This was my first time as a spectator watching the Kona event (I am only dabbling in watching some stuff this on YouTube and the other webs). I am surprised that the women seem to ride “within” themselves and run decently in the heat, whereas at least half the men blow up even on courses with more forgiving run course conditions like the one in France. Hardly any women blew up in Hawaii. Either the women are just harder, or the men have different psychology, or there just isn’t nearly as much depth and parity in the women’s field, or something. What is it?
You are asking why the women have good whole-race plans? I suppose I’d ask why some people don’t plan for the full thing.
This was my first time as a spectator watching the Kona event (I am only dabbling in watching some stuff this on YouTube and the other webs). I am surprised that the women seem to ride “within” themselves and run decently in the heat, whereas at least half the men blow up even on courses with more forgiving run course conditions like the one in France. Hardly any women blew up in Hawaii. Either the women are just harder, or the men have different psychology, or there just isn’t nearly as much depth and parity in the women’s field, or something. What is it?
-
it was really a lot of first timers in Kona this year
-
women may be more consistent about what they want, and about the tought conditions of Ironman Kona.
-
there are examples of women finishing empty in Ironman, last year there were one example, but there are some other famous “crawling” until finish line
I am surprised that the women seem to ride “within” themselves and run decently in the heat, whereas at least half the men blow up even on courses with more forgiving run course conditions like the one in France. Hardly any women blew up in Hawaii. Either the women are just harder, or the men have different psychology, or there just isn’t nearly as much depth and parity in the women’s field, or something. What is it?Why are you surprised?
Maybe women are just more sensible, baysically: it’s a triathlon after all, not a ‘see who can get to T2 first’ race.
Maybe women can achieve the mummy bear bike/run balance (within tolerances) with more success.
I wonder if the power meter thread has something to do with this: suggestion is that far less women use a power meter than men so ride on ‘feel’ or HR (maybe).
Or maybe men are more prepared to risk it ‘on the limit’ on the bike or in the first half of the marathon, and a proportion only find out at 30k.
You are aligning “going harder” (as in thread title) with “blowing up” which I suggest is a false equivalence.
“at least half the men blow up”? Please help us with a simple definition of “blow up” so we(I) can look to see if the data suggest that.
The top ten Pros at Kona all positive split the run: in the conditions that is unsurprising. Interestingly (nerd alert) the run speed order was almost aligned with how close they each were to an even split (number of minutes the second half was run in cf first half): Haug was <2, Sodaro >2, Philipp >3, LCB >4, Ryf >5 down to Knibb on 8.
Maybe women are just more sensible, baysically: it’s a triathlon after all, not a ‘see who can get to T2 first’ race.
Maybe women can achieve the mummy bear bike/run balance (within tolerances) with more success.
I wonder if the power meter thread has something to do with this: suggestion is that far less women use a power meter than men so ride on ‘feel’ or HR (maybe).
Or maybe men are more prepared to risk it ‘on the limit’ on the bike or in the first half of the marathon, and a proportion only find out at 30k.
I do not think they are more sensible. Surely the men want to win just as badly and will use reason to do so. And yes, clearly at least when taking the pro women, they are better at achieving the bike run balance.
I am not so sure about the age group women, but the power meter numbers are not surprising to me. You had a much weaker and less experienced amateur field this year than in previous years. All the pro females had power, right, as did the men, so that’s the comparison I am interested in. With the men we see huge failure rates (all but out of the race by halfway through the marathon) while almost all the top women were all in the mix in Hawaii.
Because us women have common sense and realise we need to get to the end. Men let testosterone get the better of them and are like “that dude over took me, I’ll show him†😉😉
It was even mentioned a few times in the Kona broadcast the pro woman often even or negative split the marathon whereas the pro men almost never do. Women are likely more patient.
One other thing to keep in mind if looking at this weekend in Kona specifically, is that the usual messy winds were basically non-existant on Saturday. Thus, less opportunity to pedal harder/over-the-top into those winds.
Semi-related, thought it was notable that every single female athlete finished the swim within the cutoff.
Women having better and more consistent pacing during endurance events has been known for a while and shows itself in other endurance sports as well.
