Is triathlon too open?

BUACHAILL

Tunney don't mistake what I said for me not being a competent swimmer or going into an event under prepared. I am more than able to complete the swim.

However

I am new to the sport and know my limitations. Last thing I want to do in a race is be going quicker than I should or get in someone else way who has a real chance of featuring.

hypersonic

how about club only events, maybe including a coaches note to say you are ready. this would improve the quality of the field with out increasing the expense (much)

Oryx

hypersonic wrote: »

how about club only events, maybe including a coaches note to say you are ready. this would improve the quality of the field with out increasing the expense (much)

Many triathetes are not affiliated to a club. And strict policing like that could go badly if you have coaches with differing standards. My own club has no TI affiliated coaches anyway. And also, being a stubborn sort, if I had a club coach who could dictate what races I could do, I would leave the club.

Nwm2

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.

I must admit to really disliking this attitude, but I do understand it. If you simply modify it by saying "a personal challenge to complete an ironman in <Xhrs" then that would be great.(X needs to be <<17hrs, assuming you are not too old).

BUACHAILL wrote: »

Lots of great triathletes out there who are not strong swimmers so it could be based on experience and number of races also.

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong....

BUACHAILL

Ok let us be clear, while we are picking on wording.

I was agreeing with the points most had made and was just giving you different perspective, we should not all be tarred with the same brush. Maybe my wording wasn't the best but for the record,

I have my goals and times, I am very competitive yet I am also realistic. When I started this "challenge" I was heavily overweight and unfit, how am I to know how I will feel on the day, if I go too hard on the bike and suffer on the run, don't take on enough nutrition. I am new to this, I appreciate the severity of the challenge and the training it takes, I won't endanger my life or anyone else's for that matter, but I won't be so stupid as to jump in with people out of my depth getting in the way and burning out trying to keep up.

On the swim:

Again my wording may not have been the best, I say I am not a strong swimmer, I compare alway with everything I do to the best or what would be considered strong, so say a sub 1hour 3.8k swim. I would be aiming for. 1.15 - 1.30 swim so don't consider myself a good swimmer. When I said there are a lot of good triathletes out there who are not strong swimmers it was with the same comparison so again not the best wording.

As for the attitude, you don't know me, the hours I put into this, how serious I take this sport even though I am new to it, originally treated it as a challenge for myself, but also as a love for the sport i wanted to get involved in and the discipline it takes to compete. My attitude is in line and if more beginners like me approached it the same there wouldn't be half the problem. Know your limits.

All that said what do people expect, ironman allow 2000 entrants. Do people really feel that everyone going into them can compete? Do as Tunney suggests if you don't agree with it, don't sign up. I do think though for the few stupid people who take chances with their lives especially in the swim, they ruin it for the majority and I can see how this gets on people's nerves.

longshank

does anyone have any statistics for % of races where swim is cancelled/shortened in Ireland over last few years?(not own personal experience stats!) Any statistics for number of people who have died in swim leg of Irish swims? Is this a real or imagined problem? Genuine question as I'm competing for 5 years now and haven't really noticed a big problem but maybe I have just been lucky.

RayCun

BUACHAILL wrote: »

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.

(excuse my butting in )

Combining with a point someone else made, what if you had to qualify for certain waves by completing other races. In a HIM, you can only go in wave 1 if you've completed a HIM before, or for an open water tri you can only get in wave 1 if you've completed an OW swim of the same distance before. Wave 2 if you've completed an Olympic distance, or a shorter OW swim. Wave 3 is open to anyone, so the race isn't losing money by turning people away.
If conditions are okay but scary, no swim for wave 3.

enzeder

RayCun wrote: »

In a HIM, you can only go in wave 1 if you've completed a HIM before

Terrible idea.
I did my first HIM a couple of weeks ago and finished in the top ten. I wouldn't like to be prevented from starting with the top guys just because I've not done one before whereas there would be a huge number of much slower participants in the wave ahead of me that I would have to swim/bike through.
Many athletes do well on their first attempt at a distance. Chrissie Wellington would be quite a good example of that off the top of my head.

griffin100

Nwm2 wrote: »

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong....

Really? Liam Dolan qualified for Kona in 2011 with a 1.11 swim - hardly a great swim time - its about the same as me and I'm not a great swimmer. He did a 1.35 swim in Kona in 2012 - is he a poor triathlete?

