Commentary.

By Tom Demerly.

Bike fitting is big business. Having some version of “professional” bike fitting is the new standard for any bike sold above $1000.

How do you tell if your bike fitter knows what they’re doing? Are they a credible, trained, experienced fitter or just repeating buzzwords in a kind of bike fit “theater” learned in a weeklong clinic under the guise of years of experience fitting athletes during the evolution of bike fitting?

Here are ten checkpoints to assess the credibility of your bike fitter:

Do They Ride? The Way You Do?

If a bike fitter knows what it’s like to be a beginner triathlete filled with anxiety and not even know what questions to ask they can help the newest beginner with solid recommendations. A good fitter knows the “beginner’s mind”.

At the opposite end of the experience scale, if your fitter knows what it’s like to sit on an uncomfortable saddle for six hours at Ironman- and can fix it– it’s easier for them to understand what you’re experiencing. If they have done it themselves, you’ve found a fitter you can relate to.

“After their bike fits Dave and Enrique couldn’t help but wonder if there had been some confusion between their two appointments…”

When a bike fitter combines the “beginner’s mind” with elite level competitive experience balanced with formal training and tempered against learned judgment from doing thousands of bike fits, you have a master. And the less a new rider knows, the more the fitter must.

There are a few credible fitters who are not triathletes or bike racers but do know bike fit well. But they are the exception.

Having the practical experience of riding the way you do (beginner or expert) makes communication more effective. It also means your fitter had to apply what they’ve learned about bike fit to themselves. It teaches them critical thinking and hones their analytical skills. That makes them a better fitter.

There is a dark side to the super-athlete bike fitter though, see #10 below.

Have They Been Trained in Multiple Methods?

Beware of any shop or fitter than espouses a single fit methodology. If a shop tells you “We do Retül (or Guru, or FitKit, or Body Geometry, or FIST)” but uses no other system and is not familiar with any others, it’s worth learning how deep their understanding of bike fitting and positioning really is.

How long have they been fitting? Have you spoken to any other fit clients of theirs? What are their reviews?

Bike fit systems are only tools to make the fitting process easier, more theatric, and in some cases, to sell bikes.

Dan Empfield, inventor of the triathlon bike and of the Stack and Reach sizing convention teaches a F.I.S.T. bike fitting class in England.

The quality of the end product depends on the fitter, not the system. A fitter with experience across a number of systems has a more balanced understanding of the bike fit landscape and assesses your fit from a broader perspective. That likely means you’ll get a better bike fit. Beware of the one-trick pony and the Johnny-come-lately with the shiny new fit bike and laser levels.

Do They Espouse One “Fit System” Over Another?

If a fitter uses only the cookie-cutter fitting system associated with the bike brand they sell, you may still get a good fit on that brand, but the fitter’s capabilities may be limited.

As with point #2 above, bike fitting systems are merely tools. All of them will produce a favorable result in the hands of a skilled fitter- but all of them rely on an experienced fitter.

Nice tools, but do they know their stuff?

When was the last time you asked your bike mechanic, “What kind of wrenches do you use?” As bike fitters become more experienced and capable the system they use becomes less relevant.

It’s the experience and skill of your fitter that matters, not the system they use.

Do They Only Suggest New Saddles for Saddle Discomfort?

Saddle discomfort is a leading motive for bike fit, but if the only thing your fitter does to make you more comfortable is bolt different saddles on your bike or try to measure your “sit bones” to sell you the right saddle, then they are a good salesperson, but a poor bike fitter.

A good fitter will take a holistic approach to saddle discomfort, addressing fit, position, saddle comfort habits, rider fitness and posture and the rider’s clothing to improve saddle comfort.

Bolting on new saddles is a great way to drive sales and usually the most logical approach to the customer, but it is a myopic view of what makes a person comfortable on a bike seat. Your fitter owes you more than a sales pitch on another magic saddle.

Do They Claim To Be Able To Make You “More Aero”?

A great way to tell if a fitter is a hack is if they claim to be able to make you more aero without using wind tunnel testing or computational fluid dynamics.

A bike fitter can use empirical, data-driven checks to verify joint angles. They can take specific measurements of frame dimensions and geometry. They can take quantifiable measurements of your body and make mathematical comparisons to determine relevant ratios for bike fit.

A bike fitter cannot do this for aerodynamics. If your bike fitter claims to be able to make you more aerodynamic on your bike they are guessing, and lying.

Air is 784 times less dense than water, and it is nearly impossible to predict the behavior of water swirling around your finger. Guessing how air will swirl around a pedaling rider at speed in different wind conditions is impossible without empirical analysis.

I know- I’ve been that guy. I spent over ten years telling clients I would get them “more aero” by lowering their handlebars and making them “more aggressive” until a wise man who happened to have a PhD in aerodynamics told me to “stop embarrassing yourself” by trying to guess at aerodynamics.

