Is triathlon too open?

mossym

mloc123 wrote: »

How about a race that is run - bike - run for those that don't like swimming....

you should patent that idea.

i guess it's the same as being discussed, if the provision was there to quickly split the field and allow those who are able to swim to do so, and quickly send the others off on a separate pre bike run, then that's a far better situation that forcing the whole field into a duathlon.

having seen multiple people wading down the river at athy on saturday, i'm pretty sure those people would have rather waded on shore than waded in the water. course now they say they did a triathlon, rather than a duathlon

Oryx

mossym wrote: »

i guess it's the same as being discussed, if the provision was there to quickly split the field and allow those who are able to swim to do so, and quickly send the others off on a separate pre bike run, then that's a far better situation that forcing the whole field into a duathlon.

That's not solving the problem of underprepared people. If someone enters a race, they should be ready to do it, within the safety parameters that apply to competent swimmers.

having seen multiple people wading down the river at athy on saturday, i'm pretty sure those people would have rather waded on shore than waded in the water. course now they say they did a triathlon, rather than a duathlon

At what point do you say to someone like that 'no, you didnt'?

mossym

Oryx wrote: »

That's not solving the problem of underprepared people. If someone enters a race, they should be ready to do it, within the safety parameters that apply to competent swimmers.

i agree totally with that. but i'm pretty sure people cheering at the cancellation of a swim aren't ready to do it. two options then. turn them away completely and lose the revenue (unlikely), or find a way to offer them a non swim arrangement.

i think the idea of having a non swim option, coupled with the license idea above, could work. make it clear on sign up, there is a chance this swim could be cold or rough, if so, all participants below x level will be sent on a run instead. all participants above a certain level will be allowed complete the swim if deemed safe.

Oryx wrote: »

At what point do you say to someone like that 'no, you didnt'?

again i agree, but at what what point would they accept you are right?

i'm very new to tri, athy sprint was my first. but i knew going up to it if they turned around and said the swim was lengthened to 1500m, or if it was rough, that i could do it. If the regs required it, i'd have no issue proving that to a trained instructor prior to being allowed to do a tri. I was heavily involved in scuba diving for several years, including helping out with trainees, so the idea that you prove yourself before being allowed to progress sits well with me.

sconhome

Oryx wrote: »

At what point do you say to someone like that 'no, you didnt'?

Where's Tunney when you need him?

hardCopy

Oryx wrote: »

That's not solving the problem of underprepared people. If someone enters a race, they should be ready to do it, within the safety parameters that apply to competent swimmers.

At what point do you say to someone like that 'no, you didnt'?

Unfortunately some people will always sign up for things that are beyond their ability. In a marathon some people will push their way to the front and end up walking after half a mile while everyone else tries to dodge them.

The safest thing would be to simply bar them until they had completed a suitable course but this makes it very difficult for tri to grow as a participant sport.

There will obviously be days when the water is too rough or cold for these folk but if conditions are good and the swim is manned with enough kayaks, let them at it.

A licencing system could also be used by some races to cut back on the number of kayaks for "licence holder only" races, possibly cutting the cost of racing.

Unregistered.

Hmmmm..... A1, A2, A3 and A4 National Championships anyone? It mean that there is something more than PBs in it for more people - especially newcomers, i.e. A4, where they would have no chance at winning age groups or otherwise.

Nwm2

Unregistered. wrote: »

Hmmmm..... A1, A2, A3 and A4 National Championships anyone? It mean that there is something more than PBs in it for more people - especially newcomers, i.e. A4, where they would have no chance at winning age groups or otherwise.

Yeah, I liked this idea on first reading, but really it is a way of making people feel better about being slow, so screw it. Train hard and if you can't get well up the field in at least the small local events, then sorry you're just (relatively) slow and let's not make a category so you can be best of the slow people.