(See here for running: https://runningmagazine.ca/the-scene/women-are-better-pacers-than-men-study-finds/).
I don’t think it’s controversial to say that men generally and on average have a higher risk appetite than, both in sports and in general, and so would be more prone to adopting a risky race strategy.
Maybe women are just more sensible, baysically: it’s a triathlon after all, not a ‘see who can get to T2 first’ race.
Maybe women can achieve the mummy bear bike/run balance (within tolerances) with more success. Or maybe men are more prepared to risk it ‘on the limit’ on the bike or in the first half of the marathon, and a proportion only find out at 30k.I do not think they are more sensible. Surely the men want to win just as badly and will use reason to do so. And yes, clearly at least when taking the pro women, they are better at achieving the bike run balance.
All the pro females had power, right, as did the men, so that’s the comparison I am interested in. With the men we see huge failure rates (all but out of the race by halfway through the marathon) while almost all the top women were all in the mix in Hawaii.“Surely the men want to win just as badly and will use reason to do so.” You have said that men ‘blow up’ more, so clearly (with equal motivation) their level of rationality is lower. (Actually I think this is rather a ‘risk it for the biscuit’ mindset).
“With the men we see huge failure rates (all but out of the race by halfway through the .” You need to define what you mean by “all but out of it”.
All the top women (there were 7) bar Matthews were “in the mix” though Sodaro had a bike fail (why?) so had to run up from #20 (22:30 down on the lead) to #6. But at the finish the top six on form (apart from Matthews DNF) finished in places 1 through 6.
What about the women who ‘blew up’? Crowley was the biggest ‘blow up’ (3:45). Stage Nielsen was 13 mins slower than in Texas in April. Langridge seemed to swim one pack back, rode the first third OK and then dropped off (remember she rode up to LCB last year), and then jogged it in. Wilms, Vesterby, Svensk, Langridge, Bleymehl, Lane.
https://www.trirating.com/ironman-hawaii-2023-wpro-only-analyzing-results/
At Nice in the top 15 only Barnaby and Currie had poor runs (slower than expectation) NB the latter was emotionally weighed down by the penalty that was rescinded post-race. So who are these 'blow-ups in the men? Frodeno, Skipper, McMahon (who I assumed walked it in (5:31) out of respect for it being the World Champs): low % of the field.
https://www.trirating.com/...3-analyzing-results/
It was even mentioned a few times in the Kona broadcast the pro woman often even or negative split the marathon whereas the pro men almost never do. Women are likely more patient.@Bryan - they may have said this in commentary but they are using the wrong orifice. I have checked and found no athlete in the top 16 who even/negatively split the run. The athletes closest to even were Visser (#15) and Haug 1:31 and 1:53 slower respectively.
In that top 16, Knibb ‘blew up’ the most taking nearly 8 minutes more for her second half. After showing such restraint on the bike (I am convinced she could have ridden up to LCB if O’Brien (assumed) hadn’t set her a power limit), I think she just paced the run’s first half to aim for 3 hours but, in her first 42km run, she found the last 10km increasingly hard after a portaloo stop at 27km and then Haug passed her (@28km ) - I don’t know whether there were more/multiple portaloo stops in that final half hour.
This is a question with many possible answers. In my mind, the most likely are:
-
Heat production and energy expenditure for the men is much higher. Men are on average much larger, with more muscle mass. Your typical pro male is between 150 to 165 lbs and riding at an average power of 280-310 for the race, whereas the typical pro female is between 115-130 lbs and riding at perhaps an average power of 210-240. While most athletes are not wearing Stryd power meters during the run, the power differential remains unchanged. The men are producing significantly more heat per second. This creates a much riskier situation for the men, as it is proven that overheating during a race is usually irreversible and results in a precipitous drop in pace. In addition, the men are burning significantly more calories per second, more than a thousand cals per hour. Large athletes like Sam long, Magnus Ditlev, and Sam Laidlow are burning 1200+ calories per hour during an ironman. This results in huge carbohydrate requirements. This requirement places a much greater stress on the GI tract then that of much smaller female athletes, who are burning around 6-800 per hour. Once your GI tract shuts down during an IM, you are screwed.
