Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time

Forum guidelines BT super discount
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 5
 
 
2010-08-11 2:33 PM

User image

Master
1588
1000500252525
San Francisco
Subject: Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time
I'm not sure if everyone's seen this chart below from this site http://www.runtri.com/2010/07/runtri-benchmarks-easiest-ironman.html


 

The original article seems to equate finish time with course difficulty.  Obviously, there is some correlation there, but that seems a little misleading.  For that to be true, there would have to be the same level of competitors at each race.  Obviously, Kona will be packed with mostly Kona qualifiers.  Anecdotally, when I did Wisconsin, it seemed like that was a very popular race for first timers.  When I did Lanzarote, I'd say that, on average, the racers were more fit than I've seen in U.S. IMs.  If you look at the link, you'll see for example that the run split from Wisconsin is worse than IM LP, but the IM LP run course is way more hilly than WI.  In any case, the data was interesting food for thought.


Edited by enginerd 2010-08-11 2:34 PM

2010-08-11 3:03 PM
in reply to: #3037686

Expert
759
5001001002525
Subject: RE: Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time
Wow this data is very interesting and not what i expected to see. I agree though that finishing times do not necesarily equate to "Ironman Difficulty" and that is misleading. There are way too many other factors as you have pointed out.

Interesting for sure though
2010-08-11 3:33 PM
in reply to: #3037686

User image

Master
2404
2000100100100100
Redlands, CA
Subject: RE: Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time

Ouch, I know St George had alot of newcomers but I still think it will be on top.  In addition to the hills, the wind is nasty. 

The comparisons have been done in many different variations, and I don't think there's one end all be all to gage difficulty. Kona (as you said) will be faster, and you also have the claims that european and aussies are better athletes, as having never competed in either one I can't verify that.   

These IM comparisions threads can get really dirty as some feel its an indirect critique to a huge accomplishment.  I have no horse in the game, but finishing any of them is a huge accomplishment in itself.

2010-08-11 3:38 PM
in reply to: #3037686

User image

Subject: RE: Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time
Interesting, but mostly cuz AZ is listed smack dab in the middle.  AS you said, too many variables, as this is probably historically based on the April date.  Or maybe more "newbies" do AZ because it's seen as "easy."

Anyway, I always knew Kona was easier than everyone said
2010-08-11 3:54 PM
in reply to: #3037686

User image

Elite
3658
200010005001002525
Roswell, GA
Subject: RE: Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time

Is it based on just last season?

I couldn't find the answer on the website, and it makes a big difference.  The weather at some IM's can swing drastically and impact the finish times.  There was an article (maybe it was a letter to the mag) in LAVA magazine that compared the DNF's of various IM's year to year, and it wasn't uncommon to see the DNF's double in the hot years.

2010-08-11 4:09 PM
in reply to: #3037686

User image

Regular
288
100100252525
Doylestown, PA
Subject: RE: Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time
disregard.

Edited by ironman2284 2010-08-11 4:10 PM

2010-08-11 4:42 PM
in reply to: #3037686

User image

Veteran
486
100100100100252525
Newcastle, England
Subject: RE: Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time

different cut off times skew the averages ... Germany is 15hrs and some of the US ones are 17 ...

2010-08-11 5:02 PM
in reply to: #3037977

User image

Champion
5782
5000500100100252525
Northridge, California
Subject: RE: Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time
brown_dog_us - 2010-08-11 1:54 PM

Is it based on just last season?

I couldn't find the answer on the website, and it makes a big difference.  The weather at some IM's can swing drastically and impact the finish times.  There was an article (maybe it was a letter to the mag) in LAVA magazine that compared the DNF's of various IM's year to year, and it wasn't uncommon to see the DNF's double in the hot years.



It appears to be the average finishing time for the most recent race (I say that just based on the fact that clicking on the hot link associated with the average finishing time in the comparison table takes you to a finishers list for just the most recent year).  So, yeah, if that's true, not necessarily meaningless, but a lot less meaningful than it could be.

(The thing in LAVA was in a "ask the coach"--"coaches"?--type column...someone complaining about how unfair it was that the IM St George course was just so darned hard that way too many bucket-list-carrying deserving age groupers DNF'ed.  The response pointed to the huge variation in DNF rate at IMWI due to conditions, among other things.)
2010-08-11 5:06 PM
in reply to: #3037912

User image

Master
1588
1000500252525
San Francisco
Subject: RE: Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time
furiousferret - 2010-08-11 1:33 PM

Ouch, I know St George had alot of newcomers but I still think it will be on top.  In addition to the hills, the wind is nasty. 

The comparisons have been done in many different variations, and I don't think there's one end all be all to gage difficulty. Kona (as you said) will be faster, and you also have the claims that european and aussies are better athletes, as having never competed in either one I can't verify that.   

These IM comparisions threads can get really dirty as some feel its an indirect critique to a huge accomplishment.  I have no horse in the game, but finishing any of them is a huge accomplishment in itself.



