Fair Triathlon

Discussion in 'Triathlon' started by [email protected], Apr 11, 2006.

  1. Tags:


  2. [email protected] wrote in news:1144791783.581861.57980
    @t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

    > Folks here may be interested in this paper
    > http://www.bepress.com/jqas/vol2/iss1/3/ that discusses a triathlon
    > that is more evenly balanced between sports.
    >
    >


    Not exactly a new topic, it comes up all the time. In the author's example,
    OD tris should have a 2500M swim instead of 1500M. Problem is, triathletes
    aren't really the greatest swimmers out there. Most newbies approach the
    swim portion as a survival segment.

    Don't get me wrong, there are great swimmers among triathletes, but by and
    large, the swim is the portion that the average tirathlete is least skilled
    in. It's also probably the least widely participated in sport on a stand
    alone basis.

    So if you look at the skill base that's out there in terms of participants,
    the swim is probably challenging enough as is. It's a shame though, if the
    swim was longer, it would be much later in the race that I was hopelessly
    out of the running :)
     
  3. Rookie

    Rookie Guest

    Tom Henderson wrote:
    > [email protected] wrote in news:1144791783.581861.57980
    > @t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
    >
    > > Folks here may be interested in this paper
    > > http://www.bepress.com/jqas/vol2/iss1/3/ that discusses a triathlon
    > > that is more evenly balanced between sports.
    > >
    > >

    >
    > Not exactly a new topic, it comes up all the time. In the author's example,
    > OD tris should have a 2500M swim instead of 1500M. Problem is, triathletes
    > aren't really the greatest swimmers out there. Most newbies approach the
    > swim portion as a survival segment.
    >
    > Don't get me wrong, there are great swimmers among triathletes, but by and
    > large, the swim is the portion that the average tirathlete is least skilled
    > in. It's also probably the least widely participated in sport on a stand
    > alone basis.
    >
    > So if you look at the skill base that's out there in terms of participants,
    > the swim is probably challenging enough as is. It's a shame though, if the
    > swim was longer, it would be much later in the race that I was hopelessly
    > out of the running :)


    I like the approach of using deviations in time to complete events to
    calculate the proportions (rather than the normal approach of trying to
    make all the events the same length). Would be interesting to know
    where they got the stats from though.

    If they took deviations from triathlon results then they will be skewed
    in favour of a short run due to the large spread in times over the
    running part of the course when everyone is knackered.

    If they took deviations from pure swimming, cycling or running events,
    then they probably don't capture the broader variety in swimming
    ability among triathletes - I suspect nobody enters swimming races
    unless they're pretty good at swimming already, whereas lots of people
    enter 10k runs or bike rides for charity.
     
  4. Ken

    Ken Guest

    I have been doing tri's since 1987 and moct are as they are now. I don't
    believe that the distances were engineered to be proportional to energy
    expenditure or time. Most likely they were distances which fit a
    situation.
    I have acclimated to the current distances and would prefer they stay as
    they are. Nothing stops a new race from being established for the distance
    you prefer so go for it.

    [email protected] (still lurking about now and then)

    "Rookie" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >
    > Tom Henderson wrote:
    >> [email protected] wrote in news:1144791783.581861.57980
    >> @t31g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
    >>
    >> > Folks here may be interested in this paper
    >> > http://www.bepress.com/jqas/vol2/iss1/3/ that discusses a triathlon
    >> > that is more evenly balanced between sports.
    >> >
    >> >

    >>
    >> Not exactly a new topic, it comes up all the time. In the author's
    >> example,
    >> OD tris should have a 2500M swim instead of 1500M. Problem is,
    >> triathletes
    >> aren't really the greatest swimmers out there. Most newbies approach the
    >> swim portion as a survival segment.
    >>
    >> Don't get me wrong, there are great swimmers among triathletes, but by
    >> and
    >> large, the swim is the portion that the average tirathlete is least
    >> skilled
    >> in. It's also probably the least widely participated in sport on a stand
    >> alone basis.
    >>
    >> So if you look at the skill base that's out there in terms of
    >> participants,
    >> the swim is probably challenging enough as is. It's a shame though, if
    >> the
    >> swim was longer, it would be much later in the race that I was hopelessly
    >> out of the running :)

