Why "runners" hate ultrarunners?

Comments as I glance at the posts on a slow Tuesday night.

"....Because we are mentally tougher?..."

I have no idea who this "we" is you are talking about. I've been around ultras for quite a few years and don't recall any spokesperson being elected. There is no such thing as one event having a monopoly or even a majority of toughness.

"...if they [cant] wint the competitive races like the 10k 15k..."

Why is the idea of running rather than racing so hard to comprehend? Some people (way past high school or college or whatever) run for the love of running rather than so they can bash someone else's running.

"...ultrarunning lacks depth. It's always the same guys...We need more guys like Matt Carpenter."

Jurek at Western is one of the few pictures of consistency there is. Get the end of the year summary and check the repeat winners column. As for Carpenter--he is being annointed a king based on one incredible run. I hope he has more. I hope he goes to many other events, but until then what he has is one great run and a show of potential.

"...The marathon is far enough...."

Speaks loads for your imagination. Do you believe it is a sprinter says 400m is far enough. What about the women being too frail to run a marathon?

"...But this weekend I need my first 100 miler and I has quite disappointed in the sense that many people were walkin and finished walking. It's called ultrarunning not ultrawalkking...Or hiking!"

Even Jurek and Carpenter walk part of the 100-milers. Since you refer to a 100 from this past weekend, it almost has to be the Javelina Jundred just outside of Phoenix. Temperatures got up in the 90s. Very high drop rate. You walk so you can survive and hope for a better day somewhere else.

If you were surprised at the walking, you didn't bother learning much about the event you entered. Hours and hours in the sun will make anyone walk.

"...Then the media exposure they get paints them as these extreme, talented bad asses...at any distance where you truly have to run fast..."

Nah. The newpaper interviewed me after I won a 100k. They wouldn't print the story. Editor told me they didn't believe anyone could run that far. The media is trying to sell copy, not a sport.

As for the "truly run fast"...you run 5k slower than a mile, 10k slower than 5k, marathon slower than a 10k, but no one here seems to grasp a 100-mile trail run will be in a totally different world.

I averaged 7:28s for 50 miles. I felt like I was flying. I still feel like a ran as hard as I could, given that I wanted to cover 50 miles, not 5k.

"...has a lot to do with the relatively thin competition...very few talented runners ever attempt anything longer..."

There are so few of us in ultras who really give a rat's ass about winning or racing that it really matters more on this forum then it does on an ultra course. We are out for a day's running at whatever effort level we feel like doing. The "winning is everything" mentality was shed years ago--there is nothing wrong with spending the day covering 30, 40, 50 miles of trails in the company of friends. Hell, we even talk to each other.

"I think most ultramarathoners are trying to dodge the competition..."

Lemme see here. I run trails. I run ultras. I find the trail and ultra competition at trail runs and ultramarathons. Why would I go into town, run on the concrete and asphalt amongst the exhaust fumes just to make someone eles happy?

"There are 2 sports, running and jogging. Ultra marathons fall under the jogging category because [its] about how FAR you can run [rather] than about how FAST....Real running is about how fast you can run a certain distance therefore..."

Why not say "There are 3 sports: sprinting, running, and jogging."

The pace slows as the distance increases. Takes a real thick skull to be unable to understand that one. Either that or you would never validate the incredibly slow times for covering a 10k right after watching the open 400. Go to a 24-hour track run someday...haul you butt on out there and set on 9:00 pace (a jogging pace, right?) for 24 hours and cover 160 miles.

"There are very few real ultrarunners out there."

Hmmmm, what is a "real" ultrarunner? What is a "real" marathoner? What is a "real" runner? "Real?" Catchy, arbitrary, arrogant word.

"In road marathons, no matter what popple run or shuffle at the very least..."

Oh yeah. Yup. Sure. That, dear reader, is a crock. I've seen walkers in 10ks and half-marathons. I've seen whole herds of walkers in marathons.

"...I suggest to all those who call themselves ultrarunners, better run or go home."

Yeah, and anyone slower than, hmmmm, 2:20 in the marathon shouldn't even bother showing up. Right?

"...no one is born to be an ultrarunner. [T]hey're just distance runners who are avoiding the competition."

I certainly wasn't born to be an ultrarunner. I was a sprinter/hurdler many long years ago. The road courses and "gotta have a PR every run" syndrome stunk. I found trails, marathons 'neath the redwoods, desert skies to run under, praries to run across and forests to run through, trails way high in the Rockies, and on the other side of the Mississippi. I still go to track meets, cross country meets, do event volunteer stuff at other running events--I don't care. It is a love of running that keeps me running--it happens to be done on trails for longer distances.

mr cripple wrote:

In the early 80's, the ultras were a lot more popular and better runners participated. Park Barner was a 2:13-2:14 marathon. Alex Ratelle(sp) was a top 50+ runner.

Park Barner was nowhere close to being a 2:13-2:14 marathoner. There have been some good American marathoners who have seriously competed in ultras, however. Barney Klecker and, more recently, Dan Held come to mind.

I certainly agree with the oft-repeated point that the level of competition in ultramarathoning just isn't very high. The same was true in the marathon for a long time, although to a lesser extent. Eventually, publicity, prestige, and money came to the marathon, and first-rate runners flocked to the event. That hasn't yet happened in ultramarathons -- not even in the Comrades race. Maybe it eventually will, although I have my doubts.

Run or walked!

I've checked three dictionaries.

"A race run on foot."

Now define "run"--something along the lines of, "to move swiftly on foot so that both feet leave the ground for an instant during each stride."