I got a prize in an A4 TT event once, felt great but had to concentrate on reminding myself that I should feel inferior to the guys who came last place in the categories above me and that I won the prize in the slow category.

Unregistered.

Nwm2 wrote: »

Yeah, I liked this idea on first reading, but really it is a way of making people feel better about being slow, so screw it. Train hard and if you can't get well up the field in at least the small local events, then sorry you're just (relatively) slow and let's not make a category so you can be best of the slow people.

I got a prize in an A4 TT event once, felt great but had to concentrate on reminding myself that I should feel inferior to the guys who came last place in the categories above me and that I won the prize in the slow category.

That's no excuse to scrap it, if you are top of the A4 for you should HTFU and get in to A3. Which would incentive you more, say, finishing in the Top 20 in your category or finishing in the top two or three hundred? In my opinion, knowing that you're not far off a milestone is great encouragement. Knowing that there is 100's ahead of you can appear daunting, even though winning an A4 wouldn't change that. But the mind is a fickle mistress. I'd think that it would encourage newcomers to stick with the sport as well. Shorter, achievable, recognized and (ideally) rewarded goals.

sconhome

Being Devil's advocate here. Has anyone asked people what they want to get out of it?

I mean, yes, there are those who take it seriously, whereby its their sport, they've invested time and money into training, equipment, etc and then there are those who maybe just want the sense of achievement of completing a triathlon, are not worried about being serious or an uber triathlete, and are happy to do a bit of training just to get by.

I don't mean to belittle or offend people with that spectrum but thats a rough divide.

Is it possible that those races that are being affected are simply as a result of being oversubscribed? In the same way that the commercial 5k and 10k events attract 1,000s while club events get 100's? By being in the public eye is it possible that that is why these events are swamped and as a result swims restricted for mass safety and 'the weakest link'?

If asked (and this is where I refer to my original post about governing & structure from TI) would those at the back of the pack have preferred to do an easy event away from the pressure of a NS race but just didn't know about the options? That is one of the reasons why I believe a tiered structure of 2-3 years in the sport, climbing a ladder & proving your ability will actually enhance everybodies racing experience, leading in the long term to a sport that endures rather than being a hit for a couple of years as folks tick, sprint, oly, HIM & IM before going onto the next crazy thing to do.

I'm all for development and encouraging newbies, but there is a sensible and safe way to induct people starting out to ensure everyone is happy.

yheno

Are the weaker swimmers really influencing the decisions of the race organisers to shorten the swim ? i would find this very hard to believe ! im not the fastest swimmer but i can do any distance and as the run is my strongest leg i dont whinge when 60 % of the field are slower than me ! Is that not the challenge of triathlon that you constantly try to improve your weakest leg Why be good at one when you can be average at three:rolleyes:

griffin100

Anything too complex won't work and will drive people towards non TI races. Talk of replicating cyclings A1,A2 etc classifications misses the point I think. The cycling classifications are about speed, we are talking about swim competency here not swim speed, they are not the same thing. You can be a comfortable competent breaststroker well able to do up to IM distance but at a slower pace than others.

How about TI introduce a 'rookie' membership that applies to everyone in their first year of membership, converting to 'experienced' membership after year 1 subject to completing x number of ow swim races. Race organisers can indicate if their race is rookie friendly or if rookies are excluded from the race based on the swim difficulty. Races that are somewhere in the middle can have a wave start, with wave 1 for experienced swimmers and wave 2 for the 'rookies', where the swimmers most likely to get into trouble are to be found. Races that are rookie friendly could also reflect that in their water safety plans and numbers of safety boats. Not perfect by any means but I think it could work.

hypersonic

what about people like me, I do the local Olympic distance once a year on a one day licence. all the ideas laid out above would put me off.
just put the event on, if I f**k up I'll live/die with the consequences, we are dealing with adults!

sconhome

hypersonic wrote: »

what about people like me, I do the local Olympic distance once a year on a one day licence. all the ideas laid out above would put me off.
just put the event on, if I f**k up I'll live/die with the consequences, we are dealing with adults!

