login
Kona Qualifying by the Numbers
-
No new posts
|
 2015-10-11 7:00 AM |
 1502   Katy, Texas |  Subject: Kona Qualifying by the NumbersInspired more by my new toy (power meter) but also a little bit by yesterday's race, I have continued my search for tangible numbers to understand what it would take to qualify for an AG Kona slot. I found the following blog, which (among many others) had these really interesting entries: http://www.endurancecorner.com/How_To_Qualify/AC/benchmarks http://www.endurancecorner.com/How_To_Qualify/AC/realist I'm totally addicted now, because it is full of tangible numbers. I'm also totally deflated when I look at what those numbers are. I wanted to get others thoughts on a couple of items listed on these various articles. - Stating that 70% of the population could qualify for Kona provided the commitment is there (this adds hope) - That VO2 max can be increased from 50's to 60's in a couple of months time - Training load required for a Kona run (I'm going to changing from working from home, to an office job in the coming weeks, so I'm going to lose my unlimited training time) In essence, my attitude for Kona qualification went from naively optimistic, due to looking at what each event would take on their own and saying, "I could do each of those, so it's just a matter of more time before I could do them all in one day." To then realizing what a monstrous chasm exists between the two and saying, "dang....maybe not." To getting a power meter and realizing that my fear was probably well founded; that I ride and train in a pretty easy local for biking. Aside from the heat and wind (which can an can't be much of an issue) it appears the speed I get here doesn't equate to what it appears. I've only got a few data points during my taper, but as an example, I did an easy ride yesterday and was able to hit an average of 21 mph with only an average NP of 145 watts, which, from what I've seen is pretty dang low. So instead of saying, "wow, I can hit 21 mph going easy" I'm now saying, "21 mph is just easy to hit here," Which started to make me lose hope. To then reading these articles and saying, if I can make the commitment, I have a shot...maybe. But dang, 20 hrs/week for 4 months? I don't see that happening. |
| 2015-10-11 8:39 AM in reply to: 3mar |
Expert 2355   Madison, Wisconsin | Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying by the Numbers Originally posted by 3mar Inspired more by my new toy (power meter) but also a little bit by yesterday's race, I have continued my search for tangible numbers to understand what it would take to qualify for an AG Kona slot. I found the following blog, which (among many others) had these really interesting entries: http://www.endurancecorner.com/How_To_Qualify/AC/benchmarks http://www.endurancecorner.com/How_To_Qualify/AC/realist I'm totally addicted now, because it is full of tangible numbers. I'm also totally deflated when I look at what those numbers are. I wanted to get others thoughts on a couple of items listed on these various articles. - Stating that 70% of the population could qualify for Kona provided the commitment is there (this adds hope) - That VO2 max can be increased from 50's to 60's in a couple of months time - Training load required for a Kona run (I'm going to changing from working from home, to an office job in the coming weeks, so I'm going to lose my unlimited training time) In essence, my attitude for Kona qualification went from naively optimistic, due to looking at what each event would take on their own and saying, "I could do each of those, so it's just a matter of more time before I could do them all in one day." To then realizing what a monstrous chasm exists between the two and saying, "dang....maybe not." To getting a power meter and realizing that my fear was probably well founded; that I ride and train in a pretty easy local for biking. Aside from the heat and wind (which can an can't be much of an issue) it appears the speed I get here doesn't equate to what it appears. I've only got a few data points during my taper, but as an example, I did an easy ride yesterday and was able to hit an average of 21 mph with only an average NP of 145 watts, which, from what I've seen is pretty dang low. So instead of saying, "wow, I can hit 21 mph going easy" I'm now saying, "21 mph is just easy to hit here," Which started to make me lose hope. To then reading these articles and saying, if I can make the commitment, I have a shot...maybe. But dang, 20 hrs/week for 4 months? I don't see that happening. Keep in mind that was written a few years ago (I believe). EC has written several Kona qualifying articles. The game has changed, many races for anything under M55-59 it takes either close to 9 hours, sub-10 or low 10's to qualify depending on when and where. It also depends on who shows up. For example, my g/f has raced IMWI twice and any other year she raced her times would win her AG, but the years she raced future pros took showed up and denied her spot, one was about 30 minutes faster then the usually winning time, but by someone who decided to never take their card because....Kona. Is Kona possible? Yes. Is it tangible? Ca be, but it's hard to get to Kona without dedicating your life to the sport and making tons of sacrifices along the way to get their. If you want to try, go for it, but be all-in by making smart decisions, such as a course that is suitable to your strengths. |
| 2015-10-11 8:55 AM in reply to: 0 |
