For those who miss the 17hr cutoff

Personally, I feel that if you cross the finish line, you're an Ironman.

While there will be lots of people that disagree with me, it's just my opinion.

People put in months and months of training, and something just doesn't happen right on race day.  But they still put in the work, the heart, and the determination to get it done.

That speaks for something....

I would think it's the same feeling as missing a particular race goal, let's say a BQ, by mere seconds.  Just multiplied times 100.  Of course I'd still be happy and take comfort in the fact that I did better than all those people out there who chose to sit on their couch and never even try.  But I'd also probably replay the multitude of times during that day in which I could have gotten that minute or two back and be quite frustrated.

I think it just shows that people and personalities are different, and while some folks can look at crossing that finish line as a victory and can enjoy that success, others are (maybe cursed?) with the inability to be happy without setting and meeting a goal.

I think there has to be some time limit and 17 hours in more than adequate unless you run into problems along the way or just aren't ready (speaking generally).  If not 17 hours than what, 24 hours? two days?  Same goes for the swim and bike cutoffs, IMO.

x2 with the caveat that what you do is still an accomplishment and no one can take that away from you. 

x3.  WTC gets to define the challenge, and they have.  Participants get to attempt to meet that challenge.  Some succeed, some fail.  yeah - it may be heartbreaking, but them's the rules. 

I think I'll go out and run a marathon, except I think that 25.5mi is close enough.  So, that's all I'm gonna' do, and call myself a marathoner.

x4! The cutoff is part of the challenge.

It was worse than that...she missed by a mere 4 seconds.

http://ironman.com/events/ironman/worldchampionship/matthew-dale-profiles-lottery-winner-nancy-summers#axzz1gXQmmou1

Sub-10 or it shouldn't count.

The OP is not questioning the cutoff time or whether or not the person is officially an ironman or not. He's asking if anyone was ever in that position and how they felt about it.

Personally, I think it might depend on circumstance.  If I went into the race somewhat untrained but figured I could pull it off anyway, I'd be pissed at myself for not upping the ante somewhere along the line enough to make up those two minutes.  And yeah, I'd sulk about it (or use it to charge me up) for months, I'm sure.

But, if I was well trained, well prepared and knew that I'd make the cutoff with no problem...and then something went wrong...I might look at it differently.  I mean, a mechanical on the bike?  A bad injury?  Intestinal cancer that doesn't make itself known until the middle of my ironman attempt?  Whatever.  Somehow, I'd like to think that having even gotten THAT close despite facing those types of issues might not be as hard to swallow as having just been under-trained.

Of course, this is all speculation.  I haven't attempted one.

My bona fides - didn't miss the cutoff, but as mentioned above, was well trained and wouldn't have had issues meeting the cutoff but a medical issue got in the way of that.

If I didn't meet the cutoff, not sure what I would say.  Personally, I think those that go 140.6 but cross 17+ shouldn't be listed as DNFs, that they should be called "Outside Time Limit" or OTL or something.  Yes, I know 17 hours is part of the challenge.  I think there is a big difference between someone that missed the swim cutoff and someone that missed the 17 hour cutoff.  I would notwear finisher's gear though in that circumstance

X4...?

I might be in the minority, but if you train properly prior to the race you should be able to finish in 17 hours with a few exceptions, injury, illness, accident, etc.

Are they even allowed to continue on the course?  At IMFL I distinctively remember WTC blocking the finishers chute at the 17 hour cut off.  So the point is that they wouldn't even be able to complete the course.

I kind of liken it to a situation I have been in.  I am sitting for the CPA exam.  It's a four part test where you need 75 points on each part to become a CPA.  I passed the first parts with no problem, however when I took the last part last month I scored a 74.  I failed.  I am not a CPA.  If I want to be I will still need to pass the last part of the test (I still do, I'm taking it in January).  I think it's the same for the Ironman, if you don't complete the task with the minimum amount or points required, or within the timeframe required, you failed. 

Having said that, I think you can take pride in how close you came to succeeding, but you did not suceed.

Really?  I mean, I get that if you are a pro and have many other races lined up and it's only a small piece of your year or if you've already completed multiple ironman races.  But for someone who maybe scrimped and saved and shelled out a lot of time and money (and possibly sacrifice on the part of family members, too) just to get there.  I mean, this is no local sprint we are talking about, right?  For many people, it IS a once in a lifetime shot.  In that situation, I think I'd probably still want to get the whole experience, even if it was going to be substantially slower than my original goal due to an unforeseen problem.

But again, if I made enough 'peace' with it to go ahead and continue knowing that I wasn't making my goal and might even miss the 17 hour cut-off, then I'd probably already be well on my way to being 'ok' with not finishing officially anyway.

Have to agree.  Only race I've gone into unsure whether I was prepared to finish was my first IM, but that was due to an significant injury during taper, not lack of preparation or fitness to finish...wasn't sure whether I'd be able to get through the day at all, not whether I'd beat the cutoff.  But, obviously, that's not really the point of the OP's question...a lot of people clearly to get to the start with questionable odds of finishing (and several of my friends have not made it across by midnight over the years).

I think Chris kinda got at the litmus test for how people feel about the "validity" of a 17+ finish with his passing comment about not wearing the finisher gear.  If you crossed the line in, say, 17:05, would you wear a finisher's shirt or hat?  (There are "finisher" branded items for sale, besides what you get when you cross the line in under 17:00.)  I suspect that's one place opinions would divide here.

Someone else already mentioned it, but I'm also put in mind of Boston qualifying here:  If you miss it by a second, you miss it.  No Boston.  No calling yourself a "Boston qualifier."  Them's the rules...sucks when it happens (esp. when it happens to you), but it isn't like you don't know what the rules are going in and the consequences of missing the standard, no matter by how little.