General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3 Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 4
 
 
2011-06-16 3:27 AM
in reply to: #3551517

User image

Master
1927
100050010010010010025
Guilford, CT
Subject: RE: Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3
AndrewMT - 2011-06-15 8:23 PM
tripadigin - 2011-06-15 8:12 PM

bryancd - 2011-06-15 8:19 PM Yes, 70.3 WC in Henderson is going to be a race very much in demand, it's a great course. And as an "IM'er" or whatever, I know many who enjoyed the experience at Clearwater very much, the racing wasn't the best, but WTC put's on a quality WC show. I know, I have been to all of them.

Not saying that they will not put on a great show, even in Clearwater for that matter...just sayin' that 70.3WC

Wondering if they were to open the 70.3WC to general entry...would it close out in minutes like IMNYC, IMLP, IMAZ, IMMOO, IMFL.  My guess is it would not.

Obviously not...because then it wouldn't be a WC.

IMs may have more appeal to a lot of people than 70.3 races, but there's nothing special or magical about an IM.  It's just another race distance.  For some of us, IM holds no appeal, while the challenge of 70.3 is something to get excited about.  It's an individual thing.

I did IMCdA in '09 and had a blast.  Beautiful location, great race and I performed well; and now I don't really have a desire to do another.  Meanwhile, I'm busting my tail to secure a Vegas slot either this year or 2012.  I skipped IMTX despite having registered and having it be less than 10 minutes from home simply because it didn't have any appeal.  No fun factor at all. 

I have to agree with Bryan that the 70.3 WC is "greater than" a run of the mill IM.  Anyone can register for and complete an IM.  Not anyone can qualify for and compete in a WC.  Even with the questionable exclusivity of the WC, it's still not a general entry race. 

 

 

my perspective as well....

 

An ironman is just a long race.  They are in demand because people want to feel like they've accomplished something special but most people aren't really racing.  Almost anyone can sign up and muddle through one with proper training if they have the time and means to train for one.  Not almost everyone can go out and hammer a 70.3 in the world championships.  It may be less in demand to the general joe average but it's a real race with more people actually trying to race.



2011-06-16 9:18 AM
in reply to: #3551738

Regular
156
1002525
Annapolis, MD
Subject: RE: Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3
acumenjay - 2011-06-16 4:27 AM
AndrewMT - 2011-06-15 8:23 PM
tripadigin - 2011-06-15 8:12 PM

bryancd - 2011-06-15 8:19 PM Yes, 70.3 WC in Henderson is going to be a race very much in demand, it's a great course. And as an "IM'er" or whatever, I know many who enjoyed the experience at Clearwater very much, the racing wasn't the best, but WTC put's on a quality WC show. I know, I have been to all of them.

Not saying that they will not put on a great show, even in Clearwater for that matter...just sayin' that 70.3WC

Wondering if they were to open the 70.3WC to general entry...would it close out in minutes like IMNYC, IMLP, IMAZ, IMMOO, IMFL.  My guess is it would not.

Obviously not...because then it wouldn't be a WC.

IMs may have more appeal to a lot of people than 70.3 races, but there's nothing special or magical about an IM.  It's just another race distance.  For some of us, IM holds no appeal, while the challenge of 70.3 is something to get excited about.  It's an individual thing.

I did IMCdA in '09 and had a blast.  Beautiful location, great race and I performed well; and now I don't really have a desire to do another.  Meanwhile, I'm busting my tail to secure a Vegas slot either this year or 2012.  I skipped IMTX despite having registered and having it be less than 10 minutes from home simply because it didn't have any appeal.  No fun factor at all. 

I have to agree with Bryan that the 70.3 WC is "greater than" a run of the mill IM.  Anyone can register for and complete an IM.  Not anyone can qualify for and compete in a WC.  Even with the questionable exclusivity of the WC, it's still not a general entry race. 

 

 

my perspective as well....

 

An ironman is just a long race.  They are in demand because people want to feel like they've accomplished something special but most people aren't really racing.  Almost anyone can sign up and muddle through one with proper training if they have the time and means to train for one.  Not almost everyone can go out and hammer a 70.3 in the world championships.  It may be less in demand to the general joe average but it's a real race with more people actually trying to race.

