My triathlon resume thus far consisted of 6 races, all sprint distance, up until yesterday at the Rochesterfest Triathlon where I finally did an Olympic distance triathlon (RESULTS). My goal was to go under 2:30:00. On paper( well, the internet) using this calculator and estimated splits, I could've went just under 2:16:30. Here's a recap...
SWIM (1.5 k): My goal for the swim was 30 minutes. Long, but still a goal as my swim training consists of a mere 2 sessions per week at 30 to 45 minutes each. Just enough to keep my floating. The Rochesterfest Olympic distance swim is set up Xterra style. You do two laps separated by an exit from the water, across the beach and a timing mat (so you get lap splits for the swim) then you plunge back in for a second lap. The start waves were huge--about 60-70 in wave two. Pretty much all non-elite men under age 39. I was kicked in the face a couple times so hard that I thought would result in a black eye, but nothing really came of it. After things spread out a bit, I felt ok. I checked my HRM when I came out of the water and I could see that I was at 14 minutes and some change. I thought "This is good--I could go under 30." I went back in, had a much better second lap, but it was longer than the first. Oh well. I barely made it under 30 with a time of 29:58. The run up the hill was a little rough, but had my wetsuit top off within seconds. I was happy to see 'strippers' at the top of the beach. No, not that kind of stripper. They had wetsuit strippers available yanking suits right off your body. They got my wetsuit bottoms pulled off very quick. I was off to my bike--where I believe 'my' race started.
BIKE (25 miles): I never set goals based on speed when training. It's probably one of the worst things you could do because if you need to stay in a certain zone, but you set an average speed goal, you may blow your training ride due to weather conditions (ie: wind), terrain, or other things out of your control. However, for racing, it's ok to set a goal, but you should use past race paces, adjusted for the distance, course, etc. I know this course reasonable well. I knew it was pretty hilly, there were predictions of 12+ mph wind so I figured my speed would be a little slower than normal. I reviewed some of my past average speeds and took a look as how the top 20 or so guys paced at last years Rochesterfest olympic race and determined that I could probably manage 23 mph without much trouble. It took a while to get out of town as there were many sprint distance participants already on the road. The course went north and west out of Rochester to Oronoco by way of long stretches north, with some shorter roads heading west. The wind felt pretty strong out of the west. So strong that at times I was wobbling bad enough that I thought I had a flat tire. At about mile 4 I took down an e-Gel (see sidebar for link--they kick a$$). I had two with me and knew I would need them both. I was running water in the Aerodrink, but had mixed in a packet of Power Edge. You know those drink packets like Propell, or Crystallite, well, Power Edge is a sugar free packet with the punch of Redbull. Its supposed to be one packet to 16 oz of water, but I had it weaker because my Aerodrink was topped off. However, it was still too strong. It burned in my stomach a bit and was only able to eat one gel for the duration of the race. The turn around for the sprint course was a problem. The sprint course people needed to turn 180 degrees to the left at the mile 5 mark. (The first 5 of each course were the same route.) The volunteers were not telling them to move to the left to make there turn. We, olympic racers, couldn't pass on the left because they, sprinters, could turn into us. We couldn't pass on the right because they were going wide right in order to turn left. Due to a rider I was gaining on pretty fast, who was slowing, I had to slow to her turn-around speed. I thought I was going to have to do a track stand! Once that situation cleared, I ramped up the effort a bit. The course is mostly an out and back with a loop in Oronoco. The Oronoco loop was the prior Winter BeGone Du long run course loop in reverse. Entering Oronoco I kept thinking was that once we start heading east and south on the way back we'll have some tail wind to help us out. At the half way point on the bike I was at 21.1 average speed. I nailed the hills pretty hard on the way back because with the tailwind it was a little easier to keep momentum going into them. I did keep my HR under threshold knowing I'd need the energy for the run. By the time I racked my bike in T2 my computer was showing 23.1 average speed. It would officially end up 23.4--fast enough to rank as the 10th fastest bike split of the day, including the Elites.
