Skip to content

Analysis

Pros Battling Hypothermia in Non-wetsuit Swim at IM Frankfurt

This year’s IM Frankfurt produced a number of DNFs due to hypothermia when there was a non-wetsuit swim for the Pros because of high water temperatures. This post goes into some more detail on what happened, my best understanding of the current rules and some suggestions for avoiding more occurrences of this issue. I hope that this post can add some details to the discussion that needs to happen.

Temperatures at Langener Waldsee

In the days before Ironman Frankfurt there was a lot of speculation if the Pro swim would be without wetsuits. The cutoff temperature for the Pro race is 21.9°C (71.5°F). As the temperature was hovering around this mark, the final decision would be made on race day morning. I was out at the “Langener Waldsee” on Wednesday when the posted water temperature was 21.8°C. After a few nice warm days it was already at 22.1°C on Friday and on Saturday it had risen to 22.5°C. But Saturday was cloudy and had some rain, so it was a surprise that on Sunday morning the official temperature was announced as 22.6°C (even higher than Saturday) and the race was to start with a non-wetsuit swim.

Among local athletes who swim in the Langener Waldsee on a regular basis it is well known that there are warmer and colder spots in the lake and that temperatures can vary quite widely depending on where you measure. According to the rules the water temperature is to be taken “at the middle of the course and in two other areas on the swim course, at a depth of 60 cm. The lowest measured temperature will be considered as the official water temperature.”

According to ITU rules, the air temperature also plays a role. While I am not aware of any official measurements, air temperature was somewhere around 12°C before the race started and 14°C at the time that athletes started the bike.

There are some reports that the life guards at the Langener Waldsee measured a temperature of 21.5°C on Sunday. After a cold and rainy race day the temperature dropped pretty quickly, on Monday it was posted at 21.0°C and 20.3°C on Tuesday.

Pro Athletes in Trouble

After the decision to not allow the use of wetsuits for the Pros, a lot of Pro athletes were struggling in the swim. The most public case was Daniela Ryf who was leading the women’s race after the swim but couldn’t get warm and had to abandon the race after an hour on the bike because of hypothermia.

There were a lot more athletes that struggled with the cold and DNF’d on the bike. Some athletes even had to be rescued on the swim, close to becoming completely disoriented and loosing consciousness. At least two athletes were sent to the hospital when their low body temperatures raised serious concerns with the lifeguards.

WPro Bikes

(Photo: The lonely bikes of Kristin Möller and Diana Riesler in T1 after both had to be rescued during the swim.)

Brett Sutton has written about the issue as well and included a list of athletes that DNF’d because of the cold – making it clear that both men and women struggled in the water. An even larger number of athlete’s races were affected, here’s a short excerpt from Caroline Livesey’s race report (she went on to finish 12th in the female Pro race) about the end of her swim:

Determination kept me going but coming into T1 I knew I was in a bad way. I couldn’t really think straight so I just went onto auto pilot and transitioned onto the bike leg. I am pretty sure if anyone medically trained had stopped and checked me over I would have been delirious and probably have been pulled from the race. Apparently spectators were wondering out loud how on earth I was going to run a marathon when I could barely run in T1.

It is obvious from the number of athletes struggling that this is not a gender-specific issue and that the official water temperature was not an accurate reflection of conditions on race morning. Racing without a wetsuit should avoid overheating on the swim, but the dangers of hypothermia were clearly much bigger for the Pro athletes in Frankfurt.

Wetsuit Rules

Before offering some ideas on how to avoid a situation as in Frankfurt, it’s a good idea to review the rules as they stand.

