See my post on the equilateral tri concept–do it based on established world records at each distance…wouldn’t base it on any one person
.
It would be interesting to have the swim last; people trying to get their wetsuits on in T2…lol. They would also need a lot more lifeguards in the water to pull people out. There would be a lot more DNF’s.
DNFs??? more like MIAs
But you can be sure that your nearest and dearest will be paying a lot more attention to the race as it nears its conclusion!!
DNF … MIA … DOA … DIS (drowned in swim)
They would have to start designing wetsuits with Emergency pop-out flotation devices
This gets brought up occasionally. While it makes sense, it won’t happen – not on a large scale. That said, down in Clermont, there is a race held in conjunction with the Great Floridian that’s 2K/60K/15K (is that the old Nice distance or at least very close to it?). I’m planning on trying that one – it’s longer than an Oly but shorter than a half IM.
“Average ‘competitor’ - 25 min swim, 1:20 bike, 40 min Swim”
That’s not a triathlon. Do you mean 40 min run?
To the point about the 50th percentile, I pulled the 1200th place of 2400 finishers at IM Wisc. Times were 1:15, 6:07 and 5:52. Here you can see the dis-proportion of the swim leg. You could cut the Bike & run legs by even 50-75% for better balance.
Let’s have a RD step up and innovate where each discipline could be roughly equal by time and see what happens. Sure, the swimmers will be happy but only because the run & bikes have been shortened - not because the swim was extended.
I see two problems with the “equilateral triathlon” concept. First, it’s based on overall world-record times, which aren’t relevant for most participants; that would suggest that mean times across all competitors would be more relevant. Second, the times will probably cluster closer to the mean in one discipline relative to another. If the nature of one discipline is such that it’s harder to put some time between yourself and the next competitor, shouldn’t that discipline receive greater weight? Fot this reason, IMO it would be more appropriate to design the distances such that the standard deviations in times would be approximately the same in each discipline. You’d also have to keep in mind that due to the swim cutoff, the distribution curve in times is cut off at one end, and adjust the calculations accordingly. (There really isn’t a corresponding “bike cutoff” or “run cutoff” per se, just S+B and S+B+R cutoffs.)
Of course, all that math might just detract from the fun of the sport, which is why I’m happy just to do the race distances we have right now!
To the point about the 50th percentile, I pulled the 1200th place of 2400 finishers at IM Wisc. Times were 1:15, 6:07 and 5:52. Here you can see the dis-proportion of the swim leg. You could cut the Bike & run legs by even 50-75% for better balance.
Let’s have a RD step up and innovate where each discipline could be roughly equal by time and see what happens. Sure, the swimmers will be happy but only because the run & bikes have been shortened - not because the swim was extended.
It’s not all about the duration of each leg. How about evaluating the relative impact of each leg on the final placings. Just a hunch, but I suspect that for most distances the relative performances of the bike leg do not impact the final placings as much as the run leg despite it being longer.
Great post / point.
IMO all three events need to matter with respect to the overall outcome, they don’t need to take the same amount of time.
How about a race that is not by total time but rather by ordinals. I.e., 1st place swim, 5th place bike, 3rd place run = 9 points. Lowest points wins.
Along these lines I’d be interested to see a race distance that lands squarely between OLY and HIM, if possible… would be nice to have a race distance that mortals can complete in the 3-4 hour range.
Santa Barbara Long Course Tri- 1-mile swim/34-mile bike/10-mile run.
aquaman triathlon, 3.5 mile swim / 35 mile bike / 13 mile run
http://www.kingdomtriathlon.org/
Man, I would LOVE to do that race! Bummer it’s 3,000 miles away!
Great post / point.
IMO all three events need to matter with respect to the overall outcome, they don’t need to take the same amount of time.
How about a race that is not by total time but rather by ordinals. I.e., 1st place swim, 5th place bike, 3rd place run = 9 points. Lowest points wins.
Interesting approach. You probably need to add in the total transition time into this formula also or I could see some 20 minute transitions.
I didn’t mean long in the context of normal single sport racing. I know many semi serious single sport athletes. Mnay many cyclists have done centuries, same with runners and marathons. Very few swimmers that race in HS college or adult have done a race longer than 1500m. Swimming in an IM is the only leg where its longer than a normal competitive distance.
