General Discussion Triathlon Talk » To Ironman or to not Ironman Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
To Ironman or to not Ironman
OptionResults
Skip the 70.3 and do Ironman3 Votes - [5.77%]
Do the 70.3 no need to rush things44 Votes - [84.62%]
Do a 70.3 early in season and do Ironman later in the season5 Votes - [9.62%]
This is a multiple choice poll.

2006-10-13 4:51 AM

User image

Expert
904
500100100100100
Subject: To Ironman or to not Ironman
I'm about to finish up my first tri season and am looking forward to next year. Next year I am planning on doing a marathon 2-3 sprints and an Olympic Distance maybe 2, but I don't know if I can sneak another one in and don't want to over do it. Should I go for a 70.3 the next year or go all out and do an Ironman. To help with your answer I will give you one reason why I want to skip the 70.3. I live in San Diego and am in the military, the following year (2009) I will not live in San Diego anymore and will most likely move to Virginia/D.C. needless to say my I lose the wonderful training weather. What are your opinions? Has anyone ever done this before? Thanks for the help.


2006-10-13 6:32 AM
in reply to: #568212

User image

Extreme Veteran
707
500100100
pnw
Subject: RE: To Ironman or to not Ironman
I find the 1/2s "fun". Not being or wanting to be a big runner at some where past 9 hrs the IM races become real work and not fun for me.

No problem getting an IM in before you leave SD but I'd make sure you do a 1/2 before the jump to a full. It is a big jump imo.
2006-10-13 6:58 AM
in reply to: #568212

User image

Tulsa, Oklahoma
Subject: RE: To Ironman or to not Ironman
Personally I love the 70.3 distance. It's still tough and a huge accomplishment - just a little easier on the training schedule. There are some great 70.3 races out there and they are easier to get into than an official IM full. I would recommend doing an official IM Full for your first - which leads me to....... there are only two still available in North America for next year so if you were going to do one next year you would need to make a decision quickly if you want an M-Dot race. There are plenty of people that don't do a half before a full - so it is an option - just depnds on your personality, desire, willingness and ability to put in the miledge. I do completely understand about training in San Diego vs Virginia.....can't really beat that San Diego weather. If anything sign up for a full - add a half earlier in your season and just see how your season progresses..........

Good Luck

2006-10-13 7:28 AM
in reply to: #568212

User image

Pro
3705
20001000500100100
Vestavia Hills
Subject: RE: To Ironman or to not Ironman

FWIW, regardless of whether you do an IM next year or not, you should do a H-IM prior if for no other reason than to test drive your nutrition + race plan.  After doing two H-IMs this season - and seeing first hand how difficult 70.3 miles is to complete ... and how different they are to even an Oly distance - I cannot imagine going the full IM distance without the benefit of this first hand experience.

As part of the IM CdA training my friends and I are doing, our coach has us scheduled to do a H-IM 8-10 weeks before the big show.

Also, there are but a handful of IM races you could consider ... and getting in would take some luck as the IM races typically sell out 1 year in advance.  Those that have registration periods coming up are IMFL (which sold out in less than 3 hours last year) and the IM to be held in Louisville, KY (IMKY?).

 

2006-10-13 7:31 AM
in reply to: #568212

User image

Not a Coach
11473
5000500010001001001001002525
Media, PA
Subject: RE: To Ironman or to not Ironman
The weather in VA/DC may not match San Diego, but you can easily train there year round.  I don't think that's a very good reason to try to "squeeze-in" an IM.  Do it when you're ready.
2006-10-13 8:35 AM
in reply to: #568261

User image

Crystal Lake, IL
Subject: RE: To Ironman or to not Ironman

JohnnyKay - 2006-10-13 7:31 AM The weather in VA/DC may not match San Diego, but you can easily train there year round.  I don't think that's a very good reason to try to "squeeze-in" an IM.  Do it when you're ready.

Agree.  One could even claim training in a more varied weather situation will prepare you better for the possible range of weather possibilities on race day, depending on which IM you are going to do.  Even those of us who live in climates where the weather can vary wildly (in one day) are having to re-learn what to wear for what type of workout in colder temps.  Experience with this certainly won't hurt you come race day even if the weather is pleasant.



