Yes training is the major difference.   I wasn't disputing that.  

I have an entry level carbon fiber road bike.   Didn't want to go to a Tri Bike due to lack of versatility, and since I am new to biking I wanted to make sure I liked it.   

I recently put on some clip on aero bars, and have a 2nd Seat Post & Tri Seat which essentially puts me in Tri position.    I had them both sized perfectly and now I have two set ups from my Road Bike.   A quick switch.

In my last Tri it absolutely made a difference to be Aero.    I finished the 40K bike in 1:12 which was a full 10 minutes better than my last race where I was NOT aero.    I do need to train more.    I only started biking in May so still a newbie.      Aero helps.........and some nice perty new wheels would help even more.   

My whole point is that for an age grouper I would love to know what my competition was riding.    At the elite level the equipment is elite for EVERYONE...........for age groupers it is not.

If would be EVEN MORE fun to know how much everyone trained.......but that isn't as realistic as entering the bike you ride during the sign up process.

AND YES mattr it is the best feeling to pass those 6-9K  bikes.....I absolutely loved it and it makes me want to train even more.   

My first season of doing Triathlons has been fantastic.   Got one more left coming up here on Nov. 8th in Parker Arizona....anyone else doing that race?

You got that right.   The training is everything.    I struggle to get in 7 hours a week and typically only have a good chance at 1 x 2 hr training per week....and sometimes only every other.   Many of my workouts are only 30, 45, 60, or 75 minutes.

I sneak in 1 Mile swim's during lunch 2-3 times a week unless I am traveling that week.   

I work as a business executive for a toy company and end up flying around 170,000 miles per year to multiple continents so consistency will always be my challenge.     I do want to take advantage of all this travel though and work in an overseas triathlon in perhaps Germany, London, or maybe Hong Kong during a trip.

Despite all this I have still managed to average round 5 hrs of training per week and am looking to bump that to 8 next season.     I do love it.

 

Or look at the people with higher body fat than me who run fewer miles and STILL kick my ass or tie me in races...I hate those people (one of them is my BFF)...gah!

Hahaha thats so true, its because they are better swimmers and more powerful on the bike (my theory). I'm a runner so I really struggle in the water. 

I remember a friend of mine was impressed that after getting a bike fitting and adjustment, his run splits on Olympic dropped by a minute or two (I think in the 37min range) -- he attributed that primarily to the improved bike fit.

 I wouldn't call that imperical data.

My 5k can fluctuate that much.....

Then, who has the correct bike fitting.......there's more than one way to fit you to your bike. And I wouldn't discount the placebo effect.

Don't get me wrong, a properly sized bike with a proper fit is essential but I don't think you need to go pay $300 to have it done......I think a decent bike shop that has experience with Tri Bikes and is customer focused can get you pretty close to where you need to be.

That 2 mins cost him a decent penny I imagine......you could get two mins for free if you worked on your swim.

  

 

 

Let me try this again -- although I wonder if this is all a troll and I'm missing the humor:

 

His observed and measured time improvements are not "imperical" ? (Did you mean "empirical" -- and if they're not empirical -- then what are they? Theoretical?)

 

His bike fit was too expensive? Really?

 

He should train his swim more? Really?? (This is, well, just a bit hard for me to believe, actually.)

 

Or do you mean that I should train my swim more? Is that related somehow to his bike fitting?

 

(Yeah, clearly most of your post made little to no sense to me; not sure if it went over my head or what.)

 

 

 Sorry...I meant empirical.  His observations were not free from his own influences. They may well have been biased because he was looking for and expecting to see a better run time.

I'm not saying a proper bike fit does not make a difference.....I believe it does.

Was his bike fit too expensive.....I don't know....that's up to him.  If he's satisfied / convinced that the bike fit decreased his running time and the "2 minutes" was worth the price then I guess the answer is no.

I wasn't saying he should train his swim more but over a 1000 yard swim, gaining 2 minutes is not unreasonable.

I don't know what his swim splits are but if he isn't swimming at a pace of 1:35/100 YDS (which is very obtainable) then yes, investing more time in swim training may have an impact.  At no dollar cost (unless he really sucks and needs lessons.....which I would spend the money on at any level of ability) Even if you don't improve your swim time, getting thru the water more efficeintly is going to set you up for a better race. Less energy expended there leaves more for later. To get proficient at swimming you have to swim alot. It's only happened a few times for me but T1 goes much quicker when there are fewer people around you. Thats like componded time....out of the water ahead of everyone and saved time in T1.

I was saying that you could reduce your overall finish time by spending more time on swim training and not invest any $.  A better value to obtaining a better time than your friend. But if your bike is that bad then your time is better spent there. I was just trying to make the point that there are always ways to train yourself to a better overall time without spending big bucks.

What I am saying is that a professional bike fit can run around $200 to $300 dollars. Those that have gone thru it in my club swear it made them faster.....yet they are still finishing outside of the awards and still training 5 -7 hrs a week......a waste of money in my opinion.......I haven't had a proffessional bike fit......I've read a ton of articles and there's enough info available to get me pretty damn close to optimum.

Don't get me wrong......I know equipment makes a difference.......I just feel that people are beginning to discount the real difference training can make and are to quick to go out and buy it.

Honestly.....the guy that has both the money and the time to train has an advantage......Not to mention the fancy bike trainers, spinervals and watt meters, etc. The field is pretty even at the elite level......not so in the AG ranks because the cost of some of the equipment is out reach for some. Or maybe impractical......would I want to go spend 3 - 5k on equipment to do a few races a year ? I know a few people that would answer yes.....but they can afford it.

No...I'm not trolling.

I've witnessed a substanial shift in the sport of Triathlon........I've seen it come from the salt of the earth, everyday athlete looking for a new challenge to becoming a sport for the upper middle class and up. Training time is simply no longer enough to get you in the upper ranks as an AG'r. (also keep in mind that there was no such thing as a Tri bike when I first started)

Just like the OP wants to see results based on equipment.....so in his mind he can see where he ranks with out the influence of equipment. If I run a road race I know exactly where I stand in fitness compared to my AG and the overall field. You can't do that in Triathlon because equipment is such a huge factor.

Thanks Slow Hand.   I liked your last reponse and theories on equipment.  

This being my first Tri season....and since I have my last race of season on Sunday...I have a strategy question.   However...it's a new topic really so I will start new thread.