| 1502 Katy, Texas | Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying by the Numbers Originally posted by bcagle25 Originally posted by 3mar Inspired more by my new toy (power meter) but also a little bit by yesterday's race, I have continued my search for tangible numbers to understand what it would take to qualify for an AG Kona slot. I found the following blog, which (among many others) had these really interesting entries: http://www.endurancecorner.com/How_To_Qualify/AC/benchmarks http://www.endurancecorner.com/How_To_Qualify/AC/realist I'm totally addicted now, because it is full of tangible numbers. I'm also totally deflated when I look at what those numbers are. I wanted to get others thoughts on a couple of items listed on these various articles. - Stating that 70% of the population could qualify for Kona provided the commitment is there (this adds hope) - That VO2 max can be increased from 50's to 60's in a couple of months time - Training load required for a Kona run (I'm going to changing from working from home, to an office job in the coming weeks, so I'm going to lose my unlimited training time) In essence, my attitude for Kona qualification went from naively optimistic, due to looking at what each event would take on their own and saying, "I could do each of those, so it's just a matter of more time before I could do them all in one day." To then realizing what a monstrous chasm exists between the two and saying, "dang....maybe not." To getting a power meter and realizing that my fear was probably well founded; that I ride and train in a pretty easy local for biking. Aside from the heat and wind (which can an can't be much of an issue) it appears the speed I get here doesn't equate to what it appears. I've only got a few data points during my taper, but as an example, I did an easy ride yesterday and was able to hit an average of 21 mph with only an average NP of 145 watts, which, from what I've seen is pretty dang low. So instead of saying, "wow, I can hit 21 mph going easy" I'm now saying, "21 mph is just easy to hit here," Which started to make me lose hope. To then reading these articles and saying, if I can make the commitment, I have a shot...maybe. But dang, 20 hrs/week for 4 months? I don't see that happening. Keep in mind that was written a few years ago (I believe). EC has written several Kona qualifying articles. The game has changed, many races for anything under M55-59 it takes either close to 9 hours, sub-10 or low 10's to qualify depending on when and where. It also depends on who shows up. For example, my g/f has raced IMWI twice and any other year she raced her times would win her AG, but the years she raced future pros took showed up and denied her spot, one was about 30 minutes faster then the usually winning time, but by someone who decided to never take their card because....Kona. Is Kona possible? Yes. Is it tangible? Ca be, but it's hard to get to Kona without dedicating your life to the sport and making tons of sacrifices along the way to get their. If you want to try, go for it, but be all-in by making smart decisions, such as a course that is suitable to your strengths. I'm really just trying to figure out what would it take. To me right now, I don't see how that much of a gap can be covered in that time frame. i.e. someone like me at mid-50's VO2 Max, MOP first IM, 10-15 hrs training/week to be able to improve to that level by next year's IMTX in May? Specifically with my less than stellar biking. That's kind of where I am right now. Do I get a coach, buckle down and go for it, or just stick with 70.3's for another year to build base. I have Beach to Battleship next weekend (half) and I'm hoping that can give me an indication of my current fitness and maybe a bench mark to go by. Edit: by "10-15 hrs/week training" I'm talking about my current training load, obviously that would have to increase on a Kona run. Edited by 3mar 2015-10-11 8:56 AM |
| 2015-10-11 11:00 AM in reply to: 3mar |
Expert 2355 Madison, Wisconsin | Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying by the Numbers I'm going to challenge you with this, hopefully for the better. What was your first IM? What was your time. Which AG will you be trying to KQ at? What are the usual times needed for a KQ? Do you know what your strengths and weakness in AND out of training are? 10-15 hours is enough time to train for an KQ slot, I have seen many do it. It's proper planning, and training load management that is key. Some respond well and need high volume, others are the opposite. But if you are not successful in the 153-158 hours per week outside of training to optimize your training, then you should work on that first, so you can not just trying 10-15 hours but do it right and accomplish the proper objectives. People love to use and chase numbers to give validation for their training. You can hit, and increase all the numbers you want, but if you can't make it work on race day then it doesn't matter much. It's kind of like nutrition, when people have these detailed plans of when they will eat what, but don't even know the caloric needs their body demands on the bike and run. Geting a coach for a KQ attempt is recommended, and a coach who has worked with KQ'ers will be even better since they have more knowledge of the demands and experiences you will need and face. I know of several great coaches if you are interested I could get you in contact with that have got athletes to Kona. |
| 2015-10-11 11:57 AM in reply to: bcagle25 |