And if you die everyone else has to live with the memory of your unnecessary death & what about race directors? officials? marshals? everyone involved? How can they live with the consequences of your actions?

hypersonic

amphkingwest wrote: »

And if you die everyone else has to live with the memory of your unnecessary death & what about race directors? officials? marshals? everyone involved? How can they live with the consequences of your actions?

this is true of all sports, cycling, rugby, horse riding, rock climbing, etc etc, triathlon is not particularly dangerous.

p.s. maybe compare it to mountain running, which is more open, probably more dangerous but actually seems to work just fine.

EC1000

hypersonic wrote: »

this is true of all sports, cycling, rugby, horse riding, rock climbing, etc etc.

Its not really. In triathlon, its up to one or two people to decide if the course is safe and suitable for the entrants on any given race day. Sometimes this call is marginal due to inclement weather, cold waters etc. In this respect, its uniquely different from other sports.

hypersonic

EC1000 wrote: »

Its not really. In triathlon, its up to one or two people to decide if the course is safe and suitable for the entrants on any given race day. Sometimes this call is marginal due to inclement weather, cold waters etc. In this respect, its uniquely different from other sports.

then maybe that is what needs to be changed. provide a briefing, out line the risks and then get the people who want to race sign a waiver.
putting all the responsibility on the officials will just absolve people of their own personal responsibility, and is kinda begging people to do stupid things.

griffin100

hypersonic wrote: »

this is true of all sports, cycling, rugby, horse riding, rock climbing, etc etc, triathlon is not particularly dangerous.

p.s. maybe compare it to mountain running, which is more open, probably more dangerous but actually seems to work just fine.

Triathlon is not particularly dangerous, but people still die doing it - primarily in the swim. Loneswimmer made a good point on his website this week (it's worth having a look) - open water swimming is much more dangerous than triathlon, but people tend not to die doing the former.

sconhome

hypersonic wrote: »

then maybe that is what needs to be changed. provide a briefing, out line the risks and then get the people who want to race sign a waiver.
putting all the responsibility on the officials will just absolve people of their own personal responsibility, and is kinda begging people to do stupid things.

You will find all that is already done at TI sanctioned races and it basically means nothing. You sign a declaration that you have swam 2/3 of the race distance and there's race briefing, but people ignore the consequences of 'stretching the truth' and simply sign the waiver.

Unfortunately risk does not follow nice simple rules and that is why officials are tasked with making decisions, often unpopular, for the greater good.

People are people and people do stupid things everyday.

Watch the news and you will see odd reports of drowning victims ( not related to triathlon) and very often it is the person who goes to the rescue that gets into trouble. People die saving others and it is stupid people putting other people's lives at risk which is the bigger issue. (I'm using 'stupid' in your context)

This is a bigger issue and not just focused on swim risks, there are also risks inherent to dangerous cycling too.

hypersonic

triathlon will eventually paint itself into a corner if it tries to remove all the risk.
I've been in a road race where a runner died, at no point did it cross my mind that it had anything to do with the sport or the race organizer, to me these things are an unfortunate fact of life and sport.

griffin100

hypersonic wrote: »

triathlon will eventually paint itself into a corner if it tries to remove all the risk.
I've been in a road race where a runner died, at no point did it cross my mind that it had anything to do with the sport or the race organizer, to me these things are an unfortunate fact of life and sport.

