I want to make it clear that simply because you are a 16 min 5k guy and a 2:30 marathoner does not mean one damn thing in the world of Ironman Triathlon. The world is full of losers like you who think that your mediocre results at running equate to a good finish at the Hawaii Ironman. Qualify for Hawaii, then talk the talk.
Yes, I think that 90 percent of you letsrunners are c***s.
1/10
I am absolutely OUTRAGED. I am now going to type up a lengthy manifesto about why triathletes are lame and runners are great. I will add some stuff about how runners are actually better athletes than pro football players. I will also put in some stuff railing on the networks for not showing more cross country races on t.v.
knower of stuff is very immature and quite rude on many of his/her posts BUT he/she is somewhat right. i've talked to many runners who think because they ran a 3 hour boston marathon thatthey could win an ironman event. theythink the swim and bike don't count and that "it's all in the run". lol. that is stupid. i actually think the bike is just as important.
Yeah, Knower is right. My hubby has done Kona several times and is going back this year. It's very difficult to qualify. The last time he ran an open marathon - which is years ago, he was in the low 2:40's. He's a strong swimmer and a good biker. It takes a TON of training and is really competitive.
It's hard to use times as general gauges b/c every course is different. For instance, he finished in IM-Florida in the 9:30's and didn't qualify. In Wisconsin, he finished in just under 1- hrs and it was his best race by far.
It's funny b/c he gets Sooooooooo annoyed watching the television coverage and seeing all the air time the lottery winners and "celebrities" get. He knows how hard he has to work to get there and it kills him to see people just get in on luck or money.
""He knows how hard he has to work to get there and it kills him to see people just get in on luck or money.""
ANYONE doing an Ironman - even if it akes 16 hours and 59 minutes - has my respect. Your huaband sounds like a good athlete. Tell him to be supportive, not bitter.
dawgruff123 wrote:
i've talked to many runners who think because they ran a 3 hour boston marathon thatthey could win an ironman event.
No, you really haven't. You haven't talked to even ONE person who thinks that except in your own little fantasy world.
dawgruff123 wrote:
knower of stuff is very immature and quite rude on many of his/her posts BUT he/she is somewhat right. i've talked to many runners who think because they ran a 3 hour boston marathon that they could win an ironman event. they think the swim and bike don't count and that "it's all in the run". lol. that is stupid. i actually think the bike is just as important.
You have to admit, though, that if a top runner, a top cyclist, and a top swimmer all took up triathlon, the runner would have the most success 8 out of 10 times. I am a runner who cycles on a club team and I know that cycling is many times more about technique and getting into the right break than aerobic fitness. Also, not all cyclists are good at TT. A top cyclist may be a sprinter or climber and would shudder at a 100+ mile TT in a tri. The majority of cyclists would be average (at best) runners, but the majority of runners do very well in cycling.
I am not putting cyclist or swimmers down...heaven knows that I couldn't beat anyone in a 100 man sprint to the line in a crit. I am just saying that the typical top runner body makeup allows them to also be very good triathletes. A typical cyclist or swimmer is not a cookie cutter triathlete, but they are very good at what they do.
Rolly Olly wrote:
You have to admit, though, that if a top runner, a top cyclist, and a top swimmer all took up triathlon, the runner would have the most success 8 out of 10 times.
No you dont. For sure not in draft-illegal triathlons like Ironman. The cyclist would have the most success more often than not unless he was an horrendous runner.
If you think cycling is more about technique than fitness, you have a lot to learn about cycling.
cyclist wrote:
Rolly Olly wrote:You have to admit, though, that if a top runner, a top cyclist, and a top swimmer all took up triathlon, the runner would have the most success 8 out of 10 times.
No you dont. For sure not in draft-illegal triathlons like Ironman. The cyclist would have the most success more often than not unless he was an horrendous runner.
If you think cycling is more about technique than fitness, you have a lot to learn about cycling.
If you think cycling is more about anything than being a gay homersexual, then you have a lot to learn about cycling.
Rolly Olly wrote:
dawgruff123 wrote:knower of stuff is very immature and quite rude on many of his/her posts BUT he/she is somewhat right. i've talked to many runners who think because they ran a 3 hour boston marathon that they could win an ironman event. they think the swim and bike don't count and that "it's all in the run". lol. that is stupid. i actually think the bike is just as important.
