Ironman Lake Placid : Official Thread (Page 46)

I have a Garmin 800.I plan on mapping out the course during a training run and figuring out power numbers to try and keep to the overall plan. I do have last year's ride data too.

My training took a huge hit after Boston, I was just completely demotivated and hurting, and got stuck in a rut. I've biked, but that's really it. Sunday I went to a triathlon with my club and I think I'm back on course. Biked yesterday, had a great swim and bike today.

cornick - 2013-05-07 10:45 AM Did a small sprint tri Sunday with my father (his first) and my 6yr old son doing a kids tri (his first). 3 generations of Cornick boys doing a tri in the same day. Proud moment.

That's so awesome. My dad got me into running. My boys were so not into it, and this year my son joined the track team. My dad had both hips replaced but we are still going to find a way to do a 5k together, even if it's slow.

IMLP 2013 just officially became a pseudo "time trial" start. 

http://www.ironman.com/triathlon-news/articles/2013/05/swimsmart-initiative.aspx#axzz2SnhE5WWu

Now there's no way to know if that guy just ahead of you in your AG is actually beating you or not.  Lame. 

They have also reversed the direction of the swim so this year we'll make right hand turns (clockwise) instead of the they previous counterclockwise loop.

All in all, I'm trying to digest the information.  My immediate reaction is disappointment but I'm trying to think about things from the perspective of all the athletes.  I understand and support efforts to make the race more safe.  The resting platforms -- while a bit excessive to my mind -- strike me as something that makes sense likewise the model they are trying with self-seeded corrals.  But the Lake Placid model -- where we will essentially enter the water single file -- really is a kick in the pants to those of us who do best in the water.

At least they have given us more than two months to digest the information.  If you are fast enough to have a "racing strategy" (which I am not...I have a pacing strategy for the race and won't ever see the top of a podium) the time to think through your approach is way better than learning of this change to the start during race week.

Was just reading through that. While I am firmly in the "don't change the swim start" camp, for some reason I had an even stronger negative visceral response when I read that they were changing the direction of the swim to clockwise. Completely irrational I know. Ah, well.

jcnipper, I guess you could go to the front of the line and be pretty well assured that if you see anyone ahead of you they have passed you somewhere on the course. 

Strategywise, I wonder if it is smarter to start at the front and try to find clean water or to start somewhere in the middle and try to get in a "passing lane" and go from one short-lived draft to the next.  Last year I swam in 53 minutes.  Like I said above, swimming is the only part of triathlon where I can be strategic...everything else is pace driven and I'm truly a middle-aged amateur.

Rusty, my guess is that the change in direction is explained.  We'll all start a few feet up the beach and run into the water underneath what used to be the arch signaling the end of the swim.  If they tried a time trial start from the deep water section of the lake parallel to the dock where the start has been in the past, people would line up while treading water and it would be impossible to get a chip time/start time that is accurate.

I can't bilateral breathe and stick to the left. Guess I have 2 months to learn. This is disappointing

As a crap-tastic swimmer, that's wouldn't be such a good idea for me.  I actually think the problems with self-seeding could make this strategy less safe, not more.  With a mass start, sure there is chaos at the beginning, but the one IM I've done it spread out very quickly.  Now we get the people who want to start early but are slow to contend with. 

I hadn't give the clock-wise vs counter-clockwise thing much thought. 

I realize that I'm not going to change the WTC on the swim decision.  It is like a flat during the race -- it isn't fair that the universe crapped on you -- and the best thing to do is assess the situation, make a plan and move on.  I need to assess and move on toward the race.

But I'm pissed.  Reading through the statement again from WTC it really is a bit of a mess.  There is a world of difference between something that is changed to improve safety and something that is done to make the race easier.  The former should be welcomed even if at the margin it makes the race easier.  The latter is simply an adulteration of the race. 

Unless they are going to change the rules for Kona, why would they change the rules for other courses?  It would be like the NFL playing with two-hand touch counting as a tackle until the Super Bowl when suddenly full contact is allowed.  Sure, that is an extreme example, the but difference is in degree not in kind.

While the change clearly looks like another attempt by WTC to broaden the appeal of the sport and make it easier to get people in the door, they are missing out on a key and likely unintended consequence.  (Pointed out to me by Patrick offline from this thread.)  To the degree that changes in the swim -- the washing machine effect being eliminated, what next? will they get rid of courses that have more than x,xxx feet of climbing -- make it appear easier it is more likely that the marginally athlete will get involved at the 140.6 level, the marginal athlete will undertrain, the marginal athlete will not practice open-water versus pool swimming and there will be MORE danger, accidents and even deaths. 

