Dimitrius wrote:
[quote]McDonny wrote:
He still thinks a 2:35 marathon is more significant than a 29:30 10K and usually is hurt for at least 3 months after one of his 3:05-3:20 marathons.
This mirrors my experience with the ultrarunners that I have met in my community. Personally, I could not care less how people occupy their free time as long as they are not breaking laws or doing destruction to the community ... and training or racing ultras is pretty harmless in the grand scheme of things.
I do take exception when I hear ultrarunners bragging about their accomplishments, like taking 3rd place in a 100 mile race that has only 50 competitors, when they can only manage to run a 3:20 marathon. The thing that a lot of ultrarunners fail to realize is that just because a race is longer does not mean the challenge is greater.
Well said. People need to realize that ultrarunning has it's challenges but to say that I'm so good when you place 3 or 1st in an event that has say...50 or 87 people is pathetic. Look at Scott Jurek, he won badwater with only 87 or 85 "runners", most of whom are there just to finish to there to compete against jurek or someone else. Some of the those so-called runners aren't even runners, they are adventure racers, hikers and what not. Some get into ultrarunning for spiritual reasons/experiences....Please!!! How pathetic is that? Trying running a sub 2:30 marathon and that could become a spiritual experience when you can't walk for a few days.