I didn’t get the bib code email until this morning registered 2 days ago. Since I didn’t register my code before my Zwift ride, it looks like it didn’t count toward the challenge. It uploaded but I’m still 0%.
It’s just for fun, but if they are gonna to put the event on, it should work.

use fitfiletools, mentioned higher in the thread.

it was chunky registration wise, but not difficult to figure out. i just emailed the contact to get my bib number. so far my 5k run and 13.1mi run have uploaded easily and are showing.

All my stuff did since yesterday is showing on my personal dashboard, but only my bike ride this morning is counting towards the challenge I can tell that because it says 33% completed on the challenge page. (1 out of 3 things I guess?) I've poked around the site a lot and can't find more details on the challenge except for the top 10 leaderboard.

For those that think what you've uploaded is actually counting, you might be wrong. Anybody know how to find the page that shows your workouts that specifically counted towards the challenge?

I just know I did 56 miles on the bike and it said 33% complete. I went and ran 5k and it said 67% complete. I don't now another way and I searched like you.

---

http://www.sfuelsgolonger.com

I'm pretty sure it's just the dashboard page: https://app.ironmanvirtualclub.com/en/dashboard

There are a number of ways to finagle workouts that don't show up. Since I did my 5k 30 minutes too early yesterday, I finished my ride today by rolling my bike 3.1miles in the same time as I ran yesterday. Gotta do what you gotta do to make sure your times are counted in this zero stakes game!

---

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

For each leg that you complete you get 33%. It’s based on segment not distance. 33% for leg one, 67% for two legs and 100% for all three.

I was pretty excited about this, but I don't think I'm going to bother with the half marathon tomorrow.

I never paid much attention to speed/distance on my trainer, but it's nowhere near real world speeds. I was riding just under 200 watts today and only averaged 18 mph. On flat roads in normal winds I'm rolling 22+ mph at 200 watts, easily. It dawned on me just how much variability there must be from trainer to trainer, treadmill to treadmill, etc. making the result meaningless. My ankle is kind of bothering me when I run so I think I'm just going to can the run and go for a nice easy long ride instead. If I wasn't planning to take 10 days off running I'd probably finish the "race" but the leaderboard doesn't mean as much to me as I was hoping. No sense risking injury for a race that doesn't "count" in my mind.

I like the VR concept. And I think it could actually work for a run-only even if you use some kind of "grade-adjusted" pace. But there just isn't a way to level the playing field for the bike and treadmill running.

Oh well. I applaud the effort on Ironman's part and am glad there people are finding ways to keep the motivation and spark alive.

My main issue with indoor distances is that you are given zero advantage for making smart gear choices. I get that that's impossible so I don't expect it or anything, but it negates any advantages those of us who pay attention to the details might get. I love that aspect of racing so it doesn't feel the same. Which is why I rode a stretch of road 5xout and back for 56 miles today. And it was a blast.

---

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

To address the previous two comments, there's some fixes to your problems.

1. If you ride on some of the platforms that put you in the world virtually via watts, it does come out to real-world distances. I ride on Zwift and the distances per effort are incredibly accurate. It's actually shocking how accurate they are!

2. In Zwift, you can earn your way up to the best gear by riding and putting in the hard work. Honestly, I wish the real world was like that, instead of being able to buy the best gear with zero experience or time in the saddle whatsoever. After thousands of miles and hundreds of hours of riding, I've worked my way up to level 49, which allows me to choose to ride a P5X with a zipp disc wheel and an aero helmet. So yes, you can use the best equipment, you just have to earn it first. I know, you may have already earned it in the real world through hard work (I did too), but Zwift levels the playing field all over again. It's kinda cool.

3. I can't speak for the other platforms like Rouvy or Fulgaz. But yes, if I do ride the trainer in "dumb mode" and let my Garmin calculate the distances all by itself, they are more like riding a Walmart bike full upright with a windbreaker on. I agree, it's annoying and I'd love to hear about a way to change that if possible.