-
Mens races, even at the IM level exhibit much higher variability of effort compared to the women’s. Surging is suboptimal for optimal endurance performance, but it is often times necessary for athletes who are trying to make a “draft legal” bike pack.
-
You can’t compare Nice to Kona, they are completely different courses.
This was my first time as a spectator watching the Kona event (I am only dabbling in watching some stuff this on YouTube and the other webs). I am surprised that the women seem to ride “within” themselves and run decently in the heat, whereas at least half the men blow up even on courses with more forgiving run course conditions like the one in France. Hardly any women blew up in Hawaii. Either the women are just harder, or the men have different psychology, or there just isn’t nearly as much depth and parity in the women’s field, or something. What is it?
I guess we can sum up a reply to your question as follows:
Men have dcks to measure. There’s no such thing as vag measuring that I’m aware of. So they aren’t doing it.
@Alex, I wonder if there are any past women’s result that might support that theory. I think it was Rinny who said it.
This was my first time as a spectator watching the Kona event (I am only dabbling in watching some stuff this on YouTube and the other webs). I am surprised that the women seem to ride “within” themselves and run decently in the heat, whereas at least half the men blow up even on courses with more forgiving run course conditions like the one in France. Hardly any women blew up in Hawaii. Either the women are just harder, or the men have different psychology, or there just isn’t nearly as much depth and parity in the women’s field, or something. What is it?
Maybe the question to ask is “why don’t the men pace better?”
It was even mentioned a few times in the Kona broadcast the pro woman often even or negative split the marathon whereas the pro men almost never do.@Alex, I wonder if there are any past women’s result that might support that theory. I think it was Rinny who said it. Maybe. But I haven’t the data. I took my analysis for the top 15 Pros off the IMWC(W) Kona tracker which still offers easy access to the splits, using the 19.6km timing mat to extrapolate forward to 21.1km btw.
Had a quick look at the winners of the last 3 ‘top’ events (so again not even, let alone negative):
Name Event mins slower 13.1-26.2
Haug Roth 6
Sodaro Kona 22 5
Ryf IMWC’21’ 4
You’re welcome!
(Looked also at Matthews who gave it the old “I’m going to pace it super even: watch them race off and come back to me” in Breakfast with Bob. At IMWC ‘21’ St George: 1:30:06 and 1:30:45. This year, as last, didn’t get the chance to run 
This was my first time as a spectator watching the Kona event (I am only dabbling in watching some stuff this on YouTube and the other webs). I am surprised that the women seem to ride “within” themselves and run decently in the heat, whereas at least half the men blow up even on courses with more forgiving run course conditions like the one in France. Hardly any women blew up in Hawaii. Either the women are just harder, or the men have different psychology, or there just isn’t nearly as much depth and parity in the women’s field, or something. What is it?
Maybe the question to ask is “why don’t the men pace better?”
Touche. I think it’s the same question put another way.
One of the more interesting things said here was that Taylor Knibb likely rode to a coach-prescribed power, which is noted as the reason she did not bridge to Lucy Barkley. That’s a fascinating assumption but not sure why it is assumed. The assumption would mean that women, or at least LB, are MORE analytically inclined and less emotional in racing than men. In triathlon I think I might buy this argument
Both LCB and Laidlow, had aggressive and risky race strategies. In both cases, it worked out for them and there was no blowup.
I think people are just becoming really good at their craft and most importantly nailing down their nutrition strategy.
This was my first time as a spectator watching the Kona event (I am only dabbling in watching some stuff this on YouTube and the other webs). I am surprised that the women seem to ride “within” themselves and run decently in the heat, whereas at least half the men blow up even on courses with more forgiving run course conditions like the one in France. Hardly any women blew up in Hawaii. Either the women are just harder, or the men have different psychology, or there just isn’t nearly as much depth and parity in the women’s field, or something. What is it?
Maybe the question to ask is “why don’t the men pace better?”
Touche. I think it’s the same question put another way.
