They are so common, in fact, that one has posted in this thread...

Not really a unicorn dude.

ETA - actually there are probably at least 2 in this thread who have gone sub 9 but probably can't do sub 1hr on a "real" sprint distance race.

I think well balanced would be more like 1hr/4:45/3:15, but probably splitting hairs. If you're going for a time based goal I'd guess the chosen course would be relatively flat. To go sub 9 on a tougher course would take a much better athlete, because you're right they'd need that 3hr marathon.

wow, 12 hours/week, those guys must have some crazy talent.... I would probably feel undertrained for even a sprint on volume that low. Yeah agree, a coach will make a big difference for a guy like me, pretty sure i won't come close to that 4:15 bike though :P

where does the 5 to 10 minutes of transition times come from? bike? run?

the op's question is always fun because there's just so many ways to get to 8:59:59 that it is fun to discuss and tell canadians they're wrong about everything.

For a 9:00 IM a reasonably well balanced athlete would be looking at splits of 1hr/5hrs/3hrs - with a bit of give and take on each leg for individual sport variation and of course for the bike and the run in particular the geography of each course.[/quote]
Thank you for your post

Even at advanced age I can see being able to do the swim and bike times.

But even when I was in my 20s and 30s and weighed 150lbs at over 6’ I could never come close for that pace in running even for a 10k

So strange. And depressing lol

lol, ok

:58/4:40/3:15

That's what my 9hr would look like if I could ever manage to do it.

I think well balanced would be more like 1hr/4:45/3:15, but probably splitting hairs. If you're going for a time based goal I'd guess the chosen course would be relatively flat. To go sub 9 on a tougher course would take a much better athlete, because you're right they'd need that 3hr marathon.


Here I'll admit to a few of my strengths weaknesses.

I came darn close to breaking 9 a few times back in the early 1990's. (9:04 and IMC was my best). My splits on that day were 1:00/5:00/3:04 (and probably 2 - 4 minutes of transitions embedded in there)

I was a "weak" swimmer, strong cyclist and even stronger runner (31 min 10K runner before getting into triathlon). Now - other than aero bars, you would laugh at what we rode on back in these days. So maybe, if you are to believe all the aero watts/time savings and gains, 4:45 is possible. Given where I was at - and I rode 5:00 flat or within a couple of minutes of that at 3 - 4 different IM's - 4:45 back then for me, would have been a BIG reach. I probably could have ridden that fast, given the fitness I had, but I was confident in my run and banking on a run split close to 3:00. So I tended to ride more conservatively.

At IMC where I had my best races, I was typically out of the water somewhere in the top 50 - 100. Would move up into the top 20 -25 on the bike, and then run my way to my final place - the 9:04 time from '92 was good enough for 11th overall!

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

where does the 5 to 10 minutes of transition times come from? bike? run?

the op's question is always fun because there's just so many ways to get to 8:59:59 that it is fun to discuss and tell canadians they're wrong about everything.


1. I only ever raced IM's at IMC and IMH. Back when I was doing this in the late 1980's and early 1990's transition areas even at the larger IM races, were reasonably compact and you were in and out fairly quickly. I'd have to dig up actually hard-copy results of my races from back then, but I don't recall T1 and T2 being more and 3 - 5 minutes in total.

2. Yes - as Canadians we are wrong about everything! :-)

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

Yea transitions play a huge role. At IMAZ the past two years they were quite a bit longer than previously. So anyone on the cusp of being a sub 9, sub 10, etc athlete would've struggled. I didn't waste too much time in T1/T2 last year but my T1 was a staggering 10 minutes (I did do a fair amount but did not waste time, I don't think). Just a really long run for T1 (although really fast people were about half of my time).


only about the important stuff

Thanks for the info!

I already train between 15 and 18 hours so i should probably focus on more specific workouts. I was thinking on building my long ride up to 6 hours with some long tempo blocks slightly above race pace. For the run i was thinking of building my long run until something like 30k at 4min/km. I will look for a coach but in the meantime, do these workouts sound good or should i go even longer?

