I was poking through some recent IM results and got to looking at the top clydesdale results and comparing them to top AG results. I think the conclusion I’ve come to is one we’d mostly agree on: clydesdales, at any level, take longer to complete the distance than an equivalent regular age grouper. For example, in last year’s IMFL, only two big boys were able to make it in under 10 hours, as compared to 104 AGers). Since IMNA appears to acknowledge that certain factors affect how long it takes you to finish the race (notably age and gender, vis a vis the presence of age groups and classification by sex), why doesn’t IMNA acknowledge that size plays an important part in this too? Clydesdales (and Athenas, the same to which is applicable) comprise almost 10% of any IM field, more than any individual age group, and I think they should be in line to win a spot to Kona.
To be equitable, I wouldn’t suggest a proportional representation for race slots, as the Clyde division is padded (pardon the pun) with fatties, but kick in a spot or two per race. If numbers of people at Kona are really a problem, we could crop out the triple amputees who try to scrape around the course after never completing an Ironman (I’m assuming these people don’t magically win the lottery year after year).
Give big people a chance. After all, they expend most energy to complete the race!
By the same logic, perhaps a guy under 6.3 who hits a basket should be awarded 4 points. A guy under 6 feet hitting a basket should be awarded 6 points. This logic escapes me, to be honest.
I’m not a clydesdale. I have weighed well more than that prior to re-starting my Triathlon career. I see NO magic in an artificial threshold of 200 pounds. Why not 197, 185, 154…
First of all, the clysdale limits are set fairly low, there are quite a few people around the 200 pound mark that are pretty fast. I know a guy who is about 6’ 8" and 195, and he runs like a gazelle. Many of these guys race age group, if a Kona slot was on the line, you’d have a lot more 190 pounders taking on a full gut of water and stuffing lead up their ass to get over 200 for the weigh in. I don’t think that is what you’d want. I wonder, if you fall under 200 for the post race weigh in, are you eliminated from Clysdale?
The way I look at it is most guys over 200 could get leaner and be faster. I’ve been over 200 in the last year, but I’m sure with a perfect nutrition plan I could get to 160 or so. I don’t consider myself very fat, but all the extra muscle isn’t really doing me any favors as a triathlete. So, why should I get a kona slot instead of someone who does exercise a better nutrition plan (for a triathlete) and is faster (not that I’m in danger of winning clysdale, but just as an example).
My suggestion, if you want one, for a group deserving of Kona slots: A special lottery for anyone with 15+ IM completions but has never qualified.
Actually by the same token they need a little people division. The only one of the three sports that skinny and little REALLY favours is running. Swimmers are often tall and muscular. Cyclists are not so little either. I am skinny and little - consequently I have had to work REALLY hard in the gym and on the bike and in the pool (sure running came comparatively easily). What this means is that weight and size classificationsa are a load of old crock. There are many athletes both pro and local who can place top three overall - but can “win” the clydesdale prize based on thier height. Um
If a Clyde (like me) wants to qualify for Kona, he can register as a Clyde for Clyde awards and Kona slots as AGer, and get his ass out on the road like everyone else.
As another fellow Clydesdaler… I agree with ChrisM and Dapper Dan. Kona slots should go to those who qualify in their age group. I know more then one person who’s “training plan” included gaining weight just so they could race as a clydes…
It’s not as if most Clydesdales are well muscled and that’s why they weight over 200 pounds. Most just have a higher percentage of body fat and need to lose some weight. If there is going to be some type of handicap given to “bigger” competitors, it should be based on something other than their weight. It would make more sense to define Clydesdales as competitors who can … say … bench press 175% of their weight. I’m not suggesting this be done, but it would make more sense.
Personally I think the Clydesdale division is great. However, I think the weight limit is too low. There is a guy at my gym who is no more than 190 lbs, but races as a Clyde simply so he can get awards that he would otherwise not win. Sure some blame needs to go to race organizers for not watcing closer, but still with big races how much time do you have to weight everyone? We rely on a lot of honesty in this sport and there are those who take advantage of that.
I think when you race Clydes you should no less than 225 and be weighted and certified before every race.
And, before anyone freaks on me, I weight 205 and do race Clydes, however I will not be in the next three weeks when I drop below 200.
Pretty much any suggestion to change the rules for Kona has merit to some. Dudes get their panties in a knot about slow finish times, drafting, oldies, fatties, celebrities, lotteries and the list goes on. The only thing that has remained constant for the vast, vast majority is the way to get to that particular race is to train your butt off and gain a slot. For such a small portion of the race field (the non racing slot getters), there sure are a whole heap of green eyed monsters watching them. Personally, I would not be surprised if they DID add Clyde/Athene slots at some time in the future and you can thank the fat ass American population for it.
For the record, I have entered two events as a clydesdale. My first two, years ago. Got me hooked, got me skinny and I loved the idea of it and still do. As a means to get a start at the most prestegious race on the planet(to many), I don’t think it would be ‘right’.
Yes, lets reward people who are too lazy to get in proper shape to do an Ironman a Kona spot.
Let us encourage mediocrity.
I wouldn’t go that far to say it’s a lazy thing. These people are doing an IM triathlon, seriously how friggen lazy could they be?
That said, I’m registed for CDA next year as a clyde. I register in this section becuase honestly I know I can’t hang with the little guys. I like to see how I fare against guys in my size range. I don’t think we need our own Kona slots as I don’t really think we need our own prizes. Like I said, I like to know that I move pretty good for a 250 pounds guy.
Small hands and feet make for terrible swimmers. Short arms mean less reach.Light-weight bodies blow around on the bike course. Short legs make bad levers on the bike.Short legs mean that we have to take a lot more strides, which equals a lot more pounding.
There are divisions for gender and age because they are inherent factors that you have no control over whatsoever. You are born male or female (usually…). And you are born when you are, and you don’t get to control your age. Weight, however, is something that we have at least some control over. And you cannot argue that.
You are taking the simple way out here. Lazyness has nothing to do with it. Facts are age groupers get whacked by the pro’s, the top 25 years olds will beat the 55 year olds, and the top men will beat women. In a long distance race chances are the 160 pounder will be beat a 210 pounder.
So to say lazyness is a factor is wrong.
I race clydes, because I like to compete and have a race that I can have an impact in. Just like 40 to 45ers like to have a race they can compete in.
I come from a background of college and pro football, weightlifting and bodybuilding. I am 6’ 4" and weigh about 210 with less than 10% bodyfat. I can run a 18:00 5k based on less that 20 miles per week. So I am very fit, not lazy.
The clyde vs non clyde argument over lazyness is a bad one.
If you look at the counterparts to endurance sports on the amature recreational level (Unless you are getting paid to race at Kona it is recreational)weightlifting you have age groups (masters) and weight groupings.
Personally speaking though it is ok for races like Wildflower, m-dots, Clearwater and Kona not have a Clyde grouping, because those races are about the best of the best or people setting goals for themselves that have nothing to do with a podium placing. But I would be VERY happy if they did, and I would race Clydes.
It would be nice to have a best of the best for Clydes as well whether it be OLY, SPRINT, 70.3 or IM. Perhaps Kona or Wildflower would be a good place for that. Eat up if you want to, but you still have to carry the extra weight and get on the scale after the race!
Then last point! The fastest clydes are still going to go 930 to 1100 hrs in IM or 2:15 and below in an Olympic. So they are not SLOW.
