New Irish HIM record. (unconfirmed)

Ceepo

Congrats to Waterfords Robbie Wade on breaking the Irish record for the 70.3 distance.
Robbie is from Portlaw but is based in the US. Finished the 70.3 in 3,54 finishing up with the fastest run split of the day in 1.12.

Pulses Mark Horan. Finished in 4.14 cracking time as well. One to watch nfor the National Champs.

Credit where its due lads

pc11

Ceepo wrote: »

Congrats to Waterfords Robbie Wade on breaking the Irish record for the 70.3 distance.
Robbie is from Portland but is based in the US. Finished the 70.3 in 3,54 finishing up with the fastest run split of the day in 1.12.

Pulses Mark Horan. Finished in 4.14 cracking time as well. One to watch nfor the National Champs.

Credit where its due lads

To be fair, distance measurements in triathlon are a joke.

Yes, here comes the inevitable debate between those who care about measurement and those who don't. The point is, records don't mean anything without reliable measurement, regardless of where you stand on this.

Ceepo

pc11 wrote: »

To be fair, distance measurements in triathlon are a joke.

Yes, here comes the inevitable debate between those who care about measurement and those who don't. The point is, records don't mean anything without reliable measurement, regardless of where you stand on this.

FFS

pc11

Ceepo wrote: »

FFS

I wonder what your point is...

catweazle

pc11 while I somewhat agree with you on this point of view with Sprint and Olympic distance, middle and long distance seem to be more about time and there is less discrepancy between courses. Certainly the Irish record in long distance is being sized up by 5 or 6 people these days

I assume this was New Orleans 70.3, from looking at the splits of the winners you would expect it will be near enough to course distance, nothing stands out as being short. I see Robbie had a faster run split than Raelert and 2nd fastest run overall, fair play to him. Doesn't look like any IM attempt this year - perhaps he will be the one to take it down when he does

mloc123

catweazle wrote: »

pc11 while I somewhat agree with you on this point of view with Sprint and Olympic distance, middle and long distance seem to be more about time and there is less discrepancy between courses. Certainly the Irish record in long distance is being sized up by 5 or 6 people these days

Not true, none of the 70.3 I have done were accurate distance wise.

pc11

mloc123 wrote: »

Not true, none of the 70.3 I have done were accurate distance wise.

Indeed. AFAIK the rules allow for 10% under distance even for the 'standard' distances. So, records don't mean anything.

tunney

catweazle wrote: »

pc11 while I somewhat agree with you on this point of view with Sprint and Olympic distance, middle and long distance seem to be more about time and there is less discrepancy between courses. Certainly the Irish record in long distance is being sized up by 5 or 6 people these days

I assume this was New Orleans 70.3, from looking at the splits of the winners you would expect it will be near enough to course distance, nothing stands out as being short. I see Robbie had a faster run split than Raelert and 2nd fastest run overall, fair play to him. Doesn't look like any IM attempt this year - perhaps he will be the one to take it down when he does

that is total bull. the present IM record was set on a course that was ridiculous short. so short that the complaints were so heavy that they brought it back to what it was. the bike was the guts of 10km short that year and the run 4km.I believe.

catweazle

Gahhh just before I pressed reply I hesitated - this is the main forum Catweazle, don't press here, stick to the training logs, there do be sharks here.

I feel like Will Smith in I am Legend

miller82

he went seriously fast clearly and the fastest run split....brilliant.

not sure why people would want to p1ss on this. the thread wasnt started to discuss distances, it was a, well done, thread.

so well done to the two of them, very impressive.

tunney

miller82 wrote: »

he went seriously fast clearly and the fastest run split....brilliant.

not sure why people would want to p1ss on this. the thread wasnt started to discuss distances, it was a, well done, thread.

so well done to the two of them, very impressive.

Fastest run spolit respect.

The OP was about a record over a specific distance. WTC are very bad with distances on the courses that set records.

pc11

miller82 wrote: »

he went seriously fast clearly and the fastest run split....brilliant.

not sure why people would want to p1ss on this. the thread wasnt started to discuss distances, it was a, well done, thread.

