weight to go!!!
117
Member
1216 days
sljv posted 3 years ago.
well i got kind of disspointed the other day because im only 5'8 and starting to drop from 150 and i know triathletes (as well as all other pro male athletes) are over six feet... but then i saw the itu world championships on OLN and peter robertson won that race (as well as in 2001 and 2003 i believe)... hes only 5'9 or 5'8 i think and cant be more than 145 or 150.. im sure size plays an important role, but its not everything..
-josh
834
Member
1372 days
JamieM posted 3 years ago.
It's not about size and it's not about power. It's about power/size. It's about how many watts you can produce per pound of body weight. Others may be bigger but if you can produce a fraction of a watt per pound more than the next guy, it gives you an advantage.
478
Member
1475 days
kona_expat posted 3 years ago.
Search the forums--I posted something about ideal weights for triathletes. Actually, smaller is better, especially when it comes to biking, as said above it's your power to weight ratio. Also, lighter means less pounding on your joints, which is an advantage in running. Smaller means you cut a smaller hole in the water which can be advantageous. So if you're comfortable at your weight, and particularly if your body composition is good (I'm betting it is!), don't listen to others telling you anything. They are just jealous!
1796
Member
1541 days
PrinceofClydes posted 3 years ago.
Greg Welch.
Christian Bustos.
Paula Newby-Fraser
are small in stature.
Roberto Heras,
Robbie McKewen,
and hell, 99% of the Tour riders,
everybody except Axel Mercx,
George HIncapie and
Magnus Backstedt is a midget.
(no offence meant)
Geoff
6'3", 230, envious.
"Pain doesn't last, chicks dig scars, glory is forever!"
- Shane Falco.
399
Member
1201 days
TBRAVO posted 3 years ago.
I agree with Jamie. It’s all about the number of watts you can produce (and sustain) regardless of your bodyweight. The only caveat to that might be swimming. Taller swimmers usually have an advantage over shorter ones and technique also plays a huge role. I think there is no “right size� but I do think you need to analyze your strengths and weaknesses and then plan your training and race strategy accordingly.
That’s the cool thing about Tri’s, you have to focus on 3 different disciplines that are not necessarily complimentary that’s what makes it a challenge.
- T
477
Member
1344 days
geochuck posted 3 years ago.
Is size important?
I have known great athletes that came in smaller packages. The Jappanese swimmers were all 5' 2 or 3". and pretty slender, and can they ever swim. Ford Kono a great American swimmer was small in stature. Some of the great Marathon runners were very short and slender. Some of the best cyclists I new were short in stature especially the Olympians from Italy. Size is not the only thing that counts.
417
Member
1230 days
BrianMc posted 3 years ago.
I agree with everything said.
Reminds me of this summer when I told someone I was a triathlete and she looked at me and said "You don't look like a triathlete"
:confused:
Sorry? What was that? Exactly what does a triathlete look like? I'm 6'2", 185lbs, not exactly out of the ordinary.......
I think triathlon has some sort of stigma associated with it for those who know very little about it. Its one of those fringe sports that only super crazy athletic people do. Of course we all know this to be not true (although the super crazy part may be true).
Brian
95
Member
1601 days
virturace posted 3 years ago.
Every race - I get dusted on the bike by a handful of heavies (some super tall and thin, so not so tall and not so thin if you get my meaning). They go flying by and I just watch in amazement. I also take a mental note of who and how many pass me.
I have yet to NOT catch one of them on the run. When I look at their faces as I run past them, I'm always amused because I KNOW that's the exact same look I had on my face 30 minutes ago when they passed me.
As everyone else has said here - size is relative. I've seen 230 pounders run like they were 150 pounds and I've seen 150 pounders run like they had cement in their shoes.
If you feel undersize/underpowered, then do more power and strength work. I'm 5'8" and 162 and I've never thought of myself too small to compete.
Mind you - I have no intention of ever being a world champion (or state champion for that matter).
VirtuRace | The Results You're Searching For.
www.virturace.com
815
Member
1169 days
dr_rios_ec posted 3 years ago.
Hey...the reason people know me as "Flea" is because I am 5´4´´ with just 146 pounds right now...
But we small athlethes have a good advantage compared with the big guys....we don´t hae to move that much meat during a race...
Besides...triathlons and endurance sports are not about size....is ALL ABOUT HEART!!!!
Saludos desde Sur America
-Santiago
"Man!! Defeat is worse than dying, cause´you have to live with it" -My Dad
"It ain´t about how hard you can hit...it is how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward"-Rocky Balboa
477
Member
1344 days
geochuck posted 3 years ago.
I have trained race horse (standardbreds) the little 14 hand horse competes with the 16 and 17 hand horses and are less prone to injury. A lot of long geered athletes are also prone to injury and have to use better technique to not have injuries. The smaller athlete does not have to have the fineness of the rangy athletes.
58
Member
1322 days
cg posted 3 years ago.
Its not the size of the dog in the fight, it is the size of the fight in the dog.
-McArthur? Nimitz? Some US military leader during WWII...