I was talking to a fellow racer at vineman and he had done St. George as his first and I don't know if he totally knew what he was in for (being new to IM), although he was a local to that area.  It made me wonder whether or not a lot of first timers did St. George. 

I wouldn't go so far as to say europeans or aussies (although I don't really know either) are more fit in general...but at Lanzarote (being a small desert island) there will be very few locals who race it so that means almost everyone has to fly in to do the race, plus it's a difficult course, so presumably people self-select (i.e. those who are well prepared for the challenge) to do the race.

I agree that any IM is an accomplishment.  re: your comment about indirect critiquing, it was an interesting side note that the person who forwarded the link out to our tri club, of course, had just done St. George.  

personally, I don't have much of a horse in that game either (critiquing) since I just hope to do them all one day anyway Wink
2010-08-11 5:07 PM
in reply to: #3037977

User image

Master
1588
1000500252525
San Francisco
Subject: RE: Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time
brown_dog_us - 2010-08-11 1:54 PM

Is it based on just last season?

I couldn't find the answer on the website, and it makes a big difference.  The weather at some IM's can swing drastically and impact the finish times.  There was an article (maybe it was a letter to the mag) in LAVA magazine that compared the DNF's of various IM's year to year, and it wasn't uncommon to see the DNF's double in the hot years.



yeah, can't really tell.  If you click through on some of the links, it shows race results from 2009 and some from 2010. 
2010-08-11 5:24 PM
in reply to: #3037686

User image

Champion
10157
500050001002525
Alabama
Subject: RE: Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time

Wow, what a great chart.  Thanks for posting this.  I have always wanted to see this data.

One thought though...as Chris pointed out, Kona looks easy!  OK, so obviously the graph provides no insight into who is racing.  Consider this, I would probably not sign up for LP or Canada or CdA becuase of the hills.  So maybe the people who signed up for say IM France are mostly great bikers and very used to biking in the Alps.  The chart might give the impression that the race is easier than it really is.  Anway, just a thought.

I am very excited to see IM Austria way down on the list!  Mean I might be able to pull a sub-13 hr there in 2012 - this is based on my 14:30 IMKY and a little optimism.  ;-)  This of course totally ignores what I posted in the previous paragraph.

~Mike

ETA - the Eurpeon races might be skewed as I've been told they do not have a many "bucket list - just finish" type in those races.  I have no idea WHY that would be so.



Edited by Rogillio 2010-08-11 5:28 PM

2010-08-11 6:11 PM
in reply to: #3038160

User image

Master
2404
2000100100100100
Redlands, CA
Subject: RE: Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time
tcovert - 2010-08-11 3:02 PM
brown_dog_us - 2010-08-11 1:54 PM

Is it based on just last season?

I couldn't find the answer on the website, and it makes a big difference.  The weather at some IM's can swing drastically and impact the finish times.  There was an article (maybe it was a letter to the mag) in LAVA magazine that compared the DNF's of various IM's year to year, and it wasn't uncommon to see the DNF's double in the hot years.



It appears to be the average finishing time for the most recent race (I say that just based on the fact that clicking on the hot link associated with the average finishing time in the comparison table takes you to a finishers list for just the most recent year).  So, yeah, if that's true, not necessarily meaningless, but a lot less meaningful than it could be.

(The thing in LAVA was in a "ask the coach"--"coaches"?--type column...someone complaining about how unfair it was that the IM St George course was just so darned hard that way too many bucket-list-carrying deserving age groupers DNF'ed.  The response pointed to the huge variation in DNF rate at IMWI due to conditions, among other things.)


In my defense... actually I have none!
2010-08-11 6:28 PM
in reply to: #3037686

User image

Champion
7559
500020005002525
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Subject: RE: Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time
Looks like the article calculates/graphs the numerical average for each race. 

Looking at Coeur D'Alene 2010 results
The average is 13:08:01 (we won't worry about the extra second)
The median is 13:02:06.
The 1048th finisher out of 2096 finishers had a time of 13:01. 
32 people finished between the 1048/2096 finisher and the 13:08 "average"  Those 32 people are happy to be "above average" per the article metrics. 

How should the 168 DNF's factor into this? 

Edited by McFuzz 2010-08-11 6:28 PM
2010-08-11 6:32 PM
in reply to: #3037686

User image

Expert
1360
10001001001002525
Subject: RE: Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time
See I knew I wasn't picking one of the easiest races when I chose to do Florida for my first. 
2010-08-11 6:36 PM
in reply to: #3037686

User image

Master
1588
1000500252525
San Francisco
Subject: RE: Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time
For those who didn't click the link, this table with the breakdown by split is just as interesting.


