This is the kind of discussion I was hoping to generate =)

The reason that I question the Clydesdale division is that it's quite clear that the top athletes who are 6'4" and 200lbs can go very fast and don't need their own division. I feel like having a Clydesdale division cheapens the entire idea of having triathlon as an individual test of fitness by giving awards to people who are not as fit or as fast as they could be. Those athletes who are as fit and as fast as they can be and still 200+lbs are obviously just like every other athlete and can thus compete in their age group with sometimes astounding success.

The reason that I didin't like it at St. Anthony's was that suddenly there were 40 more people walking away with awards. In my opinion there are already too many people taking away prizes in the first place. I've been to races where half the field walked away with an award... which makes a true podium finish less unique and outstanding.

If a fat and out-of-sape person wins a cheap-ass $5 trophy and then goes home and brags about it ... yeah, I think it's pretty poor. But if there's a chance that this same person realizes that he/she has abilities that were unknown prior to the "award ceremony", and then continues to train and turns into a truly competitive athlete(*), I think that the $5 trophy turns into a lot of bang for the buck.

(*) Competitive has nothing to do with how well you finish, it has to do with what you do with the information. Training better to improve one's time *is* being competitive: it doesn't matter how slow the athlete really is.

Getting all worked up because 40 most people get awards is just not the way to go. I spent 5 years at Princeton as a grad student, and I can tell you that, maybe, 25% of the kids have *truly* amazing intellectual abilities. The "other half" (sic) will succed in life due to fully developed ass-licking abilities, and Princeton's reputation as having "one of the best Law School in the country" (**). This is called grade inflation, and it's rempant, and we now have to deal with it.

(**) Princeton doesn't have a Law School, but most "influencial people" think it does. Same comment has been made about it's Medical School, which also doesn't exist.

And I'd bet that most fit 6'4" athletes DO NOT register as Clydes, 200 lbs or not.

Dre'

I don't really have a strong opinion about whether or not there should be clydes/athenas. It just doesn't make it on to my radar screen of significance.

But what is important to me is your apparent reference to athletes over 200 lbs as "fatasses." There are plenty of 200+ lbs athletes with body fat % comparable to your own. Even those who are carrying some extra fat, you should not be maligning them for trying to better themselves, or from signing up for in a category that seems appropriate, nor for starting at the time assinged for their wave. If you have an issue, take it up with USAT or with St. Anthony's race director. Calling participants fatasses (as you did in your post purporting to explain why St. Athony's was dangerous) is unhelpful, inappropriate and offensive.

Everyone's got different ideas of the appropriate. I see nothing wrong with weight classes. They show up in a whole bunch of different sports from wrestling to rowing. Given the option, I'll race Athena since I definitely come from a big girl gene pool.

OTOH, I'm one of those whiney fishies who doesn't think wetsuits should be allowed unless water temp is under 60F, and that the idea they should be used because they make things safer is a dangerous one. If it's over 60F, I'm not going to wear one. It's not how I want to compete in the sport. And that's a personal thing that probably cost me hardware (yep, in the scarlet A class) a couple weeks back when I was one of maybe 10% of the field that was wetsuitless in perfectly comfortable 68F water.

Everyone's got a slightly different view of how it should all work. It's in the RDs best interest to make the tent as big as possible and keep growing the race/sport.

The Clyde issue, couple of things at play here.

Firstly we lose Clydes we should lose Danskin, I cant enter it, thats BS.

Ok, now we see the absurdity of the situation.

I think I am penalised as I am 5'11" and 150, I cant compete on a flat course, big guys put to much time in to me on the bike.

Its all BS getting worked up over people that want to compete with their peers, they are not detracting from the value of your performance or do you feel they are? do you feel that your performance is'nt truly recognised so long as there are others out there the same age as you that get to compete in a different category?

That said there are some smoking fast Clydes out there, shockingly fast, I think I've seen Clydes go under 2.00 for Olys and 3 of them finish in the top 20 at an IM, I'll worry about losing the category when i can beat them all.

hey Zinc to quote your own words

"It is an Individual test", I couldn't give a rats ass where anyone else finishes. To me it's about giving 100% of what I have in me that day that is my satisfaction. Put your ego away because no one else really cares if you were on the podium or not. There will be, at any one time, someone faster or slower than you, learn to deal with it gracefully. Nobody likes a whiner.

