My 40 yr old bud did 10:30 in his first IM at Madison and says he wasn’t close to qualifying. I am surprised, and wonder what he needed to qualify.
Are you sure he went 10:30? That would Q for Kona!
09:48:35 M40-44 1/328
09:53:32 M40-44 2/328
09:55:35 M40-44 3/328
10:17:00 M40-44 4/328
10:26:09 M40-44 5/328
10:28:27 M40-44 6/328
10:33:37 M40-44 7/328
10:34:18 M40-44 8/328
10:39:33 M40-44 9/328
10:40:41 M40-44 10/328
1st & 3rd did not take thier slots. Rolled down to 10:40:41
Yeah…your bud is sorely mistaken. That would only be true for a fast course like IM-FL.
Don’t get me started… oh, OK, do.
If it wasn’t a North American event, you wouldn’t be surprised.
In the competitive IM nations, 10:30 is a long way from what should be expected for a 40 y/o to qualify. He’d need sub-10 in one country that comes to mind.
Don’t get me started… oh, OK, do.
If it wasn’t a North American event, you wouldn’t be surprised.
In the competitive IM nations, 10:30 is a long way from what should be expected for a 40 y/o to qualify. He’d need sub-10 in one country that comes to mind.
Please explain. Do you understand the conditions the past few years and the winning results? Perhaps look at comparative times on “easy” courses in “good” weather…and you’ll be surprised.
When the top pro men can barely break 8:50 at IMWI then a 10:40 ain’t so bad …
Are you sure he went 10:30? That would Q for Kona!
09:48:35 M40-44 1/328
09:53:32 M40-44 2/328
09:55:35 M40-44 3/328
10:17:00 M40-44 4/328
10:26:09 M40-44 5/328
10:28:27 M40-44 6/328
10:33:37 M40-44 7/328
10:34:18 M40-44 8/328
10:39:33 M40-44 9/328
10:40:41 M40-44 10/328
1st & 3rd did not take thier slots. Rolled down to 10:40:41
Wherre did you find this information? Thanks for your help.
My 40 yr old bud did 10:30 in his first IM at Madison and says he wasn’t close to qualifying. I am surprised, and wonder what he needed to qualify.
Maybe that 10:30 was on the run, which would explain his problem. “wasn’t close” is also in the eye of the beholder.
<<<“Please explain. Do you understand the conditions the past few years and the winning results? Perhaps look at comparative times on “easy” courses in “good” weather…and you’ll be surprised.”>>>
I’ve looked at the qualifying times for all of the North American qualifying races and I have been surprised; by how soft they are. Sometimes they are very slow, sometimes even slower. Too many qualifying spots for too few talented athletes. It helps to explain why American athletes generally perform so poorly at Kona, as debated here: http://forum.slowtwitch.com/gforum.cgi?post=1045842;
search_string=search_string;#1045842
Try qualifying in Germany, New Zealand or Australia if you want to know what a competitive race looks like.
My 40 yr old bud did 10:30 in his first IM at Madison and says he wasn’t close to qualifying. I am surprised, and wonder what he needed to qualify.
Maybe that 10:30 was on the run, which would explain his problem. “wasn’t close” is also in the eye of the beholder.
Umm. NO.
I think 10:30 in his first IM, especially Madison, is impressive to say the least.
My 40 yr old bud did 10:30 in his first IM at Madison and says he wasn’t close to qualifying. I am surprised, and wonder what he needed to qualify.
What is his name. Maybe he is lying to you to make himself look better than he is for some reason.
It is all available here: http://www.ironmanwisconsin.com/results/index.php
Here are the first few M40-44
13 09:48:35 MONKS CARMEN M40-44 1/328
17 09:53:32 SCHMATZ WOLFGANG M40-44 2/328
20 09:55:35 GIORDANELLI CHRISTOPHER M40-44 3/328
40 10:17:00 DUENNER JOACHIM M40-44 4/328
62 10:26:09 HILLE ARND M40-44 5/328
68 10:28:27 HISKES MARK M40-44 6/328
83 10:33:37 VAN SCOYOC DAVID M40-44 7/328
85 10:34:18 TEUFEL ROLAND M40-44 8/328
99 10:39:33 BEAMAN MIKE M40-44 9/328
101 10:40:41 POTTER JOHN M40-44 10/328
106 10:42:40 MARTIN CHIP M40-44 11/328
107 10:43:03 WELLMAN ANDY M40-44 12/328
111 10:43:50 FANKHAUSER KLAUS M40-44 13/328
113 10:44:00 ZUEGER KARL M40-44 14/328
121 10:45:43 HERBE ANDREAS M40-44 15/328
122 10:45:49 CARLSON JEY M40-44 16/328
124 10:47:15 LOMI EMILIO M40-44 17/328
128 10:49:11 KANDEL MICHEL M40-44 18/328
Its on the IMMoo (and every other IMNA site). you can search for all of the Kona Q’s overall, by age group, etc. IM has one of the best “results pages” out there in the Tri world.
oops. I goofed, he did 11:30 and I was thinking of someone else in WI that did 10:30.