You have to admit, though, that if a top runner, a top cyclist, and a top swimmer all took up triathlon, the runner would have the most success 8 out of 10 times. I am a runner who cycles on a club team and I know that cycling is many times more about technique and getting into the right break than aerobic fitness. Also, not all cyclists are good at TT. A top cyclist may be a sprinter or climber and would shudder at a 100+ mile TT in a tri.
The majority of cyclists would be average (at best) runners, but the majority of runners do very well in cycling.
I am not putting cyclist or swimmers down...heaven knows that I couldn't beat anyone in a 100 man sprint to the line in a crit. I am just saying that the typical top runner body makeup allows them to also be very good triathletes. A typical cyclist or swimmer is not a cookie cutter triathlete, but they are very good at what they do.
You're wrong in just about everything you say. Get all your top runners together and throw them in the water, see how many don't drown. A "top" runner would be so far behind after the swim and bike that a world record marathon wouldn't matter.
If you think cycling is more about anything than being a gay homersexual, then you have a lot to learn about cycling.
Judge don't bring homer simpson and his lifestyle into this. Homer would whip all of us in an ironman.
I agree, people who know nothing watch the Hawaii IM coverage and see the fat/old/disabled people and they think that it must be a joke, it seems like they forget about all the fat runners at marathons coming in past 5 hours (without swimming or biking before hand) and they also forget about gallowalkers and walkers. Somewhere along the line they forget that running is not exactly the elite sport that it used to be.
It is like going to chillis or applebees when a football game is on the TV, everybody and their mother is suddenly an expert on football. Running is cool, so is triathlon but people who simply watch an IM on TV and think it will be easy are more than likely the people who will be cutting that 17 hour mark a bit close.
Ante up wrote:
You're wrong in just about everything you say. Get all your top runners together and throw them in the water, see how many don't drown. A "top" runner would be so far behind after the swim and bike that a world record marathon wouldn't matter.
Get all your top cyclists and swimmers and see if they can even complete a marathon. I would venture to say that some cyclists might be able to, very few swimmers could even come close. I am not comparing runners to triathletes...but runners to cyclists and swimmers.
Ok, take the top 10 swimmers in the world, the top 10 cyclists in the world, and the top 10 runners in the world. Race an ironman...a half, even, and see who wins.
My bet is that the runners dominate, that's all. Now if you match any of the 30 above with a world class triathlete, no matter what background they come from, the triathlete kills them for sure.
Do you really think that the majority of the best swimmers and cyclists would beat the majority of the worlds best runners in a tri? I certainly don't
Like I said, I am not taking anything away from the cyclists or swimmers here. They are very good at what they do and would destroy anyone posting on this board. And a triathlete undoubtedly destroys even the top runner in a tri. I am only saying that the typical runner comes into tris with more attributes that will allow them to have success than a cyclist or swimmer, that's all.
They all deserve respect but it does suck... I mean the it is called the "World Championships" but many get in as a fun challenge. I do agree with qualifying...how do you get in anyways?
2/10
I like Jeff galloway. He makes people be pro-active and not ashamed to get out and exercise. I know a lot of elite and hardcore runners make fun of walk breaks and stuff BUT why do they care if it helps someone else? People making fun of that fat guy doing the hawaii ironman in 14+ hours are stupid. it took a lot of effort for him to do that and i gurantee none (most) of us couldn't do it as of right now/today.
The way I've been reading is that many of the woman race winners dominate on the bike and many of the european men winners win the race on the bike. stadler/sultan/fraser/etc. would build up a big lead and then survive the run.
i have never run one but i know people who did. one of my best friends from highschool ran a 2:56 marathon in boston. he was stoked. he decided to do the ironman arizon in 2005. his final time was over 15 hours. he was 32 year old and in AWESOME shape. he said he'd never experienced anything like it and his ironman marathon was almost about 6 hours 9 more than double the boston time).
i also think that the order makes a lot of difference. if you started out with the marathon, followed by the bike, followed by the swim - you'd probably see different athletes winning. just my $.02
I say the mediocre swimmers that are primarily runners would still be ok, against those ELITE swimmers....the swim portion is the shortest portion of the race, you still have to be a damn strong cyclist and tough-ass runner to survive the majority of the race....
Judge Smails wrote:
If you think cycling is more about anything than being a gay homersexual, then you have a lot to learn about cycling.
Hmmm, what about the straight homosexuals?
you have to get top 3 or win your age group in a major qualifying race. There are 27 qualifying races across the US every year