RUN (10 k): Right from the start...pain. Once I got into a rhythm I was picking people off--mainly runners that were suffering more than me. And many of which had to be sprint coursers. At about 1.5 miles into the run I saw the first male, elite Sam Hauck, followed by a couple others (not close enough to catch him) coming back. I thought I was in pretty good shape considering they went off 3 minutes before me, they could actually 'race' the swim, and were all-around faster triathletes. At the halfway point in the run I was under 20 minutes. I didn't hit 'lap' on my HRM, but know I started the run at 1:36:30 (give or take a few secs). When I hit the turn around I was at 1 hr 57 minutes--and I don't know how many seconds. I new I was around 20-21 minutes for the first half of the run, and it appeared that I was on track to go under 2:16:30 or at least 2:16:59. The run back was pretty miserable. Shortly after the turn around, my legs got really heavy. There was a section of trail (dirt/sand) that ran along the river so that can be a bit slower. Since we went down a hill to get next to the river, it meant running up to get back on to the regular course. Then it came--the hill going back up to the road. I've been on this before, but today, being tired, it felt worse than it really was. It's a short, maybe 30 feet, gravely/sandy little jaunt back up to a sidewalk/paved path. However, it felt like running the wrong way up an escalator with a bungie cord pulling you back. It was a slow last couple of miles to the finish. I lost a couple minutes in the second half of the run. My predicted 10k time was just under 40 minutes, but I went 42: 04.
In the end, I completed my first Olympic distance triathlon in 2:19:05. I'll take it!
For the Olympic race, including Elites, here's how I faired:
20th OVERALL (185 finishers)
139th Swim (I think I need to work on that...)
10th Bike
21st Run
3rd Age Group 35-39 (16 finishers)
11th Swim
1st Bike
2nd Run
Monday, June 29, 2009
Friday, June 26, 2009
Full-Bar
Ok, I have delayed in writing my review of Full-Bar. Almost a couple months ago, I was talking about some new bars on the market and mentioned Full-Bar. I received a couple samples from them and, well, they're pretty good.
The idea is to eat a Full-Bar about 1/2 hour before a meal, wash it down with a glass of water, and you will eat less during your meal. From what I could tell, it works. First of all, the bars are pretty big. Visually, they are filling. However, when you hold it, it is really light weight. So you end up eating a lot of bar, but it doesn't leave you feeling weighed down and heavy. The bar is mainly made from puffed wheat--picture a nutrition bar made from Post Honey Crisp cereal. Its not made from that, however. The bars are pretty tasty, fairly nutritious, and have a good amount of fiber. We had soft shell burrito's for dinner the night I had the bar. (Pinto beans, salsa, lettuce, avocado, sour supreme, and Mission medium white, and whole grain tortilla's.) Normally, I have about 3 of those. That night, one. I started to feel full, but not sickly. Sort of like after you eat pasta and feel full--that feeling. My mouth still wanted the taste of another burrito, but I just had a mini burrito bowl after the one burrito. Then I was done.
I had the Cranberry and the Choco flavor. I have to say this too... Before I followed the directions on their eat-a-bar-before-you-eat-a-meal method, I had the choco flavor as a between meal snack (a few days earlier than my experient described above). I was really hungry after work, ate the bar, then we had a late dinner. The bar may not be intended for that, but it worked that way too. If I am hungry right when I get home I may have something like a bowl of cereal, some fruit, etc, but the Full-Bar did the trick in that way as well.
Check them out at http://www.fullbar.com/
The idea is to eat a Full-Bar about 1/2 hour before a meal, wash it down with a glass of water, and you will eat less during your meal. From what I could tell, it works. First of all, the bars are pretty big. Visually, they are filling. However, when you hold it, it is really light weight. So you end up eating a lot of bar, but it doesn't leave you feeling weighed down and heavy. The bar is mainly made from puffed wheat--picture a nutrition bar made from Post Honey Crisp cereal. Its not made from that, however. The bars are pretty tasty, fairly nutritious, and have a good amount of fiber. We had soft shell burrito's for dinner the night I had the bar. (Pinto beans, salsa, lettuce, avocado, sour supreme, and Mission medium white, and whole grain tortilla's.) Normally, I have about 3 of those. That night, one. I started to feel full, but not sickly. Sort of like after you eat pasta and feel full--that feeling. My mouth still wanted the taste of another burrito, but I just had a mini burrito bowl after the one burrito. Then I was done.
I had the Cranberry and the Choco flavor. I have to say this too... Before I followed the directions on their eat-a-bar-before-you-eat-a-meal method, I had the choco flavor as a between meal snack (a few days earlier than my experient described above). I was really hungry after work, ate the bar, then we had a late dinner. The bar may not be intended for that, but it worked that way too. If I am hungry right when I get home I may have something like a bowl of cereal, some fruit, etc, but the Full-Bar did the trick in that way as well.
