Ironman

Ask Ozzy.

I did see many, and I mean many, dudes at the PF Changs with "Ironman" tats on their calves who were finishing in around 5 hours. At least 4 of them.

Which, despite finishing modestly in my first Ironman, is exactly why I don't have an Ironman tatoo. It doesn't mean anything. The dudes that put up a 5 spot in the marathon were probably damn close to the Ironman time limit. Probably walked 20 of the 26 miles, chatting away with other "competitors" with big smiles on their faces. Then they get home, and slap that Ironman tattoo on their calf so everyone will ask them what it was like to do an Ironman.

Yeah, I guess I'm bitter, but I like to complain about stupid crap.

You know, I did 7 IM races, one of them with a 5 hr marathon but the rest in the low-mid 3:00s. I thought seriously about getting that IM tat, then changed my mind. Glad I did.

Why? So you wouldn't be associated with the slow guys? What difference does it make to you?

No, not at all, actually. I regularly have come on here to defend the slow runners of triathlon (in addition to the fast ones).

After participating in IM triathlon for about 10 years, I came to the conclusion that, in my life, the training for an IM, at the level I wanted to do it, was unbelievably selfish. I trained at the expense of my marriage and my children in the selfish pursuit of a personal goal.

That's fine for anyone who wants to do it, as far as I'm concerned, but it ended up not being fine for me. So, I'm glad I never got the IM tat.

Bandito wrote:

Why? So you wouldn't be associated with the slow guys? What difference does it make to you?

No, I don't think so. It's not a matter of being slow, as it is a matter of effort.

I did modestly well in my first (and only) attempt at the distance. I worked my ass off for 6 months (to the extent that Johnny described), and fought my heart out for the entire race.

The marathon portion was a double out-and-back. As I was finishing my second loop, I passed in the opposite direction of many competitors that had just begun their first. The bulk of participants in that part of the race showed very little spirit of competition. I was a little surprised by it, even though I shouldn't have been. Never once, in my training, or in actually racing, did it cross my mind that anything other than 100% was an option.

With many of the people, the effort clearly was not 100%. The people walking, smiling, talking about their favorite college football team (yes, I was going slow enough at points to catch full sentences of others' conversations). They clearly had more to give. They were not competing...they were completing. I'm not saying everyone has to compete. Just completing the thing is a huge accomplishment, and to some, that's the only goal. And it's an admirable goal.

But I don't want my accomplishment associated with someone who didn't fight their heart out.

For me, a tattoo has to be something that truly differentiates me and says someting significant about who I am. While an Ironman tattoo does differentiate, it only does so to the extent of completing the distance. As I said, it was much more than that for me. And the Ironman tattoo, as it is worn, does not capture the spirit of what the Ironman was to me.

That's why I do not have one.

Yep, done 6 of em, and don't have a tat. Nothing against them, or the people that take 17 hours to finish, but they just approach the whole thing differently than I do. And that's fine. I didn't want to do one unless I could race the event - if you want to get right down to it, it's a race, although many (most?) see it as an event, just like most marathoners do today.

For the record, I broke a big toe (yes, nice solid fracture) in my 5th IM, and was forced to walk all but the 1st mile. Yep, I walked 25 straight miles. 2 observations: 1) you can power walk a 5 hour marathon (I had roughly a 5:30 "run" split that day), so I'm not sure how people actually "run" a 5 hour marathon, unless of course they are actually walking most of it, or chatting it up at the food stations, and 2) power walking that thing was maybe the most painful thing I've ever done. Of my 6 IMs, the amount I suffered was inversely proportional to the time. I went sub-10 at IMFL a few years ago, and it felt effortless most of the day (sure, a few tough miles near the end, but I held pace just fine). So, I'm a little hesitant to bash on the slower folks because I do believe they suffer an awful lot.

Hey dudes I'm referring to an actual runner ......Hilton County...washington State....not these crossover freaks !

Bella lugosi wrote:

Hey dudes I'm referring to an actual runner ......Hilton County...washington State....not these crossover freaks !

Apparently no one had an answer for you.

Yeah, I knew that...I guess I'm to blame for taking it off on a tangent. Sorry about that.

Thanks ,guys. I guess the dude might post a time some day soon this century !