Results are up for the S.O.S. I really was the slowest finisher! However the numbers confirm my sense of things, that it's my cycling split that's so woefully slow. I'm not aerodynamic, I ride the brakes on the downhills (i.e. can't make up time there from slow climbing) and I don't ride that much (haven't ridden on hills since May for instance) - it is not surprising. I still don't know how long the run course really was (the numbers on that chart are from prior years - oh, here are some numbers, they had announced a run of 12.8 miles but really it looks as though it was only 10.1, that is much more plausible), but there were at least five others with slower run splits than I had, my swim time is solidly in the 'middle of back of pack' and clearly my trudge to the skytop in conclusion was more efficient than that of some others - I will take it!
(The numbers don't quite add up, I think the chip missed splits for a couple racers as real total finisher number is 141, but they offer place for each separate leg: I came in dead last on the bike at 138, but fell in at 132 on the run, 127 on the swim and 121 on the final insane steep uphill hike. It wasn't enough to make up for cycling deficit and gain any places as a finisher, but I felt that I was finishing pretty strong - my swim was really enjoyable, and I had some energy still left in reserve to scramble up the hill. Good to see this sense confirmed in the results.)
1 comment:
Way to finish strong! Was the bike also curvy? I find it is hard to go fast downhills on curvy roads - it takes a lot of guts!
Post a Comment