I think this is disrespectful to those out there that are trying to finish the race.  Everyone out there is racing...not everyone out there is hammering in Zone 3/4 because they would be done before they even got on the bike.  But everyone, according to their fitness level, is racing towards the finish line.

IMO, the OP's question was a rhetorical one.  He would not of grabbed the slot and plunked down the $250-$300 if he didn't want to do the 70.3WC race.  If he did take the slot and was still considering doing IMMOO instead then I believe that would be bad form since he effectively would be taking the WC slot away from someone else.  The real question the OP should have asked is "should I have taken the slot in the first place when I was already signed up for an IM on the same date".  Again I say is was the wrong decision, not just because I believe the IM to be a better experience, but once you have gained entry into the IM (especially those that close out within minutes of opening), you should have an obligation to fullfill that race entry, barring injury or family emergency.  That entry spot to IMMOO could have gone to someone else who wanted to do the race, who was at their computer once registration opened, but ultimately was closed due to the incredible demand by people like us.  Simply giving it up to do another more desirable race is (I'll probably get flamed for this, but oh well) poor form in my book.

2011-06-16 9:55 AM
in reply to: #3552116


23

Subject: RE: Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3

You certainly won't get "flamed" for giving your opinion.  I signed up for Wisconsin with full intention of competing in it.  Maybe the original question was a little rhetorical, but I was definitely conflicted.  My entire tri year was based around performing better in Wisconsin and at least breaking 12 hours.  With that said, I had my best personal race in Kansas by breaking 5 hours and then stuck around to see my name called in the roll down.  At that point, you have 1 second the make the decision on whether or not to claim the spot.  I jumped at the opportunity only to have second thoughts about fulfilling my Ironman goal for the year.  And, I had to face my wife and tell her that I paid for 2 IM events on the same day.  Not a pretty sight.  If I could transfer my spot to Wisconsin, I certainly would.  I just wish the WTC would work with us to transfer spots as long as no one "profits" on the transfer (the net number for each event would therefore stay the same and wouldn't adversely affect the WTC).  If the WC was in Clearwater (held in November), there would be no conflict and I could do both. 

I don't think that I exercised "poor form" in claiming the WC spot.  The only "poor form" that I showed was my dreadful swim stroke...

2011-06-16 10:09 AM
in reply to: #3552116

User image

Master
1927
100050010010010010025
Guilford, CT
Subject: RE: Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3

Not meant to be disrespectful.  I put myself in that category.  semantics...

really just over valuing a race because it's long is what most people do.  I want to experience it like everyone else but I take it for what it is.  I'd rather go 15 minutes in a 5k than 12 hours in an ironman....it's cool but it's not the pinnacle of performance

2011-06-16 10:23 AM
in reply to: #3552197

Regular
156
1002525
Annapolis, MD
Subject: RE: Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3
Snyderman - 2011-06-16 10:55 AM

You certainly won't get "flamed" for giving your opinion.  I signed up for Wisconsin with full intention of competing in it.  Maybe the original question was a little rhetorical, but I was definitely conflicted.  My entire tri year was based around performing better in Wisconsin and at least breaking 12 hours.  With that said, I had my best personal race in Kansas by breaking 5 hours and then stuck around to see my name called in the roll down.  At that point, you have 1 second the make the decision on whether or not to claim the spot.  I jumped at the opportunity only to have second thoughts about fulfilling my Ironman goal for the year.  And, I had to face my wife and tell her that I paid for 2 IM events on the same day.  Not a pretty sight.  If I could transfer my spot to Wisconsin, I certainly would.  I just wish the WTC would work with us to transfer spots as long as no one "profits" on the transfer (the net number for each event would therefore stay the same and wouldn't adversely affect the WTC).  If the WC was in Clearwater (held in November), there would be no conflict and I could do both. 

I don't think that I exercised "poor form" in claiming the WC spot.  The only "poor form" that I showed was my dreadful swim stroke...

