A 100 miler offered $15,000 for 1st last weekend. Where does the money come from & when will the Africans start showing up?

Africans already busted numerous times for doping in the shorter mountain running distances. Why would anyone allow them to show up and corrupt 100 milers?

The point is not that they couldn't figure it out, it's that it takes experience to do so, and in particular, this race requires more than some other 100s.

Welcome to the future:
It’s all about the visual quality of the environment. Golf’s Pebble Beach & Augusta.

The best trail running events are in the most dramatic locations.

The 100 mile/k course will be a nitch activity due to excessive time commitment - crippled by competition in the dark, trudging athleticism & barriers to entry. It will be quickly outpaced by multiple 30 - 50 k daily races combined to create overall winners. This form is viewer & athlete friendly. The hosting locales & broadcasting will be finically rewarded providing far greater prize money to help support the athletes.

There may even be a day for pro/am hobbyhikers who have the $.

North Face offered some good money for their championship race also. No EAs showed up.

My theory would be that running a hard 50 or any 100 would required a break afterwards, and they might not be able to race again for a while, unlike zipping into town winning a 10k and zipping off to the next town.

Of course the could figure it out but it would take a couple of years just like it did for Jim Walmsley.
Not that I know the details but I think most racing decisions of African top runners are made by their managers and trainers. I can't think that somebody like Kipchoge is browsing the internet and thinks ohh there is an easy $15000 to be had in Steamboat Springs.

A Kenyan placed top 6 in Comrades?

You need to be motivated by a lot more than money to race 100 miles.

Oh the irony.

ofa lon teh

$15k for an "easy win" but not one single sub 2:10 guy even considers giving it a go for an easy payday.

Yeah, ok.

If you’re referencing mile pace for a trail ultra, you make it clear you have no idea what you’re talking about. Go ahead, try and keep “12 min pace” for this race and see how it goes.

We've been over this a million times. Yes, gear and nutrition and terrain are a big thing. It probably takes a couple years to make the transition from ultra to marathons. But I'm tired of ultra runners pretending that it's an entirely separate sport. Some guy recently tried to say ultra running had as much in common with soccer as it does with marathoning in that they're totally unrelated.

Eventually, and probably soon-ish, some 2:10 guys are gonna make the switch and I can't wait to see the egg on the ultra people's faces. Certainly some won't be successful, trail running is a skill, but it's a subset of running and very, very related. I mean no disrespect to ultra runners, but, I do mean maximum disrespect for the, "A 2:10 guy could never stand a chance against a 2:30 guy on the mountains," crowd. They're just playing Calvin Ball, for now.

Do you think that speed at one distance directly correlates to speed at another distance? If that were true, why are the 10K, HM, and M records held by different people? Those three races are extremely similar from a mechanical/metabolic standpoint, and they are far more similar to one another than to a trail 100M. Just because someone is the best at the marathon doesn't mean they'll be the best at ultradistance. Would a 2:10 marathoner be good at 100M trail races? Probably. Would they be competitive on the world stage? Maybe. Would they be the best? Probably not

There is a very strong correlation, especially the longer the distance gets. Why are the distance records held by separate people? Because they specialized in that distance. However, we've seen people successful at multiple distances on the track, we see it every year. How is this even remotely confusing? I don't think that because I have more raw speed than Eliud that I can beat him in a 5k, even though it's way way closer distance wise to my specialty (800/1500) than his (marathon), he'll stomp me.

I'm not saying every 2:10 guy could be plopped into a 100 miler tomorrow and dominate. I'm saying if they bothered to specialize in the subset of running known of ultra running, specifically races around 100 miles, many of them would be very successful. And I'd suspect that there's a very high chance we have a new greatest ultra runner ever.

I agree with all of these points. But the claim that any given 2:10 runner could win any given ultra is incorrect

Ultra runners don’t think they’re special. They’re just sick of guys who have never gone more than 26.2mi on a road acting like they know anything about going up (or even worse, going down) a steep, technical trail 10 hours in, with 7 hours to go. It’s not special, it’s different.

The constant speed comparison is sooo out of touch with what the event requires. I’d take a guy built like a freight train with an iron stomach and a mindset to just keep ticking, over a guy with the typical marathon build and a 27:30 10k pr on the track in a 100mi trail ultra every time.

And where did I say that? I said if they specialized, they'd have a very high likelihood of success.

I do agree that people who think ANY 2:10 guy could win an ultra on a whim and that trail running isn't a skillset, etc. are just as insufferable as people who think ultra running is some entirely separate sport.

Yes, and I would add that there is a good chance of a DNF. It would also be dumb for a dozen East-Africans to compete for $15K. It would require appearance fees to get EAs to show up and where would that money come from?

Again, you are entirely failing to understand the argument I'm making.

If a high level marathoner decides to specialize in ultra and trail running, they have a very high chance of being a high level ultra runner. Some would certainly fail to translate their road talent to ultra talent as they just wouldn't be cut out for the trails or their stomach couldn't handle it. How many would fail? Half? More? Less? I don't know. But aerobic capacity is by far the greatest physical trait any distance runner can have. To believe otherwise is just foolish.

I showed up to a trail marathon 10lbs overweight, barely running at that time. Won the race outright, although I'll admit it was a very dinky local race. But I smashed a lot of people with trekking poles and vests and all that. I drank flat soda between loops. I won because I was way way more aerobically developed than them, not because I was some trail god.

To be fair, I don't think you said that. Your view is appropriately nuanced. But it is common opinion on LR