I am not a particular big fan of TDB. Not sure how well the drafting rule is respected during the IM (heck, he won 4 IM and got 2 drafting penalties).

However, his 2001 race was quite awesome. OK, not a sub 8h, but the conditions were brutal, he stayed strong the whole way, ran a great marathon and overall won by 15'. On paper it does not look as strong as 8hrs, but it was a great race.

One needs to be very careful when talking about greatness (and many other things too).

Tim DeBoom may or not be great. Personally I think he is Great. Just to win an Ironman justifies that moniker.

I don't think he will be RECOGNIZED as great however, for the reasons outlined in your post.

There are a huge number of great people out there. It's just that most of them don't get recognised for it, or get the press necessary for everyone else to realise it. Hell, I'm great, you just haven't heard about me yet. With all the hurdles (real and imagined) I've had to jump through, I've excelled and qualify as great. I just haven't got the reconition and press I deserve.

Tim DeBoom is or isn't great. He is not FAMOUS however. Paula, the Big 4, etc. They are all great, probably just as great as Tim, but they are Famous as well.

As far as triathlon is concerned, going hard, pushing past your limits (ie that famed 110%) doesn't necessarily make you fast (just look at me). Likewise, going fast, like Tim DeBoom, and possibly? racing within your limits, for the win, doesn't mean you're going hard. Being fast doesn't make you great, pushing your limits doesn't make you great. Who knows what makes you great? I dunno.



TriDork

---

TriDork

"Happiness is a myth. All you can hope for is to get laid once in a while, drunk once in a while and to eat chocolate every day"

Your logic is flawed. It is like saying Lance is not great because he doesn't try to humiliate his opponents. He comes to Kona to win, not to see how close he can come to blowing up.

Two wins does not determine greatness. If Tim can win 4 or 5 or 6 of these, he will be considered great, regardless of how hard you perceive he is racing and, even if his wins are "slow" compared to the record.

---

--------------
Frank,
An original Ironman and the Inventor of PowerCranks

Orcaman writes: Tim Debooms comment is "If people want to think I am out there loafing in for the win because I didn't go eight hours, then tough, I'm there to race the current race, not everyone from the past."

To me greatness and legend is reserved for the people who did the unthinkable, who dug in and went to levels never achieved. Who gave 110%..not just 100%. Tim is good..no doubt about it..but he seems to be content in just winning not in setting a mark, leaving an impression on the race.
---------
Where does Tim say, "I don't give 110%, just 100%." Maybe going sub-8 hours in 2001 and 2002 would have required Tim or anyone to go 150%. No one has gone sub 8 in Kona - not Allen, not Molina, no Scott, not Tinley. Kona is a race unlike any other because of the unpredictability. An 8:24 in Kona might be equal to a sub 8 on any other course. When Peter Reid went sub 8 hours in Austria it was said that the run course was short. Granted he went fast as s**t, but the course was apparently short. Guys who have done sub 8 in Germany - granted they are fast as well, but Germany is very well known to be a huge draft fast as well.

I know Tim personally. I think Tim is a great guy and I think he's an unbelievable athlete. As someone else mentioned, I don't know if he's one of the greats - yet. I think he's on his way. Will he never be considered great because he never broke 8 hours or in your mind, never gave more than 100%? Don't know, but I wouldn't bet against it. If Tim wins this year, he's in a very elite group of guys in the history of IM Hawaii that have not only won multiple times, but multiple consecutive times. To me, that makes Tim one of the greats.

Dennis

I love it when people (and our society is full of them) judge someone on a single statement. those who judge this way are (pardon me) just foolish.

Seems to me Tim was just expressing the fact that he races tactically. But that's just me giving him the benefit of the doubt.

On greatness, I'm thinking maybe that could (possibly) not be Tim's goal. Maybe Orcaman it's yours. But if I had to put a lable of "great" on you or Tim Deboom... well it wouldn't be a difficult choice.

Greatness (or fame would probably be a better word here) is fleeting and useful in a world of hype (which is where we all live) but it's real value is small (IMHO) Tim seems like a real guy who has worked real hard to achieve the goals he's set... seems to have a good wife, brother... family and all. That seems like real value to me.

Greatness is all relative.