The applicable rules for Ironman races state in Section 4.02 (Wetsuit Rules):

(a) For professional athletes, wetsuits may be worn in water temperatures up to and including 21.9 degrees C/71.5 degrees F;

The cutoff temperature was reduced from 76.1 degrees Fahrenheit (24.5 degrees C) in 2014 to align more closely with changes in the ITU rules. These are as follows (Section 4.2 Wetsuit Use):

ITU Wetsuit

In addition the ITU rules have a section (Section 4.3 Modifications) on shortening or cancelling the swim in certain conditions:

ITUShortening

Air temperatures also play a role on how big the danger of hypothermia is – in cold temperatures athletes will be shivering in the final minutes before the race start, and it becomes much harder to dry and get warm once on the bike. Therefore Section 4.3 also contains a table that shows how to decrease the measured water temperature to account for low air temperatures:

ITUAdjustTemperature

However, this table only applies for water temperatures below 22°C and – at least the way I understand the wording of the rules – is only to be used in determining to shorten or cancel the swim, but not for the decision to allow a wetsuit or not.

In order to to deal with special conditions not covered by the previous rules there is a catch-all rule (also in Section 4.3) that gives extra powers to the referees:

b.) If other weather conditions dictate, i.e., high winds, heavy rain, changing temperature, current, etc. the Technical and Medical Delegates may adapt limits of the swim length or adopt provisions about the use of wetsuit.

However,  I’m not aware of a similar provision in the Ironman rules and it was not invoked on race morning of IM Frankfurt.

To sum up, if the measured water temperature of 22.6°C is deemed correct, then the current rules directly imply a non-wetsuit swim.

Suggestions

If the current rules in place put athletes in danger as has happened in Frankfurt, obviously they need to be changed to avoid similar occurrences.

Rethink the Cutoff Temperature for IM Racing

Ironman has much bigger experience in organizing long-distance triathlons than the ITU that is primarily concerned with racing on the Olympic Distance. The ITU rules make a distinction between Olympic Distance swims (1.5k) and those longer, but of course there is a large difference between racing a 70.3 swim (1.9k) and an Ironman swim (3.8k), and the use of wetsuits in Professional long-distance races seems to be an issue that both organizations should discuss and maybe adjust their rulebooks.

Uniformly Adjust the Water Temperature

Rather than simply adjusting the cutoff temperature as discussed in the previous section, my suggestion is to extend the water temperature adjustment procedures and base all decisions off that modified temperature. In order to be used for these cases the table needs to be extended for warmer water temperatures, at least up to 25°C or even higher to make the table applicable for agegroup racing as well. (To my engineering mind, there’s also no clear description on which row/column to use, for example does a temperature of 22.6°C correspond to the row of 22°C or should it be rounded up and then correspond to the 23°C row.) This would still not address situations with large differences between warm water and cold air temperatures (for example 25°C water and 8°C air temperature), so Ironman rules should allow referees to make a call on race day.

If we assume that this modified temperature rule was in place and there was an air temperature of 15°C (it probably was even lower an hour before the start), then the adjusted temperature would be 21°C, clearly under the Pro cutoff temperature. If this adjusted temperature had been used in making the decision about allowing wetsuits, IM Frankfurt would have been a wetsuit race and most of the issues we saw could have been avoided.

Discuss with the ITU, Federations and Ironman

Of course change is not going to happen on its own, so Pro athletes, coaches etc. have to make  the ITU, their local federations and Ironman aware of this issue and encourage them to better address it in the rules. While I have suggested a possible solution above, there may be other (and better) ways of updating the rules. An open discussion about the changes would surely be appreciated by many athletes, especially those that barely escaped without lasting damage from racing an Ironman.

What Happened to GPS Coverage of the Pro Races?

In January 2015 Ironman announced enhanced race coverage of major races, including GPS tracking devices feeding into a new athlete tracking platform (see my post looking at the details). This post looks at the progress Ironman has made during last year and where things are for this season.

2015 Season

GPS tracking was off to a slow start. At the Regional Championships Pros were given a tracker that they had to carry on the bike and run. The following photo shows the tracker on the left compared to an iPhone 5 (the photo doesn’t show that the tracker is about three times as thick as an iPhone):

OldTracker

The Pros had to carry the devices, but for the first Regionals the information was not made publicly available. If you knew where to look, you could see “dots on a map” on a “semi-secret” site by Quarq, the manufacturer of the devices.