I know your pain. 

2011-06-16 10:50 AM
in reply to: #3552116

User image

Champion
9407
500020002000100100100100
Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia
Subject: RE: Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3
tripadigin - 2011-06-16 11:18 AM

Again I say is was the wrong decision, not just because I believe the IM to be a better experience, but once you have gained entry into the IM (especially those that close out within minutes of opening), you should have an obligation to fullfill that race entry, barring injury or family emergency.  That entry spot to IMMOO could have gone to someone else who wanted to do the race, who was at their computer once registration opened, but ultimately was closed due to the incredible demand by people like us.  Simply giving it up to do another more desirable race is (I'll probably get flamed for this, but oh well) poor form in my book.



While you may believe that it is poor form, IM events bank on a percentage of registrants not showing up as they oversell the events.

Shane


2011-06-16 11:17 AM
in reply to: #3552348

Regular
156
1002525
Annapolis, MD
Subject: RE: Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3

gsmacleod - 2011-06-16 11:50 AM
tripadigin - 2011-06-16 11:18 AM Again I say is was the wrong decision, not just because I believe the IM to be a better experience, but once you have gained entry into the IM (especially those that close out within minutes of opening), you should have an obligation to fullfill that race entry, barring injury or family emergency.  That entry spot to IMMOO could have gone to someone else who wanted to do the race, who was at their computer once registration opened, but ultimately was closed due to the incredible demand by people like us.  Simply giving it up to do another more desirable race is (I'll probably get flamed for this, but oh well) poor form in my book.
While you may believe that it is poor form, IM events bank on a percentage of registrants not showing up as they oversell the events. Shane

You've missed my point.  This is no consolation to those that tried to get into IMMOO but were closed out.  25+ people from my club are doing the race, some of which had to pay the foundation fee to do so b/c general entry closed out.  I bet a couple of those people would have liked to take the OP's general entry spot at the regular price.

2011-06-16 11:38 AM
in reply to: #3552401

User image

Champion
9407
500020002000100100100100
Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia
Subject: RE: Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3
tripadigin - 2011-06-16 1:17 PM

You've missed my point.  This is no consolation to those that tried to get into IMMOO but were closed out.  25+ people from my club are doing the race, some of which had to pay the foundation fee to do so b/c general entry closed out.  I bet a couple of those people would have liked to take the OP's general entry spot at the regular price.


I wasn't trying to offer consolation to those who didn't get in; if you want to do IM then that's something you need to contend with for most NA races. As for the people who paid the foundation fee, they decided that the race was important enough to them to pay double for race entry and while they likely would have preferred to pay the general entry fee, it was their choice to pay more. If they wanted to pay less, there are NA IM events that don't sell out right away and there are non-branded IM events that don't sell out so there are always options.

Shane
2011-06-16 11:46 AM
in reply to: #3552440


23

Subject: RE: Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3
I actually paid the Ironman Foundation fee for my Ironman Louisville experience.  Hey, I got a "free" IV out of the deal when I passed out after the finish line...
2011-06-16 11:56 AM
in reply to: #3552240

User image

Extreme Veteran
408
100100100100
Spokane, Wa
Subject: RE: Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3
acumenjay - 2011-06-16 10:09 AM

Not meant to be disrespectful.  I put myself in that category.  semantics...

really just over valuing a race because it's long is what most people do.  I want to experience it like everyone else but I take it for what it is.  I'd rather go 15 minutes in a 5k than 12 hours in an ironman....it's cool but it's not the pinnacle of performance

A 15 min 5k is not equal to a 12 hour IM. I would equate a 15 min 5k to a 9 hr IM. Now which is cooler? I'd go with a 9 hr Ironman myself. Ironman is just a much cooler experience than going out to a local 5k and running 15 minutes. As far as ranking the experience I'd go in this order. 1. Kona 2. Ironman (a close second if it's a local race for you that your friends and family can watch. 3. 70.3 WC 4. 70.3. I've done everything except a 70.3 WC. Maybe I'll love it but I know I love ironman races. I'll find out September 11th.
2011-06-16 11:57 AM
in reply to: #3552401