Check them out at http://www.fullbar.com/
Monday, June 22, 2009
Last Longer Session til Race
Yesterday, I got up early and put in a 1.5 hour bike, followed by a 45 minute run. That's not really too long, its just long compared to this next week. I've been tapering for a couple weeks for the Rochesterfest Triathlon (olympic distance). It will be my first of this distance as I've don't mainly sprint distance. 2008 Heart of the Lakes was close to oly distance as it was 1/2 miles swim, 22 mile bike, 5.3 mile run. It would have been nice to do a race of that distance prior to Rochester, but oh well.
The bike yesterday had an 8 mile TT within it and the second half of the run was at race pace. Now its just short maintenance type training (some race effort intensity) along with recovery/easy stuff in between.
The bike yesterday had an 8 mile TT within it and the second half of the run was at race pace. Now its just short maintenance type training (some race effort intensity) along with recovery/easy stuff in between.
Friday, June 19, 2009
TNT Last Night
I finally went to a TNT (Thursday Night Triathlon) training session. They aren't races, but are set up as a tri would be so you get the feel of a race. The powers that be of TRI-Rochester have put together some mini-tri's that change format from week to week. The city has given permission to the tri club to swim just to the out side of the buoys so we can get in a swim, bike, and run session. They aren't races so you can go at any level you want. I needed to put in a race-paced effort so I treated it like a mini race. Last night was a short one.. 400 meter swim, 7.9 mile bike, 2.1 mile run. I can't hammer the swim because just swimming makes me feel like I am hammering. Here's how it went:
Swim- 9:07
T1- 3:07
Bike- 20:50 (22.75 mph)
T1- 48 sec
Run- 13:53 (6:32 pace)
TOTAL: 47:50
With no warm-up the swim felt harder than it needed to be. We did two laps of 200 meters. This was an approximate distance. It's a long way from the water to the bikes so tran should have been about 2 minutes if rushing. I took my time. Once on the bike I took about a mile before I started going at race pace. The course is a T shaped loop of 3.95 miles so the turn arounds take down your speed. Also, its constantly rolling. Once finished with two laps on the bike, I hit the run HARD! It was painful and I felt like I was moving at about a 6 minute pace. When I hit the turn around (1 mile) I lapped the HRM and was at 6:57. The route back took 6:56. NO WAY! My pace at the Pigman 2 weeks ago was 6:12--and that was a 5k after a .5k swim and a 25k bike. This has to be longer than a one mile out and back. After the training session, a guy with a Garmin HRM measured it at 2.12 so that's a little better. It was 85 degrees or so that that could have slow things down a bit.
After some chatting about training and other stuff with fellow TriRoch members, I decided to do one more lap on the bike and another run. Both at recovery level. I needed to put in a total of 1.25 hours so that did it.
And of course, what training session would be complete with out me forgetting something. Tonight, I forgot my towel (for transitions and afterwards) and my HRM transmitter belt--so I have not HRM data--just splits and total.
Swim- 9:07
T1- 3:07
Bike- 20:50 (22.75 mph)
T1- 48 sec
Run- 13:53 (6:32 pace)
TOTAL: 47:50
With no warm-up the swim felt harder than it needed to be. We did two laps of 200 meters. This was an approximate distance. It's a long way from the water to the bikes so tran should have been about 2 minutes if rushing. I took my time. Once on the bike I took about a mile before I started going at race pace. The course is a T shaped loop of 3.95 miles so the turn arounds take down your speed. Also, its constantly rolling. Once finished with two laps on the bike, I hit the run HARD! It was painful and I felt like I was moving at about a 6 minute pace. When I hit the turn around (1 mile) I lapped the HRM and was at 6:57. The route back took 6:56. NO WAY! My pace at the Pigman 2 weeks ago was 6:12--and that was a 5k after a .5k swim and a 25k bike. This has to be longer than a one mile out and back. After the training session, a guy with a Garmin HRM measured it at 2.12 so that's a little better. It was 85 degrees or so that that could have slow things down a bit.
After some chatting about training and other stuff with fellow TriRoch members, I decided to do one more lap on the bike and another run. Both at recovery level. I needed to put in a total of 1.25 hours so that did it.
And of course, what training session would be complete with out me forgetting something. Tonight, I forgot my towel (for transitions and afterwards) and my HRM transmitter belt--so I have not HRM data--just splits and total.
