Jump to content
Toolish

Ironman - 10 hours

Recommended Posts

Your "under 90kg" is so subjective it's ridiculous.

 

You at 90kg (6ft 4) and me at 90kg (5ft 10) are worlds apart. I'm around 86kg now and I know for sure that unless I force fed myself even more chocolate than I eat now, there is no way I can do the training needed to go sub 10 and stay at the weight I currently am, let alone put another 5kg on.

 

And I do speak from experience.

Lucky for you, you get to have an opinion because you're not fat.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol.

 

we have a fat guy, who doesn't have the fortitude to do the work, telling people they are soft if they don't go sub 10 hours- as long as they train hard enough?

 

what am i missing here?

Not to mention with his significant stride length advantage it is amazing he hasn't run a 2:15 mara off the bike or swum a 38min with his Mark Spitz wing span. We can take logic like this anywhere. Edited by Diamonds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tell that to someone with altitude sickness.

A little off topic but huh? Altitude sickness at 2500m?

 

Also, this weight debate is pointless. Chances are someone that is 95kg and 6'6 is probably going to be quicker than someone who is 80kg and 4'10. It's also possible to be 90kg with 8% body fat and 90kg with 40% body fat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lucky for you, you get to have an opinion because you're not fat.

It's all relative nealo. When I was 74kg last year, 86kg feels awfully fat to me, especially going uphill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tell that to the people under 90kg who failed to go sub. 10 despite following a qualified coaches program.

Qualified coach..... Weekend course and you're in......

 

You see, I live in an area rich with triathlon, I see how people train, world champions and the like, and how people train but there going through the motions, not really training....

 

Now Coaches, not all coaches though, set programmes for their customers. Now if the customer wants, the customer often gets (no need to comment grinch). Its a fact of life.

 

Some coaches are great, others are offerings life coach experience, and people are there for all different reasons, some to be the best triathlete they can be, others for the comraderie, others for x, there is a litany of reasons why coaches and athletes do the sport. I wonder how many athletes swap coach's. I wonder how many coaches sack athletes ?

 

Do you reckon there are coaches out there that take the cheque and are never honest with the athlete?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A little off topic but huh? Altitude sickness at 2500m?

 

 

It's possible at 2400m and above but uncommon.

 

Anyway, altitude sickness is a binary thing - you have it or you don't. The real hardness of altitude is the thin air - which isn't much of a factor at 2500m.

 

PS to the OP - I race at about 80kg and haven't broken 12 hours yet, after a couple years of pretty steady training and some bitchen aero gear. It's not all about the weight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A little off topic but huh? Altitude sickness at 2500m?

 

Also, this weight debate is pointless. Chances are someone that is 95kg and 6'6 is probably going to be quicker than someone who is 80kg and 4'10. It's also possible to be 90kg with 8% body fat and 90kg with 40% body fat.

I dunno, i googled 2500... Lol. I've seen it at about 4500.

 

Yeah, but that's m point about the weight, someone 4'10 with 40% body fat isnt training properly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Also, this weight debate is pointless. Chances are someone that is 95kg and 6'6 is probably going to be quicker than someone who is 80kg and 4'10. It's also possible to be 90kg with 8% body fat and 90kg with 40% body fat.

Hows about 107kg and 36% flubber?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to mention with his significant stride length advantage it is amazing he hasn't run a 2:15 mara off the bike or swum a 38min with his Mark Spitz wing span. We can take logic like this anywhere.

I think 3:15 is a more realistic goal.

 

I might have swum 38 in New York.... Lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your "under 90kg" is so subjective it's ridiculous.

 

You at 90kg (6ft 4) and me at 90kg (5ft 10) are worlds apart. I'm around 86kg now and I know for sure that unless I force fed myself even more chocolate than I eat now, there is no way I can do the training needed to go sub 10 and stay at the weight I currently am, let alone put another 5kg on.

 

And I do speak from experience.

Wouldn't you eat less chocolate and get leaner than 86...,

 

Your missing my point, train properly and get fit, if you swallow a gobful of wonka's finest and get fat and b 89kg, you ain't going sub 10.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think 3:15 is a more realistic goal.

 

I might have swum 38 in New York.... Lol

Dunno. I cant break 4 hours and take two steps to your one. If we both run 4, you must have a cadence of 45 or just refuse to take the right size strides for your frame. Why do you big lumps only half stride? LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tell that to the people under 90kg who failed to go sub. 10 despite following a qualified coaches program.

yep

about 1500 people in every ironman held in oz in the last ten years

sub 10 is a lot harder than just being 89kgs and doing 3 swim rides and runs a week

 

sub 10 also comes ahell of a lot easier at melb and busso , so OLs 10hr 50 at busso is more like 11-30 at port (maybe 12hrs if hes 90.1 KGs)

cheers

IP

Edited by ironpo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dunno. I cant break 4 hours and take two steps to your one. If we both run 4, you must have a cadence of 45 or just refuse to take the right size strides for your frame. Why do you big lumps only half stride? LOL

. Lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yep

about 1500 people in every ironman held in oz in the last ten years

sub 10 is a lot harder than just being 89kgs and doing 3 swim rides and runs a week

 

sub 10 also comes ahell of a lot easier at melb and busso , so OLs 10hr 50 at busso is more like 11-30 at port (maybe 12hrs if hes 90.1 KGs)

cheers

IP

But STILL sub 13 ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yep

about 1500 people in every ironman held in oz in the last ten years

sub 10 is a lot harder than just being 89kgs and doing 3 swim rides and runs a week

 

sub 10 also comes ahell of a lot easier at melb and busso , so OPs 10hr 50 at busso is more like 11-30 at port (maybe 12hrs if hes 90.1 KGs)

cheers

IP

It was 10'50 something, not 10'50.

