login
competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessary
-
No new posts
|
 2009-04-17 4:32 PM |
 29 |  Subject: competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessaryI have only been to a couple triathlons, but I noticed something similar at both events. The guy who won the clydesdale division actually finished 2nd overall for the whole race. How do you feel about people entering a division they may not need to be in. Yes he qualifies as a clydesdale and yes he has the right to enter in that division, and no it wouldn't have made any difference on my getting a finishers medal. Personally I'd be happier to have taken a 2nd place medal for the entire race than the first place medal for my division, but that's just my opinion. Scott |
| 2009-04-17 6:33 PM in reply to: #2092708 |
Expert 724   Simi Valley | Subject: RE: competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessary The contrarian sense is that he has to register in a category to race be it AG or weight division. It seems your sense that he should have registered 26-30 (just for the sake of example) rather than clydes and that he would have placed regardless (and perhaps even won his AG). Would you be comfortable with an 26-30 AG who said that a larger athlete should be required to run Clydes to race against his own kind and not take an AG spot from someone else (as he would be granted an overall and AG medal liken to your example of getting 2nd and the Clydes gold)? I believe that every race is against the people who show and the level of training the possess at its maximum and against our own goals, training, expectations, and PRs at its best. The athlete in your example provides a basis for comparison for the caliber of competition within your field. As I read it, it reinforces my sense that Clydes/Athenas have a place in the sport and that we have tremendous athletic potential. |
| 2009-04-18 1:10 AM in reply to: #2092708 |
| 29 | Subject: RE: competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessary No, I see all specialty classes as an opportunity for for someone to be competative where they may not normally have been. I think that due to the physical limitations of being heavier that the opportunity to place within the weight based category is better than it is in an age group, and should be reserved for those people who need to physically matched against those of a similar physical nature. Why would you want to compete in a category where you Know you are going to win. Where is the competition in that scenario. This guy was the second fastest competitior no matter which category he would have raced in. Nobody else in the clydesdale division was even close to placing that well. So it isn't like the whole division was superbly fit and equally matched. I would feel the same way about a professional running in an age group category instead of with the pro's. |
| 2009-04-18 4:59 AM in reply to: #2092708 |
Pro 4353 Wallingford, PA | Subject: RE: competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessary Just curious.... in most races I've been to, top placers (1st - 3rd M & F overall finishers, usually) are not eligible for AG/division awards. Was that not the case in this race? |
| 2009-04-18 8:17 AM in reply to: #2093428 |
Expert 838 West Palm Beach, FL | Subject: RE: competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessary Seht - 2009-04-18 2:10 AM Why would you want to compete in a category where you Know you are going to win. Where is the competition in that scenario.QUOTE] Why would you assume he'd "know" he was gonna win? Maybe he had a great race that day. The only qualification for Clyde/Athena is weight, so if he qualifies he can race wherever he likes. While Clydes/Athenas are typically slower than most of the field I think it's cool when someone can show that big people can be fast. |
| 2009-04-18 12:14 PM in reply to: #2093475 |
Pro 4089 Without house | Subject: RE: competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessary jsnowash - 2009-04-18 4:59 AM Just curious.... in most races I've been to, top placers (1st - 3rd M & F overall finishers, usually) are not eligible for AG/division awards. Was that not the case in this race? x2. I won 2nd place Athena in a race because 1st place Athena actually won 2nd or 3rd overall (otherwise I would have been 3rd). |
| 2009-04-20 2:40 PM in reply to: #2092708 |
Master 1517 Western MA near the VT & NH border on the CT river | Subject: RE: competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessary X2 what RBD said This question seems to come up about once a month. First, you need to understand what the category of Athena/Clydesdale was intended for and not what it has become (or the perception (yours, as the OP) of what the category is) This is a Clydesdale:  Big, strong and muscular, but kind of slow.. and racing against this:  The Clydesdale will have a hard time beating a smaller, faster, leaner horse (most of the time), which is why the category was created. To give big people (like football players and body builders) a chance to compete against people of similar stature and not just against the smaller, leaner marathon runners that are in the same age group and 50 pounds lighter. This is not a Clydesdale:  but according to your question, (How do you feel about people