Should the cut off time be changed for IM? (Page 3)

Bryan, you were right.... this doesn't end well. Guys, this was a QUESTION based on the other IM threads that suggested that IM is the next 10k, IM is becoming watered down, IM is becoming a fad, people are doing for the T-shirt and tattoo and so on.

So I though it would be a good debate to see if changing the cut off time would maybe help with these issues. I did give a half baked\knee jerk opinion with the question that I thought up as I was writing the question. It was NOT something I was thinking about for months prior. Big mistake!
It was not to keep slower competitors that are giving 100% from becoming an Ironman. It was just a question!

To the people that burnt a cross on my lawn last night....not funny! i don't have the power to change the cut off time nor do I really care to.

As for the angry guy I quoted, thank you Edgar Allen Poe for pointing out the ERROR in my writing

Edited by stchase34 2009-06-12 7:20 AM

I told you. But you can get a pass and this thread wasn't nearly as nasty as the last time we had the topic come up, that one was a barn burner!

I have thought about this a lot and used to think that it might be a good idea to lower the time, but since then I have realized it actually is the perfect 17 hour combo, 7:00am-Midnight, really works and provides all participants, especially the older one's, an opportunity to finish. Personally, I don't have a lot of athletic respect for anyone who shows up at an Ironman who hasn't prepared properly by design and are just interested in finishing. That's my own personal feelings and if people don't like it, too bad. I'm not saying they are bad people, I just don't respect their commitment. However, 17 hours does allow for those that have blown up, gotten hurt, have worked their butt's off to be their but are only just quick enough, or older folks to fullfill their personal goals.

Who are you calling OLD?!?!? You're such a d-bag!

Agree 100%

Thanks

Thanks. 

I wouldn't disagree with your comment here as far as it goes (initially my own comment included a bit about WTC and NAS, in fact, but I edited it)...but, really, can you imagine what the uproar on a forum like this one would be if cutoffs on all the M-Dot races were changed.  I suppose as long as it was a change that was announced before anyone had registered for any race, the furor would be minimized, but--honestly--I'd bet a lot of money that there'd be a ton of comments spanning the continuum from the outraged ("How come I have to do this in 16 hours now when everyone else got to be an Ironman in 17!?!") to the merely bitter ("Dammit, I knew I should have registered last year...that's it...I'm selling the P4!")

Oh, no doubt, BT would be in flames for a few days.  But people adapt (eventually) 

but cheap P4s, huh?  that might be worth it

I'm actually quite disappointed in you.  Usually the OP in these threads takes the position that the cutoff times should be lowered, and offers proposed times.   you caved under the pressure.  You are not ready for ST, grasshopper

NB:  Above is in jest.  You unknowingly stepped into a hornet's nest that has been debated and argued many times over. 

Yeah, I know..... I wish there was a "Things to never bring up" list here on BT!

I assure you, I am learning!

Are the cutoff times consistant in North America at least?

France:

Cutoff times

 
SWIM: 2h15 (local time: 8h45)

SWIM+BIKE: 10h45 (local time: 17h15)
You have to join the "St Bernabé" point (118.70 kms BIKE) before 15h10.

SWIM+BIKE+RUN: 16h00 (local time: 22h30)
You have to finish the third loop (31.50 kms RUN) before 21h45.

I don't think the cutoff times should be changed. The whole debate about deserving to race an ironman only if you can race it in XXXX amount of time UNDER the current cutoff is a load of crap. My PR is somebody else's worst nightmare and vice versa.

Questioning someone's motivation for this kind of race and justifying those thoughts with bogus time and pace standards is nothing more than chest beating and cock crowing. I think it's so weird that some folks hate the "I just want to finish" people. Yeah. That's my goal. I just want to finish. Heck, this is my first IM. How can I put a time goal for something I've never before experienced? Yeah, I kind of know what to expect from my training paces, but I don't know what the weather conditions will be, how my body will react and if I experience any mechanical difficulties and such.

Just finishing is quite a lofty goal in my opinion. Sure, I would love to finish well before any cut off time approaches, but I will take all 16 hours and 59 minutes if that's what it takes to finish next Sunday. It seems like with every race report that I've read and personal stories that I've heard, every racer experiences something unexpected that took more time than they'd planned on to overcome. Nobody is guaranteed a finish. The current time cut offs at least allow some forgiveness if portions of your race don't go as planned.

The fast people have my admiration. It would be really cool to be in a position to race an IM for the win or AG placing. I hope my attempt at achieving my goals does not interfere with their race. But I paid my money, did my training, booked my travel, and I will be out there next Sunday on that course for as long as it takes. Wahoo!!!

