I'm going to bump this thread like it was your momma's behind.
I'm going to bump this thread like it was your momma's behind.
Hi Barry in SD.
I was dumbfounded to read your post.
Your post is factually incorrect. It is nothing short of an invention. A piece of fiction.
I consider the post to be defamatory.
I insist that you remove this post.
Alan Thurlow (Dob) 09/12/1954
thurlowalan wrote:
Hi Barry in SD.
I was dumbfounded to read your post.
Your post is factually incorrect. It is nothing short of an invention. A piece of fiction.
I consider the post to be defamatory.
I insist that you remove this post.
Alan Thurlow (Dob) 09/12/1954
Email the brojos.
fsda wrote:
I can't believe you all missed the true reason for the distance of the marathon.
When the Greeks defeated the Persians at the Battle of Marathon, the messenger ran nonstop all the way back to Athens proclaiming the good news, approximately 26 miles.
He apparently dropped dead upon arrival. This might be one of the first indictments against extreme long distance running. LOL.
OK. This is going to take some explaining isn't it. The messenger actually ran from Athens to Sparta first, to ask for aid against the Persians, then ran back to Athens to deliver the news, then ran to the field of Marathon to tell those in battle, then likely fought in the battle (that's what they did back then. everyone fought) and then, after running from Athens to Sparta and back and fighting in battle, ran to Athens. He dropped dead after running over 300 miles (In the mountains!!!) and fighting in a major battle. And the guy has a name. It's Pheidippides.
No doubt.
Ultra Running is just a bunch of bammer miles. Nothing impressive.
Kilgore was funny. wonder what happened to that guy?
STEVE, THE ADDICT^^ wrote:
Right now news networks and LRC are trying to censor the police murder of Daunte Wright. Do not let them get away with this.
use your brain wrote:
My two cents..... the majority of "ultrarunners" I know personally started out as terrible 5k to marathon runners. So naturally rather than working hard and improving at those distances they run these silly ass 50k to 100 mile races to "set" themselves apart from the crowd. They also carry some of the largest egos I have ever seen.
However there are a couple of good ultrarunners that I know who can run respectable times at all distances. One guy can run 17 low for 5k while training for 100 mile races, which in my book is pretty good. But when the guys who can't break 21 for 5k want to move up to 100 milers to set themselves apart that is just a joke to me.
On a side note I'm not a great runner by any stretch but I've run 16's for 5ks and 33's for 10ks. I ventured to do one 50k to see what it was all about ( which I only ran about 10 miles a week for 6 months leading up to it and I finished in the top 25% of finishers at a race that is considered one of the toughest 50ks in the nation). So for these Ultrarunners to think they are special or great because they can avg 11 min/mile for 50k that is just absurd.
Old post but I always see this site dunpimg on ultrarunners. I'm an ultrarunner who runs a 4:48 mile, 15:53 5k etc. To me, training to run those times took less training and was easier than training for a 50 or 100 miler. You finished top 25 percent out of how many? This isn't very impressive to me given how small trail running fields are. GO race a mountain 50 mile and see how you feel. Ultrarunners like myself train to run 50 miles or so of trails with a lot of gain and loss at sub 8 or even sub 7 minute miles.
As an ultrarunner I'd whoop you at everything from the mile to 100 miles and beyond. 😋 And I haven't even been running that long, (~3/4 years).
wilfredo wrote:
Julio down by the school yard wrote:
Which distance is more competitive?
the marathon, obviously. If the 40 guys that beat you in the marathon ran the ultra too, they'd probably all beat you
I highly doubt this. I'm in San Diego and have had a lot of fast road guys that are similar to speed in me or even faster and I absolutely own them on the trails. That is like saying take those corvettes that do well on the road and put them against jeeps offroad, they will do just as good! Lol. Not everyone has the skill to run both well.
wilfredo wrote:
Julio down by the school yard wrote:
Which distance is more competitive?
the marathon, obviously. If the 40 guys that beat you in the marathon ran the ultra too, they'd probably all beat you
Also, I can go and win a local road 15k with over 4000 competitors but it is harder and more competitive for me to win a local 50 mile race with less than 200 sometimes. Road races have more numbers but a lot of those number are walkers, kids, etc.
YersiniaPestis wrote:
Kilgore was funny. wonder what happened to that guy?
Agreed. I used to read his blog too, very funny and he writes very well. I wish he'd make an appearance to let us know what he is up to.
use your brain wrote:
My two cents..... the majority of "ultrarunners" I know personally started out as terrible 5k to marathon runners. So naturally rather than working hard and improving at those distances they run these silly ass 50k to 100 mile races to "set" themselves apart from the crowd. They also carry some of the largest egos I have ever seen.
However there are a couple of good ultrarunners that I know who can run respectable times at all distances. One guy can run 17 low for 5k while training for 100 mile races, which in my book is pretty good. But when the guys who can't break 21 for 5k want to move up to 100 milers to set themselves apart that is just a joke to me.
On a side note I'm not a great runner by any stretch but I've run 16's for 5ks and 33's for 10ks. I ventured to do one 50k to see what it was all about ( which I only ran about 10 miles a week for 6 months leading up to it and I finished in the top 25% of finishers at a race that is considered one of the toughest 50ks in the nation). So for these Ultrarunners to think they are special or great because they can avg 11 min/mile for 50k that is just absurd.
I love how you call 100 milers "Silly ass races," like they are beneath you when you have yet to even finish one. It always interests me when people downplay an accomplishment that they haven't even tried or done themselves.