If the bike leg was cancelled in your race... (Page 3)

If USAT really wanted to have a LC championship, they WOULD pair up with the WTC and use E-Man, Florida or California as their HIM race and something like Vineman for their full.  Those 3 HIM races already get the cream of the crop for the distance.  When someone does a sub-5 and still barely breaks the top 100 in their age group you KNOW the field is competitive.  That is what it is like at E-Man some of the time.

As for the times for the full distance?  20 minutes between the first and second finisher is more than telling there.  If it was really trying to attract the cream of the crop ........... it shouldn't be a month before Kona, that is just plain stupid planning.  Sub-10 is a great time at any iron distance and that would earn a kona slot in most IM's now (barely).  But if some of the athletes who are on BT put up some of their times from their IM (on tougher courses like LP and WI) they would have been top 10 overall in this race!  And yet they weren't even top 20 in the AG a lot of the time at their IM.

A national championship should be representative of the crop of athletes that are available.  USAT does not do a good job of marketing the distance and races because they simply cannot compete with the juggernaut that is WTC.  This does NOT mean that the independents are not well run races on great courses with a lot to offer - they almost always are!!  It simply means that the governing body is not getting a representative pool of athletes for the distance when they try to market a race as a National Championship.

It is not a knock against the race or RD at all.  It is a knock against the USAT and their classification of the race.

Edited by Daremo 2009-09-21 7:33 PM

Since the thread is utterly hijacked anyway  

The USAT/Halfmax qualifying times are not all that fast (said as someone who has never put up a qualifying time, but I never pretended to be fast).   At least in 2009, the USAT/Halfmax was Pumpkinman (Nevada). I entered as a general entry (there are a number of general entry slots), but to qualify I would have to go 12:35 at an IM, 10 minutes faster than my precisely MOP12:45.

I was scared sh**less going in that I would be the last one out on the course.  Turns out I was 5/8 in my AG.  It was a very well run and great race, and one that I was planning on doing this year again

Halfmax doesn't have that Clearwater cache

Not sure this is still relevant, but...  I'd do the HIM, but not the IM.  The second swim in the case of IM would be just too much to take.

I have to agree with Jorge, USAT should make their Championship a little more competitive with the 70.3 races. Also ChrisM made a really good point with the times that qualify you for the Halfmax Championship are very high compared to a time that would qualify you for Clearwater.
I participated in the last two Long Course Championships races the one in Nevada last year (which was my first Half "general admission" and this years Redman.
Redman this year attracted a lot more fast folks, the winning time was under 4hrs, and the top 10 were well under 4:28hrs which is respectable. I am just saying that because we want some fast folks representing the USA at worlds.
Myself was able to snitch 3rd in 25-29 and i know in any of the 70.3 series would not get me to 3rd place with a 4:37.
Back at the subject of the swim-run-swim, i spoke to the race director at the end and he admitted that would not happen , even though they initially mentioned that. All my respect to the volunteers who made this race actually happen.

Edited by maubueno 2009-09-21 8:28 PM

 
No need to take this personal; as Rick said it is not a jab against Redman, RD or competitors, it is a critique of the USAT and what they present and their national long course championship (aka HIM championship). For instance one critique of it is that it takes them a long time to announce what races will be qualifiers and championship. I did a Google search and learned on some none-tri forum that USAT picked myrtle beach as the site of the 2010 usa triathlon national championship festival to be held nov. 6, 2010, still I can't find a website, I don't know what races will be qualifiers and there is no mention of the above on the USAT website nor it appears on its 2010 calendar of events. 

But in the end, you are free to believe that the best AGers participated at the USAT LD champ. It has nothing to do with results but with reality and the reality is that the current standard to qualify for LD champs is not overly hard to achieve to the point some (many) of the fast AGers (i.e. those earning AA honors in USAT rankings, qualifying to Clearwater, Kona) more often than not don't consider it as a main event in their schedules.

I think it would be cool if the USAT would create a series to compete with the 70.3 in which participants could qualify for the long course champ (with harder standards) but also earn points at each event based on placing or something (maybe top 10, 20, 30 whatev get points). That way athletes could compete for overall points and for titles at each race and the champ; since a fit athlete could do 3-4+ HIM in a year maybe that would attract more of the top competitors and give more value to their rankings and have a series for all AGers beyond one race.

PS. if you don't mind me asking, in what HIM race did you qualify for the USAT long course championship and what were the requirements for this 2009 edition?

Here's another interesting failing of the USAT.  Reading this post, I got curious, and looked at the web site.  (I live in SC, so was intrigued about Myrtle Beach being the venue.)  It turns out that a race I did this year was a qualifier.  Not only that, but I qualified.  Was either fact ever made known to me by any means, even a quick email?  Nope.  First I've 'heard' of it.  I wouldn't have done the race--that's not the point--but I guess if USAT wants to promote these events, then maybe they should, um, promote them.