Too true, there are no guarantees, no matter what shape you are in

And GOOD LUCK!!!!  We'll all be watching from the comfort of our homes while you're out doing it!!!! 

Here, here well said!

I think it should be cut back to 15 hrs.

This user's post has been ignored.

I apologize if this has been said already; IMO no cut off times should not be changed. There is no need to, WTC is the owner of IM bran races and they + RDs decide what are the best rules to follow. People signing up for races know those rules and play accordingly. They are in the biz of making $$ and the faster their races sell out the better regardless if 50% are beginners or 90% finish under 9 hrs. It doesn't matter, through the years the cut off times have changed to accommodate the organizers needs (roads open, personnel available, etc.) and to accommodate the different AGers participating.

Those on the 70-74 to AG while fit and ready to tackle the race simply won't have the ability anymore to go 12hr 14hr or whatever time. A few yeasr ago sister Madona missed the bike cut off due to her age; do you really think she didn't train enough to get there or has the experience after MANY IMs? Rick and Dick Hoyt didn't make the swim cutoff also some years back and mainly it was because aging and the challenge they face when racing finally caught up with them. Yes maybe some participants cash in the 17 hrs cut off time to train the least possible and complete the race but those are the rules and that's their choice. Maybe it is not the wisest thing to do but no one can judge what's best for anyone but for ourselves, at least that's how I see it. As I coach I try to talk people out of IM racing if I don't think they are ready not because they won't finish but because with more time of training unfer their bodies the experience IMO will be more rewarding and enjoyable, but in the end people do whatever they want. I can always choose to help them or say "no thanks".

The point is that WTC set up the cut off times, so far they are working in the sense that races keep on selling out months prior to the race, new people keep on jumping into the challenge, those who just want to do one for bragging rights will do so and those who want to go to KQ will keep trying. No one really cares about your times but you (and maybe your family), so really it makes no difference IMO. I don't buy into the "if you set up cut off times you are an elitist" mentality, come one we all know the rules and we play by them.  Some races require you to qualify (Kona, Boston) and if you want to play there you better get to work. Some others are open to anyone and because you are a sub 9hr IM you accomplishment won't be affected by the guy finishing in 16 hrs.

The hardest part about IM is not the race per say, but the training. Doing the work day in and out and getting to the starting line healthy. And yes, IMO almost anyone who spends the time doing the work will increase his/her chances to finish the race succesfully; that's the "easy" part (easy relatively speaking to the months of training, planning, time invested, $$, etc prior the race).

The time should be changed to whatever the last place finisher achieved in the very first ironman held.

From reading the SI article, that would be over 24 hours, I believe ( or certainly longer than 17, I don't think there was a cutoff originally)

Edited by ChrisM 2009-06-23 11:45 AM

Ok, had to go look it up. According to Ironman.com, first IM held Feb 18, 1978, the last placed finishers time was 15:30:14. Faster than I thought it would be.

hmmm, maybe it was the second year then, could have sworn I read that it was well into the next day.....  but perhaps not

ETA - looked up the article.  Last finisher in 1979 was 8:30 a.m. Monday morning for a Sunday morning start.  Ouch

Edited by ChrisM 2009-06-23 12:15 PM

From Slowtwitch (http://www.slowtwitch.com/News/Races/Top_Ironman_Hawaii_Finishers_Archive_58.html):

ORIGINAL IRONMAN FINISHERS
1st	Gordon Haller	1:20:40	6:56:00	3:30:00	11:46:58
2nd	John Dunbar	1:00:15	7:04:00	4:03:00	12:20:27
3rd	Dave Orlowski	1:09:15	7:51:00	4:59:00	13:39:13
4th	Ian D. Emberson	1:01:40	7:47:00	5:15:00	14:03:25
5th	Sterling F. Lewis	1:02:30	7:47:00	5:15:00	14:04:35
6th	Tom Knoll	2:13:05	8:19:00	4:13:00	14:45:11
7th	Henry Forrest	1:36:42	8:47:00	5:06:00	15:30:14
8th	Frank Day	1:44:20	8:45:00	6:09:00	16:38:31
9th	John Collins	1:31:15	9:15:00	6:14:00	17:00:38
10th	Archie Hapai	57:35	8:06:00	8:20:00	17:24:22
11th	Dan Hendrickson	1:35:35	11:39:00	6:48:00	20:03:28
12th	Harold Irving	1:05:30	11:04:00	8:08:00	21:00:38
NOTE : No women competed in 1978

Shane