It’s not uncommon for triathlon athletes to not be very good swimmers.
It’s a sport that many get into later in life, not everyone has equal access to pools, and swimming in open water is much harder and scarier than swimming in a pool.
And those rocks look sharp. I would not want to be dashed against them.
I have done a (sprint distance) triathlon in conditions that were similar to this. I don’t know what happened in this race but in that one something like eight people had to be rescued from the water. I was also surprised that the swimming leg wasn’t canceled in that race.
However, I didn’t personally have any trouble swimming in those conditions, as someone who swam competitively all through middle and high school and can swim 3+ miles in the pool without trouble.
I think what makes swimming in triathlons so dangerous is that there is a wide range of swimming skill levels, and conditions that are reasonable for advanced swimmers can be deadly for newer ones. But organizers don’t want to cancel an expensive event that people have traveled internationally to compete in over weather conditions that are reasonable for prepared athletes.
I have also done a half Ironman and I think it is at that weird middle distance where people sign up for it with big plans to train aggressively, fall behind on their training, and then attempt it anyway and end up not finishing. Unfortunately, with the swimming component, under-preparation can be deadly.
I think that 'normal' triathlon, including Iron Man (maybe especially Iron Man) is an endurance sport, not a technical skill sport. Rough sea swim, plus downhill MTB, plus trail run would be a different kind of tri. For 'normal' endurance amateur athletes that swim in lakes, ride and run on roads, something as technically difficult as swimming in rough surf should be called off. It is not something that most participants have trained for (or want, even).
Another factor: the swim is the shortest leg of the triathlon, in terms of time. Many put less training into it, because it has less benefit.
I was a (barely) competitive high school swimmer, and was surprised to find myself dominating the swim leg of triathlons. But I'm a mediocre cyclist, and would find myself passed over and over through the second leg. (And occasionally make some of it back on the run leg.)
Thank You
The article really didn't convey it.
This puts it in perspective.
Should have been cancelled.
Two dead.
How many quit midway, abandoned the race. That would also help add context. Rarely do people die in isolation, there were probably a lot of people struggling, they just happened to make it to a boat.
Seconded, when I heard about this my first reaction was that some rough seas would be no big deal, but seeing that video... damn. Not only is that a rough environment for a hard swim, but it's a terrible one for people doing the life-guarding and rescue work.
If an ice skater gets too tired to skate, they don't die. There's a reason why swimming has lifeguards. Beyond the water being more difficult to swim in, it may make rescuing swimmers more difficult.
The "scary" thing from an advanced swimmer is that its that despite some comments here its not REALLY looking scary for anyone born close to such conditions.
I know its actually scary because I've seen some "countryside " swimmers get full panic for a third of that kinda waves.
There are levels to this and iron man organize should take that into account
There's an implicit assumption that the organizers would cancel the race if conditions are unsafe. E.g., when I go on a rollercoaster, I assume engineers have calculated the safety better than I could ever evaluate
The article is pretty terrible all around. You have to get to the last sentence before they throw in the detail that it's not actually an Ironman race -- it's a half-iron. I wouldn't mind it so much in a general-interest source, but ESPN writers of all people should know the difference and should sweat even the immaterial details. A "so-called" half-iron? No that's actually what it is. No need for the "so-called".
Yeah, that is kind of insulting.
Guess people don't realize there are many lengths of triathlons.
Fulls and Halfs are typically done together with an extra lap or leg added in for the Full.
Not sure I understand the insult. The article mentioned the distances and called it half ironman (Ironman 70.3 might be more correct, but I think everybody calls that half anyway).
Adding the word to the title doesn't make a huge difference to me "Two men die in Half Ironman Cork competition in Ireland"
Here’s a more informative article that provides details such as the names of the deceased and states that Triathlon Ireland, the national governing body for triathlon events in Ireland assessed the safety of the swim section and concluded that due to the “adverse conditions”, they would not sanction the event: https://www.thejournal.ie/two-men-died-ironman-event-named-l...
At least they died doing something they loved. Recently overheard a troubling conversation where a triathalon competitor observed a 60+ year old man clearly in major physical distress who refused any kind of assistance. It needs to be first of all understood that these are not necessarily tragedies so much as people taking things way too far and secondly considered that it might be best for everyone that they be allowed to do that.
If I'm reading right I agree with you that it's nobody's business if someone wants to push themselves hard and accept the consequences - although you'd still want to try and talk your friend out of it given the chance. It's not clear if that's what happened here though.
