The second Ironman race of the weekend, Arizona, was a much larger and faster affair than Malaysia. Around 2,500 athletes competed on Sunday and while results were faster than in Malaysia they weren’t particularly quick for the Arizona course. Overall age group times appear to have been on par to slightly slower than the race averages.
This year’s distributions are broadly the same as previous results, but have a little more weight towards the back of the field that brings down the median times. The swim is an exception which proved slower across the entire field, but otherwise the front of the age group pack was consistent with previous years.
To improve this comparison I’ve removed pro results in the above chart to eliminate the influence of exceptional pro performances. It’s not a huge issue for a race like Arizona, but as some races lose their pro field and the faster times they bring, it makes sense to remove them from this comparison. If you’re interested in what the charts look like with pro data included you can see it here. Including the pros makes a small difference to the top 5% of each chart.
|Listed Athletes||Swim Finish||Swim DNS/DNF||Bike Finish||Bike DNF||Run Finish||Run DNF||Overall DNS/DNF|
There is nothing exceptional about this year’s DNF/DNS rate. If anything it is at the lower end of expected results, but this may reflect a reduction in the DNS rate rather than DNFs. Either way, alongside the distributions, this suggests typical conditions for the Arizona course in 2015.
Age group median splits at this year’s race closely match those from previous years, just coming out slightly slower overall. The pro data here suggests that this year’s race was much faster for the elites. As with last year there’s a separation between the pro performances and those of the age groupers, the former group pushing ahead of the averages while the latter remains inline.
Looking at changes in times across the age groups for the last 10 years of racing in Arizona gives a mixed pattern. This year’s results don’t differ too significantly from those for the previous few years, but whether they are faster or slower varies. It’s the sort of result we should expect when a race looks to be comparable with previous averages.
|Slots||Winner||Average Kona Qualifier||Final Qualifier|
Estimating the Kona slot allocation – I’m sure the numbers announced today will differ a little – allows me to estimate likely Kona times for each age group. Much faster than the figures we saw for Malaysia yesterday, but typical of North American races. More details on these figure can be found on my Kona Qualification page.
Looking at the top twenty within each age groups shows times that generally trend faster than the averages. For female age groups results appear to closely match those of 2014. For the men it’s more varied, but leans towards a faster race. None of this is by a huge margin though. Competition for slots at the 2015 race appears to be as high as usual.
A largely unexceptional year in Arizona for age groupers. There does appear to be a little more weight at the back of the pack which pulled down the median splits slightly. It’s not a huge change though and at the front of the field times were largely comparable.
You can access a spreadsheet of the full results and splits for Ironman Arizona 2015 on my Google Drive.