User image

Alpharetta, Georgia
Bronze member
Subject: RE: Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3
tripadigin - 2011-06-16 11:17 AM

gsmacleod - 2011-06-16 11:50 AM
tripadigin - 2011-06-16 11:18 AM Again I say is was the wrong decision, not just because I believe the IM to be a better experience, but once you have gained entry into the IM (especially those that close out within minutes of opening), you should have an obligation to fullfill that race entry, barring injury or family emergency.  That entry spot to IMMOO could have gone to someone else who wanted to do the race, who was at their computer once registration opened, but ultimately was closed due to the incredible demand by people like us.  Simply giving it up to do another more desirable race is (I'll probably get flamed for this, but oh well) poor form in my book.
While you may believe that it is poor form, IM events bank on a percentage of registrants not showing up as they oversell the events. Shane

You've missed my point.  This is no consolation to those that tried to get into IMMOO but were closed out.  25+ people from my club are doing the race, some of which had to pay the foundation fee to do so b/c general entry closed out.  I bet a couple of those people would have liked to take the OP's general entry spot at the regular price.

As to the bolded statement above... says who? An athlete has every right to bow out of a race and absolutely should not be judged on their PERSONAL decision. THAT is poor form if I've ever seen it.

As for those who didn't get in and see this as a "wasted" spot... it is well known that the only guaranteed way to get into a race like IMOO is to volunteer the year beforehand and get priority registration the day after. This is no secret, and there is no reason to hold a grudge against a stranger's personal decision simply because the approriate effort was not made on their part.

 



2011-06-16 12:08 PM
in reply to: #3552440

Regular
156
1002525
Annapolis, MD
Subject: RE: Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3

gsmacleod - 2011-06-16 12:38 PM
tripadigin - 2011-06-16 1:17 PM You've missed my point.  This is no consolation to those that tried to get into IMMOO but were closed out.  25+ people from my club are doing the race, some of which had to pay the foundation fee to do so b/c general entry closed out.  I bet a couple of those people would have liked to take the OP's general entry spot at the regular price.
I wasn't trying to offer consolation to those who didn't get in; if you want to do IM then that's something you need to contend with for most NA races. As for the people who paid the foundation fee, they decided that the race was important enough to them to pay double for race entry and while they likely would have preferred to pay the general entry fee, it was their choice to pay more. If they wanted to pay less, there are NA IM events that don't sell out right away and there are non-branded IM events that don't sell out so there are always options. Shane

Still missing my point.

2011-06-16 12:10 PM
in reply to: #3552501


23

Subject: RE: Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3
I also "wasted" a spot at Ironman Branson 70.3 when my wife told me that I was instead going to "Family Day" at my daughter's college on the same weekend.  The WTC must love all the money I give them!
2011-06-16 12:17 PM
in reply to: #3552524

User image

Champion
9407
500020002000100100100100
Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia
Subject: RE: Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3
tripadigin - 2011-06-16 2:08 PM

Still missing my point.



Perhaps you could clarify your point as clearly I am too obtuse to understand what you were attempting to say.

Shane
2011-06-16 12:22 PM
in reply to: #3552543


23

Subject: RE: Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3

He is saying that I should have known last September that my training would pay off, I would have a great race in Kansas 9 months later, the roll down would work in my favor and I would get into the WC 70.3.

Or he is saying that because I signed up for IM Wisconsin, I should take one for the team and give up a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to compete in the World Championships.

2011-06-16 12:27 PM
in reply to: #3552501

Regular
156
1002525
Annapolis, MD
Subject: RE: Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3
lisac957 - 2011-06-16 12:57 PM
tripadigin - 2011-06-16 11:17 AM

gsmacleod - 2011-06-16 11:50 AM
tripadigin - 2011-06-16 11:18 AM Again I say is was the wrong decision, not just because I believe the IM to be a better experience, but once you have gained entry into the IM (especially those that close out within minutes of opening), you should have an obligation to fullfill that race entry, barring injury or family emergency.  That entry spot to IMMOO could have gone to someone else who wanted to do the race, who was at their computer once registration opened, but ultimately was closed due to the incredible demand by people like us.  Simply giving it up to do another more desirable race is (I'll probably get flamed for this, but oh well) poor form in my book.
While you may believe that it is poor form, IM events bank on a percentage of registrants not showing up as they oversell the events. Shane

You've missed my point.  This is no consolation to those that tried to get into IMMOO but were closed out.  25+ people from my club are doing the race, some of which had to pay the foundation fee to do so b/c general entry closed out.  I bet a couple of those people would have liked to take the OP's general entry spot at the regular price.