entering a division they may not need to be in), is what you think should only be racing the category. Because I bet the Clydsale horse above would beat this horse in a race. Second, and most importantly, Its a race - not a self esteem event where you get a reward for just showing up. You never should be upset if someone who qualifies for your category, is faster than you, wins. It would be like a 44 y/o complaining that the person who won the AG is really 39 but b/c their birthday is 12/30, that puts them in the 40-44 AG. Personally, my opinion is you should be proud of the clyde that came in 2nd overall, congratulate him and use that as a motivator that you can do it too. A competitive Clyde category is not a bad thing. Be happy with the accomplishments that you made and be proud of the fact that you completed a triathlon, gave all that you could and left it all on the course. That should be enough. Another racers accomplishment shouldnt effect your enjoyment of the race. Last month, someone else posted this and I think it is fitting... "Medals tarnish over time. Memories last forever" |
| 2009-04-20 3:26 PM in reply to: #2092708 |
Veteran 297 Michigan | Subject: RE: competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessary ^^^^^^ Can we have permission to use this post over and over and over? Well said. |
| 2009-04-20 4:03 PM in reply to: #2097957 |
Pro 4089 Without house | Subject: RE: competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessary slick - 2009-04-20 3:26 PM ^^^^^^ Can we have permission to use this post over and over and over? Well said. x2 |
| 2009-04-20 5:01 PM in reply to: #2098066 |
Sensei Sin City | Subject: RE: competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessary I think I was at the same race as the OP. I was shocked (but VERY impressed - and proud!) that a fellow Clyde took 2nd overall! Gave me hope that it can be done by the bigger guys! He didn't take a Clyde award because he was top 3 overall... I have said it before and I will say it again. I NEVER compete against my division while on the course. I always compete against myself and my last time. I only look at the results later to see how I placed. I will probably always race clyde when it's available. AG when it's not. It doesn't matter to me. It also doesn't matter who else is in the division either. There have been WAY to many examples of how things can work out... In this same race, I would have placed far better if I was YOUNGER! The 40+ clydes were FAST! Other times, I would have crushed the sprint, but chose to do the oly and got killed. OR, I there have been races I don't place in clyde, but could have done better if I ran AG. I also know that there were a lot of guys out there that could have been in Clyde, but probably did not sign up for it (there seemed to be a lot of big boys out there). If they did, that division would have been huge. You never know who is going to show up, what division they are going to be in, etc. It's not worth brain damage, IMO. Edited by Aikidoman 2009-04-20 5:04 PM |
| 2009-06-24 6:54 AM in reply to: #2092708 |
Veteran 136 Minnesota | Subject: RE: competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessary Personally I race where I feel like I am with those of like ability. If I drop a few more #'s and can get my feet moving on the run, I will sign up for AG even though I'd still qual for Athena. I just want the challenge and motivation to improve my own time and stay interested in working out every day, I have enough medals, and a quilt of t-shirts. |
| 2009-06-25 6:51 PM in reply to: #2092708 |
Expert 1452 Troy, MI | Subject: RE: competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessary I qualify for Athena but have never signed up as athena. I don't want to race against those younger than me. I think age takes more of toll on my body than my weight (I am 13 lbs an athena if you go by 150). I think that its a personal decision and its nice to have the choice. |
| 2009-06-25 10:47 PM in reply to: #2092708 |
Expert 1040 SF Bay Area | Subject: RE: competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessary I would cheer for him. One of us placing that well is fantastic. You need to congratulate him. |
| 2009-06-25 11:51 PM in reply to: #2092708 |
Veteran 268 Kauai girl now in MIll Creek/Silver Firs | Subject: RE: competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessary I LOVE that explanation with the horse pictures. Beautifully done - that fat Shetland pony is hysterical. |
| 2009-06-26 8:26 PM in reply to: #2092708 |
Member 32 | Subject: RE: competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessary everyone on here seems to have a good sense of what the class SHOULD be.... but i've always felt the weights should be slightly higher for these categories. 150 and 200 are alittle light in my opinion. but everyone has one of those too.....LOL. |
| 2009-06-27 8:52 AM in reply to: #2246663 |
