Analysis

Before Kona, there was a lot of speculation about Caroline Steffen’s prep which included a full Ironman-distance race just six weeks before Kona. Now that the race is over, I have a closer look at some of the data on the impact of season planning for performance in Kona.

Of course this analysis has some limitations:

• There are not too many data points – after all, we only had 85 pro athletes on the start line in Kona.
• Each athlete recovers at a different rate, the analysis can only be a general guideline that has to be adapted for each athlete.
• My data and analysis is limited to the Pros, the picture could be different for age groupers.

With these caveats out of the way, let’s have a look at the data. I’ll be showing graphs of athletes Kona performance. The Kona performance is the time difference (in minutes) between their Rating (based on all their previous results) and their normalized Kona finish time, after accounting for the course and conditions on race day. A „normal“ day would produce a Kona performance of 0, performances larger than 0 mean that the athlete performed better than expected, negative numbers indicate that things didn’t go quite as well.

Last IM before Kona

The first graph show the athletes Kona performance in relation to the time that each athlete took between racing his/her last Ironman-distance race before Kona:

The month names indicate when the last IM-distance race was, the light blue line shows the median Kona performances, and the thicker blue line a „best fit“ for the data.

Here’s the raw data behind this graph:

Month	Athletes	DNFs	DNF %	Median Performance
November	5	1	20%	3:12 (not shown)
March	8	2	25%	2:20
April	1	0	0	(not shown)
May	6	0	0	9:42
June	13	4	31%	1:52
July	26	6	23%	-1:52
August	22	5	23%	-2:39
September	4	0	0	-12:00

There are a few interesting observations in this data:

• The time since the last IM does not seem to have a discernible influence on the DNF rate.
• In order to deliver the best Kona performance, there seems to be a sweet-spot in May. (But if we included the November data, we would end up with a relatively „flat“ graph before May. Hard to tell if there is much of a difference with so few data points.)
• After May, the less time there is before Kona, the more likely it is to have a bad result. The 2013 data doesn’t show much of a difference between July and August.

Number of IMs before Kona

There is another way to look at the Kona performance: in relation to the number of IMs athletes have raced before Kona:

Again, the light line with the data points show the actual data, and the darker line a best fit. (6 is actually a category representing 6 or more races. It won’t be a surprise that the athlete with the most was Peter Vabrousek with 11 IM-distance races between Kona 2012 and 2013.)

Again, the main information is relatively obvious:

• The more IM races you race, the more you’ll probably struggle in Kona.
• The ideal number of long distance races (outside of Kona) seems to be either one or two.

Implications

I think that there are a few implications for athletes that want to focus on their Kona performance:

• Avoid long-distance races close to Kona. (It’s just one data point, but I would think that Caroline is wondering what would have happened if she didn’t race MetaMan.)
• Try to qualify at the end of July if possible. (The best case scenario is probably Jordan’s 2012 season: Qualify late, then have a conservative Kona race to get some good points for the next season.)
• Make a decision whether to focus on Kona or one of the European and North American championships (Frankfurt in July, Mont Tremblant in August). As far as I know, with the exception of Chrissie Wellington we’ve never had the same athlete win both in Frankfurt and Kona.
• If you have enough points, just race an Ironman either in November („just validate strategy“) or in April/May, then have a focused Kona build. (This seems to be the strategy that Rinny feels very comfortable with.)

Unfortunately, this is a bit in conflict with the way WTC has set up the KPR system – late season big races, and the hectic August qualifying. In my opinion, this is not the best way to set up athletes for great Kona performances.

After Ironman Hawaii, I’ve updated my Top 10 Ratings and Course Ratings (in the menu bar). Here’s a short overview of the main changes in the Top10:

TOP 10 Rated Male Athletes

Almost all of the top-rated athletes are falling back a bit. With Crowie falling back to #3 after his disappointing Kona result, Andreas Raelert is again the only athlete in the #1 spot – but he hasn’t really claimed the top spot. The main person moving up the ranks is Frederik Van Lierde, he was 12th at the end of 2012 and is now tied for 6th.

