The intent is that there's no pre-arranged teamwork in Ironman-style racing. Collaboration by convenience is OK. I did this recently. Came out of T1 and had trouble passing a guy on the bike. Realized he was the bike course record holder. Perfect! Sat on him at legal distance.

That's OK.

If we'd agreed beforehand that he'd wait up for me at T1 so I could sit behind, that's not OK.

Well if anyone knows who you really are outside of your FastKitty handle, then yes you can't have your husband pace you. If no one knows who you are and you can do this without getting caught only you are the one that knows it was not correct and only you have to look yourself in the mirror every day.

To answer your question which many have already done, no he can't pace you to KQ.

"Get out there and fucking kill it and stand on the podium with your head held high that you got that slot because you are a fucking bad ass on your own."

This was the only thing Kitty needed to hear in this thread.

So yeah Kitty!!! Good for you for coming on here and getting some clarity (about the rules -- plus what douchebags some of your fellow competitors are). Now you're going to get back out there and FUCKING KILL IT and in the end, you will be so happy that you did it on your own. Keep the hubby on the sidelines where he belongs ;)

Again, to hell with those a-holes in your AG who are blatantly getting paced.

Best of luck to you!!!

"Intent" is a non-physical thing that cannot be gauged by a third party - - such as a course Marshall.

Should they carry a lie-detector on their motorcycle?

Again... this is why I believe these rules should be eliminated all together. They are a) Not followed anyways b) Not enforceable without personal judgment and c) Opens people up to "edging" legalities and trying to find an advantage.

Again, If pacing and drafting were legal all of this conflict about judgment, higher "standards", and the need for course-psychics, would be moot.

And if there were no rules at all, then rule enforcement would be really easy.

The fact is, the rules are there because people have a certain idea in their minds about what the sport ought to be. The sport of no draft triathlon ought not to have drafting, or outside assistance.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

This is an interesting, and more complex, scenario. I appreciate that you raised it without resorting to "we can never know for certain his true intent, so it shouldn't be a rule." I think having these conversations and pushing on the edges of the hard topics improves sport.
In the scenario you describe I still call that a violation. If the pace he chose was chosen not specifically for any purpose of his own, but with the intent of helping her, it is pacing. If his finish time doesn't matter and all he needs to do is snag some points and punch a ticket, stay 10 minutes behind her all day. Or stay 10 minutes ahead. But if he selects as his pace a pace that is intended to help her do better than she would have done in his absence, he is pacing her.

---

__________________________________________________
The plural of anecdote is not data. :-)
- Andrew Coggan

I agree, but apparently people here are saying there should be no inside assistance, either.... for the sake of a rule. No more encouraging people. No more running beside people and spurring them on. Since this also is what the sport ought to be, either way we lose the spirit of the race.

I don't think people are actually saying that encouragement is against the spirit of the rules. But pacing is.

I'm pretty sure you understand the difference.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

Intent is gauged by third parties - in the form of judges and juries - in courtrooms every day. Judgments about intent can and do mean the difference between someone being acquitted or being convicted and spending the rest of his life in jail. No psychics needed or involved.

Your suggestion that we abandon these rules on this basis makes about as much sense as saying that Major League Baseball shouldn't have a rule against pitchers intentionally throwing at batters because we can't trust umpires to judge intent.

Wouldn't it feel so much sweeter to just accomplish the KQ on your own without resorting to cheating, whether you get caught or not?

If you get your hubby to pace you, and you FINALLY KQ... you'll know forever that you did so by breaking the rules and the spirit of the race. I don't know about you, but that would feel like I was only cheating myself. It would bug me forever and hover as an asterisk over my accomplishment.

---

Long Chile was a silly place.

Sure, it would make rule enforcement easier if there were fewer rules, but it would also change the nature of the sport massively. This would be most significant on the cycle where race tactics would become entirely focused on getting into a fast group on the bike. At the pointy end of the race, it would be all about making it into the attacking group and then shedding any known fast runners. It would become a road race within the triathlon. Further down the field you'd end up with pelotons within every race. you'd also end up with lots of injuries, especially if the use of tri-bars was still allowed. To say all tricky rules should be abandoned seems ridiculous to me. The willingness of a few to cheat should not dictate the whole nature of the sport that we compete in.
Let me give an example in another sport: The rules of race walking are, I suspect, pretty difficult to impose perfectly. As I understand it, you must have a foot in contact with the ground at all times. By your logic, the solution is to just drop the rule and say it's okay for both feet to leave the ground...now we have a running race.

Where the impact on the sport of simplifying the rules is not significant or detrimental then I'm fully in favour of keeping things simple. If you got rid of drafting rules in triathlon you end up with a very different event. So I disagree with you.

This.

---

http://www.jt10000.com/

Who is saying that? I haven't seen anything in this entire conversation that I read as advocating that. Which comments did you read that way?

Working with someone is ok
Working for someone is not ok

---

__________________________________________________
The plural of anecdote is not data. :-)
- Andrew Coggan

why does Ironman hate marriage so much?

---

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

If FastKitty never posted this and just did it, nobody would have ever noticed...including race marshals. How do I know? Because people do it every single race.

I'm not saying that we should abandon the rules because of this alone. I have long been a proponent to abandoning the rules BECAUSE THEY SIMPLY AREN'T BEING FOLLOWED ANYWAYS.