2006-10-13 9:15 AM
in reply to: #568212

User image

Expert
1274
10001001002525
Houston, TX
Subject: RE: To Ironman or to not Ironman
I also just finished my first season completing 2 sprints. I am planning on a 1/2 as my first race of next season and then probably making the jump to IM in 08. I don't think there is any need to rush things. You want to do it and you want to do it right. I want to be able to finish IM in as good a shape as possible and I don't want to DNF or end up in the SAG wagon. Good luck!
2006-10-13 9:23 AM
in reply to: #568212

User image

Cycling Guru
15134
50005000500010025
Fulton, MD
Subject: RE: To Ironman or to not Ironman
I live in the Balt./DC area (actually exactly halfway betwen the two) and train year round. At least running-wise. I didn't skip a running workout all year. Riding you'll need to do indoors in the winter and swimming is really a pool necessity to begin with around here, so you won't miss those workouts much (obviously no ocean swimming with the Bay and the Potomac).

Plus, if you wanted to do a true IM event in the US, the only two left on the schedule for next year will be Louisville in August (goes on sale next week) and IMFL (which should go one sale first week of November), so you'd have to make your decision quickly! If you just want to do an irondistance, then wait until you get here and you can do Chesapeakeman in Sept., a good race run by a solid promoter.

I'd say go for the HIM next year and keep building towards the goal.

And thanks for serving!!
2006-10-13 10:02 AM
in reply to: #568392

User image

Pro
3705
20001000500100100
Vestavia Hills
Subject: RE: To Ironman or to not Ironman

Plus, if you wanted to do a true IM event in the US, the only two left on the schedule for next year will be Louisville in August (goes on sale next week) and IMFL (which should go one sale first week of November), so you'd have to make your decision quickly! If you just want to do an irondistance, then wait until you get here and you can do Chesapeakeman in Sept., a good race run by a solid promoter. I'd say go for the HIM next year and keep building towards the goal. And thanks for serving!!

... and, to me, the distance is the distance -- whether the event is WTC or another race production company is irrelevant.

2006-10-13 10:09 AM
in reply to: #568212

User image

Extreme Veteran
412
100100100100
Fort Worth
Subject: RE: To Ironman or to not Ironman

I agree with doing the HIM first. I want to do a full IM next year, but I am going to wait until I see how the HIM goes first. No need to rush and not be ready.

OH and I agree - thanks for serving.

2006-10-13 10:16 AM
in reply to: #568256

User image

The Original
7834
5000200050010010010025
Raleigh/Durham
Subject: RE: To Ironman or to not Ironman
brian - 2006-10-13 8:28 AM

FWIW, regardless of whether you do an IM next year or not, you should do a H-IM prior if for no other reason than to test drive your nutrition + race plan.  After doing two H-IMs this season - and seeing first hand how difficult 70.3 miles is to complete ... and how different they are to even an Oly distance - I cannot imagine going the full IM distance without the benefit of this first hand experience.

As part of the IM CdA training my friends and I are doing, our coach has us scheduled to do a H-IM 8-10 weeks before the big show.

Also, there are but a handful of IM races you could consider ... and getting in would take some luck as the IM races typically sell out 1 year in advance.  Those that have registration periods coming up are IMFL (which sold out in less than 3 hours last year) and the IM to be held in Louisville, KY (IMKY?).

 

I totally agree with Brian.  I have 2 1/2's under my belt before my full.  They were both really good test runs of what not to do and what to do for longer races.  Doing a 1/2 isn't going to hurt and would be excellent practice.  And if anything it will open to eyes to how much training is involved- it's a big jump from an olympic.  I think it's good to ease into IM training by doing a half- that way you can kinda know what to expect with IM training and will be used to having to put in longer training hours.



2006-10-13 10:27 AM
in reply to: #568453

User image

Cycling Guru
15134
50005000500010025
Fulton, MD
Subject: RE: To Ironman or to not Ironman
brian - 2006-10-13 11:02 AM
and, to me, the distance is the distance -- whether the event is WTC or another race production company is irrelevant.


Says the guy registered for IMCDA next year ...

j/k

Edited by Daremo 2006-10-13 10:28 AM
2006-10-13 10:30 AM
in reply to: #568212

User image

Master
1661
10005001002525
Newbury Park, CA
Subject: RE: To Ironman or to not Ironman

Once you can answer this question yourself you'll be ready.

2006-10-13 10:44 AM
in reply to: #568212

User image

Elite
2844
200050010010010025
Reston VA
Subject: RE: To Ironman or to not Ironman

I understand where you are coming from. I spent 4 years in San Dog in the Navy (without doing ANYTHING physical), had orders in the DC area, and have been here in NO VA eversince. 

