The American men get spanked at UTMB 100

logical conclusion wrote:

lfk wrote:Nobody is saying slower is better, in terms of talent. Of course, in general, faster runners are faster. We get it. And companies support the fast guys, the guys who win races. They're not gonna go dig up some random 2:15 guy and start begging him to run ultras. It might never translate. He might hate it. Who knows?

As far as the training goes, like every other distance, specificity counts.

Man I agree with everything you say! Was I arguing with you I must have misunderstood sorry about that.

2:15 guy will put his mind/training to an ultra & crush everyone once races start putting up enough prize money.

of course the 2:06 african will catch win of the $$$ on the ultra circuit, adjust training accordingly, and clean house. then everyone else will go home butthurt that playtime is over.

it's still just running. the best talent who is properly trained will still win.

Fife wrote:I feel bad for krupicka. Unfortunately it seems like he is always the safe bet for a DNF/DNS, except for today obviously.

lfk wrote:

So you asuume Francois D'Haene has prohibitively better 800/1500m fitness than anyone else in the field he just crushed? Or that he spent a lot of time focusing on it in the past?

Flip side of that is would you have expected a 1:51 800 meter runner to crush western and leadville in the same year having none of the background that you expected? I just read an article about D'Haene running a 2:34 hilly marathon off the cuff with no training and how the last 5 km was really hard. That would indicate to me perhaps a 2:2x guy at the very least. At least I hope this is the same guy I don't know exactly if the picture looks the same.

siding with the speed guy wrote:

lfk wrote:

So you asuume Francois D'Haene has prohibitively better 800/1500m fitness than anyone else in the field he just crushed? Or that he spent a lot of time focusing on it in the past?

Flip side of that is would you have expected a 1:51 800 meter runner to crush western and leadville in the same year having none of the background that you expected? I just read an article about D'Haene running a 2:34 hilly marathon off the cuff with no training and how the last 5 km was really hard. That would indicate to me perhaps a 2:2x guy at the very least. At least I hope this is the same guy I don't know exactly if the picture looks the same.

Tons of people saw Krar coming. He won the La Sportiva Mountain Cup the year before he started running ultras, and then moved up gradually, dominating every step. So yes, I expected him to win Western States and Leadville. Many people did. He's 37. His college track days are ages ago, and he's been focusing on long trail stuff for a while now.

And yeah, D'Haene is fast. Again: Nobody is arguing that slow runners will magically win ultras. I'm just saying specificity counts. D'Haene is the best mountain runner (or among them) because he trains specifically for it, and is, of course, very talented.

I think you know the context that I mentioned Krar to your statement it was your own rhetorical question I'm not going to bother with that. Besides seems a moot point if you admit D'Haene is fast and talented since that other guy was simply saying speed and talent matters. Everybody once they start doing ultras seriously will train specifically for ultras.

siding with the speed guy wrote:

I think you know the context that I mentioned Krar to your statement it was your own rhetorical question I'm not going to bother with that. Besides seems a moot point if you admit D'Haene is fast and talented since that other guy was simply saying speed and talent matters. Everybody once they start doing ultras seriously will train specifically for ultras.

Regarding Krar, I honestly have no clue what you're talking about. He's a fast guy that runs ultras now. Ok?

D'Haene is fast too. Got it.

Of course speed and talent matter. I've said that the entire duration of this discourse. Literally nobody has argued otherwise.

All I've ever argued is that our talented guys don't train specifically enough to excel at UTMB.

My argument, in the most succinct terms:

In the men’s race, Francois D’Haene of France won for the second time and set a new course record of 20:11:44. The top American finisher was Jason Schlarb, who placed fourth in 21:40.

“It was more vertical up and down than any other run in my life,” Schlarb said. “Had I not been here for three months, there is no way I could have held on for the last half. You just can’t get this in North America.”

http://running.competitor.com/2014/08/news/american-rory-bosio-repeats-utmb-champion_112392#9XqRMUAQ1MLpOm8G.99

I've heard it said that US trails are generally not as technical as the ones in Europe. Therefore US athletes are not as good when it comes to dealing with the tricky bits of the course.

