i have 109.97 miles on the bike and 26.48 on the run

176.6k on the bike. 41.8k on the run.

My Garmin didn’t pick up satellites immediately, I ended up with 109.2 when I look at other strava rides:
109.6
109.6
109.7
110.0
110.1
109.6
1:09.5

Garmin died at mile 24 of run... I was getting my mile laps about 400-800 meters past each mile marker, fwiw.

---

-
"It's nice to be great, but far greater to be nice"

This Strava link should take you to a flyby of athletes on the run course, if you disregard those that don't start at the start and end at the finish you get between 26 and 26.1 Looks like between 109.6 and 109.7 on the bike.

---

---

Save: $50 on Speed Hound Recovery Boots | $20 on Air Relax| $100 on Normatec| 15% on Most Absorbable Magnesium

Blogs: Best CHEAP Zwift / Bike Trainer Desk | Theragun G3 vs $140 Bivi Percussive Massager | Normatec Pulse 2.0 vs Normatec Pulse | Speed Hound vs Normatec | Air Relax vs Normatec | Q1 2018 Blood Test Results | | Why HED JET+ Is The BEST value wheelset

I recorded 109.77 & 109.74 (watch and bike GPS, respectively), and 26.26 for the run.

you're only supposed to do the paperboy on the bike ;-)

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I had 110 & 26.1 on my 520 & 735xt respectively.

Here's the question for IMTX folks. Who botched the distances? Weren't there turn-around cones on the bike and run?

While we're at it, did we ever determine why the age group bike course was not marshaled?

For an event labeled as the "North American Championship" these are issues I would not expect.

109.69 miles on the bike.

25.98 miles on the run.

Dunno about how the turnarounds were marked- I'm usually willing to chalk up a half-mile of error to me not seeing where to hit the transition button on my watch.

Word on the street is that course marshals were moving back and forth either too fast or in too close proximity to racers for the local cops, and so the marshal vehicles were pulled off the roads.

I'm not fast enough to hang with anybody (as my 6:14 bike leg will attest to), but there were packs of 30-40 riders out there either coordinating their rides or enjoying the fact that they were all coincidentally the same speed, depending on who you ask.

I have distanced as follows (recorded by Suunto Ambit Peak 3):

Bike - 109.8 (I realized I was still in T1 mode on my watch on the opening stretch to the first right turn so there were s probably 0.1mi missing)

Run - 26.1

My Garmin recorded 110 even for the bike, and 25.6 for the run. I am pretty confident I hit the interval button as I turned the corner where they were applying sunscreen coming out of the change tents.

109.56 on the bike
25.79 on the run

I did start my watch late on the run maybe by a minute or two, past the Groggan's mill bridge. My Strava profile is in my sig with the files

---

Strava

109.7 for the bike and 26.1 on the run. Happy to share garmin/strava files.

The funny thing is that the course was short last year too, so I was expecting a short course coming in . . . not sure why IM felt the need to say they just decided to shorten it the morning of the race.

I had -
Garmin 925 run: 26.11 and bike: 109.77
Garmin 520 had 109.58

-Mark

I run the 935xt and 800 on my bike and both had 109.77 miles.

My 935 had 26.2 miles for the run, first time it ever has measured a marathon a marathon!

---

---

"Only those who risk going too far can possibly find out how far one can go." T.S. Elliot | Cycle2Tri.com
Sponsors: SciCon | | Every Man Jack

109.6
25.9

The course was different on lap 1 (250 on the course before me) and lap 3 (thousands of loops completed).

Cones had been kicked over, the spectators were getting in the way “encouraging” cutting corners and a huge increase walkers which encourages passing inside the corners.

But I think the biggest culprit: there was a line of portos. I saw no one stop at the beginning. If you accessed the portos from the back you knocked off 50 yardS. I only saw one person do this, it was on the last loop. I suspect it became popular as the race wore on.

Run: 26.2 http://tpks.ws/...LF3HQZPCSFBK6CALWIHI
Bike:176 according to srm with speed sensor.
Sam

Slowman wrote:

and who had a GPS on it? who raced it? because i'm getting 177km on the bike from a fair number, but the run, those numbers are all over the place, from 25.2mi to over 26mi.

I did the event last year and had 110 for the bike.

FWIW, there is an article in the Houston Chronicle:

https://www.chron.com/...2.php?ipid=happening


.

---

Once, I was fast. But I got over it.

I had 109.8 on both my 935 and my 520.

I hit start on my run a smidge late, but still recorded 26.1 miles. I might have missed 100 yards or so.

109.7 on the bike, 25.66 on the run via my 935.

On the run, though, my Garmin was set to auto-pause when stopped. And there were a few spots where I stopped long enough for it to pause, and it wouldn't restart for about 50-100 yards or so.

I had 110.4 on the bike and 26.4 on the run. Almost identical to last year.

110 on the bike. 25.98 on the run.

This. It’s the same as last year and there was zero fuss then. Why is everyone so shocked this year?