This is my first year doing triathlons and I am KICKING myself for not utilizing the beautiful weather in San Diego.

But, you will KNOW when you are ready to do an Ironman. And you can reasonably train in either locale for an IM.

Another factor (especially in the military) is how much free time you will have in a job. On my last ship in San Diego I was done work everyday at 2PM. When I moved to DC, I had to work 12 hr days but could work out during the day whenever I pleased. Now that I am a civilian I only have to work 8.5 hrs, but I can only train before or after work (which is much harder).

2006-10-13 10:54 AM
in reply to: #568212

User image

Coach
10487
50005000100100100100252525
Boston, MA
Subject: RE: To Ironman or to not Ironman
Don't... The 140.6/IM distance is overrated!

Do it when you are confident that you can commit to do the training…



Edited by amiine 2006-10-13 10:57 AM
2006-10-13 11:02 AM
in reply to: #568212

User image

Pro
4675
20002000500100252525
Wisconsin near the Twin Cities metro
Subject: RE: To Ironman or to not Ironman
Skip the sprints and focus on Olympic distance races to get ready for a HIM. Then do a full IM the following year if you think you can commit to the training needed. Good luck.


2006-10-13 11:05 AM
in reply to: #568472

User image

Member
48
25
Subject: RE: To Ironman or to not Ironman
MarkQuiet - 2006-10-13 10:09 AM

I agree with doing the HIM first. I want to do a full IM next year, but I am going to wait until I see how the HIM goes first. No need to rush and not be ready.

OH and I agree - thanks for serving.



To each his own, I guess. I took the opposite (and most definitely, minority) position - I did not do HIM first, went right to IM. I think it really comes down to knowing yourself, how you operate, etc. I live in WI and there is a half here that quite a few people do prior to IMWI (and I probably will next year) but for me, it actually came up too early in my training schedule, which I really stuck to like a glove. I'll also admit - I didn't want anything BAD in the half to affect my mental preparation for the full. All that being said, I think it's probably a good idea (generally) to to a half first, but certainly not necessary.
2006-10-13 11:29 AM
in reply to: #568392

User image

Champion
9407
500020002000100100100100
Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia
Subject: RE: To Ironman or to not Ironman
Daremo - 2006-10-13 10:23 AM

I live in the Balt./DC area (actually exactly halfway betwen the two) and train year round. At least running-wise.


Agree 100% - I am somewhat further north and I was able to run outside all year - ran in a couple of snowstorms and with some pretty crazy windchills but it is definitely doable. As for the bike, I was able to get at least one outdoor bike every month along with lots of trainer time.

Definitely not the same as training outside year round but definitely not impossible.

Shane
2006-10-13 4:32 PM
in reply to: #568212

User image

Extreme Veteran
345
10010010025
Tucson, AZ
Subject: RE: To Ironman or to not Ironman
I eventually want to do an ironman, but I think we all need to gradually up the millage before just launching out there.
2006-10-15 6:44 PM
in reply to: #568212

User image

Extreme Veteran
474
1001001001002525
Sydney
Subject: RE: To Ironman or to not Ironman
I think it depends on why you're doing it... without opening a can of worms discussion about this:-

- If you want to do IM to tick it off - tell people at dinner parties and bbq's that you've finished one and don't care if the only thing you're racing is the cut-offs then go for it. This is the camp that I used to be in. If you're going to do this, then get your entry in (or you can have my IMAZ 04/07 that I'm now not going to use ) and get it done.

- If you believe (like I do now) that Triathlon is a part of my life and will be for the forseeable future, and the IM journey isn't about 17hrs but about 12 then 10 then KQ - then be patient - train hard - do some bike racing, do some marathons and 1/2 marathons, race some Olympics and focus on bringing your times down and build a couple of years of base - then start the IM journey.

By that time you won't just have the base to really pump out the IM training hours for a respectable time with a lower injury chance, but will enjoy it more and will have learnt all the lessons about how to fit 8-10 hours a week into your schedule and have worked out where the rest of the time is going to come from (one of the keys in my mind).

As for training in poorer weather - I live in Sydney so can't really comment , but there are plenty of people here who live in much worse weather and the level of IM activity is higher in Canada than anywhere else (maybe something to do with having nothing else to do on those long winter nights).
2006-10-15 11:23 PM
in reply to: #568212

User image

Pro
4100
20002000100
Wherever the trail takes me, WA.
Subject: RE: To Ironman or to not Ironman
Both are one heck of an experience.....


New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » To Ironman or to not Ironman Rss Feed