IM Finish...has just finishing lost its prestige?

Cut-off should be 12 hours.  Obviously.

12????? ha!  so cliche 

You have to appease the floaters, coasters and walkers somehow.

I dunno about 12 hrs, well maybe im just saying that because i'm not that fast, but i do wish it was standard across the board. Most overseas races it's 15, and here it is 17.

So I guess finishing a euro IM might be more prestige than a north american one not knowing ones time. Heck they could be the same time.

At the same time would WTC miss a market by going from 17-15? They don't have a problem selling out most races now at 17, so would it make that much differance losing the people that now think they don't have a chance?

I still know a ton of people for whom completing a regular ol' 5k fun run is a pretty big deal, so no, I don't think it has lost its prestige.

For many people, it is simple inconceivable that someone could even do it, much less that person actually believe that they could do it themselves.

You don't have to invent them.

True dat.  The azz clowns out to make a quick buck have really latched on to the public's surging interest in endurance sports.  Good for them!

Dude your remarks are hilariously placed all the time and deserve an applause, and your kid (I hope its your kid) with the helmet make them that much greater.

Maybe as you said, in some circles, yes.  But in most circles, no.

There has always been a finish time that is considered a great feat.

Almost anything under 12 hours is impressive to me in terms of performance.  Anyone over 12 hours I'm still impressed by the performance but more by the finish.

OMG... He's gonna need a bigger pair of underwear to fit over his head...

Look, the phrase "in certain circles" is key. Most people have no appreciation for he different between a 5 hour marathon and a 3 hour marathon. Just look at the Paul Ryan marathon story coverage, The only people that cared were runners. Take that to IM, and trust me, the non-triathlete or endurance athlete is still blown away by the distance at any pace.

A major part of what I love about the endurance community is the respect for one anoher at any pace. There will always be a few vocal jackwagons who have to look down on others, but they are few and far between. (i wrote about this in an article published here on BT, about Jan Brady syndrome.)

But a deeper question I have is this: "if the luster os off, so what?" Sure, as a blog writer and conspicuous racer by my size, I certainly get feedback from others that is encouraging. But I have set my goals for me. I don't care if someone else thinks it's not good enough. Really, the top athletes are always the most encouraging to the slow plodders like me, so that's not even an issue. But as to whether it will be less a big deal to vast amounts of peple who just want to know what the trend or "it" thing is supposed to be, I couldn't care less. I have a very short list of people I am trying to impress. It starts with me and ends with my wife and kids.

Edited by TheClaaaw 2012-11-30 8:23 AM

If you're not a pro and you're doing this sport for the luster or how impressive you are to other people, I think you're seriously missing out.

Just getting to ride the bike from the OP's avatar in a sprint would be enough luster for me!

Exactly. I do not understand why people think finishing at the 17 hour cut-off mark is easy. I am consistently in the 12-13 hour range, which usually has me somewhere in the MOP. The idea of moving to the FOP by finishing 1-2 hours faster or BOP by finishing 3-4 hours slower seem similarly difficult in terms of pain and exhaustion. In my opinion, the middle half of the field - 25-75 % seems to be the easiest place to finish.

I don't think it has lost its prestige, considering the age and health conditions of some of those participants (and the fireman who wears the full 40 lb gear).

Not everybody deems it such a BIG ordeal, and that's acceptable.  To me, on the other hand, its still quite an ordeal and still is quite an accomplishment.

Agree completely.  when you're surrounded by other triathletes and have your own abilities to measure against, I suppose it becomes ho-hum and you can look at finish times and think about 'better' performances but in the end, completing an ironman is a huge accomplishment and often very personal.  For those with families who can juggle it all to make it work - that's inspirational.

I just did my first and I finished 13:19 - i am thrilled with this - it's not even near the average finish time for the race but: 

- four years ago I didn't swim - at all.  Finishing a mass-start 3.8k swim was a HUGE HUGE feat for me

- i had a busy year - i signed up for ironman not knowing what life would throw at me and my mom got cancer (they live 2 hours away) and my sister got married - those family commitments were as important to me as my training to get me to the race

- I performed to my abilities to that day - perhaps in a few years I could be faster and closer to my 'potential' but with real life going on, I am absolutely thrilled.  This is my hobby not my job and we all start somewhere. 

Again, when you're surrounded by other triathletes it hard to put the bigger picture into perspective as to just how few people do it and how even for those who are 'slower' there can be a lot that factors into getting them there - that may be more impressive than a fast finish time. 

Ironman (TM) . . . it's better than being a drug addict.

It might be debatable on whether or not it is any cheaper though

I was obviously being extreme there, but you get the point.  I did an Ironman.  It was cool.  I may do another one day.  I also want to spend time with my children before they get older and don't want to hang out with dad anymore.