Who would win and why? (Page 3)

You would think a cyclist would. In either 2008 or 2009 at Ironman Wisconsin there was a retired pro cyclist that rode for Crédit Agricole. He destroyed the bike and led the run for a while but was chased down around mile 10 if I remember right I think he also had really bad cramps and eventually pulled out of the race completely. 

As for the times that are also posted. I would do it this way.

I would put an elite swimmers time in the mid to low 40s for time.

The cyclist’s time is probably not going to be as fast as you would think maybe 23-24. They are so used to having everything done for them. No one is there to swap a tire or give them food or pushes (Watch Lance fumble and look clueless in Race Across the Sky).  They also don’t do 112 mile TT’s very often.

A true professional runner I would wager would be in the 2:20-2:30 range if not faster.

This is a great discussion and here is my 2c. I will be making some assumptions.

1 - All three can complete the race and are not noobs in the other disciplines. 

2 - Using the results from RunTri.com http://www.runtri.com/2011/06/how-long-does-it-take-to-finish-ironman.html   Which looked at 41,000 results, I will be using the averages for the Athletes in their non-dominate sport.

swim - 1:16 | bike - 6:25 | run - 4:54

3 - Using world record times when I can find them

swim - @1500m 14.34 world record = ~37min for 3862m (adjusting a little)

bike -taking times from Tour De France - Fastest average over a flat surface 50.355 kph (31.29 mph) by Mario Cipollini in 1999 over 194.5 km (121 mi.) Really really rough math here but 3h:34m

Run - 2:03 current world record

4 - I'm not going to get into being tired and how biking hurts your bum, or the pounding on your feet, transition times, etc. Purely looking at the times of World Record + Average.

Results:

Swimmer = 11h:55m

Cyclist = 9h:43m

Runner = 9h:44m

Looking at the numbers, in a ridiculously, I'm bored at work way... The cyclist would edge out the runner by a minute. I would give it a toss up between the cyclist and runner. If my math is off I'm sorry, just using some crude math to get it +- a few minutes. Photo Finish!

This works except for the cyclists time. You would need to find the fastest time for an individual solo effort on a bike. Using TdF times doesnt count as you have the entire peleton working. Come to think of it I cant think of any solo 100mile race not on dirt for cycling. Would be interesting to see what a pro could avg over 100miles.

I'm not sure putting phelps in the race with two endurance athletes is really in the spirit of this competition. He is a sprinter. I think it would be a better comparison to at least put a pro distance or even open water swimmer in to the competition.

Maybe it would be more accurate if you took the absolute fastest ironman legs in each discipline as the gauge to what the pros would do?  I think that's about as close to taking into account the uniqueness of ironman (3 events) vs just doing one event on how it affects times.

swim is 46:41

bike is 4:18

run is 2:40

combine that with average times swim - 1:16 | bike - 6:25 | run - 4:54

swimmer finishes in ~12:05

cyclist finishes in ~10:28

runner finishes in ~10:21

They are roid raging and did not shower before the swim leg.

He is also a middle distance swimmer.

Define middle distance, and then put it in the context of Ironman.

Would we all agree to put Usain Bolt in the event  because he's dominating at the 200m and even puts up respectable 400m times as well as his world record 100m time?

I can't even find a time for a 1500m freestyle for Phelps online.

For the swimmer, I don't think it matters who you pick.  If the worlds fastest open water, 2.4 mile swimmer does it in 38 minutes, Phelps would probably do it in 40 minutes.  The 2 minutes is irrelevant...what is more relavent is how the swimmer (Phelps or whoever it is) adapts to the biking and running.

Its an unfair question. It cant really be answered becasue your trying to break it down to just one sport and yet add two more. Its like asking who would win a Decatholon the best jumper, the best runner or best thrower.

I have seen this question alot on BT and think about it folks. Are we Triathletes training for a triathlon? I get the impression most people are looking for a way out instead of doing the training. Wanting to devote to one sport and get lazy on the others. Take another look at the Question.

I don't think its so much a question of getting out of training for two of the sports.  Obviously triathlon is a sport all its own and to train for triathlon is to train not only the three disciplines, but train them like a triathlete.  The question is more along the lines of an old joke... Three men walk into a bar, a swimmer a biker and a runner.  How do we decide who is better?  Obviously we need a race with all three disciplines!  And ironman was born.  I was more curious if a winner ever became apparent.  From this thread the answer is no, a winner is not apparent, but a looser is, poor swimmer seems to only have a chance if the other two drown!

It would be a friggin' miracle for a pro swimmer who has nary run a single mile in his life nor stepped on a bike, to finish an IM in 12:05. He'd almost definitely DNF from leg cramps.

However, even with marginal bike/run training this guy would be a uberthreat. But that's not the OPs question - we're assuming 'as-is', which is a totally fictional and non-real world scenario, as the first thing any of these pros would do would be to at least buff up on their weaknesses even before toeing the line. 

Looking at the numbers, even though the bike is a larger portion of the race, versus the fastest athletes (the ones that do the best splits in any discipline), the average IM athlete loses very close to the same amount of time in both disciplines.  roughly 2-2.25 hours.