| 1502 Katy, Texas | Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying by the Numbers Originally posted by bcagle25 I'm going to challenge you with this, hopefully for the better. What was your first IM? What was your time. Which AG will you be trying to KQ at? What are the usual times needed for a KQ? Do you know what your strengths and weakness in AND out of training are? 10-15 hours is enough time to train for an KQ slot, I have seen many do it. It's proper planning, and training load management that is key. Some respond well and need high volume, others are the opposite. But if you are not successful in the 153-158 hours per week outside of training to optimize your training, then you should work on that first, so you can not just trying 10-15 hours but do it right and accomplish the proper objectives. People love to use and chase numbers to give validation for their training. You can hit, and increase all the numbers you want, but if you can't make it work on race day then it doesn't matter much. It's kind of like nutrition, when people have these detailed plans of when they will eat what, but don't even know the caloric needs their body demands on the bike and run. Geting a coach for a KQ attempt is recommended, and a coach who has worked with KQ'ers will be even better since they have more knowledge of the demands and experiences you will need and face. I know of several great coaches if you are interested I could get you in contact with that have got athletes to Kona. I finished IMTX last year in 12:10. However that does come with a caveat; it was a bad race, for me anyway. I had never ridden a single hill and this course had something like 3,600' of elevation gain. Now, I get it, that's not a lot, but I can't state this strongly enough; if you have NEVER ridden a hill EVER, 3,600' is going to make for a bad day (that's not centered at you bcagle, but every time I say that someone just has to chime in). Not trying to make excuses, but 20 miles into the bike, I knew my race was over. I certainly know my weaknesses, and I'm more than eager to work on them. My strength is I'm like a dog playing Frisbee at the park, no matter how exhausted I am, you throw that thing and I'm running after it. Also, I have a naive amount of optimism that tends to go a long way, and is somehow rarely affected by negative outcomes. It's a time management thing for me this year. I'm just trying to decide if it is at all possible. Is there a plan of action that I could follow and get there? It doesn't matter how hard that plan is, I can handle that, but is there anything that is even possible given my current fitness? If not, I put in more volume and wait until I get there. I would be targeting IMTX again (sounds crazy considering my first paragraph right?), but I'm actually moving to Houston in two weeks, so I will be able to train the course, hills and all. Also, right now my kids are still young enough that we don't have many evening commitments or activities outside of home. They are all in bed by 8 every night, so that means I can be in bed by 8, up and 4 and that gives me plenty of time to train, and I'm still home from work at the same time, and with them until they go to bed and they're none the wiser. Also, in my new job I negotiated for quite a bit of PTO, so I can use that as well. So, if there's a shot, I'm willing to take it, but if not, then I'm ok taking the time to get to the point where I'll be ready...just trying to figure that out. If it's possible and just a matter of commitment and determination, then that's an easy one. |
| 2015-10-12 6:26 AM in reply to: 0 |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying by the Numbers It's pretty easy to figure out the minimal requirements to KQ in terms of CSS, VDOT, W/kg and CDA. I know my numbers and I won't even try an IM until I think I'm meeting the MINIMAL requirements. Minimal meaning you have the basic ingredients, but how they are mixed into a full recipe is another story. It's pretty easy to assess where you are. But I strongly suggest you assess each metric from multiple angles and not just individually The size of the gap will tell you how far away you are. To give you an idea, a guy over 50 needs to 54VDOT, about 3.8 w/kg (real number not an approximation) on the bike, a sub 23min 1500 and be efficient to have a shot. The hard part is figuring out how to close that gap. Even harder is making sure you are going down the right path and not burning out. Every person responds to training differently. Every year I have discovered that X in one sport brings me one step forward but Y in the other took me two steps back. So you go back to the drawing board and figure it out slowly. Taking into account aging and other factors. I do believe you are of KQ material and with the right plan, if you stay healthy will get there. I hate to burst your bubble, but it's not next spring. 70.3 WC is coming back to NA in 2017. I'll just throw out the idea, figure out what it takes to qualify for that and work towards it. It's certainly compatible with your KQ goals and you won't burn yourself and your family in the process. BTW, I suspect there are many people that if they start now, map a plan, could achieve this for 2017. Especially the women who will be given more slots than ever befpre If you do go the coaching route, I would suggest a coach that is going to show you the roadmap, show you the plan, show you the milestones and show you that you are on track or why the roadmap needs to change. Pick your coach wisely. Not every coach is for every athlete. It's part art, part science. The science can tell you where you are and where you need to be. The science can tell you how well the art is working. It can give early warn signs you are off track. But the art is setting the right track and getting you there healthy. Edited by marcag 2015-10-12 6:43 AM |
| 2015-10-12 7:27 AM in reply to: 0 |
| Master 10208 Northern IL | Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying by the Numbers Originally posted by marcag The size of the gap will tell you how far away you are. To give you an idea, a guy over 50 needs to 54VDOT, about 3.8 w/kg (real number not an approximation) on the bike, a sub 23min 1500 and be efficient to have a shot. Saw something like this for guys in their 30's a bit ago. The bike and run were approaching 4.5 W/kg and 60 Vdot. At least getting into the ball park of these (people like round numbers to remember). I forget if there was a shorter swim section, but trying to get it near an hour. Anything changed or revised? Edited by brigby1 2015-10-12 7:28 AM |