Indeed. Sports involve risk, and competition is about learning to navigate those risks. This implies a right to self-destruction. Without this sports are void of courage and competence, and their value is greatly diminished.
It is true that there are a lot of deaths in 'extreme' sports. And people push themselves too far. But I think swimming is an exception. If you are running and in a 'fog', or being 'out of it', because of exertion, then fine, eventually you drop. But in Swimming, the risk is super high, you die. If in the water, and distressed, then the life guards should be able to over-ride someone waving them off.
If you’re a citizen of my country and do that then you’re one of the reasons I’m paying out of my ass so you can be a vegetable in a hospital. So please don’t do that. And I support criminalizing such reckless behavior because the only other alternative is that you end up disabled on the street because I shouldn’t pay for your selfish macho stupidity.
I suspect some do, making it look like tragic accident. High mortality in some activities is not a secret. Mostly due to high risk, but some deaths are intentional. Like those jumpers from cruise ships.
Just because some people feel that way, I don't think it's right to project that attitude onto another person you don't know without any evidence that they actually do too.
This reminds me of Lebron James' son Bronny suffering cardiac arrest. Fortunately he survived.
He's so young he may not have been screened properly. But a lot of people have difficulty affording to be screened.
There are different types of screening and Theranos was going to help society with some of it, but of course we all know how that went, and it probably set back advances in screening with technology.
I don't really feel like Bronny James's story is relevant here- this was due to poor weather conditions, not any type of cardiac issue or lack of screening.
It seems likely to me. The article didn't say anything about them drowning or colliding with another swimmer.
As for the weather, I can't judge from a couple videos. I have some experience but not with an Ironman. What I do know is that race organizers typically don't cancel just because the weather is going to make a race significantly harder.
The headline immediately made me think of healthcare and how to improve it, within the area of sports. It would be better if more people knew the risks and benefits of participating in sports based on their own health statuses.
Maybe you should respond to the article, and not just the headline. Your response is completely off topic and the random promotion of a known fraud is insulting.
Because they took money that was intended to improve it? Especially for busy people? These two attempting the half Ironman were likely busy, ambitious people, because people who travel to another country for an endurance event tend to be. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12426285/Two-men-di...
> Theranos may have been the worst-case scenario for the testing industry, but the big-picture idea — that testing should be faster and more convenient — is still true, Klapperich says. “Now, people are trying to sort out the question of what was real about what Theranos was saying. Because we still need this stuff.”
I still don’t understand Theranos’s original value prop. Once you are already going in to have blood taken, what difference does it make whether it’s a small amount or a full test tube?
It was perhaps less about the actual value proposition and more about a promise that they'd developed some kind of revolutionary new medical testing processes (and not, you know, just running existing diagnostic tests with an inappropriately small sample).
Is there some kind of bug or issue with HN comments? Maybe a bug in a client people are using? I've noticed over the last couple days what appear to be comments like this one above that are completely unrelated to the post. It almost seems like they were made in error or associated with the wrong post.
I honestly thought it was amusing. Finding humour in disaster is comforting.
My mom passed away a week ago. She was an adventurer, and known to travel to unpredictable remote places on very short notice. I prefer to say, half jokingly, she just left for her next adventure.
Very sad but it’s not that uncommon. Swimming as fierce and excited pack in open water results in a lot of people getting kicked and thrashed. If you get knocked silly or not even, it’s probably similar to getting trampled but then drowning.
It’s a sport that many get into later in life, not everyone has equal access to pools, and swimming in open water is much harder and scarier than swimming in a pool.
And those rocks look sharp. I would not want to be dashed against them.
I have done a (sprint distance) triathlon in conditions that were similar to this. I don’t know what happened in this race but in that one something like eight people had to be rescued from the water. I was also surprised that the swimming leg wasn’t canceled in that race.
However, I didn’t personally have any trouble swimming in those conditions, as someone who swam competitively all through middle and high school and can swim 3+ miles in the pool without trouble.
I think what makes swimming in triathlons so dangerous is that there is a wide range of swimming skill levels, and conditions that are reasonable for advanced swimmers can be deadly for newer ones. But organizers don’t want to cancel an expensive event that people have traveled internationally to compete in over weather conditions that are reasonable for prepared athletes.
I have also done a half Ironman and I think it is at that weird middle distance where people sign up for it with big plans to train aggressively, fall behind on their training, and then attempt it anyway and end up not finishing. Unfortunately, with the swimming component, under-preparation can be deadly.