I’ll even take a risk here, I’m will to assume you’ve rode 100 miles, ran a marathon, but never did a swim only race longer than 1500 m. Am I correct?
Styrrell
I didn’t mean long in the context of normal single sport racing. I know many semi serious single sport athletes. Mnay many cyclists have done centuries, same with runners and marathons. Very few swimmers that race in HS college or adult have done a race longer than 1500m. Swimming in an IM is the only leg where its longer than a normal competitive distance.
I’ll even take a risk here, I’m will to assume you’ve rode 100 miles, ran a marathon, but never did a swim only race longer than 1500 m. Am I correct?
Styrrell
What races are those, if you don’t mind me asking?.. not out the realm of possibility that I’d travel to Ontario for a race. thanks
What would you guess the percentages would be if the events were simply rearranged? If the swim was last it would be much slower for most, and the other 2 would be faster.
The swim is fast partly because it is first.
It would be interesting to have the swim last; people trying to get their wetsuits on in T2…lol. They would also need a lot more lifeguards in the water to pull people out. There would be a lot more DNF’s.
A lot more permanent DNF’s.
Ron W.
How it should be …
Sprint 750m / 20k / 5k
Oly 1.5k / 40k / 10k
Half 2.5k / 80k / 20k
IM 5k / 160k / 40k
but it won’t be.
-j
I am somewhat biased, but I think it is telling that the swim is so relatively short that the races can’t use the same logic for the swim as they do for the run/bike (e.g. cut in halfish)
IM/70.3/Oly/Sprint
Run: 26.2/13.1/6.2/3.1
Bike: 112/56/28/13
Swim: 2.5/1.2/1/.75
As a swimmer/biker, I would gladly exchange some bike mileage for some additional swim length. All I would like is to have the swim be meaningful in some way. If I really trained in the swim, I might get another minute on the pack = not worth it. I train hard in the run, but I am not a gifted runner, I will never be a 5:00/mile guy.
In my experience, the best guys in the field are gifted at all three. Changes would not affect them. Biking and running afford the opportunity to gain an advantage to make up for a weakness elsewhere, swimming does not. It would be nice to have the same opportunities as the other disciplines
I didn’t mean long in the context of normal single sport racing. I know many semi serious single sport athletes. Mnay many cyclists have done centuries, same with runners and marathons. Very few swimmers that race in HS college or adult have done a race longer than 1500m. Swimming in an IM is the only leg where its longer than a normal competitive distance.
I’ll even take a risk here, I’m will to assume you’ve rode 100 miles, ran a marathon, but never did a swim only race longer than 1500 m. Am I correct?
Styrrell
I’m going to have to disagree with you - HS swimming is irrelevant to triathlon. HS cross country is 5k, but IM running is a marathon, or nearly 9x as far. You say swimming in an IM is the only leg where it’s longer than a normal competition distance, but that’s only true for pool swims; again, 10k swims are the norm for endurance swimmers in open water, which would make sense for an IM.
You assume wrong. My longest ride was 45 miles (I hate the bike), my longest run was a half marathon, and my longest swim race is the two 2-milers I’ve knocked out so far this year (the second in 53:XX), and I have one more 2-miler and two 2.4-milers left this season. Mind you, I’ve only been seriously swimming since February, so I am stunningly unimpressed with the whining about the swims from people who are in far better shape than I am and who spend much more time training than I do. A sprint tri should have a 1500m swim, an oly should double that, and an IM should be 10k. Maybe shorten all three disciplines after increasing to that level, since that would seriously affect the time to finish any of them, but that would be a sane ratio, unlike today.
And yes, I know this is not going to gain widespread acceptance. I’m fine with that. I’m far more of an aquathlete than triathlete (and our local aquathlons, as I said, are 1500m/5k, which I believe is a good ratio); I just plan on doing a few tris a year so I don’t have to keep explaining aquathlons to people. However, the logic is that IM swims should be longer to give equal weight to all the disciplines. I even read here someone saying “to get better at ironman, run more”. That speaks volumes to the imbalance.
Remember folks, this was a sport that started as a bar bet. The swimmer says 2.4 mi, 20 mile, 3 mile is about right. The cyclist says a 100 yd swim, 100 mi bike, 200 yard run sounds good. The runner says take a shower, 2 mile bike and a marathon is a real triathlon. Perspective is what it all about.