With Ironman's decline IM needs everyone they can get.

While you are declaring Ironman’s demise, you should switch over to the UTMB live stream and see the magnitude of that race. I think it will cause you to question your assumptions.

 

Do Referees and Officials riding on motos have to obey all traffic laws? By driving on the left side are they not endangering themselves and driving recklessly? Should they have been hugging the centerline themselves?

With how they are driving on the far left - suggests that this was a one way road. On a one way road do you have to maintain a center line?

What comparison are you trying to make with IM and UTMB?

So the issue with all of this is that in a 1 way direction the whole "centerline" is sorta irrelevant. And yes all parties should follow traffic laws, especially on 2 way traffic. IE- you will see moto's on the outside of the lane they should be in, thus why "staying right" is such an important rule. However, when there is no real traffic to deal with and the race itself has already culled the number of motos/officials/personal on the course post Hamburg, it's not that big of a deal if athletes drifted....except when it was in front of the official to get dinged for it.

But we want to talk about "discretion" with officials, there's no need to really call the centerline rule when your racing in a 1 way direction on "narrow" roads. Like the rule is always "stay right" and for the most part that's pretty much how all athletes behave, but even Knibb went all Kona Laidlow and rode all over the road at different times apparently. Again I'm not saying not call it so the athletes can ride all over the road. I just think it's unnecesssary in this particular instance.

As I said that the ref noted "if oncoming traffic was present would have resulted in crash" for justification/additional information makes no sense.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

 

So the refs themselves by driving on the left side of the road would have caused a crash too.

Nice find, how does IM justify the Sanders DQ when the live broadcast showed the Women's leader riding the left side on corners also? 3:06:45

It just a really really bad luck. We talk about discretion, this particular course should have basically nulled any “centerline” issues from the officials. That we have so much evidence of athletes disregarding it and oh they did it while not in front of official so that’s ok. It’s just a really really bad look.

Technology is only improving and why race organizers aren’t getting on board, it’s unfortunate. Many many sports are using it to improve fair play and the product even if it puts the official looking “bad”. But better to get the right calls right as often as you can.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Refs obviously have to always ride on the left of the bike riders. The more the riders scatter towards the left, the further the refs have to ride which also endangers the refs.

Ironman Group has made major investments in trail running with UTMB. They are far from struggling. People have been talking about IMs demise for at least 10 years but they have an iron grip on triathlon (no matter how much ppl want to build up the PTO races) and now trail running as well.

Except in this case, there was no danger. So it's a moot point.

So long as there's a decent prize purse and the title of world champion, then there will be top athletes to contest.
So long as there's something to qualify for to gain elite status, AG athletes will continue to participate in the 70.3WC.

I came away from Lahti very pleased with the experience. The overall race experience was top notch, as was the course design. Volunteers were very knowledgeable - to the point you could tell they had done a fair bit of training. Washrooms were plentiful, even with 6000 athletes and their retinues. I care about pro racing and think that IM (and PTO for that matter) should up their game on how they market the elite side of the sport; but as long as they keep putting on events (and courses) like last week, I'll keep giving them my money.

Overall to race dynamics.

We know Frunk did 338 watt avg at the front.

IS there data to compare from second pack bike pros to see how much the group helps etc.
12 m rule, motor traffic etc. 7 guys vs like 12 plus?

The front pack had much better organization as basically if funk or Mathis pulling hard or one else was going to surge to the front and then slow the pack.

This is the issue the seconds pack maybe had, two many guys to organize or lead.
which lead to so much issues with the group with penalties just like the women.

so maybe the issue isn't the individual racer ( everyone makes mistakes, refs too) but we now have to many racers that can all hold on so well, like what happened in st.george too a big group were you shouldn't risk moving around or else you may get stuck overloading for so long or a penalty.

too many good racers and if there was a 20 m draft zone I don't think that changes the race as 7 guys 140 m up front go the same or faster than 12-15 guys all trying to hold a line , pass 300 m long.

---

Technique will always last longer then energy production. Improve biomechanics, improve performance.
http://Www.anthonytoth.ca, triathletetoth@twitter

Listening to the PTN podcast this week, Paula Findlay spoke about the group dynamics that whenever anyone would pass, they were shouting not to "slot in" to keep each other from getting penalty, and she said one did anyways and got penalty immediately after. I think for the most part all these athletes are racing to the rules, of course they'll push the line, but LS or Blu or Knibb no one was going to be riding in the left side of the lane if it was 2 way traffic. They'd all be almost always to the right. It will be interesting what these organizations continue to do with all the advances in technology and these pro leagues forming. Who will use it, who wont.

Cheers all!

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

no, i think it is a valid point. while it does highlight that there is no inherent danger in being on the left, it means if the riders move to the left then the motos have no space and there is potential for a crash between rider and moto. generally i'd say it is up to motos to keep out of the way of riders not the other way around but you have to give them a reasonable space to do their job in.

this makes is more reasonable that you only get penalised if there is an official there since there is then a moto that needs to be given space in case they need to pass but at the same time it is ridiculous that clear infringements shown on the coverage are let pass when it would be so easy to monitor them and the optics of fairness would be enhanced. we just can't be having viewers see illegal behaviour all the time with no action taken.

