Over the past 25 years, I’ve developed a system for adjusting the performances of individuals in triathlon to eliminate considerations of age and gender. Initially, it was based on the relationships between and among world records for all ages and both genders in the 10,000 meter run, but the findings were confirmed by a very similar outcomes in 40K bike time trials and 1500 meter LC swims.
Given the idiosyncratic nature of triathlon courses and weather, it is much more problematic to establish whether the system applies to our sport as well. But I’ve used it to grade nearly 100 top end events over the past couple of decades – and I thought some might be interested to see how it applies to IM Kona 2007.
The basic formula has two parts: First, that age extracts a toll equal to 1% of the overall male world record (or in this case, course record) time for each year the athlete exceeds the age of 32. And second, that the gender difference between men and women is equal to 10% of the overall male world record time.
So, as an example, at age 52, Joe Bonness gets a credit of 20% of the overall male course record, and Juliana Nivergelt, 47, gets 25% (15% for age and 10% for gender). The men’s overall course record for IM Kona is Luc van Lierde’s 8:04:08 in 1996.
Age/Gender Graded: Overall
Reinhold Humbold 59 10:05:34 7:55:04
Frank Vytrisal 40 8:37:44 7:59:04
Luc Van Lierde 38 8:30:01 8:01:01
Tim DeBoom 36 8:22:33 8:03:13
Chris McCormack 34 8:15:34 8:05:54
Gregory Taylor 53 9:50:35 8:09:05
Craig Alexander 34 8:19:04 8:09:24
Joe Bonness 52 9:46:36 8:09:56
Chris Lieto 35 8:25:49 8:11:19
Gregory Fraine 45 9:19:02 8:16:12
Chrissie Wellington 30F 9:08:45 8:20:25
Dede Griesbauer 37F 9:33:34 8:21:04
Torbjorn Sinballe 30 8:21:30 8:21:30
Michael Hagen 45 9:26:26 8:23:16
Marino Vanhoenocker 31 8:23:21 8:23:21
Kai Hundermarck 38 8:53:03 8:24:03
Samantha McGlone 28F 9:14:04 8:25:44
Eneke Llanos 30 8:26:00 8:26:00
Heather Gollnick 37F 9:40:48 8:28:18
Michael Lovato 33 8:33:28 8:28:38
Marty Bulcock 41 9:12:35 8:29:05
Belinda Granger 36F 9:37:54 8:30:04
Patrick Vernay 33 8:35:10 8:30:20
Juliana Nievergelt 47F 10:31:22 8:30:32
Kate Major 29F 9:19:13 8:30:53
Age/Gender Graded: Women
Chrissie Wellington 30F 9:08:45 8:20:25
Dede Griesbauer 37F 9:33:34 8:21:04
Samantha McGlone 28F 9:14:04 8:25:44
Heather Gollnick 37F 9:40:48 8:28:18
Belinda Granger 36F 9:37:54 8:30:04
Juliana Nievergelt 47F 10:31:22 8:30:32
Kate Major 29F 9:19:13 8:30:53
Joanna Lawn 33F 9:26:47 8:33:37
Laura Sophiea 52F 10:59:32 8:34:12
Lisa Bentley 38F 9:51:40 8:34:20
Rebecca Preston 28F 9:26:55 8:38:35
Fernanda Keller 44F 10:25:03 8:38:43
Rebekah Keat 29F 9:27:19 8:39:59
Erika Cosmor 33F 9:39:47 8:46:37
Leanda Cave 29F 9:36:10 8:47:50
Observations.
The adjusted time for Reinhold Humbold seems amazing at first blush. But he had an even faster time two years ago (9:47:29 at age 57), which graded to 7:46:39.
Luc van Lierde’s time this year graded even better than his course record in 1996 – though if you subtracted the time he spent in the sin bin in '96, the two performances are almost identical.
I have graded most (but not all) of the IM Kona races and there have been only a handful of adjusted times that were under the magic 8:00:00 mark. Humbold’s is the best I remember, but Kevin Moats graded 7:54:33 when he went 9:26:23 at the age of 51 in the 2006 race and Karen Smyers posted a similar adjusted time a few years ago.
Julianna Nievergelt’s time this year was good for sixth in the women’s field; 23 years ago, at the age of 24, she finished seventh overall in the women’s field.
Paula Newby-Fraser’s course record of 8:55:28 in 1992 grades to an 8:07:08, which isn’t far at all from Luc van Lierde’s male course record.
though if you subtracted the time he spent in the sin bin in '96, the two performances are almost identical. \
If you are going to be accurate to your system, wouldnt’ you be adding about 5 to 10 minutes for him sucking wheel, and more time added to his run for the extra rest on the bike and the rest in the sin bin??? How do you come to the conclusion that he should get a faster time for cheating???