Towards the second half of the season (as far as I know starting with IM Frankfurt but also for 70.3 Championships and Kona) the information was integrated into the Ironman website and there was a GPS Leaderboard with constantly updating information showing the time differences between athletes. The old “Athlete Tracker” was replaced by a modernized version with a slicker look and predictions that often were comically wrong. For agegroup athletes the information was still based on the splits from the timing mats.

2016 Season

I was expecting to a see an updated version of the GPS tracking for this season, both in terms of the tracking device (smaller, lighter) and also in the functionality offered to the public. But the first Regional Championships at IM South Africa did not include any GPS information at all, neither publicly not privately.

I reached out to Ironman with some detailed questions but only received a short answer that “there was an issue for the IRONMAN African Championships” and that they are “working to have GPS tracking at the remaining Championship races”.

The North American Championships at IM Texas did in fact provide GPS tracking. A new, smaller device was used:

NewTracker

Apparently these are provided not by Quarq (who continue to offer their race tracking services, for example at Rev3 races as announced in this press release) but by Beacon Athlete Tracking. (I have contacted Beacon Athlete Tracking and they confirmed to be working with Ironman this season to provide GPS tracking but haven’t provided additional information.) Similar to the start of last season, there was a “semi-secret” website for IM Texas with dots on a map but no GPS leaderboard, and no information was available on the Ironman website. Also, the old and much-ridiculed Athlete Tracker was used to show leaderboards and splits for all racers. As has often happened in the past, the tracker had issues and the first two hours of the race no information or splits were available.

My Assessment

One can only assume that Ironman and Quarq had reasons not to continue their relationship, however it is extremely unfortunate that the biggest fans of Ironman racing – those watching the race on site and those trying to follow online –  have to suffer the consequences. So far triathletes following the Regional Championships had to rely on spotter updates from the course and the spotty tracker – very infrequent split information that is not easily available. I can only assume that this also makes the job of the two commenters of the live show, Greg Welch and Michael Lovato, that much harder. Basically things are back to were they were at the start of 2015 and all the progress made during last year has been lost.

While Ironman has stated that they remain committed to providing GPS Tracking for the Pros and their intention to extend that to agegroupers as well, it is hard to discern that from their actions. I hope that they can make quick progress in the next few weeks and at least get us back to the status we had last summer with a working GPS leaderboard and an updated Athlete Tracker for Ironman Frankfurt.

In last year’s post I wrote:

Too often, Ironman efforts have been half-hearted and ultimately disappointing.

Concerning GPS tracking, I sincerely hope that Ironman’s actions will prove me wrong.

Analyzing Consistency of Athletes

Update (April 16th): Since originally posting I have added an age-weighted component to the numbers, so that newer results have a larger influence than older ones. As you can see from the changes in the numbers, this adds another interesting dimension to the numbers in this post.

I love getting feedback on my analysis and predictions – very often, they trigger some new, interesting way of looking at the data. For example, Linsey Corbin made the following remark to me:

I wish there was a way that your predictions could show consistency. One thing I pride myself on is being fairly consistent across the board.

Thanks for the suggestion, Linsey (and great to see you back to racing)! I have been looking at different ways of attacking this question, here is what I was able to come up with. I will continue to monitor these numbers for upcoming races, maybe and I’ll include them in future predictions.

Deviation

In statistics, there are a number of way to measure how “consistent” a set of data is. The most common way to express variability in data sets is the “Standard Deviation“. StdDev basically measures the distance of data points from the average value – the more “outliers” there are and the further off they are, the higher the standard deviation.

