There is a huge ironman distance race in clermont florida ... it has a huge turn out.... Fred Sommers the race director had the chance to call it an "ironman" but ironman the company drives a hard bargain. From what I heard … Fred turned the Ironman Oragainization away. That was a good thing in my opinion. The race is stellar and the venue is A+. Nice lake, Nice grass tranisition area and nice roads. You would never know the difference from a "ironman event" to this particular Ironman Distance race. It’s like buying a one year old car let someone else pay all the overhead....

here is the link
http://www.sommersports.com/home/

If you go the distance you get the credit in my book.
Forget the "Official" status.

But if you want to do Hawaii you have to qualify at one of "their" races.
Oh, well.

PoC
wants Hawaii

This year they've completely changed the venue. It's in Davis, Dave Scott is supposed to be there, and the course has a series of out and backs which should help the spectators (family support crew) get to see more action. I'll be doing it in Sept. Just a tad nervous!

I chose to do my first Iron distance race at IM USA last year and it was a great experience. The IM (ie WTC events) are pricey and you generally have to register a year in advance, but the trade off is and "official" IM finishers medal, t-shirt, etc. and a well supported race everytime. Having said that the Great Floridian is an outstanding race well supported and if you finish it you can call yourself an Ironman for sure as it is a difficult race. I have heard that the Duke Blue Devil is a good race also although I have never done it myself. It all boils down to what is important to you, the Ironman logo on your stuff or knowing you finished an Iron-distance event. Either way you are a winner. Be careful about first year or not well known races....putting on an Iron-distance event is a monumental task and you don't want to be caught out on the course without water or support. Good luck either way

Brett

M dot is authorized....in my opinion if you do the distance then it counts

Personally I wouldn't want the tatoo if it wasn't an official one... seems like that symbol means a certain set of races in the mind of many triathletes. It would be like training and racing all on a generic gel but racing for Gu... really the same stuff, but a logo is a logo. However, I work with a company big on logo recognition and proper use of logos, so that probably colors my opinions.

I would think it a little odd if I asked someone with the tatoo what Ironman they did and it wasn't an official ironman, and although I wouldn't think less of their accomplishment at the distance, I would think their choice in tatoo a bit odd.

But it's your body... do what you feel is right... there will always be someone who thinks your choice odd :-)

I've done six IM distance events. Only one has been an IM logo'd race. Anyone who tries to convince you that a non MDot event is not an IM is full of crap. Its the distance, not the logo that makes an Ironman.

It's ridiculous, and maybe it marketing brainwashing, but even tho I'll be doing an irondistance race, and not an ironman, I still feel that the m-Dot goes to people who've finished an IM-sanctioned event. It's strange actually. The distances are the same, the effort varies from race to race, but there's some kind of mental stigma associated with that logo, that if someone were to ask me what Ironman I did, and I told them Caliman, it would bug me just enough to ruin my sense of accomplishment. That's how crazily successful the Ironman 'brand' is.

The fact that there are people who feel funny about getting something like an M-Dot when they haven't done an Ironman-sanctioned race is enough reason for me to skip the tat for now, and wait for Kona. That to me is a great reason to get the mark. Caliman, while I am excited about the race, just doesnt have the effect when I think of its history, the public perception of kona, and my perception of the mother of triathlons.

No one is denying the effort involved in completing the distance. But even tho I'll be doing the race here in California, I won't be satisfied until I see the finish line after the lava fields.

There needs to be a SARCASM emoticon or rule for text - like when ALL CAPS MEANS YOUR YELLING. Maybe it's Itallics - SARCASM, i don't know. Regardless, I admit to being more than half sarcastic when I asked my question - I am serious about going Bull riding in February 2006 though. I didn't realize until I read this thread that there was a different between an IM sanctioned and IM distance event.

I'm going to GF as my IM distance race because it fits in my schedule and I want to compete in and finish an IM distance race - not for the tattoo, not because it's put on by a certain sponsor, not because my soon to be EX thinks this is all a giant waste of time (ok - maybe that one is a serious motivating factor). When I finish my face I will then have to confront the concerns about the whether or not i deserve the body art.

Regardless of my decision - it's good to know that in this country the logo police won't take you outside and shoot you in the head for incorrectly displaying your pride in your accomplishments.

Well, I decided late (this March) to attempt an Iron-distance race this year. All the official M-dot races were sold out obviously, so I am doing GFT also. I still consider it an "ironman" in my eyes, who knows what will happen in life, this might be my only shot (I am planning on doing an M-dot next year) so I will be getting the tattoo. I train the same and the distance is the same. I want to be an ironman and will consider myself one.
Another point on the tattoo-some days it is what motivates me to get up and train. If you don't train, you don't deserve one!

I think you have done 11 ironman races. Or 11 iron-distance races. But 3 Ironman races. It is a trademarked name. However, I'm not going to care if you ever specify the capitalization. Ironman is a word used both ways -- as the type of event and as that particular set of events. However, a logo is different. Mdot isn't used to refer to the other races. It refers to a specific set of them, and if I was going to get it on my body I would want to have done a race it really refers to.