| 2015-10-12 7:39 AM in reply to: 0 |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying by the Numbers Originally posted by brigby1 Originally posted by marcag The size of the gap will tell you how far away you are. To give you an idea, a guy over 50 needs to 54VDOT, about 3.8 w/kg (real number not an approximation) on the bike, a sub 23min 1500 and be efficient to have a shot. Saw something like this for guys in their 30's a bit ago. The bike and run were approaching 4.5 W/kg and 60 Vdot. At least getting into the ball park of these (people like round numbers to remember). I forget if there was a shorter swim section, but trying to get it near an hour. Anything changed or revised? A 60 vdot would get you a 3:20ish Marathon on a course like IMMT A 4.5w/kg at 70% = 3.15w/kg would get you a 5hr bike and close, to 250TSS so pretty reasonable. Combine that with a 1hr swim it gives a 9:30ish IMMT Very rough. It could be detailed. The numbers I threw out (54 and 3.8) were for someone over 50. Edited by marcag 2015-10-12 7:40 AM |
| 2015-10-12 7:51 AM in reply to: marcag |
| 1502 Katy, Texas | Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying by the Numbers Originally posted by marcag It's pretty easy to figure out the minimal requirements to KQ in terms of CSS, VDOT, W/kg and CDA. I know my numbers and I won't even try an IM until I think I'm meeting the MINIMAL requirements. Minimal meaning you have the basic ingredients, but how they are mixed into a full recipe is another story. It's pretty easy to assess where you are. But I strongly suggest you assess each metric from multiple angles and not just individually The size of the gap will tell you how far away you are. To give you an idea, a guy over 50 needs to 54VDOT, about 3.8 w/kg (real number not an approximation) on the bike, a sub 23min 1500 and be efficient to have a shot. The hard part is figuring out how to close that gap. Even harder is making sure you are going down the right path and not burning out. Every person responds to training differently. Every year I have discovered that X in one sport brings me one step forward but Y in the other took me two steps back. So you go back to the drawing board and figure it out slowly. Taking into account aging and other factors. I do believe you are of KQ material and with the right plan, if you stay healthy will get there. I hate to burst your bubble, but it's not next spring. 70.3 WC is coming back to NA in 2017. I'll just throw out the idea, figure out what it takes to qualify for that and work towards it. It's certainly compatible with your KQ goals and you won't burn yourself and your family in the process. BTW, I suspect there are many people that if they start now, map a plan, could achieve this for 2017. Especially the women who will be given more slots than ever befpre If you do go the coaching route, I would suggest a coach that is going to show you the roadmap, show you the plan, show you the milestones and show you that you are on track or why the roadmap needs to change. Pick your coach wisely. Not every coach is for every athlete. It's part art, part science. The science can tell you where you are and where you need to be. The science can tell you how well the art is working. It can give early warn signs you are off track. But the art is setting the right track and getting you there healthy. I certainly appreciate and respect your input. The progression of increases in fitness seemed kind of unrealistic, which is why I asked. I'm more than happy to put it off until I get there. I'd prefer not to dedicate the time and effort if the chances would be slim to none. I do like the idea of the 70.3 WC though. Now just to find a coach. |
| 2015-10-12 8:15 AM in reply to: 3mar |
| Master 10208 Northern IL | Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying by the Numbers It'll still take time & effort to build up to these numbers. A notable difference is that you won't necessarily be putting in the biggest or longest workouts, which tends to be the hardest for people to do. There will be a number of smaller workouts in there that can add up to a pretty good volume, but being smaller it tends to be easier to schedule them in while also not seeming like huge burden at any one point in time. After awhile of doing this, getting out to the longer workouts for IM may not seem as difficult. Progressing up and out through the various distances can be a helpful way to test this out as well. Press up your sprint and Oly speed, see how you can extend things out for the HIM WC that was suggested. This isn't to see how much your results stack up to take the shot at IM, so much as to see how you're able to manage the workout schedule of increasing distances. Also as said, getting into 70.3 WC is not going to be easy either. |
| 2015-10-12 8:33 AM in reply to: 3mar |
Member 1748 Exton, PA | Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying by the Numbers Your weakness right now is on the bike, until you can get your bike speed up your not going to make it. So work your weakness! Work shorter distances getting the power on your bike up, if you can't go fast short distances you won't be able to go fast on long distances. I would suggest when you move to try and find some cycling groups and ride with the roadies one day a week. From your posts I would say you would fit into a B to B- group. They may let you ride with you tri bike but you would be better off getting a road bike. Does not have to be anything fancy, and aluminum bike with tiagra/105 group for right around $1,000 new will do the trick. |