This was my first try of analyzing consistency. The data analysis part is pretty simple, as the function is built into all kinds of programs. However, the results were not very helpful: In essence it helped identify athletes that had one or more sub-standard results, e.g because of walking large parts of the marathon in a race. For example, Lucy Gossage showed up as an inconsistent athlete with a large deviation, but that was almost exclusively a result of her marathon walk resulting in an 11:32 finish in Kona 2014. It also didn’t value “good” results: The difference of a good result to an average – maybe 30 minutes or so – is much smaller than that of a bad result – walking easily adds an hour to the overall time.

Identifying Non-standard Results and Quantifying Consistency

Even when looking at the deviation of results of each athlete did not lead to a good measure, it formed the basis for another way of looking at the data. In the familiar “bell shape” curve of the normal distribution, 68% of results fall within one standard deviation around the average. When looking at the difference between an athlete’s “expected time” and their actual finishing time, roughly 68% of the results are within 20 minutes of the expected time. Based on this I classify results within 20 minutes of the expected finishing time as “normal”, and any result quicker as “better” results and anything slower and DNFs as “sub-par” results.

I can then aggregate all the results of an athlete into a figure like this:

Linsey Corbin: 83% +17% -0% (18)

Older results have less of a meaning than newer, so adding in an aging component gives the following numbers:

Linsey Corbin: 79% +21% -0% (18)

Each part has the following meaning:

  • Linsey Corbin: Name of the athlete
  • 79%: Fraction of normal race results
  • +21%: Fraction of “better than expected” race results
  • -0%: Fraction of “sub-par” race results (including DNFs)
    (Note: Technically, Linsey has at least one DNF in her Ironman races – she didn’t finish IM Texas in 2011. This is a limitation in my data – I have only been including DNF’s since 2014.)
  • (18): Total number of Ironman-distance results (including DNFs)
Average numbers are about 68% of normal results and roughly 15-20% each of better and sub-par results, but these numbers vary wildly between athletes.

Examples

Here are some more numbers from well known athletes – put into different groups. (As I have updated my algorithm a bit since posting for the first time, I am also including the originally posted numbers in [square brackets].)

Stable Athletes

  • Andy Potts: 100% +0% -0% (13) [originally posted: 100% +0% -0% (13)]
  • Yvonne Van Vlerken: 84% +0% -16% (23) [originally posted: 91% +0% -9% (23)]
  • Lucy Gossage: 92% +0% -8% (12) [originally posted: 91% +0% -9% (11)]
  • Sebastian Kienle: 85% +12% -3% (11) [originally posted: 82% +9% -9% (11)]
These are athletes where predictions are a very good indicator of how they’ll perform on race day – they usually perform on a very similar level from race to race.

Normal Stability

  • Jodie Swallow: 55% +0% -45% (10) [originally posted: 78% +0% -22% (9) – she has since DNF’d in South Africa]
  • Caroline Steffen: 92% +8% -0% (20) [originally posted: 75% +25% -0% (20)]
  • Meredith Kessler: 65% +14% -20% (23) [originally posted: 70% +17% -13% (23)]
  • Andreas Raelert: 48% +0% -52% (19) [originally posted: 63% +0% -37% (19)]
  • Luke McKenzie: 51% +30% -19% (26) [originally posted: 62% +23% -15% (26)]
For these athletes predictions give a good indication, but it is also interesting whether there is a higher potential for an “up-side”, better-than-expected result (larger percentage of faster results, e.g. Carolin Steffen) or for a “down-side” result (larger percentage of sub-par results, e.g. Jodie Swallow or Andreas Raelert). For other athletes, the day could go either way (e.g. Meredith Kessler or Luke McKenzie).

