The article says that the race organizers are disputing the number of rescues being reported.
I'm not trying to start a flame war, just passing along the news as it is reported.
I'll preface my comments with this disclaimer: I am a triathlete. I've completed 1 Ironman distance event so far (with 2 additional events on the horizon), a couple of 70.3 distance events (one in Oceanside harbor) and several shorter races. I have not completed a swim of longer than 2.4 miles in any single race.
That being said: triathletes are NOT open water swimmers. They do NOT (and cannot) train with a singular focus of the swim. Most triathletes do the level best they can during the swim. The comment I mostly hear during training or prior to the start of the event is: "If I just make it out of the water, I'll be fine." With the workaday life of the average triathlete, training time is at a premium. Most triathletes see the percentages of time/distance of each event and, rightfully I might add, simply want to be "average" swimmers and excel during the bike and/or the run.
Which is tougher?? I, frankly, have no idea. But, until you swim 2.4 miles, run out of the water and get on a bike for 112 miles, then run 26.2 miles, you have no idea what a toll such an endeavor takes on your body. I know, I've been there. I do not, however, know what a physical/psychological toll marathon swimming takes on a body...I haven't done it.
I aspire to be a true open water swimmer; in fact, I have a "date" set for the English Channel in the future. In the mean time, I train appropriately for the distances I race.
For a triathlete to expose themselves to a situation which could result in endangering their life or the life of someone else is, simply put, a poor personal choice. But to say "triathlete people do not plan or train enough for these events" paints with too broad a brush. I would venture to say most triathletes have, indeed, trained properly. It is the few who do not that make the headlines.
I'll preface my comments with this disclaimer: I am a triathlete. I've completed 1 Ironman distance event so far (with 2 additional events on the horizon), a couple of 70.3 distance events (one in Oceanside harbor) and several shorter races. I have not completed a swim of longer than 2.4 miles in any single race.
That being said: triathletes are NOT open water swimmers. They do NOT (and cannot) train with a singular focus of the swim. Most triathletes do the level best they can during the swim. The comment I mostly hear during training or prior to the start of the event is: "If I just make it out of the water, I'll be fine." With the workaday life of the average triathlete, training time is at a premium. Most triathletes see the percentages of time/distance of each event and, rightfully I might add, simply want to be "average" swimmers and excel during the bike and/or the run.
Which is tougher?? I, frankly, have no idea. But, until you swim 2.4 miles, run out of the water and get on a bike for 112 miles, then run 26.2 miles, you have no idea what a toll such an endeavor takes on your body. I know, I've been there. I do not, however, know what a physical/psychological toll marathon swimming takes on a body...I haven't done it.
I aspire to be a true open water swimmer; in fact, I have a "date" set for the English Channel in the future. In the mean time, I train appropriately for the distances I race.
For a triathlete to expose themselves to a situation which could result in endangering their life or the life of someone else is, simply put, a poor personal choice. But to say "triathlete people do not plan or train enough for these events" paints with too broad a brush. I would venture to say most triathletes have, indeed, trained properly. It is the few who do not that make the headlines.