Jorge ,
This is the website with some of the races that would qualify you, but you can also qualify by time at any 70.3 race sanctioned by USAT
http://www.halfmaxchampionship.com/index.php

Half Iron-Distance Triathlon Age Group Male Division Female Division 18-24 5:15 5:35 25-29 5:05 5:35 30-34 5:05 5:35 35-39 5:10 5:40 40-44 5:15 5:40 45-49 5:25 6:00 50-54 5:40 6:15 55-59 5:45 6:25 60-64 6:30 6:40 65+ Any half or full finish in 2007 Any half or full finish in 2007 Athena & Clydesdale 39 & under 5:35 6:30 Clydesdale & Athena 40 & over 5:40 6:35

Full Iron-Distance Triathlon Age Group Male Division Female Division 18-24 11:35 12:30 25-29 11:45 12:50 30-34 11:45 12:50 35-39 11:45 12:50 40-44 12:00 13:10 45-49 12:15 13:20 50-54 12:30 13:30 55-59 13:00 14:00 60-64 13:30 14:30 65+ Any half or full finish in 2007 Any half or full finish in 2007 Athena & Clydesdale 39 & under 12:30 14:30 Clydesdale 40 & over 12:35 14:35

 

Redman wasn't just a qualifiers race as is Clearwater. There were lots and lots of AGers in the mix. Anybody could sign up for it.

If you look at the field as a whole I contend that smaller, lesser-known races have better average times overall than the 70.3s because they don't attract as many people.

Redman had an average finish time of 5:44:38. Fewer people who'd qualify for Clearwater but fewer people who'd be BOPers at a 70.3 race. I've done two 70.3s and now two non-WTC races and can say the quality isn't different and neither is the distance, obviously. I searched a couple of online results from some 70.3s and sadly most are in text-only format so they don't have the average finishers time. One I found that did was IM New Orleans 70.3, which I did in April. The average finish time there was 6:23:22. At Ironman Lake Stevens 70.3, the average finish time was 6:00:55.

I would say the courses at IM New Orleans and Redman Half were similar with Redman having a more difficult bike because of the long rollers, yet the average time in OKC was better.

To say `Oh that race is good enough for YOU but I would never do it.' is sort of insulting to those who put their hearts and soul into a race for months and months. Just because the winners don't get Kona slots and Mike Reilly doesn't call your name doesn't mean it's not a `real race.'

Sorry Lisa for hijacking your thread!

I am pretty surprised the RD would announce it if there were no intentions of following through - crazy! Maybe he just wanted to keep people's blood flowing so they would stay warm while waiting for the decision

knowing this don't you think it is a stretch to call it the USAT long course national championship?

As I said before it is hard to compare results across races due to the different variables, still to repeat myself, there are clearly more than a few 70.3 races with a deeper/stronger AG fields (hence the inclusion of some of those race results as reference), those races are well known (Eman, Tman, Wildflower, etc.)

I never argued independent races are of inferior quality than any 70.3 in fact many indy races are far better (organization wise) than many 70.3, i.e. IMO any Keith Jordan race like Mooseman is far better than 70.3 races such as FL 70.3 or Steelhead. So the quality in many races indy or not is there, some indy or 70.3 NON-championship races have deep/strong fields, which is exactly my point; how come some of those races appeal more to the faster AGers vs the so called "Championship". Lake Stevens or NOLA 70.3 (which was a new race) are among those in the 70.3 series that I wouldn't consider it with deep/strong fields necessarely, IOW other races have stronger fields, but that's my "everyone is beneath me" opinion

you are now adding emotions to what I said (obviously taking offense) and because of that misrepresenting my post intention. It doesn't matter whether the race has Kona slots or who announces at the finish line, trust me that's irrelevant, it is about competing against the best, whether that is at Draftwater or Oklahoma. If the best show up that to *me* is appealing; call it masochism but I enjoy getting my butt kicked by all the speedy studs. If a race doesn't have that I rather not compete (which is my choice) even if I would have a chance at winning something, to me that's not fun.

The fact that the national championship is open to anyone to sign up reinforces what I stated on my very 1st post. I think most would agree that in general in a championship you expect to have the top athletes for the event. You think I am seeking to degrade anyone and that's not true (but feel free to take it anyway you prefer), I just choose not to spend my $$ on a race which IMO is not really representative of a national championship. For that matter I can race any of the great HIM in the area for a cheaper cost and less traveling hassle.

Given the choice I would go to clearwater rather than any USAT LC champ based on the current qualifications and the fact the race is open to anyone; even when the current 70.3 champ venue lends to cheating, still the competition is tougher and that for me is part of the challenge, motivation and fun. The good thing is that it doesn't have to be in an either or situation, I can just pick the races (indy or not) that usually attract deep fields and head there to get my arss kicked!

I have dreams like this...that would make my f'ing day!

Redman originally had 150 "general entry" slots, which sold out very quickly. When the alloted entries for the national championship were not filled, they opened the remainder of the slots up for additional "general entry."

Of course people are free to choose what 70.3 distance-races they do, and which ones they view as the more authentic "championship" race. But the attitude in your posts is pretty elitist, I bet even you can admit that. If I had qualified and competed as a qualifier on Saturday, I'd be pretty taken aback by your posts. 
 