113
Member
1266 days
outexan posted 3 years ago.
size only matter to people who cant do something. Size only matters to people who are looking for an excuse, an easy way out. I am 5'9 and played QB all through high school. Took my team to the playoffs, district MVP, threw for 1500 and rushed for 1000. No college would touch me with a 10 foot pole. Ended up walking on as a safety and lasted 1 year before they told me i was too small to help them. Size doesnt matter. the only thing that matter is if you can play
Help me raise money for the LAF by donating anything that you can. Thank you so much!
http://www.livestrong.org/grassroots2008/ironmanchris
849
Member
1489 days
catwood posted 3 years ago.
virturace wrote:
As everyone else has said here - size is relative. I've seen 230 pounders run like they were 150 pounds and I've seen 150 pounders run like they had cement in their shoes.
Yeah... I'm 5'6'', 110 lbs and I definitely run like I've got cement in my shoes :rolleyes:
But as far as racing goes, I'm happy with my build. I have beat and been beaten by people bigger and smaller than me in all disciplines.
LOL I've got a build that just screams "distance runner", but my biking and swimming are much better...
283
Member
1388 days
Amy Lee posted 3 years ago.
good things come in small packages! i'm 5'1'' and 110 lbs... yep, a spark plug. i was once told i have the body type like that of a power lifter :eek: ... could it be my thighs? :confused:
not the best build for running, but i hold my own. i swim slower than peanut butter drips from a jar. my body type is probably most suited for cycling.
i have learned to make the most of what i've got.
it always amazes me when i see people who appear to be so unfit whiz by me on the bike or the run. how can they have that beer belly or those humungous hips and be faster than me? i have to give them a lot of credit.
we come in all different shapes and sizes. i agree that power/size plus our individual desire and ability to tolerate pain is what sets us apart from each other.
90
Member
1251 days
marzian posted 3 years ago.
hey,
i agree wriith you brian, i get that a lot too ' you do't look like a triathlete' hahahhaa. its not like we wear 'mark allen' or 'peter reid' jerseys to promote or 'sport of choice' hahahaha
keep on keeping on
marzian
146
Member
1297 days
VTIRON posted 3 years ago.
We come in a wide variety of shapes and sizes but the definition of an athlete is the person who gets the most out of the body they were given.
122
Member
1251 days
Beldrueger posted 3 years ago.
Power to weight ratio is only part of the equation in biking. The other part is power versus frontal area. In other words how much power do you have versus how big a hole do you cut through the air.
In that equation I believe you will find that heavier riders (provided they are just as proportionally fit) have an advantage. I have been long out of high school physics, so take this for what it's worth. I know that as an example, if you have a 110lb rider who races at 160 w and a 220lb rider who races at 320w, the 220lb rider will be able to average a higher MPH on a flat course with no drafting. The reason is that he is not cutting twice as big a hole as the 110lb rider. If his frontal area only increases 50%, that would mean that if the small rider required 100w to hold 18mph. The big rider would need only 150w ... or thereabouts to overcome aerodynamic drag.
I find its easy to think about this in car terms. Weight has no direct effect on top speed. Weight affects acceleration. Top speed is all about horsepwer vs (frontal area x coefficient of drag).
Better power to weight is always going to be a benefit on slower hilly courses where aerodynamics are less a factor, but at a constant speed on a flat course with few demands on raw acceleration, is all about pwer to effective frontal area.
477
Member
1344 days
geochuck posted 3 years ago.
If you want to see a picture of bodies of swimmers look here, It is a picture that Conrad Wenenberg took before the 28 mile race and published in his book -A Brief History of Marthon Swimming - WIND WAVES and SUNBURN
http://swimdownhill.com/_wsn/page11.html I just added it to my web site. He took the picture and asked us to stick out our stomachs. I used to be able to pop my stomach out and I did. That race was always the first of the season and I would get down another 20 lbs before the end of the season. My friend in the photo was one of the best marathon swimmers in the world and he made a funny face for the fotos.
102
Member
1159 days
merlinextraligh posted 3 years ago.
Until you get to a very elite level, training and desire will matter more than whether you start with an ideal frame size.
Also what's ideal will depend on the course too.On a flat course on the bike being small may be a little bit of a disadvantage. Take the Roberto Heras example. He's a great climber, but a relatively poor time trialist.
In climbing its power to weight ratio that matters, and you have an advantage at your size. In a flat TT its power to frontal area that matters most. Thus slightly bigger riders often can TT well (think Jan Ullrich)
As for me at 6'1" and 200lbs, I can TT pretty well, but have to watch guys like you blow by me running.
hello all,
i have a question. first the reason: when i talk to friends and athletes (mostly runners) and we come about triathlons, i tell them that i am a triathlete. the response is, ' you are too small to be a triathlete.' this comes from single sport athletes, swimmers and runners mostly. now, i am 5'6' and weigh 135lbs., i am slender with muscular tone. i do not produce as much power (watts) as a 'taller/heavier' athlete but i do have good muscular endurance which is just as good in the long haul. there is no 'ideal weight' for triathltes, is there? its an arbitrary number i would say, at best. we are all different in shape and sizes. i do not know how to answer that question. what do you all think?
marzian