FarHorizon

I'm not a racer (of ANY type) and don't wish to beome one. The only "clydes" and "uberclydes" I know are those in this forum. If racing orginizations arbitrarily designate any >200# racer as a clyde, then those are the rules. Don't like the rules? Get them changed, race with another orginization, or live with the existing rules. In racing, from what I understand, the modus opperandi is to find every loophole in the rules and turn them to your advantage if possible. Just commenting as an outsider looking in...

ookiihito

imho, clydes under 250 are not clydes.

Tom Stormcrowe

All I can say is that we inherited the standard from the tri world.

flip18436572

I haven't read everyone's posts, but I am 6'3" and at 199 pounds I will just reach the BMI top range of the normal. I can say at 215, I will still feel overweight, but I will work very hard at anything I do and will still be classified as a clyde. I was thinking of running in a 2 mile this fall, but they are thinking of dropping the clyde's class, because it is not politically correct.

I am still over 45 pounds away from my first goal weight and would really like to lose 60 more. I will see how I feel at these other weights first. But my goal is to be at least under the clyde status. My physical shows that I am in good condition with great blood workup. I plan on keeping it that way for years to come. Bicycling is going to be one of many ways for me to do that.

Have fun with your sport and race if you like. I will consider myself a clyde until I am under the clyde weight. I will run/swim/bike/ as fast and as hard as I can because that is how my brain works. I am sorry if that would offend you. I don't enter any events at this time, but it is something I may do in the future.

UtRacerDad

one of the race series her has a 55+ category and a 57+ category. As for the clydes I would be happy if they had a couple of age groups in the clyde category, a 45+ clyde racing a 20+ clyde is what isn't fair. I can hold my own against a 45+ clyde, but I get stompped on by the 20+ clyde.

bautieri

Dude it's a weight class that the other racers were qualified for, right or wrong they have every right to be there, just take it as a chance to compete against the skinny clydes you destest. I'm not defending them, as a matter of fact I fully feel for you, I remember in high school wrestling my coach would bump me between 189 and heavyweight (up to 275lbs). I remember weighing in at Johnsonburg High in 2000 at 180lbs and wrestling a guy who weighed over 260lbs. Now that's a huge weight difference and one that was defiantly not in my favor. This guy was a tank. I was still able to beat him as he had sloppy form but just saying, you take the cards your dealt and make the best of it. Maybe you aught to take up another sport where your body type can work to your advantage.

With that in mind yes people who take advantage of class divisions should DIAF. Would you cheer for a guy with mild ADD winning the Special Olympics? Sort of the same thing unless I missed your point altogether.

gobot

I am angry because super-models do not like my beer gut! Its not fair that skinny guys get laid more! Lets change the rules so I get exactly as much attention as Brad Pitt!

You should stop whining and train harder if you want to win.

Oh, and also, I have asthma-- should there be a clyde class for asthmatics only? Its not fair that all these fat guys with healthy lungs are racing against me!

Edit: I don't race at all-- I just hate self-pity...

Tom Stormcrowe

It also depends on the length of the event. Long distance where pacing and strategy is the key, we older Clydes have an advantage over the younger ones in self discipline and experience. Younger = better sprinter and faster recovery, older = longer endurance and better self discipline. Most Ultramarathon riders are in the 35-50 age group, for example.

andymac

The appropriate solution would seem to be to do away with the Clydesdale category completely as the number assigns tall fit people, short muscular people, overweight people, young people, old people, etc. all into the same group. At 6’7” 235 I fit into this group but wouldn’t want to compete in it if I ever decided to do another triathlon or marathon, I would prefer to just compete in my own age category as that is where my friends that I ride/run/swim with would be. At least when you are competing within your age category you have something in common with the other people in your class.

It strikes me as odd that the category ever came to exist. I was a competitive swimmer for 16 years and we had no such category, cycling didn't have the category at the time and running didn't have the category at the time either. Why did the category come into existence when the three disciplines were combined into a single event?

late

We could use bodyfat % instead of weight. 200 pounds on somebody 6'10" is not overweight.