Could be 9.88 for 100 meters, could be 11 minutes for a mile, doesn't qualify the size, shape, fitness, or gender of the runner, nor does it say up a hill, on a track, what percentage of effort, ethnicity, height, weight, down a hill, through the tunner, across the creek,...

One of the problems with most things not easily understood is they aren't easily defined. If they aren't defined, experienced, or understood, it is easier to treat them as something inferior, something deficient, something lacking, than to take the time to learn about something new.

Hmmmmm two giant egos? Can the ultrarunning world handle both?

"hate" is a strong word and I don't think it's accurate. There is pride on both sides (as there should be). Perhaps it stems from ultra runners often scoffing at the pursuits of the short distance specialists?

I believe that most ultra runners are a lot less uptight and whiney as a whole compared to the average local level 5k/10k runner.

they should whine....they usually charge over 100 dollars to run!

Question?....How far is far enough for these guys?

Maybe they should have a race to see how far they can run until they pass out. The winner would be the person who runs the farthest and still on his feet!

Doctor NH,

You speak with such authority. So people can be born to be distance runners, but not ultra runners. This use of "born to be" implies some sort of talent that is inate that corresponds to distance traveled in the race. So please tell me: What is the greatest distance one can be "born to be" a runner?

Is it 26.2 miles? But no further, right? How wonderfully convenient, that happens to be the arbitrarily set distance of the modern marathon. How lucky that the f*****g palace in London was placed where it was, making the distance of the modern marathon correspond to the genetic maximum abilities of human to race.

The statement of NH native is drivel. If you want to comment on the thin levels of competition at the ultra level that is a valid point, but the NH's "born to be" dividing line is crap.

those ultras are boring to watch, you are going so slow it doesn't look like you are doing anything but an extended easy run.

njl2 wrote:

those ultras are boring to watch, you are going so slow it doesn't look like you are doing anything but an extended easy run.

All my non-running friends feel the same way about watching a marathon. "It's so boring....why would I watch a bunch of Africans jog around the streets of a city for two hours?"

You guys are cracked....it doesnt matter abit...miler marathon runner ultrarunner...whatever...were all looked at in basicly the same way..

this reminds me of my dad and my brother argueing over 8man and 12man football...

but when it comes right down to it Tonk Hawk would probably beat out Tergat in a poll of all time greatest athletes.

HAHAHAHA....

Runners who openly hate on athletes from other disciplines and sports are simply jealous, poorly educated, and insecure people. They are very similar to the narrow minded individuals who belong to racial hate groups, gay bashing organizations, or extremely uptight religious sects. They form a very vocal animosity based on rumors, half-truths, stereoptypes, and conjecture with very little grounding in reality. They hate simply because others enjoy a different pursuit. They hate because they lack validation in their lives. They hate because they are self-loathing.

If you read your running history. Did I take it in High School or college??

Well, anyways. People who did longer endurance (ultra's) runs were usually pro athletes that may have been on the take.

There was a lot of cheating in organized professional running. The last events that were really bet on in the Us and Europe were the 6 day endurance runs. (Great stories). But, this may lead to some of the animosity between the recreational/amature runner and that of the ultra runner.

Just a thought.

P.S. I do hate tri-guys. I don't know what it is about them. Just not a fan of them.

avoiditifucan wrote:

Now far do you have to run to avoid the competiton?....bascially that is what they are doing....if they cant win the competative races like the 10k 15k,and the marathon.......and so on....they just keep uping the ante until they have a better chance of winning!.....the question is?.....how far is far enough?....100 miles?...200miles?.....300 miles?.......after awhile it is crazy and senseless.....The marathon is far enough......

I run ultramarathons myself and shorter distances as well. In shorter distances I do well at a local level, but not in big regional/national type races. I agree ultramarathons don't have a lot of competition...however, there are many joe-bloe 5K's and such in many areas that also have little competition. I've won a 5k, 10-mile, 10k, 50k, and 50 mile races...and my 5K pr is only 19:16. I've also run plenty of races where I was like 15th or 45th or whatever. Bottom line is there are plenty of races at all distances w/o competition. joan

I simply think it is a different sport. The same way the 100 meters and 10k are different sports.

I can respect a 100 meter runner, and I can respect a 100 mile runner. For different reasons.

Why are you people so insecure?

I for one do not hate ultrarunners. There are a number in my club. "hate" is not a nice term...

I bet Geb or Tergat could smoke any of these guys in their ultra races. Ultra runners are mostly old women anyways.

Park Barner was no 2:13-2:14 marathoner. His best was 2:37, but he could probably have run for a month at 2:50 pace.

I used to be quite interested in ultra marathoning. When you had someone like Cavin Woodward running sub six minute miles in 100 mile race, or even guys like Bob Deines or Jim Pearson doing 6:20s or so for 50 miles, it was inspiring.

But somewhere along the way, it seemed like racing ultras in what you might call "racing" environments fell out of fashion and the sport has become almost synonomous with vrey extended trail running and it seems fairly removed from the rest of the sport.

I have no doubt that people like Ann Trason and Scott Jurek are tremendous athletes. But I have no idea how a time for the Western States 100 or the Leadville 100 compares to what Deines or Woodward did or to what Paul Tergat does. I can't really tell how far back in the field you go before you have people who really are hiking rather than racing or running. I think hate is way too strong a word. In fact I have a ton of respect for people who race ultras. I just have a hard time figuring out who they are anymore.

Ultrarunning has a deep history among Native Americans. The marathon is a myth by the greeks and modern day greeks know that and laugh at the rest of the world.