Building the bike rides up to 6h sounds good to me. Once a week a long ride (up to 6h as mentioned with some Race pace/slightly above intervalls) and a second ride with some big gear work?

I don't know your target pace in your IM (4:15min/km for 2:59 Marathon?) but a workout like 30k at 4min/k will kill you before your race even started. Build your run workout up to something like 3-4x4-5k at IM Pace with some warmup, cooldown and easy in between you will get up to 30k.

The longruns i did were like this: starting really really easy (!) and building the pace to slighly above target pace. Starting at 1:30h and increasing the duration each week up to 2:45h 3-4 weeks before the race.

Don't smoke yourself before the race even started. I see this way to often that some athletes are fit as f*** but physically and, more important, mentally not fresh.

In my opinion the most important things:
-nutrition (develop a strategy and test it in your longruns and bike rides)
-mental preparation (it will hurt really really bad when you go for a time like sub9)


The best option should be a coach. He will prevent you from overdoing.

Yea transitions play a huge role. At IMAZ the past two years they were quite a bit longer than previously. So anyone on the cusp of being a sub 9, sub 10, etc athlete would've struggled. I didn't waste too much time in T1/T2 last year but my T1 was a staggering 10 minutes (I did do a fair amount but did not waste time, I don't think). Just a really long run for T1 (although really fast people were about half of my time).


Transition areas today are MUCH bigger (there is a HUGE difference between race fields of 1500 vs nearly 3000!!). They also make it so that EVERYONE has to run the same distance these days - this was not the case back in the earlier years, as an elite/pro or seeded athlete, you (unfairly), got to run the least distance in transition.

Also, some races just have ridiculously long transitions physically due to proximity to water etc . . . I think the run from water's edge at IMLP to the transition area is 400m - 500m. That's about 2+ minutes of running right there!

I seem to recall at IMC in Penticton the way transition was set up back in those days, it was 50m - 75m to the where the Pro/Elite bikes were racked. And that was in turn, right by the Bike Exit. So you ran your bike about 10m - 20m and jumped on! That's why the whole process of T1 was 2 minutes or less. T2 was about the same.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

Strictly hypothetical since I haven’t accomplished it but I was on pace for sub 9 Florida 2018 before the Canadian in me fried in the heat but if I got lucky with weather I think I had a shot.
IM Whistler 2019 I had garbage training leading up and took the races easy and had a 9:49 including a mechanical on a very slow course so I think i have potential for sub 9 on a fast course if I put together a solid race (moved to Florida so heat is less of an issue.)

That said, no way in my wildest dreams could I do sub 1 on a sprint. At 5’10 175 with a 42” chest and 25” thighs, I got endurance and power but my legs can’t turn fast enough for that.

Close but no cigar. Proved my point. Also if you could do a sub 1 hr sprint. Then you would have been sub 9 for Florida easy. Time is not a good judge in ironman or sprints unless the courses are basically the same as well a sprint with 20 turn and 6 turn around will be much slower then a loop with no breaks. As no ironman goes perfect so all those guys at 8;30, 9, 9:30. Also had issues and could have gone a bit faster with no issues.

Like I said if I guy is looking at sub 9 as a goal he better first be able to do sub 1 hr sprint or he will have alot of bad races and bad excuses usually on things out of his control ??? But mostly just made an unreasonable goal.

---

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

No excuses. Just context. I’m fairly new to all three triathlon disciplines but I know I’ll eventually break 9hrs. Just stating that I know I’m not too far off breaking 9hrs on a faster course but doubt I’ll ever get under 1hr for a sprint.

Train yourself to go sub 1 hr for a sprint then you will be able to do a sub 9 ironman. Trying going the other way you will break, burn out and give up before you reach peak fitness and skill.

---

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

With the high volume you're already doing and a super fast 5k time you have the vo2 max already. Your bike plan of JRA with 1-2 group rides/week is less than stellar. Do some structured intervals on the bike if you're not already doing those. For IM, lots of longer intervals are common (4x8minutes, 3x10 minutes) but some 3-5 minute intervals are helpful to get work in above your ftp too. I find that I can't do as much high intensity running stuff as I can high intensity bike stuff without risking injury.

