Per Herbert Krabel’s Article on ST for the Top 15. Fun to calculate your Lange weight.
Per Herbert Krabel’s Article on ST for the Top 15. Fun to calculate your Lange weight.
Cool. Could you instead sort on run splits (not final placing?)
Nice work. While the entire field is reasonably homogenous Lange and Sanders are both outliers, in opposite ways. It really shows up while watching them run.
My ratio is 2.65, so theoretically I could podium at Kona.
Could you do the female field as well?
Per Herbert Krabel’s Article on ST for the Top 15. Fun to calculate your Lange weight.
Are we sure that Lange is actually that tall?
Pretty sure that Lange is 5’10" which should be 178. The more telling thing is you pretty well have to be 5’10" to 6’2" and quite lean. But we already knew that.
Interesting, I’m exact same height and wright as Lange. I always thought I was too skinny, now I will have to find another excuse…
I am well off the chart at 188 cm and 84kg
.
I’m with NickAg here. I guess I have no excuses. I’m 178 and around 70 kg for racing and I will never break 9 hours. I seemed to have perma-peaked around 9h15 for a full. I guess I can’t complain that it is a body composition problem.
Pretty sure that Lange is 5’10" which should be 178. The more telling thing is you pretty well have to be 5’10" to 6’2" and quite lean. But we already knew that.
Relatedly, I’m not sure this height/weight ratio makes sense to compare except for people that are very near the same height. I am ~5’5"-ish and upper 120s, so about the same as Lange on that ratio, but not nearly as lean as him or some of these other top guys.
Pretty sure that Lange is 5’10" which should be 178. The more telling thing is you pretty well have to be 5’10" to 6’2" and quite lean. But we already knew that.
Relatedly, I’m not sure this height/weight ratio makes sense to compare except for people that are very near the same height. I am ~5’5"-ish and upper 120s, so about the same as Lange on that ratio, but not nearly as lean as him or some of these other top guys.
My thoughts exactly.
Height to weight ratio is not a particularly useful statistic. It doesn’t really tell you much about the person unless you’re comparing similar heights. The data needs to be normalised. Whoever put that chart together doesn’t sem to have known what it was for! No offense intended 
Perhaps something like BMI would be more useful if the idea is to compare these athletes and ourselves by “slimness”. It can be easily calculated from the same data.
Perhaps something like BMI would be more useful if the idea is to compare these athletes and ourselves by “slimness”.
There’s not a ton of data here with only 15 athletes, but I nonetheless did some small investigation. BMI was uncorrelated with height, so it seems like BMI might be an okay model to use to compare across height. The average was right around 22. Interestingly, Lange was a massive outlier, and there was a strong trend toward HIGHER BMI correlating with HIGHER placing amongst this group if you took Lange out. My takeaway is that if your BMI is sub 23 then there is likely more important things to worry about, though I’d still be concerned that the heights of these guys were too closely grouped to be confident that this is true for shorter athletes, like myself.
Are we sure langes weight is correct, the other people around his wieght are 7-10 kg heavier?
Are we sure langes weight is correct, the other people around his wieght are 7-10 kg heavier?
Lange’s weight is correct.
One of my big takeaways was that the top 6 were all 178-180 cm. The weights varied in a narrow band inside those heights other than Lange who was an insanely light outlier (almost 7 kilos lighter than the rest). It is amazing that he can ride that fast being so light on generally a non climbing course. His aerodynamics are pretty darn clean. Faris claims that he rides at 4W per kilo, which puts his average watts at 252W. That’s no joke at that weight. Lionel also put out the same watts per kilo (around 4W per kilo) and obviously since his brute watts are so munch higher (~310W) he goes faster given that his aerodynamics are cleaner than in the past. Then we get to the run and Lionel is carrying 10 extra kilos for the entire marathon over Lange at the same height.
I’m 170cm and 68kg, so also a ratio of ±2.5…
Now the question, why do we rarely see pro’s (finishing well, doesn’t even have to be in Kona) that are around the 170cm mark? All are about 180cm… Now obviously they probably have longer arms etc which could aid in their swimming, likely they are heavier so easier to put down power on the bike, and longer stride which helps on the run I guess… But being a tad bit shorter has to have their advantages as well? Less drag on the bike, lighter so although a shorter stride they should be able to run quick too (Kenians in marathons aren’t that tall either, although not a good comparison) and I’d think they are also less influenced by the heat than a taller/larger person?
Yeah, 193/ 77. 2.5, so that isn’t the obstacle. More worries about my watts per kilo ratio!
They’ve got to get through the swim and bike in contention for the advantage of being shorter/lighter once running to get them to a high OA placing. As you mentioned, the taller you get - the heavier you usually get (absolute power) and being taller lends itself to better swimming for many reasons.
They’ve got to get through the swim and bike in contention for the advantage of being shorter/lighter once running to get them to a high OA placing. As you mentioned, the taller you get - the heavier you usually get (absolute power) and being taller lends itself to better swimming for many reasons.
Let’s take the 40 kph mythical 4:30 Kona bike split. Every athlete who wants to bike 4:30 has to push their 700C wheels through the air using the same number of base watts (more or less, let’s assume everyone has the same wheels and rubber for a second). So the athlete with more top line watts is relatively taxed less for the fixed cost of the wheels. The bike frame and body are proportional to some degree to size, but not entirely. In any case, let’s roll with that assumption. Then you get to the run and let’s take the 170 cm athlete, 180 and 190. Generally weight will scale with height (although you can see for the top 2 in Kona they are basically the same height but are 20 lbs different in weight…but it’s actually a good example of my next point). Generally the taller athlete, will have more weight to generate more power with on the bike (thus faster bike split), but will have more weight to haul around on the run and will generate more top line heat. The 170 cm athlete, should run the fastest, being the lightest (let’s assume all have relatively proportional engines and 170, 180 and 190 cm athletes have the same weight per unit of height). the heaviest guy gains the most on the bike and loses the most on the run (not just due to carrying weight and pounding but also due to more heat generation for the same meters . We saw that dynamic in the same height between Lange and Sanders.
In any case, I never really gave much thought to all of this because in every local tri, there are all shapes and sizes. Then I got to Kona 2006 and literally everyone around me was 4-8 inches taller (I am 5’6"…very few age group men in that range…that seems to be the height range of a lot of age group women though in Kona) and you see that height zone reflected in the Kona top 15 men. You get a few outliers under 5’7", like Welch, or Josh Amberger etc. But if you do the basic math, you see why being too short hurts on the bike-swim and if you are too tall, it hurts on the run. So you see in the top 15, what the correct height range is for long course tris for maximum performance. Every sport has their “natural selection height/weight”. Lange is actually a bit of an outlier on weight, but then he gets everything back on the run.