| 2015-10-12 8:50 AM in reply to: 0 |
Extreme Veteran 3025 Maryland | Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying by the Numbers I looked at KQ stuff last night....for my age group I would need to be in the 9:30 range to have a shot anywhere....many races faster. Think I'll wait till I'm old. 3mar, I personally would advise you to get fast at short course, then start stretching the speed out. I have found that the best way to bring up that FTP is to ride hard, really hard. Sometimes it can be difficult to get that intensity if you're training for an IM. Especially if you have time constraints. ETA: I agree with mike (what is coming of the world :P )
Edited by dmiller5 2015-10-12 8:51 AM |
| 2015-10-12 9:18 AM in reply to: 3mar |
Extreme Veteran 1986 Cypress, TX | Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying by the Numbers The brutally honest: A bad day at IMTX notwithstanding, your other results 4:59 HIM, and 2:28 oly are also not anywhere close to where you would need to be in comparison to your KQ peers. We're talking 4:20 HIM times and 2:00-2:05 oly times. You're in the second largest and probably the fastest AG. Look at the top-10 in your AG at IMTX this year. Times were 9:01-9:45. That's where you'd realistically need your times to be to have a chance. Maybe think of Kona as a long term goal. Forget it for the short term. Not happening. The brutally honest #2: Slots are decreasing across the board with the exception of the 5 regional championship races (which have 75 slots). There's only 40 slots to the IM races next year. It's going to be way more cutthroat. At 40 slots even the largest AG is only going to have 3 slots. Third place in your AG at IMTX this year was 9:17. Does that sound doable? Didn't think so. I agree that setting your sights on the 70.3 WC is a better short term goal. You do have some serious upside potential. KQ would be a very long journey. 70.3 WC could be a lot shorter. I know plenty of people that have 70.3 WC qualified that can't some close to KQ. I'm in the Houston area and could give you some coaching recommendations when you get settled in. |
| 2015-10-12 9:56 AM in reply to: 3mar |
| 812 Katy, Texas | Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying by the Numbers What part of Houston? I'm an up at 4am training West Houstonite. Give me a shout when you get here. I'm doing IMTX next year as my first and will be looking to ride the course every once in a while. And I'm no authority or anything, but I wouldn't be thinking about KQ unless I had a good performance at an IM that I thought I could improve on. |
| 2015-10-12 10:11 AM in reply to: GMAN 19030 |
| 108 | Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying by the Numbers Originally posted by GMAN 19030 The brutally honest: A bad day at IMTX notwithstanding, your other results 4:59 HIM, and 2:28 oly are also not anywhere close to where you would need to be in comparison to your KQ peers. Â We're talking 4:20 HIM times and 2:00-2:05 oly times x2 those results are not anywhere close even for the women's field. what I saw a number of people in their late 40s and 50s doing this summer as I worked 6 IMs is having their own goal of a certain number of IMs a year - for instance, a Canadian couple was doing 4 in 4 weeks, a German couple doing 3 in 6 weeks, an American couple did two in two. You don't see the under 40s doing this, but an awful lot of over 40s. Most cite giving up on the KQ dream that is not happening for them while focusing on what they can do. Will they PR their races doing this? no, but 4 in 4 weeks was more realistic for them then KQing. It could be you do have what it takes, but if you don't, don't give up on the sport because you can't KQ, find your goals. |
| 2015-10-12 10:12 AM in reply to: GMAN 19030 |
| 1502 Katy, Texas | Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying by the Numbers Originally posted by GMAN 19030 The brutally honest: A bad day at IMTX notwithstanding, your other results 4:59 HIM, and 2:28 oly are also not anywhere close to where you would need to be in comparison to your KQ peers. Â We're talking 4:20 HIM times and 2:00-2:05 oly times. Â You're in the second largest and probably the fastest AG. Â Look at the top-10 in your AG at IMTX this year. Â Times were 9:01-9:45. Â That's where you'd realistically need your times to be to have a chance. Â Maybe think of Kona as a long term goal. Â Forget it for the short term. Â Not happening. The brutally honest #2: Slots are decreasing across the board with the exception of the 5 regional championship races (which have 75 slots). Â There's only 40 slots to the IM races next year. Â It's going to be way more cutthroat. Â At 40 slots even the largest AG is only going to have 3 slots. Â Third place in your AG at IMTX this year was 9:17. Â Does that sound doable? Â Didn't think so. I agree that setting your sights on the 70.3 WC is a better short term goal. Â You do have some serious upside potential. Â KQ would be a very long journey. Â 70.3 WC could be a lot shorter. Â I know plenty of people that have 70.3 WC qualified that can't some close to KQ. I'm in the Houston area and could give you some coaching recommendations when you get settled in. That's sort of what I figured, but that article had a "do X to get from Y to Z" that seemed a bit out there (as I noted; going from mid 50s vo2 max to mid 60s with a couple of months of high volume) I really wanted a reality check on if that had any bearing in reality. I guess not. |
| 2015-10-12 10:56 AM in reply to: Jet Black |