I’ve been privileged to wind tunnel test with two bike brands and one independent engineering laboratory in three different wind tunnels over 25 years, on the bike and in the control room. I’ve learned that no one can guess what small changes will make a rider faster over the entire length of a triathlon bike leg. And remember, the goal is to get faster, not just “more aero”, and while those two things are closely related, they are not entirely the same– especially for new riders with comfort issues.

“Jim wondered about riding 112 miles at Lake Placid like this after his bike fit was over.”

Firstly, no bike fitter without a wind tunnel or computational fluid dynamic analytics can guess at the behavior of the boundary layer of air surrounding your body across the entire performance envelope.

Secondly, even if they could, the constantly changing variables of speed, terrain, wind yaw angle and rider posture would make that snapshot in time a very fleeting case study.

Thirdly, while rider aerodynamic drag is the most significant force to overcome in cycling even at moderate speeds, wind tunnel positioning concepts were developed in testing at very high speeds, usually over 25 MPH. British professional triathlon coach Russell Cox discovered the median bike speed for the Men’s 40-44 age category at Ironman Florida, one of the fastest courses in the U.S., was only 17.5 MPH. At these sub-25 MPH speeds there are more opportunities for your fitter to improve your bike split through things that they can actually test for, as opposed to things they are guessing at for speeds you don’t even ride at.

The narrative “Let’s lower your bars to get you more aggressive…” is a valid way to tell if a bike fitter is regurgitating empty rhetoric from YouTube, a triathlon forum, or a three-day fit clinic.

Faster Bike Shop in Scottsdale, Arizona was the first and is likely the only bike retailer in the U.S. with actual wind tunnel test facilities.

If a fitter tries to critique your aerodynamics challenge them by asking, “Can we measure my drag coefficient before and after any changes?” You’ll likely get the sideways puppy stare or a litany of qualifying excuses. Don’t fall for it. There is only one bike retailer in the United States with a wind tunnel, Faster in Tempe, Arizona. If you aren’t there, then your fitter is guessing.

Are They Trying to make you “Straight”?

There is a sub-segment of bike fitting and positioning that tries to enforce symmetry on the human form. The only symmetrical human is Mona Lisa. The rest of us are crooked.

It’s simple to use lasers and shims to try to make a person “straight”, but it may create further skeletal misalignment since our skeletons are usually not straight and symmetrical, especially as we age and accumulate injuries.

The craft of the experienced fitter is to find a functional balance between moderating asymmetries that could contribute to discomfort, or even an injury, and facilitating them. There is likely a “sweet spot” between facilitation and adaptation that provides the optimal benefit to each unique rider. This sweet spot is different for a new triathlete than a person doing their 10th Ironman.

If a bike fitter’s singular goal is to “get you straight” you should tell them to get bent.

Do They Acknowledge Their Limitations?

Many bike fitters try to- or claim to be able to- do too much.

A retail bike fitter should be able to recommend a new bike model, frame size name and geometry that fits you optimally for the type of cycling you want to do. They can then adjust that bike for an optimal basic position, often using different handlebar stems, aerobars and other size-specific components to achieve the best result. Then, they can use any number of analytical tools to verify the results against commonly known bike fit standards.

That’s all.

Bike fitters can’t make you comfortable or “fix” you. They can’t add additional fitness or make you less overweight. They can’t produce the perfect saddle that feels right to you. You still have to train, lose weight if you are overweight and get acclimated to sitting on a bike seat. Those things don’t happen in a two-hour bike fit.

Unless the bike fitter in your store has a formal University level credential in anatomy, physical therapy, medicine or exercise physiology that should be their boundary, and they should respect their customers by working within their boundaries.

Beware of the bike fitter who tries to do too much without the degree to back it up. If a bike fitter learns a customer is suffering from a sports injury they are correct to refer them to a qualified physical therapist. Some licensed physical therapists now have formal instruction in bike fitting too, and you (or your health insurance) will pay extra for that, but it is worth it.

If your bike shop bike fitter tries to play physical therapist, limp out of there.

How Long Have They Been Doing Bike Fits?

Ten years ago it was still easy to sell a bike with a quick test ride. Now customers are smart enough to demand a more empirical, data supported process to selecting and adjusting the right bike. As a result there has been an explosion in the number of new “bike fitters” in the last ten years.

Not all of the new bike fitters are good.

Many new bike fitters are adequate and recognize their capabilities- and limitations- but many are also quick-talking hucksters who can sling the lingo and the laser beams to appear credible.

Ask your bike fitter questions about their training, their experience, their own cycling background and their limitations. A fitter who claims to be able to do everything has big shoes to fill.

Are They Willing to Recommend Equipment They Don’t Sell?

It’s a good sign if a bike fitter occasionally “walks” a customer by telling them he has nothing in his store to fit them. That suggests their first motive is to get the customer on the right bike, not just get a bike out the door.

A specialty bike shop will stock a well-planned assortment of bikes that have subtly different fit characteristics. Some work well for larger, heavier riders, some for smaller riders, some for long torso cyclists, others for short torso cyclists.

When Triathlon Hall of Famer and inventor of the triathlon bike, Dan Empfield, invented the “Stack and Reach” table for comparing bike dimensions he created a kind of Rosetta Stone for bike fitters to make meaningful comparisons of different bikes and their dimensions. This leveled the playing field and decoded cryptic bike brand size names that have little to do with actual bike dimensions. Empfield’s accounting of bike dimensions gave bike fitters one of their most valuable tools since the tape measure, and also held fitters accountable for being honest.

Are They Good Listeners?

A good bike fitter conducts an interview with his customers, listening to their experiences, their goals and what they are thinking very carefully. This leads to more questions from the bike fitter. In fact, a good bike fitter often asks the customer more questions than the customer asks them when selecting a new bike.

The best bike fitters listen carefully to position their clients optimally on a continuum between facilitation and adaptation. Facilitating a client means the fitter exclusively listens to the client and does what they say makes them comfortable. Adapting a client means the fitter applies known principles of bike fitting without input from the rider and says, “This is right, get used to it.” The best bike fitters know how to listen to their clients to find the optimal balance between these extremes.

Some bike fitters try to be know-it-alls or local heroes. They try to mold each client into a specific posture or fit model, and they have little space left in their effusive knowledge of all things bike fit, cycling and triathlon related to learn anything from a lowly client. If you can’t get your bike fitter to listen to you, let them talk to the hand.

Craig Turner, founder of Nytro, one of the first triathlon shops in the world, is also one of the best listeners and bike fitters in the industry.

I once listened to Craig Turner, founder of Nytro in Encinitas, California, work with a bike customer. I was surprised by how little Craig said, how much he listened, and how he restated the key points the customer made back to them. It was clear that Turner was a careful and analytical interviewer, asking the right questions and leaving space for complete answers. When he was done with the interview he had the expertise to make learned and supportable recommendations. It was like listening to an expert attorney advise a client.

About The Author:

While Tom Demerly can be full of shit he has been fitting bicycles since 1984 and performed well over 5,000 bike fittings including Olympic athletes Sheila Taormina and Olympian, National Champion and Tour de France rider Frankie Andreu. More importantly, Demerly has fit thousands of first time triathletes and only a few of them still have numb crotches.

“Warriors” Cat Fiction: The Next Big Thing?

March 19, 2016

Book Reviews, Commentary.

3 Comments

By Tom Demerly.

I was in a small gift shop on an island when I first saw one of Erin Hunter’s The Warriors series books. I opened it and read one page.

And my trip began.

Warriors is an opulent, luxurious fantasy novel series featuring fictional cats who are empowered with mythical abilities. Their mystical powers have roots in ancient lore attributed to Native American, African and Asian cats- including Egyptian mythology. The result is a dream-like journey with loveable characters overlaid on a detailed examination of cat zoology and animal behavior science. Plot lines and morals threaded through the series feel like an amalgam of sacred texts, from Buddhist writing to the Bible and many others.

The Warriors series is immensely complex, featuring a dizzying number of cat-characters. On the Wiki page for the book series one reviewer is cited as saying the series is “confusing due to its large number of characters”.

But the incredible dream-like quality of the scenes, characters and the fairy-tale, Aesop’s-like moral themes unfold at a brisk pace that is incredibly readable and engaging.

“The incredible dream-like quality of the scenes, characters and the fairy-tale, Aesop’s-like moral themes unfold at a brisk pace that is incredibly readable and engaging.”

Author Erin Hunter is actually three writers and an editor/plot director; Kate Cary, Cherith Baldry, Tui Sutherland write the The Warriors series with Victoria Holms editing.

“Warriors” writing team includes (Left to right) Victoria Holmes, Kate Cary, Tai Sutherland and Cherith Baldry.

This writing team may have created The Next Big Thing. Before you dismiss this idea, let me propose the following:

According to the A.S.P.C.A. there are 96 million pet cats in the United States. Nearly 37% of American households, more than one-third, have a cat. One celebrity cat, Tara the Hero Cat, earns an estimated “$55,000-$463,000 per year” according to the New York Times. Add in other celebrity cats and the total take for the top earning celebrity cats is well over $10 million- probably much more. Now, consider the “Hobbit” film trilogy grossed over $3 billion for three movies, and no one has a Hobbit for a pet. You get the idea; combine cats with a Star Wars style plot line and some convincing computer generated cat characters with celebrity voices and… The commercial potential for The Warriors series is titanic (pun intended), with licensing possibilities for plush toys of each of the cat characters, lines of every pet accessory attributed to the series and about every other standard movie merchandising theme imaginable. The earnings potential is boggling. Why the big movie studios haven’t grabbed this series already is a mystery.

Business potential aside, The Warriors series is why we read. It is escapist, descriptive, creative and pulls you in. Your imagination wanders the mystical forests in the moonlight with the cats. You learn about real cat behaviors and you see your own cats differently after reading these.

I’m a Tom Clancy, Robert Ludlum, Robert F. Dorr fan- technotrhillers, not flowery fantasy stories. But The Warriors series spans genres and speaks across topics to the animal lover and storyteller in me. This series is a gem waiting for mainstream discovery. I’m looking forward to seeing this series explode in popularity and I’m thrilled I discovered it early.

Why The F-35 Has No Friends on Facebook.

January 27, 2016

Commentary.

The Most Important Campaign Issue in 2016.

January 19, 2016

Commentary.

2 Comments

By Tom Demerly for tomdemerly.com

Immigration, the economy, national security, foreign policy, health care: the hot point issues in the 2016 election.

But the single most important issue for Americans isn’t on that list.

This single issue governs the direction of every topic listed above. The success or failure of this single issue, usually low on the list of hotly debated topics, will determine the trajectory of our collective future in every area. It also has the potential to fix nearly every major challenge our nation faces.

It is the single most important issue in society, and one of the most neglected.

It is education.

America has done decades of government by crisis management. From the federal budget to the Affordable Care Act to our diplomatic efforts, our collective doctrine is to moderate problems after they’ve happened. Usually when they are in crisis.

As a result of our collective “fix it after it’s broke” doctrine we waste billions of dollars on missed opportunity, crisis management and bad planning, from the personal level with individual citizens to the national and international level with failed projects, damage control and wasted conflict. We legislate common sense instead of teaching it. We litigate tolerance and acceptance instead of learning it. And we struggle to resolve endless global conflicts in a bizarre replay of history that seems never ending.

We do this because we are collectively less educated. We’re less able to think critically to solve complex problems. Because we know less based on the trends in our test scores, we draw from a smaller and smaller inventory of knowledge and skills to solve problems. More importantly, we fail to learn from mistakes and avoid them in the future. That is an ominous trend. As the world becomes more connected and more populous we become less able to think critically, to reason and make well-conceived decisions. Our decisions become simpler and less forward thinking.

When we do learn, we learn the hard way, and the ominous trajectory of society is that we are becoming less educated, not more.

In 2013 then- Secretary of Education Arne Duncan said, “We have a real state of crisis. This is much bigger than education.”

Duncan was talking about the effects of an “education deficit” emerging between the United States and the rest of the world based on a global comparison of test scores in a battery of tests administered to 166,000 people, ages 16 through 65, in 23 countries in both 2011 and 2012. Results reveal the U.S. is trailing many other countries in test scores and graduation rates. These test results make the U.S. less employable, productive and innovative.

Our collective health is in decline only a few decades after massive reductions in physical education. We needed more exercise in school, teaching better lifelong health habits. Instead we have a band-aid healthcare system that protects big medicine financially and sticks the individual healthcare consumer with the bill, mandated by law and enforced by fines. All the while we get fatter, sicker, eat worse and spend more than we can individually afford on healthcare. Better health and fitness education over the last four decades could have moderated this crisis. Instead we try to fix it after it is broken.

The same paradigms exist in math and science. America has lost ground in test scores in every area. As other countries teach English as a second language requirement, our schools struggle to even teach English. Americans can voice a passionate opinion about Syrian refugees but can’t name that country’s capital or find it on an unlabeled map.

Our next President needs to put education first, above all other agendas. If people are educated in problem solving, recognizing signs of mental health problems, resolving conflict and accepting diversity they may not choose gun violence as a way to resolve conflict. Someone may recognize a person’s mental illness and help them get treatment. If people are better educated they will make better life choices and avoid substance abuse. If people are better educated they will take more responsibility for their health and be less likely to be obese. If people are immersed in sciences we may produce the student who becomes the doctor who cures cancer. But only if we put education first.

Why hasn’t education gotten more attention in the election rhetoric? It may be a self-feeding problem. We’re too dumb to realize how bad it is.

And while the economy, national security, foreign policy and health care are the banner issues in this election, the structural problems with our future only get worse. Based on the Republican and Democratic debates, it doesn’t look to improve any time soon.

10 Truths of No-Bullshit Triathlon Training.

January 14, 2016

Commentary., Triathlon Tips

40 Comments

By Tom Demerly for tomdemerly.com

Triathlon is big business now. With profits to earn and gadgets to sell how do you cut through the marketing haze and decide what really gets you to the finish line?

There are 2,377 books about triathlon on Amazon.com. An online seminar, a Facebook page and- bam, anyone is a triathlon coach. Add triathlon forums, that guy with an M-Dot tattoo dispensing advice and the amount of bullshit heaped on new triathletes is harder to cut through than the swim pack at Lake Placid.

Here are 10 no-bullshit, hardcore, old-skool insights on triathlon training. No quick-starts, no “12 Weeks to Ironman” plans. They aren’t easy, they aren’t pretty, but they produce results. You may not like them, you may disagree with them, but history proves these are solid producers for getting better.

Fire your coach.

You don’t need them and they’re probably not qualified. You can learn everything you need to know about swim stroke, bike handling skills and transitions faster and for free on YouTube. Mostly, you just need to train more. Your first year in the sport should be about building an aerobic base and slowly developing technique. As a wise old-timer once said, “Intervals are the icing on the cake, and you don’t have a cake yet.”

Triathlon coaching in the U.S. is a mostly B.S. affair. Anyone who passed a three-day clinic can call himself or herself a coach. By contrast, in Germany using the title “coach” requires a graduate degree in exercise physiology. While there are outstanding triathlon coaches in the United States there are many more who are not qualified to dispense training advice, especially to new athletes. The difficulty in knowing the difference between the few truly good coaches and the many truly bad ones combined with the basic goals of building an aerobic base while losing weight mean coaching can wait.

Take ownership of your knowledge of the sport. Learn basic exercise physiology. Learn technique. Do the reading. Be a student of the sport, not just a consumer of cookie-cutter coaching plans. And most of all, put in more time.

Actually Learn How to Ride Your Bike.

Get on the road. Yes, a car might hit you. You might fall. No, you will fall. There are two kinds of riders: the kind who have crashed and the kind who will. Sport has risk. The difference between a competitor and spectator is accepting- and managing- that risk, not just avoiding it.

Wear a current helmet adjusted properly. Find out the safest routes to ride from local road cyclists. Get out of the protected parks and onto roads that are appropriate for cycling. Ride in the real world. It is dangerous. But it is important to develop good bike handling skills and the ability to not panic when you are in a real-world riding environment. Your “A” race won’t be held on a spin bike at the health club. And, you may be interested to know the facts show that road cycling is safer now than in previous years.

Take Responsibility for Basic Bike Maintenance.

Can you fix a flat tire? Remove and replace your wheels? Put a bike in a flight case? Do you know your bike fit measurements? If not, learn those skills from YouTube. Don’t be the person who can’t change his or her own flat tire, didn’t carry a spare and has no clue how to remove and replace a rear wheel. Take responsibility. Be competent. Learn today. If you can’t name the components on your bike, start there.

Your Bike Doesn’t Fit.

It doesn’t. I’ve been fitting triathletes on their bikes since before triathlon bikes were invented in 1987. I see good triathlon bike positions about once a month. I do about four bike fits a day. Very few triathletes I see are on a bike that is the right frame size for them, and even fewer are in the right position to remain comfortable and be efficient.

If you hear a bike fitter say, “We’re going make your position lower and more aggressive and get you more aero” don’t walk, run out of there. No one can guess at aerodynamics. No one can guess at what will make you “more aero”.

If you’ve heard an athlete say, “Triathlon bikes are less comfortable than road bikes” what they are really saying is; “My triathlon bike doesn’t fit me and I don’t know what I’m talking about.”

Spending money on a bike that fits and is comfortable is one way you actually can buy speed, and it doesn’t have to be a $10K superbike. It just has to fit, and your bike likely doesn’t.

Get in the F@#king Open Water. NOW!

Scared of the open water? That’s fine, there’s still bowling and ballroom dancing.

Triathlon was born in the ocean, by people who were competent and comfortable in the ocean. Lifeguards, swimmers, surfers, watermen, Navy SEALs. Yup, there are sharks. They won’t hurt you. Well, probably not. There are waves. You’ll get seasick. The salt will burn your eyes. Deal with it. This is triathlon. We swim. In the ocean. With the big fish.

If you are doing all of your swimming in a pool and expect to be immediately comfortable in an open water mass swim start- that is not a reasonable expectation. You will panic and be a danger to yourself and athletes around you. You will get kicked and shoved. When you freak out (and you will) it is your fault. You failed to prepare adequately. Get your swim anxiety under control before race day. Way before. Take responsibility for being competent in the unforgiving maritime environment. Your race will depend on it, and someday your life may too.

Swim More. Way More.

Good swimmers swim a lot. Three days a week might get you through the swim leg. It might. It also might not. There is an axiom in triathlon: get tired running, and you walk, get tired cycling, and you coast, get tired swimming, and you drown. The reason the swim is first is to improve your chances of living through it.

Talk to any good open water swimmer and their yardage and time is incredible. Five days a week. Six days a week. Two times a day. Swimming is no-impact (except on race day) so you can put in long training sessions regularly and not suffer overuse injuries. On race day you will not only be a safe, competent swimmer you may actually have a decent swim split. This one is easy: Swim more.

Ditch the Superfluous Gadgets.

If it takes you more time to learn how to use your GPS, power meter, training log website, “smart” indoor trainer, smart phone app, body fat calculating scale, swim gadgets and all the other crap available to triathletes, than you spend in a workout- get rid of them. And just train. I used a “smart” indoor bike trainer for a season but spent so much time setting it up, making sure it was connected, trying to sync all the apps and then trying to find the “data”, much of which wasn’t really data at all but largely an estimate of power output the trainer made, that I eventually stopped using it. Using a “smart” trainer made me so dumb I didn’t realize I was wasting a total of 2 hours a week just trying to get it set up and working right. I could have used that extra time for training. And believe me, I needed the training more than I needed the technology. When your technology takes time from your training, get rid of it. You need the training. You don’t need the technology.

I’ve been in the triathlon industry since it started in the 1980’s. I am one of the guys responsible for selling this stuff to you. Some of it is useful, most of it is a time suck. Some of it makes training more convenient and easier. I only use one gadget: A Garmin Fenix wrist top computer since it is easy to use and does what I need. That’s it. Only one. It tells me how far, how fast, how hard. That’s all I need.

Think about this: how much data do you really need? The sport is pretty basic: Speed, time, distance. Most fitness apps are so overloaded with features that cutting to the chase of how fast and how far takes scrolling, clicking and sifting through reams of superfluous “data” that is really just bullshit. And don’t get me started on “sharing” your workouts on social media. That is a bizarre phenomenon all to itself. The reality is, if you have to flaunt your training in some disjointed attempt to “stay motivated” then you are doing it in a vein attempt at impressing someone else, not for yourself. The motive needs to be intrinsic. It needs to be internal.

Remember, at the finish line only one metric counts: how fast you got there.

Practice Transitions.

You say you are just there to finish, but I have been doing this long enough to know that you are lying. If all you wanted to do was go the distance you wouldn’t have pinned on a number or paid an entry fee. It’s a race. Race it.

The best way to shave a few seconds (or minutes) quickly is to practice transitions at home. Set up a transition area in your driveway and let your neighbors laugh at you. You’ll get the last laugh on race day when you win your age category by the 15 seconds you just learned how to save in transition. That is free speed.

Lose Weight.

You’re too fat. Don’t take offense, I am too. The fastest way to get faster is to be lighter. Nearly all of us could drop 10-30 pounds. Finishing a triathlon when you’re overweight is an impressive accomplishment, but it doesn’t give you a pass on being overweight. It is less healthy, harder on your body and your equipment and even more dangerous.

Take responsibility for your fitness. This isn’t about body shaming. It is about health, safety and performance.

Losing weight is basic: burn more calories than you take in every day. That’s it. Do that and you’ll lose weight. It is inherently simple. That doesn’t make it easy. It’s one more reason not everyone does this sport. If it were easy, everyone would.

Just Train More.

More is more. There are no shortcuts. Time and distance are ruthless, indiscriminate arbiters. On race day you learn that you either put in enough time or you didn’t. Almost everyone realizes they didn’t. There is no faking it.

We live in an iThing, instant gratification, One-Click world where almost everything we aspire to can be had quickly and easily. Not here, not in this sport. If you want to have a good race you have to earn it in the months and years before race day. There are no shortcuts. You either have the miles in your legs or you don’t.

Before race day, make sure you do. There is no bullshitting the miles or the clock into believing you do.

SaveSave

SaveSaveSaveSave

Fear or Hope: Our National Choice.

January 5, 2016

Commentary.

1 Comment

By Tom Demerly for tomdemerly.com

Hope or fear? Which do we choose?

More than any recent decade Americans are strongly divided between two themes: Hope for a better tomorrow or fear of repeating an ominous history.

Both hope and fear are presiding doctrines that come with peril. The human condition has never been problem free.

Which narrative prevails? Why do both exist?

Our country is founded on hope. Hope for religious freedom, hope for greater opportunity. Hope for a new tomorrow that, while fraught with peril, so greatly exceeds a prior condition it is worth any risk. Even risk of life.

Read the lore of our founding fathers, this is their doctrine: risk for the hope of a better tomorrow. Some starved, some were killed in wars. Some lived to see the birth of a nation so vast that in only two short centuries has lead the world to countless new things. Our country passed ancient ones fraught with conflict, suffering and oppression for thousands of years, and we did it in less than 200 years. In nearly every case, when a person is downtrodden and wants to leave their homeland for the Promised Land, the United States is their first choice. Because hope is our legacy, our doctrine, our national narrative. Not fear.

The advancement of mankind and of our country has accelerated at a dizzying rate during the last centuries. At first our national throttle was at idle for a few decades, moved into “drive” for a few more, slammed into “reverse” around 1867, nearly ran out of gas in 1929, plowed forward through terrible storms at a grinding speed until 1945 then drove down the on-ramp of a new freeway in the 1950’s and accelerated to a speed that went supersonic.

Like any momentous journey through time there have been tragedies and triumphs; wars, depressions, recessions, scandals and controversies. But these have only punctuated a national narrative of momentous success and dizzying progress.

What is the next chapter in this great national novel, the Story of America? Is it that we circle the wagons, build walls and shut out a world that accelerates at a pace approaching and in some countries exceeding our own national velocity? Or, do we espouse a risky and promising doctrine of world community? inclusion rather than exclusion, new ideas and new challenges rather than a serialized, romanticized yesterday often embellished by historical lore and suspiciously untarnished by the historical reality that any time our national tempo toward “better” has diminished, calamity has followed.

I still choose hope.

This comes from a man who has had everything, has lost everything, and grinds inexorably back toward that great American Dream; not just material wealth, but precious things that enrich our lives like free ideas, a sense of community, the guarantee of inclusion and the promise of growth so vast I cannot envision it. And mostly that ephemeral and fleeting feeling of safety.

These things are possible. We have had them. And while we have suffered tragedies the trajectory and acceleration of our national destiny tracks more favorably when propelled by the thrust of hope than the drag of fear.

So, I still choose hope.

6 Reasons Why Americans Won’t Give Up Their Guns.

December 16, 2015

Commentary.

Five Key Shifts in the War on ISIL: The President’s Address on 12/6/15.

December 7, 2015

Commentary.

2 Comments

By Tom Demerly for tomdemerly.com

The President made several substantive statements during his address to the nation on Sunday, December 6, 2015. In the diplomatic subtlety that is a necessity from a U.S. President he signaled five key shifts in U.S. policy and additional changes in the perspective of his administration. Here is an analysis of the President’s remarks:

The U.S. President told us the shooting in California was “An act of terrorism, designed to kill innocent people”.

Key Shift #1. For two days after the shooting the media and government was reluctant to label this attack as “terrorism”. That word carries with it gravity beyond terms like “mass shooting”. It specifies a coordinated, planned attack by a group, not an individual, with the goal of undermining the way of life in the United States.

This acknowledgement grants clemency to make future policy decisions congruent with a new goal: preventing terrorism in the United States. It also signifies a different political environment. When a U.S. President acknowledges an “Act of terror” inside the U.S. the thematic and actual rule set for every U.S. military, intelligence and law enforcement agency changes. We saw that change before our eyes last night, albeit in the subtle words of a President practiced in measured language. But as of today, it is no longer business as usual.

In the very next paragraph of his address President Obama said, “Our country has been at war with terrorists since Al Qaeda killed nearly 3,000 Americans on 9/11.”

Key Shift #2. That remark further recalibrates our policy decisions going forward: We are at wartime footing now. Previous remarks have used words like “conflict” or the word “war” in a more colloquial context. This was a very George W. Bush-like declaration. President Obama said, substantively, that the United States is at war. That acknowledges the nature of the attack and grants a change in tenor toward our response, and our future responses to similar incidents.

“…We will continue to provide training and equipment to tens of thousands of Iraqi and Syrian forces fighting ISIL on the ground so that we take away their safe havens. In both countries, we’re deploying Special Operations Forces who can accelerate that offensive.”

Key Shift #3. The President announced we have special operations forces deployed on the ground in Syria. Through the masterful use of a plural pronoun for Iraq and Syria referencing this first sentence, the President told us there are U.S. Special Operations forces on the ground in Syria. This may be the first executive acknowledgement of U.S. intelligence and military personnel deployed on the ground inside Syria. He also said, by masterful omission, they are there in a combat role by using the words, “…can accelerate that offensive.”

The President acknowledged there are U.S. Special Operations troops inside Syria.

In Washington-speak there is a difference between deploying small special operations direct-action and intelligence gathering personnel and using larger military assets from the U.S. Quick Reaction forces including Army Rangers, U.S. Marines, Army Airborne and light infantry units.

The conduct of a sophisticated and subtle special operations/intelligence war compared to the deployment of more conventional forces is the difference between treating a cancer with sophisticated chemotherapy that subtly targets key cells, or treating it with an amputation. The President told us we are doing the former.

The President told us, “Congress should act to make sure no one on a no-fly list is able to buy a gun.”

Key Shift #4. This suggests a recalibration for the President’s argument for reviewing gun laws when he asked for changes in weapons buying for people on an existing no-fly list. It isn’t easy to get on a no-fly list, and this step resonates with common sense in a time of war. It is also a minor concession from his more sweeping rhetoric for gun law reform. Polarized conservatives will likely still reject this proposed change in firearms buying law, but it does suggest a concession, however minor, in the President’s relentless admonitions for new gun legislation.

The President brought the inertia of unity to his argument, acknowledging that “…65 countries that have joined an American-led coalition.”

This is an “all against one” war against ISIL. This acknowledgement of the balance of power and the cooperation of the international community is significant.

The President said, “…We should put in place stronger screening for those who come to America without a visa so that we can take a hard look at whether they’ve traveled to warzones. And we’re working with members of both parties in Congress to do exactly that.”

Key Shift #5. This administration has come under criticism for not being tough enough on immigration. This statement signals a shift in that mindset.

The President’s most important thesis statement may have been, “We cannot turn against one another by letting this fight be defined as a war between America and Islam.”

America has become a culture that mistakenly seeks one solution to one problem. Any experienced analyst will tell you that is not possible, especially in a complex conflict. This is an asymmetrical war, not a conventional war. There is no front line, the enemy doesn’t wear uniforms and the battlefields are not the vast oceans, high skies and sweeping deserts on some faraway continent.

The battlefields are our churches, schools, festivals, arenas, shopping centers, airliners and anywhere a vulnerable crowd gathers that can be exploited through violent terrorism and instant media.

“If we’re to succeed in defeating terrorism we must enlist Muslim communities as some of our strongest allies, rather than push them away through suspicion and hate.”

This continued agenda of inclusion and mutual problem solving is the most effective doctrine in undermining ISIL’s “us against them” rhetoric. A key strategy to any insurgency is to divide the larger opponent into polarized factions that will fight against themselves. It is the manifestation of the ancient Arabic saying, “The enemy of my enemy, is my friend” and it is exactly the doctrine ISIL is employing in Syria. Unity in the United States makes us impervious to that doctrine.

“…It is the responsibility of all Americans — of every faith — to reject discrimination.”

More than just a call to reject discrimination, this is a call for all Americans to think more deeply and learn more about this conflict. Most Americans couldn’t find Syria on a map, or name its capital. They don’t understand the conflict. Rather than applying the template of old belief sets to new conflicts, Americans must seek first to understand this conflict before trying to apply old rules to fighting ISIL. This is a different war. There will be no carpet-bombing, no sweeping armored assaults across vast deserts and no squaring-off of infantry divisions. ISIL has no sophisticated air force (yet), no large navy and does not field massive armored divisions. They are a cancer, not a compound fracture.

6 Reasons Why I Don’t Carry a Gun.

December 3, 2015

Commentary.

14 Comments

By Tom Demerly for tomdemerly.com

People are talking about carrying guns, gun laws and mass shootings. I was in a Long Range Surveillance Unit in the U.S. military and I grew up with guns in my family. But I don’t carry a gun. Here’s why:

I Don’t Want To Live In a Community Self-Governed by Threat of Force.

I’ve traveled all over the world. Been to conflict zones on three continents. I have seen first hand what it is to live in a community governed by threat of force. That is not how I want to live. Our society and culture develops congruent with our vision. If our vision is an armed society, that will be our reality. If our vision is a society less reliant on arms to solve and prevent problems, our reality will manifest that way. That is how I want to live. So I do.

Carrying a Gun is Inconvenient.

When I did carry a gun it was a significant responsibility, and it was inconvenient. The heavy pistol concealed on my belt caused my pants to fall down when I went to the bathroom. The handgun dug into my back when I sat in a car. I couldn’t draw it in a hurry from a concealed position in a car anyway. When I got home at night I had to secure the weapon in my house. It was a lot of extra work and responsibility. I don’t want that.

I Probably Couldn’t Hit Anything Anyway.

I haven’t pulled a trigger in over a year. I am not current or proficient in combat shooting. And, with the small pistols commonly carried as a concealed firearm, I doubt I could hit anything beyond 10 yards accurately and dependably anyway. For me to carry a gun and then employ it effectively and safely in a civilian setting I would need extensive re-training and then ongoing proficiency training. In the military we had to qualify with our weapons on a regular basis. I haven’t done that in a long time. Despite my military and civilian experience, I’m not qualified.

I Don’t Want The Responsibility of Deciding Whether or Not to Take a Life.

If I carry a gun to defend others, and myself but I make a bad decision and accidentally shoot the wrong person, I would regret that- and cannot undo it. Carrying a gun is making the decision that you are willing, and ready, to kill. I am not- at least not at a moments notice in a civilian setting.

Many people don’t realize that the responsibility of shooting another person, even when justified, exposes you to significant civil liability. If you shoot a criminal and your actions are judged to be legally justified, you won’t do jail time. However, you may be financially responsible for some loss the criminal you shot may suffer. These losses can include medical bills, disfigurement and compensation to a surviving family. You may stay out of jail for a justified self-defense shooting, but it could cost you hundreds of thousands of dollars in a civil suit in addition to the cost of mounting a costly defense.

It Is Unsettling to People, Especially Some of My Friends.

I have friends on both sides of the firearms debate. Some carry firearms, some are opposed to even owning guns. I respect both perspectives. I also consider myself an animal rights advocate, but I don’t brandish my animal empathy in front of someone eating a steak. Ultimately, we all have to get along. I am a shooting enthusiast, I love to shoot, and I own guns. But I do it respectfully. I know carrying a gun, openly or concealed, makes some people uncomfortable. I don’t want to do that.

It’s unlikely I’ll Ever Really Need It.

I’ve climbed mountains, fallen in crevices, jumped out of airplanes, visited all seven continents, swam with sharks. I’ve never been in a civilian situation where I needed deadly force. The odds are, I never will. I have had to take medications to save my life when I had a heart defect. I still have that heart defect, but I don’t carry the medications; because I likely will never need them again and it is inconvenient. I view having to use a gun to save my life as a very remote possibility. I don’t carry a fire extinguisher (although my house is full of them), a CPR mask or a personal flotation device with me (I live near water). Like a gun, it is statistically unlikely I will need any of those things on a daily basis. So I don’t bother with it.