New weight rules for Athena & Clydesdale in 2013 (Page 3)

Or, we could take everyone that entered the race, and divide them up into 100 different, but homogenous pods based on age, weight, sex, training volume, etc.

I'd rather just race the field, and myself.

Can't wait for an A/C tennis division though.

And your post made me think of this

yep!!

pretty much says it all.

Rules are rules.  I'll race within the framework of whatever rules are in effect for the sport in which I want to compete.  Just tell me what those rules are, hold everyone to the same standards, and let's go run (and swim...and bike).

Basically this just accelerates my fitness goal from when I got into competition; I was looking forward to the day when I could NOT sign up in the C division.  Now my goal has just changed slightly: I want to make that change myself, before someone else makes it for me!  I'm about halfway to that goal; got another 25 lb to go.  Time to get back to the gym.

(By the way, ran my first race this weekend.  Finished 5th in the Clyde division, and was 5 min under my target time - very happy with my first race.  The Clyde podium finishers would have placed 2nd, 5th, and 4th in their respective AG classes, and all were exceptionally fit "big" guys.  Good for them, that's what the rules are for.  I shook all their hands after the finish and congratulated them on a good race.)

It is easy to get off track in several directions in this conversation.

Whatever the reason for a weight class, this internal bickering about what should constitute a "real clyde" is not helping. Why should a guy carrying massive muscular weight be treated differently that me carrying my fat weight? Good on him! We carry the same weight, and he does it better. I have no problem with him taking a category win. The disadvantage is on weight/power, not body composition.

And let's compare apples and apples here. If we're going to say weight classes matter in some sports, while that is true, none of them exist in racing sports at a pro level. Weight classes exist in boxing and wrestling. But when the pros line up at Kona, there are no weight classes. Nor at any track and field event. So if we want to compare our AG and Weight classes in this amateur pursuit, look more to how pro RACING is done, and not pro boxing.

I dont like it.  They basically are making the A/C the 'out of shape category'.  Which is the general consensus of the the cat is and not what it was intended to be.  

"Clydesdale running dates to the late 1980s when a Baltimore-area accountant analyzed 20,000 runners in 10-kilometer races and marathons. The analysis showed that once men reach about 170 pounds, their performance declines relative to athletes of about the same age with a slighter build. The findings suggested that, compared with his peers, a 210-pound man who runs a 10-kilometer race in 51 minutes (about an eight-minute-per-mile pace) is performing as well as a 150-pound man who runs the distance in a speedy 38 minutes (about a six-minute-per-mile pace)."

If you think it should be based on BMI - you are one of the people who think that this is a 'handicapped' division for fat people and that no one really wants to be a clyde.  I've always said, if your goal is to get out of the clyde category, you're not a clyde - you're just using triathlons as a weight loss program and want an 'easy' medal.  (look at the posts that complain about the in shape guys and gals on the podium)

At 6'3". I havent seen the other side of 200#'s since freshman year in high school (when I was 5'11") except for a brief time during my 'salmonella diet ' 10 years ago when I dropped to 195 - which didnt last too long.  Depending on my level of fitness, I hover between 205 and 220.  

I've always been active: Martial arts, Mt biking, surfing, snowboarding, played inter-mural sports in college (had a chance at a football scholarship but screwed my knees up my HS senior year).  I've always been bigger than my peers and a lot are surprised at my weight and that I carry it well.  I'm not a runner, I am better suited for fast twitch sports.  But as I get older, there arent a lot of FT sports that I can participate in that my knees can handle.  So for me, having a category with other tall and heavy people is more appealing and a better gauge of where I stand than competing with a 5'6" 150 lb distance runner in AG

Personally, I'd rather see the categories done by age and then height as opposed to weight.  I feel a better kinship with a 6'2" 190lb athlete than a 5'6" 210lb one.

Well isn't this just a kick in the pants; always wondered if I was going to lose my Clydesdale status and now I will unless I gain weight. 

I am 44, 5 foot 9 or 10, and 206.  And I have 14% body fat. Always been big, and played offensive line through high school. Being a Clyde let me compete with other people like me - fit folks who may have come to triathlons from other sports.  I was actually weighed in at my last tri (took as a compliment  frankly). 

Three comments:

1) BMI is interesting one - but BMI is actually moving the opposite way I think unless they set the BMI number very high - my BMI number is not very good (I would have to lose a bunch of muscle to get my BMI number in the right range as an example). I am overweight per the BMI scale and being 220 makes me obese, so that is not where I want to go at all. In fact 220 pretty much ensures anyone in the clyde category is at minimum  overweight per BMI and unless they are over 6 foot they will be obese. Not sure BMI was even considered for this to be honest

2) If you take my winning times as a master clydesdale from my last two tris - I finished 2nd as a MC and would have been 8th in my age group in Oct and then I won the MC and would have been 16th out of 26th in my age group - it just does not give me hope of ever AG placing frankly. I know that competing in these races are not about winning, but at least I want a chance..

