Lifetime Fitness Triathlon

Are they really that fast?

I mean, 31:00 is okay, but if this is really a world class event...

I guess you're right... I always just assumed that these guys weren't this fast at running. If he can run 31 minutes after swimming for 20 minutes and biking for an hour, how fast do you suppose he could go fresh? I have a new respect for these people.

You'd be suprised that the gap between these guys fresh run and run splits off the bike aren't that far off. I'm not in the vicinity of these guys, but my 5K PB vs 5K off the bike PB is about :15sec (both on cert courses) and Ironman mary vs fresh mary about 20mins. Mark Allen routinely ran low 2:40's off the bike yet never was able to get <2:22 for trials.

It's true these guys can run a great split for their 5k or 10k's after all of this because they simply train to sustain this pace even after everything. I was consistently running around 16:30-40 on the roads for 5k and then my 1st tri of the year I hit a 16:33 5k split. I never understood it quite but after I bike and swim, i have more of a desire to catch people than I do in just a road race for some reason as well....

A LOT of Tri's have shotty measuring unfortunately.

For example, at the World duathlon championships..do you really think all of these guys could run mid28 10ks on the road:

http://www.duathlon-wch-2007gyor.hu/index.php?mod=static&pageid=17

and this is at their world championship, so you'd expect accurate measurements.

heyyyy wrote:

A LOT of Tri's have shotty measuring unfortunately.

For example, at the World duathlon championships..do you really think all of these guys could run mid28 10ks on the road:

http://www.duathlon-wch-2007gyor.hu/index.php?mod=static&pageid=17

and this is at their world championship, so you'd expect accurate measurements.

It's not shoddy measuring. The different legs of the triathlon just have to be within a certain percentage of the set distances. I believe that triathlons are allowed lee-way b/c of the constraint of having to begin and end all three legs at/near transition area.

Also, I agree with the other posters, triathletes, expecially top guys, run very close to their open PR's off the bike. That's what makes them top triathletes.

heyyyy wrote:

A LOT of Tri's have shotty measuring unfortunately.

For example, at the World duathlon championships..do you really think all of these guys could run mid28 10ks on the road:

http://www.duathlon-wch-2007gyor.hu/index.php?mod=static&pageid=17

and this is at their world championship, so you'd expect accurate measurements.

Merely because it annoys me that someone is compelled to bring this up in every triathlon thread, here's a link to the USATF Certified Course map for the OP's event:

Carry on . . .

Am I missing something? wrote:

Are they really that fast?

I mean, 31:00 is okay, but if this is really a world class event...

yes. when you train hard on the bike, your legs aren't shot after riding hard and you can run pretty close to your best times especially on a relatively shorter tri.

Just because it's certified doesn't mean they ran an accurate course.

Look at threads in regards to road race 5ks that are certified and WAY off.

I'm not saying that ALL triathlons are off, just some of them.

It's brought up in every triathlon thread because it happens. If it didn't ever happen, then it would never be brought up.

And give me a break on how traithlons are given leeway. If the run portion isn't 10km, don't advertise it as that. Make it like many european XC races where the race distance doesn't matter.

I think the problem a lot of us runners have w/ triathletes is when they claim there PR off of some split and then can't touch it in a single 10k race or whatever.

Another thing that helps with 10k times is whether it is a draft legal race. Not sure if this one was but if all you do is sit back in the pack and draft you can come off the bike feeling pretty refreshed.The bike seems to hurt faster runners more than slower ones (i.e., a 29 minute 10k guy may only muster a sub 32 minute 10k in a triathlon whereas a 32 minute 10k guy could run a sub 33). It takes more muscle mass to push heavy gears. Faster runners don't carry as much muscle so they seem to come off the bike hurting more than a true Tri-hack-a-lete.The best running analogy I can think of is the difference between a steeplechase and a 5k. The rhythm runners fall apart in a steeple and the steeplechasers are too slow for the 5k.

missing something wrote:

I am having a hard time believing the results that I've seen posted for the Lifetime Fitness Triathlon. I'll admit, I know very little about triathlons and triathletes, and I realize that this event attracts the best in the world due to the high payout, but is this possible for the top 10 10k times?:

1 Greg Bennett North Palm Beach, FL, USA 30:58.9

2 Bruno Pais Fundao, , Prt 32:14.9

3 Craig Alexander Sydney, NSW, Aus 31:38.5

4 Hunter Kemper Colorado Springs, CO, USA 32:03.2

5 Rasmus Henning Birkerod, DENMARK, Dnk 32:34.4

6 David Thompson Long Lake, MN, USA 33:45.6

7 Bevan Docherty De Pere, WI, USA 33:33.5

8 Stephen Hackett Shelly Beach, Aus 34:03.4

9 Tj Tollakson Des Moines, IA, USA 34:12.1

10 Filip Ospaly Lelekovice, CZECH REPU, Cze 33:13.9

I just can't believe these guys could throw down this fast after swimming close to a mile and biking 25. I think I might be missing something.