Lower Stability

  • Sarah Piampiano: 41% +47% -12% (14) [originally posted: 50% +43% -7% (14)]
  • Luke Bell: 23% +5% -72% (26) [originally posted: 38% +12% -50% (26)]
  • Dede Griesbauer: 41% +18% -40% (26) [originally posted: 32% +32% -36% (25)]
  • Tim O’Donnell: 14% +63% -23% (11) [originally posted: 27% +45% -27% (11)]
  • Pete Jacobs: 5% +16% -79% (26) [originally posted: 15% +42% -42% (26)]

Then there are athletes that have a lower fraction of “normal” results. Here it’s also interesting to look at the upside (e.g. Sarah Piampiano, Tim O’Donnell) or downside potential (e.g. Luke Bell). Some athletes’ results are very hard to predict from previous numbers – for example Dede Griesbauer and Pete Jacobs have had a good fraction of great results but also slower, disappointing results.

Continental and National Fastest Times

After the fast times at the end of 2015 there has been some discussion about continental and national “records” over the Ironman-distance. Because of doubts about the accuracy of courses, comparing times from different courses is always a bit tricky, but here is an overview of the data I was able to compile.

Please let me know if I missed some older results that are better than the continental and national records in this list!

Continental Records

Female Athletes

Continent Athlete Nation Time Date Race
Africa McEwan, Dianne ZAF 09:37:45 14.04.13 IM South Africa
Asia/Pacific Shiono, Emi JPN 09:23:26 01.03.08 IM New Zealand
Australia Carfrae, Mirinda AUS 08:38:53 20.07.14 Challenge Roth
Europe Wellington, Chrissie GBR 08:18:13 10.07.11 Challenge Roth
North America Corbin, Linsey USA 08:42:42 29.06.14 IM Austria
South America Monticeli, Ariane BRA 08:59:08 31.05.15 IM Brasil

Male Athletes

Continent Athlete Nation Time Date Race
Africa Cunnama, James ZAF 07:59:59 08.07.12 Challenge Roth
Asia/Pacific Vernay, Patrick NCL 08:03:46 12.07.09 Challenge Roth
Australia McCormack, Chris AUS 07:54:23 24.06.07 Challenge Roth
Europe Raelert, Andreas GER 07:41:33 10.07.11 Challenge Roth
North America Starykowicz, Andrew USA 07:55:22 02.11.13 IM Florida
South America Amorelli, Igor BRA 07:59:36 31.05.15 IM Brasil

National Records

Sometimes, the nation of an athlete is not clear – often athletes are listed with their country of residence (e.g. foreign athletes staying in Boulder), and some athletes have dual citizenships. Please let me know if I have mis-attributed a fast result by an athlete to the wrong country!

Female Athletes

Nation Athlete Total Date Race
AUS Carfrae, Mirinda 08:38:53 20.07.14 Challenge Roth
AUT Wutti, Eva 08:37:36 18.08.13 IM Copenhagen
BEL Goos, Sofie 08:57:08 29.06.14 IM Austria
BRA Monticeli, Ariane 08:59:08 31.05.15 IM Brasil
CAN Naeth, Angela 08:54:55 28.09.14 IM Chattanooga
CZE Reed, Lucie 08:57:34 06.10.13 Challenge Barcelona
DEN Pedersen, Camilla 08:56:01 07.07.13 IM Germany
FIN Lehtonen, Kaisa 08:48:40 04.10.15 IM Barcelona
FRA Collonge, Jeanne 09:20:51 23.06.13 IM France
GBR Wellington, Chrissie 08:18:13 10.07.11 Challenge Roth
GER Wallenhorst, Sandra 08:47:26 13.07.08 IM Austria
HUN Csomor, Erika 08:47:05 13.07.08 Challenge Roth
IRL Mullan, Eimear 08:56:51 04.10.15 IM Barcelona
ITA Niederfriniger, Edith 08:59:45 13.07.08 IM Austria
NED Van Vlerken, Yvonne 08:43:07 02.11.13 IM Florida
NZL Martin, Britta 08:56:34 07.12.14 IM Western Australia
SUI Steffen, Caroline 08:34:51 24.03.12 IM Melbourne
SWE Lundstroem, Asa 09:02:49 22.03.15 IM Melbourne
UKR Kozulina, Tamara 09:06:42 13.07.08 IM Austria
USA Corbin, Linsey 08:42:42 29.06.14 IM Austria
ZAF McEwan, Dianne 09:37:45 14.04.13 IM South Africa

