Handicaped by size? (Page 2)

In the water, you could make a conceptual model with two paddle wheels that have short-stubby planks or long-thin ones.  One wheel will require a lot more force than the other to rotate because of increased drag (due to larger surface area and increased velocity at the ends of the planks).

ETA: To remove some erroneous physics content (I'm not a physicist, so I'm stopping here)

You can easily simulate this on the bike. You don't have to worry about all the other variables, because it's you both times. Determine your highest possible sprinting speed on a flat straight. Then, shift to the highest gear (thereby lengthening your effective stride with more gear inches), see what is the fastest you can go. I expect you'll be faster spinning than you are mashing.

(I didn't read the last two pages of the thread, sorry if this has been covered)

If we were talking strictly about swimming then yes, you're at a disadvantage (as am I: 5'9" with a 30" inseam).  There's a reason Phelps--the perfect swimming specimen if there ever was one--is 6'6" or something like that.  Long in the water is soooo beneficial. 

However, we're talking about all three disciplines, and there's no 'one size fits all'.  Normann Stadler is 5'10"; Macca is 5'11".  If we go to the other specialties:

cycling - Lance is 5'9" (some list him as 5'10"); Contador is 5'9"; even the taller cyclists like Andy Schleck (6'1") don't go much over 6'. 

running (specifically the marathon distance) - Ryan Hall (5'10"); Merga is 5'7"; Bill Rodgers is 5'9"

In fact, in searching for heights I came across this article specifically about height in running: http://mysite.verizon.net/jim2wr/id109.html (read down halfway if you want to skip to the height argument, but the entire article is very interesting)

Finally, I just want to say that you are as good at something as the time you put into it.  Sure, you and I would never play in the NBA, and we'd never be great swimmers either.  But using height as a crutch is only holding you back.  No one floating in the water before the gun goes off before a race is sizing up the field, trying to determine how many tall people are there that day to beat them.  Just think of a guy like Dustin Pedroia: a 5'8" guy (who most people say is actually 5'6") playing among a host of guys with more 'ideal' heights for a baseball player...and he won the MVP last year.  One thing he always says, and that others always say about him, is that he never uses his height as an excuse, that he plays as though he knows he's better than everyone else, regardless of how small he looks.  In fact, he acts like he's the tall one, boasting all the time about how strong he is, how he's going to destroy a certain pitcher, etc, etc.  Confidence is a great psychological edge, don't worry about the height, worry about getting yourself prepared.

Fair enough, sorry for the implication.  I guess the point I was trying to make with my post is that while your height does make a difference in swimming, it doesn't appear to hold cyclists back and it may actually benefit you on the run...and maybe that's why we see pros who are both tall and lean and also short and...well, still lean.  I don't think being 5'8", in this sport, is any worse or better than being 6'4".  Frankly, I've always thought that my height (5'9") is actually a very good height for a triathlete--sure, a bit short for the swim, but a good chunk of the cyclists and long distance runner I've watched tend to be sprinkled within a few inches of that and those two disciplines are 80% of the race.