We're straying from the original question about swim competency into the annual discussion about whether triathlon and in particular IM triathlon should be a mass participation sport. Who gives a fcuk whether or not someone stays in the sport for one or ten years or if they see IM as a box ticking exercise. Whether you take 16hrs or 10hrs to complete an IM no one gives a fcuk except you and your family (if you're lucky) - you're still an amateur engaged in a hobby. Fine if you think more than 10hrs for an IM is crap, as a plodder it doesn't bother me.

IM itself as a brand is already tainted and adding rest stops in the swim just devalues it further. The IM brand is about the money - you need it to race, and the company are happy to take it from you. I wounder what the average salary of a Kona qualifier is?

catweazle

griffin100 wrote: »

Really? Liam Dolan qualified for Kona in 2011 with a 1.11 swim - hardly a great swim time - its about the same as me and I'm not a great swimmer. He did a 1.35 swim in Kona in 2012 - is he a poor triathlete?

Yes but a fantastic duathlete

tunney

griffin100 wrote: »

Really? Liam Dolan qualified for Kona in 2011 with a 1.11 swim - hardly a great swim time - its about the same as me and I'm not a great swimmer. He did a 1.35 swim in Kona in 2012 - is he a poor triathlete?

Does it hurt your eyes to watch him swim? Yes
Does he put massive effort in for little return? Yes
Onto the important questions:
Does he have experience swimming in all manner of conditions? Yes
Is he clinically obese and at risk of a heart attack in the water? No
Is he likely to panic and drown in the water? No
Does he have a healthy respect for the dangers of the water? Yes
Does he have over a decade experience doing triathlon? Yes

griffin100 wrote: »

We're straying from the original question about swim competency into the annual discussion about whether triathlon and in particular IM triathlon should be a mass participation sport. Who gives a fcuk whether or not someone stays in the sport for one or ten years or if they see IM as a box ticking exercise.

It makes a huge difference what the experience of the competitors is. If it is mainly box tickers then there will be silly rules to protect those who really shouldn't be there.

griffin100 wrote: »

Whether you take 16hrs or 10hrs to complete an IM no one gives a fcuk except you and your family (if you're lucky) - you're still an amateur engaged in a hobby. Fine if you think more than 10hrs for an IM is crap, as a plodder it doesn't bother me.

No one (well one person is but most aren't) is equating time with competency and openness. The issue alot of people have is best summed up by comments from IM NZ when the swim was cancelled. Alot of people trained hard and were competent swimmers and were happy to swim in the rough cold lake. The swim was cancelled because it was pandering to the lowest common denominator. The sh1t swimmers. And this is the Aussies and Kiwis who really wouldn't be that soft. Why should those competent and prepared have their day out ruined because some people really shouldn't have entered? Same for races in Ireland - not a strong swimmer? Don't enter an event where 33% is water based.

BUACHAILL

tunney wrote: »

Does it hurt your eyes to watch him swim? Yes
Does he put massive effort in for little return? Yes
Onto the important questions:
Does he have experience swimming in all manner of conditions? Yes
Is he clinically obese and at risk of a heart attack in the water? No
Is he likely to panic and drown in the water? No
Does he have a healthy respect for the dangers of the water? Yes
Does he have over a decade experience doing triathlon? Yes


It makes a huge difference what the experience of the competitors is. If it is mainly box tickers then there will be silly rules to protect those who really shouldn't be there.



No one (well one person is but most aren't) is equating time with competency and openness. The issue alot of people have is best summed up by comments from IM NZ when the swim was cancelled. Alot of people trained hard and were competent swimmers and were happy to swim in the rough cold lake. The swim was cancelled because it was pandering to the lowest common denominator. The sh1t swimmers. And this is the Aussies and Kiwis who really wouldn't be that soft. Why should those competent and prepared have their day out ruined because some people really shouldn't have entered? Same for races in Ireland - not a strong swimmer? Don't enter an event where 33% is water based.

Ok well if you could be constructive for a second as opposed to just trying to exclude everyone.

How do you suggest it's patrolled?? If we cannot have some sort of link in competency to time, how do you try find a reflection of someone's ability to rule them in or out ?? Purely experience ?? I have done 20 triathlons all of them I came last. But hey didn't drown and lots of experience. Problem hardly solved.

I have been warned to chose my tri club carefully as to certain attitudes and an unwelcome mentality that can be shown by senior members, I always thought this was a little dramatic. The more I read this it's not hard to see why people could feel this way. Everybody has to do an event at some stage for the first time.