Rank	Name	Nation	Rating	Last Race	# Races
1	Andreas Raelert	GER	08:16:22	IM Austria on 2013-06-30	11
2	Eneko Llanos	ESP	08:20:50	IM Hawaii on 2013-10-12	18
3	Craig Alexander	AUS	08:22:18	IM Hawaii on 2013-10-12	10
4	Timo Bracht	GER	08:22:24	IM Hawaii on 2013-10-12	20
5	Sebastian Kienle	GER	08:22:30	IM Hawaii on 2013-10-12	7
6	Marino Vanhoenacker	BEL	08:23:22	IM Germany on 2013-07-07	14
7	Frederik Van Lierde	BEL	08:23:22	IM Hawaii on 2013-10-12	12
8	Bart Aernouts	BEL	08:23:36	IM Hawaii on 2013-10-12	4
9	Faris Al-Sultan	GER	08:25:19	IM Hawaii on 2013-10-12	17
10	David Dellow	AUS	08:26:20	IM Germany on 2013-07-07	5

TOP 10 Rated Female Athletes

For the lasts year my assessment was that Rinny had “inherited” the top spot after Chrissie’s retirement, but her fantastic Kona result made it clear that she has absolutely earned it by now. Yvonne and Rachel continue to move up in the ranks, with Caroline between them. New additions to the Top10 are British athletes Jodie Swallow and Liz Blatchford, with Julia Gajer (dropping to 17th after Wales) and Sonja Tajsich (dropping to 11th) they have ousted two German athletes.

Rank	Name	Nation	Rating	Last Race	# Races
1	Mirinda Carfrae	AUS	09:07:39	IM Hawaii on 2013-10-12	8
2	Yvonne Van Vlerken	NED	09:12:14	IM Hawaii on 2013-10-12	11
3	Caroline Steffen	SUI	09:12:20	IM Hawaii on 2013-10-12	15
4	Rachel Joyce	GBR	09:13:25	IM Hawaii on 2013-10-12	13
5	Jodie Swallow	GBR	09:14:18	IM Sweden on 2013-08-17	3
6	Liz Blatchford	GBR	09:15:23	IM Hawaii on 2013-10-12	3
7	Mary Beth Ellis	USA	09:15:28	IM Mont Tremblant on 2013-08-18	10
8	Anja Beranek	GER	09:20:56	IM Mont Tremblant on 2013-08-18	4
9	Lucy Gossage	GBR	09:22:12	IM Wales on 2013-09-08	4
10	Linsey Corbin	USA	09:22:58	IM Hawaii on 2013-10-12	15

In my post on the changes to the KPR system, I wrote:

There will be even more changes to the start lists in the last few days than we already have. (If there’s a strong field, withdraw; if there is a weak field, try to enter late.) Athletes can register for as many races as they want, and can enter or pull out just a few days before the race without any penalties.

This prompted a reply from Jordan Rapp that “tightening procedures” is part of the suggestions he and the other athletes made to WTC. He offered to explain what the registration process looks like and also put me in contact with Heather Fuhr and Paula Newby-Fraser who manage the registration process for WTC. They were kind enough to answer my questions and make sure that the information I present here is as accurate as possible. (Any remaining errors are completely my own fault.)

Overview

As usual, a picture is helpful to give a quick overview of the process and the people involved in the process:

Before going into details, here is a short summary:

1. A WTC Pro applies for a certain race at WTC Pro Registration (usually handled by Heather Fuhr).
2. If the application is before the deadline (usually two or four weeks before a race) and the Pro race isn’t full, that Pro is then entered into the list of “registered applicants” on active.com
3. The WTC Pro can then register for that race through active.com, similar to how an age-grouper registers. He is then on the “official” start list.
4. This list is sent by Pro Registration to the relevant race organization. It is then released to the public and used for printing the bibs.
5. Withdrawal before the race is done by sending an email to Pro Membership. That information is then forwarded to the race on an ad-hoc basis.

A detailed look at the Process

One caveat before I go into the details: This is the process how it typically works for North American Ironman-distance races. There are some variations for races that are organized by WTC licensees, and more changes for 70.3 and 5i50 races around the globe.

Becoming a WTC Pro

Any athlete who is recognized by their national association as a professional or elite athlete (standards vary from country to country) can contact WTC Pro Membership and ask to become a new WTC pro (or if they already have been a Pro, renew their membership). They have to pay the membership fee of 750$ (processed through active.com, some reduced fees for those who only want to do a single event).

Applying for a race

Once an athlete is a WTC Pro, he or she can apply to register for a race by sending an email to WTC Pro Registration. Apparently, athletes still try to contact the individual races directly, but that just delays the whole process as all applications have to be handled by Pro Registration.

