Maybe the RD can make the following adaptations to the 2011 event.

Last wave is for all those who wish to simply participate to complete the course rather than race for awards or slots.

Last wave is a "participants" wave and goes off 60 minutes after the previous wave to keep it mostly seperate from the competitor waves.
Wetsuits allowed, use at your own discretion
Drafting discouraged but not penalized
Blocking discouraged but not penalized
Overtaken/Position fouls not assessed
Official race results say FINISHER (no splits or time, they were not properly racing for time anyway) - but you can still get a slip with your time from the timers just like they did at the race site after you finish.

OR

Maybe those who sign up for a half ironman race can treat the challenge with the respect it deserves and put in the time to learn to swim with more confidence/faster/safer or whatever their concern is that makes them feel the need for a wetsuit.

You're right - 2 1/4 miles - I just checked Google Maps - had to stop to ask a policeman for directions - luckily I knew it was the Middle School - he wanted to send me to the Elementary School. As far as shuttles - we were told no bikes on the shuttle - you were expected to ride your bike back to your car. Of course this wasn't an option before the race because bikes were 'locked' in transition.

Thanks for your comments. Hope you had a better weekend. Jim B.

Absolutely. But certainly we can expect the same degree of preparation from the RD. There are over 140 posts on this thread, and still there is disagreement about what the rules required. While there are a bunch of anectodal swim reports about the water being hot and the possiblity of overheating with a wetsuit, the fact is that was not the stated reason for the change on race morning. The announcement was only that they were changing it to a non wetsuit swim because the water was over 78 and that they had no way to track people who would have decided to still race w/ a wetsuit. That was THEIR reason. Since they didn't have a system in place, they wouldn't allow racers to use wetsuits. The decision was never communicated to be one based on safety considerations. It was communicated to be based on a desire to ensure tracking accuracy. The safety issue is hard to argue with -- of course everyone wants to make decisions to protect the safety of the racers. But in this instance it's being used to justify a rule deviation that was made for completely different reasons. They had no way to track wetsuit racers, so they said no wetsuits.

People on Saturday were hovering around the "swim-out" and going for quick swims in their wetsuits. There had to be close to 50 people there at one point, all in wetsuits, all jumping in and taking short swims. None of them came out complaining of the water being too warm. Lots of people were complaining when they changed the rule on race morning. The water on Saturday couldn't have been very different on Sunday (see some of the posts above about people doing a quick test swim and stating how warm the water was). We were told on Saturday by the RD that it was a wetsuit swim. There were 2 pre-race meetings on Saturday, and not a single comment was made that raised even the slightest possibility that there could be a change that eliminated wetsuits altogether. Not a single comment at packet pick-up, not a single comment at the pre-race meetings, not a single comment when racking your bike. The river didn't shoot up 2 degrees overnight. Why didn't they tell everyone on Saturday? Why did the RD sound so absolutist about it being a wetsuit swim less than 24 hours before the race?

Conditions less than ideal? Adapt. The bike is windy? Adapt. The current is strong? Adapt. The rules are unclear? Make them clear. You're an RD and not sure if it's going to be a wetsuit swim? Don't tell everyone it's a wetsuit swim. You have no way of tracking wetsuit racers who want to race and forego awards? Adapt. I guarantee you the RD will have a contingency in place next year, and that with the exact same conditions they'll allow wetsuits and have a system that tracks those racers.

This was not a safety-based decision. This was a decision based on not having an adequate tracking system in place for people who wanted to race w/ wetsuits.

More condescension towards weak swimmers. Thanks.

Stop giving official times for "participants" and you'll find far fewer of us in your way at events. But then fewer triathletes = fewer, more poorly supported races, less money invested in developing new gear, etc. That's not going to be good for anyone. (This is the way this argument usually goes, right?)

I'm getting the feeling that those who don't care about rules changing 1 hour before an event are all in the front-of-the-pack crowd who aren't affected much by the change.

I had a regular swim suit and a Blue-Seventy swim skin in the car, but left them because everything you took to the race start you had to shlep 4 miles back to your car after the race.

I feel bad for you that you weren't able to finish the whole course, but really? Carrying about half a pound of clothes would have put your load over the edge?

More condescension towards weak swimmers? I AM a weak swimmer...so put your high horse back in it's stable with the horsepoo arguments you are spouting. Next time you are out on the course, look around you at your fellow athletes. 95 percent of them are HTFUing and just doing the race. YOU are the exception, the whiner, the one who just can't accept the results of your own lack of preparedness. What was your plan if race day water temps had been 85 degrees? Consider yourself lucky that one of the properties of a wetsuit is it's positive flotation so that you can participate in a sport which you would otherwise be unable to participate in. Ingrate.

My plan for 85 degree water was to swim without a wetsuit -- just like I did on Sunday. The difference is that I knew that there wasn't much chance of the water being that warm, so I was willing to take the risk.

My plan for 79 degree water, which I knew was likely because I had been following NOAA's reported water temperatures (see http://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/...ge.php?station=camm2; there's a link at the bottom for 45 days' worth of measurements), was to swim in a wetsuit and accept the lack of awards and prizes I wasn't going to win anyway.