Having waves is the only way to fairly approach it to cater for all levels. Having a selfish attitude is thankfully not healthy for the sport or cater for all walks not all who want to compete at the highest level and have just as much right to partake as the best of them.

I am not saying you should not put in the work or take a chance on actually being able to get through the swim, that's just plain daft. But you will never be able to control this.

If you want a pure elite triathlons bring in stricter regulations or leagues. That way the box tickers won't be in your way !!

Nwm2

griffin100 wrote: »

Really? Liam Dolan qualified for Kona in 2011 with a 1.11 swim - hardly a great swim time - its about the same as me and I'm not a great swimmer. He did a 1.35 swim in Kona in 2012 - is he a poor triathlete?

OP said 'Lots of great triathletes', you list one.

Also, OP's definition of a 'strong swimmer' I'm guessing would include a 1:11 swimmer.

BUACHAILL

Nwm2 wrote: »

OP said 'Lots of great triathletes', you list one.

Also, OP's definition of a 'strong swimmer' I'm guessing would include a 1:11 swimmer.

Ha ha here we go again

I already said a sub 1 hour is a strong swimmer to me. So would I look at 1.11 as strong... No. But stronger than me and certainly not a weak swimmer, also said i probably did not word it the best in the first place.

Does this mean I should not enter the race?

ShineyShiney

Agree that adjusted and cancelled
Swim sections are very frustrating but disagree that it's a result of weaker swimmers.

The ever increasing health and safety and duty of care responsibility in our society as a whole is having massive knock on effects including many unintended consequences.

In an ideal world, it's buyer beware, take your chances and if you drown it's your own fault for overestimating your abilities. In the real world event organizers will find themselves in court charged with anything from negligence to manslaughter with potential financial ramifications for continuing with an event if there is even the slightest suggestion that they didn't react to conditions for the protection of entrants.

Remember one such incident as listed above could stop countless clubs and events from taking the risk of staging an event. Then we would all be worse off.

I would be of the opinion that all comers into triathlon should be welcomed but that no rule changes of any kind should be rushed into. The vast majority of scheduled events each year go ahead as planned.

Elitist comments about fat, slow, box tickers etc do no one any favors they just devide the tri community.

Rant nearly over, finally why would any sport wish to be less accessible?

tunney

ShineyShiney wrote: »

Elitist comments about fat, slow, box tickers etc do no one any favors they just devide the tri community.

The Godwin's law of tri discussions, when in doubt shout "elitist".

ShineyShiney

tunney wrote: »

The Godwin's law of tri discussions, when in doubt shout "elitist".

There's nothing wrong with having an elitist perspective, its a perfectly reasonable position to take, i dont share it but its one perspective, I'm not arguing that. I'm simply saying that in the discussion of the topic "is tri too open" that it's not constructive and just leads to division.

I made many other points intended to offer a different view to those already articulated, did none of those interest you?

Like, h&s and the changing face of civil law in Ireland having an effect on the actions of Rd's

Id be more interested in your response to that than taking an interesting topic down the road of a slagging match over elitism which may have been done a couple of times already.

Go easy on me now I'm a new poster and don't know your a legend yet!

enzeder

tunney wrote: »

The issue alot of people have is best summed up by comments from IM NZ when the swim was cancelled. Alot of people trained hard and were competent swimmers and were happy to swim in the rough cold lake. The swim was cancelled because it was pandering to the lowest common denominator. The sh1t swimmers. And this is the Aussies and Kiwis who really wouldn't be that soft.

You're right. Aussies and Kiwis aren't soft. The swim that was cancelled (in 2006, I assume you're talking about) was cancelled because the weather made Lake Taupo an extremely dangerous place to swim and the organisers would have been idiots to let a swim go ahead. Even the ladies winner and a bunch of top swimmers went on record afterwards agreeing with the decision.

Last year the same thing happened. A huge storm hit the country on the day of the Ironman. That day the conditions were too dangerous to even cycle so they had a 70.3 on the following day.

Yes, it's regrettable when these things happen but you have to allow for SOME instances when weather does make the conditions too dangerous to have a swim.
We're triathletes but we're not fools.

griffin100

tunney wrote: »

Does it hurt your eyes to watch him swim? Yes
Does he put massive effort in for little return? Yes
Onto the important questions:
Does he have experience swimming in all manner of conditions? Yes
Is he clinically obese and at risk of a heart attack in the water? No
Is he likely to panic and drown in the water? No
Does he have a healthy respect for the dangers of the water? Yes
Does he have over a decade experience doing triathlon? Yes


It makes a huge difference what the experience of the competitors is. If it is mainly box tickers then there will be silly rules to protect those who really shouldn't be there.



No one (well one person is but most aren't) is equating time with competency and openness. The issue alot of people have is best summed up by comments from IM NZ when the swim was cancelled. Alot of people trained hard and were competent swimmers and were happy to swim in the rough cold lake. The swim was cancelled because it was pandering to the lowest common denominator. The sh1t swimmers. And this is the Aussies and Kiwis who really wouldn't be that soft. Why should those competent and prepared have their day out ruined because some people really shouldn't have entered? Same for races in Ireland - not a strong swimmer? Don't enter an event where 33% is water based.

I agree with most of what you say here. If you cant do the swim you have no business being in the water, but people are as a rule idiots and will still enter races they shouldn't be in. I said it recently in another thread, race directors should not have to consider poor swimmers when deciding on a swim in marginal conditions, they should always be able to assume that every competitor can swim the distance comfortably.

Policing entry in the area of swim competency is one thing and I have no issue with that - excluding people because they are box ticking is another. You cant assume that just because you are working your way through a bucket list that you wont train properly. But if you had to show some form of swim competency to enter then that would quickly eliminate those who don't train. Take the Mini Marathon as an example - you don't gent into the joggers start pen unless you can show that you have run a 10km in the recent past (bad example but it shows that entries can be streamed).

ps using Liam Dolan as an example is a bit extreme. He could dogie paddle the swim and still probably quality for Kona.

MrCreosote

griffin100 wrote: »

I said it recently in another thread, race directors should not have to consider poor swimmers when deciding on a swim in marginal conditions, they should always be able to assume that every competitor can swim the distance comfortably.

The point is that they have to consider the poorer swimmers- everybody has a limit based on their personal ability AND the conditions. What may be an achievable 750 or 1500 or 3800m swim one day for a person could be unmanageable the next. Even a good swimmer will have their limit, just that it will be higher than a weaker one. There'll always be weaker swimmers, and the race directors will always have to consider them first.

Both of those cancelled IMs in NZ that Enzeder mentions were very obvious cancellations- I think the problem was that the conditions improved quite quickly afterwards and left people feeling a bit hard done by. But the only decision that could be taken at the time the swim was due to go was to cancel it.

As for a licencing system like the cycling- this would be a disaster for a sport like triathlon. Even in a well established sport like cycling, it is a huge barrier to participation (even though I can see why they have to do it), and for a new and upcoming sport like Tri it would be a fatal blow.

Shedite27

tunney wrote: »

not a strong swimmer? Don't enter an event where 33% is water based.

This is a point I agree with. But the standard of Triathlon in Ireland is a lot higher than the standard of duathlon (in my opinion). Maybe we need better Duathlons, and make it more attractive to these people.

I'm a good swimmer and would see it as my advantage, hate when it gets cancelled. Rougher the water, the more advantage to me.

As people said above, it's supposed to be a tough event. We make it too easy for people by cancelling swims when it's rough. My weakest discipline is the cycle, I'd love it to be cancelled especially in windy conditions. This ever happen?

BennyMul

coming for a weak swimmer standpoint and relatively "new" to the sport

the main problem I see is a lack of competiveness, with the multi-wave start you are racing time and not a competitor and as such a certain section of the filed do not take it serious, to them it’s not a race it’s an leisure event, Is this attitude wrong No to each his own.

Should a course be cut to suit this section of athletes NO, a marathon is not 20miles as some folk never trained, They don’t take the hills out of the Shay Elliot to let the A3 finish in the bunch and pretend he raced, these are races and should treated like such.
However should a course be cut if there is a genuine risk to the overall safety then yes.

tunney

BennyMul wrote: »

However should a course be cut if there is a genuine risk to the overall safety then yes.