Each race has a pro registration deadline (published at “Event Registration“), around two to four weeks before the race. (From what I heard, WTC is trying to establish a four week deadline for all races.) Also, there is an upper limit of pro slots that a race offers, but that limit is rarely reached for Ironman races. (Apparently, it has happened for late season races such as Florida or Arizona, but it’s more of a problem for popular 70.3s such as Honu.)

The application email from the WTC pro is usually handled by Heather Fuhr, WTC Pro Liaison (and 1997 Kona champion). She makes sure the formalities are observed (the athlete is a registered WTC Pro, applying before the deadline for a race with open slots) and that nothing “funny” is going on (for example, someone trying to apply for three different races on the same weekend).

Enabling Registration and Registering

If everything looks okay, Heather enables the pro for this race on active.com, and the athlete can go through the normal registration process. (Except for the prize being 0$, a pro registering is basically the same as for any age grouper – name, address, t-shirt size, medical info, etc.)

Publishing Start Lists

Close to the deadline, Heather makes sure all loose ends are tied up (for example athletes trying to register in the last few days or athletes that applied but never registered). The start list is then sent off to Athlete Services for the individual race. The race organization is then responsible for publishing the list on the race website, release it to the media etc.

Withdrawing

If an athlete wants to withdraw, he/she can do so by sending an email to Pro Registration at any time. If the start list has already been sent, that information is then forwarded to the race organization. About two days before the race, a final list taking all last minute withdrawals into account is then sent to the organization that does the timing for the event and is also reflected on the Athlete Tracker.

Suggestions for Registration and Publishing

The way I see it, there are some issues where the process can be improved further:

1. There should be some information how many athletes have already registered for a race. (This could help avoid a situation such as IM France with only 5 women registered the week before the race and very little to do about it.) This could be as simple as a monthly email to WTC pro athletes (and maybe the triathlon press).
2. Standardize the registration deadline to four weeks.
3. After the registration deadline, a list in a standard format should be made available in a standard location. (Ideally, this would be the race page on Ironman.com.)

Implementing #3 would remove my biggest frustration in writing posts before a race – how do I get a decent, standardized, up-to-date start list? From what I heard from Heather and Paula, WTC is already working on it:

“Going forward what we are looking to do is have a centralized location on the Pro Membership website where we can house pro start lists. These will be published [..] just after the registration deadline.”

Missing Deadlines

Respecting the “event procedures” is part of the “WTC Code of Conduct” that each athlete accepts as part of the registration as a WTC pro.

Registering for a Race

If an athletes misses the deadline for a race registration, he/she can ask – given extenuating circumstances – for a late entry, but there’s no guarantee it will be granted. Jordan notes that “WTC has been remarkably accommodating”, but even so this means that my earlier statement (“athletes can enter just a few days before a race”) is not correct. Athletes might get lucky and be allowed a late entry, but it’s totally beyond their control.

Withdrawing from a Race

If an athlete withdraws very late or without a proper explanation, WTC can sanction the athlete, “including but not limited to” (I love these lawyerly terms!):

• Loss of 500 earned qualifying points
• Temporary or permanent suspension from WTC events

To date, no WTC pro has ever been sanctioned in this way.

Suggestions for Withdrawals

I think the withdrawal process is still pretty loose: There is no expectation for the athlete other than notifying Pro Registration a few days before the race that he/she won’t start. Also, notifications from athletes that they won’t start are not always reflected in the released lists. (The most recent example I noticed: Clemente Alonso had withdrawn from Mont Tremblant, but was still on the start list and got some press mentions.)

As we’ve seen in the past, this leads to lots of changes to the start list in the last few days before the race. It is also very unfortunate for a race to print bib numbers or prepare signs for the transitions areas for athletes that won’t start.

Therefore, I propose a two weak deadline for withdrawals. This sends the clear message to athletes that “normal” withdrawals (by change of plans, longer-term injuries etc.) should be communicated to WTC at least two weeks before the race. At this point, Heather can improve the “four-week list” (after registration closes) by removing all those athletes that will definitely not start and also by adding late additions. This would also help to avoid unnecessary press, signage etc.

If the start list is published on ironman.com, it could be updated at the two-week-mark. Ideally it should be simple to figure out what changed to the initial list put out, e.g. by crossing out the athletes that have withdrawn, and adding a special “late entry” section.