3) Moving the weight limit up to 220 really discourages someone like me - I am perfectly in the middle here - reminds me of high school wrestling when I was faced with cutting a bunch of weight to make 185 as a senior and after two previous seasons of cutting, just decided to get pummeled at heavyweight - and of course they added more upper weight classes soon after that 

I am tempted to write someone here but feel likes it just spitting into the wind...

For me (6'1, 255lbs) the weight change doesn't bother me (plus I'm in Canada where A/C categories have almost been abolished).  The one race I was able to "compete" as a clyde, there wasn't necessarily a A/C division, the race organizers put a ATH or CLY beside your race number when the results were posted.  This allowed you to compete competitively in the AG categories, but compare your results to other A/C's and have a more personal victory.

I really enjoy competing in Triathlons, and training for them, but its alittle disheartening to train and then compete against someone 100lbs lighter and finish 46/48 in the AG. Where in my first triathlon I may have finished 96 overall, I was the top Clyde to finish, I may not have gotten a trophy or a plaque but I knew where I stood apples to apples. At the end of the day if I finish with a better time then the year before I am happy, but comparing apples to apples is always nice.

This describes me to a T. And well said.

This describes me to a T. And well said.

This is exactly how I feel.

Some good points have been raised here. I have been racing as a Clyde since getting into the sport 2 years ago. I'm 6'2" and currently around 210 give or take a few pounds. This change will exclude me from the Clyde class and I don't like it.

I love triathlon, and I compete to compete. Making personal gains in performance is great, but lets face it, this is racing! I can race myself evey day when I train. I know I will never win an overall. I'm 47 and got into this sport well past any chance of that. I can however compete against other guys over 40 and over 200 lbs. I don't think it is truly fair for me to race a guy who weighs 160. Between the two of us, and with equal fitness, the 160 guy will kill me every day. That is just a fact. If you think otherwise, put on a 40 pound backpack and see how fast you can run then!

I just dont see the need for this change. I never thought there were a bunch of sandbaggers in the Clyde group at any of the races I have entered. If someone beats me fair and square, good for them. I have never had to weigh in to race, but I do think if the RD feels the need, then you should have to weigh in your race gear, not street clothes. But if someone feels the need to cheat to win, that is on them and kharma will catch up with them sooner or later. I don't think a person should be penalized for being fast though. To me that is like saying "well, you won your AG so now we are going to make you race in a younger group"

I will continue racing and I will follow the rules set by USAT and whatever race I'm in. I will still try to win my group whatever group I get placed in. I know I'll never be the fastest one on the course, but hopefully I won't be the slowest either

Again I just don't see the need for this change. To me it is like USAT is saying "You have worked really hard, and trained your a$$ off to be competitive, but maybe your getting a little TOO competitive so were changing the rules on you" SLAP!

Well, I modified my earlier post and emailed it to the address Keri provided and I got very quick a response

So I responded 

Great email, this is the reason you are my favorite clyde on this board since i started this at 260lbs back in mid 2008.

i appreciate the post.

Thank you for the complement   That means a lot

I did get another email from Jack - but it was pretty much the same.  I do appreciate the responses and I hope that the matter is not completely settled yet and they revisit the issue at the end of the 2013 season.    

So in 2013 Ill still be here in spirit, just no longer in the category.

I emailed Jack as well with no response yet - one of my points is this

1. What I find most interesting is that the USAT has flown in direct opposition to BMI. I am no fan of BMI and my doctor and I have agreed we will ignore it. But to be a Clydesdale and under 6 feet means that your technically obese on the BMI scale and over weight on BMI until you hit 6 foot 7.  For a sport that promotes or really demands a healthy lifestyle to be competitive, I found this really curious and frankly odd.  

And yes I was asked to weigh in at my last tri as a Master Clyde (aka old fat guy) and expect to again - I weighed in in my tri shorts, a tshort and shoes and socks at 207 ..

I joined this site just because of this thread. I've been losing a lot of weight over the past 6 months and started training for triathlon about 2 months ago. At first glance I was kind of interested in the concept of the Clydesdale division, but as I've learned more about the sport and talked to people who've done triathlons and about what the Clydesdale means, it really came across to me as something not doing what I understood is intended. From what I've heard, the guys who win Clydesdale divisions are taller and more muscular guys. As a 5'8" guy who is Obese and is on a track to lose weight as quickly as possible, I don't have a lot of well developed muscle. Because I'm on a diet and exercise routine designed to lose body fat, I will not be competitive against the guys who are 6' 2" to 6' 6" who are maintaining a muscular 200+ lb build and are maintaining at 3,000-4,000 protein rich calories for strength and maintenance against my 1700 calorie diet and exercise designed to maintain and tone muscle but burn fat.