Is Deboom as great as guys/gals who have won it 6 + times? No

Is he greater than someone who has never even finished it? Yes

We can't all be as great as "Orcaman", but maybe if Deboom sometime achieves a Hawaii sub-8 he will at least be close. Orcaman must undoubtedly have many sub-8 finishes since he feels so comfortable casting stones at Mr. Deboom.

"Greatness is all relative."

His IM Kona times are only the 13th and 15th fastest. This will not qualify for "greatness" along with Allen, Scott, LVL. However, he is the best at the time in which he competed.

Is this a troll or what?

Any 2X winner of the hawaii IM is great - without question. Is he a legend? Not yet. But if he keeps winning, regardless of his times, he will be. Why would he risk blowing up by going "150%" if all it takes to win is 110%. That would be just stupid. He does what it takes to win. That's both smart, and great.

You define great as unforgettable. Sian and Wendy crawled to a 4th and 5th place finish - does that make them great. No, it makes them couragous athletes with a lot of heart. But not great.

"Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in a gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat. It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena; whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends himself in a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows in the end the triumph of high achievement; and who, at worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat."
- Theodore Roosevelt



My opinion is that Tim Deboom is great. The feats of Allen and Scott, are great, but they are also memorable. Deboom is methodical, almost mechanical in his preparation and racing. While this may not make him memorable, it cannot take away from the greatness of his achievements.

---

-"Bottom line, it's the Hunter, not the arrow. Ride what you want."

http://fulltriathlonracing.blogspot.com/

I just hate that term "give 110%". In my experiences the people that use it seldom put forth even 75%. DeBoom gives what it takes to win.

---

In Reply To

---

"Greatness is all relative."

His IM Kona times are only the 13th and 15th fastest. This will not qualify for "greatness" along with Allen, Scott, LVL. However, he is the best at the time in which he competed.[/reply]

I believe you may be confusing 'great' with fast. I believe the two can be independent. If you look at any number of great finishes in endurance sports it is not always the fastest athlete we remember sometimes it is the athlete who we admire the most not only for their speed and ability but also for the intangible qualities that make them great.

That being said I have no opinion either way on TDM he is fast enough and from what I have read he works hard and achieves his goals so it does not matter what my opinion of the man is.

By the way, Macca had a GREAT bike last year and Petaki(sp)had a GREAT TDF.

Bob Sigerson

He has been the best in the world 2 years in a row. Thats pretty damm good. Didnt see Macca or Leder on the Podium. Action not words?

---

-----------------------:)
SUPPORT OPERATION REBOUND:
http://www.operationreboundcalifornia.kintera.org/ejs3

Kestrel Syndicate
Macca Fan Club

Hmmm... looks like you're judging Orcaman based on a single statement. Would that make you foolish?

Another way to look at it is that if Tim can win a couple more at Kona, he may be considered GREAT because he's the smartest racer out there.

IF Tim wins a couple of more at Kona, he will be considered great. But he is not great, he sucks wheel and saves his legs, then runs a good marathon. Hell, he gets off the bike in a pack of about 6 every race. He races smart or cheap, take your pick,they let him suck wheel and he does it. I happen to think that winning does not make you great, it is how you win. Tim wins by default. Somebody blows up and he passes them. He does not challenge them. If people consistently blow up and he wins, hats off. The "great ones" do not RELY on other people to fail for them to win.

I used to really hate drafters until I came to the realization last year that just about all the professionals and elites do it. If you're going to dislike Deboom, you're also going to have to dislike just about every other professional..

I've heard that IMH and other IM North America events are pretty well officiated these days. This is probably thanks to a single individual who is willing to make tough calls. But I've also heard that in international IM's and in the old days of Hawaii that is/was not the case. Austria, Australia, Switzerland, etc. are supposedly ride with pacelines, as was early 90's Kona.

The irony is that Deboom was one of the few speaking out against the drafting that went on at Lifetime Fitness.

Was Lance Armstrong "great" after he won two Tours? Is he any more great now that he almost lost his fifth? Granted this is a slightly different situation because Tim did not have to come back from cancer, but I think the analogy applies. Lance was great after he won the first, but his second affirmed his greatness and now he's reached legendary status with the other five time winners.