---

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


"on your Left"

Other people walking away with awards... How does that negatively affect your race experience? Unless you feel you should have been one of those people. The same argument could be made for age groups and age group awards in general. The five year age group seems completely arbitrary to people who come from other sports. Awards and podium finishes should be reserved for overall winners regardless of age or weight. For everyone else, that's what the T-shirt is for.

In USCF bike races there are categories based on ability. Everyone starts out the same but you don't move to the upper categories unless you do well in a significant number of races. This is probably a better system because it usually leads to less of the type of problems you had.

I was going to post on this a while back, but decided against it. I'm a clyde, one of those 6'4" 200 pounders that's been referred to in this thread. I've got some issues with the Clydesdale class, but still continue to race as one in races that offer it. Maybe that makes me a hypocryte. I can deal with that.

Right up front, let me tell you my issues with the Clyde/Athena classes. I think that classes by weight are a fine idea, I simply have a problem with not using classifications consistently. If we want to use age, fine. Weight, fine. Both, great too. Whatever criteria we choose to use to define divisions should be used consistently across the board such that everyone fits into a single division. As it stands, I currently have the choice to race in one of two categories, whereas my lighter fellow racers do not have that choice. I think that's unfair.

Now, I'm by no means fast, but I do get hardware racing as a clyde. I liked to race as a clyde cause I could get more race mementos than just a t-shirt. I've never been disillusioned into thinking I'm some world class athlete. But I'm also not out beating a drum that heavy people need their own category. It's this simple: I have the choice between two categories to race in. In one I have the opportunity to get the occasional plaque, trophy, watch, etc., and in the other I don't. For me the choice is easy. But I always care more about how I place overall and in my age group than in the Clyde category. One of the ways I guage my personal improvement is by how I place relative to the different "fields".

This has never really bothered me until I got 2nd in a pretty high profile race. Compared to my age group, my time just sucked. When I got my award, I felt like I was somehow cheapening (sure, I'm making up words) the accomplishments of the uberfast age groupers. I felt so bad for that I told myself I wasn't going to race as a Clyde again. After a few weeks, I realized that my thinking was just crap. There is so much stigma around the clyde categories, and people get so pissed off that it's just ludicrous. Regardless of the division I race in, I just want to become the best triathlete that I can, period. I'll never understand why people have a problem with that. I've heard enough pricks grumble about fatasses and even recently learned on this forum that I can't ride a bike solely by virtue that I'm a clydesdale that I've decided that I'm going to continue to race as a Clyde as long as I qualify. This weekend I finished first in the Clyde division and would have been 4th in my AG in a small local race. I can't wait until I'm up there in my AG and still racing as a Clyde.

For those of you who feel that the clyde division is somehow taking something from you, grow up. Clydes get no special consideration when it comes to IM quailification. Maybe you should focus your efforts on the community fund and celebrity slots. Those do have an impact.

One thing I will say about the Clydesdale division. It is a ton of fun. The guys tend to be really easy going and are racing for, get this, the fun of it. It just may be the least disillusioned division on the course. It truly is a blast to be floating in the water with the fellow clydes before the gun goes off.

I raced in Holland (Almere) in 1998. Most people there are VERY tall and probably many of them would be clydesdale...

then I decided I hated clydesdales and they should be banned from racing. I was in the second row waiting to start the swim (behind some kind of fences on a mini beach)...and from the whole of my 5'7'', I couldn't see the water because of these bloody clydesdales ! :-))

that said, some are nice, Pooks said he will be careful not to walk on me in a future expo we may see each other at! :-))

I used to not like Clysdale divisions, since they never had short guy's basketball or skinny kid's football when I was younger. Guys built like me could never compete in those sports. Lately I find that if the same guys who benefitted from their size and weight want to race in divisions that are basically handicapped, let them. It is funny that they whine about what used to be an advantage being a disadvantage. If they can go and pick up an award for being the fastest bigboy, go for it.

It is really funny to watch guys who you know don't weigh the 185 or 200 pickup awards. I know guys who used to drink over a gallon of water on the rare occasion a race would actually make clyds weigh in. If they need that $3 trophy that bad, go for it. Hit the Burger King training program!

I fully support WTC not having slots for Clyds. That would be unfair. And doesn't USAT not rank you if you compete Clyds, or any special catagory for that matter? That is great.

