Time for a change ...?

TriWazza

So I've spent much of the summer on the sideline and whilst watching the National Standard Distance Championships in Athlone I was dissappointed to see that many of the top contenders both male and female were in different waves.

Paul Carroll who finished third seemed to enter the run course during a very busy period was it looked like he had a tough time passing people at points.

Is it time we designate a seperate wave as 'Open' and allow people across age groups race one another head to head. The waves could be limited to 30 people who relistically have an opportunity to fill the top 30 slots in the National Championships.

Is this something the athletes should raise with TI for next year.

Any thoughts?

BTH

TriWazza wrote: »

So I've spent much of the summer on the sideline and whilst watching the National Standard Distance Championships in Athlone I was dissappointed to see that many of the top contenders both male and female were in different waves.

Paul Carroll who finished third seemed to enter the run course during a very busy period was it looked like he had a tough time passing people at points.

Is it time we designate a seperate wave as 'Open' and allow people across age groups race one another head to head. The waves could be limited to 30 people who relistically have an opportunity to fill the top 30 slots in the National Championships.

Is this something the athletes should raise with TI for next year.

Any thoughts?

Has already been discussed at great length, and was, I believe, brought up at this http://triathlonireland.com/index.php?id=107&nid=939

Peterx

I kinda do triathlons as I do some of the multisport races which are very similar and having contenders in different waves has been all but done away with in these events.

A straight race with all the contenders in the first wave and no timeouts racing against the same conditions is brilliant. If someone is in front of you, they are in front of you, easy!

In terms of triathlons it would presumably add to the excitement to see the lads actually racing head to head as opposed to splitbrowsering the race to see where who did what when.

tunney

TriWazza wrote: »

So I've spent much of the summer on the sideline and whilst watching the National Standard Distance Championships in Athlone I was dissappointed to see that many of the top contenders both male and female were in different waves.

Paul Carroll who finished third seemed to enter the run course during a very busy period was it looked like he had a tough time passing people at points.

Is it time we designate a seperate wave as 'Open' and allow people across age groups race one another head to head. The waves could be limited to 30 people who relistically have an opportunity to fill the top 30 slots in the National Championships.

Is this something the athletes should raise with TI for next year.

Any thoughts?

How do you determine the top 30 for these 30 slots?

peter kern

top 20 from previous champs
top20 from previous nat series.
people that hav had a top 5 place in a nat series race in last 12 month
and 5 wildcards which the race organicer can give away if the want

But basically the ones that have the balls to give up their age group and race open. As this would be the easiest.
and I like KISS and self seclted open works well in Australia

And i say if you come last in a open race you have to pay each draft marshall a beer.

Wave starts are a great idea to race your age group and have more space on the course and for the onces that want to win a race and not an age group its great to race against the other contender.

tunney

peter kern wrote: »

top 20 from previous champs
top20 from previous nat series.

Its already been established that the NS is not about an accurate ranking system and as such would be precluded from inclusion in determining a ranking of athletes for inclusion.

peter kern

tunney wrote: »

Its already been established that the NS is not about an accurate ranking system and as such would be precluded from inclusion in determining a ranking of athletes for inclusion.

and it has been talked about with TI and they are aware of the fact and peromised to change it to make it more valuable.
and its accurate enough already to find out who are good people

And as said KISS ie self selected would be by far better and keeps admin down ( and nobody either TI or race organice really have time for more admin ) and the wave can take 50 people and I cant see really more than about 30 guys and 18 females people putting their hut in the ring and if the last 3 or so have to buy drinks for the race marshalls the pretenders will do something good to the officials ( which is also needed badly that officialls get more recognition for their work )

tunney

peter kern wrote: »

and it has been talked about with TI and they are aware of the fact and peromised to change it to make it more valuable.
and its accurate enough already to find out who are good people

No they haven't promised anything of the sort. They have been refreshing honest and open. However making it more valuable to the pointy end of things was never on the cards.

peter kern

i never understadn you dave I think only Bmc has more tri gear in Ireland you are the most obsessivbe block writer i have ever read ( 2 years ago or so ) ,
but you dont seem to care about performance.

tunney

peter kern wrote: »

i never understadn you dave I think only Bmc has more tri gear in Ireland you are the most obsessivbe block writer i have ever read ( 2 years ago or so ) ,
but you dont seem to care about performance.

