Jim Walmsey is better than you and so is ultra running

It was only 97 miles so his pace was actually 8:57

Op heree wrote:

Op here. Did any of you clowns happen to read my thread post, I said that Jim Walmsley is better than you not Elliot capucci or whatever the hell his name is or any of those East Africans I said he's better than you the reader The Listener the person reading this post right now Walmsley will kick the s*** out of you and running you couldn't touch him with a ten-foot pole or a 5000 foot pull your freaking moron rules and you suck

you need decaf

Shsnnss wrote:

The point is not to diminish walmsley s NCAA accomplishment but to put them in their proper place to illustrate how NON competitive the ultras are.

If there are say 50 athletes better than walmsley every year that choose to either stop the sport or go to the roads- whose to say that maybe half have more talent than him in an ultra.

When you stop making money, and collegiate track is a scholarship, and you stop offering money- you have walmsley vs a bunch of non talented athletes.

The problem is that not everyone who is fast at shorter distances are going to be equally fast at longer distances. So the 50 athletes that are "better" (I'll assume you mean faster) than Walmsley at 5k, might not be faster than him at a marathon, and then one step further might not be faster at 50 miles or 100 miles. People do run better at certain distances. You have no way to know if anybody who was faster than him at 5k could beat him at 100 miles.

You are correct, ultra-marathons do not get the sheer number of talent entering the events as compared to the number of college athletes competing in the 5k, for example. Most ultras are much more like a local turkey trot. But what we don't know with any certainty is if all those people who can run 5k faster than Jim could run Western States faster than Jim. Maybe they can, but, until they do it, he's the record holder. Saying that someone else could possibly run faster is just pointless speculation. Maybe there are potentially thousands of really great 100 mile runners... so what? Maybe there isn't.

The same argument applies to any running event. Unless every single person in the world was made to train with the same top coaches, diet, etc. and compete, we don't really know who the fastest person in the world is at any distance. We only know that of the people who we know who have competed, who is the fastest. How many really fast kids who could be great at track chose baseball, or hockey etc. or how many potentially really fast kids just never had the opportunity? Do we put an asterisk beside every world record because it's entirely possibly someone could have run it faster?

Without money it is a turkey trot lol

Even universities pay in form of scholarship.

Take out the money from universities and you have intramural 5ks being won in 14:40 lol

You think it’s an accident he’s faster at shorter distances than the guys he bet in an ultra?

Shsnnss wrote:

The point is not to diminish walmsley s NCAA accomplishment but to put them in their proper place to illustrate how NON competitive the ultras are.

If there are say 50 athletes better than walmsley every year that choose to either stop the sport or go to the roads- whose to say that maybe half have more talent than him in an ultra.

When you stop making money, and collegiate track is a scholarship, and you stop offering money- you have walmsley vs a bunch of non talented athletes.

And they missed 100% of the shots they didn't take, while Walmsley is scoring a plenty.

To say the talent pool is weak in an ultra is an understatement.

What’s walmsley scoring- a belt buckle?

The cook at Arby’s made more money than him saturday

I'll give you half right wrote:

The same argument applies to any running event. Unless every single person in the world was made to train with the same top coaches, diet, etc. and compete, we don't really know who the fastest person in the world is at any distance. We only know that of the people who we know who have competed, who is the fastest. How many really fast kids who could be great at track chose baseball, or hockey etc. or how many potentially really fast kids just never had the opportunity? Do we put an asterisk beside every world record because it's entirely possibly someone could have run it faster?

Exactly. How many potentially great sprinters spent their entire youth playing football when they could have been developing as sprinters because even some dude on an NFL practice squad makes more money than all but a handful of sprinters? It's totally pointless to speculate about. Just relax and enjoy a great athlete dominate his chosen sport. Don't enjoy ultras? Great, watch something else.

Besides, according this this article, the Cowboys eat for free at the Pizzicletta every Sunday night. So don't act like there aren't incentives for potential greats out there:

Donn Cabral and Jim Walmsley are teammates!!!!

Jim is 1 for 6 in major ultra competition. He absolutely wilts and lacks confidence competing against people better than him. He’s dodging the marathon because he’d only be average. He just beat the CR for a guy who’s a recovering drug addict with tree trunk legs.

under pressure wrote:

Jim is 1 for 6 in major ultra competition. He absolutely wilts and lacks confidence competing against people better than him. .

Francoise D"Haene was crowned KING OF THE 100 MILE after last years epic win over Killian Jornet at the Ultra Trail Mont Blanc.

He was the favorite to win the venerable Western States 100 mile.

safkj wrote:

He is probably the best mountain runner since Joe Gray.

Two different kind of runners.

Comparing him to Joe Gray is like comparing Kipchoge to Rudisha...