I do not think that Lifetime is a draft legal race.

Good showing by Hunter Kemper considering his injury issues this year.

Lifetime is not a draft legal race, and that run course is pretty damn accurate.

Doesn't happen often that a top (World class) triathlete enters an open running race, but here ya go. 2007 Bay to Breakers:

Greg Bennett Australia 35 M 37:01 37:01 13 13 13 89.4%

Hilly and tough course, dude can run okay for a 35 yr old-(as can all the top triathletes).

Lifetime Fitness triathlon is a non-drafting race.

"Benno" won $60,000 for the race and another $60,000 for winning the series. His wife won $200,000 and an H3 Hummer a few weeks ago at a World Cup in Des Moines IA (not a bad month)-with that sort of money, why does it surprise people that the top guys are actually good athletes?

See, this is the kinda times I thought these dudes were capable of. How "hilly and tough" was it, because 6 minutes slower is a lot unless the thing is straight up a Mountain.

I don't know why I always assumed these guys weren't very good at running, clearly I was wrong. Maybe it's because world-class decathletes suck at the 1500... but that's a different animal altogether.

I agree with previous posters that this course is accurate and I apologize to any world-class triathletes that read this message board for underestimating them.

I get it, 12k.... sorry again, obviously I'm an idiot.

There is a long list of top triathletes that were d1 level runners and switched to tri's because the training is fun/the pay was better/ whatever.

Mark Allen, Ryan Bolton both went low 2:20's for the marathon. Ryan was top 20 at XCncaa. Wyoming I think.

This year, one of the better woman races a mary in 2:40. good training run I think.

Simon Whitfield ran the canadian XC nats this year and did well. he's a sub 30 runner.

Some of the euro duathletes are crazy fast runners. low 14's sub 30's. Benny vansteelant and his brother (SP)

I think the low 2:20s for Allen is apocryphal. He dropped out of Berlin going for an OT qualifier.

cool word. I dig it.

Maybe, maybe not. He was capable of it for sure.

Other examples of the quality of athlete in the sport is the number of people form other sports that have tried to be triathles and failed. Chan Mcraie, Amy van dyken, and so on. Mostly cyclists that think they can beat up the geeks on the bike and they get their asses handed to them.

Some have done really well though. The level of athlete in the top fields is really as good as you'll see in just about any sport right now.

I'd be willing to bet i could take a field of pro triathletes, train them in running only for one season, and have a very good shot at winning ncaa xc's.

lawoof wrote:

cool word. I dig it.

Maybe, maybe not. He was capable of it for sure.

Other examples of the quality of athlete in the sport is the number of people form other sports that have tried to be triathles and failed. Chan Mcraie, Amy van dyken, and so on. Mostly cyclists that think they can beat up the geeks on the bike and they get their asses handed to them.

Some have done really well though. The level of athlete in the top fields is really as good as you'll see in just about any sport right now.

I'd be willing to bet i could take a field of pro triathletes, train them in running only for one season, and have a very good shot at winning ncaa xc's.

I'd take that bet. The intrinsic problem with your premise is that a triathlete could become a fast runner. Which typically they cannot do.

This is precisely why athletes become triathletes. They cannot run, swim or bike fast enough to be competitive. They physiologically are stuck in no mans' land. Too mesomorphic to run fast, to big to ride fast and not tall enough to swim fast. Everybody has their definition of fast but I would say fast is national/world class times. Racing a triathlete against runners would be like racing a NASCAR against an INDY car. They're not designed for the same purpose. Now throw a runner in a triathlon and he'll drown in the water and ride a little above average.

I'm not dobuting that triathletes are very good at their primary sport but they're not great nor are they likely to achieve greatness no matter how many seasons you've got them for...