Western States, Over 24 Hours? Here's a silver buckle anyways??

100 miles of disappointment wrote:

genetics.

durability.

injury prone when running more than 40-50 mow

lack of interest.

golden tickets.

my age.

my wife and child.

running pretty solid times on the roads at HM and under.

those are the main reasons.

I wouldn't dominate and never said I would, but I could certainly go under 24 hours on my first try. I'm very confident in that.

The funny thing is, most LR types could run a sub-24 hour off even 40-50 miles a week. People go 24 hours at Western States that don't have BQ times. It's really not a prereq. It's a 14:24/mi for a net downhill course. The only thing killing that is bad strategy - going out too fast, hydration, nutrition, etc.

UltraHack wrote:

100 miles of disappointment wrote:

genetics.

durability.

injury prone when running more than 40-50 mow

lack of interest.

golden tickets.

my age.

my wife and child.

running pretty solid times on the roads at HM and under.

those are the main reasons.

I wouldn't dominate and never said I would, but I could certainly go under 24 hours on my first try. I'm very confident in that.

The funny thing is, most LR types could run a sub-24 hour off even 40-50 miles a week. People go 24 hours at Western States that don't have BQ times. It's really not a prereq. It's a 14:24/mi for a net downhill course. The only thing killing that is bad strategy - going out too fast, hydration, nutrition, etc.

But the real truth is that LR types couldn't run for more than a few hours; couldn't manage the hills, uneven terrain, elevation gains and the altitude; and would be angry that their shoes were shoes got dirty and muddy and their socks were trashed long before the race was over. ... Just like Walmsey, LR types would DNF, but drop out many miles sooner.

The funny thing is that most runner types are Letsrun visitors. Pros visit this site, trolls, good runners. This site represents almost every runner in the USA and is the best running website in the United States. I've fixed every injury and formed every training plan since I graduated college from info and advice gathered on this site. I'm not saying it wouldn't be miserable, but I could run under 24 hrs on my first try. I'm a 2:33 marathoner who was a good 800m runner in college and ran from Yosemite to Mammoth on a whim with a camelback and couple of gels on a hot dayUltra running is tough, but it's just getting started in terms of talent

Dusty Shoes wrote:

UltraHack wrote:

The funny thing is, most LR types could run a sub-24 hour off even 40-50 miles a week. People go 24 hours at Western States that don't have BQ times. It's really not a prereq. It's a 14:24/mi for a net downhill course. The only thing killing that is bad strategy - going out too fast, hydration, nutrition, etc.

But the real truth is that LR types couldn't run for more than a few hours; couldn't manage the hills, uneven terrain, elevation gains and the altitude; and would be angry that their shoes were shoes got dirty and muddy and their socks were trashed long before the race was over. ... Just like Walmsey, LR types would DNF, but drop out many miles sooner.

ultras are boring

/thread

In response to the original question, I'm not sure what the deal with your instagram feed is, but I'd be shocked if Western States was giving out silver buckles for finishes over 24 hours. I couldn't imagine them doing it and I couldn't imagine a 25 hour finisher wanting one. I was there one year when there was a guy on the track when the clock hit 30 hours. He was trying for his 10th finish (special category where you're guaranteed an entry one time to attempt the 10th finish and get a 1000 mile buckle). They recognized the close call, but he wasn't credited with a finish.

Ever Heard of wrote:

If you were the race director, would you throw away 2017 silver buckles and pay to have more 2017 bronze buckles made and sent out months later? In other words YOU take a loss on your income? Or just give the medals out and know that the recorded times are what really matter?

Nice hypothetical reply, but totally wrong. The WS buckles don't have the year indicated so the RD simply saves un-issued buckles, whatever color, for the next year... I highly doubt that they gave out silver buckles to anyone finishing over 24 hours, that would be sacrilege in WS lore. They usually line up the shinny new buckles during the awards ceremony and have the exact number of silver buckles laid out. Perhaps the photos referred to by the OP weren't very clear.

I'm quite happy with my old bronze WS buckle by the way, not my best run 100 miler but happy nonetheless.

[quote]100 miles of disappointment wrote:

genetics.

durability.

injury prone when running more than 40-50 mow

lack of interest.

golden tickets.

my age.

my wife and child.

running pretty solid times on the roads at HM and under.

those are the main reasons.

I wouldn't dominate and never said I would, but I could certainly go under 24 hours on my first try. I'm very confident in that. "

So if i'm reading this correctly it would be extremely difficult for you to avoid a DNS. You are correct that sub 24 is not an extremely difficult or even athletic accomplishment inside of the context of ultra running. That being said the training needed for an effort like this is more about "time on feet" than fierce

aerobic effort. A 2:33 marathon on the road is totally irrelevant and you know that. Your joints and the pounding they would take would be the issue if you can only train 40-50 mpw. Also, 23k of downhill would plant its flag on your face no problem. So while I agree athletically you would have more than enough talent to run sub 24 no problem, without putting the time in and doing specific training for the event sub 24 is nothing but a pipe dream. My guess would be a dnf at around 100k due to sore knees/feet. To quote Lavar Ball "stay in yo lane".

I have a "bronze" one. It says 100 Miles on one side of the buckle, and 30 Hours on the other. Although it is supposed to be bronze (for over 24 hours) it is solid brass so it looks gold to me.

I have buckles for both sub 24 and sub 30. The difference between the buckles is that the sub 24 says 100 miles one day while the sub 30 merely says 100 miles.

Yes, any 2:33 marathoner can finish sub 24 provided that the legs don't fall off, the nutrition can be handled, you don't get disoriented in the dark, etc., etc. I was a 2:27 marathoner and 5:35 50 miler but had a difficult time going sub 24 at WS.