Is triathlon too open?

mloc123

Following a conversation myself and Tango had on Saturday..

What do people think? Is triathlon too open to people now and as a result are race organisers cutting distances, cancelling swims too easily etc..?

There was a comment in the Tri an Mhi thread, something along the lines that the course/swim has to cater for the weakest athlete involved... why?

I am not in tri very long but even when training for my first race I knew the distance and would not have entered or raced if I felt I could not do it.

Now it seems people decide their friend 'did a tri' a while back and it seemed easy, I'll enter that one in a months time... might even train a bit for it and can say 'I did a tri'.

NewWheels

Should there be a requirement to work your way up the distances?

Example - must do Sprint x 3 before an Olympic and Olympic x 4 before Doubles or Half Iron etc

Of course all distances would need to be included in the ladder/experience approach so start with SuperSprint or Try distance

Just a thought

miller82

NewWheels wrote: »

Should there be a requirement to work your way up the distances?

Example - must do Sprint x 3 before an Olympic and Olympic x 4 before Doubles or Half Iron etc

Of course all distances would need to be included in the ladder/experience approach so start with SuperSprint or Try distance

Just a thought

thats a decent option, but then would their be massive congestion in sprint distance, between people wanting to stay at that distance and people that are earning their "stripes"

mloc123

Should races have a broom wagon? Should OW races have a strict time cut off? If you are not out of the water in X minutes you are lifted into a boat.

HIM/IM races have cut off points at each stage.. should this trickle down into sprint and oly?

Oryx

NewWheels wrote: »

Should there be a requirement to work your way up the distances?

Example - must do Sprint x 3 before an Olympic and Olympic x 4 before Doubles or Half Iron etc

Of course all distances would need to be included in the ladder/experience approach so start with SuperSprint or Try distance

Just a thought

I did 4 sprints, 1 oly, 1 sprint, 2 HIM, in that order, as my first 8 tris, ever, in the space of 18 months. IM was my 10th tri, ever.

Progression is not required, experience is. I put in a shedload of training hours, and a lot of ow swimming.

Trouble is, how do race organisers police entrants' experience? They simply can't. What would work is stricter cutoffs and competency waivers that actually mean something. (The best waiver I ever signed said '...if I die taking part in this race its my own bloody fault for coming...' ) If waivers did what they are meant to, and covered race organiser's asses, then we would not see the issues we are getting with weaker competitors being nannied along so much. Even in athy this weekend great mention was made of the 1.40 swim cutoff in the double. Yet still a guy in the results has a 1.41 swim time. Meaningless cutoff is meaningless.

Weaker athletes do need to have a level where they can enter, do a short race, and be taken care of. Which is what most beginners do. The problem is mainly in the swim with people assuming the wetsuit does most of the work and thinking they can blag it. I'm not sure how you get rid of that attitude, but through clubs and other networks we can attempt to get the message across that ow swimming needs work. Otherwise we will see more cancelled swims, or stricter regulation forced on us.

enzeder

NewWheels wrote: »

Should there be a requirement to work your way up the distances?

Example - must do Sprint x 3 before an Olympic and Olympic x 4 before Doubles or Half Iron etc

Of course all distances would need to be included in the ladder/experience approach so start with SuperSprint or Try distance

Just a thought

I don't agree with this approach. I, for one, didn't do enough races to meet those criteria before moving on to the next distance up. But then I came from a distance running background and was a fair swimmer. Rules like that might discourage people like me getting into triathlon as they may only be keen on longer distance competition.

I do think that we're reaching a point where there are a huge number of people trying triathlon and it does need to be addressed by Triathlon Ireland so the race doesn't necessarily accommodate the weakest athlete.

Strict swim cut-offs are certainly a way to do this. Not necessarily pulling people out of the water into a boat (huge cost if there are a lot and reduced safety presence for anyone in need) but more refusing entry to T1 after X number of minutes has passed. After one or two races where a large number of people were ct off it would certainly encourage anyone who wanted to 'do a tri' to at least prepare for the swim a bit more than perhaps some people have been doing recently.

nerraw1111

Pretty sure none of the swims/races were cancelled this year because of the competitors?

I thought it was just the reality of doing triathlon in Ireland while abiding by specific rules on water temperature?

Anyone can do a triathlon. People are frequently showing it to be the case.