No one is talking about removing all of the risk from triathlon. It's about trying to manage the people who enter OW races with no concept of what the swim involves and consequently put themselves in danger and tie up safety crew who then can't monitor other competitors. There's something wrong with some competitors when the cancellation of a swim leads to cheers - would an announcement that a marathon was being cut to 20 miles lead to the same reaction amongst runners. Race directors have to take account of these persons when deciding if swims can progress and consequently there seems to be a tendency towards being too conservative.

hypersonic

I do appreciate your points, maybe it needs a rebranding as a high risk sport, but that would be a difficult balancing act while trying to grow the sport at the same time.
I'll be heading along for my annual outing in about a month, I'll probably start it, but I can't guarantee I'll finish it.

tunney

In marathons we have the "respect my five hour marathon, its a personal achievement" and everyone says "yeah sure, whatever, doesn't affect me, big up yourself no harm". The super slow people who can barely run have no impact on those doing the races. In triathlon the super slow barely able to swim people do have an impact - they result in canceled swim legs and the races ruined for competent swimmers.

This whole bullsh1t of "lets make it inclusive, everyone can do one, its all about getting people into the sport" is just that bull****. A few years ago the average lifespan for a triathlete in Ireland was four years. They came into the sport, raced and left in four years. I would venture a guess that there is still the same sized "core group" of triathletes as a decade ago but now there are much more people in for one race or one season. Sprint -> Olympic -> HIM -> IM. Out of the sport in a season or two at most. Ticking boxes is all. This box tickers do damage the sport for those that are in it for the long haul (or at least four years). And as for this crap of "get the parents (specifically mothers being mentioned) and you get the next generation of triathletes in the sport at a young age". Total horsesh1te, but thats a different point.

Look at Team In Training in the states. The ultimate collection of box ticking. Ironman in the US now will have rest pontoons on the swim for people to have a little break as they swim around - probably breaststroke too. Thats the way its going here - all these suggestions of licences and qualifications just won't happen - its all about the revenue stream.

Consider yourself one of the "core" - then vote with your feet. Race cancels the swim, don't enter it ever again. Tell others not to. Very quickly race organisers will push back on silly enforcement of rules "Oh no there is a big wave, lets cancel the swim won't somebody think of the fattie who just wants the t-shirt and is then going to try adventure racing next"......

miller82

tunney wrote: »

Ironman in the US now will have rest pontoons on the swim for people to have a little break as they swim around .

Good post.

tell me you're taking the p1ss with the above ??

Unregistered.

tunney wrote: »

Consider yourself one of the "core" - then vote with your feet. Race cancels the swim, don't enter it ever again. Tell others not to. Very quickly race organisers will push back on silly enforcement of rules "Oh no there is a big wave, lets cancel the swim won't somebody think of the fattie who just wants the t-shirt and is then going to try adventure racing next"......

It's not up to the race organisers though if the swim is cancelled? They'd have to obey the rules. I think there should be a provision in the rules where those who pose the most risk in the swim could be clearly identified and can be told not to do the swim, where the other, more advanced athletes can.

tunney

miller82 wrote: »

Good post.

tell me you're taking the p1ss with the above ??

http://triathlon.competitor.com/2013/05/news/ironman-announces-swimstart-initiative-in-north-america_75537

Anchored resting rafts to be strategically placed along the swim course (please note that athletes will NOT be disqualified by resting on these floats).

Oryx

Unregistered. wrote: »

It's not up to the race organisers though if the swim is cancelled? They'd have to obey the rules. I think there should be a provision in the rules where those who pose the most risk in the swim could be clearly identified and can be told not to do the swim, where the other, more advanced athletes can.

The TO has the final call on cancelling the swim.

Those most at risk might not like to be singled out as such.

BUACHAILL

Certainly no expert on the matter but this is how I see it and I am one of these people who have only taken up the sport as a personal challenge to complete an ironman. Just to mention I have also caught the bug and won't be stopping at this challenge I plan on joining a club and improving next year. I wouldn't have decided to do it in the first place had I not had a serious interest in it.