    >
    > I like the approach of using deviations in time to complete events to
    > calculate the proportions (rather than the normal approach of trying to
    > make all the events the same length). Would be interesting to know
    > where they got the stats from though.
    >
    > If they took deviations from triathlon results then they will be skewed
    > in favour of a short run due to the large spread in times over the
    > running part of the course when everyone is knackered.
    >
    > If they took deviations from pure swimming, cycling or running events,
    > then they probably don't capture the broader variety in swimming
    > ability among triathletes - I suspect nobody enters swimming races
    > unless they're pretty good at swimming already, whereas lots of people
    > enter 10k runs or bike rides for charity.
    >
     
  5. Tony

    Tony Guest

    People need to leave the sport alone. Why do people feel they always have
    to fix something that is not broken. Are there any more triathlon
    fundamentalists anymore?


    <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > Folks here may be interested in this paper
    > http://www.bepress.com/jqas/vol2/iss1/3/ that discusses a triathlon
    > that is more evenly balanced between sports.
    >
     
  6. > Most likely they were distances which fit a situation.

    I'm with Ken on this one, despite falling for the April 1st ITU Press
    Release in which it was suggested that they'd balance out the sport a
    nit more.

    A more longer swim would likely significantly increase costs for many
    races as greater safety requirements would be needed. Sure lots of
    major Standard/Oympic distance races already have canoes, life guards,
    recuse facilities etc. but many smaller local races do not. Certainly
    in the UK the majority of races(albeit the smaller less commercial
    ones) are pool based and simply can't take 750m/.5 mile swims, let
    alone anything longer.

    Also, its getting increasingly harder to find bike courses that are
    safe in and around most metropolitan areas, again even in the UK the
    dreaded traffic signal creep has started and many traffic
    circles(roundabouts) have them now and it makes finding and organising
    a decent bike course very hard unless you can close the roads.

    As Tony suggests, I'm sure you could get a lot of takers for almost any
    well organised triathlon, irrespective of course length. If you want to
    go ahead and organise a non-standard distance go ahead, after all it
    hasn't hurt escape from alcatraz, they now have world wide qualifiers
    to get a slot.... sigh.
     
  7. Steph

    Steph Guest

    "Tony" <[email protected]> wrote in
    news:BSm%[email protected]:

    > People need to leave the sport alone. Why do people feel they always
    > have to fix something that is not broken. Are there any more
    > triathlon fundamentalists anymore?
    >
    >
    ><[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    >> Folks here may be interested in this paper
    >> http://www.bepress.com/jqas/vol2/iss1/3/ that discusses a triathlon
    >> that is more evenly balanced between sports.
    >>


    Read through everyone's posts and of course feel each is entitled to
    their own opinion. But the bluntness of this one intrigued me.

    I too began doing tri-s in the mid 80's. I had a strong swimming
    background and was an above average cyclist. Running was never my suit,
    and continued to be my downfall in races.

    I was the guy that exited the water near the front and finished the bike
    leg in the top 10 only to barely finish in the top 1/3 after the run; I
    had 75 year old guys run past me during a 10k wondering if I was in the
    same race as they.

    No problem, I accepted it and did my best to improve my running.
    Likewise I continue to push my other disciplines and regularly ride
    centuries or swim 4.5 miles in open-water - yet I have never done a
    marathon and obviously never done a full Ironman; my body just can't do
    it.

    I read a bit ago about some of the high-profile early Ironman elite that
    can no longer run. They are looking for races I wished for all my life,
    swim - bike duathlons. The difference is, now you got big names that want
    to do these races and not pound their bodies during a run segment, so we
    actually have a few this spring and summer.

    Are the current Triathlons skewed towards one sport or another? I
    definately think so and agree with the journal; do I think they need to
    adjust the current races (and tick off Tony)? No, leave them alone as
    Tony wishes; but there should be the option of racing a more balanced
    race IMHO. Until then I am going to shop for swim-bike events, or find a
    relay person for the run segment <g>
     
Loading...
Loading...