Oh, and you're wrong. The run has gain and loss. I'll tell what that is at some time also. Find me a 26.2m course that's not on a track or treadmill that really has zero elevation gain and I'll be impressed.
Yeah, but the NET change in elevation on the run is zero, I'd bet. On the bike, too. However, it was positive on the swim at Ironman Wisconsin, by about 8 feet.
--Harold Buck
"I used to rock and roll all night, and party every day. Then it was every other day. . . ."
Oh, and you're wrong. The run has gain and loss. I'll tell what that is at some time also. Find me a 26.2m course that's not on a track or treadmill that really has zero elevation gain and I'll be impressed.
I'm sure there are some - especially in coastal areas like the low country of South Carolina.
I've done the Parris Island sprint which has literally zero elevation gain on either the bike or run courses (close enough to zero to not register on a GPS unit). It runs through flat as a pancake marshlands - and no, there aren't any bridges. All you would have to do is run both the bike and run courses and you'd have 21 miles of your supposedly impossible-to-find marathon course. Take a detour on a few Parris Island side streets, double back on part of the course, or run down the abandoned airfield runway and you're there.
Want to argue with that? OK, on a more literal note, any loop course which begins and ends at the same location has, by definition, zero elevation gain.
While I have to agree (done it a few times) that IMFL is one of the flatter courses out there, it's not completely flat. After all is said and done I bet you do close to 700-900' of climbing. I'm going to map this out sometime on topo or use a local gis system to find out for sure.
Speaking of TOPO, any suggestions on decent, cheap software for mapping eleveations etc?
While I have to agree (done it a few times) that IMFL is one of the flatter courses out there, it's not completely flat. After all is said and done I bet you do close to 700-900' of climbing. I'm going to map this out sometime on topo or use a local gis system to find out for sure.
Oh, and you're wrong. The run has gain and loss. I'll tell what that is at some time also. Find me a 26.2m course that's not on a track or treadmill that really has zero elevation gain and I'll be impressed.
I did the Mississippi Gulf Coast Marathon last weekend and I'll bet there's not 10 feet of elevation change. There's 1 slight hill in the first mile of maybe 8-10 feet and the rest is table flat.
[email hidden] (Old Timer) wrote in news:15cf49f4.0312010355.64b366e6 @posting.google.com:
Quoted message said:
Chesapeake Man - October 8, 2004 at the site of the Blackwater Eagleman Triathlon in Cambridge, Maryland. It will undoubtedly be flatter than IM Florida, and probably be the flattest there can possibly be, other than perhaps the Espirit Triathlon - which is a crit style ironman distance race around a lake somewhere above the northern US border. For M-dot races, though, IM Florida would be my guess.
See you at Chesapeake Man.
Flatter than NW Florida? Wow. I guess there's no bridge on the course? That's the only hill at IMFL.
I can almost assure you that the New Ironman Western Australia will be a Super fast bike course.
ironmanwa.comironmanwa.comOpen ↗ BIKE - 180.1km (3 x 60km laps) Looking for a fast bike course? Well here it is! 3 x 60km loops on flat, fast roads protected by winds and on a great surface. The bike leg makes its way through the majestic old growth Ludlow Tuart Forest National Park (the largest old growth Tuart forest in the world) and will be lined with spectators. This is a great course for family and friends with many vantage points to view all the action.
That has to be a misprint. Sydney is in *eastern* Australia; western Australia is largely uninhabited, right?
:-)
--Harold Buck
"I used to rock and roll all night, and party every day. Then it was every other day. . . ."
Bzzzt. Sorry. Neither the run or the bike finish at the exact same place. Though they have a net elevation change of probably <1' it's still not zero.
-Andrew Boulder, C)
Harold Buck said:
In article <1070396735.840221@sj-nntpcache-5>,
Andrew Halperin said:
Oh, and you're wrong. The run has gain and loss. I'll tell what that is at some time also. Find me a 26.2m course that's not on a track or treadmill that really has zero elevation gain and I'll be impressed.
Yeah, but the NET change in elevation on the run is zero, I'd bet. On the bike, too. However, it was positive on the swim at Ironman Wisconsin, by about 8 feet.
--Harold Buck
"I used to rock and roll all night, and party every day. Then it was every other day. . . ."
Want to argue with that? OK, on a more literal note, any loop course which begins and ends at the same location has, by definition, zero elevation gain.
I always thought the definition of "elevation gain" was total UPHILL distance, as opposed to net change in elevation, which is zero if you start and end in the same place.
--Harold Buck
"I used to rock and roll all night, and party every day. Then it was every other day. . . ."
I've used TOPO USA quite a bit. Not exactly the most accurate DEM's (digital elevation model) but pretty darn close. If you get the topo quads, you'll get even better accuracy.
If you're looking for a specific course, let me know. I may (big maybe) have it done already.
-Andrew
MJuric said:
Andrew Halperin said:
While I have to agree (done it a few times) that IMFL is one of the flatter courses out there, it's not completely flat. After all is said and done I bet you do close to 700-900' of climbing. I'm going to map this out sometime on topo or use a local gis system to find out for sure.
Speaking of TOPO, any suggestions on decent, cheap software for mapping eleveations etc?
There is one bridge on the course - elevation - maybe 6 inches for 50 yards. If you've done Eagleman you've done that hill. Kills me every time. There's a tiny little uphill at almost the end of the course as well, maybe 4 inches.