Monday, June 15, 2009
Soooo Many Races Over the Weekend
With around a half a dozen races to choose from over the weekend, which one did I do...? None. I wanted to do the Fairmont Sprint Triathlon. Coming in 2nd overall in that in 2008, I thought it would be challenging to give that a shot again. However, 2 hours of driving for a hour long race didn't seem like a logical choice. The in-laws have a cabin near there so we were in that area last year and it was convenient. This year it didn't workout to be there over this weekend so are going there next weekend. I thought about doing Trinona, but again, I want to do Rochesterfest as my first Oly, so doing a sprint didn't seem to do the job of the training I need this weekend. It just didn't workout to race. I am going to do an olympic distance tri for the first time at Rochesterfest so preparing for that was the first priority when it comes to training--considering I am on the edge of the training improvement window. Training Tip: Any training within about 10-14 days from a race will not improve fitness/endurance by then--only maintain what you've got (that's why you taper for 2-3 weeks prior to your 'A' race). Some skills can be improved upon, and fine tuning can be made, but looking at the big picture, if you ain't got the fitness a couple weeks out, you ain't gonna have it by race day. So, being that Saturday June 13 is about 15 days, I had to put in a decent brick and get one last blast of endurance training. Since 2008 was what I consider my first year of multisport racing (2008 Pigman was the first tri), I have been training specifically for the distance of the events that are upcoming as I just don't have the time to train anymore than what's necessary. That being said, the longest I've ridden this year has been just over 30 miles. The longest run, about 7 miles; swim = one mile. I've been training with the plan of doing the RochesterFest Oly race in less than 2.5 hours so what I did over the weekend was really the best thing considering that goal.
Looking over the race results from the weekend, with regards to the races I had in mind, had me kicking myself a bit. With most of the MN area talent crammed into the
For the
I guess I'm not really going to kick myself. It just wasn't in the plan this weekend. I am trying to peak for Rochesterfest so training, not racing, was more important when considering the overall plan.
Friday, June 12, 2009
Stray from the usual sports blog posts
I heard this morning that we, tax payers, are supporting a chunk of money from the stimulate-us bill to go to people who have been driving beater cars. They get to trade up and get credit back up to $2500.00. A co-worker heard it was $4500.00. Either way, they get the cash if the trade in a junker for a vehicle that is more 'green'. Ok, I think the green thing is going way to far. It's a hoax anyway. This got me to ranting... Here it is...
Green cars will have no impact on the environment. Not because of the fact that when you get more per gallon, you justify longer trips, thus using the same amount of fuel you would have if you had a guzzler and restricted your travel. I think that many of you believe that global warming is real. I believe there are changes taking place because they always are. Always. Global warming/climate change is not caused by humans. That's right. It's not your fault. It's weather. We tend to believe that its our fault because its all over and because if Al Gore said so, I guess its true.. Like when he invented the Internet. Remember that. Anyway.... Fact is, going green is an industry like any other. There is a ton of money to be made by scaring people into 'going green.' Does that mean we should be wasteful and pollute? No. Does that mean we shouldn't recycle and reuse? No. We have to live here so it might as well be clean and efficient. Should we conserve, opposed to waste, natural resources. Of course we should. Many 'green' things are coincidentally just smarter. I replaced almost all our light bulbs with the new ones. They cost more, but will save me from having to change them when the regulars burn out (apparently, the new ones last 7-9 years). That is worth it and smarter to me. Why do we think we are hurting the planet. Answer: because we can not fathom how big the planet truly is, we feel like we are making and impact or hurting the planet if we do anything that is not green. We basically believe what we hear, much of which is junk science. However, we are too small to make an impact--even every person on the planet altogether can not hurt Earth. Its arrogant, conceded and self-righteous to think that we are powerful enough to hurt the planet. Earth pre-dates our existence, and will outlive us. The climate changes are part of the cycle of the atmosphere. We only have weather data going back a couple hundred years. The earth is like 4 billion years old--how do we know what weather cycles occurred before we were here? Its common sense to acknowledge that we are subject to what the earth gives us to deal with, not the other way around. Both our size and duration on this planet are microscopic. We have been on the planet a fraction of a second, relative to its existence. In that fraction the population has grown, but is still very, very small compared to the land mass available on the planet. If every family in the world moved to Texas, California, Colorado, and Alaska, every family would have a .7 to .9 acre lot. The rest of the land on the planet would be undeveloped. Of course, some of the remaining land would have to be developed to sustain us. But not much. If you spread those families across the globe and develop all the land necessary (as things are now) we only use about 3% of the land available on the planet. That number may not be accurate (wiki). The planet is roughly only 29% land, 71% water. So, to think that humans can have an impact on the planet by using a small percent of what's available is insane. Not to say that congested cities aren't polluted, they are, but those are geographically contained problems. Should cities be cleaner? Yes, of course, don't be stupid. If you want to live somewhere, you have to live in the conditions you create (the old 'you made your bed' rationale). But that still doesn't affect the planet as a whole. The earth is more powerful than any humans will ever be. Period.
Oh, and if you think you are being green when you take shorter showers, use less materials, and recycle, etc. Think again. That can't even begin to compare to how less of a certain resource your would use if you omitted one thing from your diet: meat. Yes, eating meat is one of the most wasteful things you can do with regards to our water supply. If you eat meat, you are contributing to the waste of water 30 fold compared to a non-meat eater. Each persons share of water per day is around 123 gallons. That takes into consideration averages used for everything we do. Cleaning, washing clothes/dishes, cooking, drinking, etc. Basically, everything we do uses some sort of water. To raise a cow, it takes approximately 2500 gallons of water per pound. If you eat a 1/4 pound burger you've just contributed to the use of 3000 gallons of water because that's how much it takes, everything considered, before it finally it makes it to your mouth. Go Green!!
Green cars will have no impact on the environment. Not because of the fact that when you get more per gallon, you justify longer trips, thus using the same amount of fuel you would have if you had a guzzler and restricted your travel. I think that many of you believe that global warming is real. I believe there are changes taking place because they always are. Always. Global warming/climate change is not caused by humans. That's right. It's not your fault. It's weather. We tend to believe that its our fault because its all over and because if Al Gore said so, I guess its true.. Like when he invented the Internet. Remember that. Anyway.... Fact is, going green is an industry like any other. There is a ton of money to be made by scaring people into 'going green.' Does that mean we should be wasteful and pollute? No. Does that mean we shouldn't recycle and reuse? No. We have to live here so it might as well be clean and efficient. Should we conserve, opposed to waste, natural resources. Of course we should. Many 'green' things are coincidentally just smarter. I replaced almost all our light bulbs with the new ones. They cost more, but will save me from having to change them when the regulars burn out (apparently, the new ones last 7-9 years). That is worth it and smarter to me. Why do we think we are hurting the planet. Answer: because we can not fathom how big the planet truly is, we feel like we are making and impact or hurting the planet if we do anything that is not green. We basically believe what we hear, much of which is junk science. However, we are too small to make an impact--even every person on the planet altogether can not hurt Earth. Its arrogant, conceded and self-righteous to think that we are powerful enough to hurt the planet. Earth pre-dates our existence, and will outlive us. The climate changes are part of the cycle of the atmosphere. We only have weather data going back a couple hundred years. The earth is like 4 billion years old--how do we know what weather cycles occurred before we were here? Its common sense to acknowledge that we are subject to what the earth gives us to deal with, not the other way around. Both our size and duration on this planet are microscopic. We have been on the planet a fraction of a second, relative to its existence. In that fraction the population has grown, but is still very, very small compared to the land mass available on the planet. If every family in the world moved to Texas, California, Colorado, and Alaska, every family would have a .7 to .9 acre lot. The rest of the land on the planet would be undeveloped. Of course, some of the remaining land would have to be developed to sustain us. But not much. If you spread those families across the globe and develop all the land necessary (as things are now) we only use about 3% of the land available on the planet. That number may not be accurate (wiki). The planet is roughly only 29% land, 71% water. So, to think that humans can have an impact on the planet by using a small percent of what's available is insane. Not to say that congested cities aren't polluted, they are, but those are geographically contained problems. Should cities be cleaner? Yes, of course, don't be stupid. If you want to live somewhere, you have to live in the conditions you create (the old 'you made your bed' rationale). But that still doesn't affect the planet as a whole. The earth is more powerful than any humans will ever be. Period.
Oh, and if you think you are being green when you take shorter showers, use less materials, and recycle, etc. Think again. That can't even begin to compare to how less of a certain resource your would use if you omitted one thing from your diet: meat. Yes, eating meat is one of the most wasteful things you can do with regards to our water supply. If you eat meat, you are contributing to the waste of water 30 fold compared to a non-meat eater. Each persons share of water per day is around 123 gallons. That takes into consideration averages used for everything we do. Cleaning, washing clothes/dishes, cooking, drinking, etc. Basically, everything we do uses some sort of water. To raise a cow, it takes approximately 2500 gallons of water per pound. If you eat a 1/4 pound burger you've just contributed to the use of 3000 gallons of water because that's how much it takes, everything considered, before it finally it makes it to your mouth. Go Green!!
Monday, June 8, 2009
The Pigman Cometh
Ok, we actually went to the Pigman. It's a long drive down to the Pigman in Palo, IA, but its worth it. They have this race down with regards to check-in, transition set up, checking out your transponder chip, post race food, swag in the bag, etc. It's a very well run race.
TriRochester had 6 members going to the race (4 men, 2 women). There is a competition within the race for clubs-- they take the top 3 male and top 2 female finishes from your club, add the times together and rank your club accordingly. However, 2 members were not present from our club, one male, 1 female, so we would have been short one of the female finishes. As an honorary member thru club member Peter Maves, we added Peters sister, J.R. Grawe, as a club member--her result was used as the second female finish so we had 5 TriRochester results to use (Peter Maves, Patti & Jeremy Ekman, J.R. Grawe, and myself). TriRochester ranked 6th of 9 clubs who had enough results to be ranked. There were some seriously competitive and/or large clubs there. Gear West was made up of their Elite team so that is hard to compete with. Iowa Trihawks had 21 members and Midwest Xtreme Tri Club had 109 club members in the race. Yes, 109 of the 700 or so in the race belonged to one club! The 3 just mentioned finished 1,2,3 respectively. So with only 5 TriRochester results to use, I think we did pretty well coming in 6th.Go here to view the Pigman results:http://www.pigmantri.com/pig1rst09.html
Personally, I had a great race. My swim can always improve and it should have been better than it was. It kept me from winning my AG, but oh well. The swim felt better than last years Pigman (which was my first tri ever), but I only seemed to shave about 20 seconds off of it. In 08 I was 337th of 608 in the swim. This year, 281st of 666. My bike improved by almost a minute, and the run improved by 37 seconds. T1 & 2 were relatively the same. In total, I improved my time on the course by almost 2 minutes. Overall, I was 29th of 666, and 2nd in AG 35-39. I was #1 in my AG on the bike and on foot, but the 1st place guy in 35-39, Jeff Mortensen, took more than 3 minutes out of my swim and that's nearly impossible to make up.
Props go to TriRochester member Jeremy Ekman who I think turned a major corner on his racing abilities placing 5th in our AG. He averaged over 22 mph on the bike and had the 40th fastest swim of the day--just to highlight a couple bright spots.
TriRochester had 6 members going to the race (4 men, 2 women). There is a competition within the race for clubs-- they take the top 3 male and top 2 female finishes from your club, add the times together and rank your club accordingly. However, 2 members were not present from our club, one male, 1 female, so we would have been short one of the female finishes. As an honorary member thru club member Peter Maves, we added Peters sister, J.R. Grawe, as a club member--her result was used as the second female finish so we had 5 TriRochester results to use (Peter Maves, Patti & Jeremy Ekman, J.R. Grawe, and myself). TriRochester ranked 6th of 9 clubs who had enough results to be ranked. There were some seriously competitive and/or large clubs there. Gear West was made up of their Elite team so that is hard to compete with. Iowa Trihawks had 21 members and Midwest Xtreme Tri Club had 109 club members in the race. Yes, 109 of the 700 or so in the race belonged to one club! The 3 just mentioned finished 1,2,3 respectively. So with only 5 TriRochester results to use, I think we did pretty well coming in 6th.Go here to view the Pigman results:http://www.pigmantri.com/pig1rst09.html
Personally, I had a great race. My swim can always improve and it should have been better than it was. It kept me from winning my AG, but oh well. The swim felt better than last years Pigman (which was my first tri ever), but I only seemed to shave about 20 seconds off of it. In 08 I was 337th of 608 in the swim. This year, 281st of 666. My bike improved by almost a minute, and the run improved by 37 seconds. T1 & 2 were relatively the same. In total, I improved my time on the course by almost 2 minutes. Overall, I was 29th of 666, and 2nd in AG 35-39. I was #1 in my AG on the bike and on foot, but the 1st place guy in 35-39, Jeff Mortensen, took more than 3 minutes out of my swim and that's nearly impossible to make up.
Props go to TriRochester member Jeremy Ekman who I think turned a major corner on his racing abilities placing 5th in our AG. He averaged over 22 mph on the bike and had the 40th fastest swim of the day--just to highlight a couple bright spots.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)