I have no IM tattoo or license plate. I don't wear my IM clothing anymore or bring up my IM finishes at parties. If I never have to recite the IM distance to anyone ever again, I'll be a happy man. But I will always believe that anyone who has completed an IM, even if they walked the entire marathon and coasted down every hill, has acheived a physical feat that should never be described as "very easy." :)

After one IM I am not satisfied at all. I still consider myself very new to the sport of triathlon. I've been training, learning, competing (mostly against myself) and attempting to "race" for four years. I finished my first IM at IMCDA in June. I didn't feel I "raced" as I was very much in learning mode. When family, friends, co-workers "ohh-ahh" over my accomplishment I am pretty quick to remember that for the most part I just showed up and did what it took to just cross the finish line. In August I actually felt I "raced" an HIM - there was strategy, pacing, no wondering if I would "finish" and tactical things that I did to greatly improve my time. I came in 2nd in my AG but more importantly felt I had put together a very complete race. The reason I'm doing another IM in 2009 is to again learn but also to try to employ some strategy, pacing and so on to get that same satisfaction that I had at the 70.3 distance. I don't expect this will happen as quickly and based on what many have said it is a life-long pursuit in IM to figure things out. I have a long way to go for me to be impressed enough with myself to say, "ohh-ahh".

i'll go one further and say that the average person would most likely drown in the ocean.

Agree w/ Tom C... Who is anyone else to say that I should spend less time w/ my kids so I can "race" it in 11 hours vs training a bit less and muddle along in 14? So is the embodiment of IM reflected by someone who's willing to give up balance w/ family and/or job because their own personal obsession is more important? I guess it's true for some...

Any reasonably fit and healthy person can...( put anything here )

By this thinking pretty much life would be easy for any reasonably fit and healthy person.
Life isn't easy for many and finishing a 10 k race isn't easy for many.

If you are a physicist the following statement might be similar.
Any reasonably intelligent person can understand string theory after 3-4 months of physics classes: Unlike the point particles in quantum field theories such as the standard model of particle physics, strings interact in a way that is almost uniquely specified by mathematical self-consistency, forming an apparently valid quantum theory of gravity.

Life is easy or life is hard. Depends on your unique perspective.

Every challenge one conquers is a worthy one.

---

it turns out that our OP is only "mostly" dead........ ElGordo

Awesome!

I"m usually caught flat-footed by that guy at the party. Most people might say something like this just out of conversation, but we all have met those who seem to enjoy reducing the accomplishments of others.

LOL!

I have read some of the responses and at first I thought, yeah most folk could finish an IM. BUt then I thought more and got annoyed- you should have turned around and said "Really? Then get the f#*k out there and do one as well as*^#le" this pisses me off. Just getting to the start line is an accomplishment, a sacrifice that many families, children, and colleagues could testify to. The IM itself is the final step in the journey- yes there may be a 70yr old nun out there, and ther may be larger folks plodding along, but 140.6 is 140.6 no matter which eay you cut it. I have done a bunch of IM races all around 11:30-12:30 and I have always returned to the finish line to watch the 15-17hr folks come in. They are the real work horses of the show, the real hard core folks IMO- and I tip my hat to them. 15-17hrs is along time to be on the move no matter what speed you go at.

At the nex party, down a tequila and challenge the fu*#er to a race! 140.6 or go home...

Weeman

So is the embodiment of IM reflected by someone who's willing to give up balance w/ family and/or job because their own personal obsession is more important?

Perhaps part of the equation is waiting until a point in your life where that balance is easier to maintain, even with the additional stress of sufficient training to race what is intended to be a race.

Does that mean you are a sub 9 IM racer??? Because if you're racing than you are out there for money or medals.

If you're not in the top ten then you ARE one of the rest.

Another way of putting this is that finishing an IM is "simple" but it ain't "easy." To finish you just need to do the right thing in your training for about 180 consecutive days and a reasonably fit adult can finish an IM. Try doing anything for 180 days in a row and you will see what I mean.

Mallory told people who asked why he climbed mountains that he did it "because they were there." He was really trying to find a polite way to tell people to piss off: it's a way of saying that people who ask the question that way will never understand the answer so he wasn't going to bother with you. I feel the same way about people who worry about how fast you have to go to become a "real" Ironman. Or some dork at a party who noticed a 70-something nun on TV one day racing Hawaii.

