New weight rules for Athena & Clydesdale in 2013 (Page 2)

i was just using some of the more notable races, i think in the sprint/oly distance the spread is even closer, regardless of terrain. It is basically who is on their game that day, who trained harder.

Long distance especially IM distance, i think the run will hurt a clyde more than anything, 26.2 is just soooo freaking long.

I am at 205lbs, the last 5 have been very tough to lose, So this new rule kinda forces my hand, but in a Sprint or Oly, i will be competitive in AG and overall, and that is what i race the most anyway. I have no Kona dreams or IM 70.3 WC dreams, so it really makes no nevermind in the long run

Run what ya brung is what i always say, he/she with the biggest motor wins.

And Claw, just for the record, you are an inspiration to me, just cause i think you are cool and you seen to have a great time doing this. I really do not care how fast or slow you are, you and your attitude are just damm impressive. Keep at it.

Yes, a larger athlete will have to expend more energy to go the same speed, but the larger athlete also can generally put out more power than a smaller guy, so long as there are no crazy elevation change, it comes down to who is more fit....generally.

nothing is perfect though.

There were 18 clydes that finished my HIM in 2010 of the 39 that started the race that day.  Of those 39, I would say that over 15 were there because of them being really fit and strong and their muscle weight and not because they were overweight like I am still.  But, my goal was not to win an event, but to complete the HIM that I entered.

I think 220 is a better weight for the purpose of keeping the ultra fit out of the class if that is what they want to do, but I am not sure that is a good thing for the sport either.  I don't care about a medal, so it doesn't matter to me.

I debated on sharing and I am sure this might get me into trouble but it seems to be something being missed for the Athena women like me.  I'm shocked "boobs" got overlooked......seldom are mine missed.

I carry extra weight in my chest that my skinny runner friends just don't have.  Sure they say things like "you are tall, your stride is bigger than mine" and "You are way stronger than me, you should be able to keep up easy". I'm just not built like a runner, but a 1945 pin-up model.  I carry chest weight that contributes nothing to my running speed or endurance......just my appearance in my tri-top, but appearance doesn't make me fast.

I have come to accept this as one of the handicaps on being an 5'10, Amazon, and why I race Athena.  It's pretty demoralizing when I train 5 to 6 days a week and some one 60% my size training half as much runs past me like I was an old lady with a walker.  I am happy to join my fellow Amazon sisters in a race.......and I secretly miss my old contact sports where a clothesline or a hipcheck was the perfect thing to slow down those skinny speedy women.

I also thought the weights were arbitrary, although admittedly very few of the races I do are USAT certified. 

It was my understanding from reading everything about a year ago that while you don't qualify for nationals in the A/C category, ANYONE who qualifies for the A/C category by weight can sign up for nationals.   So, if you're heavy enough for the standard you simply sign up for nationals.  That's it.

So...  that would cut down the number of people who wanted to do that.

Of course, now I can't find where I read that. I will look and post a link if I can find it.

Edit: can't find a description, but you can sign up for an event and see that there's a separate link for A/C and no qualification requirement.  So, I guess if you simply just wanted to be part of the event - that's a good way to do it.  For us

Edit P.S.: your results are posted separately.  I looked at the Olympic Distance Triathlon Championship results for 2011.  Tara Costa was an Athena, by the way.  There were still only 33 participants in the A/C categories, total, almost all of whom would kick my butt in an Oly. 

What? No hipchecking either? Just be careful not to get caught I guess.

Right there with you.

People also underestimate how much long legs weigh and that a long stride is not always a good thing. I know I have had to shorten my stride and quicken my cadence to stay injury free so the long legs not so handy.

I also enjoyed racing with fellow Athena's that were out there to support each other and have fun.

Those skinny people don't understand how big fleshy things like bellys work.  If you wack them with those they will be forced to assume it was an accident when you say "Oh I'm sorry I'm just bouncier than I thought".

After reading those minutes the link earlier pointed to, what they did appears contradictory.

Early it says the change was being recommended because "athletes today are bigger and stronger (and consequently heavier) than they were in the past." The use of the word "consequently" suggests that they mean TALLER when they say BIGGER, as opposed to fatter.

Later they mention that the self-reported weight of the average American over the past 20 years has increased "about 20 pounds in both sexes". This may sound harsh but who in their right mind thinks that weight gain in an entire population (in this case the American one) is due to training, strength, and height, more than diet?? (and I'm speaking as a fat bastard, so I'm not throwing stones)

They also recommended changing Athena and Clydesdale labels to "weight classification athletes" in the rule book. That should make people feel better about themselves (sarcasm mode).

Wish what they were saying made more sense.

For only selfish reasons, I would not be happy with the new rule.  I've raced the last couple of years at 225-230 and the new standard would not have affected me.  However, I've dropped down to 210-215 and would not be eligable anymore.  At local races, I've at times held my own to being one of the top 10 - 20% AG.

However, I have taken flack for racing Clyd because of some of my times.  For a season, I did not race clyd; until a friend said "you fit the standard, you can race it.  I'd rather race somebody who fits the standard who is also fast, than continually be known as the 'fat, unfit, and non competing group'"  I decided I'd rather have some of the "bigger" front of the packers in the group to make it more competative. 

I haven't read all of the reply's, so sorry if this has been covered.

