In this last blog of our aeroCAST Series we want to go back to square one and have a look at how aeroCAST can help you with the easy achievable results from our aeroTEST. In the first blog we mentioned that aeroCAST can help you for the preparation of your next race. Our tool can be used to define your race structure in the later process of the season, but what we want to show you now is how it can help you decide where to race in the next season. Please keep in mind that the focus for that is set by you and aeroCAST is there to help you achieve this.
In our example the goal is an Ironman Distance Triathlon in Sub 9 hours. This is a very ambitious goal which we will use to show you the process by using a hypothetical scenario. For this we will use the real CdA Value which we received after aeroFITTING with our aeroTEST. The value was 0.244 qdm or 24.4 aeroPOINTS. The second step is to look at potential races. We decided to use Challenge Venice, Challenge Roth and Ironman Hamburg as long distance races. We added Ironman Hamburg as a race to use aeroCAST for a possible Ironman World Championship qualification. Additionally, we have put in one Ironman 70.3 Distance race into the portfolio, to show the results for a half distance race, which additionally fits good into the preparations for Challenge Roth and Ironman Hamburg.
The third step will be the data collection. For this we have taken a look at the weather at our chosen races for the last three years in the cases where it was possible to receive a better tendency. Three given constants in this scenario will be the Swim, the Run and both Transitions. We will define the Swim time at 57 min, the Run time at 3:20 hrs for a flat course and 5:00 min for both Transitions. Of course, the time needed for the Transitions in Hamburg is longer and the new run course in Roth is a lot more challenging, but for this hypothetical example we will take it as a given. So adding those constants together gives us 4:32 min as a given constant, leaving 4:27 min for the Bike Split.
Below you can see the table for the three races.
According to this table, racing at Challenge Roth, under the current circumstances would have resulted in all three cases in not achieving the goal of Sub 9 but in the second one just by 38 sec. At Ironman Hamburg this would have been impossible with the given circumstances. Only at Challenge Venice there would have been a 100 % Chance of beating the necessary bike time. Therefore for reaching the goal, this would be the best option next year. However, in all options, the optimization of the wind resistance has resulted in more than 8 minutes of time bonus, without additional training.
Since we are big Hamburg fans and the race was a great success we will still have a detailed look at this race. In Hamburg the time sums up to 9:14:22 min. Below you can see the power and CdA graphs for the Hamburg race.
We are showing these for two reasons because now we can think about investments. A 9:14:22 would have given slots in all age groups above and including M35-39. In M30-34 A gap of 1:04 minutes would have to be made up. This could be done by either increasing training or improving the CdA, if a participation at Ironman World Championship would have been the goal.
The same simulation can be done for a Half Ironman Race. We will show this exemplarily with Ironman Ironman 70.3 Kraichgau.
AS you can see in the Table, in all three years a 5 minute better bike performance would have been achievable. And all of this with no additional training effort.
We have been showing this Graph for Ironman Distance in the past Blogs. This is just to show, how an improvement in aerodynamics is also beneficial.
In the last 6 weeks we have been showing you how to use our tools aeroCAST and the aeroTEST to optimize your performance without investing money into equipment. So far, we have been only discussing the optimization of your body position. In the next series we will be taking a differential look at bike components and their influence on the wind resistance.