One of the more interesting things said here was that Taylor Knibb likely rode to a coach-prescribed power, which is noted as the reason she did not bridge to Lucy Barkley. That’s a fascinating assumption but not sure why it is assumed. The assumption would mean that women, or at least LB, are MORE analytically inclined and less emotional in racing than men. In triathlon I think I might buy this argument
I’m not touching the men/women claim with a 10ft pole, but there is an interesting subquestion about prescriptive v. reactive racing. We all know that you can go just a little bit harder when racing someone right next to you as opposed to training on your own. The alternative strategy for Knibb would be bridging up to LCB in a controlled manner and then racing it on the run. You never know how people will react, maybe LCB breaks just a little bit under pressure, maybe Knibb is buoyed by being in a 1-on-1 battle for the lead. I find it hard to believe that the prescribed power was so close to her limit that going 5% higher for 30 min would be a race breaking effort.
At WC it makes more sense to race closer to your limit. Who came in 2nd and 3rd this year? It’s not a cumulative series race where you need to be smart and get points. It’s a one off where winning is worth 1000x than finishing second.
This was my first time as a spectator watching the Kona event (I am only dabbling in watching some stuff this on YouTube and the other webs). I am surprised that the women seem to ride “within” themselves and run decently in the heat, whereas at least half the men blow up even on courses with more forgiving run course conditions like the one in France. Hardly any women blew up in Hawaii. Either the women are just harder, or the men have different psychology, or there just isn’t nearly as much depth and parity in the women’s field, or something. What is it?
Maybe the question to ask is “why don’t the men pace better?”
Touche. I think it’s the same question put another way.
One of the more interesting things said here was that Taylor Knibb likely rode to a coach-prescribed power, which is noted as the reason she did not bridge to Lucy Barkley. That’s a fascinating assumption but not sure why it is assumed. The assumption would mean that women, or at least LB, are MORE analytically inclined and less emotional in racing than men. In triathlon I think I might buy this argument
I’m not touching the men/women claim with a 10ft pole, but there is an interesting subquestion about prescriptive v. reactive racing. We all know that you can go just a little bit harder when racing someone right next to you as opposed to training on your own. The alternative strategy for Knibb would be bridging up to LCB in a controlled manner and then racing it on the run. You never know how people will react, maybe LCB breaks just a little bit under pressure, maybe Knibb is buoyed by being in a 1-on-1 battle for the lead. I find it hard to believe that the prescribed power was so close to her limit that going 5% higher for 30 min would be a race breaking effort.
At WC it makes more sense to race closer to your limit. Who came in 2nd and 3rd this year? It’s not a cumulative series race where you need to be smart and get points. It’s a one off where winning is worth 1000x than finishing second.
true, i think i’d also add the factor of strategy and depth of field.
historically - and no disrespect to the women - the pro men’s field has been deeper. that is there are usually more men who ‘could’ win than women who could. so, in the men’s field, maybe some guys have decided that in a deep field, playing it ‘safe’ is a losing strategy, and it’s better to gamble for the big win. in a less deep women’s field, the ‘play it safe’ strategy of going steady and sticking to your numbers might be more likely to pay off - maybe not in a win, but in a podium or a money position.
of course i guess that’s changing now too. we saw how deep the women’s field was this year, and lucy won it with a laidlow-esque gamble, and so maybe in future the women’s race will be more dynamic and less time-trial, and that will mean more blowups along the way?
This was my first time as a spectator watching the Kona event (I am only dabbling in watching some stuff this on YouTube and the other webs). I am surprised that the women seem to ride “within” themselves and run decently in the heat, whereas at least half the men blow up even on courses with more forgiving run course conditions like the one in France. Hardly any women blew up in Hawaii. Either the women are just harder, or the men have different psychology, or there just isn’t nearly as much depth and parity in the women’s field, or something. What is it?
Maybe the question to ask is “why don’t the men pace better?”
Yes, I was wondering the same thing. The OP certainly chose an interesting way to frame the issue. Regardless of conditions, a 97 percent completion rate on a hard course is remarkable. Other options for the subject line:
- Why do women race smarter than men?
- What can men learn from women when it comes to racing a WC?
- Does the higher male DNF rate indicate it’s too easy for men to qualify for the WC?