IMO they have to set the weight somewhere.  I wish they would set the Clyde and Athena class based on your BMI, or somehow on your fitness.  I'm so far over 200-220-250, even 270 that it will likely never matter to me.  I have seen a clyde division where there was a guy my sized (around 5'9" Round in the middle, yet very active) standing next to a really tall very in-shape looking guy at the start of the Clyde wave.  Just doesn't seem like a good match-up.

Well, my 2 cents are worth the same as everyone else's.  I've never understood the need for the A/C classes.  For the record, I would qualify . . . and I get the "competitive disadvantage" argument.

But weight is just one of many things upon which you can differentiate the ability to "fairly" compete.

I say do away with them entirely.

After thinking about this for a few days, I've come to the conclusion that this is just the type of motivation that I needed. I always looked at just the Clyde category and tried to compete against the people there. In races around here the Clyde category seems pretty competitive with a couple of guys making it up to the top overall. 

As crazy as it sounds, I see now that this might have been a subconscious reason to not drop the final few pounds. I like being a Clyde and enjoy racing against people my size, but I've come to realize that since I've lost all this weight I'm not the size I once was and I should be competing against those skinnier guys. I looked up some of the taller pro guys and found Matty Reed, he's 6'5" and 180. He totally blew away my idea that tall guys just weren't designed to run fast. In reality, tall guys who are really overweight and don't train, aren't meant to go fast. Matty is my new inspiration, not that I'll ever be able to compete like he does. I should keep losing weight and drop down to skinnier faster me. I've got a lot of work to do and I'll get started right after I finish this pizza and beer.   

Yes!!!!! I am always amazed at people who are are negative towards larger people. We large people (6'3") don't have a chance against a equally fit (5'8 to 6') . Stop it would you -your killn me smoltz!.

 When I was 20 years old I weighed 185 ounds -32" waiste and 6% fat. I had to race these guys at 140 lbs -no way. now at 49 a bit heavier. I would race anyone my weight - no matter what age. work done is energy to move weight period.yOU PUT A WATT METER ON THE BIKE I WILL PULL 300 WATTS TO SOMEONES 180 OR 200 FOR THE SAME SPEED. THATS THE SIMPLE FACT. Age far less affects performance then weight.

I like it and I don't care -Don't be a tri prude!!!!!! Let us race - what are you afraid of. In fact there needs to be more weight catagories and less age catagories. My gosh every 5 years -give me a break !!!The best senerio is every 10 years and every 20 lbs of weight from 180. that would be most accurate for competivness. !!!

why do we have age catagories , male, female catagories?This is most confusing to me . weight matters more time-than any of these in performance endurance sports.  - hmmmmmm!! 

why is the implication that  if your larger your less fit or less qualified. if the only criteria is who finished first all other catagories should be eliminated.

Sorry-I just can't let this go. Are we being brainwashed here. "I run for fun" ," it doesn't matter to me" . " I race against myself". WHAT!!! SORRY GUYS/GALS - You don't need to enter into a tri for any of those reasons - You enter to see what you do on any given day AGAINST COMPETITION! Why have times , etc. Lets just all have fun. Com'on sorry for the sacasism but we need a reality break here. I run , train and enter triathlons. i want to win!!! of course I can't but to lets not let some people declare us insignificant because they" have advanced to a higher state of competative eutopia!- again sorry.

Look you enter to perform -they're clubs rides etc. to just have fun. There seems to be an adversity to the clydes group perpetuated by some to put a taint on the division- why!!!!!!!!Why is there so much decent towards it!!! 

Ladies and gentleman weght catagories are especially correct in INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE SPORT-BOXING -WRESTLING ETC. There are inherent phicicallities with people. Can you imagine if they say lets have a 125 pound boxer fight a 210 pound boxer, no !!!! because weight is and avantage here isn't it. So are we critisizing clydsdale division because FINALLY WE CAN DUMP ON BIGGER STRONGER PEOPLE.THIS IS A SPORT WHERE SMALL PEOPLE RULE - BEGONE BIG GUY! YOU  Are the inferior one.! now!

I'm not going to let you guys pass on this .  Age cat should be every 10 years and weight every 20 lbs. based on diminished INHERANT phisical abilities in performance ; the same premise as gender and age.

I like this idea!  The only area it seems you need 5 year increments is at youth and older, post-retirement ages.

LIke many here, at 260 now (down from 275 four months ago!) the new cutoff makes no difference to me.  I'm a Clydesdale.  Maybe in another year we'll have something to talk about, but I'm here for a while.

Really though, whether it's USAT or other organizations, they are trying to make simple differentiations among competitors, when weight is seldom a true indicator.  Composition is always key.

I have no dog in this fight, but I'd like to share an observation from a recent race.

The three fastest clydes were very competitive within their age groups.  I was surprised to see them on the Clyde podium because they weren't particularly tall (nor did they have much flab).  But they had lot of muscle mass, likely from spending a lot of time lifting weights.  My thought upon seeing them is that they were at no natural disadvantage compared to those in their AG (like a 6 ft 4 guy might be), but that they qualified for an "easier-to-podium" Clyde category because of their lifestyle (lifting) choice giving then an extra 15 lbs.

I think the new rules will keep these types of guys out of the Clyde category and leave it for those who are truly at a natural disadvantage due to size.

Brian