I really can't stop laughing every time you post. If your boss told you to do something unethical, it sounds like you would do it. Are you just one of those passive excuses for men? Or are you someone who can actually think through things and stand up for themselves? There is no way in hell I would ever violate my ethics for a job. If I was told do not ask a question, you might not like the answer then my response would be "You either answer my question, or I'm not doing the job"

---

Make Inside Out Sports your next online tri shop! http://www.insideoutsports.com/

The whole intent thing is very interesting.

Years ago, I was competing in an IM race. An acquaintance that owned a local bike store, was one of the course Marshall's. Thanks for volunteering, we need volunteers. He'd raced Kona a bunch of times and lived and breathed tri.

I had a shocker of a day. Super windy day on a very challenging course. My back gave way (broken back several times) and I suffered like a rented mule. I ended up walking virtually all of the marathon :-(. I was walking at about the 35km mark when a colleague that had waited for hours for me to show up, walked beside me for a while. I'd say he walked beside me for about 100metres or so. He was asking how I felt, whether I'd make the cutoff and stuff like that. The Marshall met us, walked with us for a while (200m?) and then said to my colleague, if you keep walking with him, I'll DQ him for being paced.

There was no intent of pacing, and certainly no benefit to me by him talking to me. It was probably a net drawback since I was wasting energy chatting to him.

While I believe 'intent' needs to be discussed, addressed and is important, as part of our moral contract, it is like many things in life, that it's a double edged sword.

---

TriDork

"Happiness is a myth. All you can hope for is to get laid once in a while, drunk once in a while and to eat chocolate every day"

We wrote government contract, so if it was wrong or illegal it might time in jail

---

http://www.toughmantri.com

https://robinsonsstrengthandendurancecoaching.wordpress.com/

Yes, I think Richard Nixon, Rod Blagojevich, and Elliott Spitzer had that philosophy also, to name a few. Worked out well.

There are unlimited Boston Qualifier slots. Getting one via cheating doesn't take one from somebody else. The opposite is true for Kona. Teaming up with somebody else to pace you directly damages another competitor's rewards.

---

----------------------------------------------------------
Zen and the Art of Triathlon. Strava Workout Log
Interviews with Chris McCormack, Helle Frederikson, Angela Naeth, and many more.
http://www.zentriathlon.com

h2ofun also has an interesting way of 'discussing' things online, he basically stops responding if anyone has an opinion that he can't counter with his brand of BS.

Here are some of his thoughts on 'individual sports'. He clearly has absolutely no understanding of the topic, or is deliberately being a troll.

http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...post=5735523#5735523
"Why do so many keep trying to say this is an individual sport. Never has been, never will be. The rules do not support this.

If it were individual, there would be no swim drafting, no mass starts.

There would be no bike zone as today which does allow some legal drafting.

If you started a sport and say it was going to be 100% individual, no way would you end up with the set of rules we have today. "

I'm starting to wonder if he is a professional troll

---

Make Inside Out Sports your next online tri shop! http://www.insideoutsports.com/

Not so fast. Riding in groups is not new to Kona. Macca writes about pacing in his book, "I'm Here to Win." For 2006 "I stayed with my lead group and let them do some of the work. Even though drafting is illegal in IM, there is a benefit to riding with a group. It's easier to set and keep a steady pace, so you conserve a lot of energy..." And, regarding the 2010 race, "If you're a weaker rider, you can get behind the stronger riders and let them set a strong pace for you - even as they let the very best riders set the pace for them." Seems like a well known tactic the pro's have long employed while respecting the drafting rule and which officials have acknowledged.

Tell that to the roughly 4500 people who had qualifying times for the 2016 Boston Marathon but were not accepted into the race because there weren't enough slots.

Cheating to qualify for Boston definitely takes a spot away from someone else who actually deserves it.

Moral compass and ethical boundaries.....

LOST

Irretrievably.

Ah, didn't know that. Well, running is so natural, capitalizing on it and charging people for access to it is kinda dumb anyway. Unless you disagree. Then in your mind, you're correct and I'm fine with that.

---

----------------------------------------------------------
Zen and the Art of Triathlon. Strava Workout Log
Interviews with Chris McCormack, Helle Frederikson, Angela Naeth, and many more.
http://www.zentriathlon.com

which AG?

---

leslie myers
http://www.foodsensenow.com

Sylviane and Patricia Puntous almost always raced together. Sylviane was a bit stronger and won Kona a couple of times with
her sister's help..

I know that their rivals didn't like it but I don't recall ever hearing the term "cheating" used. I'm sure some of you Ironman historians
who have been in the sport 4 or 5 years can expound on that.