| 1502 Katy, Texas | Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying by the Numbers Originally posted by Jet Black What part of Houston? I'm an up at 4am training West Houstonite. Give me a shout when you get here. I'm doing IMTX next year as my first and will be looking to ride the course every once in a while. And I'm no authority or anything, but I wouldn't be thinking about KQ unless I had a good performance at an IM that I thought I could improve on. I'm moving to Katy (off of FM 1093). We're moving into an apartment there until we can close our house sale here and buy. We're planning on buying in the same area. If you're in the area we should definitely get together to train, especially if you're a faster cyclist, because I could use the push! |
| 2015-10-12 12:12 PM in reply to: 3mar |
| 1502 Katy, Texas | Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying by the Numbers I appreciate everyone's input, but I certainly won't give up on triathlon, or Kona. If it takes until I'm in the 70 age group, so be it. I want to make that crystal clear. I've been told what I *can't* do my whole life, and it's never stopped me. I always go big, and just keep cranking until I get there. If I ever set a goal I can reach easily (or that doesn't look ridiculous) then I've failed. You should have saw the look on my college advisor's face when I told him I wanted to be a chemical engineer...I scored around 20% on my chemistry entrance exams. Essentially guessing (I was pretty much guessing as it might as well been in Japanese). Actually, if I remember correctly, I would have got a higher score had I guessed just based on statistics. Heck, I had to take the SATs twice to get a score high enough to get into a summer program to even get into college on a probationary level. But I grew up waaaaay below the poverty level, so if I was working my way through school I wanted the most bang for my buck and I read that chemical engineering had the highest starting salary, even though I really wasn't sure what it was. But I was determined I'd do it. I was told (through laughter) that it was ridiculous. It was the most difficult and competitive undergrad program and there was just no way, not for me, I was miles away. They allowed me to take the 1st year engineering courses anyway. I made dean's list (thanks to the guy laughing), but they still wouldn't let me into the engineering program as they just couldn't get over my test scores (boo Penn State). So I called every other college in a 200 mile radius until I found one that would let me in (go Pitt). This was all while being told I was just too far away, it was ridiculous and even if I got in a program, there was absolutely no way I would finish, even smart kids that didn't work 50 hrs/week couldn't hack it. The head of the ChemE program saw something though...or he was just tired of me calling his direct line every day and let me in. I'm sure you can guess how that story ended. Point is; when I want to do something, I will do it. No matter how long it takes. Also, I've been doing this from a little over a year. That oly PR was after 6 months of training. The HIM was after 8. That's from day 1. I'm just getting started  . Is it possible this year? Probably not, and that's fine. Next year? Maybe. The year after? Whatever. It will happen. |
| 2015-10-12 1:20 PM in reply to: 3mar |
| 812 Katy, Texas | Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying by the Numbers Originally posted by 3mar Originally posted by Jet Black What part of Houston? I'm an up at 4am training West Houstonite. Give me a shout when you get here. I'm doing IMTX next year as my first and will be looking to ride the course every once in a while. And I'm no authority or anything, but I wouldn't be thinking about KQ unless I had a good performance at an IM that I thought I could improve on. I'm moving to Katy (off of FM 1093). We're moving into an apartment there until we can close our house sale here and buy. We're planning on buying in the same area. If you're in the area we should definitely get together to train, especially if you're a faster cyclist, because I could use the push! Cool, I'm in "Old Katy" (North of 10 by Katy High). I'm no elite cyclist, but I'm ok, FTP of about 3.3 w/kg right now. I do a group ride on Saturdays with a local club that has a lot of fast guys, great way to push yourself trying to hang on. You need a regular road bike to go with these guys though. |
| 2015-10-12 1:32 PM in reply to: 3mar |
Expert 2355 Madison, Wisconsin | Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying by the Numbers Originally posted by 3mar Originally posted by marcag It's pretty easy to figure out the minimal requirements to KQ in terms of CSS, VDOT, W/kg and CDA. I know my numbers and I won't even try an IM until I think I'm meeting the MINIMAL requirements. Minimal meaning you have the basic ingredients, but how they are mixed into a full recipe is another story. It's pretty easy to assess where you are. But I strongly suggest you assess each metric from multiple angles and not just individually The size of the gap will tell you how far away you are. To give you an idea, a guy over 50 needs to 54VDOT, about 3.8 w/kg (real number not an approximation) on the bike, a sub 23min 1500 and be efficient to have a shot. The hard part is figuring out how to close that gap. Even harder is making sure you are going down the right path and not burning out. Every person responds to training differently. Every year I have discovered that X in one sport brings me one step forward but Y in the other took me two steps back. So you go back to the drawing board and figure it out slowly. Taking into account aging and other factors. I do believe you are of KQ material and with the right plan, if you stay healthy will get there. I hate to burst your bubble, but it's not next spring. 