RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - Triathlons


Archive Home >> Triathlons


Half Ironman Times? What to expect?(11 posts)

Half Ironman Times? What to expect?haydensimons
Apr 30, 2002 9:37 AM
I've done a couple of sprint tris and will be doing a few olympic distance this summer. I am looking at doing a Half-Ironman on August 17th. I just did the first one of the season 2 weeks ago. Times were:
600m swim: 16:30
11.2mile bike: 38:50
5k run: 23:30
I realize my swim is slow. I know I need much more practice in open water. I was swimming the 600m in 11:30 2 days before the race. What kind of time do you think I could finish a Half Ironman in? Am I ignorant for even attempting? I'd like to do it in under 6 1/2 hours. The other day I biked 50 miles in 2:45. That included rest stops to eat. Any help is appreciated.
re: Half Ironman Times? What to expect?brider
Apr 30, 2002 1:44 PM
It's virtually impossible to predict your finish time based on the data you presented. The swim will be 3-1/2 times as long, the bike will be 4-1/2 times as long, and the run will be 4 times as long. If you were in a totally steady state that you knew you could maintain for the entire distance, then you could extrapolate the times, but it doesn't work that way in real life. Most likely you'll not want to stop on the bike leg, maybe just get a feed bag. Also, what about the weather? How acclimated are you to the conditions most likely to be present on race day? Also, you've got a lot of build up time before your half-IM, so that throws EVERYTING out the window. Maybe as some sort of yardstick, I could knock off Olympic distance races in under two hours easily, but my half-IM time was 4:45. They're just such different animals that it's very hard to predict one from the other.
Fast bialiu02bhs
Apr 30, 2002 7:42 PM
Brider you are one fast bia. You can do a olympic distance sub-2 easily? Are you like a top age-grouper or pro?
Fast biabrider
May 1, 2002 5:18 AM
It's not so much a matter of I "can" as much as I "could". In my day (1988-1994) I was near-pro level. However, I was also trying to hold down a full-time engineering job and keep a house (true fixer-upper) from collap[sing around my ears. I decided that I'd need to give one up to make the leap into pros, with the possibility of a lower income. Not acceptable to me (and my now-ex). So I backed off and went into bike racing.
Sacrificeliu02bhs
May 2, 2002 5:48 PM
I feel you brother. I wish I was good enough for pro, pros now days gets a lot of dough, if they win a lot of course. My friend has the dilemma of choosing bewteen going pro and going to school. He chose school, I think it's a wise long term choice. Although if I can the choice, I would of gone for the glory. But I don't, so I have to go get my engineering degree. If only smart people can also be athletic, what would the world be like, I'll never know.

Okay, I think my post was just incredibly stupid and immature.
Sacrificebrider
May 3, 2002 8:13 AM
Actually, your friend's dilemma isn't all that hard to address. If it's a choice between school and tri (making a go of it in the pro ranks) I'd say give the sport a chance. Now that's with the caveat that he (or she) doesn't have family and house type commitments that need the secure income. Many times a prt-time job along with winnings (and contracts) can keep the income stable, while allowing anough time for training and travel. Make sure that travel costs are negotiated into the endorsement and sponsorship contracts. Now if there's a wife (or husband) and children added to the mix, that changes things considerably.

And yes, the pros now make much more $$ than 15 years ago, as then it was an elite few that made good $, and the rest were sniffing at the scraps left over. Now, it's about winning, media placement and marketing.

I have an engineering degree. It's not all it's cracked up to be. I'm going to get on a little bit of a soapbox here, so bear with me. I'll start with an illustration:

The company I work for (the only major commercial airline manufacturer in the US) routinely takes in summer interns from colleges across the country. At one of the crew meetings for my group, the supervisor had the interns stay outside the conference room while he conducted a survey of the group: what year car do you drive? He plotted the data on a chart, which made a bell-curve. The peak of the curve? Right around 1993 (this was done just last summer). He then removed the data from the chart, brought in the interns, and asked them to put the curve on the chart, based on what they thought the people wer driving. They centered the curve at 1999. He then showed them the actual data, and just left it at that. I'm thinking "What the..." So after the meeting, I took some of the interns aside and asked them what they thought the chart told them. They had no clue. I then told them "These engineers aren't living the life you think they are!"

