Kona Qualifying- What it takes.. (Page 4)

2007-08-18 6:36 PM

in reply to: #922334

Champion

9600

Fountain Hills, AZ

Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying- What it takes..

One other attribute Kona AG qualifiers seem to share, in general, they are COMPETETIVE. I am always amazed at the recent development of the "everybody is a winner" syndrome. When I was a kid, if I finished fourth at a swim meet or a cross country race, you know what I got? NOTHING. Awards went to the top 3 and that's it. Now, it seems kids get stuff 10 deep and even the last one to finish get's something. There's nothing wrong with competition, but you wouldn't know it from todays "we are all great!" attitude. Where's the challenge? Where's the drive to be better? You know who I respect? That guy that finished 13 min ahead of me at IMAZ and was the #1 AG to finish that race. I had to suck it up and take 7th. A Kona qualifying performance for me, and yet I wasn't even close to the top and I now I wan to better, or as best as I can be, but NO one will tell me it's "good enough".

THAT'S WHAT IT TAKES.

2007-08-19 4:59 PM

in reply to: #922334

Subject: ...

This user's post has been ignored.

2007-08-19 5:46 PM

in reply to: #922334

Expert

1296

Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying- What it takes..

While Aaron mentioned it in one of his post above, I was curious as to everyone's thoughts on the topic of Kona via 70.3.

My question is what are your feelings on qualifying for Kona at a 70.3 event? How does the "what it takes" idea differ between a full IM qualification and a 70.3 qualification? I have my own opinions on the issue but for the most part I am ok with qualifying for Kona through 70.3.

After all M Jones did one IM just to nail down nutrition but she did all 70.3 races last year as race sims and wound up with a win in Kona. I had a Kona slot at Eagleman this year and passed it up. Why? Well it rolled down and in my opinion I am not really ready to "race" in Kona this October. Sure I could have slogged through the race but I am going there to "race." If I was top 2 in my Age Group and didn't have to take the roll down I would have felt differently.

But ultimately I have no problem taking a Kona slot at a 70.3.

2007-08-19 5:55 PM

in reply to: #922334

Champion

9600

Fountain Hills, AZ

Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying- What it takes..

I'm against it, but not because I don't think the athletes are deseving. It was a corporate desicion to give 70.3 Kona slots to help build the race series. Qualifying for the 70.3 Championships in Clearwater is too easy, in my opinion and no offense to those that want to race there. Heck, I'm going to try and race there next year as on off IM year. But the qualification standards are weak, everybody knows it. It's too easy, but thats a function of the newness of the series and the corporate decision to make them accesible. That's fine, I just hope as they grow in popularity, which I think they will, they will become more competetive.
Now, my issue with the Kona slots is that they are still adding new Ironman branded races to the calender and need to spread out the slots among more IM races. There are already almost too many athletes going to Hawaii as it is and this just makes it worse and more crowded. By giving 70.3 slots, they are dilluting the pool even further and taking slots away from Ironman races. That's no good.

Edited by bryancd 2007-08-19 5:55 PM

2007-08-19 6:16 PM

in reply to: #930655

Elite

3130

Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying- What it takes..

bryancd - 2007-08-18 5:36 PM When I was a kid, if I finished fourth at a swim meet or a cross country race, you know what I got? NOTHING. Awards went to the top 3 and that's it. Now, it seems kids get stuff 10 deep and even the last one to finish get's something.

Well then, by your own logic, do you know what you should have gotten for finishing 25th overall at IMAZ?

NOTHING!

2007-08-19 6:20 PM

in reply to: #931170

Not a Coach

11473

Media, PA

Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying- What it takes..

bryancd - 2007-08-19 5:55 PM I'm against it, but not because I don't think the athletes are deseving. It was a corporate desicion to give 70.3 Kona slots to help build the race series. Qualifying for the 70.3 Championships in Clearwater is too easy, in my opinion and no offense to those that want to race there. Heck, I'm going to try and race there next year as on off IM year. But the qualification standards are weak, everybody knows it. It's too easy, but thats a function of the newness of the series and the corporate decision to make them accesible. That's fine, I just hope as they grow in popularity, which I think they will, they will become more competetive. Now, my issue with the Kona slots is that they are still adding new Ironman branded races to the calender and need to spread out the slots among more IM races. There are already almost too many athletes going to Hawaii as it is and this just makes it worse and more crowded. By giving 70.3 slots, they are dilluting the pool even further and taking slots away from Ironman races. That's no good.