Male Athletes

Nation Athlete Finish Date Race
AUS McCormack, Chris 07:54:23 24.06.07 Challenge Roth
AUT Weiss, Michael 07:57:39 03.07.11 IM Austria
BEL Vanhoenacker, Marino 07:45:58 03.07.11 IM Austria
BMU Butterfield, Tyler 08:05:22 31.05.15 IM Brasil
BRA Amorelli, Igor 07:59:36 31.05.15 IM Brasil
CAN McMahon, Brent 07:55:48 16.11.14 IM Arizona
CZE Ospaly, Filip 07:58:44 02.11.13 IM Florida
DEN Henning, Rasmus 07:52:36 18.07.10 Challenge Roth
ESP Rana, Ivan 07:48:43 29.06.14 IM Austria
EST Albert, Marko 08:08:17 03.07.11 IM Austria
FRA Chevrot, Denis 08:05:58 07.12.14 IM Western Australia
GBR Amey, Paul 08:01:29 19.11.11 IM Arizona
GER Raelert, Andreas 07:41:33 10.07.11 Challenge Roth
LUX Bockel, Dirk 07:52:01 14.07.13 Challenge Roth
NCL Vernay, Patrick 08:03:46 12.07.09 Challenge Roth
NED Van der Marel, Jan 07:57:46 04.09.1999 Almere Triathlon
NED Diederen, Bas 08:05:36 05.07.15 IM Germany
NZL Brown, Cameron 08:00:12 24.03.12 IM Melbourne
POR Marques, Sergio 08:05:21 06.10.13 Challenge Barcelona
SLO Plese, David 08:02:20 04.10.15 IM Barcelona
SUI Schildknecht, Ronnie 07:59:42 05.11.11 IM Florida
SWE Nilsson, Patrik 08:08:05 15.08.15 IM Sweden
USA Starykowicz, Andrew 07:55:22 02.11.13 IM Florida
ZAF Cunnama, James 07:59:59 08.07.12 Challenge Roth

Notes

There are a few records that need some explanations.

Female African & South African Record

I have listed Dianne McEwan (now Dianne Emery who became a mom in January) as the African record holder, but she herself considers Annah Watkinson’s 9:31 from IM Austria 2015 as the record. Annah has been racing as an age-grouper then, and because of the different race dynamics from the Pro race I’m not counting her result. But Annah has turned Pro this season, so there’s a good chance we will see a new African record this year, maybe as early as IM South Africa!

Male Canadian Record

Lionel Sanders sent me the following tweet after I posted the fastest times:

SandersTweet

Lionel is right that Peter finished in 7:51:56 in 1999. However, it is accepted that the marathon in Klagenfurt was short (Peter ran a 2:35:21!) – probably by more than 1k. With Peter being a great athlete and fast runner, one could speculate if he could have finished faster than Brent’s 7:55:48, but I’ve decided to not accept his time as a record.

Male Dutch Record

Jefry Visier, the Operational Director of Challenge Almere, was going through older Almere results and found four times (three by Jan Van der Marel and one by Frank Heldoorn) that were quicker than the one I had from Bas Diederen.

2015 Money Lists

This is an except from my free “2015 TriRating Report“. If you’re interested in more information about the 2015 long-distance Triathlon season, you should definitely check it out!