As to the bolded statement above... says who? An athlete has every right to bow out of a race and absolutely should not be judged on their PERSONAL decision. THAT is poor form if I've ever seen it.

As for those who didn't get in and see this as a "wasted" spot... it is well known that the only guaranteed way to get into a race like IMOO is to volunteer the year beforehand and get priority registration the day after. This is no secret, and there is no reason to hold a grudge against a stranger's personal decision simply because the approriate effort was not made on their part.

 

Who was the pro one year at Kona that couldn't run anymore due to injury (Rutger Beke perhaps).  Instead of quitting he continued walking.  His reasoning was he didn't want to disrespect the slot that he had by quitting...a slot that could have gone to someone else.  He earned huge points in my book for this and from the IM tri community.

Another example...I remember reading in Triathete magazine a year or so ago about how Matt Fitzgerald signed up for multiple IMs in hopes of qualifying for Kona.  (I hope I'm getting the story correct...my memory is not what it used to be).  Anyway, ultimately he decided against racing one or two of the races due to poor form.  I remember reading some angry letters to the editor about his taking of those spots away from other eager triathletes.

As an aside, its no wonder that WTC is so huge and can command large race fees...people just sign up for the events but drop out for lame reasons.  If you intend to signup for the event make sure your are fully committed.  Maybe this way the race fees will be held in check.



2011-06-16 12:28 PM
in reply to: #3552528

Regular
156
1002525
Annapolis, MD
Subject: RE: Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3

Snyderman - 2011-06-16 1:10 PM I also "wasted" a spot at Ironman Branson 70.3 when my wife told me that I was instead going to "Family Day" at my daughter's college on the same weekend.  The WTC must love all the money I give them!

IMO, a good excuse.  Family first.

2011-06-16 12:30 PM
in reply to: #3552575

User image

Alpharetta, Georgia
Bronze member
Subject: RE: Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3
tripadigin - 2011-06-16 12:27 PM
lisac957 - 2011-06-16 12:57 PM
tripadigin - 2011-06-16 11:17 AM

gsmacleod - 2011-06-16 11:50 AM
tripadigin - 2011-06-16 11:18 AM Again I say is was the wrong decision, not just because I believe the IM to be a better experience, but once you have gained entry into the IM (especially those that close out within minutes of opening), you should have an obligation to fullfill that race entry, barring injury or family emergency.  That entry spot to IMMOO could have gone to someone else who wanted to do the race, who was at their computer once registration opened, but ultimately was closed due to the incredible demand by people like us.  Simply giving it up to do another more desirable race is (I'll probably get flamed for this, but oh well) poor form in my book.
While you may believe that it is poor form, IM events bank on a percentage of registrants not showing up as they oversell the events. Shane

You've missed my point.  This is no consolation to those that tried to get into IMMOO but were closed out.  25+ people from my club are doing the race, some of which had to pay the foundation fee to do so b/c general entry closed out.  I bet a couple of those people would have liked to take the OP's general entry spot at the regular price.

As to the bolded statement above... says who? An athlete has every right to bow out of a race and absolutely should not be judged on their PERSONAL decision. THAT is poor form if I've ever seen it.

As for those who didn't get in and see this as a "wasted" spot... it is well known that the only guaranteed way to get into a race like IMOO is to volunteer the year beforehand and get priority registration the day after. This is no secret, and there is no reason to hold a grudge against a stranger's personal decision simply because the approriate effort was not made on their part.