But if the genuine risk to safety is arising because some people are under prepared?

paddyh117

....for the life of me don't understand why some people, who either can't swim, won't put in sufficient practice to swim or don't even like swimming enter Triathlons - it's in my opinion for one reason - to say they've "done" a Tri!

as said earlier, swimming makes up 33% of the event - if you're not able to do that 33%, do something else!

there are lots of running/cycling/duathlon/adventure races in this county lots and lots of them!!...........that don't require any swimming, so why not do these?

also, there's nothing "elitist" about suggesting that people that are rubbish swimmers, should maybe spend a few more months in the pool before thinking about going open water! ...........basic common sense surely??

enzeder

tunney wrote: »

But if the genuine risk to safety is arising because some people are under prepared?

That's the crux of the argument.
The risk to safety should be not based on the under-prepared but based on the assumption that all competitors are well able for the distance in most water conditions.
Sometimes the conditions do necessitate a reduction in length/cancellation of swim (not often in Ireland, mind you) for the safety of all because the conditions are genuinely dangerous.

However, we cannot continue to cancel/reduce swims based on the (presumed) ability of the weakest. Suggestions have been made for waves of different swim distances in rough conditions etc. I think that all suggestions made can be argued against. There will always be slow but very capable swimmers who are happy to take on any distance in any conditions and would not be happy about being in a reduced distance wave. There would then need to be wave starts based on swim competency without any emphasis on pace (within reason) and there is no way to do this (that I can see) except for self-classification, which is not ideal.

Unfortunately for race directors and technical officials, people are turning up to triathlon events underprepared and the last thing that they want is someone to die on their watch.

Strict swim cut-offs, legally binding/accurate liability waivers and increased boat/kayak presence probably would help somewhat but, in the long run, education and awareness of what conditions can be like/how prepared you need to be for newbies is probably what is required. It would take a reasonably big campaign from TI and all clubs.

How would we go about getting it implemented?

nerraw1111

The question isn’t whether tri is too open. The answer is of course not.

The question is whether triathlons are sacrificing quality for quantity. There’s an obvious conflict of interest.

Seems to be that the problem isn’t the newbies or the box tickers, it’s the organisers. They’re letting it happen, cutting the swims and so on. Same with Ironman putting rest stops on the swim.

It’s a problem probably unique to triathlon given the safety concerns. There are cut off times in some of the IMRA races for safety reasons. If you don’t reach a checkpoint by a certain time, you can't finish/turn back.

Of course, there’s no risk of drowning if someone gets in over their head but it does send out a clear signal, this race requires a certain standard.

BennyMul

tunney wrote: »

But if the genuine risk to safety is arising because some people are under prepared?

there is a difference between overall and under prepared safety.
Organisers should be looking at this from the majority perspective not the minority.

there are a risks in most sports, I have had a few big tumbles while bike racing, were these the fault of the organiser No, I took responsibility for my actions and know the risk when singing on.

Maybe these athletes need to do the same after all they are adults.(or should be)

paddyh117

BennyMul wrote: »

there is a difference between overall and under prepared safety.
Organisers should be looking at this from the majority perspective not the minority.

there are a risks in most sports, I have had a few big tumbles while bike racing, were these the fault of the organiser No, I took responsibility for my actions and know the risk when singing on.

Maybe these athletes need to do the same after all they are adults.(or should be)

You are of course correct - in an ideal world, it's up to individuals to accept personal responsibility, however we know that's not always the case

this is probably most problematic I'd imagine in situations where the conditions create doubt......is the wind/swell too strong? is the water temperature too cold?

you can't really blame the organizers for not wanting some weak, under-prepared swimmer from drowning, and them ending up in court

hf4z6sqo7vjngi

paddyh117 wrote: »

You are of course correct - in an ideal world, it's up to individuals to accept personal responsibility, however we know that's not always the case

this is probably most problematic I'd imagine in situations where the conditions create doubt......is the wind/swell too strong? is the water temperature too cold?

you can't really blame the organizers for not wanting some weak, under-prepared swimmer from drowning, and them ending up in court

And thats the problem right there, legislation around H&S in Ireland is such right now that you will be holed up in the clinker if you cause a death/serious injury and are found negligent. Can you really blame the organisers, they are probably being over cautious and i can understand why. Does not make it right though.

RoseTinted

I have to say I have always found Tunney's infatuation with LCD very touching and I have always felt for Tunney when despite his outlandish predictions LCD has never stormed to even an Irish victory in his three appearances in Kona. Liam is a fine athlete but despite all the preparation and experience that Tunney alludes to, Liam was actually pulled from the swim a couple of years ago in Kenmare - just prior to heading out to Kona. Safety is an issue for everyone, even the experienced can have bad days.