...heck...

You Can Always Get The Horns First, And Add The Mdot After You Do An Mdot Race....

What do you have in mind... personally, I think that 140.6 says it all...

After reading some of the other posts-after I replied the first time I feel...well hell I alomst feel ashamed for not knocking off a official ironman, and thinking/dreaming about being an IRONMAN. Bummer dude. That Boston Analogy really hit home, but I dunno. I think of Boston like I think of Kona. Much like the pinnacle of your sport.

I want to say that distance is distance. Anyone who completes it is a champion. Right?? :confused:

I think a key problem here is that we lack an adequate noun-adjective for an ironman race. It's not going to solve the M-Dot problem, but it would help in how we describe such an event.

Going with the marathon train of though, you can be described as a 'marathoner' and you can do a 'marathon'. No one has put a trademark on the word Marathon. Imagine if the folks at Boston had done that? Would people be getting 'B' tatoos on their calves?

There really isn't a word (or logo) available for iron-distance people that can convey the same amount of information and has that level of meaning as 'Ironman' and the 'M-Dot'. The folks behind the Ironman franchise have really done a good job at securing this word (noun and adjective) to the ironman business.

Now I don't know copyright/trademark law. So I don't know if this is true. But don't the rights behind the logo/trademark eventually die off after a period of time and go into public domain? Not that this will solve the problem, but it will remove the legal bindings...

Anyway, this is clearly an issue that isn't resolved in people's minds. I think the easiest way around this is for everyone who hasn't completed an official Ironman but have done irondistance events is to call themselves an Ironwoman. I really don't think they have rights to that word do they? ;) I'm kidding tho. I seriously doubt we'll ever have a good word/logo replacement, but we can at least dream right ;)

The Inside Triathlon website has a decent series going on right now explaining the whole M-Dot/ Iron distance thing:
Part 1: http://www.insidetri.com/news/fea/2758.0.html
Part 2: http://www.insidetri.com/news/fea/2759.0.html
Part 3: http://www.insidetri.com/news/fea/2764.0.html

How bout you remember to remind me? ;)

OR just visit http://www.insidetri.com/ everyonce in a while. While the Coaching Center has been slacking lately, there's some good reading to be had!

Part III of that series is out, lin posted in my post above. Good stuff.

Anything for the lady!

Yeah a lot of this has come about. More if ya want it:
http://www.slowtwitch.com/

You are so right Mr.Mutt!

Yes, I have a big honkin MDot on my right calf...but it has nothing to do with my two ironman finishes at IMLP.
It has to do with getting there. My mom died of lung cancer part way through my training cycle for my first IM.
It was hard and many days it was all I could do to put one foot in front of the other.But then I'd remember how she was suffering or how my Dad suffered,having died several years before,and the feet would move.Ironman isn't about the bloody race..it is about getting there. My Tat reminds me of how hard it all was and how easy it is now.
For myself...if you have a Mdot tat because you did the race...you missed the point.

Go Happy... or go home!

Interesting set of articles. I am curious as to how this will all shake out regarding the Ironman events and the iron-distance ones. Reading the articles makes me want to support the local guys. To me, this healthy competition just means there will hopefully be more quality iron-distance events from which to choose.

And I like the '140.6' tatoo idea. It does, afterall, convey the true meaning of the day. And really to me it's much more impressive. :)

I have been reading a little about the WTC and their diverging path with USAT.

An article in the September '05 issue of Triathlete gives the preverbial mic to WTC and after reading the article I think I may have been a little hard on them,

[WTC] references a situation where USAT wanted to penalize two triathletes for running together in an event (they were husband and wife) and stated that WTC is trying to be careful in their leadership of the sport.

Specifically:
* letting athletes know when they are being assessed a penalty on the course (giving them the opportunity to work harder to make up time)
* determining intent prior to penalty assessment (husband/wife agegroupers running together vs. two driven competitors attempting to draft off eachother)

So I would like to take the opportunity to rescind the statement above after having the chance to read more on the subject...

rr (hat in hand)

rr doesn't mention "running together"...just riding.
I think it's ...ok... for couples to ride together as long as they are not blocking...and a couple riding together would still get benifit from being side by side. Not all wind comes fore or aft. And of course there is the psychological benifit of having someone with you on the bike to help pull you through.
Riding NEAR each other... fine. But why should someone have an advantage over me simply because they are "a couple." Running together...fine, but it is a race with rules designed for safety,and to level the course for all,not a bike tour.

Have a great day!

A little off topic, but it relates to running together, and really bugged me.

I had a race on the weekend where the winner of my age group actually had someone out on the run course with him, pacing him. This other guy was not enrolled in the event, but was merely there to push him throughout the run course. He had on a heart monitor and GPS unit, so he could maintain his intended pace, and (as it was an out and back) was running alongside him giving encouragement.

To me, this just seemed to be outside of the spirit of the competition. Triathlon is an individual competition and this seemed a little unfair. Its not like this guy needed any help to win his age group, as he has finished in the top 3 or so at all the events I have seen him at. Is this actually allowed?