Anyway, it seems to me that there is a real opening in the sport for an elite "ironman style event" that not just anybody can enter. There is a qualifying system and you must be more than competent in all events. Just like the Boston marathon you must qualify with time. The swim being the most common issue obviously more emphasis must be put on times. I would just be weary about where you start and stop. Lots of great triathletes out there who are not strong swimmers so it could be based on experience and number of races also. Failing that the only other way to do it is to forget mass starts, have 3-5 waves. Wave one for the pro's, 2-3 based on times in previous events and 4-5 for the amateur hardcore ego maniacs who actually can't swim, should it be a rough day wave 4-5 either have swim reduce or cancelled depending.

Not easy way to patrol this, at some stage with wave starts amateurs get in the way if the swim is shortened they will be in the way on the bike and can equally be as dangerous. So I would favour a more elite triathlon series where your past results, club affiliation and experience qualify you to enter. Is this feasible ? Ironman doesn't think so they just want your money.

That's how I see it. People will always attempt things and challenge themselves and yes you won't stop the stupidness and them endangering other people at the same time. So what do you do, change sport? Accept its human nature and try get ahead of them in events?

I for one would not be a strong swimmer in comparison to triathlon level, should I not sign up for an event? Or do I keep practicing , train hard everyday and know my level, come race day hang back let the strong swimmers go ahead and get into my own tempo and enjoy the day for what my level allows?

miller82

Oryx wrote: »

Those most at risk might not like to be singled out as such.

I would have little sypmathy on this though. they are making a call based on the conditions and the abilities, or lack of ability, of a certain portion of swimmers. seems fair to me. what doesnt seem fair is the rest of us being punished for swimmers that are weak

tunney

BUACHAILL wrote: »

Certainly no expert on the matter but this is how I see it and I am one of these people who have only taken up the sport as a personal challenge to complete an ironman. Just to mention I have also caught the bug and won't be stopping at this challenge I plan on joining a club and improving next year. I wouldn't have decided to do it in the first place had I not had a serious interest in it.

Anyway, it seems to me that there is a real opening in the sport for an elite "ironman style event" that not just anybody can enter. There is a qualifying system and you must be more than competent in all events. Just like the Boston marathon you must qualify with time. The swim being the most common issue obviously more emphasis must be put on times. I would just be weary about where you start and stop. Lots of great triathletes out there who are not strong swimmers so it could be based on experience and number of races also. Failing that the only other way to do it is to forget mass starts, have 3-5 waves. Wave one for the pro's, 2-3 based on times in previous events and 4-5 for the amateur hardcore ego maniacs who actually can't swim, should it be a rough day wave 4-5 either have swim reduce or cancelled depending.

Not easy way to patrol this, at some stage with wave starts amateurs get in the way if the swim is shortened they will be in the way on the bike and can equally be as dangerous. So I would favour a more elite triathlon series where your past results, club affiliation and experience qualify you to enter. Is this feasible ? Ironman doesn't think so they just want your money.

That's how I see it. People will always attempt things and challenge themselves and yes you won't stop the stupidness and them endangering other people at the same time. So what do you do, change sport? Accept its human nature and try get ahead of them in events?

I for one would not be a strong swimmer in comparison to triathlon level, should I not sign up for an event? Or do I keep practicing , train hard everyday and know my level, come race day hang back let the strong swimmers go ahead and get into my own tempo and enjoy the day for what my level allows?

Case and point.

Oryx

miller82 wrote: »

I would have little sypmathy on this though. they are making a call based on the conditions and the abilities, or lack of ability, of a certain portion of swimmers. seems fair to me. what doesnt seem fair is the rest of us being punished for swimmers that are weak

Oh, I agree. I just dont know how you put a dividing line through a bunch of swimmers waiting to start a race, letting some swim and some not, without starting a bloody riot. Some people overestimate their ability. Some want to go in and take their chances anyway. And some people will be very vocal at being removed from a portion of a race. How on earth do you deal with it? The answer, unfortunately is that you don't. You cancel the swim.

Our club race last year had a truncated swim. I was one of the people onsite fighting to have 'a' swim, even a shortened one, rather than a duathlon, which was the other option on the day.