Perhaps where you are in the race is different, but as a solid MOP I can say that there are draft packs and run pacers in every single race I do that go unmarshalled.

Why is it suddenly my job and your job to shake my finger at other people?

And there is nothing wrong about changing the dynamic of the sport. Ironman is TOO CROWDED to be an individual race at this point. FOP will still be FOP. MOP will still be MOP. BOP will still be BOP. The only thing that changes is how quickly the race is completed. It will be much more exciting for spectators.

I never figured out if anybody in any triathlon event anywhere in the world
has been penalized for doing exactly what she asked about.

My thinking is that if a husband/wife pace raced but did not draft whatsoever
there's no way in the world that a rival would believe that there was no drafting going
on. I know I'd have a hard time believing that.

---

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

It happened here at IMAZ last year. Husband waited for his wife to catch up on the bike. The road together and did the entire run together. He was even seen pushing her up a hill with a hand in her back. He is a 10 hour finisher but went 11 that day and she won her AG. I think a protest was logged and WTC couldn't prove it but gave them a warning.

---

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

I finished MOP in a 70.3 with 2500 participants a little while back. I saw a few cyclists drafting. That's their problem more than it is mine. They should have some self respect and stop cheating. But I'm not going to worry about it because I'm MOP. I'm racing myself, not them.

I think you are wrong when you say the rules are simply not being followed. Some people aren't following them. I think the majority are.

You are wrong to say the only thing that changes if you abandon the drafting/pacing rules is how quickly the race is completed. That's absurd. The whole strategy changes. Fast athletes will still be fast and vice versa, but the event will be a very different one and the contribution towards results of various strengths and weaknesses will alter significantly. The advantage of strong cyclists will likely be negated and so on. It's very feasible that you will get completely different winners in a draft legal race than you would if everything was the same except that the rules remained. Draft legal races favour good swimmers and the best runners. It neutralises the bike to a great extent.
Most importantly, mid pack, it will become a race against other competitors rather than a race against yourself. Different people will have different preferences but it will, very substantially, change the whole essence of the race. Do you really think draft legal races are just quicker versions of non-drafting races? They're different animals and the bigger the numbers the more different they will be.

This is probably true. But - do you want it like this? Is this your preference?

I think that even though it happens and is unpunished, even though it MAY be rampant, I don't think it should happen. I think it goes against the spirit of the sport that I thought I was signing up to compete in. So rather than abandon the rule just because it is frequently misunderstood and difficult to enforce, I would prefer that we clarify the rule, publicize the rule, educate people about the rule, and make an effort to enforce the rule where it is clearly being violated. Perhaps I am overly optimistic, but I think that would at least cut down on the violations, which would improve races.

It is my impression that many people violate this rule because they don't know about the rule or understand the rule. Many others violate the rule because they perceive others doing it and don't see it being enforced, so they choose to "level the playing field" on their own. If we improve efforts to clarify, educate, and enforce, I think many of these violations will go away. Look at FastKitty, she wasn't sure so she sought clarification and guidance, and has said she will now not engage in the tactic. I think that is great and I commend her for it.

---

__________________________________________________
The plural of anecdote is not data. :-)
- Andrew Coggan

Do you understand the difference between racing in a large group of people and a pre-arranged plan to essentially hire someone to do the race as your pacer/guide? A crowded race has nothing to do with this discussion of pacing. This discussion is about someone having a personal pacer that has no other interest in the race.

Have not read through the whole thread. However, it's ironic and interesting as my wife and I have been talking, "what if's" recently.

My wife who is a former Pro triathlete is contemplating a return to long distance racing, and a possible run at qualifying for her AG for IMH in '16 or '17. She's been goading me to consider having a go at it to ( It's remote that I would do this - but play along a bit here). She'd be in the 45 - 49 AG for women, and I would be in the 55 - 59 by then (I'm 54 now). There's a good chance that she will be able to go 10:30'ish and perhaps faster. I've done some number crunching and analysis of where I'm at now and where I could be in a year or two, and looked at the times in both the 50 -54 and 55 -59 AGs for men. Some of the men in the results I see and who have KQ'd I raced against years ago and I was competitive with them. Short story - all hypothetical, but I would possibly be in the 10:30'ish range as well. I think I can do that, and I would need to that or a bit faster to guarantee the KQ - thus my wife and I, would be close to one another out on the road in the race! :)

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

+1

I feel like every time one of these threads shows up, we need a PSA which says
"Pacing against other competitors is not the same as pacing against someone who's ambition is something other than a highest possible place on their own terms."

Yes, there's some debate to be had as to whether we can police this distinction, and another debate on whether this is a fair rule or not. However, if we know that we're already discussing the latter scenario, then it should be quite apparent that there is this distinction. And yes, it is already spelled out in the rules.

That's brilliant....laying out a defense months in advance of pacing your wife.....or would she be pacing you?

---

Chicago Cubs - 2016 WORLD SERIES Champions!!!!

"If ever the time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." - Samuel Adams

That's brilliant....laying out a defense months in advance of pacing your wife.....or would she be pacing you?

Glad that's pink! :)

If this ever comes to pass, which is really remote, I am guessing it would be her pacing me! :)

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog