Happy training!

Even the Most Beneficial Innovations Don’t Sell Themselves

Many people believe that, if an innovation has obvious benefits, it will sell itself and that it will be quickly adopted. In fact, most innovations, even those with the most obvious benefits, get adopted at a very slow rate.

The following example of an innovative way of controlling scurvy demonstrates how an obviously beneficial innovation catches on very slowly.

read more

We’re writing this because we believe that the soon-to-be-published book from VeloPress, entitled Iron War, inaccurately and inappropriately portrays us. As an example, in the advance copy sent to the media for review, the author stated, “In a sober, clinical sense of the term, Dave and Mark are both somewhat psychologically unbalanced.”  We have never been diagnosed as “psychologically unbalanced” by any medical or mental health professional.

And there’s a lot more where that came from – too much more for us to simply look the other way. Indeed, Iron War author Matt Fitzgerald has written an endless stream of inaccurate and defamatory assertions about our lives, our thoughts, our motivations and what drove us to such a high level of athletic excellence in what he spitefully and negatively describes as “the showdown that left one battling his inner demons to emerge victorious and one devastated on the pavement and unable to forgive his loss.” In fact, the massive degree of inaccuracy in the advanced reading copy has necessitated that we file a lawsuit against VeloPress and Fitzgerald in response to the defamation and privacy issues that were breached.

As most of you know, our intense racing rivalry in the 1980s was prime fuel for countless debates each October when triathletes around the globe gathered to predict who would become the next Ironman Champion.  And perhaps the greatest race to ever come out of our rivalry was the 1989 Ironman World Championship – the so-called Iron War – during which we raced toe to toe for close to eight hours, never separated by more than a few scant seconds.

That rivalry, which was built on a great mutual respect for each other as athletes and as individuals, ended long ago, and we are now united in expressing our deep concern over the portrayal of our individual journeys to become such tenacious competitors in Fitzgerald’s Iron War.

While some might applaud Fitzgerald for his creative writing, we must express our deep disappointment over the many falsehoods and errors in his book. He has very little respect for journalistic integrity, the essence of which is truth. Fitzgerald also shows no respect for our privacy by disclosing and discussing very personal information that has nothing to do with our rivalry or accomplishments as triathletes. His goal appears to be to embarrass and discredit us. We also have to wonder, what’s the point? . . . other than book sales for VeloPress, of course!

You should know that we were asked by Fitzgerald to provide in-depth background information about our personal lives and to deliver the exhaustive detail necessary to understand what made us tick as athletes. This time-consuming request, however, was made without any offer to share the benefits that would be considered normal when one is asked to divulge a lifetime of detail.

But more importantly, by his refusal to have us be cooperative partners in the book, we had overwhelming concern that our stories, if told to him, would not be recounted with accuracy and, in the end, we did not participate in the project. The result of that decision: Fitzgerald has created an endless string of seemingly personal anecdotes that because of his deceptive writing style leave the reader with the perception that they came directly from our mouths.

Unfortunately, Fitzgerald and VeloPress have reduced our 1989 test of wills on the Big Island to a flawed and sadly shaded depiction of its protagonists. Our hope is that you, as intelligent and discerning athletes, will know and remember our battle in 1989 for its grit, and use that as inspiration to explore and break through your own limits to find greatness in both your racing and in your personal lives. And if you do decide to read Iron War be prepared to wade through fiction, fantasy and fabrication.

 

“You have two brains: a left and a right. …your left brain is your verbal and rational; it thinks serially and reduces it’s thoughts to numbers, letters, and words…  You right brain is your non-verbal and intuitive brain; it thinks in patters, or pictures composed of ‘whole things,’ and doesn’t not comprehend reductions, either numbers, letters, or words” (“The Fabric of Mind”, Richard Bergland)

read full article

Most swimmers use center mount snorkels these days.  It’s a great tool that helps you work on your technique and body position while allowing you not to worry about breathing to the side.

The first time I saw a center mount snorkel used by swimmers was about ten years ago.  I didn’t know if it had been used before this, so I decided to do a little research about the history of the center mount snorkel.  Here is what I found out.

The first official record of a center mount snorkel that I was able to find was a US patent from 1863 that was called ” Apparatus for teaching the art of swimming”.

I had thought that a center mount snorkel was a recent invention so I was very surprised to discover that somebody actually invented it in 1863. It was 16 years before Edison invented his first incandescent lamp!  In other words, swimmers had center mount snorkels before electricity!

The above snorkel was invented by S. Scholfield.  It doesn’t really look all that different from the snorkels we use today.  The concept is the same.  Looking at this invention in 2011 you will notice three things that might strike you as odd:

First, the “snorkel to head” attachment mechanism looks bulky and uncomfortable.

Second, the mouth piece had special “pipes” that went inside the swimmer’s nostrils.  ”This mouthpiece, when properly inserted, furnishes a communication with both the mouth and nostrils for the purpose of breathing, the air being received and expelled through the pipe.”  This nose piece is invasive and looks uncomfortable.

Third, the snorkel was completely straight.  It didn’t curve back like the modern snorkels.  This is a very interesting point because what this straightness indicates is the swimming technique of that time.  It appears that people swam looking forward not down as we do now.

Read full article at AquaVolo.com