Thanks to Bill for this great comment he left yesterday on the "10 Great Tri Holiday Gift Ideas" Post:
Don't forget to remind folks that until Friday, 30 November, there's a $50 rebate on the Garmin 305. Coupled with that Amazon price, it ends up being $155.
I'm still playing with mine, which I've had a whole 2 days.
So there you have it. You can get one of these great GPS training tools for a pretty decent price.
Somebody (not sure who) left me a comment about THIS swim safety device about my editorial called "A quick Release Leash" about the need for race director to monitor the health of athletes on the swim.
The SwimSafe device seems to solve the flotation issue, but so does a wet suit to a large extent. Both will keep you afloat.
My main concern was not with flotation, but a heart attack on the swim as I've personally seen happen on two occasions at two different races.
I don't think that the SwimSafe device fully addresses this issue.
So my original question still stands.
If my watch can monitor my heart, why can't the race director? It would seem to me that the $500.00 Ironman race entry should first and foremost buy the safest possible race experience.
More importantly I believe it should be technologically pretty straight forward for big races like the Ironman to electronically monitor the health of their athletes on the swim.
Will it be cheap?
Will it be cheaper than the lawsuits that are sure to come as the deaths mount, and a grieving families hire good attorneys to litigate their losses?
Especially if the attorney's can prove in court that this is a known, repeated, and perhaps preventable cause of death at Ironman races.
Which I believe it is.
Don't believe me? Google Ironman Utah and read about the results.
And yes Utah had a race back in 2002.
And yes somebody died on the swim.
And yes this is also why many of you will be racing Coeur d'Alene in 2007 instead of Utah.
Here's the LINK for your convenience.