but on that note , there are many people always asking what is the easiest course.
i wonder if ironman is doing this on purpose to retain athletes by giving them “PR’s”
In fairness to IM, they have tried to put on “harder” races but the people don’t support them. At least in North America (can’t speak for the rest of the world).
IM St. George - gonzo
IM Los Cabos - soon to be gonzo
IM Arizona - people bitched and moaned about it being too hot/windy so they moved it
IM Texas - same thing re too hot
Yet, people fall all over themselves to sign up for “easier” races like Florida, Chattanooga, etc.
And IM 70.3 Branson, that was a great and fun course, but a 56 mile bike with with 9 Cat5 climbs was too much for easy course/PR seekers.
And IM 70.3 Branson, that was a great and fun course, but a 56 mile bike with with 9 Cat5 climbs was too much for easy course/PR seekers
Totally forgot about that race. I did it the last year (I think it was the last one - 2012) and LOVED it. The bike course was amazing, challenging and completely closed to cars. The post race atmosphere was great as well at the finish line. We hung around one of the bars along the finish chute for hours after the race.
And IM 70.3 Branson, that was a great and fun course, but a 56 mile bike with with 9 Cat5 climbs was too much for easy course/PR seekers
Totally forgot about that race. I did it the last year (I think it was the last one - 2012) and LOVED it. The bike course was amazing, challenging and completely closed to cars. The post race atmosphere was great as well at the finish line. We hung around one of the bars along the finish chute for hours after the race.
I think that’s when I did it, next year I think Rev3 had it, I had hoped it would increase in numbers since Rev3 supports family fun races etc. which I thought Branson could be just that. Didn’t happen unfortunately.
“dont know if that is a joke or not? in usatf certified races, the course will be always long, to guarantee you do the distance… so 114 is fair”
When you certify a course, you certify it is at least said distance. So yes it will be long if you don’t run perfect tangents, etc., but you don’t need two miles. It usually means on a cert 5k you will run 5.05k even if you are careful. It’s a whole thing with calibration rides, temp factors, distance from the curb…
That being said I think there are a lot of things at play here. Some are legit. Some are bs. People want fast times, permits, blah, blah.
It would not surprise me one bit to find out some courses were short for that very reason. There is a timing company near me that I am pretty sure uses this logic.
Back to the original point, I think it should be like another other distance. If you want to certify a record it needs to be on a certified course. Of course there are a lot more things that can impact the total time of an event like an IM. Drafting off lead motos for one.
If they were to certify distances, wouldn’t they also have to certify elevation gains, number of turns, etc.? There are so many variables in courses, I don’t understand why a tenth of a mile here or a half of a mile there can really prove to be that important.
USAtf doesn’t adjust for other factors. That’s why lame downhill races slip through the cracks. Now I like IAAF standards which do account for elevation. For instance Boston / CIM are the maximum net drop courses allowed to OT-Q
“dont know if that is a joke or not? in usatf certified races, the course will be always long, to guarantee you do the distance… so 114 is fair”
When you certify a course, you certify it is at least said distance. So yes it will be long if you don’t run perfect tangents, etc., but you don’t need two miles. It usually means on a cert 5k you will run 5.05k even if you are careful. It’s a whole thing with calibration rides, temp factors, distance from the curb…
The USATF “short course prevention factor” is 0.1%, so on a 5k it’s an extra 5 meters. If one were to apply that criteria to a 112 mile bike course, it would add 591 feet, not two miles.
“dont know if that is a joke or not? in usatf certified races, the course will be always long, to guarantee you do the distance… so 114 is fair”
When you certify a course, you certify it is at least said distance. So yes it will be long if you don’t run perfect tangents, etc., but you don’t need two miles. It usually means on a cert 5k you will run 5.05k even if you are careful. It’s a whole thing with calibration rides, temp factors, distance from the curb…
That being said I think there are a lot of things at play here. Some are legit. Some are bs. People want fast times, permits, blah, blah.
It would not surprise me one bit to find out some courses were short for that very reason. There is a timing company near me that I am pretty sure uses this logic.
Back to the original point, I think it should be like another other distance. If you want to certify a record it needs to be on a certified course. Of course there are a lot more things that can impact the total time of an event like an IM. Drafting off lead motos for one.
And how would you certify a swim course?