Oryx

nerraw1111 wrote: »

Pretty sure none of the swims/races were cancelled this year because of the competitors?

I thought it was just the reality of doing triathlon in Ireland while abiding by specific rules on water temperature?

Anyone can do a triathlon. People are frequently showing it to be the case.

A number of sea swims were cancelled or truncated last year due to rough water conditions unrelated to temperature, that, tbh, weren't that rough.

Nwm2

I have seen fat and slow thirty-somethings completing Ironman in 17 hours. Not that it is unsafe, it's just too easy to do.

So personally I would start with Ironman, and make the cutoff times much more stringent, and base it on AG.

<30 = 14 hrs
<40 = 15 hrs
<50 = 16 hrs
>50 = 17 hrs

or something. Maybe give females an extra 30-60 min over males.

sconhome

mloc123 wrote: »

Following a conversation myself and Tango had on Saturday..

What do people think? Is triathlon too open to people now and as a result are race organisers cutting distances, cancelling swims too easily etc..?

There was a comment in the Tri an Mhi thread, something along the lines that the course/swim has to cater for the weakest athlete involved... why?

I am not in tri very long but even when training for my first race I knew the distance and would not have entered or raced if I felt I could not do it.

Now it seems people decide their friend 'did a tri' a while back and it seemed easy, I'll enter that one in a months time... might even train a bit for it and can say 'I did a tri'.

I think it should go deeper than this. Along the lines of a cycling type license with controls brought in by TI at the top.

There could be a multi tier calendar with clubs arranging try-a-tri events of short, sprint and olympic distance races open to all comers and one day licence holders.

As people come to love the sport and develop further they could get a TI full member card once they co-join a club at the same time. Being a full TI member and club member will encourage a minimum standard and understanding of the rules of racing triathlon (taught by the club) and also the development of cycling skills, swim pool ettiquette etc (all the bugbears that annoy people).

Your license number should be unique to you, and used to track all your race history (similar to Athlinks) in TI sanctioned events through your triathlon career / lifetime.

People should be encouraged to train and race at sprint & olympic distance in their first year, accumulating experience before moving into National Series racing and middle distance racing in their second year of training and racing. (Think of L drivers and restricted drivers in their 1st year after passing the driving test)

IMO this would make the experience more rewarding for newbies rather than the peer pressure to move to IM ASAP. It would also serve the function of achieving a minimum standard at the bigger competitive races such as Championships / National Series.

Kurt Godel

The problem is a large amount of people who are looking to tick the Tri box, sign up, aren't ready/capable for the swim, TO guy see's this and truncates/cancels the swim. I've entered 3 TI sprints (one swim cancelled, one swim curtailed to 200m, one pool where guys in front massively overestimated their ability). In all cases a strong swimmer would have excelled in the conditions. I entered one non-TI sprint (EiremanX), pretty choppy sea swim, against a tough current, we were really thrown about. The organizer had a Duathlon option ready on the day for those who didn't fancy the swim, worked great, we got a great swim race in, anyone not confident to go in got a run/bike/run; everyone was safe on the day.

That's a much better way to handle back-of-pack ability and safety, rather than (as currently) allowing back-of-pack ability to dictate what level of risk is involved. I'm tired of hearing the mantra "Safety is our No.1 priority"; don't allow the unprepared to enter OW races if safety is a concern, and certainly don't allow the unprepared to dictate the type of race everyone else gets to do. I'm all on for allowing (and encouraging) newbies to do Tri, but the onus has to be on them to be prepared.

Oryx

Nwm2 wrote: »

I have seen fat and slow thirty-somethings completing Ironman in 17 hours. Not that it is unsafe, it's just too easy to do.

So personally I would start with Ironman, and make the cutoff times much more stringent, and base it on AG.

<30 = 14 hrs
<40 = 15 hrs
<50 = 16 hrs
>50 = 17 hrs

or something. Maybe give females an extra 30-60 min over males.

In my opinion, IM dont have a problem. They have strict cutoffs, which people know will be adhered to. If a swim goes non wetsuit, it goes non wetsuit, even if people cant do it, and they cry. They dont set their criteria at the weakest, they simply set what they expect people to do, and thats it.
They are the least of the problem, imo.

Nwm2

Oryx wrote: »

In my opinion, IM dont have a problem. They have strict cutoffs, which people know will be adhered to. If a swim goes non wetsuit, it goes non wetsuit, even if people cant do it, and they cry. They dont set their criteria at the weakest, they simply set what they expect people to do, and thats it.
They are the least of the problem, imo.