Dunno whether this is actually the case or not...

speed kills at any distance wrote:

[quote]lfk wrote:

Trying to win in the mountains by doing 20 X 400 is a fool's errand.

you don't get it.

train 2 guys ultra-style, one with 1:51/3:45 speed (Krar's PRs) and the other who can barely crack 2:00/4:00. assuming they respond similarly to the training, of course runner #1 with crush #2.

quote]

That is absolutely false. The terrain plays too big a role in how different runners are able to handle the course.

This isn't even an ultra but a few years ago I ran a hilly 16 mile race that had a 600 ft climb around mile 13. Having done numerous hilly races the previous couple months I caught a runner near the top of the climb and ran 4 minutes faster over the last two miles. He was easily 4 minutes faster than I was in a flat road half marathon. Multiply that distance by over 6 times and you see how big a difference the styles of runners can make. In another 15 mile race I beat a guy that was 1:30 faster than me in the 5k.

Here is the problem. If you run too many faster miles, you can't run enough to keep your muscles from shutting down when you get to a certain distance. If you run enough miles to keep that from happening, you can't run enough faster miles to keep the leg speed up for shorter distances. The goal is to get the right mix of each so you are able to run your particular race the fastest.

"I've heard it said that US trails are generally not as technical as the ones in Europe. Therefore US athletes are not as good when it comes to dealing with the tricky bits of the course.

Dunno whether this is actually the case or not…"

Sort of depends.. where versus where..

In the alps the UTMB is very untechnical.. very quick running just long gradual ascents and descents, you are going uphill for hours then down hill for a good hour plus at a time so it really hammers your muscles.

Technicality wise I have to say the trails in the NE USA are about as rough as I've ever experienced, even compared to the majority of UK trails. Out West USA the trails are said to be less technical.

Races like the UTMB, Sierre Zinal are very much mountainous trail races, with quick fairly non-tech sections and the odd rougher section, but the sky races generally cover much rougher, almost trackless terrain.

I think the issue for US runners is similar to the ones faced by top UK runners, the terrain is just foreign to them, we just can't replicate easily those sorts of profiles they face. Some have done OK but as Sage says they are the ones who get out there early or have a great deal of alpine experience.

The speeds in the UTMB, even for the elites, is slow, I don't think its down to speed like for example the more runnable 100 milers. Lizzy Hawker will beat many of the men who are much much quicker runners. I think its basically efficiency and wear and tear.. basic robustness..

re Krar, not sure, I got the impression from racing him he's not great on the rougher trails, they are rough enough that if you aren't super efficient at traversing the rougher trails you get more more muscle damage and in a 100 like the UTMB I think that's crucial. Its where Kilian murders the field, at races like Sierre Zinal he's just one of many top runners, at the big mountain ultra's he's pretty much in a class of his own, well maybe with 2-3 others.

We would fair better at these races if more legit mountain runners decided to run ultras.

The 3 strong salomon guys going out together helping each other is the reason the US will never win. We just do not have that dynamic. I see a performance based funded team of young studs and gals with speed training for this thing. I see them going out in packs keeping each other honest and helping each other. I see one or two guys just having that magic day and the whole american team celebrates as one of your own wins it. Or we can just come back again next year and get beat up again in the same fashion lol.

Foote. He's been the top USA finisher twice.

Can't believe you forgot him. But since you did, it shows how little you know about Ultras...

did you read the part where i said "train 2 guys ultra-style" - hiking, 4-5 hour runs, whatever the h*ll ultra guys do. that's both guys, no difference in training. assuming both handle &respond to it well, the faster guy will win.

if those guys with better flat PRs trained properly, they wouldn't have lost to you on the hilly courses. they are more talented runners if they are that much faster than you in the HM & 5K on the flat.