 

At 95kgs, and with 8kms of severe cramping on the run did 11'06 (i think) at port. I wasn't race hardened enough, did a lot of sprint triathlons in the lead up and only two rides over 100k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to mention you are the only bloke in the field who can physically not draft. Us little blokes can suck the rubber off the wheel in front. There is your sub 10 right there! Sub 8:45 at Franga

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just scrolled through this thread. To paraphrase "anyone under 90kg should with the right training break 10hours in an IM easy" according to a guy who hasn't done it yet!!!

 

Hmmmmm...

 

It ain't as easy as you think mate even in Melbourne or Busso etc. Look at the results. Busso 2011 100 people broke 10hrs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just scrolled through this thread. To paraphrase "anyone under 90kg should with the right training break 10hours in an IM easy" according to a guy who hasn't done it yet!!!

Hmmmmm...

It ain't as easy as you think mate even in Melbourne or Busso etc. Look at the results. Busso 2011 100 people broke 10hrs

You missed a bit.

 

If you train properly on the right course with the right conditions and are fit....... Busso in 2011 was a day when the wind blew if memory serves, so the swim an bike were tough and the sun came out to heat up the run, so not ideal conditions

Edited by Oompa Loompa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was 10'50 something, not 10'50.

At 95kgs, and with 8kms of severe cramping on the run did 11'06 (i think) at port. I wasn't race hardened enough, did a lot of sprint triathlons in the lead up and only two rides over 100k

Still 1000 miles off sub ten at port even if your 80 kg

You still have to have the mongrel

There are plenty of time in that 559 minutes to find any excuse you want to drag up why you didn't do it

Cheers

Ip

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still 1000 miles off sub ten at port even if your 80 kg

You still have to have the mongrel

There are plenty of time in that 559 minutes to find any excuse you want to drag up why you didn't do it

Cheers

Ip

So are you saying if you have a mongrel, you will go sub 10 at under 90kgs. I would imagine you would have to cover it with your race number?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More excuses?

Why are you always looking for excuses.

 

What's so hard about accepting that Ifyour under 90kg, fit, on the right course with the right conditions, you have a good race, you'll go sub 10. Be positive, have some faith in your fellow triathletes and what they can achieve. It sounds like people are quitting before they start and have no faith in themselves.

 

Do you think macca an crowie would have gone sub 8 if they didnt believe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like I'm soft then, 30mins off a sub 10 and I'm well under 90kg

 

I would have gone sub 10, but it was windy, I have nutrition problems, I spent a good 10mins emptying poo poo, I cramped on the run, and it was just a farking hard day :) I just don't have the excuse that I'm over 90kg, damn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like I'm soft then, 30mins off a sub 10 and I'm well under 90kg

I would have gone sub 10, but it was windy, I have nutrition problems, I spent a good 10mins emptying poo poo, I cramped on the run, and it was just a farking hard day :) I just don't have the excuse that I'm over 90kg, damn

If you sort out your nutrition, poo poos and cramping you'll get there. Based on what you wrote I have faith in you, that you can achieve sub10 even if windy. You just need to have the same faith in yourself that I have in you. You can do it if you believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes we all need some extra help to connect with our inner aura and channel our secret, mystical super powers.

 

I know who I turn to at times like this...

 

 

 

He is my hero

Edited by The Glycogen Lilo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just checked the data -

 

6.6% of finishers overall in a combined total of 11498 Australian ironman athletes (3 year sample) go under 10 hours

 

93.4% of Ironman athletes must be over 90kgs or lazy :)

Edited by Coach@triathlon
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Some coaches are great, others are offerings life coach experience, and people are there for all different reasons, some to be the best triathlete they can be, others for the comraderie, others for x, there is a litany of reasons why coaches and athletes do the sport. I wonder how many athletes swap coach's. I wonder how many coaches sack athletes ?

 

Lots of athletes swap coaches - but they seldom do any better - in fact they often struggle to achieve what they have in the past - because they take their same attitudes / problems / excuses with them - if they could truly leave the past behind they'd have a better chance of improvement

 

And coaches do occasionally sack athletes but they usually don't have to - it's a bit like a restaurant - if you don't like it you usually don't go back - you usually don't have to be thrown out :scared:

 

This is a typical Transitions thread - a thread about breaking 10hrs for an IM and most of the posters have never been close and never will go close :scared:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This is a typical Transitions thread - a thread about breaking 10hrs for an IM and most of the posters have never been close and never will go close :scared:

Spot on Al, its why Cronulla won't ever win the NRL, they've never done it before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

:scared:

 

This is a typical Transitions thread - a thread about breaking 10hrs for an IM and most of the posters have never been close and never will go close :scared:

AP, how close does one need to be to comment?