Yeah, but I'm coming at it from a different perspective. The IM cutoffs are strict, but far too generous.

catweazle

Nwm2 wrote: »

Yeah, but I'm coming at it from a different perspective. The IM cutoffs are strict, but far too generous.

IM are just as happy to take your money if you are a sub 10 athlete or trying to make it in before the cut off time. I would expect a lot of have a go heroes might be put off if they found out that they might actually have to train hard to make a more aggressive cut off time limit thereby impacting them on their bottom line.

I would agree with AK, I assume there are many problems with the cycling classification but I bet there aren't too many A4 riders who would look to get into an A1/A2 race if they had the chance.

However there are perhaps a handful of races if any in this country that would look at running a race for higher caliber entrants excluding a large percentage of their entrants

woody1

i think let them at it..and take them out of the water sharpish when their in bother...( of course your going to need a lot of kayaks/support to do this and look after those that are actually swimming ) or maybe do a short warm up swim and identify those in bother , then take them out , if people cant be arsed to put in the work ..and getting used to o/w conditions is part of that then it should be their loss and not everyone elses.. and this is coming from a beginner swimmer..

so i think a broom wagon is a good idea ..

also i think ak's cycling licence idea has a lot of merit, and it opens up an element of competition to the lower ranks ( like me ) in terms of racing with similar abilities .. so you could have category winners ( not neccesarily prizes for this, but to be able to say i won the a4 or whatever section.. would spur people on )

kurts duathlon option works too, i saw this in action in a local tri recently and it worked fine..

hardCopy

How about having a "HardCore" wave of proven/fast racers?

On an ideal day this would be the quickest wave and they wouldn't have to do too much overtaking on the bike and run.

On a rough day the swim could be cancelled or shortened for all but the HardCores.

Anybody looking to podium or score National Series points would have to be registered in this wave/waves.

Once you've completed a race in open water you can register for this competitive wave. Minimum swim times in previous races could also be a criteria.

This way the top dogs get to race even if the conditions are rough and organisers can rest assured that no beginners are being put at risk. Some rule could be set up for complete abandonment of the swim if the conditions are extreme.

darrenoconaill

When you start seeing this kind of thing you know it's time to start clamping down:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oObelwk8WAI

Unregistered.

Why don't they follow Cycling Ireland's approach with categories based on your ability and experience? All newcomers start of in A4 and work their way up.

However, instead of having different races for different categories, the categories should dictate which wave you go in. I think this is a good idea because it would allow TI to be assured of some level of competence from A3, A2 and A1 waves. Then, perhaps, they could change the rules regarding water temps such that a swim could be cancelled for A4 waves only but not A3 etc. This could help manage having to cater for newcomers at the expense of more experienced athletes.

NewWheels

Good to see healthy discussion on this as it probably needs looking at.

There are some good suggestions e.g. the waves based on categories like Cycling Ireland, stricter cut off times and TI should be looking at these.

However the bottom line is unless the method implemented allows the event organisers to "cram-em-in" and get the entry fees and TI get their licence fess nothing will be done about it.

I have many years experience of trying to bring in a fairer system in another sport in Ireland and it always came down to money - sad really.

Do think the wave approach linked to licence level is workable from all sides though.

Unregistered.

NewWheels wrote: »

Do think the wave approach linked to licence level is workable from all sides though.

I agree, it sounds like a reasonable approach. It doesn't restrict people from taking part. They could have a number of ways to progress from A4 to A3 as well if you are new to the sport... e.g. by demonstrating swim competency (meeting a threshold time, or take part in a number of swims/races etc?)

68 lost souls

I think openness in any sport should be encouraged, why isolate people from taking part in a sport. Any one can play football doesn't make them all an amazing player like Messi and just because they finish a Triathlon in a much slower pace I'm sure it is an achievement for them. I am currently training to complete my first and am going for a super sprint because I think I should ease myself into it. I wont be winning any category but I sure as hell want to be able to say I completed it. I have my own reasons for starting out and if I enjoy the race I will be sticking with it and maybe look at moving up a distance.