Where did anyone piss on him? That's not good reading comprehension. The thread was started to talk about records, which automatically means a standardised distance. It's pretty straightforward.

bryangiggsy

Congrats Robbie Wade and Mark Horan. Savage times. Giving how good mark Horan is and robbie wade goes 20 mins faster its bloody impressive

miller82

pc11 wrote: »

Where did anyone piss on him? That's not good reading comprehension :rolleyes: . The thread was started to talk about records, which automatically means a standardised distance. It's pretty straightforward.

well picking it apart by saying records are meaningless and the distances are never right, and "records don't mean anything" etc etc, would seem like p1ssing on it to me. Do you have any records ?

El Director

This is getting a little petty, no? Everyone is aware of the distance discrepancy but surely these lads are to be congratulated on their achievement and admired for their commitment and hard work after all they are not (afaik) going around saying how great they are and how they've broke X record. In other words it is not their fault if other people want to attribute these records to them.

For the record I agree that these records are pretty meaningless, I mean 10% :eek: that's just crazy.

miller82

El Director wrote: »

This is getting a little petty, no? Everyone is aware of the distance discrepancy but surely these lads are to be congratulated on their achievement and admired for their commitment and hard work after all they are not (afaik) going around saying how great they are and how they've broke X record. In other words it is not their fault if other people want to attribute these records to them.

For the record I agree that these records are pretty meaningless, I mean 10% :eek: that's just crazy.

extremely. with a sprinkle of bitterness maybe

pc11

miller82 wrote: »

well picking it apart by saying records are meaningless and the distances are never right, and "records don't mean anything" etc etc, would seem like p1ssing on it to me. Do you have any records ?

I've tried to explain to you that's not what anyone said, but there is none so blind and all that. You're reading meanings that aren't there.

Ok, let's spell it out. No-one 'pissed' on Robbie. It's clearly an excellent performance. My comment (and others') was on the very notion of 'records' in triathlon and how poorly the sport treats measurement. Quite different. Mmmkay?

Do I have any records? As if that has anything to do with anything...

pc11

El Director wrote: »

This is getting a little petty, no? Everyone is aware of the distance discrepancy but surely these lads are to be congratulated on their achievement and admired for their commitment and hard work after all they are not (afaik) going around saying how great they are and how they've broke X record. In other words it is not their fault if other people want to attribute these records to them.

Ah here, for feck's sake. Who said the slightest thing against Robbie and his fine performance?!! Lads, would ye not try reading the what's actually posted?

El Director wrote: »

For the record I agree that these records are pretty meaningless, I mean 10% :eek: that's just crazy.

True that.

miller82

pc11 wrote: »

I've tried to explain to you that's not what anyone said, but there is none so blind and all that. You're reading meanings that aren't there.

Ok, let's spell it out. No-one 'pissed' on Robbie. It's clearly an excellent performance. My comment (and others') was on the very notion of 'records' in triathlon and how poorly the sport treats measurement. Quite different. Mmmkay?

Do I have any records? As if that has anything to do with anything...

wow. thats a mighty high horse
right, well IMO, it seems like poor form to be follow up a post such as the OP, with one saying ah records arent worth anything, distances arent the same etc etc and not acknowledging the achievement. honestly, it stinks of bitterness IMO

El Director

pc11 wrote: »

Ah here, for feck's sake. Who said the slightest thing against Robbie and his fine performance?!! Lads, would ye not try reading the what's actually posted?

I was more eluding to what wasn't posted TBH. IMO acknowledgement should have been given first to the "fine performance" first and then if there is a point to be made about whatever, in this case a good, do it then. It wasn't until your 3rd/4th post until you gave him some credit, probably an oversight I know. That's me though and I always seem to see the positives first

pc11

There's only person posting in this thread who sounds bitter, and it ain't me.