The proper way to broaden the sport is to bring people in where there is more room for error with the things that can cause serious harm like anxiety in the water, poor skills on the bike and uninformed nutrition on the run.  Instead of monkeying with the format, why are they not investing more energy and resources into a youth program and the 5150 series?  Instead, they cancel 5150 races left and right and focus on the high dollar IM140.6 races.

I know you all don't need my ranting and I appreciate feedback...it will probably help me put my head on straight before spending five hours in the car tomorrow with all my kids.

I'm with you on the craptastic part, and agree completely, that after about 250m in a mass start scenario, you'll be more-settled than in this modified TT start. Having not raced LP before, I'm ambivalent on direction, although it is counter-intuitive, what is this a NASCAR road course?! 

Oh, yes - I am sure there is a very good reason, I meant I had an irrational reaction to the news, not that the WTC was being irrational. I was kinda laughing at myself at having a relatively strong reaction to something that does not really matter one wit to me - I never care which direction a swim goes. Mine is more a comment about how much we visualize every second of this race and the smallest of changes can disrupt us. My favorite thing about long-course racing is rolling with the punches and having the mental acuity to not get ruffled and simply adjust your strategy as the unexpected comes your way. I kinda pride myself on that as a personal asset on race day so I found it funny and surprising that the change in swim direction unnerved me for a second.

Yet another example of how Rusty is a better athlete than I am.  Maybe with some distance from this morning, my strong visceral reaction will be chalked up to irrational.  At the end of the day, I'll only be in the water for about an hour and that is less than 10 percent of my raceday so I need to reassess and move on.  Still, it is visceral.

My email is blowing up this morning from members of my tri club. I think 8-10 of us are doing LP, so it's a big topic. Counter-clockwise is only a big deal in that I am fixated on how it was. I agree, this self seeding isn't going to help. I cannot see how a bunch of lemmings pushing forward into the water is any safer. My original strategy was to hang back and right, swim the tangent toward the cable, and avoid the mess up at the line. 

What exactly is self-seeding?  Can I walk up to the front of the line at 6.15 and simply say, "Hey look guys, I know you've been standing around a long time but I'm actually faster than you so I'll just step in here.  Thanks."  That would be seeded.  I think what they want to say but don't is that this will be based on a queuing system...which is not at all a seeded swim.  (I'm not advocating that someone act like that much of an ...I'm just using it as an example.)

But I think that is exactly what they mean. I'm assuming the pro's get in front and go first, then everyone else lines up where they want. Which means the pro's and fast AG'ers should be coming around as the last of the mortals enter the water.

I was at a race like this on Sunday and they had the women's wave enter the water just as the men's first wave was coming around the start. In a pond. It was a mess. These IM branded races are better organized and in larger venues which should eliminate some of that.

I do give them credit for trying to address safety issues.

That's the way it seems to me.  "hey, Imma swim this thing in 57 min, so I get to be up front."  I've been in marathons that do that, and there is inevitably a walker on the start line with headphones on. 

Yeah ... that'll be the fair analogy here. But we're usually by those people within a mile or two. It'll be even quicker in the water with this start. You'll swim around them within a few hundred meters. We know those jokers are going to be part of the equation ... they were anyway with the mass start as well. We can't control whether or not they show up. All we can do is plan accordingly to how we'll react in a way that keeps us calm with our head in the game.

[I suppose I should preface all of my comments with, I don't think this is the end of the world, I'm just annoyed]

I agree that these people can be passed, I just think that having this "trickle start" can increase the problem, rather than decrease it.  I've only done one IM (Florida in '10, mass start).  I started near the back, as I'm not the best swimmer.  For those people who self seeded poorly, I had passed them within 5 to 10 min.  Now, if they get a 10 to 20 min head start, I may be passing slower swimmers for half the swim.  I guess I just don't get the logic.  I'd honestly prefer a straight up wave start based on age groups. 

Either way it's chip time. So does Mike Reilly call your name but then you really didn't finish in 17 hours? That part is unclear.

Maybe some of my "not that big of a deal" reaction is coming from the fact that I just finally decided to stop fighting it at run races. I was getting too worked up.

And Brian ... with any luck, Mike Riley is going to be calling my name well before the 17 hour mark.