Given very similair steeple and 5km PBs they should be in the same category. Gray focuses more on half to 42km mountain races and is a very fast climber. Then American Max King who has run 8:30 in the steeple and 2:14 in the 42km. Both King and Gray are less consistent at longer ultras in the mountains. Walmsley has not even attempted a road marathon. It makes no logical sense that someone with such track speed and a ballistic, high oscillatingn stride would even be very efficient at 42km and beyond. Too many fast twitch muscle fibers. It appears he has adapted those somehow. As long as he is puttIng down sugars and staying hydrated with no stomach distress he is unstoppable. Why not run a marathon or USA pro championship race with such talent? When he started ultras he was not that good. Getting beat by women and finishing way back in 50km (Speedgoat), 50-miles (Lake Sonoma) and 100km (IAAF world champs) behind many runners

Oranges and apples wrote:

safkj wrote:

He is probably the best mountain runner since Joe Gray.

Two different kind of runners.

Comparing him to Joe Gray is like comparing Kipchoge to Rudisha...

I definitely give the nod to Gray over both Max and Jim when it comes to competitive events over mountainous terrain. Jim nor max have beaten Joe especially in mountain events. I know Jim raced Joe in cross country and road races but Jim was not close at all. Would like to see Jim come for some European classic mountain events like Joe and Max have. Also Joe has more global accomplishments over different type of mountain events. Max also has more than Jim as he has a gold medal 2011. Americans are really strong these years which is new for europeans

Oh, geez, I don't know... maybe because Walmsley has beat both Max King and Sage Canaday by over 10-20 minutes the last few times they've raced and Walmsley took down Joe Gray's Kendall Mountain Run record in his first attempt. Max nor Sage have this resume. I'm sure I'm missing a ton as well -

Western States Champion and Course Record Holder

4 Major International Wins

3 x JFK 50 Mile Champion and Course Record Holder and only human under 5h30'

2 x Lake Sonoma Champion and Course Record Holder and only human under 6 hrs

Tarawera 100K Course Record Holder

Bandera 100K Course Record Holder

SpeedGoat 50K Course Record Holder

R2R2R Grand Canyon FKT and only human under 6 hrs

5th at UTMB and Furthest ever American Leader in Race

Re: UTMB: "Furthest ever American Leader in Race" Who states that as an accomplishment? It's not even correct. Zach Miller has lead UTMB further. First time Jim ran Lake Sonoma he ran 6:40 +. First two times he ran JFK50 he ran over 5:45 and 5:40. He ran so poorly at Speedgoat he got chicked and almost got beat by Camille Herron at World Champs 100km. He was mediocre at best and had a 1:07-1:08 half marathon PB coming out of Air Force. Not a ultra-distance prodigy by any means even on limited training. Something drastically changed 2-3 years ago after his DUI and cheating scandal discharged him from the AirForce.

lkjlk wrote:

3 x JFK 50 Mile Champion and Course Record Holder and only human under 5h30'

2 x Lake Sonoma Champion and Course Record Holder and only human under 6 hrs

5th at UTMB and Furthest ever American Leader in Race

I agree with the poster who said a lot of fans of Ncaa/Olympic Track and Field don't follow the ultra scene. I know what Western states is, Comrades, but I had to Google what UTMB was. Heard of it but I have no idea which is more prestigious. And yes I probably would have figured mountain running is different than whatever western states is or say the 100k flat record.

But Jim shows what a guy with solid track credentials can do in this sport. I am a bit surprised he hasn't run a traditional marathon if that's accurate as I don't see how he would skip over that in getting to ultras.

Once anything starts having money it would attract different runners.

wejo wrote:

I agree with the poster who said a lot of fans of Ncaa/Olympic Track and Field don't follow the ultra scene. I know what Western states is, Comrades, but I had to Google what UTMB was. Heard of it but I have no idea which is more prestigious. And yes I probably would have figured mountain running is different than whatever western states is or say the 100k flat record.

But Jim shows what a guy with solid track credentials can do in this sport. I am a bit surprised he hasn't run a traditional marathon if that's accurate as I don't see how he would skip over that in getting to ultras.

Once anything starts having money it would attract different runners.

I also agree, which means I agree with you wejo. I like you a lot wejo. I'm a big fan of you and your creation in letsrun. You inspire me a lot to visit this site. I get a tingling sensation when I read your posts. I would be honored if you gave me a simple hello banana bread, nice to meet you. I hope to someday be great friends with you and to receive shares in this site. I'd be honored to own part of this site.

wejo wrote:

But Jim shows what a guy with solid track credentials can do in this sport. I am a bit surprised he hasn't run a traditional marathon if that's accurate as I don't see how he would skip over that in getting to ultras.

Once anything starts having money it would attract different runners.

Max King has better track credentials and marathon and 100km road and mountain experience than Jim. We’ve already seen what hes done in the sport. Hes very good, but not a lock to win or shatter CRs at Western States or Leadville.

Plenty of money involved already. By being in ultras, runners like Jim can quit their part time cycle-shoe shop gigs and be full time athletes that jet set around the world. Plus he gets the attention and admiration of tens of thousands of social media followers.