Is a 2:30 100 yd that bad? (Page 2)

It isn't very competitive and if you know how to swim, you don't really need to save yourself.  There are people swimming 1:30/100m and faster who aren't saving anything for anybody.  Last year @ 2:00/100m I felt like I was way behind from the get go.  With my poor swimming my off season focus was on becoming a better swimmer and I am... at least in regards to pool times.  In terms of saving yourself or it being "easy" I heard a quote the other day from a famous bicyclist to the effect of "it doesn't get any easier, you just go faster".  

My take, you need to work on your swimming.     

That's a 12:40 Ironman pace.  Sounds pretty quick to me.  :-)

That's a good point and shows that "slow" is relative.  Most of my IM training was done at 2:00/10 mm/17 mph...and yet by best IM time was 14:30....much slower than my training pace.

Slow is indeed relative and those numbers are generally slower than my average training paces. Maybe I need to get more aggressive with my sub 12 goal for IMLP 2011.

According to your logs, you are much faster than that.  I could not run a 7:XX mile if a bear were chassing my a$$! 

And BTW, I was 255 lbs when I did that 14:30......so maybe if I were lean and mean I could have sustained my trainning paces for the duration of the 140.6 miles.

Edited by Rogillio 2010-04-30 2:47 PM

Wanna know what they call someone who swims a 2:30/100, rides at 14 mph/av and runs at 10:00/mile in a triathlon....?

A TRIATHLETE! 

Face it-regardless of our speed, we're sooo much cooler than our friends who don't 'tri'.

The best part about swimming 2:00/100 and running 10 m/m is it makes the math easy. 

16 mph on the bike is a good number too:  112 miles / 16 mph = 7 hrs.  Ya gotta love that!

~Mike

That was a 5 mile road race, and it hurt.