This has been a very interesting thread. To zerobars and those that have responded, thank you for having a conversation versus drawing lines in the sand. I think I would (if one had to) classify people in two categories: participants and competitors.

Competitors in my mind are those that are going for the podium or for the money (if applicable). These are people that have the ability, the skill, the equipment, the training, etc., (i.e. all the components) to make them competitive.

I, myself, would put myself in the participant category. I am out to participate in this event because I have a limitor. Being diabetic, I have challenges and thus I agree that IMs are simple to complete, but not easy. I say simple to complete in the context of execution. It will still be easy. For me, completing my first IM (IMAZ 11/08) has been a true journey to learn what my body can take and how to deal with low levels of adrenelin, insulin, and glycogen production. I substituted the "70 year old nun" into the above statement with "diabetic" so that it read like this: "I read that a diabetic does that event, how hard can it be? Puts a whole different context into that statement, doesn't it.

Regardless of participant or competitor, we each have a set of goals. It is the meeting of our individual goals that make us winners.

To all...GREAT success in what ever you are trying to accomplish.

Does that mean you are a sub 9 IM racer??? Because if you're racing than you are out there for money or medals.

If you're not in the top ten then you ARE one of the rest.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everybody races to their own ability and age. For a 70 year old finishing in 16:59 might be racing but for somebody else 11:59 hour might be cruising and having fun.
But again when you finish one, most regular Joe's won't even ask you the time but just go hu-ah...That is why for people in the know the whole thing is a joke but most won't admit it freely because a lot of money and interest is tied to Ironmans.

---

--------------------------------------------------------
I see obsessed people.

this is the perfect answer ... we have a winner

"So is the embodiment of IM reflected by someone who's willing to give up balance w/ family and/or job because their own personal obsession is more important?

Perhaps part of the equation is waiting until a point in your life where that balance is easier to maintain, even with the additional stress of sufficient training to race what is intended to be a race. "

Agreed. What constitutes racing is highly individual-but the point of IM (I believe) is to race it. For some that will take 16-17 hours but they will train and race it. My concern is with those particpants who do not sacrafice but who go out just to finish. "Just walk the marathon" I do not think anyone who is training for IM with the intention to walk the marathon (when with proper training they could run it) should be doing IM. Not when there are folks who are willling to make the sacrafices to race but can't get in because of the overdemand for spots. IM is an ultra endurance event it should be respected as such. Ultraendurance events by their very nature require a tremendous sacrafice of time. If you cannot make that sacrafice then perhaps you should be doing something else. Taken do its logical extreme you would have no issue with folks (who are otherwise reasonable fit but did not want to sacrafice to train) spending their day walking the NYC marathon and going to work the next day to say that did the marathon. Based on some of the posts in this thread some of you would applaud those folks as embodying the true spirit of the marathon since unlike the folks who finished under 3 or 4 hours they were out there all day... I suggest these folks should not be at the starting line.... Few would disagree that Julie Moss' 1982 finish at Kona embodied IM -not because she finished under 17 hours (she finished just over 11 hours) but because she put all out on the course..few can approach that kind of determination but those who race understand and grapple with determination when it gets tough out there.... I do not see alot of grit and determination among many of the walkers- I see smiling, waving, picture taking etc... which is fine but not sure that is what IM is all about. Remember that the first Ironman included the folllowing statement (now a trademark) in the rules for the event: Swim 2.4 miles! Bike 112 miles! Run 26.2 miles! Brag for the rest of your life",
I believe the excellence demanded by that statement has been watered down to Swim 2.4 miles! Bike 112 miles! Run/Walk 26.2 miles! Brag for the rest of your life". For the fit individual I believe the former formulation of the statement should be the requirement for IM....

I agree with everyone that this has been a great thread. I figured I'd share my opinion. I agree that there are all types of people who complete Ironmans but when it comes to the overall percentages its still quite low compared to most things people can say they accomplished in their lives. I definitely wanted the Ironman on my endurance resume and will probably not do another. As most of us on this forum, we probably don't tell casual observers what our time was but in the case of the thread starters conversation I probably would've been steamed enough to blurt out my time and talk about all the training that I did to achieve that time.

Overall, I've been surprised by how many people are impressed with completing an Ironman who aren't endurance athletes.