I dont buy that someone who specifically trains to go sub 1 hour could then (in the same block/focus) go sub 9.

I dont disagree that someone, somewhere has gone sub 1 hour in a sprint... then, later goes sub 9 or... during (years?) of prep for a sub 9 performace has clocked a sub 1 hour for a sprint. But I'd wager those occurances are less than frequent.

I think one needs to plan, assume they are not the special case, put in the work and focus to acheive their specific goal I've never gone sub 1 hour in a sprint, but can appreiciate the work that it takes can be compared to go sub 9 (having done that). Neither are an easy thing.

The OP makes comparison to sprints. If the ultimate goal is to go sub 9 its not the same and requires specific (different) prep to both acheive that goal and 'enjoy' (that is hilarious) the race. Not saying they wont crush it ( I hope they do). I say that as someone that has gone from sprints to olympics to half to fulls.

I'd fucking die if I took my 1:05 sprint and 1:55 (short bike.. whomp whomp) olympic ass and tried to race a sub 9 hour full.

---

________________________________________________________
Taylor Rogers

2024: IM Hamburg

that is my point. you understand with your short course pace results, you wouldn't make sub 9 and would blow up. So you race smarter.

I never said with the same training protocol or program I said a program will not take you to sub 9. You need to have the tools x,y,z to be able to do the right work. and unless you have the skills and talent etc for a sub 1 hr sprint you shouldn't just grab a program for sub 9 . It just will not work.

---

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

I come from a running background and what you are saying makes a ton of sense to me after watching a bunch of people shoot for and either fail or succeed at 3 hour marathons.

Speed at shorter distances is a necessary but woefully insufficient condition for success. If you can't break 19 minutes for a 5k, you're going to have a hell of a time trying for a 3-hour marathon even if you do everything else right. If you can break 19 minutes for a 5k, you still have to get nutrition, fueling, pacing, heat stress, technical issues, etc right and it's still easy to hit the wall and fail. It's sad to see people who do everything else right but just don't have the speed to break 3 fail at it because they've put in a big training cycle for something that wasn't really attainable.

roger that.

The biggest mistake in Long distance Triathlon is training for distance of a race over top speeds, strength , and moving efficiently.

Training Distance leads to injury, boredom, lack of quality training, and becoming the same pace every workout.

People start to think If I can hold x pace for one hour I can hold it for two. No wrong.

The elites of the world drop 2-3 % slower every time you double the time of activity.
The amateurs can drop between 4-25% every time you double the time of activity.

Why the elites only train speed (skill of movement and rhythm) strength (load of impact and bounce), moving efficiently (getting rid of improper moments which lead to deceleration and injuries).

You can go short distance without emphasis on these qualities but they show the longer you go.

The Op should be able to do it if he can sub 60 a sprint. He need the right coach not program to make sure he isn't wasting time doing the things he already good at.


that is enough for me I am out.

---

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

Thanks for the detailed advice, yeah i think (if all goes well) i'll start at 4.15/km.

Aren't a few 5k repeats at IM goal pace way to slow to prepare your body for an IM run? Shouldn't you at least do those at open marathon pace?

You can also do it like this: 3-4x4-5k (1k @ 4:25; 2k@ 4:15; 1-2k @4:05). These workouts are all just examples and maybe these intervalls don't work for you. As I said a good coach should be the best option.

But in my opinion it's ok to run at target pace. For most athletes the limiting factor in an ironman is the energy. I think you should teach your body to work as efficient as possible at your IM-Pace.

If you want a lower cost alternative to a coach that is still dynamic and will adapt to your personal abilities, timeline and performance, check out our Plans at 2PEAK. We have had many athletes break that barrier and with your talent over shorter distances i am confident you could be another.

Cheers and keep training!
2PEAK.com

I am not sure, he is a solid runner with a 15 min 5k, so 30 k @ 4/km wouldn't be that taxing and well above open marathon pace. I know of one ~9 hour IM guy that does 30 km long runs at 4-4:15/km on a regular basis.