Should have added.... DEFINITELY flatter than IMFLA. Been to both. There's actually a decent uphill at IMFLA, not steep, but long. Might not really be a decent hill, but I was expecting totally flat, and was surprised. I can't remember the name of the road, but at the top you make a right onto a busy highway.
Harold, according to the link it is near Perth in Western Australia
Ken
"Harold Buck" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
In article said:
I can almost assure you that the New Ironman Western Australia will be a Super fast bike course.
ironmanwa.comironmanwa.comOpen ↗ BIKE - 180.1km (3 x 60km laps) Looking for a fast bike course? Well here it is! 3 x 60km loops on flat, fast roads protected by winds and on a great surface. The bike leg makes its way through the majestic old growth Ludlow Tuart Forest National Park (the largest old growth Tuart forest in the world) and will be lined with spectators. This is a great course for family and friends with many vantage points to view all the action.
That has to be a misprint. Sydney is in *eastern* Australia; western Australia is largely uninhabited, right?
:-)
--Harold Buck
"I used to rock and roll all night, and party every day. Then it was every other day. . . ."
Want to argue with that? OK, on a more literal note, any loop course which begins and ends at the same location has, by definition, zero elevation gain.
I always thought the definition of "elevation gain" was total UPHILL distance, as opposed to net change in elevation, which is zero if you start and end in the same place.
--Harold Buck
Elevation: The height of a thing above a reference level; altitude.
Gain: a. To manage to achieve an increase of. b. To increase by (a specific amount).
So, if you start and end at the same point you have "managed to achieve an increase in altitude" of exactly zero. What you describe (total UPHILL distance) would best be described as "total vertical climb".
;-)
Seriously, in triathlon circles you are, of course, right Harold. In my world (where I'm a smart ass and my fiancée writes for a living) I pick on such things. After your comment about an uphill swim at IM Wisc (which I got, by the way) I hoped you might see through my sarcasm.
Okay, my point was that you'd be very hard pressed to find a absolutely flat (0' of vertical gain or loss) marathon course. Not pretty flat, not mostly flat, not unnoticeably flat, but empirically flat.
-Andrew
Bruce said:
Tom Henderson said:
Quoted message said:
Andrew Halperin <[email hidden]> wrote in news:1070396735.840221@sj- nntpcache-5:
>Find me a 26.2m course that's not on a track or treadmill that really has zero elevation gain >and I'll be impressed. >
Maybe we need a Utah slat flats merathon?
Its not totally flat, but look at Long Beach Marathon - the only elevation change is one freeway bridge - about 30 feet total change.
Okay, my point was that you'd be very hard pressed to find a absolutely flat (0' of vertical gain or loss) marathon course. Not pretty flat, not mostly flat, not unnoticeably flat, but empirically flat.
-Andrew
Bruce said:
Tom Henderson said:
Quoted message said:
Andrew Halperin <[email hidden]> wrote in news:1070396735.840221@sj- nntpcache-5:
>Find me a 26.2m course that's not on a track or treadmill that really has zero elevation gain >and I'll be impressed. >
Maybe we need a Utah slat flats merathon?
Its not totally flat, but look at Long Beach Marathon - the only elevation change is one freeway bridge - about 30 feet total change.
Okay, my point was that you'd be very hard pressed to find a absolutely flat (0' of vertical gain or loss) marathon course. Not pretty flat, not mostly flat, not unnoticeably flat, but empirically flat.
-Andrew
Bruce said:
Tom Henderson said:
Quoted message said:
Andrew Halperin <[email hidden]> wrote in news:1070396735.840221@sj- nntpcache-5:
>Find me a 26.2m course that's not on a track or treadmill that really has zero elevation gain >and I'll be impressed. >
Maybe we need a Utah slat flats merathon?
Its not totally flat, but look at Long Beach Marathon - the only elevation change is one freeway bridge - about 30 feet total change.
It's a new Ironman for qualifying in the western side of Australia. The other Ironman in Australia is on the Eastern side of Australia about 4hours north of Sydney and 7hrs south of Brisbane.
From Sydney, it is a 5hr flight plus 2hrs Drive to the Western Australia Race. It also costs a bomb to fly there.
It is actually cheaper to fly to New Zealand and do their race than do the Western Australia Race.
Mind you the Eastern Australia race required athlete's to Qualify to partake. Average 1/2 Ironman Qualifying time is 5hours. The Western Australia Even does not require qualifying. Neither does New Zealand.
Most (Slow) Aussies do IM New Zealand.
Pete
Quoted message said:
(pete) said:
I can almost assure you that the New Ironman Western Australia will be a Super fast bike course.
That has to be a misprint. Sydney is in *eastern* Australia; western Australia is largely uninhabited, right?
I've used TOPO USA quite a bit. Not exactly the most accurate DEM's (digital elevation model) but pretty darn close. If you get the topo quads, you'll get even better accuracy.
If you're looking for a specific course, let me know. I may (big maybe) have it done already.
-Andrew
I'm actually looking for something I can route the regular courses we do for our tri club and post them online so people know what to expect. I looked at the TOPO USA stuff but if memory serves it was around 1200$. A little out of my range for a nicety to put on our web site.
~Matt
Quoted message said:
MJuric said:
Andrew Halperin said:
While I have to agree (done it a few times) that IMFL is one of the flatter courses out there, it's not completely flat. After all is said and done I bet you do close to 700-900' of climbing. I'm going to map this out sometime on topo or use a local gis system to find out for sure.
Speaking of TOPO, any suggestions on decent, cheap software for mapping eleveations etc?