---

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

"Remember: a bicycle is an elegant and efficient tool designed for seeking out and defeating people who aren't as good as you."

--BikeSnobNYC

I"m an Athena. I'm 5"11" and weigh about 100lbs over what the limit for Athenas is ie. I'm around 250lbs.

I'm not a lazy fat ass. Fat ass yes. Lazy no.

This is my 5th season of triathlon. I'm training for my first 1/2 Ironman in August. This weekend I ran 2:45 on Sat and cycled 2:10 on Sunday. Tonight I'll be swimming with Masters, tomorrow, interval run, Wednesday will be a recovery run, Thursday will be a 90 minute hill workout on my computrainer.

So ... to recap, fat, yes, lazy, no.

The Athena category creates a competitive environment for me. While it is a great accomplishment simply to complete a triathlon, I find I push harder when I'm trying to place ahead of other Clydes. It just makes it that much more fun.

Tri Hard !

Inga Andriessen

---

Tri Hard !

Question: Since a Clydesdale is a large breed of horse (definately not a fatass horse, quite possibly one of the more impressive breeds) and therefore could be male or female, why do we need an Athena category? Not belittling, just asking.

---

____________________________________________

"which is like watching one of your buddies announce that he's quitting booze and cigarettes, switching to a Vegan diet and training for triathalons ... but he's going to keep snorting heroin." Bill Simmons, ESPN

I agree with you Athena makes limited sense, if any.

In Canada the categories are Clydesdale and Lady Clydesdale - I only referred to myself as an Athena as I know many on this forum are USA and would understand the terminology better.

Inga Andriessen

http://www.canclydes.ca

---

Tri Hard !

this subject pissed me off many times before but I've calmed down on it so I reply with little entusiasm, it's not that important to me but heck...

Having their own division and compete against their peers seems totally ok and as somebody mentioned could stimulate competitivness in one or the other (I'm not saying all clydesdales are not competitive, ok!)

But there is always that Ironman issue, damn.
So if somebody takes away a slot for Hawaii from somebody that is 30min faster but unfortunatly 40lbs too lean, that doesn't seem right to me. There is only so many people that can compete in Hawaii, hence limited slots. Having some of those slots given to a cathegory that is founded on body weight, seems not right to me. Nor does giving em to some actress or pro football player for that matter!

here are some reasons for that not all:

being a man or a woman is not really a choice right?
Getting 40y/o isn't either

but being 5'11" and 250lbs seems like a choice to me, you can get that weight down, if you can train for triathlons and complete something like a half or full ironman, you CAN loose that weight!
if you're 6'4" and 200lbs, this is not an issue because you can get your
slot in a regular agegroup, since you will swim and fly on the bike like a rocket!

Agret, take a chill pill! There are NO, repeat, NO Kona slots for Clydesdales. Sure, some have gotten them, but they've raced AG. I race Athena when the race has the category. If not, I race AG. I like how IM NZ has done in the past---everyone races AG, but there was an informal Clyde/Athena competition.

And, due to a big mess last year, Half Vineman, which is a Kona qualifier, will NOT have C/A categories this year at all. Seems a very fast big boy was fast enough to qualify for Kona, but since he raced Clyde (totally separate wave), he wasn't eligible. Not sure how it turned out, but they dropped the category this year so it wouldn't happen again.

---

clm
Nashville, TN
https://twitter.com/ironclm | http://ironclm.typepad.com

Just to clarify, it is my understanding that Clydesdales do NOT get qualifying slots for Kona or any other IM race. And I agree that if they did, that would be unfair.

I then have to present my sincere apologies to everyone that I offended by my post. I'm sorry guys and gals!

I just thought there where Clydsdale/Athena specific slots.

But since there are none, I have absolutely nothing against a separat e category for Clydesdale and Athena.

Then I actually think it's a great idea!
Can't believe I just said that! Me, that always bitched about that...

I still think, that the main goal of a Clydesdale (under 6'3") should be to someday race in a regular AG.
And if you are competing in any triathlon, no matter what category, you're on the right track, keep it up and you will beat some of those
tanned, shaved leged, multi 1000$ bike riding, think they are the best....

THAT is the real reward for the average joe!