Lads, I'm out of here. I made a simple factual point that was taken up by some people in other ways that they chose. Argue amongst yourselves.

tunney

Plus I am sure if we used the Dan Martin rule (or have we already used it here??) (also known as summer IM tracking rule) I'm sure we could find a faster Irish time.

rwade1401

Lads,

Not normally a message board poster. But someone told me about this tread. I agree "record" is a strong word to use unless its a track race etc. Even the Marathon is a "World best" So "best" is the word if anything should be applied for 70.3 and IM distances. Every WTC race in North Amercian I have done has been right at 70.3, i have some buddies that work for WTC and they pride themselves in their work. I do feel that there should be some standard in this day and age that all races are the actual distance they claim to be, 10% is way too much to be off, 1% maybe is ok in my mine. In NOLA I had 56.2 on the bike, and for the run I just used a timex watch taking splits every miles. None of them were way off. (all within the same range) My buddy wore a garmin and had 13.07 or 08. Anyway just my 2 cents.

The best of the day was seeing 2 ladies dressed in green/white and gold when I finished, got to talk to them they were over with Mark. I didn't get to speak with him as I had to get back to T1 to pack and head home to San Antonio as my wife is due in 2 weeks and was nice enough to let me drive 8 hours to race.

All the best,
Robbie Wade

Bambaata

Congrats Robbie, serious result! one i could only ever dream of. Serious result by Mark Horan too.

shotgunmcos

+1 congrats Robbie, well done, savage performance. Saw you at Eurpoean Duathlon champs and you have some speed. Any plans to take down the Irish IM record some day? Or is it too false a record to bother with?

mrbungle

It's all gone very quiet in here.

shotgunmcos

mrbungle wrote: »

It's all gone very quiet in here.

Anything to add?

rwade1401

Thanks! Limerick was great feeling. I have lots of respect of Martin and the lads that have broke 9hrs.
As for me one of these days I will give the distance a go. I feel it's a beast to master the full.

tunney

mrbungle wrote: »

It's all gone very quiet in here.

The lad said the course was accurate. If the OP had said "New HIM record on a course of legitimate length", then it would have been a different thread. Probably just a series of thank yous. Much like if someone ever sets a record on the Frankfurt course

Well done rwade1401, its the run I find particularly impressive. What do you think you would do for a straight (accurate ) half marathon?

rwade1401

Thanks guys !
In the last 2 years I switched the way I do my run training. I no longer do stuff at the paces I did when I was just running. But if I added a weekly track session and worked on more fast paced tempo, I would be around my PB of 67:47. I do alot of stuff at the pace I want to run off the bike @ for 70.3. That way I can do more volume and also be less taxed to get the rest of the weeks work done. I did get after a 5km off an easy an 1h30, and ran 15:10 with my buddy pacing me on his bike.

Abhainn

Another impressive performance by Irishman Robbie Wade in IM Kansas 70.3 at the weekend. A 4:02 and 6th position with fastest run of the day
Crowie won in 3:51

Nice to see Ire up there in the results:)

griffin100

Now that's impressive, getting that close to Crowie (although I'm sure someone will tell me why it's not )

Abhainn

griffin100 wrote: »

Now that's impressive, getting that close to Crowie (although I'm sure someone will tell me why it's not )

It was Crowie's 2nd 70.3 win in 8 days. Machine.

Fazz

It was straight up a superb performance by Robbie imo.

What's even more impressive is the progress he has made since last year.
Looks like his swim has improved a lot and his run which was always fast has gone nuclear

From Memory I think Robbie was 20-25 mins off Crowie at Vegas last year so to have closed so much is inspiring.

Looking forward to seeing how he does in Vegas this year and hopefully makes more progress.

Also im looking forward to racing the same course and comparing splits to who is the best Irish 70.3 racer at present.
Maybe I'll get some run tips! !

Ceepo

Another super impressive race yesterday from Robbie,

3,55,44 at IM Kansas 70,3. For 4th place, Only 11 seconds of the podium

The man just gets faster,

http://www.ironman.com/triathlon/events/americas/ironman-70.3/kansas/results.aspx#axzz34843VyCV





Serious respect bud

pgibbo

Saw that online last night. Great performance