To me, the end result is Clydesdale as it was setup and even as it's being proposed to change ultimately mean nothing that provides any interest to me. While I signed up as a Clydesdale in my first triathlon (and hopefully my only one where I'll be above 200 lbs) for early June, I have zero expectation and therefore drive zero motivation out of the special classification. At the end of the day, it's a division designed to be dominated by tall guys who are pretty fit who are making themselves fit the weight definition or who have a primary sport activity independant of triathlon. If the goal of the division is to provide some type of healthy competitive incentive for someone coming from a lower fitness level trying to break in, there has to be in my opinion some type of consideration for how height to weight ratio comes into play as well. Maybe body fat percentage would/should play a role as well? I don't know what the answer is, but if the Clydesdale division is intended to inspire or support people trying to become more fit, it doesn't do it for me, but perhaps I misunderstand the goal of the division.

I like ratherbesnowboarding's response above, but I would contest the legitimacy of referencing BMI as the thing to consider and look at on considering how to define Athena/Clydesdale. It is used to make a fine point, but BMI is useful only up to a point. Once you are closer to a healthy weight, BMI takes a back seat to more factors such as body fat percentage and lean muscle mass. You could technically be obese according to BMI standards, but be below 8% body fat or even lower if you have developed a lot of muscles.

Great post Terra99! Keep up the good work, and happy racing.

To me the clyde division was never about being overweight or entry level, it was just another division to make competition more fair. A division where I could race against others that were heavy and not as fast in the run. If I got beat by someone who was 6'6' 205 and really fast, good for him. Gave me something to shoot for. next year I'll be AG only.

So my question is this, Why have age groups at all? Why not just pro or amateur? ??? Im being facetious here, but hey, 60 is the new 40 right?

because the slow 40/50/60+ year old men and women would have something else to beech about.

there is only one winner, that is the guy/girl with the fastest time, everyone else is getting a secondary award for not being the fastest.  While i would love to get an AG podium or win, it is secondary to the overall.

Yes.

The answer to why we have age groups, or A/C divisions, or any other aribitrary segmentation of the racing population is plainly and simply for everyone to feel better about themselves.

It's NOT about fairness.

NTTAWWT

My wife and I had the pro/con Athena / Clyde  category discussion when I started doing Tris in 2011.  Last season I was 209 lbs but am 6'00".  When I signed up for my first race, my wife asked if I would register as a Clyde.  After learning what it entailed, I opted not to go that route.  I told her that I was not the type of person this category was created for.  After my first race, I saw some of the people who registered for the category and thought to myself, "Wow".  There were some very competitive persons in the field but there were also those who were taller, slimmer (not necessarily lighter), and faster than most of the field.

Even after my first race experience, I refused to register as a Clyde.  I look at the category in the same manner as Welfare.  There are some who qualify and meet the need as to why the program was created.  However, there are those who qualify and abuse the program (talking about welfare).  If faced with the situation, I would rather rely on my work ethic to help persevere before I accepted Welfare.

During the off season, I changed the way I train and saw dramatic results in my speed and overall fitness.  By the time my first race of 2012 came around, now at 200 lbs, I was ready to set a PR and felt confident that I would.  I PR'ed my 1/2 Marathon time by 26 minutes.  Did shaving those 9 lbs help me shave off 2 minutes per mile off my pace?  Doubtful.  It was the hard work I put in that helped me.  I missed my overall goal of a sub 2 hour 1/2 marathon by 1 minute but this has only encouraged me to work harder.  Did I finish before some who were 30 lbs lighter? Sure I did.

The whole argument about different weight classes for boxing or wrestling is like comparing apples to oranges.  Could a 125 lb boxer beat a 210 boxer? Yes (Ever Heard of a Punchers Chance).  Can a 170 lb buy beat up a 240 lb guy? Remember Royce Gracie in UFC 1.  Being a BJJ practitioner, I have seen firsthand similar circumstances.  I have seen people cut as much as 30 lbs in a week order to compete in a lower weight class.  I laugh when they are beaten by a smaller, true to the weight class, more skilled practitioner.  The lesson learned here, it is not always about who is bigger and stronger, or in triathlon who is smaller and more nimble, but it is about a persons ability.  I for one did not start doing triathlons to win hardware but to test my abilities, find the limits, and push beyond those limits.

Now that the 2012 Tri Season has started, I am proud to say I am a slimmer 195 lbs and hope to meet my goal weight of 185 by the time I attempt my first 70.3 in November.  I will continue to train smart and train hard and hope to continue to improve.

I think it was Mark Twain who said, "It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog."

Good Luck to all this Tri Season!!