Point taken - which means his 2007 race was even better than his course record (provided, of course, that the current regimen of drafting enforcement is substantially equivalent to that of the mid-90’'s). My system tries only to adjust for the two specie-wide factors over which we have no (Renee Richards aside) control. Can other factors affect performance? Of course - but in the end, they are all either subject to human control (drafting and its enforcement) or so freaking random that they defy quantification (illness, mechanical failure, etc.).
My goal is not to attain an absolutely perfect system. It is rather to highlight the fact that “great” performances can (and do) come from all points on the age and gender spectrum.
No, I actually like the guy…He has been around a long time, paid plenty of dues, and had great results. I just don’t see discounting a penalty…I actually was in the lead vehicle that year, and followed him and Helliegrel the whole way. He had some very questionable stretches, and the marshalls agreed…I will say that he rode clean the last 30 miles when it was just him and Helliegrel, mano a mano. It was not a dig at him, but at the OP’s conclusions…Sometimes I just feel like I have to be the truth police around here I guess…
Hey Lew, I was argueing with Dan the other morning about the handicap at Hawaii between the pro men and women. Here’s what I think…I believe that an equal race there is about an hour difference, based solely on my historical perspective of the race…Dan thinks it is much smaller like 45 to 50 minutes… SO last year for instance, Norman had a much better race that Michelle, since the difference was around 68 minutes I think…Paula’s 8:55 is the greatest performance of all time…This year under my calculations, Chrissy had a better Day than Macca did…
Hey Lew, I know you no longer put on any races, but I’d love to see an age / gender handicaped race wher you start in reverse order and with your handicap time built in. IE everyone should converge at the finish line at the same time. It would be pretty cumbersome for a IM but half and olympic might work out.
Under my system, 1% of IM Kona male course record is 4:50, which means 10% (my system’s “gender gap”) is equal to 48:20. Sixty minutes would be a handicap of over 12% - and that just doesn’t fit the experience of nearly every other related sport. Example: the men’s world record in the marathon is now about 2:04:26, while the women’s is around 2:15:30. 10% of 2:04:26 is 12:27 - so that means the current gender gap in the marathon is actually slightly BELOW 10%. Of course, that fits what we know about the aging process, since the current world record-holder (Haile G.) is rapidly approaching senility (i.e., 40).
Note: When using past results of a single race to identify a universal standard such as this, you always have to beware of the limited sample size. In the case of IM Kona, ask yourself two questions: (1) does Hawaii get the very best triathletes (i.e., how fast might Vanessa Fernandes or Emma Snowsill go if the incentives were right to get them there in the prime (pre-32) of their careers) and (2) are we sure the best athletes in the world are even getting into the sport of triathlon? On that second point, did you know that Shalene Flanagan has a background in age group swimming?
I too have long thought about producing such a race - but there are some significant logistical issues. For example:
Because the swim and bike courses would be open for times much longer than normal, it necessitates a facilty where that wouldn’t be a problem (though if you made it a sprint course, that wouldn’t keep things open longer than a typical race with normal wave starts).
Because there would be a lot of passing on the final leg, you couldn’t do it on a trail-run course like Ann Arbor or Waterloo.
If you planned for a field of significant size and allowed all abilities to enter, the amount of passing on the bike course would be extreme - and probably dangerous. But if you limited the field to only a relatively moderate number of very accompllshed athletes, you wouldn’t have enough entries to pay the bills.
I’d be interested to see how the bike worked out. There would be a lot of passing, but on the plus side their wouldn’t be a mass of people all clumped at the start of the bike. I’ve never been at Memphis in May, other than it being seeded randomly (which should help keep the bike spread out) its close to the same set up.
The first TTT race in Ohio I did they were going to have the top 10 teams go off in handicapped order for the last day. The modified it becasue the gaps were so large they would have had the first team and 10th team separated by an hour or more.