70.3 WC is coming back to NA in 2017. I'll just throw out the idea, figure out what it takes to qualify for that and work towards it. It's certainly compatible with your KQ goals and you won't burn yourself and your family in the process. BTW, I suspect there are many people that if they start now, map a plan, could achieve this for 2017. Especially the women who will be given more slots than ever befpre If you do go the coaching route, I would suggest a coach that is going to show you the roadmap, show you the plan, show you the milestones and show you that you are on track or why the roadmap needs to change. Pick your coach wisely. Not every coach is for every athlete. It's part art, part science. The science can tell you where you are and where you need to be. The science can tell you how well the art is working. It can give early warn signs you are off track. But the art is setting the right track and getting you there healthy. Now just to find a coach. Get in touch with: Mark Van Akkeren (MarkyV) Brian Stover The Purplepatch team |
| 2015-10-12 1:44 PM in reply to: 3mar |
Member 1748 Exton, PA | Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying by the Numbers Originally posted by 3mar I appreciate everyone's input, but I certainly won't give up on triathlon, or Kona. If it takes until I'm in the 70 age group, so be it. I want to make that crystal clear. I've been told what I *can't* do my whole life, and it's never stopped me. I always go big, and just keep cranking until I get there. If I ever set a goal I can reach easily (or that doesn't look ridiculous) then I've failed. I'd don't think anyone here said you couldn't do it. We just pointed out that your not there yet, and trying to give you an idea of direction to head. I've seen large improvements in people over the first 4 years of doing tri's, after that they tend to be much smaller improvements. This depends a lot on the person. I think if you work at it, you have a good chance by year 3 or 4 for a KQ. You have a lot of bike work to do, you will not KQ doing 21mph on flats. |
| 2015-10-12 2:06 PM in reply to: 3mar |
Coach 9167 Stairway to Seven | Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying by the Numbers Originally posted by 3mar That's sort of what I figured, but that article had a "do X to get from Y to Z" that seemed a bit out there (as I noted; going from mid 50s vo2 max to mid 60s with a couple of months of high volume) I really wanted a reality check on if that had any bearing in reality. I guess not. That may be possible... but its not a direct translation to a fast IM. There are "lucky" and hardworking people who race their first IM in 10:xx like one of my athletes did yestaerday at IMLOU (humblebrag...) but he's still got to shave off 30 minutes or more in an IM to have a shot at KQing. It may seem like it's "easy" to go from 12:30 to 10:00, but it becomes exponentially harder to go from 10:15 to 9:45 due to the smaller incremental rate of return as speeds get faster. Everyone I know personally who has KQd as an age grouper or a neopro has taken years to to get there. LIke other posters above, its a long path of consistency, chipping away at your limiters and getting good at racing, getting good at prioritizing training and recovery, and using smaller shorter races to not only master that distnaces but as preparation for training for the next event. They LOVE tri, they LOVE training, they LOVE racing. and when you love it, you do it more often, wiht less resistance. They embrace the need for form and technique (even pros take swimming lessons) knowing it's a foundational component of speed. They also race a LOT. They learn and get fit from racing and it makes any single race less of a big deal. Sure thye have goal and A races and revenge races to beat their nemesis...but they get more out process and experiences and living it , than they do from any single result. The end result is lots of days of fast racing, great resulst and with a littlee planning and luck...a great result on their most important A race. The bottom line for me is that the mental skills are equally as improtant as the physical once and need to be practiced daily. That combo will make you fast. |
| 2015-10-12 2:14 PM in reply to: bcagle25 |
| 1502 Katy, Texas | Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying by the Numbers Originally posted by bcagle25 Originally posted by 3mar Originally posted by marcag It's pretty easy to figure out the minimal requirements to KQ in terms of CSS, VDOT, W/kg and CDA. I know my numbers and I won't even try an IM until I think I'm meeting the MINIMAL requirements. Minimal meaning you have the basic ingredients, but how they are mixed into a full recipe is another story. It's pretty easy to assess where you are. But I strongly suggest you assess each metric from multiple angles and not just individually The size of the gap will tell you how far away you are. To give you an idea, a guy over 50 needs to 54VDOT, about 3.8 w/kg (real number not an approximation) on the bike, a sub 23min 1500 and be efficient to have a shot. The hard part is figuring out how to close that gap. Even harder is making sure you are going down the right path and not burning out. Every person responds to training differently. Every year I have discovered that X in one sport brings me one step forward but Y in the other took me two steps back. So you go back to the drawing board and figure it out slowly. Taking into account aging and other factors. I do believe you are of KQ material and with the right plan, if you stay healthy will get there. I hate to burst your bubble, but it's not next spring. 70.3 WC is coming back to NA in 2017. I'll just throw out the idea, figure out what it takes to qualify for that and work towards it. It's certainly compatible with your KQ goals and you won't burn yourself and your family in the process. BTW, I suspect there are many people that if they start now, map a plan, could achieve this for 2017. Especially the women who will be given more slots than ever befpre If you do go the coaching route, I would suggest a coach that is going to show you the roadmap, show you the plan, show you the milestones and show you that you are on track or why the roadmap needs to change. Pick your coach wisely. Not every coach is for every athlete. It's part art, part science. The science can tell you where you are and where you need to be. The science can tell you how well the art is working. It can give early warn signs you are off track. But the art is setting the right track and getting you there healthy. Now just to find a coach. Get in touch with: Mark Van Akkeren (MarkyV) Brian Stover The Purplepatch team Thanks. I will be sure to. |