Of course, you can’t force athletes to start an Ironman race, and there may always be things coming up shortly before the race that prevent an athlete from starting.  But it should be clear that these “late withdrawals” will be more closely watched by WTC, and a “personal discussion” with Paula about “professional conduct” would probably help to keep these to a minimum (even without official sanctions). (More process – such as a fee for a late withdrawal, limiting the number of late withdrawals per season or requiring a doctor’s notice – sound tough, but will probably not achieve any meaningful results: Either the requirements are easy to “fake”, or you’re punishing everyone for the transgressions of few.)

Registration Process and the KPR

In my discussion of the recent KPR changes I saw the danger of “more changes to the start lists in the last few days than we already have: If there’s a strong field, withdraw; if there is a weak field, try to enter late.” I’m glad that the registration process as outlined above should do a pretty good job of limiting last-minute additions.

As outlined above, I think the withdrawal part of the field still should be firmed up a bit more. While it’s great that WTC have been very accommodating, the changes in the KPR mandate that withdrawals later than two weeks before the race should be for “obvious reasons” only.

Jordan has a clear view on this:

I think WTC was way too accommodating on not penalizing athletes for dropping out last minute. This was one of the big pieces of feedback that Craig, Meredith, and I all gave WTC, not only because we were upset by athletes abusing the registration process, but because we got a lot of feedback from our peers that were also peeved by athletes abusing the process.

To sum up, I hope that late registrations become an exception, and that repetitive “fishy” late withdrawals will be sanctioned.

Summary

I think that with just a few tweaks the WTC registration process will do a very good job of making sure that late entries and frequent late withdrawals can be limited to exceptions. WTC is rarely accused of being too accommodating, but the KPR changes require a tightening of the withdrawal guidelines and a stricter enforcement of the rules. This would also make it easier for WTC to make up-do-date start lists available to the public starting about four weeks before a race. All in all, this would be very welcome improvements to the current situation.

Last weekend, the final Professional Kona slots were decided and 10 slots for the men and 7 slots for the women were awarded. This post has a closer look at the changes in the KPR standings between the end of July and the end of August and what was required to become an August qualifier.

Athletes close to the cutoff

The first set of tables shows the men and women who

• were in the August qualifier spots at the end of July (i.e. the first 10 or 7 non-qualifiers).
• qualified at the end of August, or
• were very close to qualifying.

The tables list these athletes together with

• their rank (among the non-qualifiers) and points at the end of July and August (qualifying spots are marked green),
• the Delta between July and August (i.e. the change in ranks and the addition points scored), and
• a short description of their August race results.

Here’s a look at the men’s table:

And here’s the same data for the women:

It obvious that “big result racing” was required to qualify:

• Daniel Halksworth made the biggest jump from somewhere around #100 (he was so far back I didn’t copy his July standing) to #9, winning in the UK and then baking it up with a 4th place at Mont Tremblant. On the women’s side, Anja Beranek moved from #29 to 5th place.
• Lots of athletes qualified by racing in Mont Tremblant, making use of the large number of points available in the P-4000 race (e.g. Luke, Brandon, Keatsy, Liz Blatchford).
• Some athletes had to race multiple times (because they didn’t score enough points in their first race), sometimes even back-to-back (Mike, Dominik and Paul had to score in Mont Tremblant and a week later in Canada to qualify).
• If you were sitting in an August qualifying spot at the end of July, you had to race in order to stay get a slot.

Non-qualifiers

The following tables show the result that the athletes who didn’t qualify would have needed. Obviously, those athletes that didn’t race would have needed another race, and especially with those close to the cutoff just a mediocre result in a big race such as IM Mont Tremblant would have been sufficient. (15th place in IMMT would have been 800 points, 10th place was 1600.)

I guess the data highlights a few points:

• It’s a bit risky to “rely” on just one good result, a DNF can destroy your hopes pretty soon. (Daniel Fontana had a mechanical 60k into the bike and had to let go of his Kona dreams.)
• Even if you think you’re not having a good day, it still makes sense to fight for each and every place. The difference for Kimberly Schwabenhauer between 5th and 4th in Mont Tremblant was less than 6 minutes, similar for Haley Chura between 8th and 6th. Just a few minutes in any race can make the difference between qualifying or not. I’m sure that there are other examples in earlier races.

Note: An earlier version of this post was written before Sarah Piampiano declined her slot. The women’s tables have been updated to reflect this.