---

Find out what it is in life that you don't do well, then don't
do that thing.

Craigj is correct

An effectively unlimited amount of people can make the cut off time, but ultimately only X thousand people can toe the start line for capacity reasons, so the pack is thinned until they had a suitably small number of people and this is done by retroactively lowering the cut off. This year, only people who were more than around 2m30s faster than the official cut off got the invite.

The moral issue here is, IMO, pretty clear.
However, I think there are two conversations happening in the same thread. Some are talking about the moral issue, others are talking about enforceability and others are trying to intertwine the two. But what the hell, I'll comment anyway and risk embroilment!

We compete as individuals. That doesn't mean it's done in complete isolation, it means it's done without a team. They are mass start races and sharing the course is a part of the event. They are races, not time trials. Everyone on the course is free to use others to gauge their pace and decide their strategy. They can draft them on the swim and run, they can match speed on the bike. But those "others" must be other competitors, not team mates. I think that's very easy to understand. I find it hard to believe those saying this is complex or unclear are sincere. I think they are trying to conflate a concept of fair play/morals, the rules, and their enforceability to justify their own agenda.
I think it's pretty obvious that if you are competing you are obliged to participate alone. As Dan discussed, enforcement must be based on judgement and allow discretion

I don't think you'll ever eliminate cheating. But lets at least maintain the ideal of fairness even if we can't deliver it 100%. There will always be those that seek to cheat. More often than not they'll have convinced themselves it's justified for whatever reason; "Everyone's doing it" being the most common claim. If they cheat, they cheat, and we can only do our best to dissuade them or penalise them. Some will succeed. They wrong others and distort the results by doing so, but I would argue that we stand to do much more damage to the sport, individuals, and society as a whole, if we go the route of abandoning ideals that can't be 100% enforced or rationalising the unjustifiable just because we can't eliminate it. Better to allow a minority to fool themselves and condemn them for it than to follow suit in order to even the score and damn us all. That may sound a bit melodramatic but you get my drift. I think the same should be true in all walks of life but alas that's not the case. In politics, business, and other fields, fairness is hardly a consideration. It's just used for window dressing. However Sport, especially amateur sport, should aspire to better. We're not doing it to survive. We're doing it to test ourselves or just to enjoy ourselves. That shouldn't require us to lie to ourselves or others in the process.

If the OP wants a spot in Kona even though she says she needs to cheat to get there, I'd question what motivates her to compete in the first place!

That's not exactly true - people qualify for Boston and don't get in for not qualifying "fast enough". Regardless, in the marathon case it is not at all against the rules to pace someone. Most larger marathons have specific pacers for this purpose. Running is not triathlon, though, and in triathlon we have a specific rule against pacing. It is pretty much as simple as that.

Here is my take on this, if you are racing and ride legally in group as the pros do in Kona that is racing, hiring or paying someone entry fee just for the purpose of pacing is cheating.

Second thing, if you are going to do something in life, I don't care if it is triathlons, running, cycling or business, the minute you doubt your actions, reread something to make it say what you want or ask the question is this legal or moral you have your answer it is not.

---

http://www.toughmantri.com

https://robinsonsstrengthandendurancecoaching.wordpress.com/

A good example - here, neither sister subjugated their race ambitions although they raced together.

HelloKitty's husband is apparently going to do just that, which is against the rules.

---

-------------------------------
´Get the most aero and light bike you can get. With the aero advantage you can be saving minutes and with the weight advantage you can be saving seconds. In a race against the clock both matter.´

BMANX

Would someone please explain to me how a power meter or a GPS watch does not fall under the "pacing rule"? Is it expressely allowed in another subset of rules?

---

Austin Hardy -

This whole discussion reminds me of similar discussions about the NBA' rule against traveling.

This is rather ambiguous. Which "pacing rule"?
I think it would be more productive if you tell us which rule you think is breached by GPS or a power meters and we go from there. I'm not aware of one but I'm not about to go through them to try and figure out where you're coming from!
On the other hand, if you're suggesting that a GPS watch or power meter isn't covered by a rule but should be, then could you please tell us your argument for it?

I would contend that Patricia knew she could not beat her sister so she helped her win by pacing her. To me
it's a very subtle difference.

Chris McCormack never had any pacing issues since nobody wanted to be around him.

---

Find out what it is in life that you don't do well, then don't
do that thing.

How could a race official make that 'call', though? Both athletes racing legally on the bike, neither subjugating their race ambition. Plus who would get disqualified?

---

-------------------------------
´Get the most aero and light bike you can get. With the aero advantage you can be saving minutes and with the weight advantage you can be saving seconds. In a race against the clock both matter.´

BMANX