I appreciate your Brett Sutton impression above (ie not making sense)

In three years I have bought two pieces of kit (other than runners). I don't have that much kit Peter, I have three bikes. Race bike is a P2c - about five years old. Road bike is a 7 year old CAAD9. Commuter is a hodge podge of second hand parts at this stage. I stopped buying stuff for the sake of it years ago.

"Block writer" - assuming blog writer. Yes I have always kept a blog on training, Wes Murphy got me started 8 years ago and I'm still at it. Habit combined with the ability to type about 120 words per minute means what looks like a long blog probably only took 2-3 minutes. Helps that i don't think about what i write.

As for not caring about performance? I care about nothing else. (Well with the exception of my kids, wife and work) What my attitude towards performance has to do with this thread I do not know though.

peter kern

tunney wrote: »

No they haven't promised anything of the sort. They have been refreshing honest and open. However making it more valuable to the pointy end of things was never on the cards.

it dosnt matter pointy end or not there is no differecne as points affect everybody from first to last, if its not fair for the 100th its fair for the first... and everything I have heared from the meeting was a step in the right direction .
So everything which has been discussed in that meeting effects everybody from last to first.

tunney

peter kern wrote: »

it dosnt matter pointy end or not there is no differecne as points affect everybody from first to last, if its not fair for the 100th its fair for the first... and everything I have heared from the meeting was a step in the right direction .
So everything which has been discussed in that meeting effects everybody from last to first.

Scroll back through my posts. Find my use of the word "fair" in regard to anyone. I didn't. You did.

I never said it was fair. I said it achieved its stated objectives.

I was asked to take part in that meeting and had lots of preliminary discussions before the meeting. I was filled in, in detail, about the meeting. I appreciated being filled in and I think the meeting did alot of what it set out to do.

What you are claiming is simply not the case. It was made painfully clear that the NS is not about the fast age groupers.

tunney

tunney wrote: »

Scroll back through my posts. Find my use of the word "fair" in regard to anyone. I didn't. You did.

I never said it was fair. I said it achieved its stated objectives.

I was asked to take part in that meeting and had lots of preliminary discussions before the meeting. I was filled in, in detail, about the meeting. I appreciated being filled in and I think the meeting did alot of what it set out to do.

What you are claiming is simply not the case. It was made painfully clear that the NS is not about the fast age groupers.

To be clear I didn't actually go to the meeting. My daughter got sick and to be honest as well I didn't want to go as once the discussion was properly framed I didn't see the point in the meeting as I failed to see the point in the NS.

peter kern

tunney wrote: »

I appreciate your Brett Sutton impression above (ie not making sense)
thanks for the compliment ;-) he is widely considert to be amongst the 5 best tri coaches in the world amongst his peers.

tunney

peter kern wrote: »

tunney wrote: »

I appreciate your Brett Sutton impression above (ie not making sense)
thanks for the compliment ;-) he is widely considert to be amongst the 5 best tri coaches in the world amongst his peers.

I'm glad you read between the lines and saw that I was really complimenting your work with female athletes.

peter kern

tunney wrote: »

Scroll back through my posts. Find my use of the word "fair" in regard to anyone. I didn't. You did.

I never said it was fair. I said it achieved its stated objectives.

I was asked to take part in that meeting and had lots of preliminary discussions before the meeting. I was filled in, in detail, about the meeting. I appreciated being filled in and I think the meeting did alot of what it set out to do.