I'm a little suprised by some of the less than comlimentary views re clydes/athenas. I've been competing in the division for as long as we've had it in the Mideast. We even voted it in as a region 5-6 years ago, maybe longer. In 10 years of triathlon I've never heard one negative comment, in person, regarding clydes/athenas. Some light-hearted joking around but that's been it. Several years ago John Cobb had some interesting numbers imbedded in an article about the need for a seperate clyde division...I went looking and could not find it on his website. The analogy I recall was comparing a 150lb athlete vs 200lb clyde. Cobb's data suggested it would take 40% more power produced by the clyde to match his sevelt brother, but he would have to do with xx% less VO2 Max... something about increase size/BM resulting in a corresponding drop in VO2 max. I don't think its quite as cut-dry as that on the AG level. But at the elite-pro level I think we wait a long time before we see a clyde win an IM.

It does not make any difference to me wether there's a clyde division or not. Seems to me its a way of drawing people into the sport, and that's a good thing. Yes, it may come with its down side, persons not knowing the rules, can't hold a line through a corner etc, but I fail too see why the ax is being ground on the clydes. How is it that clydes are especially prone to poor race etiquette.

"if you're 6'4" and 200lbs, this is not an issue because you can get your
slot in a regular agegroup, since you will swim and fly on the bike like a rocket! "

That is seldom the case unfortunately. I read why in a book, I think is was "Serious Cycling" by Ed Burke. He wrote that lung capacity doesn't increase in proportion to body mass. He wasn't talking about fat but larger framed and muscled people. On flats by getting in a good position the damage of a larger frontal area can be minimized somewhat but on hills there is no hiding from gravity. The effect is even more pronounced on the run. Even a lean, chiseled 200 pounder in top condition will beat the little fellers only on rare occasions on the perfect course. For the average Joe clydesdale with average athletic talent and time to train, forget it, your precious Kona slots are safe. Also, did you know that if clydesdale is offered, there are only under 40 and 40+ divisions and sometimes only one wave for all ages of clydesdale.

No, not everyone can diet down below 200 in a healthy manner. I'm 5'11" and 215#, don't know my BF% but 46" chest, 34" waist are decent proportions. I've been over 200# since I was 16 yo (46 now). That's how it is and I do with it what I can. BTW, we let the little guys have their own weight classes when I wrestled in high school. It would have been a lot easier flopping a little 140 pounder around the mat than going against another 205. :)

"but being 5'11" and 250lbs seems like a choice to me, you can get that weight down, if you can train for triathlons and complete something like a half or full ironman, you CAN loose that weight! "

Nice comment Agret.

So I've chosen to be 250 - I presume you agree I had no choice in the 5'11".

Well, you're right, sort of. I chose to weigh 278. I chose to do that by having a sedentary unhealthy lifestyle while building a business.

I then chose to become a triathlete and lost about 30lbs and am extremely healthy, except for the weight.

However, I disagree that I've chosen to be 250 - it would appear that the number has chosen me as it won't budge despite healthy eating and training.

I really find it frustrating to read your statement as I know many other trigeeks probably feel the same way. I can't help now but wonder if when athletes see me at races that they think I should lose some weight before I compete in their sport. Perhaps they feel that I've shown up undertrained ... I've heard that one before and that cracks me up. Think about it ... why would someone my size show up to race without training .. seriously ... don't you think I train my butt off (though it's not leaving) so that I don't finish dfl?

All in all, before you tell me I can do something, think it through - not everything you believe is accurate.

Inga Andriessen

---

Tri Hard !

Why not just equalize the race like they do in auto racing and horse racing by putting in a minimum bike / rider combined weight.

If you set a combined weight of 300 lb it would take away the advantage the light guys have.

My complaint with wetsuits is that I worked my way through college lifeguarding to help pay the bills. I was left with a low tolerance for people who go out in the water and try to do something way beyond their abilities.

The novice triathletes out there are definitely way better prepared for water conditions than the kids I used to have to pull out of the water. But the lifeguard in me cringes every time I read a race report and someone talks about how they didn't think they could have made it without the wetsuit. A wetsuit is not a personal flotation device. It wasn't designed to be one, and is definitely not certified as such. It worries me to see people who seem to rely on it to do something it was not designed to do, instead of relying on their own abilities. It's been drummed into me that those sorts of assumptions are bad water safety.

I want to see people out there loving the water as much as I do, and not getting scared by open water swims. I just think that's it's easy to rely on the wetsuit as a crutch instead of as a tool, and it's hard not to worry a bit about people who see it as that.