10:30 not close at all

10:10 getting closer

10:05 there was a head wind, >40c......, I had a broken leg....and I'm not using that as excuse, but is that close enough :-)

 

in the spirit of full disclosure, 10:40s is as close as I've been ,.... and I knew It'd be unlikely that I could get much closer. so no advice from me.... :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chiming in without experience here but it takes more than being light and consistent training to go sub 10 imo.

 

OL like you I'm tall at 6-4 but I'm 80kg possibly lighter haven't weighed in a fair few weeks.

 

Believing you can do a time doesn't do squat. I believed it was possible for me to go 4:30 at sunny coast on the weekend. You know what I didn't. Sure you can say x, y and z effected me and my lead up but bottom line is I didn't get it just like 93% of other triathletes didn't go sub 10. You either do or don't. None of this I did this but could have if I did this. That is what makes it so difficult. you are right in saying if you don't think you can do it, it's likely you can't.

 

Generalising a sub 10 at less than 90 and a bit of training is easy is a bit far fetched

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whats the 70.3 mark someone needs to aim for to make 10hrs realistic? Also was sunshine coast particularly fast or did the squad I am in just all manage to do great times (on their personal level)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Closer than 13hrs

 

a number of my training buddies have gone < 10 and 90% of my mine have gone < 13..... but I'll still reserve comment.

 

but to the 7% of athletes that have gone <10:00 well done.

 

Following from RBR's question, is the old guideline of 70.3 time x 2 + 1 hr still considered a realistic measure for MOP-BOP performers?

Edited by AVAGO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When i broke ten hours (it was a long time ago when triathlon was hard - TU was still racing back then) I didn't even think about time, I didn't work out what I have to do to break it - I just went as hard as I could for as long as I could and that's what I got

1990 - 11.56

1992 - 10.44

1993 - 10.08

1994 - 9.55

did a couple of NZIM

1997 9.58

1998 - 10.07

1999 - 10.07

2000 - 10.00.02

2001 - 10.00.32

2002 - 11.10 (been sick)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When i broke ten hours (it was a long time ago when triathlon was hard - TU was still racing back then) I didn't even think about time, I didn't work out what I have to do to break it - I just went as hard as I could for as long as I could and that's what I got

So in a nutshell you're saying train hard, race harder and the results will take care of themselves?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So in a nutshell you're saying train hard, race harder and the results will take care of themselves?

Who'd a thought.

 

It only took 6 pages.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well when you say hard - I rarely ever let my HR go over 153 - if I was out running and came to a hill where my HR went higher than 153 - I walked till it came back to 150 then ran again - on the bike I geared down and spun the gears over the hills - I did a lot of climbing at 150-153 - when you say train hard - as you get fitter you have to work to stay at 150-153

 

My resting was around 38-40 and my max was 185 - I may have run track sessions once a week for about 18 weeks of the year in blocks of 6 weeks - all 400m efforts but never flat out - just 2-5 seconds faster than my 5km TT pace

 

I ran up to 3hrs on only a dessert spoon of olive oil and water - I would carry money or gels in case I needed fuel but would rarely use them

 

But when I raced I would just go as hard as I could without going over 153HR - but I was fit and couldn't go near that on the run - I just ran as fast as my legs would carry me - always focussed on technique :smile1: I never race with a watch

 

The guys who are plotting everything with power meters and GPS are totally on the wrong track - look at PJ's performance either last year in Hawaii or yesterday at Mooloolaba (no need for GPS or power here) :shy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The guys who are plotting everything with power meters and GPS are totally on the wrong track - look at PJ's performance either last year in Hawaii or yesterday at Mooloolaba (no need for GPS or power here) :shy:

 

It seems odd then that he is sponsored by Quarq, races with a Garmin on his stem and put his Kona 2012 power file up for analysis at TrainingPeaks.

http://home.trainingpeaks.com/races/ironman-world-championship-kona/2012.aspx

It's not binary. Using a power meter doesn't necessarily mean being a slave to the numbers. It's not a crutch. It's a tool that can provide valuable information at times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chiming in without experience here but it takes more than being light and consistent training to go sub 10 imo.

OL like you I'm tall at 6-4 but I'm 80kg possibly lighter haven't weighed in a fair few weeks.

Believing you can do a time doesn't do squat. I believed it was possible for me to go 4:30 at sunny coast on the weekend. You know what I didn't. Sure you can say x, y and z effected me and my lead up but bottom line is I didn't get it just like 93% of other triathletes didn't go sub 10. You either do or don't. None of this I did this but could have if I did this. That is what makes it so difficult. you are right in saying if you don't think you can do it, it's likely you can't.

Generalising a sub 10 at less than 90 and a bit of training is easy is a bit far fetched

Do you think you might be too light, lost "power" ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...