It’s silly to compare race times between courses/conditions and stereotype “competitive”.
Using your theory, all division would be won by international competitors, which isn’t the case…minus the 40-44 div.
Really? Every triathlete I know does it. Every triathlon journalist too. Among the first things people will tell you about a new race is how tough the course is and how competitive the field.
I have no idea what you imagine my “theory” is. I wasn’t positing a theory, merely an observation (which you’re welcome to refute, if you think you can) that there are a huge number of qualifying opportunities in North America compared to other countries where Ironman racing is popular. The entirely predictable result is that the qualifying cut-offs at North American races are low, and the average performances of Americans at Kona are poorer than any other country. Have a look at the latest Kona results - it’s very striking.
Nothing I have said suggests that all divisions of any obscure American race will be won by internationals. I did notice, though, that there were double the number of Australians, Kiwis and Germans at Kona as there were qualifying spots in those countries. It is widely commented in Australia that if you really want to race Kona but can’t make the cut-off there are plenty of easier races in the USA.
some would also argue that there is a much larger culture of PED use in euro countries as well…just an observation.
Please provide data rather than acedotal stats.
You mentioned that international folks come to the US to race, but yet also say that times are slow. These statements contradict each other. Please bring up an example. The course is tough (compared to “most” international courses) The conditions in the past 3 years have been “above average” in difficulty
You can’t compare QUALIFYING times and AVERAGE times of races. Of course Moo has a higher % of 1st timers and recreational Ironman than international races. It also has number the number of participants in several cases.
I did qualify at Moo with a 10:00.06 in AG 35-39. I was less then an hour behind the winner.
The winner has done 8:30 in Germany. Was I one hour behind him there I would´ve also qualified.
I think there is a myth that the US is easy to qualify at. It stems from the times when the US-races had more spots per race then they have now. With just 80 (sometimes less) spots per race it is not easy anymore.
The remark regarding ped´s in Europe was cheap, shame on you.
Axel, from Germany
You might have been under the influence when you posted, but I’ll try to answer anyway.
<<<“Please provide data rather than acedotal stats.”>>>(sic)
The data is readily available from the Ironman web sites. I encourage you to look at it. are From the 2006 Kona results I have already pointed out the following:
The US, with less than 4% of the world’s population is offered 50% of the spots at the “world championship” (No other country has more than 10%). Is this on merit? Are they that good? Hell no.
90% of the last ten, more than 80% of the last 100 finishers were American. Relative to their participation level, US competitors are under-represented at the top of the leader board in the pros and every age group, and massively over represented at the bottom of the field, and in the non-finishers.
I can’t wait to see your (or anyone’s) data that refutes this. Despite the wacko excuses, rationalisations and insults that have been offered, the truth is fairly obvious to anyone willing to think about it rationally. The policy of preferencing Americans in selection for Kona has led to a significant lowering of the standards for qualification by Americans. Many (i.e. hundreds of) Americans who get to Kona through US selection standards would have virtually zero chance of qualifying in any other country.
There are IMs in Nowheresville USA with 80 qualifying spots, when the whole of South Africa has 30, the UK 30, Japan 50. Outside the US only the triathlon powerhouse Germany has more than 100 spots (120), still a small fraction of the 900 or so for the US.
Perhaps most absurd of all, WTC has realised that it is too much to expect some Americans to qualify for the IM world champs at an actual IM, so there are now 255(!!!) and increasing spots at half IM distance races. Americans are going to the so-called world championships of Ironman having never done the event in their lives, and some of them are DNFing and coming home again STILL not having completed an IM. That’s a bit insulting to the many excellent athletes from some countries where coming second in your age group at the full distance national championship can still mean missing out on a Kona spot.
It has been fascinating to see how difficult some people find it to admit to the blindingly obvious, but the fact remains - qualification in the US is soft, and the US sends a cheerful mass of slow triathletes to Kona as a result.
The numbers brake down to this:
North-America: 590
Europe: 415
Africa: 30
Down-under: 180
Asia: 100 (plus I think 30 at Malaysia, not listet)
Carribean: 30
Hawaii:85
South-America: 50
I have not included Hawaii in NA as it politically belongs there, but is as far from mainland as mainland is from…say… Brittain.
I you consider that Triathlon startet in the US, WTC is an US based company and most of the business is done in the US, I peronally think the numbers are not so bad.
Of course there is always somebody who feels he is not treated fairly. Like the Californians could wonder why the heartland of triathlons has only 30 spots…
I agree on the lottery, though. While I think Ironman is something for everybody, Hawaii is not. This is the Worlds, entry should be earned. A lot of people in the back of the field come from this.
Axel