SwimBikeRunTotal
St. George1:217:025:0713:47
Wisconsin1:206:295:1013:16
Malaysia
China		1:26
1:19		6:21
6:20		5:19
5:26		13:15
13:13
Cozumel1:086:395:1113:11
UK1:137:024:3013:01
Coeur d'Alene1:206:275:0513:08
Canada1:176:235:0813:00
Lanzarote1:096:594:3813:00
Lake Placid1:166:344:4712:54
South Africa1:186:185:0012:52
Louisville1:236:214:4812:51
Arizona1:206:084:5812:43
Florida
Japan		1:21
1:16		6:02
6:36		4:57
4:43		12:37
12:36
France1:176:244:3412:32
New Zealand1:096:174:3612:15
Australia1:046:154:5412:13
Brazil1:206:034:4011:59
W Australia1:115:524:4811:52
Austria1:155:464:3111:45
Germany1:115:424:3411:39
Kona1:135:564:1711:37
Switzerland1:155:484:1711:30
 
2010-08-11 7:09 PM
in reply to: #3038285

User image

Champion
10157
500050001002525
Alabama
Subject: RE: Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time
enginerd - 2010-08-11 6:36 PM For those who didn't click the link, this table with the breakdown by split is just as interesting.
 


From your signature block, looks like you've done 3 of these races.  Do your finish times show good correlation to the graph?

~Mike

ETA - oops, just realized you those are planned races....cept the two in July.  Did you really do an IM 6 days after doing an IM?

Edited by Rogillio 2010-08-11 7:11 PM

2010-08-11 7:17 PM
in reply to: #3038281

User image

Champion
10157
500050001002525
Alabama
Subject: RE: Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time
Daffodil - 2010-08-11 6:32 PM See I knew I wasn't picking one of the easiest races when I chose to do Florida for my first. 


Not "one of" but THE easiet (US) IM.  ;-)

FWIW, I'm not so sure fastest finish time necessarily equates to easiest....

2010-08-11 7:20 PM
in reply to: #3038326

Expert
759
5001001002525
Subject: RE: Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time
Rogillio - Did you really do an IM 6 days after doing an IM?


Yes...and he freakin rocked them both!
2010-08-11 7:28 PM
in reply to: #3037686

User image

Champion
9600
500020002000500100
Fountain Hills, AZ
Subject: RE: Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time
Any Ironman is "easy" depending on how slow you want to go.
2010-08-11 7:31 PM
in reply to: #3038352

User image

Master
2404
2000100100100100
Redlands, CA
Subject: RE: Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time
bryancd - 2010-08-11 5:28 PM Any Ironman is "easy" depending on how slow you want to go.


This is one of the few places you'll actually have people agree (I am not one of them) with you, and even then its a tough sell

2010-08-11 7:34 PM
in reply to: #3038352

User image

Master
1588
1000500252525
San Francisco
Subject: RE: Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time
bryancd - 2010-08-11 5:28 PM Any Ironman is "easy" depending on how slow you want to go.


 Bryan, that's an ironic comment given your signature line right below it says "-Of course it's 'effing hard, it's IRONMAN!! "  

2010-08-11 7:39 PM
in reply to: #3038365

User image

Champion
9600
500020002000500100
Fountain Hills, AZ
Subject: RE: Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time
enginerd - 2010-08-11 6:34 PM

bryancd - 2010-08-11 5:28 PM Any Ironman is "easy" depending on how slow you want to go.


 Bryan, that's an ironic comment given your signature line right below it says "-Of course it's 'effing hard, it's IRONMAN!! "  


And yet people are always posting threads "Which Ironman race is easiest?" God forbid it's hard.
2010-08-11 7:40 PM
in reply to: #3038326

User image

Master
1588
1000500252525
San Francisco
Subject: RE: Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time
Rogillio - 2010-08-11 5:09 PM
enginerd - 2010-08-11 6:36 PM For those who didn't click the link, this table with the breakdown by split is just as interesting.
 


From your signature block, looks like you've done 3 of these races.  Do your finish times show good correlation to the graph?

~Mike

ETA - oops, just realized you those are planned races....cept the two in July.  Did you really do an IM 6 days after doing an IM?


I did Lanzarote and Wisconsin in 2008, Lake Placid this year, and have New Zealand and St. George next year.

Lanzarote was the most difficult for sure although that was only my second IM distance race.  I definitely would not have rated Wisconsin harder than Lanzarote.  LP and Wisconsin seem somewhat comparable, although different.  I'd be interested to hear what others say about their experiences as well.

Yeah, two IMs in one week - one on the east coast and one on the west coast to boot!
2010-08-11 7:44 PM
in reply to: #3037686

User image

Champion
9600
500020002000500100
Fountain Hills, AZ
Subject: RE: Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time
I also can never find the red sarcasm font...
2010-08-11 7:45 PM
in reply to: #3038373

User image

Master
1588
1000500252525
San Francisco
Subject: RE: Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time
bryancd - 2010-08-11 5:39 PM 
And yet people are always posting threads "Which Ironman race is easiest?" God forbid it's hard.


True that.  Personally, it's the challenge and difficulty that make it interesting and appealing. 
New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Ranking of Ironman courses by Finish Time Rss Feed  
 
 
of 5