So what? That's one of the things that's very cool about this sport, and about IM's in general. IM isn't just about the race; it's about the people we meet along the way. So, the response might be, "yep, a 70 yr old nun does IM's. Do you think YOU'LL be in that kind of shape when you're 70?" That 70 year-old nun is an example of the possibilities of life and health that seem to have been lost somewhere between McDonald's and Dunkin' Donuts. When non-triathletes ask me about IM, one of my favorite things to talk about are some of the other people in the event because the most common response I hear from non-triathletes is, "I could never do that?" "Really? Have you heard about . . . ." It can be even more fun to watch the audience "ohhhh" and "ahhhh" over those people. Bitter-boy is just trying to steal your spotlight . . . turn it around and steal it back.

ZB - To go back to your original post and not debate about 13 hrs vs 17 hrs, the most obvious solution to avoid a repeat incident would be NEVER to say "I'm an Ironman". Not to be rude, but that just sounds a bit pretentious. Whenever I go to a non-triathlete or non-swimmer sponsored party, I just make small talk about whatever. If someone asks me how I stay lean, I say I swim a lot and do some biking and running. If they ask if I do tri, I say that I have been known to do one on occasion. Generally their next question "Do you know Joe Smith or Jack Jones who does tri", and then we'll get off on this tangent about wheter we know anyone in common. Usually by then someone else comes up and the thread of the conversation changes. You get my drift here I'm sure: force them to drag the info out of you. If they finally ask if you've done an IM, you can say yes, I've done 1 or a few or several or whatever you deem appropriate. You could say "I've done one iron distance race" or "X number of iron distance races" rather than "I'm an Ironman". The odds are that, if you are casual about it, they may well not even ask the IM question. I know that it may be hard but discretion, or modesty in this case, is better part of valor, as they say. I've known several guys who won medals in swimming and track, and they absolutely never talked about it. You ALWAYS, ALWAYS heard it from someone else. Since winning an Olympic medal of any color is incredibly, stupendously hard, MUCH harder than finishing an Ironman, I believe their example is an excellent one on which to model our behavior. Similarly, if any of the top 3 male and female Ironman medalists went to a party where they were not known at all, I doubt you would hear them say much about their achievements, unless it was absolutely dug out them under repeated questioning and even then they would downplay by saying something "Yeah, I got lucky" or something bland like that. They are almost always self-effacing.

Well, don't mean to sound like I'm lecturing, but thought I'd throw this angle out since nobody else has...

Regards,
Mulk

---

"ANYONE can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

Bingo! The guy who busted the OP's balls at the party could very well have been on some podiums here and there...

A friend who spent a couple years on the freeskiing circuit is fond of saying that it's usually the quiet guy at the party who's listening to what other people have to say that's the one you gotta worry about.

---

Eliot
blog thing - strava thing

Good post and great advice. Very well said. I don't typically talk about it with non-triathletes, but friends and family have a tendency to drag it out into the open with a, "He's an Ironman." That's when I turn the conversation to OTHER people who do IM races. I admire their accomplishments . . . I really do. It's not that I'm ashamed of my accomplishments, but I can't really explain it (and people who don't do IM can't understand it).

The year I did Ironman about 10% of the field did not finish. You may not have to be rock star fit to finish, but you need to be a rock star mentally.

To say very easy? I'd disagree with that.

This is essentially my approach. I have pride issues, so I make it a point not to advertise what races I've done. This summer I just told people I was "training for a race in Louisville." But if they ask for details, I'll talk about it. That said, if I hear anyone try to dismiss an IM, or even a marathon, as easy in public like that, I call them out. My response is "I'd be glad to show you how hard it can be. Are you interested in working out with me tomorrow? I'll make it an easy day..." Strangely they never take me up on it, and having to admit to everyone that they cannot keep up with the training effectively ends the conversation.

Dude, I never ,repeat never, say "I am an Ironman" in public because I agree with you its pretentious. Someone at the party trains with me at the pool at the YMCA and asked how IMLP went...

I agree that a good percentage of single-event Ironman athletes do it for vanity, but I know several who only do the single event because they want to see if it's in them. For this demographic, it is enough to finish even if it takes the entire 17 hours. People who race and finish in eleven hours can't possibly empathize with this prerogative, let alone sympathize with it.

Hey, what does your run time need to be so that you're not considered as having "walked" the marathon? Hoping that my one effort "qualified" as an IM. ;)