Bryan, there have been Kona slots available at select HIMs for years--it was not a "corporate" decision to help the 70.3 series.

IMO, it is generally MUCH harder to get a Kona slot at a 70.3--I think the max is 2 in an AG. While I think I could potentially qualify for Kona down the road, I am far less certain I could ever get there via a 70.3 race. But I would certainly feel fine taking it if I did.

Mike, you could do far better than "slogging" through Kona this year. But I appreciate you have higher standards for yourself. I imagine you may very well have the chance to accept a slot at E-man without a roll-down someday soon.

2007-08-19 6:38 PM

in reply to: #931160

Subject: ...

This user's post has been ignored.

2007-08-19 6:45 PM

in reply to: #922334

Expert

1296

Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying- What it takes..

Thanks for the feed back from both of you guys.

I am racing there this year and I am happy about it. (Clearwater) I know that it's not Kona and that it's a totally different ball game. I do agree with John though regarding that fact that you need to be pretty much top 2 in your Age Group at any 70.3 to get to Kona and that it's not that easy to take those slots. Also consider that only a handful of 70.3 races award slots each year. I mean look at Eagleman and then look at lets say Timberman today. Not to take that much away from Timberman but the Age Group field is stacked and way deeper at Eagleman. I was looking at the results today from Timberman and needless to say on two totally different courses I still was not overly impressed with the Age Group field. I guess what I am saying is that the races that have the Kona slots seem to be ultra competitive. That is a good thing if you ask me.

Hopefully. next year will be a Kona year for me. If not then it's not the end of the world. All I really care about is staying healty. Qualification and the like will come along as long as I take care of myself. The longer I stay in the sport the more experience I will gain. That means the more prepared will be when I hit the Big Island.

2007-08-19 6:48 PM

in reply to: #931212

Subject: ...

This user's post has been ignored.

2007-08-19 6:52 PM

in reply to: #931212

Not a Coach

11473

Media, PA

Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying- What it takes..

PennState - 2007-08-19 6:38 PM

I am really surpised that the Kona spots rolled down to you Mike. Does anyone know how far down they roll usually? Like to #20, 30 etc?

It's unusual to see them roll down as far as #10. But, of course, it depends on who shows up that day.

2007-08-19 6:53 PM

in reply to: #931227

Subject: ...

This user's post has been ignored.

2007-08-19 6:55 PM

in reply to: #931212

Expert

1296

Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying- What it takes..

PennState - 2007-08-19 7:38 PM

gadzinm - 2007-08-19 6:46 PM While Aaron mentioned it in one of his post above, I was curious as to everyone's thoughts on the topic of Kona via 70.3. My question is what are your feelings on qualifying for Kona at a 70.3 event? How does the "what it takes" idea differ between a full IM qualification and a 70.3 qualification? I have my own opinions on the issue but for the most part I am ok with qualifying for Kona through 70.3. After all M Jones did one IM just to nail down nutrition but she did all 70.3 races last year as race sims and wound up with a win in Kona. I had a Kona slot at Eagleman this year and passed it up. Why? Well it rolled down and in my opinion I am not really ready to "race" in Kona this October. Sure I could have slogged through the race but I am going there to "race." If I was top 2 in my Age Group and didn't have to take the roll down I would have felt differently. But ultimately I have no problem taking a Kona slot at a 70.3.

I am really surpised that the Kona spots rolled down to you Mike. Does anyone know how far down they roll usually? Like to #20, 30 etc?

Not to be rude but did I miss something? Why are you shocked to see that a Kona slot rolled down to 6-7th in my age group? If one of the first two guys didn't want the sport or already qualified at a previous race then of course it would roll down. Kona is a huge commitment financially as well as from a time perspective. A lot of people are not ready to make that commitment.