I can understand the frustration people can have with slower racers getting in the way and that so the method suggested about waves being associated with experience is a good way of going to solve this I think. I'm pretty sure this is in employed in other sports, if you finish your first race in a certain time then the next race you can move into a faster wave etc and perhaps yes you cannot do an Olympic or Double until you finish a sprint and so on.

Kurt Godel

68 lost souls wrote: »

I think openness in any sport should be encouraged, why isolate people from taking part in a sport. Any one can play football doesn't make them all an amazing player like Messi and just because they finish a Triathlon in a much slower pace I'm sure it is an achievement for them. I am currently training to complete my first and am going for a super sprint because I think I should ease myself into it. I wont be winning any category but I sure as hell want to be able to say I completed it. I have my own reasons for starting out and if I enjoy the race I will be sticking with it and maybe look at moving up a distance.

I can understand the frustration people can have with slower racers getting in the way and that so the method suggested about waves being associated with experience is a good way of going to solve this I think. I'm pretty sure this is in employed in other sports, if you finish your first race in a certain time then the next race you can move into a faster wave etc and perhaps yes you cannot do an Olympic or Double until you finish a sprint and so on.

You're missing the point, no-one has mentioned slower racers getting in the way. The problem is that encouraging ill-prepared novice swimmers to participate is having a direct impact on the rest of the field, in that swims are truncated or cancelled- for everyone- with an eye to the abilities of these underprepared beginners.

Here's an example of water conditions of a Sprint race I entered last year. The 750m swim got truncated first to 500m, then to about 200m. There was a palpable cheer from a certain set of entrants when this "safety measure" was announced. Had these entrants been given the option to do a Duo on the day, the rest of us could have had a race. (There were RNLI boats, kayaks, enclosed bay, etc. I'm sure others have more examples).

Some people want to enter Tri's for participation- good luck to them, the more the merrier I say. But when their lack of swim ability stops the rest of the field from having a proper competition, something has to be done about that.

MrCreosote

The simplest thing to do would be to keep it open, but to set strict cut-offs for the swim. Very unfair to seed OW tri waves based on swim time or ability alone.

Better structuring of the calendar would minimise the water temperature and weather problem, and people just have to accept that with Irish weather, a certain number of swims will be modified or cancelled. It's hardly a frequent occurrence- just part of the sport. Annoying, yes, but the way people go on you'd think every second race is cancelled.

68 lost souls

Kurt Godel wrote: »

You're missing the point, no-one has mentioned slower racers getting in the way. The problem is that encouraging ill-prepared novice swimmers to participate is having a direct impact on the rest of the field, in that swims are truncated or cancelled- for everyone- with an eye to the abilities of these underprepared beginners.

Sorry, as I said I am new to the sport and was not aware of that. I think though the waves based on previous performance could help this that if the swim leg were to be truncated for ill-prepared swimmers it would be the last wave and therefore not effect the rest of the competitors.

I think people who attempt an openwater swim without training though are crazy. I am used to open water swimming and this leg would be my strongest of the three and as a trained lifeguard I am highly aware of the dangers that openwater can pose. I am glad to hear of all the safety messures in place but people should not enter these races thinking there are boats there as a safety net.

miller82

you need to be careful that any restrictions/licences etc etc put in place, would not put newbies off. the licence or "hardcore wave" suggestions seem decent.
Swims being shortened is such a killer for lots of people and the cheers from some people really annoy me

mossym

we were discussing before athy at the weekend, and someone i met at the race mentioned that in australia they have a holding pen, and those that don't want(or possibly arent allowed) to swim are held in the pen for a set amount of time rather than have to swim, and then allowed to continue

now obviously the hold time would need to factor in the fact that these people are effectively doing a duathlon, and are going into the bike extremely fresh, so you would need to penalise them much more than just the length of the swim.

i haven't seen this myself, and only heard about it second hand, so can't give any more details..

hardCopy

mossym wrote: »

we were discussing before athy at the weekend, and someone i met at the race mentioned that in australia they have a holding pen, and those that don't want(or possibly arent allowed) to swim are held in the pen for a set amount of time rather than have to swim, and then allowed to continue

now obviously the hold time would need to factor in the fact that these people are effectively doing a duathlon, and are going into the bike extremely fresh, so you would need to penalise them much more than just the length of the swim.

i haven't seen this myself, and only heard about it second hand, so can't give any more details..

As long as these people can't win any prizes or points it doesn't really matter how long they're in the pen. It's basically a chip timed training day after that.