Overall Money List

First, here is an overview of the races I have included in my money list:

Type Description Total Prize Money # of Athletes
Kona Ironman World Championship (Kona) $ 650.000 20
Ironman Full-distance WTC races (not including Kona) $ 2.271.000 318
70.3 Champs 70.3 World Championship (Zell am See) $ 250.000 20
70.3s 70.3 races (not including Champs) $ 2.177.500 400
Challenge Full-distance Challenge races (including Roth) $ 360.750 83
Sum All included races $ 5.709.250 582

This does not include the $1 million prize that Daniela Ryf collected for winning the “Triple Crown”.

The next table shows the Top 20 athletes – both from the men and women – that have earned the most prize money in the 2015 calendar year from all the races listed above:

# Name Sex Total Money
1 Ryf, Daniela F $223.000
2 Frodeno, Jan M $213.000
3 Kessler, Meredith F $86.000
4 Blatchford, Liz F $79.750
5 Raelert, Andreas M $77.750
6 Potts, Andy M $75.500
7 Joyce, Rachel F $73.250
8 O’Donnell, Timothy M $67.500
9 Sanders, Lionel M $66.500
10 Wurtele, Heather F $64.500
11 Van Vlerken, Yvonne F $63.250
12 Steffen, Caroline F $60.750
13 Don, Tim M $58.000
14 Jackson, Heather F $57.750
15 Swallow, Jodie F $57.500
16 Naeth, Angela F $55.000
17 Kienle, Sebastian M $52.500
18 Pedersen, Camilla F $51.750
19 Piampiano, Sarah F $49.250
20 Gossage, Lucy F $47.000

Meredith Kessler has made it into third spot without any money from the “big money races” in Kona or Zell Am See.

Ironman Money List

Here are the Top 15 money earners from Ironman races (excluding Kona):

# Name Sex Ironman Total Overall Rank
1 Vanhoenacker, Marino M $44.000 $44.000 24
2 Van Lierde, Frederik M $35.000 $40.250 26
3 Kessler, Meredith F $34.000 $86.000 3
4 Van Vlerken, Yvonne F $33.250 $63.250 11
5 Hanson, Matt M $31.000 $32.000 40
6 Ryf, Daniela F $30.000 $223.000 1
6 Frodeno, Jan M $30.000 $213.000 2
6 Blatchford, Liz F $30.000 $79.750 4
6 Swallow, Jodie F $30.000 $57.500 15
6 Naeth, Angela F $30.000 $55.000 16
6 McKenzie, Luke M $30.000 $36.750 33
6 Monticeli, Ariane F $30.000 $35.750 35
6 Symonds, Jeff M $30.000 $31.250 43
6 Hauschildt, Melissa F $30.000 $30.000 44
15 Sanders, Lionel M $29.500 $66.500 9

70.3 Money List

Here are the Top 15 money earners from 70.3 races (including the 70.3 Champs):

# Name Sex 70.3 Total Zell Am See Other 70.3s Overall Rank
1 Ryf, Daniela F $73.000 $45.000 $28.000 1
2 Frodeno, Jan M $63.000 $45.000 $18.000 2
3 Wurtele, Heather F $58.000 $20.000 $38.000 10
3 Don, Tim M $58.000 $- $58.000 13
5 Kessler, Meredith F $52.000 $- $52.000 3
6 Sanders, Lionel M $37.000 $- $37.000 9
6 Tisseyre, Magali F $37.000 $10.000 $27.000 32
8 Steffen, Caroline F $33.750 $- $33.750 12
9 Aernouts, Bart M $33.250 $10.000 $23.250 25
10 Potts, Andy M $33.000 $- $33.000 6
11 Kaye, Alicia F $32.500 $7.500 $25.000 39
12 Goss, Lauren F $31.500 $- $31.500 41
13 Swallow, Jodie F $27.500 $- $27.500 15
13 Reed, Tim M $27.500 $- $27.500 51
15 Boecherer, Andi M $27.250 $6.500 $20.750 36

It’s interesting to note that Tim Don and Meredith Kessler have almost made it to the top of the list without any money from the 70.3 Championships.

Select your currency
EUR Euro
USD United States (US) dollar

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

Close