What you are claiming is simply not the case. It was made painfully clear that the NS is not about the fast age groupers.

but again the points affect everybody from first to last
And if the point system is not fair thereis no point for a nat sereis for anybody,

tunney

peter kern wrote: »

but again the points affect everybody from first to last
And if the point system is not fair thereis no point for a nat sereis for anybody,

QFT

peter kern

tunney wrote: »

To be clear I didn't actually go to the meeting. My daughter got sick and to be honest as well I didn't want to go as once the discussion was properly framed I didn't see the point in the meeting as I failed to see the point in the NS.

I know you where not at the meeting.
And I dodnt think that are you suggesting the meeting was only a lip service, and everything was framed before ?

tunney

peter kern wrote: »

I know you where not at the meeting.
And I dodnt think that are you suggesting the meeting was only a lip service, and everything was framed before ?

I said the discussion was framed, as in what the stated goals of the NS were and what the topics that were up for discussion were.

peter kern

tunney wrote: »

I said the discussion was framed, as in what the stated goals of the NS were and what the topics that were up for discussion were.

good and the minutes that one of the participants took sounded very constructive.

ps and fair to anybody that choces to take part in the nat series from last to first.

tunney

peter kern wrote: »

good and the minutes that one of the participants took sounded very constructive.

Then you have read what the goal of the NS is. So why are we still discussing this?

peter kern

tunney wrote: »

Then you have read what the goal of the NS is. So why are we still discussing this?

I take it from your private email half an hour ago that we agree quite a bit ;-)

tunney

peter kern wrote: »

I take it from your private email half an hour ago that we agree quite a bit ;-)

Well its not fvcking private now is it.

And no. My mail didn't agree with you. It actually disagreed with an assumption you made on one of my comments. I chose to correct you in private as I felt pointing this out would be insulting to some people and I felt it best not to do so in public. However we did both in the end think the same.

tunney

tunney wrote: »

Well its not fvcking private now is it.

And no. My mail didn't agree with you. It actually disagreed with an assumption you made on one of my comments. I chose to correct you in private as I felt pointing this out would be insulting to some people and I felt it best not to do so in public.

But it does appear that we agree with each other, however never of us seem willing to publicly state the opinion that we agree on!

littlemsfickle

*sigh*

BTH

littlemsfickle wrote: »

*sigh*

I agree.

Another thread turns into the Tunney and PK show....

tunney

BetterThanHoyte wrote: »

I agree.

Another thread turns into the Tunney and PK show....

Now I understand the sigh.

To recap. I disagree but agree with peter as always and I will stay away now!

BTH

tunney wrote: »

Now I understand the sigh.

To recap. I disagree but agree with peter as always and I will stay away now!

But you won't say what you do and don't agree on.

Meanwhile everyone else has jumped off a bridge :pac:

peter kern

Maybe we can go back to the orignal point I made that people can decide for themself if they want to race open.and if their will be to many people that enter the open wave without being to fast than one could think about ways to administer it , but as I said In OZ it works quite well.

Maybe overall the issue of this all is do people care about nat champs being where the best race or is it just a selling point for races ?
Do people want a meaningfull NS system or not ? And from what I hear peole want a meaningull nat series system for everybody and not just for either slower or faster people. I think their is space for everybody.

In soccer it is more about performance ( champions league is king but the lower leagues are also very important for participation )
in tri its far more about participation and less about performance
and I cant see why we cant mix participation with performance,
after all Irelands best ever triathlete Aileen Morrison comes from an age group background and the best Ironman athlete ever Chrissie Wellington also comes from and age group background.
And I am sure if BMC and Connor Murphy stick another 2 years with triathlon there will be 2 more very fine Irish pros that come from the age group ranks
Especially for long course a competive Irish age group NS series could raise the international profile of Irish triathlon on the cheap.
This is if you believe that a wide pyramide at the bottom creates a strong top (whichI would suggest is the reason why austraila and germany dominate Ironman )
Anyway thats how I think and thinking about performance has no negative effect on participation. And anybody that does not see the importance of participation fails to see the reallity of any sport. In the same way I think everybody that dosnt recognice performance fails to see the essence of competiton which is by far not as important than the health aspect but competition is is a huge motivation drive at any level.