 

Who was the pro one year at Kona that couldn't run anymore due to injury (Rutger Beke perhaps).  Instead of quitting he continued walking.  His reasoning was he didn't want to disrespect the slot that he had by quitting...a slot that could have gone to someone else.  He earned huge points in my book for this and from the IM tri community.

Another example...I remember reading in Triathete magazine a year or so ago about how Matt Fitzgerald signed up for multiple IMs in hopes of qualifying for Kona.  (I hope I'm getting the story correct...my memory is not what it used to be).  Anyway, ultimately he decided against racing one or two of the races due to poor form.  I remember reading some angry letters to the editor about his taking of those spots away from other eager triathletes.

As an aside, its no wonder that WTC is so huge and can command large race fees...people just sign up for the events but drop out for lame reasons.  If you intend to signup for the event make sure your are fully committed.  Maybe this way the race fees will be held in check.

You're missing my point

 

2011-06-16 12:31 PM
in reply to: #3552560

Regular
156
1002525
Annapolis, MD
Subject: RE: Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3
Snyderman - 2011-06-16 1:22 PM

He is saying that I should have known last September that my training would pay off, I would have a great race in Kansas 9 months later, the roll down would work in my favor and I would get into the WC 70.3.

Or he is saying that because I signed up for IM Wisconsin, I should take one for the team and give up a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to compete in the World Championships.

With the way those slots roll down, not once in a lifetime.

2011-06-16 12:42 PM
in reply to: #3552588

User image

Champion
9600
500020002000500100
Fountain Hills, AZ
Subject: RE: Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3
tripadigin - 2011-06-16 11:31 AM

Snyderman - 2011-06-16 1:22 PM

He is saying that I should have known last September that my training would pay off, I would have a great race in Kansas 9 months later, the roll down would work in my favor and I would get into the WC 70.3.

Or he is saying that because I signed up for IM Wisconsin, I should take one for the team and give up a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to compete in the World Championships.

With the way those slots roll down, not once in a lifetime.



The way they USED to rolldown. We'll see after Sept 9th if that still holds true. From what I have heard from 70.3 races, the slots are already much more desired.
2011-06-16 12:44 PM
in reply to: #3552575

User image

Champion
9600
500020002000500100
Fountain Hills, AZ
Subject: RE: Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3
tripadigin - 2011-06-16 11:27 AM
Who was the pro one year at Kona that couldn't run anymore due to injury (Rutger Beke perhaps).  Instead of quitting he continued walking.  His reasoning was he didn't want to disrespect the slot that he had by quitting...a slot that could have gone to someone else.  He earned huge points in my book for this and from the IM tri community


Rutger Beke 2007, I ran by him as he was walking in the Energy Lab. I was very impressed as a pro he felt it was improtant to finish the race and I respect that, BUT, I don't cling to some excessively romanticized concept of what IRONMAN "means" and if it should be "respected". It's just a race.


2011-06-16 12:58 PM
in reply to: #3552619

User image

Extreme Veteran
408
100100100100
Spokane, Wa
Subject: RE: Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3
bryancd - 2011-06-16 12:42 PM
tripadigin - 2011-06-16 11:31 AM
Snyderman - 2011-06-16 1:22 PM

He is saying that I should have known last September that my training would pay off, I would have a great race in Kansas 9 months later, the roll down would work in my favor and I would get into the WC 70.3.

Or he is saying that because I signed up for IM Wisconsin, I should take one for the team and give up a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to compete in the World Championships.

With the way those slots roll down, not once in a lifetime.

