One more reason to NOT do triathlons!

Running over the bad swimmers is the mentality of a lot of triathletes. Not a good one. Don't feel bad about not being the next phelps, just feel bad when you get hurt because your not prepared. Huh? I'm not gonna swim around them. It's kill or be killed in the water, take your pick.

It is my observation that triathlon is now being dominated by people who just can't swim and have the mentality that its ok not to even work on it. All the time I hear people really stressing about the swim before we start. I have a friend that I used to fear for during the swim, it would take him almost 30 mintes to go 400m. Why do I state all this? Becasue it affects the sport. Races get cancelled or RD's turn swim's into a second run when waves pick up a bit. I dropped $185 on Steelhead 70.3 last year to have the swim cancelled. Take out the swim and I lose my overall advantage and my qualification to compete at Clearwater. Now lets point the finger at me, I am not a super runner, never was. I know this. So I work at it. I did the research, I asked everying, I even called my old HS XC coach for advide. After 3 years I can finally split 6 min miles/ 10k. A triathlon is 3 sports, embrace ALL 3 or do something else. I hate the overwhelming number of people who think they need to change their lives with Tri but aren't willing to put the time in to succeed at the whole. I wanted to play football, I even tried once. I just couldn't get my once 125 lb body to be effective. I recongnize that's not my sport. Others need to do the same. Sorry, just a short rant from somebody who thinks people who can't swim shouldn't.

NT makes me crazy. At the az state meet last weekend a bunch of NT entries causes slow swimmers to be spread across two heats rather than just one (causing me a deep indescribable proctalgia as I wait my turn). My solution is to go fastest to slowest like the age-groupers and force the races to occur rather than all this caca sandbagging that goes on in the first heat. Kurt, In Colorado we haven't allowed no time entires at are state championship meets for years. And if I was dictator I mean director, I would declare that all 1000 and or 1650's were heated fast to slow. I've ran meets that way and it makes sense for so many reasons.

This is elitist bullcrap. Adults participate in sports for a wide variety of reasons. Apparently you should only compete if you can be an absolute stud in all three sports, which is ludicrous. When 60% of Americans are obese and you can't get them to take a walk for 30 minutes three times a week, it takes a lot of nerve to tell folks who want to get fit to stay away because they don't meet your standard of swimming ability. So much for growing the sport. . So it's ok for a poor swimmer or someone with subpar training to enter a tri and not only risk their safety but, the safety of others? How am I being elitist by putting in the time to be prepared? The parameters of these races are written out, read it and decide if your ability can match the requirement. Why should people unable to complete a swim in waves be able to dictate to a RD that the first leg of the race they signed up for is not safe for everyone so it needs cancelled? I love the involment of everyone in the sport no matter how fast they are. That is not the issue. The issue is personal safety. I do understand that some unfortunate situations occur, such as a perfectly healthy athlete dropping to a hidden heart problem. Nobody can predict that.

I didn't play football because I have the know all to recongnize I may be in the way. Plus I feel it's too hard to judge a persons success based on the actions of a whole team. There are so many talented athletes that will never be seen because the rest of the team is average. Cancelled swims are not isolated. I may have to take some time and get some numbers together. Running over the bad swimmers is the mentality of a lot of triathletes. Not a good one. Don't feel bad about not being the next phelps, just feel bad when you get hurt because your not prepared.

I'm sick to death of this kind of baseless, unsupported hit and run crap. Can you provide even one citation to a reported case affirming liability? Or a case that went to judgment? Or even a case that was filed? Please, spare me the "I heard from so and so who knows a former race director who told so and so's second cousin (twice removed) that the swim might have been canceled due to liability concerns." Provide the county and court of filing and date of judgment. Liability releases are valid and enforceable in most jurisdictions throughout the United States, and are a strong deterrent to claims. A quick search of all 50 states for "Triathlon and liability" turned up a whopping 22 hits. (If that seems like a lot of hits to anyone, try searching for "golf and liability", or "bicycle and liability", or "SCUBA and liability"). I found exactly one case which might be read as having a chilling effect on triathlons, Hiett v. Lake Bancroft Community Assoc., 244 Va. 191, 418 S.E.2d 894 (1992). The triathlete in Hiett struck his head on an underwater object during the swim portion, resulting in quadraplegia. Relying on about a century of Virginia case law, the Virginia Supreme Court invalidated a release and overturned a grant of summary judgment to the race organizers, remanding the case to the trial court. We don't know what happened to the case from there, but frankly, if the race organizers failed to properly check the swim area, they deserve to be held liable. A later California decision considering the validity of releases signed by developmentally disabled minors (Santa Barbara v. Superior Court, 41 Cal.4th 747, 161 P.2d 1095, 62 Cal.Rptr.3d 527 (2007)) noted that Hiett had evidently not had much impact on the availability of triathlons in Virginia: In short, there is no epidemic of lawsuits arising out of swimmers drowning in triathlons. Perhaps the race director canceling a swim made a smart decision, based on the conditions (too windy, too cold, large surf, lack of support vehicles, etc.) I suspect the thought of bearing the moral or human responsibility for the death or injury of a swimmer has a lot more to do with the decision than any thought of legal responsibility. And most any reputable event and organizer will have event insurance, generally available through the sanctioning organization, in place to cover the legal side. I think your blame of the legal system is misplaced. Sorry, you feel this way. I am an attorney myself. We live in a litigious society which has resulted in an overabundance of caution, if not paranoia. You are obviously a plaintiffs' lawyer. Save it for the Trial Lawyers Association meeting. I should also add that a release and insurance don't keep somebody from filing suit. I should also add that I was involved in a lawsuit where a participant sued the race director, so I know what I am talking about.

Let's all stay in the house & lock the doors??:badday:

Sorry, you feel this way. I am an attorney myself. We live in a litigious society which has resulted in an overabundance of caution, if not paranoia. You are obviously a plaintiffs' lawyer. Save it for the Trial Lawyers Association meeting. I should also add that a release and insurance don't keep somebody from filing suit. I should also add that I was involved in a lawsuit where a participant sued the race director, so I know what I am talking about. Exactly why one of the single most important changes that could/should occur in our society is to have plaintiff's pay the defendents legal costs if they lose.

Liability releases are valid and enforceable in most jurisdictions throughout the United States, and are a strong deterrent to claims. Had to chuckle. Last time I said something like this, a now revealed as harmless poster told me releases "weren't worth the paper they were written on." lol

I firmly believe that liability releases are pointless, kind of like the big sign on the back of the gravel truck that says they aren't responsible for rocks flying off the truck, which you can read as your car is getting pelted with gravel.