Di_bear

I know guys who are over 6 feet tall and weigh less than 180. These guys are winning. The fact is, anyone over 200 lbs is carrying a lot more extra weight than the average "winning" cyclist, which is why there is a Clydesdale category. Weight affects speed, especially where climbing is concerned. Weight matters, no matter how it is distributed. Now, if you want to be good at your class, like I do, then start cycling more and eating well.

If race promoters are to put time and money into a Clydesdale category and awards, then it is only fair that the people who win that category are the people who work the hardest, just like in any other category. It's a race. If you don't like your results, then work harder. Replace some of that fat with muscle.

tombailey

I don't see a weight diffference between a 235lb trim-guy and a 235lb overweight guy. They both have to lug that weight through the water and along the road. That weight is an obvious disadvantage in this sport, hence the category. There has to be some sort of cut-off, and the 200lb mark seems about right. Would you prefer to do a full fitness and medical test before each race so you could compete against people exactly like you?

Just think how good you'll feel once you beat the "skinny" guy. Or maybe you want to BE the skinny guy?

CliftonGK1

Henry Rollins said this when talking about weights: "Friends may come and go, but 200 pounds is always 200 pounds."
It's true for the people in endurance racing, too. Whether you're 6'3" and 200 pounds of bodybuilder ripped lean muscle, or 5'10" and 200 pounds of "about average" looking physique, you still have to move that same weight over the same distance.
Complaining that someone trained harder and has a gigantic hardbody physique in the Clyde category is not different than someone who's 20% bodyfat but under the 200 pound cutoff complaining that he's got to race in an age group against guys who are 4% bodyfat.
There's similar complaints across all competitions. In WABDL (bench and deadlift) competition, I heard guys complain that the weight classes were unfair because taller people with longer arms have to move the same weight over a longer distance (with a lower muscle mass to height ratio) than short barrel-chested guys.
If it's competitive, someone's going to find a reason to complain.

(I've worked the math, and even if I went down to 0% bodyfat I'd be 225 pounds. Just because I spent a lot of time lifting weights doesn't mean that all that muscle would help my endurance ability, though. Raw power over short distance isn't going to win any tris without the endurance training to back it up. And there are not a whole lot of big guys with that type of build who have the endurance to be competitive even in the Clyde division, much less in their age group.)

spencejm

You're a whiner! At least that's what I first thought. I don't race bicycles but I do drive Autocross and used to shoot Sporting Clays fairly seriously. I haven't had any problems in autocross but Sporting Clays could be a mess. If you shot enough tournaments and scored high enough you would be forced to move up in class. People would intentionally shoot poorly the entire season just so they could go into Nationals in a lower class and hopefully be able to outshoot the people who were in that class legitimately. By the time I quit completing it was turning into a serious problem. I never could understand the mentality. I always wanted to move up. I would rather finish 10th as a B class shooter than 1st as a C. To me there was more pride in being allowed to compete in a higher class than being able to win in a lower class.

I think this is much the problem here. You have a group (probably small) of riders who technically fit into the category of Clydesdale. They are good enough and strong enough to be competitive in a faster category but POSSIBLY not winners. Instead of taking pride in the fact that they can compete with a faster group they would rather use a technicality that enables them to ride in a slower class and probably win. It's a real problem and it sucks for those people who really belong in the class and are doing everything they can to just be competitive.

So, what's the solution? I don't know. To be honest I don't know how riders are classified. I would think there should be some sort of points system, like in sporting clays, and if you had X number of points you would have to compete at a higher level. I would even take age out of it. If 2 people can compete at the same level their weight and/or age should have nothing to do with how they are classified. It doesn't sound as though bicycling is set up that way. Any method will have it's problems and its share of people who obey the letter but beat the crap out of the spirit of the law. For right now, just do everything you can to beat the morons. That will be the worst punishment anyone could give them.

Joe

Angus

My wife suggested that for me to be competitive I should try to talk them into adding tug-of-war at the end of sprint triathlons. I love that idea!

oopfoo

Or maybe pie-eating, no? But then, given the size of the Japanese guy who dominated the Nathan's competitions for the years prior to 2007, maybe not...