Starting immediately, all new users must be approved by a moderator (due to spam issues). #sworry
You can dismiss this message by clicking the little 'X' in the top right this box.
If you are a pro triathlete, please click here to DM AaronWebstey for access to the 'Pros-only' private forum. Don't forget to include your real name, and a link to pro race result would be great if you're a 1st-year pro.
Hmm, I try to instead think that without spending that money I'd be a drunk asshole all the time, which would probably cost me more in the end. So.
(This is all approximate)
Training camp - like $1000 for everything Half-marathon - $100 Galveston - $275 + $400ish (and airline miles) for flight/Airbnb/bike/rental car Wildflower - ooh, got an entry to that, but $250 for RV Pacific Grove - free, yay Dipsea - $60 Vineman - $625 (oh god, I can't believe I bought a Charity entry for this, but upside - no travel costs) Whistler 70.3 - $220 + $400 for flight/rental car -- but it was Canadian dollars so it doesn't count TriCal's Alcatraz race - $390 Kona - I dunno, thousands and thousands of dollars + the fact that I didn't make any money for a solid three weeks.
Good thing I'm going pro now, so I'll be rolling in cash.
I'm trying to think about this. I also felt slightly ehhhhh about the tweets, but I got the point, so I wasn't exactly offended, just not sure it was the most effective or least tacky way to get the point across.
And now I'm trying to figure out why I had this feeling that it was tacky to bring up Sutton's history. Because it did feel like 'oh, we shouldn't talk about that.' I think it's because 1. I never really looked at all the details, so I'd been left with this vague impression that he'd had sex with a minor, but she was like 16 or something and it was consensual (even though, yes, I get that in a coaching relationship with younger girls, consensual is never really consensual, because the power-dynamic is too messed up). and 2. I think I had another vague sense that he'd rehabilitated, made things right and learned. And, generally, I believe in rehabilitation, and am not a huge fan of throwing people in prison forever. I do believe people, almost no matter the crime, should be allowed to earn a way back into society. So, I am willing and ready to believe that Sutton can be a useful part of the triathlon community. I think, in a sense, that's what made me uneasy -- that we're going to troll someone on Twitter 15 years after a crime and not allow them to prove they've changed.
[The Brock analogy, while timely, does lend itself to moral relativism, but also the reason people are so up in arms about that has more to do with it as an example of a flawed justice system in how we deal with campus rape and privilege, like everyone finally decided to pay attention to this problem.]
I think most people in triathlon probably have these same vague ideas about Sutton, and have never really looked at the details. I also think, though, probably, no one really wants to think too hard about it. And, sure, it's easier to ignore those facts when he produces very good athletes. (That's NOT unique to triathlon though. Look at what USA Swimming has gone through in the last couple years with widespread coach-sexual abuse issues. And gymnastics, oh man, that shit is messed up.) And everyone knows someone who worked with him, so you want to believe your first-hand experiences trump what you've heard on the internet. Plus, and this may be a little complicated, but the top-level coach-female athlete relationship tends to be fraught with fucked up power dynamics, and Sutton's known for being crazy controlling of every aspect of his athletes' lives, so in a way these issues feel like they're simply an extension of that? Which may be why it's easier to ignore -- like, no shit?
Oh my god, since everyone is arguing with me on Twitter about math. Here you go:
At a 12m drafting zone x 2,000 bikes, you'd need 24,000m, which equals just under 15 miles. That means that literally if you had a bike spaced exactly every 12 meters it'd be a line stretching about 15 miles.
OK, so then what is the time needed from that first biker to the last one. Obviously, this gets trickier because people bike at different speeds. But the average bike split in a 70.3 is about 3:00, which is 18.6 mph or so, which means at that average speed it'd take 48 minutes from the first person in our 15-mile line to when the last person could start.
Now, at Galveston (for example), I believe the gap between the first age group wave and the last age group wave was either 40 or 44 minutes. Not 100% sure. Either way, it's almost enough time technically if every single person goes at the exact same bike speed and starts the bike at the same intervals apart. If so, then you'd have your magic 15-mile line exactly evenly spaced out all traveling at 18.6 mph.
THE PROBLEM IS 1. clearly that's not how biking in a race actually works, since some people are faster and some are slower, so in practice that perfect 15-mile line isn't possible, so you need more buffers in between people to allow for passing and falling back, and 2. people don't come out of the swim evenly spaced out. They don't even start evenly spaced out, because it's not like it's one steady stream that enters the water, by definition it's waves every 4 minutes. So unless you spread out those waves more to create more buffer time or held people after the swim to release them at set intervals onto the bike, it's really simply not realistically possible on some of these courses to have all the bikers over the given distances within the given times and maintain the required zones. (You could also resolve the bike speed discrepancy issue if it was actually completely seeded so that it exactly went from fastest to slowest from front to back, because then the gaps would widen as people rode. Instead of the gaps becoming more smashed up as fast people at the back catch slow people at the front, which is another factor in our equation.)