What do you do if you are a triathlete and want to run the marathon portion barefoot?
Well, right now it depends on who is sponsoring the triathlon.
I don’t think I’ve ever heard of a barefoot runner begin gigged (disqualified or taking a time penalty) for running a marathon barefoot. It helps that there is always the example of Abebe Bilila from the 1960 Summer Olympics, before everybody got ridiculously paranoid and prejudiced about bare feet. And then there was also Bruce Tulloh.
But modern triathlons (you may have heard of them as “Ironman” competitions, which is one particular brand of triathlon) are much more recent, and I suspect that is why they suffer from barefoot paranoia.
Is it possible to change them?
Over at The Barefoot Runners Society there is a discussion going on about race rules, and the folks there are corresponding with the folks at one of the sanctioning bodies to 1) find out just what is allowed; and 2) try to change things.
But, what are the rules?
There are a couple of sanctioning bodies, with the International Triathlon Union, the USA Triathlon, and the World Triathlon Corporation (which runs the Ironman competitions) being the main ones.
The ITU is really, really sticky about requiring shoes. Their rules are quite clear, under Rule 6.1(v):
The athletes will not run without shoes or run barefoot on any part of the course.
Now, when it comes to the Ironman triathlons, one of the members of the Barefoot Runners Society says he has an email from the WTC stating that there is no barefoot rule (with the caveat that “we are going to leave it to the discretion of the race director”). That’s no good. Either there is a rule or there isn’t—you cannot show up for a race not knowing if somebody’s going to suddenly make a rule to zap you with.
If you look at the Ironman rules and regulations, they say
This event is sanctioned by USA Triathlon (USAT). Please visit http://www.usatriathlon.org for a complete set of competitive rules.
Interestingly, the USA Triathlon Competitive Rules say the following
Participants shall wear shoes at all times while on the run course.
The penalty for running without shoes is a time penalty. However, this rule is only in the section for supplemental youth rules. I guess they figure that any youth strong enough to do a triathlon also has weak feet? But at least it means that adults can do it barefoot.
By the way, the USA Track & Field organization specifically recognizes bare feet as being acceptable. Their Competitive Rules, under Rule 143.3(a), say
A competitor may compete in bare feet or with footwear on one or both feet. The purpose of shoes for competition is to give protection and stability to the feet and a firm grip of the ground.
Of course, well-conditioned bare feet do all of that.
After writing to the ITU about the barefoot requirement, and asking about minimalist shoes (and whether socks were sufficient), this is the (sloppily written) response the folks over at The Barefoot Runners Society got:
Minimalist shoes, provided that they protect the whole footplant are allowed.
* * *
What I mention to you is a protection of the foot plant is required.
Shocks are not giving enough protection to the foot.
This is clearly just the standard ignorant response. Clearly, the guy has no idea just how much “protection” (or from what) is needed. He seems to think that these “ironmen” have feet made out of pudding. Besides, if there is something dangerous on the race course (what the hell is something dangerous doing on the race course anyway?) it can easily go right through the bottom of a minimalist shoe, too.
There may be a way around this.
Many, many barefoot runners came to barefoot running after they had to give up running, because of the constant injury they experienced in shoes. It was only by running barefoot that they were able to start participating in and enjoying their sport again.
In the United States, at least, I think the Americans with Disabilities Act comes into play. There has even been a U. S. Supreme Court decision that strongly supports that. The case is PGA Tour v. Martin.
That is the case that involved professional golfer Casey Martin, who because of a disability needed to use a golf cart between holes. Such golf carts were against the rules of the PGA.
The Supreme Court, in rejecting the PGA’s arguments, first noted that the ADA applied to the PGA; they were not a “private club” under the law. I think it is pretty clear that the reasoning there also applies to something like the ITU. The Supreme Court also noted that, in Casey Martin’s case, the golf cart did not give Casey an unfair competitive advantage or make a fundamental alteration in the game of golf. I think that, when it comes to running a triathlon, doing so barefoot provides neither an unfair competitive advantage nor makes a fundamental alteration to the sport.
Obviously, suing the ITU would be expensive, etc.. However, I suspect there is a good chance if notified in advance of a competition that a runner was invoking the ADA, the ITU might make the utterly reasonable decision to make an official exception. (Yes, it’s a RPITA to have to give the advance notice and get the official permission.)
One wrinkle. The ITU is headquartered in Canada. Obviously, the ADA only applies to competitions that occur in the United States. However, it is my understanding (correct me on this), that Canada also has fairly strong protections for the disabled, so something similar might work there. (Either that, or Canadians who want to compete in triathlons barefoot should only do them in the United States. 😉 )
Clearly, this isn’t a complete solution, in that it only applies to barefoot runners who really do have trouble competing in shoes.
On the other hand, it would be really interesting to see how they respond to a viable threat to their prejudices.
It could be the camel’s nose under the tent.
[H/T: Paul Wallis]
Thanks for the extra awareness about this topic Bob. I will be pursuing my legal rights at some point if it becomes necessary, but I hope it don’t doesn’t get to that, I’m still hopeful that the ITU will eventually do the right thing and omit the shoe rule only at some point. I will continue to post any additional information from the ITU or the WTC on the Barefoot Runner’s society website that may cross my path.
Maybe the time penalty is because they KNOW it’s faster and don’t want us to have an ‘unfair’ advantage against the sluggish hobbled shod runners who also have to spend time taking their shoes off for the swimming portion. Poor them.
A look at the rules of the British Triathlon Federation (https://www.britishtriathlon.org/britain/documents/about/rulebook_2012.pdf) is interesting. In an email exchange with me a couple of years ago they claimed their no-barefoot rule was for safety and liability reasons. So it’s strange that the rule is not in the ‘safety equipment’ section (compare the rules for cycle helmets, for example) but instead in the “Running Conduct” section:
28.3 Competitiors may not run on the defined course without shoes or with a bare torso
This sounds remarkably like the NS3 signs which are often seen in the US (but totally unknown in the UK). The rule seems to be based not on safety considerations, but on notions of decorum. And unlike the Cycling Equipment section, which is very specific about helmets (rules 11.3-11.5), it doesn’t in any way define what constitutes a shoe, so in practice the rule has little or no legal value in limiting their liability. And when I asked, they made no attempt to explain why they think they have a liability problem but no other organiser of road races has that problem. They say their rules are based on the ITU rules, so there’s no chance of getting them changed unless the ITU changes its mind.
[…] wrote about their rules before, in Men of Iron, Feet of Pudding. They used to say that the athletes will not “run without shoes or run barefoot on any part […]