Are Ironman Times Slower cause the Pros rarely race Short Course

Triathlon Forum
1

Back in the 80’s the top pros raced every distance. From Ironman to Olympic. In fact, guys like Molina were racing Olympic tri every other weekend it seemed, all summer (remember that incredible 1985 season…) and then tacking on Nice and or Hawaii at the end of the year.

Anyway, it seemed that all the pros raced fast long and short. In 1989, Mark Allen beat Dave Scott at Hawaii. Both these guys had to run low 2:40 killing each other. In 1990, Mark Allen also won the first ITU World’s. Smyers, Welch and Van Lierde, seem to be the last two that were able to win or podium at Short Course World’s and then win Ironman. Kate Allen is the only won lately to win a short course championship (Athens) and an Ironman.

Now few win at Olympic distance and Ironman. In fact they barely race at Olympic distance. Macca and Lessing are likely the closest to this model, but arguably, even they seem to dominate at half Ironman and have won Ironmans (albeit not Hawaii), but rarely race over the Olympic distance anymore.

It seems that the times overall have also got slower, not just at Hawaii, but across the board at other Ironmans.

So is the talent weaker at Ironman, or is everyone just slower than yesteryear cause no one is racing short course anymore ? Or is the NBC van just further up the road on the Queen K as some might argue.

2

Today’s LC pros are just slow. Just kidding. I think today’s short course guys are just faster. Currently if your not able to go sub 1:50 or faster your leaving the race empty handed. Back then you could go 1:54-:55.

I think ITU racing has changed the landscape quite a bit. There are fewer local short course races paying money, no more Bud light tri series and only a few major non drafting short course races left. The swim and run speed in today’s races have gone up. Yesteryear Mackle, Fitch and McCarthy would swim 17:00, the main pack 18ish. Now the main pack swims 17:25 or faster. Run times were in the 31-32 range at the top and you could stay in the top ten with a 33 and even a 34 10k. Now if you run a 33:00 your getting your arse kicked and going backward through the field hoping for a top 20.

3

i would agree to most, except: there’s been no exodus of talent from short-course racing. look at the whole handfuls of guys in an average ITU (who most of us have never heard of) who can swim, ride, and run ridiculously fast.

and yes, i’ve always agreed with sebastian coe that “slow, easy training makes for slow, easy athletes.” whenever short-coursers and long-coursers square off at the half, these days, the short folks take it. another generation - ie. sam mcglone, natasha filiol, etc - are on the way up. i think you need to build a big well of basic speed, racing experience, tactical knowledge and etc., and you simply can’t do that if you’re an IM specialist. i think most of the guns of the last few years had a good s-c background, and in the future that’s going to be the way forward.

-mike

4

Brian, so what you are saying is that there is no money to be made as a long course stud by dropping down to short course these days cause it is just so scary fast. That is a good point, but what about the “training and sharpening” benefits. You just can’t get that in a training environment. In any event, most OD tris in years past were won with times well below 1:50.

5

I agree there is a huge benefit to be made by dropping down to train. I think most top guys probably undereserve themselves by not doing enough of this type of training.

I’ll disagree with the times, back in the late 80’s to early 90’s no one went 1:49 unless the course was short, that I can remember. I don’t think I ever did a BLTS race where the winning time was faster than 1:52 or so. Pigg caused times to drop a bit from what they were before he got there, then I can remember Chuckie V tearing it up for a season dropping times a bit more, but sub 1:50 I don’t recall. It then it seemed that BLTS fizzled about mid 90’s and other major races like Wilkes Barre, the Vancouver tri, and some others I can not recall declined in importance as the ITU circuit grew.

6

I have to correct you on some of your times from the past, guys were not doing 1:54 on legit courses and cashing checks. The winners were consistentaly doing in the 1:48 range, and there were many in the low 1:50’s. I know, I was one of them. Believe me, Mackel or Deittrich would both swim with Walton today, which no one else can do. Those 3 are in a different class than all the rest, the main group could not hold their feet…Just for reference, Mackle swam 4:23 for 500yds, and Wolfgang went 4:29 400m IM, and both were great open water guys…As for the running, I think you must be quoting draft legal times, if you look at legit non drafting races, it is still high 31’s to 33’s that get run by the pros, same as Allen, Welch, Bustos, and a host of others from those days…I think that the sprint guys are comprable with yesteryears greats, but the Ironman times are definately slower, and it’s not the camera van effect…(-:

7

Monty, if I recall correctly, both you and Richard Browne went sub 1:48 at the Forest City Olympic Tri in London Ontario Canada in July 1986. Now does this bring back any memories ?

Seriously Brian, all these guys were going well sub 1:48 in the mid 80’s. We need Molina to jump in here, but he could likely rhyme off 10 races in 85 alone where he went in the 1:46 to 1:48 range and most of this was on stock double diamond round tube bikes with no aero wheels and 32 three cross spokes, no aerobars, slack seat position.

8

Ok, my memory is bad. Sorry guys! :slight_smile:

9

Richard Brown, that’s a name that was lost in my memory, but now I do remember, I think we had a pretty tough race that day. Now I don’t remember if I won or not. Have to go look at the old plaque and check the place…If you also look at some of the old Chicago tri times, I believe Mark Allan did 1:46 to 1:48’s. Flat and fast course…

10

Monty…sorry, Richard beat you on that day :-(.