The only reason for the complaints that have been aired in this thread is that CTA was not prepared to follow the wetsuit-but-no-awards rule for 78 to 84 degree water. That rule was clearly stated in at least three places on the website. It is also stated on the WTA website. The document on the Eagleman site's "Race Rules" link, which some, falling victim to the inverse error, see as contravening the standard rule, gives a summary of the standard rule and omits what happens above 78 degress for brevity. That document comes from WTA and is the same for every Ironman race; how can it be read to contradict the full WTA rule?

This isn't a matter of people whining because they had a few extra minutes on their times. This isn't a matter of the 10th place M35-39 whining because the swim is his weak leg and he thinks he'd have gotten a Clearwater slot with a wetsuit. This is a matter of people being DQed -- and many of them obeyed their "do not run" notices. Perhaps the weakest of the weak swimmers wouldn't have made the cutoff even in a wetsuit. But we've already met a few in this thread who probably would have made it.

Those people spent $255+ on a race they had every reason to think they'd be allowed to finish. Because of CTA's lack of preparation (and remember, they can use the NOAA's site too) they were not allowed to do so. Is that fair?

I've corrected attacks on my logic from people who don't know what they're talking about. It has been implied that I'd drown without a wetsuit (obviously I didn't). I've called people out on their condescending "if you're slow, don't compete" rants. I've tried to present some facts. For this I'm a whiner?

CTA should have noticed there was a good chance of high water temperatures and done one of the following: 1) developed a plan for tracking wetsuit versus non-wetsuit; or 2) announced the possibility of 79-degrees-and-no-wetsuit with the offer of a refund or deferral.
Given that they did neither, they should offer a refund or comp entry to those who were DQed but likely would have made the cutoff in a wetsuit. (But even this doesn't do justice to some who completed the swim but in such bad condition that they DNFed. Again, some would have DNFed anyway, but a few would not have if they'd had a wetsuit.)

"Given that they did neither, they should offer a refund or comp entry to those who were DQed but likely would have made the cutoff in a wetsuit. (But even this doesn't do justice to some who completed the swim but in such bad condition that they DNFed. Again, some would have DNFed anyway, but a few would not have if they'd had a wetsuit.) "

You're arguing 2 different things. I agree they should have allowed people to use wetsuits for temps between 78-84, but they didn't.

HOWEVER, you should not need a wetsuit in 78+ degree weather to complete a 1.2 mile swim in the required cut-off time. If you can not do this without a wetsuit, then you should wait to enter a race such as a 70.3 until you can.

Also, for the athletes that were not allowed to run while others were that had a swim time over 1 hour, I think the ruling is up to the RD and it has to do with wave times. I think the cut-off is 1:05 after the start of the last wave. So if you were in the first couple of waves (besides the pro's), then you had longer to complete the course than the last wave did.

Also, for the athletes that were not allowed to run while others were that had a swim time over 1 hour, I think the ruling is up to the RD and it has to do with wave times. I think the cut-off is 1:05 after the start of the last wave. So if you were in the first couple of waves (besides the pro's), then you had longer to complete the course than the last wave did.

By definition, when CTA signed the contract with USAT to be sanctioned, they agreed to follow all the rules, and have plans in place to implement any of them if needed. This would be how to track folks wearing wetsuits when the water was 78-84 and could not get awards. I continue to be shocked to hear the NOAA's website had the water temp which showed it would probably be over 78. And folks are letting the RD off by when he stated on Sat, from what folks posted, that the swim would be a wetsuit swim. Clearly, the RD was going to announce a 77.9 degree water temp until the USAT official did their job. And folks can defend this race. Oh well, sure would be interesting to see what WTC thinks about this since one of their events did not follow their rules. I guess that is okay, but if any of us athletes break the rules, we get nailed.

Dave, in the statement highlighted above, you appear to be insinuating that the RD intended to dishonestly represent the water temps, but was thwarted by an honest USAT official who did not allow that to happen. Is that your assertion?

I have no idea what anyone was doing. I facts are the NOAA info any could see. The RD stated on Sat is would be a wetsuit swim. Folks ask how overnight the water temp could go up 2 degrees. No idea.

I do not first hand an RD who wrote me that even though I measure water at 82, his race would NEVER have a water temp over 77.9 So yes, I have seen first hand what some RD's do to avoid having to deal with the USAT rules they signed up for.

Back to the question Dave, are you asserting that the RD for Eagleman 2010 intended to dishonestly represent the water temps, but was thwarted by an honest USAT official who did not allow that to happen? Maybe a Yes/No with explanation following (if needed) would bring clarity to your position.

You're right, of course: no bikes on the shuttle even if they had been running. My wife would have appreciated a shuttle, though. We were lucky enough to stumble on the signed route back to the lot even though we apparently went out the "wrong" way from the park (meaning out an exit from which the route wasn't signed), and I had my phone for maps so that wasn't a problem for us.

Good luck at your next event -- I'm doing the bike leg of a mixed relay at the Celebration Sprint in 2 weeks

I have no idea who did what since I was not in their shoes, or there, so if I only get a yes/no answer, it could have to be no. I really could care less, what I care about is the rules were not followed which means the race had a process ready and used on race day for wetsuits to be used in water between 78-84