I am not talking about the center line stuff. Just the group is too big to have organization. Without a magnus willing to just go all in the bike and pull as much as possible. Is the second group to cluttered to catch.

FYI Mathis made this race what it was, he took the risk in the front to keep the pack away. although it didn't work out for him on the run the 1-4 place guys may not have been there if he didn't push the paces and keep the big pack away.

---

Technique will always last longer then energy production. Improve biomechanics, improve performance.
http://Www.anthonytoth.ca, triathletetoth@twitter

Marc Dubrick posted his numbers on instagram:

---

Benjamin Deal - Professional - Instagram - TriRig - Lodi Cyclery
Deals on Wheels - Results, schedule, videos, sponsors

If what Talbot says is true, and I don't doubt it, a train of 39 pro riders, 10m apart is a joke.

Too bad Jason West was not on form, it was a shampoo, rinse and a half marathon.

Shouldn't slotting in be permitted in theory? Unless everyone is at exactly 12m all the time, then you should be able to slot in.

e.g. If there's less than 12m between the person ahead of you and the next person, then the person you're passing is drafting and they need to vacate the area. If there's more than 12m between you and the person ahead, then the passing person has room before getting into the draft zone of the next person in line and it's incumbent on the passed person to create a space for the passing person. So unless everyone is always at exactly 12m down to the atom, there should be room to slot in, no?

I get that the refs (and probably the athletes) don't want a constant churn, but I can't imagine it's that exciting a race dynamic where your choices are either to pass the 10 athletes ahead of you in one go, or to sit on until the group dynamic changes.

he was in the second group.

So not sure of everyone overall power to wt etc. but it sounds like he was working very hard compared to his old numbers?

Although this is skewed due to over 1 foot off duct tape used.

---

Technique will always last longer then energy production. Improve biomechanics, improve performance.
http://Www.anthonytoth.ca, triathletetoth@twitter

 
If what Talbot says is true, and I don't doubt it, a train of 39 pro riders, 10m apart is a joke.

Too bad Jason West was not on form, it was a shampoo, rinse and a half marathon.[/quote]
Armstrong said that, so I figure it will be a long time before the comment goes away in this forum. He also said stuff like "it's not about the bike" Have you ever considered that not everything that Armstrong ever said was accurate or truthful?

T Cox will say whatever he has to say as he has skin in his game by being in business with sanders, but at the end of the day the guys swam 1:10 pace, Funk pushed 330 W and even a 12 m draft zone you still need to push ~300 W at that speed in a really good position. If we had 30 guys legally drafting, so what? Other races have shown that the 20 m draft zone does not really change the results, other than reducing average speeds a bit, but whether the draft zone is 12 m or 20 m.. the weak swimmers like Sanders, Long or Skipper, never every see the front of the race at this level as the front guys are stronger on the bike You could make the draft zone 40 m...and you will get the same result. So who cares?

Yes, from a simple 'mathematical' PoV, if you have A B C and B is more 12 m from A then when C passes B they are 'by definition' >12m form A so can 'slot in'. If they can't then B is in A's draft zone and should be done for drafting (and not C for 'cutting in'). When C passes B, B is required to (demonstrably) drop back (in 25 secs).
Trouble is this encourages riders to keep v close to 12m interval (risking drafting penalty in rolling terrain) to force 'C' to crack on and pass 'A' too. Of course if this a 'serious' train (men's) then movement depends on an athlete losing the wheel. But the overtaker cannot know this till they spike 30+ watts to make an overtake on who knows how many riders ahead in the train.
In Lahti this was only Ryf, Matthews and Findlay (so manageable) with Pallant wheel sucking at the back and Salthouse 'cutting in' and getting 5 minutes x 2 aiui.
Thank goodness for Nice where the terrain will sort this out.

I overall find quite ironic that over the years, Sanders hardcore fans have been influenced to believe, we need more refs, better enforcement, etc. And here we are, tougher refs, lots of drafting penalties, etc. And now we have heard them whining for over a week about a potential mistake. I give the ref the benefit of the doubt, why was a DQ issued and not a penalty. Not certain about conspiracy theories about this matter, I want to think that if a mistake was made, it was an honest one.

Rubbish, if you are going to DQ somebody there should be no 'maybes' and there should definitely be no mistakes. The decision should be black and white and beyond doubt. Otherwise a caution or a penalty.

Ya, I think this give the benefit of the doubt kind of strange when we're talking a DQ vs a 30-60s penalty. A DQ for unsafe conduct should be for something that actually caused a problem on course. A DQ for riding on the other side of the line, again should be for something like making multiple passes (first time gets high minute penalty) over this imaginary line when there was traffic coming in the other direction on the course.

In both cases, you're saying, "it's unsafe for you and those around you if you continue to race on this course as a result of your actions." The only way you can apply that to Lionel here is if you start stretching out hypotheticals.

The DQ here looks like vindictive punishment (not saying it was though) or incompetence (more likely), which is exactly why we shouldn't give it the benefit of the doubt.