I'd see it the same as someone who is fished out and allowed to finish the bike and run as pet current rules.

mossym

hardCopy wrote: »

I'd see it the same as someone who is fished out and allowed to finish the bike and run as pet current rules.

except that you never put them at the risk that they don't get fished out in time

hardCopy

mossym wrote: »

except that you never put them at the risk that they don't get fished out in time

My point is that if they go in the pen, they shouldn't be eligible to win anything, hence there's no need to sweat too much about how long they stay there.

I'm not disagreeing with you.

Although it would probably be better to stagger them a little by making them run before the bike, just so you don't have a mass start situation, most bike routes wouldn't be able to handle the glut of numbers at the start.

mloc123

How about a race that is run - bike - run for those that don't like swimming....

hardCopy

mloc123 wrote: »

How about a race that is run - bike - run for those that don't like swimming....

It needs some kind of a snappy name though, maybe double-athlon or dual-athlon? :pac:

Obviously the current fall-back plans are a fine solution for some people. What's needed is a way to quickly split the field in the event of less than perfect conditions and provide an option for the stronger, more experienced, open water swimmers to take responsibility for themselves and go ahead with a full race.

RD's will obviously want to be sure that no beginners are being thrown into a freezing cold washing machine, a grading/licensing/certification system could provide this.

Personally I think you should have to complete the swim to score points/win prizes.

mossym

mloc123 wrote: »

How about a race that is run - bike - run for those that don't like swimming....

you should patent that idea.

i guess it's the same as being discussed, if the provision was there to quickly split the field and allow those who are able to swim to do so, and quickly send the others off on a separate pre bike run, then that's a far better situation that forcing the whole field into a duathlon.

having seen multiple people wading down the river at athy on saturday, i'm pretty sure those people would have rather waded on shore than waded in the water. course now they say they did a triathlon, rather than a duathlon

Oryx

mossym wrote: »

i guess it's the same as being discussed, if the provision was there to quickly split the field and allow those who are able to swim to do so, and quickly send the others off on a separate pre bike run, then that's a far better situation that forcing the whole field into a duathlon.

That's not solving the problem of underprepared people. If someone enters a race, they should be ready to do it, within the safety parameters that apply to competent swimmers.

having seen multiple people wading down the river at athy on saturday, i'm pretty sure those people would have rather waded on shore than waded in the water. course now they say they did a triathlon, rather than a duathlon

At what point do you say to someone like that 'no, you didnt'?

mossym

Oryx wrote: »

That's not solving the problem of underprepared people. If someone enters a race, they should be ready to do it, within the safety parameters that apply to competent swimmers.

i agree totally with that. but i'm pretty sure people cheering at the cancellation of a swim aren't ready to do it. two options then. turn them away completely and lose the revenue (unlikely), or find a way to offer them a non swim arrangement.

i think the idea of having a non swim option, coupled with the license idea above, could work. make it clear on sign up, there is a chance this swim could be cold or rough, if so, all participants below x level will be sent on a run instead. all participants above a certain level will be allowed complete the swim if deemed safe.

Oryx wrote: »

At what point do you say to someone like that 'no, you didnt'?

again i agree, but at what what point would they accept you are right?

i'm very new to tri, athy sprint was my first. but i knew going up to it if they turned around and said the swim was lengthened to 1500m, or if it was rough, that i could do it. If the regs required it, i'd have no issue proving that to a trained instructor prior to being allowed to do a tri. I was heavily involved in scuba diving for several years, including helping out with trainees, so the idea that you prove yourself before being allowed to progress sits well with me.

sconhome

Oryx wrote: »

At what point do you say to someone like that 'no, you didnt'?

Where's Tunney when you need him?

hardCopy

Oryx wrote: »

That's not solving the problem of underprepared people. If someone enters a race, they should be ready to do it, within the safety parameters that apply to competent swimmers.

At what point do you say to someone like that 'no, you didnt'?

Unfortunately some people will always sign up for things that are beyond their ability. In a marathon some people will push their way to the front and end up walking after half a mile while everyone else tries to dodge them.

The safest thing would be to simply bar them until they had completed a suitable course but this makes it very difficult for tri to grow as a participant sport.

There will obviously be days when the water is too rough or cold for these folk but if conditions are good and the swim is manned with enough kayaks, let them at it.