Just finished - all uploaded pretty easily, runs on my garmin into strava, same for the bike on Zwift - strava into ironman.

Obviously the results are meaningless - some of the bike times in the top ten make Lionel look lazy - but good motivation to get more done / take your mind off things for a few hours -which is basically what we all need right now.

Only one or two really wacky ones I see so far, the 1:55 is clearly BS, I dunno about the 2:02. The rest are all reasonable enough.

---

Too old to go pro but doing it anyway
http://instagram.com/tgarvey4

Out of curiosity I checked out his last IM bike split last year also his Strava. All his rides are 27-29 miles per hour on Strava however his IM bike time was 5:14. No idea why he feels the need to post BS results on Zwift.

https://www.endurance-data.com/...-christophe-hamblot/

---

http://www.sfuelsgolonger.com

Seems like a lot of fake bike times

A lot of fake run times wtf. 1 person ran a 1:09xx for 13.1 at age 40 ok dude!! That’s a little to fast like world class! He should be a professional runner! 😳😂😂

So how strict is IM going to be with results. I see many of the bike distances on strava coming in at 55.95 ...... you cant do an extra 100m just to get .01 over to assure you hit 56??

I take it back. There are a ton of BS results up there now, bike & run alike. This one is free and meaningless, but to beat the "why do you care" crowd to their predictable punch, it's okay to wonder how/if they will address obvious cheating when they are awarding 70.3 spots.

This really kills any excitement I was trying to hold out for this if they don't have an answer.

---

Too old to go pro but doing it anyway
http://instagram.com/tgarvey4

i believe that's why this one (and maybe a few will be) was a "challenge" and not a "competition." to iron out and discover issues.

although, not sure why they did a ranking in that case... but yea some of the results are laughable and would not translate at all to real life.

well technically 90k is.. 55.9 miles.

I think you're better off leaving the P5X in the garage and find a long group ride at your target w/kg. I did the 3R 100k ride and it was full with VR1 peeps. Time-wise I think at my power, I was ~10-12mins faster than I would have been on a tri bike without drafting benefit.

Not sure it's against the spirit of Ironman VR - didn't read the fine print.

Hi mate

That would be me you are talking about😄
I’m racing as a pro triathlete this year so I have asked Ironman why I am on this list as I think there will be a separat pro-list.

---

Instagram and Strava: @lpstormo

Not questioning your ability at all, but do you think your treadmill or footpod was calibrated correctly for that run? Impressive negative splitting though.

---

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

It should be quite correct since it was new this winter. It feels correct, but of course hard to say. The treadmill sends speed and distance directly to Zwift so don’t need the footpod.
I started the run very easy, but felt so good and thought it would be fun to clock in sub 70 min (so the last part was super hard :-) .

My shape is really good these days (better then ever before) after spending the winter preparing for Ironman South Africa.
It’s anyway not important for me to defend my run, but I agree that I should not be on the AG results.

---

Instagram and Strava: @lpstormo

realbdeal wrote:

I'm not even currently able to log in. Apparently there is a pro category for the standard races as well though I'm sure there are no stakes.

The Washington Post had a piece on this event. Evindently Marinda Carfrae was racing (and in second place), when hubby dear accidentally tripped on the power cord.

"Things were going well for Australian triathlete Mirinda Carfrae as she competed in a bike race from the confines of her home in Boulder, Colo.
Suddenly, Carfrae, a former triathlon world champion, was no longer second in the inaugural Ironman VR Pro Challenge women’s race, which was being broadcast live on Facebook. The culprit? She believed she hadn’t firmly plugged her bike into the wall outlet.
Alas, the explanation for the electrical failure lay elsewhere.
Her husband, triathlete Tim O’Donnell, confessed he had tripped over the cord when he entered the room and moved behind her to hold up cards for the camera."

Well it's more ridiculous than it should be. I personally would be embarrassed by this. Its basically a wall of shame. There is currently a 1:46 , 1:48 and 1:50 bike times in the top 5 of 45-49 age group.

Anyone see the guy with the 1:30 bike split? 20k decent, like really man.