| 2015-10-12 2:27 PM in reply to: mike761 |
| 1502 Katy, Texas | Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying by the Numbers Originally posted by mike761 Originally posted by 3mar I appreciate everyone's input, but I certainly won't give up on triathlon, or Kona. If it takes until I'm in the 70 age group, so be it. I want to make that crystal clear. I've been told what I *can't* do my whole life, and it's never stopped me. I always go big, and just keep cranking until I get there. If I ever set a goal I can reach easily (or that doesn't look ridiculous) then I've failed. I'd don't think anyone here said you couldn't do it. We just pointed out that your not there yet, and trying to give you an idea of direction to head. I've seen large improvements in people over the first 4 years of doing tri's, after that they tend to be much smaller improvements. This depends a lot on the person. I think if you work at it, you have a good chance by year 3 or 4 for a KQ. You have a lot of bike work to do, you will not KQ doing 21mph on flats. I would argue that some were slanted pretty hard that way. My point is; why dwell on the impossibility of a task, just dig in. There's nothing (in my opinion) to be gained by staring at the top of the mountain from the bottom and even taking a moment to think of the obstacles, just start climbing. It's like eating a whale, just start one bite at a time. No sense dwelling on the enormity of it. As long as you don't give up, you'll get there eventually. |
| 2015-10-12 2:33 PM in reply to: 3mar |
Expert 2547 The Woodlands, TX | Subject: RE: Kona Qualifying by the Numbers Originally posted by 3mar I appreciate everyone's input, but I certainly won't give up on triathlon, or Kona. If it takes until I'm in the 70 age group, so be it. I want to make that crystal clear. I've been told what I *can't* do my whole life, and it's never stopped me. I always go big, and just keep cranking until I get there. If I ever set a goal I can reach easily (or that doesn't look ridiculous) then I've failed. You should have saw the look on my college advisor's face when I told him I wanted to be a chemical engineer...I scored around 20% on my chemistry entrance exams. Essentially guessing (I was pretty much guessing as it might as well been in Japanese). Actually, if I remember correctly, I would have got a higher score had I guessed just based on statistics. Heck, I had to take the SATs twice to get a score high enough to get into a summer program to even get into college on a probationary level. But I grew up waaaaay below the poverty level, so if I was working my way through school I wanted the most bang for my buck and I read that chemical engineering had the highest starting salary, even though I really wasn't sure what it was. But I was determined I'd do it. I was told (through laughter) that it was ridiculous. It was the most difficult and competitive undergrad program and there was just no way, not for me, I was miles away. They allowed me to take the 1st year engineering courses anyway. I made dean's list (thanks to the guy laughing), but they still wouldn't let me into the engineering program as they just couldn't get over my test scores (boo Penn State). So I called every other college in a 200 mile radius until I found one that would let me in (go Pitt). This was all while being told I was just too far away, it was ridiculous and even if I got in a program, there was absolutely no way I would finish, even smart kids that didn't work 50 hrs/week couldn't hack it. The head of the ChemE program saw something though...or he was just tired of me calling his direct line every day and let me in. I'm sure you can guess how that story ended. Point is; when I want to do something, I will do it. No matter how long it takes. Also, I've been doing this from a little over a year. That oly PR was after 6 months of training. The HIM was after 8. That's from day 1. I'm just getting started . Is it possible this year? Probably not, and that's fine. Next year? Maybe. The year after? Whatever. It will happen. I've coached some to Kona and coached quite a few who want Kona. I will tell you that the main difference is how each reacted to tedium and burn out. Those who qualified could get out of bed regardless of motivation or energy levels. The others just wouldn't. When the motivation gets low, they would skip, or start looking for some gadget or new trend to lean on instead of plain old work. It now has become much easier for me to spot who has a shot at Hawaii versus who doesn't. I have some slower athletes (at least at the moment) that I think have a legit shot at it versus some who talk the talk but can't push through the dark weeks. So stats aside, the mindset is significantly more important than the talent, at least for the long term. Best of luck and welcome to Houston. |
|
|
|
|
| How to qualify for Kona? Pages: 1 2 | ||
| |||
| |||
| |||
|
| ||||
|
| |||
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK