"It's an interesting question how far
men would retain their relative rank if they were divested
of their clothes." - Henry David Thoreau
I've been writing this column for over a year (I can even
say that I started way back when they used to print the newsletter
out on paper), and in that time period I have been holding
back a few observations of our sport. That holding back ends
now. Here are some very random wonderings that haunt me still
today:
What's with carbon cranks? There are carbon cranks out
there that cost upwards of $400 (and that's without chain
rings), while some aluminum cranks (with rings) are in the
neighborhood of $120. The carbon pushers say, "They reduce
flex by 30%", but how does that really matter if the whole
bottom bracket of most bikes flexes away from the chain-stays
and the down-tube anyway? They say, "They're 40% stiffer torsionally
[is that a word?] than aluminum cranks". Paaalease, show me
anyone who can twist a 7 inch block of aluminum with their
feet. Then there's my favorite issue - weight - carbon at
375 grams vs. ~465 grams from the aluminum jobbies. 465-375=90grams.
90! My guess is that carbon crank connoisseurs could save
more weight by passing on the bread one night at dinner and
getting a hair cut.
Training by time and training by distance. I see some
athletes and coaches who judge training by time, and some
who judge by distance. I vacillate between the two; early
in the season (and during off season), I go by time (40 min
run, 60 min run, 2 hour ride, 1 hour swim, etc.). When preparing
for a race, there is a point where it's important to go by
distance. We trust that the race director is building the
race based on distance, so training based on distance is a
plan that matches well with the effort. (Maybe someday a bizarre
race will offer a 30 minute swim, 2 hour bike and 1 hour run
- whoever goes the farthest wins)
650 vs. 700 (we're talking wheel size here). This one
is hotly contested in the tri community and I don't really
see why. There are advantages and disadvantages for both:
650's climb faster, accelerate better and create less drag
but they are less stable on the down hills. 700's descend
well, offer a smoother ride and great rolling momentum but
are a bit slower on the climb and catch a bit more wind. It's
a classic 6 of one, half dozen of the other situation. Most
bikes with 650 wheels have triathlon geometry - that is to
say that the seat tube is at a steeper angle than road bike
geometry (most 700's). This positions the hips over the bottom
bracket more and, therefore, makes it easier to run right
off the bike. Some big guys (I think of Jurgen Zack immediately)
look like they are riding a circus bike when they are on little
650's. But, some of the fastest cyclists in triathlon (I think
of Jurgen Zack immediately) are riding 650's.
Fins. I frequently swim in a masters program at Pepperdine
University in Malibu. Everybody up there, save for one guy
whom I really respect, wears fins during the whole workout.
There are a few, logical reasons to wear fins while swimming
(to lift the body out of the water during a specific drill
so to match the feeling of actual swim speed, to develop leg
strength and kick, to assist with ankle flexibility and more),
but, aside from those legitimate reasons, I think swimming
with fins for the entire workout is foolishness. Becoming
dependent on any aid can be detrimental to both technique
and confidence. All training should be specific to the race.
Bike prep should be different for Wildflower then for the
LA Triathlon, overall mileage would vary for a sprint as opposed
to an Ironman. Until a race offers a "fin swim", train as
much as you can without them. And be proud that you can hold
most of the set with your own natural appendages.
Taking Drugs. The difference between an athlete that takes
drugs and an athlete that doesn't is simple - it's about morals,
it's about character. There are those that cheat and those
that don't. We are all human and humans love to justify simple
cheating - "well, I had my goggles kicked off at the start
so it was ok to cut that first buoy". Wrong, it's not okay
to cut the buoy no matter what happened to you at the start.
It seems that taking a performance enhancing drug is something
that would be harder to justify, but in a decade, when genetic
engineering will be the new cheater's ploy, the pill poppers
and needle plungers may see "geneing" as their justification.
There are people in our society who are missing that little
voice in their head that says "don't do that, it's wrong",
these people are missing a conscience, they are subtle sociopaths.
These are the people who find themselves inching closer to
cheating by buying a hypobaric chamber, taking epinefrine,
etc. Part of the pride of being a triathlete comes from the
fact that we could bike and run from Burbank to Westwood faster
than the anybody else could go the distance in a car. As we
slither closer to "the dark side" with unnatural enhancements
we lose that natural, self propelled element. Take this sport
seriously enough to care how and where you finish in a race,
but don't take it so seriously that you have to manipulate
those results.