Thoughts from the Men’s Ironman World Championship
Last weekend, I attended the final Men’s Ironman World Championship taking place in Nice, France, before the IMWC returns to Kona, Hawai’i in 2026. A lot of people have already shared some great insights from the event, particularly Tim Heming’s take on the Triathlonish Newsletter.
I am not going to break down everything about the race, but there are a couple things I wanted to cover while I am still thinking about them
First, the course.
Second, the Norwegian sweep of the podium.
++++++++++
The Course
When it comes to Ironman bike courses, they are often not known for being particularly challenging when it comes to terrain.
However, this bike course in Nice is properly challenging, with extended climbs, technical descents and sections of flat riding that (at least on race day) were exposed to windy conditions. Moreover, the way the terrain is laid out makes it more challenging than it might otherwise be if it was distributed differently.
The course essentially climbs up to a plateau so after athletes have completed a 45-50 minute (hard) climb they are forced to immediately go into steady state TT riding instead of having a descent where they might recover a bit after one of the highest power output sections of the course.
I was on the bike course around 1K from the summit of the extended climb and I watched everyone ride through and no one was getting a free ride. Anyone that wanted to keep contact with a group was having to match the workload of whomever was setting the pace at the front. In less dynamic bike courses, it is less common to see this as the 12-meter draft rules allow strategic advantages that can only really be mitigated by challenging terrain.
Additionally, I was also able to view the bike course later in the race where athletes were beginning their descent off of the plateau, and instead of seeing large packs of riders, everyone was coming through in small bunches with only a handful of riders at most, and often singles and doubles, further displaying the effects that a challenging bike course can have at a championship event.
Moving onto the run course.
The run course was four out-and-backs next to the promenade along the coast. While not difficult because of the terrain, it was difficult because of block headwind on each return leg (I’d say around 20 mph).
However, the main thing I liked about this course is that every kilometer of the race was accessible to the public to spectate (and with ease because of the four-loop format). Granted, I think if the run course could have had a town section included in each loop (or at least somewhere), it would have been even better, but I still appreciated the fact that crowds formed to watch the race.
In Kona, the majority of the run course is out of town and is not accessible to the public, which I have always felt is a shame. Major changes in the race positioning are done out on a lonely lava field instead of somewhere in town where fans could cheer and support athletes as they push themselves to their limits.
++++++
The Norwegian Sweep
If you followed the race, you know the results. If not, the race was swept by three Norwegians: Casper Stornes, Gustav Iden, and Kristian Blummenfelt (in that order). The three of them charged through the run course together and eventually split along those lines, but their results really showed a collective success where they separated themselves from the field as a team and it was then left to which of the three of them was having a slightly better day than the other(s).
At this point, all three of them have an Ironman World Championship title to their name, not to mention a couple 70.3 World Champs for Iden and Blummenfelt, an Olympic gold medal (for Blummenfelt), and countless other race titles.
When I think about their shared success, it makes me think of the era in men’s tennis where Roger Federer, Raphael Nadal, and Novak Djokovic were consistently in the final at every major with one of them taking the title.
However, there is a difference.
Imagine going back to that time and after every French Open, Wimbledon, etc. all three of them trained and lived together until the next tournament.
Then imagine them doing it over and over again. Granted, Stornes is new to the squad, but Iden and Blummenfelt have been at this together year over year.
When thinking of it in a different context like professional tennis, it might seem completely untenable and yet, that is what’s happening amongst this contingent of Norwegians triathletes.
++++
Earlier this year, my wife Brooke was in a workshop where they asked each person to describe three moments when they were “at their best” and then contrasted that with the similarities that led to them.
I liked the concept of this exercise and I created a modified version of it that I used with another group of athletes.
In that exercise, I asked each athlete to describe a moment where they felt there were at their best as
A friend
A teammate
An athlete
The reason for these explorations was to try and recognize the patterns and conditions that led to them being at their best, because bringing our best helps others to be their best, which comes full circle by continually providing the conditions for us to be at our best.
This is presented in my rudimentary drawing below:
I don’t like to speculate too much on what makes World Champions win World Championships, but it does seem like this group has continually brought out the best in one another year over year. And all while doing it repeatedly where certain parameters of success (i.e. winning) are zero sum (e.g., if one of us wins it means that everyone else has to lose).
I think it leaves us with the following philosophical question: how willing are we to put ourselves in the position of pursuing our best, even if it means that we might make others capable of out-besting us?
