IM swim starts in jeopardy? (Page 2)

Maybe I missed it, but I haven't seen anything from WTC about this. Obviously the CDA race director & others have met to discuss this, but WTC seems to be tight-lipped about what may or may not happen? Is there a timeline to make a decision about the mass/wave start? Are there going to be further meetings discussions?

I have done 8 Iron Distance races with 7 being mass starts including 4 IM Brand. I have done both IMKY and CDA. I think someone above me said it right that it doesn't matter how many people are in a group there will be a log jam. I think unless they are changing the swim course at IMCDA it will be disasterous. It is a two loop course and they had issues just getting the  pros through on to their second loop before the mass washing machine started. And with a course where you have turns it is notorious for everyone bunching up at the bouy whether it is the first turn or the last turn.

But also correctly pointed out is the lawyer aspect and the adding additional racers aka revenue to the stream. The bigger WTC gets the more they have to watch both of these issues.

Rather than going to time trial starts, my personal preference would be wave starts the way most races operate.  I'm being selfish, but IME, wave starts provide the best drafting opportunities.  Mass starts are too much of a cluster, so it can be hard to find and stay on the best people to draft off of.  In time trial starts it's nearly impossible.  In waves by age group, it's easy to position yourself well to latch on to some other swimmers for a fast swim.

From a safety standpoint, to the best of my knowledge, there still hasn't been a study linking swim deaths with the type of start or the experience level of the athlete.  Most cases where the cause has been identified have been linked to previously undiagnosed health issues.  IMO, the best way to address that is by finding ways to provide medical treatment more quickly, such as well-equipped ambulance boats on the course that can treat victims right on the water.

Never thought of it through this lens and it makes perfect sense. Considering each second is critical in these situations and the response time from when the problem is sighted maybe reducing the potential time to realize this problem exists is key in this. Either way I am on bored and think people should give it a chance at least.

Hmmm, I'm thinking it's just another way to allow more racers and thus more $$$  for WTC because that is what will end up happening.  Sending off large groups every so many minutes and they'll figure out that they can increase there numbers by a huge amount.  Pretty certain I'll never do a IM brand event again at either distance. 

Yet another reason to seek out good independent IM or HIM races. 

Then you'll LOVE IM WI.

Just IMFL for me, but I agree 100%.  Keep the mass starts!!!!

But also keep the new buoys, floating rest areas etc. - these are good changes.  

Eliminating mass starts is not a good change and risks ruining what makes IM races so special.

Thanks for the link!

Why?  You still swim 2.4 miles.  It's about 10% of your race day so I really don't see why everyone is getting their panties in a twist.

They are looking for a way to make the swim less physical, easier to rescue distressed swimmers, and "potentially" safer... and people still want to complain about it.

I'm far from a WTC apologist but everyone should thank them for trying to do the right thing and then move about with your lives.  Or you can decide to not do WTC events any longer.  You can go do Rev 3 with their mass starts... oops they don't do them either.  You can go do Challenge with their mass starts... oh yeah, they don't do them either.

WTC has been 'selling' Kona for years, and part of what they've been 'selling' is the mass start.  It what separates IM events from other events, as you point out.  And IMHO, that's what makes IM events special.  Why change the formula?  

So, for WTC now to change their approach and eliminate the mass start for a number of events makes me wonder about their brand equity and 'special' nature of their events vis a vis Rev3, Challenge, etc.  That's what I'm commenting on.  

The extra safety precautions are good ideas, I just don't like them eliminating mass starts.  

Now if we take a step back and there may be other issues at work here.  First of all, with wave starts, it's possible WTC can increase the number of athletes at each event.  So, there may be greater profits ahead as some folks have pointed out.

Second, elimination of of mass starts at LP and MT might point that LP and MT might be too small for WTC events.  Perhaps WTC is outgrowing these two venues. On the other hand, IMFL with its large beach is keeping mass starts.  Maybe WTC has to find larger swim/beach venues for mass starts.  

Third, if WTC is concerned with eliminating potential issues on the swim leg, perhaps they should (sorry, I'm not a Slowtwitcher, so please excuse me here...) change certain events to 15 hr races, like Frankfurt.  If swim fitness is a concern, then chopping off 2 hours would likely mean that the 'marginal' athlete would choose not to register for 15hr IM races.  Folks who register would have to train harder and arrive at the start line more prepared for the day ahead.  Perhaps they can keep mass starts for 15 hr events, and then have other 17hr events with wave starts?  It would create a two-tiered system, and that has its own risks, but it's an idea.  

Ironman Louisville is an awesome race and it doesn't have a mass start.

You can't compare Kona with any other IM.  It's a qualification only event (with the exception of the 200 lottery spots and a handful of celebrity/sponsor slots) so there's a higher level of swim proficiency.  These new swim rules have a safety first concept but it does dumb down the swim a bit because WTC is taking into account all the newbies that sign up and can't swim for sh*t.  That's just not an issue at Kona.

I have no problem sending out 1700 swimmers in a mass start who finished at the top of their respective age groups at some IM event.  They're by and large very good swimmers.  I do have problems sending out 3000 swimmers in a mass start where many of them can barely tread water let alone swim proficiently.

I do agree with your other point about cutoff times.  I think 17 hours and 2:20 on the swim is far too generous.  Sorry to anyone if that comes off as elitist but it is what it is.

From the IM webpage, regarding IMFL:

I take this to mean swimmers will all mass into some narrower lane with multiple corrals, with each corral going off some X minutes in front of the ones behind.  You'll cross a timing matt as you leave the tunnel and enter the water, and that starts your time. Is this how others read it?  I've done runs with corrals like this and find it works fairly well there.

To allow everybody the traditional 17 hours to complete the event means no more midnight cut off, unless the last corral goes off at 7am.

Anyway, it'll be curious to see how this works at IMFL.

No, IMFL will be a mass start and everyone goes at 7am (gun start).  People will be corralled into sections based on estimated swim times.  It's not a rolling start like they're doing at IMCdA and IMLP (chip start).

Thanks.  I don't really see this working very well then.  If you self-seed yourself into a corral, you are taking a chip and thus race time penalty.  I just think it'll be hard to expect even your average AGer to stand there in a corral while the clock runs, and while others in the same AG (who may be faster on the swim but who knows on the bike/run) are in the ocean.  Even in the name of safety.

Anyway, I understand they are experimenting various methods this year, so we'll see.

You guys still aren't getting it.  IMFL will be a mass start only.  There's no chip start.  The race starts at 7am for everybody.

Now how they will line up the various corrals to all hit the water at once has yet to be disclosed.  I would imagine some sort of column or row approach.