11

Floating other reasons

a) maybe there are more IM races and more pros, more pros might dilute the talent pool at the sharp end.

b) Also they dont compete against each other as often (other than Kona) due to higher # of IM races.

12

Crap!!! WD went 4.29 400LC IM??? No way!!! I want evidence… that is smoking fast… and at that time would have put him easily into the top 40 or so in the world… not calling your bluff dude but i would like to see a results page.

13

this “faster work makes for better LC racing” is something that i am seriously looking into… not really a fan of the LSD aerobic way to LC racing… no gordo training for me fer sure… i am looking into what coggan has to say to assist me in moving forward with this awesome sport.

McGlone has been doing very well and I have to throw a prop in here for Chris Martin who just won the states Champion series race at Timberman… he is coached by McGlone’s coach and has been racing VERY VERY VERY WELL this season and i look forward to seeing how he performs at Kona in two months.

GO CHRIS!!!

14

no one else can swim with walton…i’ve got 5 letters for you, POTTS

and if you think those guys had good pool times just look his up, or maybe i will just for fun, but he was definitely around 4:20 in the 400m IM when he lost to namesnik and dolan and the trials in '96
.

15

"but he could likely rhyme off 10 races in 85 alone where he went in the 1:46 to 1:48 range and most of this was on stock double diamond round tube bikes with no aero wheels and 32 three cross spokes, no aerobars, slack seat position. "

Dev,

I wonder about this stuff all the time.

Bike times aren’t all that much faster even with all that aero equipment (I love the aero stuff too!) and certainly not as much faster as manufacturers claim you save if you add it all up. Then, nutritionally, it seems you here a whole lot more about stomach problems since the advent of race specific foods. And how about hyponutremia - we never had that problem until they invented salt tablets.

It makes you wonder if we are all victems of a huge marketing conspiracy hoax!

PS - FYI, we have never met but I believe we swam and biked together almost all of LP…then you left me daggling on the run!

16

It makes you wonder if we are all victems of a huge marketing conspiracy hoax!

and you can throw in the proliferation of coaching services to that mix.

Going back to your point about marketing - the science is clearly in favour of the aero stuff. Some of our roadie group went into a wind tunnel and there is a definite advantage to aero stuff (even for roadies) but you cant beat an strong powerful engine (and a fast tail wind!) Maybe we are looking at this aero stuff backwards, its very rare that an IM race is won by seconds where as seconds make a huge difference in time trials, so the cumulative aero advantage isnt as obvious in IM racing.

17

Even with all the aero du-dads, it took until 2005, for Zabriskie to break Lemond’s all time Versailles to Paris TdF ITT speed record from 1989. Granted, Lemond had Scott Aerobars and a disk, but the rest was all stock round tubing.

18

Dev,

It seems to me that you have quite a few variables in between your cause and effects with your original post. One reason why we don’t see such a mix of racing today might be the demands of the ITU travelling/racing and the need to qualify even as a Pro for Ironman. Plus I’m uncomfortable about an analysis of the top pros - it’s widely believed that they have quite a different genetics from your average age grouper.

Racing olympic to get fast at ironman. Makes a lot of sense to me. Look at Paula Radcliffe’s recent marathon - bashing out 5ks at her top speed, over and over again. There comes a point when your ironman speed has got to be pretty close to your full out speed in order to win. And if that’s good enought to win olympic distance you’re in the money.

Here’s my question - how many of you are finding that you’re getting good crossover benefits between olympic racing and ironman, and how many of you succeed at both?

19

Jstuart, I can’t say that Olympic distance racing helps my Ironman racing,but I do know that Ironman training, helps me at the shorter distances of half Ironman and Olympic. I just have a larger base to draw upon than if I trained exclusively for shorter events.

I do know that my friends who raced pro at the Olympic distance did pretty well similar volume to Ironman guys during the base training phase. The difference is the “in season stuff”.

Years ago when there were not so many mid season Ironman options, guys would do lots of volume early, race half and Olympic tri mid season and then do a final volume+intensity push in the leadup to hawaii, and the times were smoking fast.

Taking this over to the age grouper population, we did the same. Base first, then race short a lot, and then build up to a late season Ironman. Right down the field, it seems that the times were faster at Ironman.

Now (in the age group ranks), we do base, and we just keeping doing volume as we build to Ironman. We do all kinds of Ironman specific long workouts and bricks, but people just don’t race as often or as much as we used to.

I really believe that most people are actually “under-raced” in the age group ranks. They get to their A race and don’t have the experience, physically and psychologically to deal with tactics and calamities. If you want to get good at racing, you have to practice racing. Anyone can be a stud in training when you don’t have a timing chip on.

I remember Monty speaking to me at Ironman Roth 93. He was training with Jurgen Zack in Cologne and aparently every Wed was 200K ride in 5 hours (40 kph). Every weekend was an Olympic or sprint tri for “speedwork”. To me, this sounds ideal (OK, notch the 40 kph down to 33-35). Not tenable for your average age grouper, but it sure makes a lot of sense. Zack and Cristian Bustos both went sub 8:10 that day. I believe third place was Rainier Mueller who incidently finished second to Simon Lessing at ITU World’s 1992 in Muskoka.

20

Thanks Dev. I agree with your point of view.

Jon - remeber, the bald guy from Ottawa.