| 602 | Subject: RE: competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessary jinxproof1996 - 2009-06-26 8:26 PM everyone on here seems to have a good sense of what the class SHOULD be.... but i've always felt the weights should be slightly higher for these categories. 150 and 200 are alittle light in my opinion. but everyone has one of those too.....LOL. I have always thought that as well, but Im very new and havent run my first tri yet at all. I remember in my younger days, working out obsessivly and in single digit body fat I was still 211. I know plenty of women that are tall, lean, in great shape that go over 150.But hell Gabriel Reece(sp) when she posed in playboy was 170lbs I realize the running is the big limiting factor with the weight. I personaly dont think its much for an adult male with any type of muscular frame on him to be over 200lbs at 6ft mark. I doubt I will ever be near the 200 mark anyways any more. But its just my thoughts. I know a line has to be drawn somewhere and this is where its drawn. has anyone ever seen an additional class for like 225 or 250? super clyde? |
| 2009-06-27 11:42 AM in reply to: #2247012 |
Master 1517 Western MA near the VT & NH border on the CT river | Subject: RE: competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessary Garceau - 2009-06-27 9:52 AM jinxproof1996 - 2009-06-26 8:26 PM everyone on here seems to have a good sense of what the class SHOULD be.... but i've always felt the weights should be slightly higher for these categories. 150 and 200 are alittle light in my opinion. but everyone has one of those too.....LOL. I have always thought that as well, but Im very new and havent run my first tri yet at all. I remember in my younger days, working out obsessivly and in single digit body fat I was still 211. I know plenty of women that are tall, lean, in great shape that go over 150.But hell Gabriel Reece(sp) when she posed in playboy was 170lbs I realize the running is the big limiting factor with the weight. I personaly dont think its much for an adult male with any type of muscular frame on him to be over 200lbs at 6ft mark. I doubt I will ever be near the 200 mark anyways any more. But its just my thoughts. I know a line has to be drawn somewhere and this is where its drawn. has anyone ever seen an additional class for like 225 or 250? super clyde? Exactly! As a 210# 6'3 guy, I don't think I'm fat. But I know I will not (never) be competitive racing against ppl that are 50 lbs lighter and 6" shorter than me. Simple physics. When you were 211#'s, did you ever race against a fit person who weighs 160#? FWIW, I have always been a 'big guy'. I was 5'11" and 195# as a freshman in High school and graduated at 205-210# (21 years ago). I was starting Varsity football my sophomore year so I wasn't a slouch. As a tight end, I could never keep up w/ the wide receivers and cornerbacks. I was faster than the lineman though, but about the same speed as the linebackers and fullbacks. In track - we had a 'weight-man' relay team for the discus and shot putters. All big guys racing against each other, great fun. We were all in good shape and did well in our 'class' (we never lost), but our times were no where near the splits of even the JV relay team. And using your Gabriel Reece example - she's a big girl. Incredibly fit, but still a big girl nonetheless that would have a hard time in a race competing against a smaller, equally fit person like Mia Hamm. Gabriel is EXACTLY the type of person who the category was created for, not Rosie O'Donnell. I have seen super clyde, hippo and buffalo categories for those weights. Some have suggested that maybe these categories should be based on body fat % and not just by weight. Or use a height to weight ratio and I wouldn't have a problem with that either. Its just that the Clyde/Athena category was not created or intended for that purpose. I'm not saying that only fit people should race the A/C category either. It's that no one should be upset with, or give the evil eye to, a fit person that qualifies for A/C and then does well because they're not overweight. Edited by ratherbesnowboarding 2009-06-27 11:51 AM |
| 2009-06-27 3:59 PM in reply to: #2092708 |
Regular 157 Bay City, MI | Subject: RE: competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessary I think of the A/C catagory as being similar to the Heavyweights in Boxing. Sure you can be big and jiggly like Butterbean or you can be short and muscular like tyson or just taller and ripped like holyfield. your not less of a heavyweight either way you just meet the requirments. There are almost as many advantages to being in the A/C catagory as disadvantages. I am 6'4" 260 and i will never be less than 200lbs. If they qualify they are welcome to compete in the group. Saying they should not is like telling those of us on the less healthy end of the A/C that we can't compete since we are not in the same shape as those folks in the AG. |
| 2009-06-28 6:14 PM in reply to: #2092708 |
Regular 174 Surrey BC Canada | Subject: RE: competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessary Up here our triathlons don't have a Clyde divsion just AG divs, can anybody explain what a clyde division is I think its for larger participants like myself although I am dropping my weight. |
| 2009-06-28 7:16 PM in reply to: #2248731 |