The way they USED to rolldown. We'll see after Sept 9th if that still holds true. From what I have heard from 70.3 races, the slots are already much more desired.
Have you done a 70.3 since the Change in venue? They still role pretty far. I was in Boise last weekend and one slot rolled to the 15th guy in m30-34 and right before be accepted the announcer had eveyone who was left in that AG raise their hands ans was about to call them up and give it to whoever finished the race faster. This guy just happened to be next on the list. This whole thread is based on a slot rolling pretty far down. I've also heard this race is more desirable but it's still not Kona and I don't think it's once in a lifetime. I promise if you were to race Lake Stevens they will be practically giving them away. While I agree the demand is better than Clearwater it still roles down a ways.
2011-06-16 1:01 PM
in reply to: #3552627

User image

Subject: RE: Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3

bryancd - 2011-06-16 10:44 AM
tripadigin - 2011-06-16 11:27 AM Who was the pro one year at Kona that couldn't run anymore due to injury (Rutger Beke perhaps).  Instead of quitting he continued walking.  His reasoning was he didn't want to disrespect the slot that he had by quitting...a slot that could have gone to someone else.  He earned huge points in my book for this and from the IM tri community
Rutger Beke 2007, I ran by him as he was walking in the Energy Lab. I was very impressed as a pro he felt it was improtant to finish the race and I respect that, BUT, I don't cling to some excessively romanticized concept of what IRONMAN "means" and if it should be "respected". It's just a race.

Rutger Beke walked because he had taken an AGer's slot?  I didn't know that.......I though he was racing as a pro

2011-06-16 1:07 PM
in reply to: #3552672

Regular
156
1002525
Annapolis, MD
Subject: RE: Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3
ChrisM - 2011-06-16 2:01 PM

bryancd - 2011-06-16 10:44 AM
tripadigin - 2011-06-16 11:27 AM Who was the pro one year at Kona that couldn't run anymore due to injury (Rutger Beke perhaps).  Instead of quitting he continued walking.  His reasoning was he didn't want to disrespect the slot that he had by quitting...a slot that could have gone to someone else.  He earned huge points in my book for this and from the IM tri community
Rutger Beke 2007, I ran by him as he was walking in the Energy Lab. I was very impressed as a pro he felt it was improtant to finish the race and I respect that, BUT, I don't cling to some excessively romanticized concept of what IRONMAN "means" and if it should be "respected". It's just a race.

Rutger Beke walked because he had taken an AGer's slot?  I didn't know that.......I though he was racing as a pro

A pro slot not AG...the correlation is still relevant.

2011-06-16 1:15 PM
in reply to: #3552678

User image

Subject: RE: Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3
tripadigin - 2011-06-16 11:07 AM
ChrisM - 2011-06-16 2:01 PM

bryancd - 2011-06-16 10:44 AM
tripadigin - 2011-06-16 11:27 AM Who was the pro one year at Kona that couldn't run anymore due to injury (Rutger Beke perhaps).  Instead of quitting he continued walking.  His reasoning was he didn't want to disrespect the slot that he had by quitting...a slot that could have gone to someone else.  He earned huge points in my book for this and from the IM tri community
Rutger Beke 2007, I ran by him as he was walking in the Energy Lab. I was very impressed as a pro he felt it was improtant to finish the race and I respect that, BUT, I don't cling to some excessively romanticized concept of what IRONMAN "means" and if it should be "respected". It's just a race.

Rutger Beke walked because he had taken an AGer's slot?  I didn't know that.......I though he was racing as a pro

A pro slot not AG...the correlation is still relevant.

OK.  If you say so.  Although I thought this whole brouhaha was due to the bad form of an AGer signing up for a limited spot and taking away from another AGer who couldn't get in.....   I applaud Beke's resolve to continue, but that's not why he did (at least accdg to the news reports at the time)....

For those just tuning in, you can ignore the prior 3 pages as I can summarize this thread thusly:

"Chocolate ice cream > vanilla ice cream

No it's not, vanilla ice cream > chocolate ice cream

You disrespect the work in collecting cocoa beans

I don't get your point"

Some people would prefer to participate in WCs 70.3 over an IM.  Some people would prefer to participate in IM over WCs 70.3.  Neither is wrong.  Neither is right.

I certainly can't qualify for WCs 70.3 at my HIM times.  They may roll down some, but not to where I am.  I can pretty much enter any IM in the world that I want to, including NY today.  There's lots of ways to get into IM that don't require sitting in front of a computer.



Edited by ChrisM 2011-06-16 1:21 PM
New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Ironman Wisconsin vs. World Championships 70.3 Rss Feed  
 
 
of 4