Great post. WTC has done an amzing job of promoting their events. So much so that many triathletes believe a non-MDot race isnt a real ironman, or so Ive seen even on BT. It's a marketers dream. The USAT qualifiers need a name on which people can hang their hats, something easily remembered. Still, racing wiyh thousands of people doesnt much appeal to me, for a mass start IM anyway, since the swim start is daunting for a slow swimmer like me.

Clearly we have different perceptions as to what the USA triathlon national championship should be. I guess any event limiting the entry of general folks via certain criteria it can be treated as elitism from those not able to meet that criteria? I know, some people perceive competition as bad, something that is not a desirable treat even though it is something we face on our lives everyday. OTOH, others see competition as a regular aspect of human nature and understand we deal with it almost all the time and in every day activities there are people who are better than you in certain things and you are better than others in certain things. Because of this, it is normal for people to have disagreements though I have a hard time understanding why is it elitist to expect for the national championship of our sport for the HIM distance to have certain requirements.

I am not criticizing anyone who participates in those but you choose to interpret my posts in that way; certainly many had amazing performances and everyone who finished raced facing adverse conditions (from what I heard) which makes it more special. I know most trained months to get ready for the race and gave it their best, still I don't understand why their individual accomplishments and performances should be diminished in any way by having certain expectations about the national championship, and both seem like two separate issues.

Anyway, in the end you are welcome to interpret my posts and label me in any way you prefer, it makes no difference to me. I will continue to speak up my mind as to what I would hope for the USAT LC national championship to offer and vote with my $$, after all the critic is about that and not what you and others are trying to shift the discussion to. I am not alone with my opinion and the proof is in the pudding by comparing the success of USAT LC national champs vs. 70.3 championships.

It is a shame that many athletes don’t even know there is a USAT national championship or take it seriously because of the current way it is handled, the lack of promotion, information, etc. We don't get much in return from the USAT from our membership as it stands right now; I think having certain expectations about the national championship event is a valid concern, but then again maybe I am just an elitist...

Really??

I'd love to see some links to that as it has been my experience that NO ONE has ever posted anything even remotely close to this statement.

Perhaps I have not read every post out there on the subject but I cannot recall one instance where a regular BT poster would say something like that.

So has anyone realized that you are comparing Clearwater (a 1300 competitor World Championship race) to a 550 competitor national championship race. Of course there is tougher competition at Clearwater.


As for the rest. Yes, USAT should market their race better. Ironman Brand races are better known they will attract more people.


Times were compared, it really seemed like the top 5 times were all pretty darn competitive and as noted its pretty hard to compare times between races.

The point trying to be shown is that there is tougher competition at ALL the IM branded half irons compared to what the USAT is touting as the National Championship.

The only race that I have experienced with the USAT where they really pushed the whole national champ aspect is actually the Du Nationals in Richmond this year.  They really marketed it via e-mail and even got Slowtwitch on board to do a training challenge to keep people interested.  If they did that for all their championships I can honestly believe there would be more interest.  It was a pretty big field at Du Nationals and pretty fast competition.

Bad phrasing on my part, I suppose. In general, though, some people consider non-MDots lesser races than M-Dots. I found several examples of that in the old `MDot vs non-MDot race' threads. Here's a really good one that explains how people feel. Sure you may know that there's no difference but not everybody does:

``Mdots are ironman brand are have a great reputation as well supported and organized races. Non Mdot or iron distance the races vary some are former wtc races some are no frills bare bones kinda deals and some i have heard aren't so good.''



I stand by my contention that the overall field at Redman was actually better than those at the MDot races, at least those that can be compared. As I said I did both IMNO 70.3 and Redman and the Redman bike was tougher, yet the overall average time was better. If you can find the average finisher's time for the rest of the MDot races (most results are in text only) then I'd be interested in seeing those. My guess is very few would be 5:44:XX or better.

And Jorge, we get your point that you think competition is good and you're fast and you want to be competitive and that you like being challenged and you train a lot and are an FOPer. We get it. What YOU don't get is that by saying `Redman as my A race? No way ...' is offensive to those who did make it their A race, or even those who competed whole-heartedly. It's as if you're saying `That race isn't worthy of being my A-race.'

But again, if you can't see why that's offensive, then it's not worth trying to explain. I know, however, you'll come back with an explanation and some statistics to prove that what you said wasn't offensive, so I'll just drop it.

Doesn't sound like non-M-Dot is being touted as a "lesser" race, just that it can be hit or miss with what you might get as far as support structure.  I believe what that is saying is that when you do a branded race you know what you are getting as the overall package.

I did Chessieman (aqua velo) in '07 as my build for IMFL which is an independent iron distance race.  Very low key and between the full, the aqua velo and the swim only there were only about 350 or so people.  Really laid back race but still well supported.  And put on by a group that is used to huge and very competitive fields (Columbia Tri, Irongirl, Eagleman).  Yet the vibe at the race was completely different than the IM events.  No better or worse, just different.  I can only imagine, but I think Roth and Wildflower would be similar in feel to an IM branded event as they are just as popular and competitive.

Swim Run Swim is fun, even though I'm a much better cyclist. We did one fun SRS training session this summer and it was soooo sweeet to slide in to the water after a hot, heart pounding run.