Hey Lew, I understand the 10% for mortal sports, but as you yourself pointed out, the longest event is the marathon, and we are talking 4 times longer. Might not the difference grow in % at the extreme?? And using past Ironmans, I believe we have had the best athletes, because they all did Hawaii. Looking at today, you are right, lot of talent in the ITU pool, but my guess is that they would just bump against what has already been done… In essence, they would close this gap we all talk about in the difference in times from 10 to 20 years ago, and today… I hope one day we find out if Snowsill or Fernandez could go 8:55 at Hawaii. Hell, I’d settle for one of Paula’s 9 flat times she did there several times…
Using your system, Luc would have had a better race than Paula, and I just don’t see that… WHen she got 11th overall, that had to be the best of all time, but your formula doesn’t bear that out either…LOts of men have gotten close to the record, but there is only one woman(Erin)that is in the same zipcode, and 20 years later, not one challenge to her times. I mean, the world TT champion and Natasha have had several shots at her bike record alone, on some of the fastest days ever, and it still stands… SO if I work backward from her performances mathmatically, and I do believe that overall they are the greatest of all time at Hawaii, then I have to challenge your formula…Just thinking out loud here…
We actually put on a little local club race in Naples based on that type of system. It also gave handicap to “novices”. It was an off road adventure Tri. The oldest went first, it was based on age and an estimate of race time. Everyone enjoyed it except once when some hot shots who came from out of town and thought they were going to win it easily. The oldest competitor, a 76 year old, did win it once.
Be careful of the twin terrors of the aging ex-pro triathlete: nostalgia and small sample size. Paula was the best of the women who (a) got into triathlon and (b) chose to do Hawaii. But I think you take it a little far when you say that her performances represent the ultimate a woman can hope to achieve on that course. She was (still is, I’m sure) a very good athlete and she sure had the right combination of determination and iron(man) digestive track, but there are MUCH better athletes coming into the sport now at the Olympic level - and if and when the incentives are right, everything tells me the times in Hawaii will drop.
My prediction? If the sample size expands to rival that of the marathon, I predict the times in Hawaii will approach 7:45-7:50 for men and 8:35-8:40 for women. Joan Benoit and Alberto Salazar held the marathon records for a long time (at 2:21 and 2:08 - and the latter was on a clearly short course in New York) - but as the participation levels grew and incentives (read: money) rose, the records started to fall (now at 2:15 and 2:04). And they still have farther to go.
I would actually think the opposite. My understanding is that the longer the endurance event the women start to close the relative gap. I am not even going to pretend to be an expert but I remember reading a synopsis of a study a few years ago about that - something to do with male vs female power-to-weight or something.
but there are MUCH better athletes coming into the sport now at the Olympic level - and if and when the incentives are right, everything tells me the times in Hawaii will drop. \\
I believe that this has already happened, with athletes like Macca, Alexander, Mcglone, Jones, and a few other ITU athletes that have not done as well as these athletes… I think you don’t assgn enough merit to heat genetics to the Hawaii equation… I’ve watched the ITU pretty closley, and Snowsill and Gomez both melt in the heat, and that is ITU distance. Both have been interviewed, and mentione that they do not like the heat…Lots of people can work themselves to be really fast, but a very tiny % of those are going to be able to excell at Hawaii. Macca and Alexander were two of the best ITU athletes of their times, along with Michille…The names are changed now, but I do believe we have the best the ITU had to offer from the 90’s . And look how long it has taken Macca to finally get a win, and it is still no where near the old guard times.
I don’t think that Paula would have excelled in her prime at the ITU format, but it is like a different sport when you talk Ironmans in Hawaii. It’s like comparing a 10k runner, to that woman that kills in the 100 mile races. I’m sure that she would not even qualify for track meet, but not one of those girls could hold a candle to here in the western states. Doesn’t make her a less talented athlete, just different talents, I would put up Paula’s endurance/heat genetics against anyone out there racing today… There have been only a few people from your group that I’ve seen, that might have that gift. Maybe Vanessa, and that girl that out ran everyone in the HyVee for third…But the only true test is the race itself, and unless people do it, it is all spectulation about what they would do…
Anyway, my comparisons were with the completed races of men and women over the years. How do you think your 10% formula stacks up with the recorded results???
My understanding is that the longer the endurance event the women start to close the relative gap. \
You hear that all the time, but my guess that it is an urban myth…Like the one where women can endure more pain because of childbirth…Probably a few POW’s that would argue that one…It probably stems from the higher % of body fat that women have, and if left to starve on a desert island, they would kick the mens butt’s in a survival contest… I don’t think that there is any evidence that shows that in endurance sports, the women close the gender gap of sprint sports…
Great post. I would agree with you, but I do wonder sometimes when these times are going to start dropping both at the very top and collectivly in the sport of triathlon. I am trying not to brag here but merely siting this as an example of where times are going, or not going. In 1993 I raced at Ironman Hawaii and on a bad day for me finished in 200th place in a time of 9:45. I noticed that this year 200th place overall was 9:46 ( I note that the great Joe Boness came in 199th place in 9:46:XX). Race day in '93 and '07 conditions where similar from what I can tell - light winds on the bike and a hot, sunny run. So where have the times come in the past 15 years? One would think that the times would collectiveley be faster, that there would/should be way more people under 9:45. The bikes are better. The training and the training tools are better. The nutrition is better. Where’s the improvement?