Also, from what I understand the other reason slots roll down so far is that a lot of people don't stick around for the awards. They just take off and then when it comes time for the roll down spots tend to roll as far as the lowest guy that happens to be standing around with his hand out. I saw this first hand at Eagleman this year.

Edited by gadzinm 2007-08-19 6:57 PM

2007-08-19 7:01 PM

in reply to: #931227

Elite

3130

Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying- What it takes..

JeepFleeb - 2007-08-19 5:48 PM

PennState - 2007-08-19 6:38 PM
Does anyone know how far down they roll usually? Like to #20, 30 etc?

I think your sig line answers that one.

But he was asking about the past, not the future!

2007-08-19 7:04 PM

in reply to: #931241

Subject: ...

This user's post has been ignored.

2007-08-19 7:04 PM

in reply to: #931223

Not a Coach

11473

Media, PA

Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying- What it takes..

I agree that Eagleman probably gets extra competitive, in part at least, because it has those slots to offer. Of course, Timberman attracts a pretty good field too. The 2 courses are VERY different. Eagleman is much faster, especially under this year's conditions--no basis for this, but I'd guess pretty easily :15-:20 faster.

2007-08-19 7:11 PM

in reply to: #922334

Expert

1296

Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying- What it takes..

I totally agree with you. But like I said from a course and time perspective you can't even compare the two. One is ultra flat and the other is hilly. I mean it's not even reasonable to compare the two from a time perspective. What I was simply illustrating is that the depth of the age group field is totally differnent. I believe that difference is in part due to the Kona offering and potentially the timing (Early June as opposed to mid Aug) I may even go out on a limb and say that the PRO field was deeper at Eagleman as well. While both attract a star studded group there seems to be a diff. Not sure if it matter though for the PROs though as they can't qualify for Kona via 70.3 anyway and that was my main point previously.

2007-08-19 7:15 PM

in reply to: #931249

Expert

1296

Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying- What it takes..

PennState - 2007-08-19 8:04 PM

gadzinm - 2007-08-19 7:55 PM

PennState - 2007-08-19 7:38 PM

I am really surpised that the Kona spots rolled down to you Mike. Does anyone know how far down they roll usually? Like to #20, 30 etc?

Not to be rude but did I miss something? Why are you shocked to see that a Kona slot rolled down to 6-7th in my age group? If one of the first two guys didn't want the sport or already qualified at a previous race then of course it would roll down. Kona is a huge commitment financially as well as from a time perspective. A lot of people are not ready to make that commitment. Also, from what I understand the other reason slots roll down so far is that a lot of people don't stick around for the awards. They just take off and then when it comes time for the roll down spots tend to roll as far as the lowest guy that happens to be standing around with his hand out. I saw this first hand at Eagleman this year.

No offence is meant Mike. You kicked butt in that race. But as has been mentioned, the field in that race is uber-competitive and I just figured the top 2 or 3 guys would want and take the Kona slots. It is also a race that is relatively earlier in the season, so many top-triathletes may not have already qualified.

I was just surprised. Not about the Clearwater roll-downs (Heck my 4:53 in that race would have got me a spot), but about the Kona ones. I guess I thought Eaglemann was full of Kona superstars who would never pass on the spot.

I agree I was kind of shocked when I was asked to make the choice. For a second I thought about it. I said to myslef did that just really happen? Then I though "forget it". I'll settle on Clearwater. I was really shocked to see on the women's side the same thing happen. Who knows? But your right with the race being that competitive and fast more of the top 2 guys would have seemed to take the slots.

2007-08-19 9:01 PM

in reply to: #922334

Champion

9600

Fountain Hills, AZ

Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying- What it takes..

You all missed my point. I think that Ironman Kona slots should probably go to Ironman distance events. As Ironman races grow in numbers, qualifying spots will become too spread out or they will allow for larger fields in Kona whic, from what I have heard, is already very crowded. I say let each series award slots to their own series.

2007-08-19 9:04 PM

in reply to: #931182

Champion

9600

Fountain Hills, AZ

Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying- What it takes..