So here's my advice to ANYONE looking at getting into a career (especially college students who are pidgeon-holing themselves into a life-long pursuit of income): Take a look at how the people live who have been doing what you're going to school to do for at least 10 years. Look at their house, their cars, their income, their savings and 401K balances, their debt load, their family life, their marriages, their kids, their free time. Is that the kind of life you want? If not, you'd better look for another career. Or better yet, try this: Look for the people who live like you want to live, and do what they do!

All my life, I was asked what I wanted to be when I grew up. That is so backwards. I ask people how they want to live, then tell them to find a way to make that happen (through whatever job or business vehicle can make it happen). Don't even start down the road of "I need to be fulfilled in what I do..." or "I need to love what I do." Horse crap. Do what WORKS! If you try to do ANYTHING that you love to do for $$, you will soon lose the love of it. Do what WORKS financially, so you can then go do the things you love to do on your terms.

Okay, so I'm climbing down off the soapbox now.
my soapboxSteveO
May 3, 2002 10:05 AM
I'm an engineer (SW), I drive a 1991 volvo with 220,000 miles. I do NOT define my success in the car I drive; nor do i drive a specific car (or year) to mark my success. [Many others feel the same way (i would think especially amongst a bunch of bike enthusiasts)].

Does that mean we dont live fulfilled lives? Or we're not financially secure? It simply means people with different priorities are throwing off your 'bell curve', the results of which are being judged as 'success'.

Personally, I prefer having a larger 401k, 5 weeks of travel per year, A single-income household, etc., over a newer car. I couldnt be happier or more comfortable, even though, based on your criteria, id be at the bottom of your success rating.

Dont get me wrong, I agree that the college years are the time to play around, experiment, determine where you wanna head. But dont bash career fulfillment based on interpretation of a bell curve centered around transportation choices.
my soapboxbrider
May 3, 2002 10:47 AM
That was only part of it. Ask the rest of the questions. Personally, I look around at those who have been doing the engineering thing 10 years more than I have (I'm at 13+ years now), and they're NO BETTER OFF than they were 10 years ago. Across the board. THAT'S the lesson I was trying to get across. Kudo's to you if you have the 401K in order (and not by some financial planner's idea of success), the house, and the one-income home. You're truly rare if you do. BTW, what sort of income do you want at retirement? Say you're 35 now, and want to retire at 55 to a $50K (in today's dollars) income. That equates to a $90K income at retirement (rule of 72). You'd need an investment portfolio of $1.6 million (unless you're planning on living off some of the principal, which is not a smart thing to do). So, how close to on-track are you? Do you know that the financial plannig world WON'T tell you what you REALLY need to retire? They don't because if they did, people would get so discouraged that they'd NEVER START! So they dumb down the numbers, figuring something is better than nothing.

BTW, I don't count the nice car as any sort of sign of success, especially considering most of them are either financed or leased.
Should I switch major?liu02bhs
May 3, 2002 7:33 PM
I really like engineering, especially aerospace engineering. I hope one day I can work in Lockeed Martin or similar companies designing fighters. But many people have told me, engineers don't make a lot of money. They try to dissuade me from the path. Even my teachers are doing it. I generally do well in anything I attempt, so switching major before college start isn't too late. Do y'all think I should switch major? If so which major? I don't want to be a lawyer (I hate writing) nor a doctor (I hate blood).
Should I switch major?brider
May 5, 2002 6:57 PM
Here's some tenets of business for success:

1) you have to own it. Working for a company (no matter which one) puts someone else incontrol of your financial destiny.
2) watch trends. The greatest wealth has been created by positioning one self in front of trends.
3) Think long-term -- create residual income.
4) Stay debt free.
5) duplicate yourself.

Now there's nothing wrong with engineering. However, there's very few ways to get going in engineering without working for another company. My advice is to stick out the education, get a job with a large company, then start yourt own part-time business that fits the above criteria. If you have more questions, you can e-mail me directly: brider@wwdb.org
Should I switch major?SteveO
May 6, 2002 4:00 AM
First off, you should enjoy your career, too many people emphasize money over enjoyment (sure, lawyers make decent money, but most also work 80 hrs/ week. is that enjoyable to you?)

Having said that, you can make quite a decent living working at lmart (you'll never get RICH, but you'll be more than comfortable).

Do what you enjoy, maximize earning potential while doing so, and ignore those who dis your career path.

Unless your so shallow as to define success by income-level.