To provide the best experiences, we and our partners use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us and our partners to process personal data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site and show (non-) personalized ads. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Click below to consent to the above or make granular choices. Your choices will be applied to this site only. You can change your settings at any time, including withdrawing your consent, by using the toggles on the Cookie Policy, or by clicking on the manage consent button at the bottom of the screen.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Good article.
From Strava (eg Matthews’) the Hamburg course was maybe 400m short.
Not sure what Haug’s Roth 2024 run distance was.
Aiui the Ironman UK 2011 run course, when Kristin Möller ran 2:41:57, was of uncertain distance. Her other best IM marathons were several between 2:55 and 2:59).
You (and many others) may suggest that being nit-picky about distances is a distraction. I’d merely observe that if we are that interested in ‘records’ aka ‘world best times’ ( @monty ) then under-distance does matter. Doubly so if we wish to compare times on the run section of an IM against top times on properly measured marathon road races.
One per cent of the marathon distance is 422m: that seems (to me) a reasonable tolerance for getting an IM run course ‘correct’.
Worth noting, in the context of the run in Kona in October, that both Sodaro (IMNZ 2024) and LCB have run sub 2:50 (latter in IM Nice last year, albeit a km short).
“It shouldn’t come as a surprise when . . . some other woman who isn’t even on most people’s radars smashes a sub-2:40 marathon later this season. However, while it shouldn’t be all that surprising, it will still be a extremely exciting whenever it happens next.”
Isn’t going to happen this year (Roth no competition, IMLP not fast, Kona adverse conditions), but agree!
Which SC triathlete who has a demon run is going to step up? If Beaugrand can run 14:53 stand alone (or Potter 14:42(?)), what could they run a marathon in?
I bet Tertsch or Lehair will be a force when they graduates to the hard stuff. But do they want to?
Good points all! I do like the suggestion of the 1% tolerance on the course stuff. We have long had an issue with accurate distances in the sport, but I do think things are getting better of late, and as you point out, we’re able to gauge things a bit better through Strava etc. I have always wondered about Kristin’s UK time as it was such an outlier for her, but Thorsten at Trirating.com has always included it in his list so I was happy to keep that included in the list (when I was editing Ben’s story.)
(That said, Kristin routinely had a quick run, as I witnessed in person more than a few times including her win in Lanzarote and her third in Frankfurt, where she was four minutes faster than any one else in the field.)
I guess there is a few things at play are we realy going to trust watches to measure a race course …
can we talk about a marathon if we can be bothered to really measure courses seriously
how much time do we have to add for Hamburg with all the corners and 180
turns.
how much for gravel and cobblestone surface or concrete in Texas
same we cant compare the Roth run course from now with the one 5 years ago
what I would say, I think we should not write as naively abut marathon pbs as in the article, we should be a bit more serious to point out why it is so hard to talk about records.
Thorsten does a good job of discussing this in the rubric to his ‘IM Records’ page:
https://www.trirating.com/ironman-distance-records/
which he updated yesterday (after Hamburg/Florianopolis)
“Any post of “Ironman Records” has to be preceded with a discussion that “records” are a tricky concept for the sport of triathlon. First of all, it’s an outside sport on a “natural” course, so there are a lot of variations in climate and topography. (For this reason, some prefer the term “fastest known times”.) Next up, there are often issues about the course accuracy, even leaving aside the technical details on how to properly measure a course. Some races “chase” fast times and maybe don’t go the “extra mile” needed to come up with exactly the right distances.”
Wellington ran a 2:44:35 back in 2011 (14 years ago). Factor in 4% from todays super shoes (vs. 2011 tech) and she’s running 2:38. That’s not even factoring for the time shortening of the events preceding the run due to factors like CdA and Crr gains on the bike.
What is changing is the number of athletes capable of that level of performance. In 2011 Wellington was in her own league. Today you have Laura, Kat, Anne, and a handful of others that can play in that range.