ScottoNM - 2007-08-19 6:16 PM

Well then, by your own logic, do you know what you should have gotten for finishing 25th overall at IMAZ?

NOTHING!

That's correct and if slots were simply awarded to the top 3 in each AG, I would be home in October, but that's not my point.
And for the record, I was the 7th AG'er overall and 4th in myAG. I'm still pissed I got a flat and lost 3rd place. That's my point, for me I was 4th and I wanted to be 3rd.

2007-08-19 9:18 PM

in reply to: #931388

Elite

3130

Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying- What it takes..

bryancd - 2007-08-19 8:04 PM That's correct and if slots were simply awarded to the top 3 in each AG, I would be home in October, but that's not my point. And for the record, I was the 7th AG'er overall and 4th in myAG. I'm still pissed I got a flat and lost 3rd place. That's my point, for me I was 4th and I wanted to be 3rd.

But according to your logic, why even have AG's?

The top N overall (plus the rolldown) get the Kona slots and that's that.

The AGs are just there to make everyone feel like a winner. It's a dilution of the ideal of competition.

rstocks3

2007-08-19 9:55 PM

in reply to: #931408

Bob

2194

Binghamton, NY

Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying- What it takes..

But according to your logic, why even have AG's?

The top N overall (plus the rolldown) get the Kona slots and that's that.

The AGs are just there to make everyone feel like a winner. It's a dilution of the ideal of competition.

That's crazy talk! You have to have age groups to allow people to have realistic goals. I'll admit, 5 yr increments may be a little too small but most of us have families and jobs and are not training 8 hrs a day to compete in an open division. Everyone does not feel like a winner in each age group, just ask someone who came in 4th. Sorry Bryan.

2007-08-19 10:01 PM

in reply to: #931459

Elite

3130

Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying- What it takes..

rstocks3 - 2007-08-19 8:55 PM

But it wasn't my logic - it was Bryans!

OK sorry guys, I'll shut up now - I've made my smart-ash remarks

2007-08-20 7:35 AM

in reply to: #931459

Champion

9600

Fountain Hills, AZ

Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying- What it takes..

rstocks3 - 2007-08-19 9:55 PM

But according to your logic, why even have AG's?

The top N overall (plus the rolldown) get the Kona slots and that's that.

The AGs are just there to make everyone feel like a winner. It's a dilution of the ideal of competition.

Whoaa! Hey, I never said anything about AG'ers! I think thet age group classification system is very fair for a sport like triathlon. I also think the Kona qualifying systemt, based on a pro-rated number of slots divided amongst the age groupd is a good system. I have no idea how the two of you have gone down this path!

Now, all I was doing was making a general statement that I feel that a strong competetive drive is an important factor in not only trying to Kona qualifying, but taking on an Ironman in the first place. I am of the opinion, just my opinion, that it seems the the concept of winning is being dillluted, especially among our younger generations, by a prevasive attittude that everybody needs to be number one, thus, again, in my mind, making being number one less meanningful. My refrenence to awards 10 deep is from observations I've made of friends with young kids in athletic competitions where there seems to be a pathological fear of making a kid feel like they didn't "win". I feel all the times I didn't win a as a kid just made me want to try harder to win. This was purely a personal observation and has nothing to do with Ironman or Kona qualifying standards.

Oh, by the way, Ironman events give age group awards down to 5th place, so I did get an award at IMAZ, a lucite M with my AG and place on it. I am very proud of it, I just wished it said 3rd.

Edited by bryancd 2007-08-20 7:36 AM

2007-08-20 8:41 AM

in reply to: #931381

Not a Coach

11473

Media, PA

Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying- What it takes..

bryancd - 2007-08-19 9:01 PM You all missed my point. I think that Ironman Kona slots should probably go to Ironman distance events. As Ironman races grow in numbers, qualifying spots will become too spread out or they will allow for larger fields in Kona whic, from what I have heard, is already very crowded. I say let each series award slots to their own series.

I don't think I missed it. But your "point" included a factual error which I corrected.

I'm not sure how spreading out the slots dilutes their value in any way (could increase it if it gets harder to get one). I don't see anything wrong with earning a slot at a half. That's my point.