Ironplan

Yes, I am this compulsive.

To try and predict a reasonable Ironman finishing time, for each leg I have a good time, a great time, and a "wow did I really do that?" time. Note that there is no such thing as a "bad" time for each leg. Anything that gets me to the finish line within 17 hours is good. But I'm trying to narrow it down a bit.

I will spend 15 minutes combined in the 2 transitions. Possibly 20. You can lecture me all you want about how if I just planned ahead or got organized I could have better transitions. It will not happen. Anybody who has seen me on race day knows that I need the stress of transition to get my adrenaline going.

I'm not a fast swimmer. 90 minutes would be a little more than double my California 70.3 time which would absolutely thrill me, but I expect it will take a little longer. And if it takes a lot longer, so be it.

If the weather conditions were good and I went all out, I have a fantasy of doing a sub-6-hour bike. But it would kill me and I wouldn't have much left over for the run. I think the smart move is to try to do a 6:30-6:45 bike. If takes me 7 or 8 hours, that's OK.

I will crash during the marathon. Physically and mentally. It's what I do.  A big problem for me is that I don't take in enough calories during a race and then I just run out of steam. I'm hoping that I can force myself to eat more during the bike and run (mostly liquid calories) and then see how my legs react. My last marathon was about 4:30. I think I have a 5:30 Ironman marathon in me, but I think reality is going to hit pretty hard fairly early during the run and so my money is going on 6 hours.

So these are the different scenarios (click for slightly larger version):

My best guess is I'll take the golden path and come in at 14:45.