A licencing system could also be used by some races to cut back on the number of kayaks for "licence holder only" races, possibly cutting the cost of racing.

Unregistered.

Hmmmm..... A1, A2, A3 and A4 National Championships anyone? It mean that there is something more than PBs in it for more people - especially newcomers, i.e. A4, where they would have no chance at winning age groups or otherwise.

Nwm2

Unregistered. wrote: »

Hmmmm..... A1, A2, A3 and A4 National Championships anyone? It mean that there is something more than PBs in it for more people - especially newcomers, i.e. A4, where they would have no chance at winning age groups or otherwise.

Yeah, I liked this idea on first reading, but really it is a way of making people feel better about being slow, so screw it. Train hard and if you can't get well up the field in at least the small local events, then sorry you're just (relatively) slow and let's not make a category so you can be best of the slow people.

I got a prize in an A4 TT event once, felt great but had to concentrate on reminding myself that I should feel inferior to the guys who came last place in the categories above me and that I won the prize in the slow category.

Unregistered.

Nwm2 wrote: »

Yeah, I liked this idea on first reading, but really it is a way of making people feel better about being slow, so screw it. Train hard and if you can't get well up the field in at least the small local events, then sorry you're just (relatively) slow and let's not make a category so you can be best of the slow people.

I got a prize in an A4 TT event once, felt great but had to concentrate on reminding myself that I should feel inferior to the guys who came last place in the categories above me and that I won the prize in the slow category.

That's no excuse to scrap it, if you are top of the A4 for you should HTFU and get in to A3. Which would incentive you more, say, finishing in the Top 20 in your category or finishing in the top two or three hundred? In my opinion, knowing that you're not far off a milestone is great encouragement. Knowing that there is 100's ahead of you can appear daunting, even though winning an A4 wouldn't change that. But the mind is a fickle mistress. I'd think that it would encourage newcomers to stick with the sport as well. Shorter, achievable, recognized and (ideally) rewarded goals.

sconhome

Being Devil's advocate here. Has anyone asked people what they want to get out of it?

I mean, yes, there are those who take it seriously, whereby its their sport, they've invested time and money into training, equipment, etc and then there are those who maybe just want the sense of achievement of completing a triathlon, are not worried about being serious or an uber triathlete, and are happy to do a bit of training just to get by.

I don't mean to belittle or offend people with that spectrum but thats a rough divide.

Is it possible that those races that are being affected are simply as a result of being oversubscribed? In the same way that the commercial 5k and 10k events attract 1,000s while club events get 100's? By being in the public eye is it possible that that is why these events are swamped and as a result swims restricted for mass safety and 'the weakest link'?

If asked (and this is where I refer to my original post about governing & structure from TI) would those at the back of the pack have preferred to do an easy event away from the pressure of a NS race but just didn't know about the options? That is one of the reasons why I believe a tiered structure of 2-3 years in the sport, climbing a ladder & proving your ability will actually enhance everybodies racing experience, leading in the long term to a sport that endures rather than being a hit for a couple of years as folks tick, sprint, oly, HIM & IM before going onto the next crazy thing to do.

I'm all for development and encouraging newbies, but there is a sensible and safe way to induct people starting out to ensure everyone is happy.

yheno

Are the weaker swimmers really influencing the decisions of the race organisers to shorten the swim ? i would find this very hard to believe ! im not the fastest swimmer but i can do any distance and as the run is my strongest leg i dont whinge when 60 % of the field are slower than me ! Is that not the challenge of triathlon that you constantly try to improve your weakest leg Why be good at one when you can be average at three:rolleyes:

griffin100

Anything too complex won't work and will drive people towards non TI races. Talk of replicating cyclings A1,A2 etc classifications misses the point I think. The cycling classifications are about speed, we are talking about swim competency here not swim speed, they are not the same thing. You can be a comfortable competent breaststroker well able to do up to IM distance but at a slower pace than others.

