Has this been posted? RE: New Ironman Swim rules?

[taffy]

www.ironman.com/triathlon-news/articles/2013/05/swimsmart-initiative.aspx#axzz2SnhE5WWu

i agree in a sense. I hate mass starts because I hate swimming over people. But, I also think more athletes need to be better prepared for the swim. I think Ironmans intent is good. I just wonder if the events are getting too popular and too many athletes who really aren't prepared for it sign up. 

*note* I have never done an Ironman so I may just be talking out of my ass. 

[kams]

Also not an ironman, but I think it seems like a great compromise.

I do think there are a fair number of bucket listers that may not be prepared enough, and I'm sure that's a big contributor (not the only) to the dns & dnfs. If there was a movement to change the caliber of athlete that completes the race, then I think drastically reducing the cutoff times might go farther than adjusting the swim start.

I might also be talking out of my ass here.

[Susie]

I kind of agree.

On one hand, I'm all in favor of safety.

On the other, this doesn't entirely seem like a safety issue. It kind of annoyed me, all the "In an effort to improve athlete satisfaction and reduce athlete anxiety during the swim portion of the race..." lip service.

"Reducing athlete anxiety during the swim portion" is just as valid a part of getting ready for a tri (regardless of distance) as practicing transitions, learning to run on jelly legs, etc., etc., etc. It's our responsibility as triathletes. More triathletes struggle with the swim than any other part, but to me that means people should prepare better, and maybe hold off on IMs until they're really ready. Doing this feels tantamount to "we're going to eliminate hills in IM runs (or bikes), because some people struggle with them." IM is not about lowest common denominator among triathletes. (That's why I'm not doing one! I am not ready.)

To me, "improving athlete satisfaction and reduc[ing] athlete anxiety" sounds suspiciously like "we want to make IM events more accessible to more people because we want MOAR RACE FEES." Thumbs down.

[kams]

I totally get the argument that people should be more prepared for a mass swim start. And, I also get that there is something really spectacular about wading with 2999 of your newest besties waiting for that cannon to go off. BUT, I know a couple of KQers that have had serious issues in a mass start. They are inherently dangerous, and I don't think they are relatable to a hilly course. You can't just sit on the side of the road in a washing machine.

IDK, I see both sides.

[taffy]

I do agree with the water temp cut offs. When I did Alcatraz I never felt cold. I thought all was fine....until I had about 200m to go and my hands cramped up. They basically turned into claws. I pretty much had to splash my way to the finish. That was 1/2 the distance of an ironman. The same for the higher temp. That could really dehydrate you.

[mrs.jacinthe]

I've not done an ironman, but I've done a 2.4 with a continuous start and self seeding. It worked out pretty well, except that there were a lot of too-hopeful self-seeders, resulting in people getting swum over, regardless. I would hope that people doing an ironman would have a good idea where to self-seed, but you'd think the same of anyone who signs up for a 2.4mi swim in general - and I have firsthand experience of how well that works, which is to say, not at all. Also, what happens if during the continuous start someone falls? Are they going to get trampled or continuously swam over - it sounds like a risk to me.

Also, I don't agree with the "rest platforms" at all. Really? You want to swim 2.4, then bike a century, then run a marathon ... and you need to take a rest in the first leg? I mean, anyone can get swum over and need to regroup, but at that level of competition, shouldn't they be able to do so without holding on to a floaty? Maybe I'm just overly judgmental, but I can't get past this at all.

[starryfish]

Maybe the rest platforms are for people that develop a cramp?

[shorewife]

I also have not done an ironman but overall I like this change in the swim. I am a strong swimmer but do get anxious about the 'contact sport' style swim start that triathlons have. Aside from their being no real way to prepare for this madness, if I wanted to be involved in contact water sports I would play water polo!

[trigal]

I am a two-time Ironman Lake Placid finisher and I'm training for #3.  I'm not too happy about this change.

I have been involved with triathlon for years and I have been annoyed by the growing blasé attitude that people have about the swim.  If you are going to do a triathlon, then you had better be able to swim the distance.  But, I often hear people say how they just try to "survive" the swim.  My feeling is that those people are a liability.  They are a danger to everyone else in the race.  I would make the same argument for people who are not comfortable riding around other people (despite the no drafting rules).  If you have crappy bike handling skills, learn some before doing a race.  Triathlon isn't about "surviving" the swim.  It's about training for all three disciplines appropriately and knowing your limitations.

The argument is that there are too many athletes for these swims.  The first year I did Ironman (2006), there were 2200 athletes.  This year, I believe that there are 2800.  If you spread all the athletes out on the bike course, separated by the allowable "non-drafting" distance, there wouldn't be enough room.   The bike course is more dangerous than the swim course, particularly when everyone is going down the 5-mile descent at 40-55 mph behind people who are braking the entire way down. Not that 55mph is safe, but neither is the guy going 12 mph.  If they went back to 2200 people, this would not be an issue. But then, WTC wouldn't make as much money...hmmm...

At Lake Placid, the original swim course is very wide.  There was always plenty of room for the athletes in the past.  Now they are funneling us through a small area.  I'm not sure where all of these athletes are going to stand while waiting to get in the water, since before we just got in the water and floated around before the start.  Also, if the faster swimmers start at 6:30, there will be people who will be starting their second lap before other people even get in the water.  How is that safer?  The faster swimmers will be catching up to the slower swimmers sooner than they would if we all started together.

I'm not a triathlon or Ironman snob (there are plenty of those around), but the first rule of participating in an Ironman is to respect the race. If you blow off the fact that you're a lousy swimmer, then you don't respect the race and don't deserve to be out there or to be called an Ironman.

[Susie]

for trigal

We have a pretty good crew in my tri club training for IMLP this year, and I don't think any of them are happy about the change either.

[joenali]

Mass start for Ironman Canada!

I do agree that one should really be ready to swim 2.4 miles before they do an IM. Well, really before any triathlon or open water swim for that matter. I look at some of my teammates and some of them are terrible swimmers (not trying to be rude or whatever), I'm seriously wondering how some of them will finish the 2.4 miles in one piece or before the cutoff. One girl only started triathlons last year and is doing an IM, I really hope she is training enough, her swimming is not that strong, it worries me.

Part of me agrees with the platforms. Even though swimming is my strength I have found myself feeling panicky more than once and I would be nice to know that the platforms are there just in case. I probably would never use one but it would make me feel better if I knew they were there.