when my heart issue wasn't a factor)? The 20+ years of endurance training and conditioning my body to be used to the vigors of that training.

Keep that in mind when you contemplate the question the OP asked. If you have the background and "base" in your life, then you have a much better chance of getting the KQ goal. Doesn't matter if your base started a year or two as long as you understand that it will take time to build up your abilities.

---

_____________________________________________
Rick, "Retired" hobbyist athlete
Trying to come back slowly from acute A-Fib