For sure… I’ve seen buoys pulled by strong currents, waves, ropes broken from their anchors, etc. Setting a swim course the day before down to the last foot often has to be adjusted the morning of, then you’re dealing with variable depths, boats that move around while trying to set them… maybe in a still body of water with permanent mount points… otherwise if it’s close, my hats off to the aquatics course guys/gals.
It’s obvious this is not important to you. If there’s a will there’s a way.
I’ve never been involved with certification of a swim course, but I’m sure it could be done. And even if truly certifying the course is some how out of our means I would be happy if it were within the realm of the distance given ever effort was made to make it correct.
And how would you certify a swim course?
For sure… I’ve seen buoys pulled by strong currents, waves, ropes broken from their anchors, etc. Setting a swim course the day before down to the last foot often has to be adjusted the morning of, then you’re dealing with variable depths, boats that move around while trying to set them… maybe in a still body of water with permanent mount points… otherwise if it’s close, my hats off to the aquatics course guys/gals.
Yep, I have seen most of this over the years.
I just see total focus on folks making comments on the bike and run. Swim will never be 100% accurate.
I raced Boulder on Saturday, and had heard the course was 2 miles short. Honestly started to think they fixed it as my watch was in synch with the mile makers up to mile 50, then the course ended quickly.
This was technically a PR for me, but that is not something I broadcast to the world. When asked about my bike split I have been open in saying it was 2 miles short.
That being said, the run course is about 6-10 minutes “slow”, so I think that makes up for the 2.5-3 minutes you gain with the shorter bike.
I would love the course to be 70.3, but given the difficulty of that run I certainly don’t feel like I was cheated out of a tough test
Ummm… 2 miles short would be 5-7 min on the bike. What kind of motor do you have on your bike?
Interesting this year that Austria and Roth, the 2 most prolific “world record” courses on the circuit have both sorted out their run courses so that they are no longer a good half mile short. Austria has also extended its bike course so that it’s now only a mile short instead of the 2 miles it was. So it can be done with imagination and hard work - and I doubt whether either of those 2 races will be any less popular because of it.
And still Roth is too short on the bike (178km) and run (41,5km). Does anyone care? No. And I am not sure why only Ironman should get their distances right if that was such a big issue for everyone. Would you not also want to have your local race or the Challenge races to have the right distance? If you would care…?
Obviously not you because you don’t do those distances so why comment? Don’t be a moron.
does not matter what the race distance is, who cares. As long as we all race the same, who cares.
I have to agree. I want them to be close to the distance but all that really matters is your finish position. Everyone races the same course. Although I might complain if it was more than 5 miles off either way.
This post showcases your ignorance with regard to what building a course entails. Both logistically and politically. I invite you to volunteer or get hired to be a staff member of a local event and assist in putting a race on. It might greatly change your perspective.
I’m no fan of WTC (I RD for another company) and yes, marketing themselves as a distance they’ve shot themselves in the foot, but being myopic about a distance is a tad reductionist.
North Americans are a silly lot. If the race you put on isn’t precisely a full, half, or oly, no one will sign up for it, even if the course is fun and interesting. That’s some pretty pigeonholed thinking.
Herbert wrote an article on this a few years ago. 60 seconds of searching and i couldn’t find it. There was also a thread in May on the topic.
Obviously not you because you don’t do those distances so why comment? Don’t be a moron.
does not matter what the race distance is, who cares. As long as we all race the same, who cares.
I have to agree. I want them to be close to the distance but all that really matters is your finish position. Everyone races the same course. Although I might complain if it was more than 5 miles off either way.
I have always just said tell folks what the distances are. I had to fight for this at the race I was a co RD at.
It is basically impossible for most races to get the “official” distances. BUT, to not be honest about it is not right.
I care. For me I’m not racing anyone else but myself, hence on any given day ‘we all race the same’ is irrelevant to me. I’m testing myself against myself. Repeatability, stability what ever you want to call it, year on year, standard course is valuable to me and almost impossible to find at the moment.
I care. For me I’m not racing anyone else but myself, hence on any given day ‘we all race the same’ is irrelevant to me. I’m testing myself against myself. Repeatability, stability what ever you want to call it, year on year, standard course is valuable to me and almost impossible to find at the moment.
But why? I race a large number of the same events year after year. Whatever the exact distances, they are close to the same. Meaning, the swim bouys are always put in race morning so never in the same exact place. And where we have wind or heat, etc. totally changes the dynamics of the race. So there is a reason rankings are done only against folks who race on a course on a specific day all at the same time. Year to year comparisons do not mean a lot if you are talking about PR stuff, IMO.