It doesn't matter how he won. He won them. Period. We should accept his greatness despite (or because of) his mechanical, tactical, and unapologetic style of winning. Wait, who am I talking about? Lance or Tim. It seems both go about winning THEIR race the same way. Both have made their goal race their ONLY goal and have done what they've put their mind and focus to do. Why do we as "fans" crave the dramatic?

Tim De Boom is a great triathlete and until someone proves they can beat him at Kona, he's THE MAN. Tim De Boom has won two WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS in a row. That's two more than a lot of other "great" triathletes out there...

When Tim wins five in a row (if that's the criteria) I don't see how anyone can question his greatness based on the way he wins. I don't know the man, but I'm in awe of his ability to use his mind to outsmart everyone in the field. Does he have as much physical talent as everyone else? I don't know, all I know, is that he's the one breaking the tape at the finish. The same goes for Lance. Both are great athletes BECAUSE they use their minds to maximize their ability to win the big one.

It's interesting that we don't apply the time-oriented standard of greatness to other endurance sports, especially running. For example, Frank Shorter is almost universally recognized as one of the "greats" despite the fact that he never set world records and his fastest marathon was in the 2:11 range. Much like Deboom, he ran to win and often faced unfavorable weather conditions when in his best shape (such as Montreal in 1976).

I wonder if Scott Tinley would have raced as hard as he did all the time if he knew then about recovery, longevity in the sport, peak fitness, as we know today. He won Hawaii twice. But it seems that he was overtrained at the rest of his world championships in HI. Deboom comes to Hawaii in shape every year and ready to race. I bet he'll be around for a few more years, too. I'd say he is great. He won the big one twice. LVL with the fastest Kona time ever can't even say that.

________________________________________________________________________

---

___________________________
And the road gets rocky along the way
But if it gets too smooth, it's time to call it a day
-Kinks

I tend to agree with fireluv's opinion. Tim is a winner, yes. But he's not great. Luc Van Lierde is great! Dave Scott and Mark Allen are great, as well as others. But Tim is not great. And Lance was great even BEFORE he won his first TDF. Now he's super-great! The way he overcame everything this year to win the TDF instantly qualifies him as one of the greatest of the great - if you didn't think he was great already. Nuff said.

"He won the big one twice. LVL with the fastest Kona time ever can't even say that."

Van Lierde won Hawaii in 1996 and 1999.

from fireluv

" I happen to think that winning does not make you great, it is how you win. Tim wins by default. Somebody blows up and he passes them. He does not challenge them."

_____________________________________

The reason the people were blowing up all around him was because he WAS challenging them. Just happened to be on the run when it mattered instead of on the bike. I'd say the 5:40 miles were pretty challenging.

From xtri.com's race report:

McCormack entered the six mile out and back along Alii Drive with an adrenaline fuelled spring in his step. All his triathlon life he had dreamed of winning the Ironman and now, here he was, striding along Alii Drive with clear road ahead of him. How cruelly the Kona gods dealt with him. By the time he turned up Palani hill to the Queen K, Hellriegel and Chabaud had passed him and he was a shuffling, pain filled wreck. At the first aid station on the Queen K, he slumped down on a volunteer’s chair. “I’ve had a great bike, but my legs won’t run” he was saying, almost to himself. “I just can’t run.” He poured water on his head and put ice in his cap in an attempt to stave off the sweltering heat, but it was too late. This guy was toast.

Macca wasn’t the only one suffering. Stadler cracked and took four and a half hours to complete the marathon whilst Hellriegel, even though he was by now leading, didn’t look too comfortable either. Running in second place, Chabaud had gastric problems to deal with and a couple of ‘tactical pukes’ from the Frenchman decorated the side of Alii Drive. Quite suddenly, the eight minute gap to the chasers didn’t look so big after all.

Of that group, it was the three most dangerous runners who now appeared to have the upper hand. Last year’s 1-2, DeBoom and Brown, were running side by side with a rejuvenated Peter Reid, rediscovering his Ironman legs after a wretched, DNF filled 12 months. The trio played ‘Pacman’ to those ahead right out to the far turn on Alii Drive before the 5:40 per mile pace claimed its first victim, Brown. “I could only hang with that pace until the 8km mark when I had to let them go,” he later said. “It was either do that or blow up soon after.”