Totally unrelated to shoes but what’s your nutrition strategy if you need four bottles for a 56 mile bike ride? That’s impressive.
I’ve typically slowed on the bike to grab a 4th bottle but it sucks. I’m going to try this time out to drink as much as I can out of the swim in t1 to hopefully only need 3 bottles.
4 bottles in 2-2.30 hours cycling? either you sweat like crazy or you stop for a wee 2-3 times.
assume negatively impressive
This doesn’t really make sense. If they get a doping test after the race and fail it once it is analysed (weeks or months later), they get a DQ.
Presume the same would be true if they were found to be motor doping on the bike after the race. Extreme examples, obviously.
1 Like
Yes, I can see how Hayden response in that video can be taken 2 ways. It’s either like:
“sh!r, they have been noticed, best try to hide them”
or the guy tells him he should not be wearing them yet in races
“really!, didn’t know that, best try to hide them”
Hard to tell without hearing what the other guy says or who he is & represents.
What I find wild about this is people are so quick to call someone who drafts a cheat but someone who knowingly uses a shoe that break the rules and silence. Maybe it’s because yelling cheat at unspecific athletes feels safe but calling out 2 major athletes in the sport is less so.
2 Likes
I guess people are showing their respect for the convoluted rules which have this shoe as legal (prototype status) and then it’s not (running up to launch and general availability) and recognising that in 12 days they’re legal again. And given the shoes meet the single plate and <40mm depth, unproven benefit over the shoes competitors are rocking.
Long will be able (legally) to run in those shoes in IMWC Nice (after 11th September). And Wilde in Karlovy Vary. And any other athlete who’s ‘worn in’ a pair in training.
Having said that, disappointing that T100/Fédération Française de Triathlon (FFTRI) officials are either not sufficiently knowledgeable or lack diligence when executing their duties.
As an aside, but linked to respect for de rulz, pretty sure that several athletes’ bottle set up BTA infringed World Tri rules, as interpreted.
So Wilde made a conscious decision to wear illegal shoes on the Saturday for the T100 but then wore legal shoes for the WTCS race the next day? Or am I misunderstanding what he admitted to?
The race brief clearly covered what they could and couldn’t do with the bottles so maybe they briefed that they could have those set ups. The bikes were inspected as they were checked in so would be surprised if people didn’t stick to what was briefed.
Don’t think we can deduce from the clip that Wilde knew before the fact that the shoes were in the interim between legal and not legal and legal.
Wilde did run the 5km on Sunday in a different pair of Asics. Perhaps because he’s running much faster: shoes for speeds?
There was a questionable equipment choice made at a very big race last year. I asked an official a few months after if a retroactive DQ could be made if it was shown the athlete knowingly did something worthy of a DQ. It could easily be confirmed to be illegal or not. He said no. He said it would have to be raised as a protest by another athlete and I forget what the time window was but very short.
The video PTN posted has him on a hot mic
Sure. What’s your point?
“prototypes”
“pretty sure”
"they don’t chick them so . "
“I’ll take them off straight away”
“noone noticed though”
Point is he knew what he was doing
1 Like
- Informed by his sponsor to not wear the shoes
- Chose to wear the shoes after being informed
- Was reminded after race he was wearing banned shoes
- acknowledged he took the risk knowing no one checks
- hid shoes to avoid a protest knowing it was the only way he’d be DQed
That doesn’t paint the most flattering picture.
3 Likes
I suggest that you can’t ‘know’ that with a decent degree of certainty.
Why do you think the support bloke mentioned it at all, if Wilde knew they were no longer prototypes and therefore, for a few weeks, illegal for use in comptetion?
hey, personally I don’t think wearing shoes that will be legal in a week is a big deal. That is a personal opinion.
But to think he didn’t know, after that hot mic is a little “naive”. Yes, let’s go with “naive”
1 Like
While on the subject of ‘naive’ I am a bit surprised that his supporter and Wilde thought that it’d be a good idea to have the conversation with a camera thrust in their faces/knees. We can see the supporter, who had brought a sac with food and a pair of shoes, takes care to obscure his mouth when talking, so clearly he realises the issue/jeopardy. Wilde: careless (both senses).
Wilde: “It was an honest mistake [which] I only realised after the race.”
1 hour
he run his 10 k pb on the prototype shoe from sat race so plenty fast.