The article is pretty terrible all around. You have to get to the last sentence before they throw in the detail that it's not actually an Ironman race -- it's a half-iron. I wouldn't mind it so much in a general-interest source, but ESPN writers of all people should know the difference and should sweat even the immaterial details. A "so-called" half-iron? No that's actually what it is. No need for the "so-called".