How about TI introduce a 'rookie' membership that applies to everyone in their first year of membership, converting to 'experienced' membership after year 1 subject to completing x number of ow swim races. Race organisers can indicate if their race is rookie friendly or if rookies are excluded from the race based on the swim difficulty. Races that are somewhere in the middle can have a wave start, with wave 1 for experienced swimmers and wave 2 for the 'rookies', where the swimmers most likely to get into trouble are to be found. Races that are rookie friendly could also reflect that in their water safety plans and numbers of safety boats. Not perfect by any means but I think it could work.

hypersonic

what about people like me, I do the local Olympic distance once a year on a one day licence. all the ideas laid out above would put me off.
just put the event on, if I f**k up I'll live/die with the consequences, we are dealing with adults!

sconhome

hypersonic wrote: »

what about people like me, I do the local Olympic distance once a year on a one day licence. all the ideas laid out above would put me off.
just put the event on, if I f**k up I'll live/die with the consequences, we are dealing with adults!

And if you die everyone else has to live with the memory of your unnecessary death & what about race directors? officials? marshals? everyone involved? How can they live with the consequences of your actions?

hypersonic

amphkingwest wrote: »

And if you die everyone else has to live with the memory of your unnecessary death & what about race directors? officials? marshals? everyone involved? How can they live with the consequences of your actions?

this is true of all sports, cycling, rugby, horse riding, rock climbing, etc etc, triathlon is not particularly dangerous.

p.s. maybe compare it to mountain running, which is more open, probably more dangerous but actually seems to work just fine.

EC1000

hypersonic wrote: »

this is true of all sports, cycling, rugby, horse riding, rock climbing, etc etc.

Its not really. In triathlon, its up to one or two people to decide if the course is safe and suitable for the entrants on any given race day. Sometimes this call is marginal due to inclement weather, cold waters etc. In this respect, its uniquely different from other sports.

hypersonic

EC1000 wrote: »

Its not really. In triathlon, its up to one or two people to decide if the course is safe and suitable for the entrants on any given race day. Sometimes this call is marginal due to inclement weather, cold waters etc. In this respect, its uniquely different from other sports.

then maybe that is what needs to be changed. provide a briefing, out line the risks and then get the people who want to race sign a waiver.
putting all the responsibility on the officials will just absolve people of their own personal responsibility, and is kinda begging people to do stupid things.

griffin100

hypersonic wrote: »

this is true of all sports, cycling, rugby, horse riding, rock climbing, etc etc, triathlon is not particularly dangerous.

p.s. maybe compare it to mountain running, which is more open, probably more dangerous but actually seems to work just fine.

Triathlon is not particularly dangerous, but people still die doing it - primarily in the swim. Loneswimmer made a good point on his website this week (it's worth having a look) - open water swimming is much more dangerous than triathlon, but people tend not to die doing the former.

sconhome

hypersonic wrote: »

then maybe that is what needs to be changed. provide a briefing, out line the risks and then get the people who want to race sign a waiver.
putting all the responsibility on the officials will just absolve people of their own personal responsibility, and is kinda begging people to do stupid things.

You will find all that is already done at TI sanctioned races and it basically means nothing. You sign a declaration that you have swam 2/3 of the race distance and there's race briefing, but people ignore the consequences of 'stretching the truth' and simply sign the waiver.

Unfortunately risk does not follow nice simple rules and that is why officials are tasked with making decisions, often unpopular, for the greater good.

People are people and people do stupid things everyday.

Watch the news and you will see odd reports of drowning victims ( not related to triathlon) and very often it is the person who goes to the rescue that gets into trouble. People die saving others and it is stupid people putting other people's lives at risk which is the bigger issue. (I'm using 'stupid' in your context)

This is a bigger issue and not just focused on swim risks, there are also risks inherent to dangerous cycling too.

hypersonic

triathlon will eventually paint itself into a corner if it tries to remove all the risk.
I've been in a road race where a runner died, at no point did it cross my mind that it had anything to do with the sport or the race organizer, to me these things are an unfortunate fact of life and sport.

griffin100

hypersonic wrote: »

triathlon will eventually paint itself into a corner if it tries to remove all the risk.
I've been in a road race where a runner died, at no point did it cross my mind that it had anything to do with the sport or the race organizer, to me these things are an unfortunate fact of life and sport.

No one is talking about removing all of the risk from triathlon. It's about trying to manage the people who enter OW races with no concept of what the swim involves and consequently put themselves in danger and tie up safety crew who then can't monitor other competitors. There's something wrong with some competitors when the cancellation of a swim leads to cheers - would an announcement that a marathon was being cut to 20 miles lead to the same reaction amongst runners. Race directors have to take account of these persons when deciding if swims can progress and consequently there seems to be a tendency towards being too conservative.