| On your right | Subject: RE: competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessary Neilman - 2009-06-28 7:14 PM Up here our triathlons don't have a Clyde divsion just AG divs, can anybody explain what a clyde division is I think its for larger participants like myself although I am dropping my weight. The Clydesdale division is for any male at 200 pounds or over. The Athena group is for any female at 150 pounds or over. As was mentioned earlier in this thread, the original intent for the groups were for taller and more muscular people to compete in a division that was set for them. Take one of our fellow BT Clydes, Aikidoman, he's 6'8" and in great shape. But he won't ever be under 200 lbs unless his legs fall off. He will just need to be heavier because he's got so much more body. With more people getting into the tri world, people tend to think of C/A being for new or overweight people who are slower. Ultimately though, it's for fast people that are big, we slow chubby people (me, for example) just get to race with them in a special division. Oh, also the division being available to race in is up to the RD. There's no obligation to have them. Edited by Chaderbox 2009-06-28 7:17 PM |
| 2009-06-30 4:48 PM in reply to: #2092708 |
Expert 1040 SF Bay Area | Subject: RE: competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessary I've yet to even find a race that has a clyde/athena division. At 6'5" 225, I know I don't have the ideal body type for this sport and I'm OK with it. |
| 2009-07-02 9:17 AM in reply to: #2092708 |
New user 68 Lincoln | Subject: RE: competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessary I've been following this thread for a while now and had to chime in. as a weight lifter, it is nothing for even a "somewhat" muscular man to weigh 200lbs. I am in favor of raising the weight limits for Clydes to 220 or so. Some of the 200 pounders I workout with in the gym "should" be competing with the 160-180 guys that I see winning overalls. With the addition of weight trainning and better nutrition, athletes in all sports are larger than they have ever been. The clyde division was set up for those bigger athletes. not just the slightly larger (maybe fatter) first timers. For what it's worth I am 6'1'' and 230#. and yes at some point I could even see myself flirting with the 220 mark. Could I then compete against those smaller athletes-probably not. but if I don't fit in the big kid catagory anymore so be it. |
| 2009-07-03 7:46 PM in reply to: #2257937 |
| On your right | Subject: RE: competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessary As a former 345lb guy, and current 250lb-er, I'm quite happy with the weight being 200 for Clydes. This is my first season racing, and likely even if I'm not under 200 by the beginning of next year/season, I will race AG. Regardless of what the division is made up of for the most part now, it's original intent was for tall guys that carry more weight because they're tall. Endurance athletes are pretty lean as a generality, and they don't go out to build muscle mass and look jacked. I only raced Clyde this year, because I thought it sounded like a cool group. But the more I've learned about it, I don't really fit the true target of the group. I'm not quite 6' tall, and I'm fat. Just because I'm heavy enough to race in it, doesn't mean that it's the right place for me to be. Besides, I'm not winning the Clyde group, or my AG. BOP, MOP, DFL, it really doesn't matter what age group I'm in. I race for me, and not for a "win." The target audience of the divison hasn't changed, but the people getting involved have. Why change the definition because of the population? |
| 2009-07-03 11:53 PM in reply to: #2092708 |
Extreme Veteran 335 Herriman, Utah | Subject: RE: competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessary I keep hearing that the Clydesdale division was created for the muscular, taller, 200-plus pounders. Anybody have a link or documentation of that or is it just considered truth because it's said so often? |
| 2009-07-04 3:03 PM in reply to: #2092708 |
Regular 157 Bay City, MI | Subject: RE: competing as a Clydesdale or Athena when not necessary As with many rules and laws "intent" is not documented. However, since triathlon was developed as a test of fitness and athleticism it would stand to reason that the catagory was developed for those individuals that already are fit and athletic but of different makeup than traditional endurance athletes. This would allow for athletes from other sports to test themselves in the Triathlon format. I(i.e. Comparing Lance Armstong to Lawrence Taylor to Evander Holyfield) It has become known as division for those trying to get into better physical shape (I am in both catagories at 6' 4" and 270lbs) and the taller muscular athletes are seen as almost cheating when they enter. What most of us are maintaining is that it is no more right for someone to say you don't belong and should be in another division because you ARE fit and over 200lbs than it would be to tell someone you can't compete because you are not in great shape. I hear a lot on here questions like "is it fair if a 6" 6" 220lbs guy wins 2nd overall and the Clyde division?". I ask is it any more fair if someone wins the Clyde division because we pushed the in shape athletes to age group so the clyde winner is not the fastest 200+ pound man but just the fastest of the out of shape 200lbs men? Bottom line is if you are 200+ welcome to Clyde. You can run with the Big Horses or can prance with the race horses its up to you but you are welcome in the tri community either way. |
|
|
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK