You know the answer wrote:
Because attention whores who want their non-running friends to be impressed by how badass they are, can do so without having to be any good at running. Just grow a beard, get some tattoos, start a blog about your journey of self discovery, go on some long hikes and boast about it at the WATER COOLER on a Monday morning.
I think that more or less covers it.
I work as a construction worker on oil rigs. We don´t have unmanly stuff like water cooler at work.
Sorry chump wrote:
'thon
half mary
crete
moran
discus
deer
carp
These are standard spellings here, bro. Most people use them sarcastically. Get used to it.
Do you also say "half mary"?
medium_pace wrote:
I don't hate ultrawalkers. I do get a little confused about why they call what they do running? If you want to do a long walk/jog/hike call it ultra wogging or something.
4/10
Cuz this wrote:
Any sub-4 miler could show up to almost any ultra and win it. That’s why.
Any sub 2:15 marathoner would absolutely destroy the WR in any ultra (Josh Cox).
Ultra runners to actual pro runners is the equivalent of recreational flag football to the NFL.
Except that doesn't actually happen does it? Plenty of speedy studs have tried moving up to ultras and not been able to crush more experienced ultra runners.
LRC stupidity at its finest wrote:
Because LRC is full of insecure a-holes who dream of breaking 3 hours in the marathon but don't have the balls to train for it. So because every now and then they run some 6-minute miles and call it 'speedwork' they feel entitled to look down on people who can run 7-minute miles for 12 hours straight. This same people call 12 miles a 'long run.'
The insecurity on all LRC threads takes me back to my time working at a Middle School. Bunch of degenerate runners that hate on true elites or accuse everybody of PEDs. If you can't admire the spirit and balls it takes to subject your day(s) to the rigors of ultra running, god bless you. The old school belief that all ultra runners are slow trotting dudes, you're a classic LRC clown as well.
Meh1 wrote:
Ultra running is boring.
If you can't be by yourself for a few hours without being bored, maybe it is you that is boring.
portsea57 wrote:
Well, as Zatopek said, " If you want to win something, run the 100m, but if you want experience something, run the marathon".
And, of course, we can add to that with something like " If you really, really want to experience something run the Badwater ( Death Valley ) Ultramarathon.
Badwater is the most over rated "hardest race on earth" event ever with almost a 90% finisher rate.
Rono. wrote:
Kvothe wrote:
Pretty much everything past the marathon requires the same training - and its long slow plodding runs with food breaks and walk breaks
I read a post on fb by a pretty good ultra runner the other day saying how its ok and probably even the best strategy to walk up long hills.
T&/marathon require competing a distance as fast as possible. The goal in ultra seems to be just to run a further and further distance until you can win. Can't win a 100 miler? Well how about a 48 hour event!
Then you have things like the barkley where there is more walking than running.
Add on that most ultra runners are elitest and tend to look down on any fast training sessions or really anything that doesn't take place in the woods.
Its an entirely different sport. Also if you live in a suburban area, you probably can't do it. I can't even fathom where I'd go for a 6 hour run. To get a long run in, I have to run the longest trail available to me twice out and back and then do a portion of it out and back a third time, we just can't relate to spending hours and hours on technical single track slower than our warm up pace.
So is it ok for sprinters to have the same attitude for middle and long distance runners? You small minded pace snob.
I don't know if its ok, but they do. A lot of sprinters I know complain that the 10k takes too long and they're bored watching it.
My interpretation has always been that it's a manifestation of the general annoyance of people being more impressed by raw distance than speed.
The ignorance and hate of ultrarunning by most LRCers is astonishing, even considering the overall level of hate and ignorance here in general. At one time it may have been true that the level of competition near the top was substandard, but that's no longer the case. Starting about 10 years ago, the ante started getting upped considerably, and it keeps increasing, particularly just in the last few years.
One thing that has changed is that more formerly elite or near-elite tracksters have migrated into ultrarunning. Only a portion of them succeed, however. Most do not, for various reasons.
A couple of good examples who have are Jim Walmsley and Hayden Hawks. On the other hand, Sage Canaday is a near-elite marathoner, and one who has had some hits but many more misses on the ultra circuit. Sage offers an experienced perspective of someone coming from an elite-type background and patiently answers questions here on LRC from time to time about why elites often find it hard making the transition.
If you have followed Walmsley and Hayden in particular on Strava and take a look at their HR output and so forth, they are training monsters. (You can't go by pace much during their peak training blocks, because they put in 20,000 to 30,000 ft or more of vert training in a week at those times.) Both are clocking up to 130 or 140 miles per week of very hard altitude training during the peak weeks of their target training blocks. Walmsley at 7,000 feet in the Flagstaff area as his home base, and last year 9,000 feet in the Silverton, CO leading up to UTMB. Hayden typically training at a little lower elevation around 5,000 to 6,000 feet in Utah.
But even these guys can find themselves getting beaten in bigger races by ultra runners who have never been track elites, when they make missteps in their race or training strategy, or due to lack of experience.
Because you wouldn't drive a ferrari on a technical trail. You drive it on the road or a track. Ultra runners are like jeeps or subaru offroad cars but they aint fast. Letsrunners pride themselves on being ferraris.
Rono. wrote:
Kvothe wrote:
Pretty much everything past the marathon requires the same training - and its long slow plodding runs with food breaks and walk breaks
I read a post on fb by a pretty good ultra runner the other day saying how its ok and probably even the best strategy to walk up long hills.
T&/marathon require competing a distance as fast as possible. The goal in ultra seems to be just to run a further and further distance until you can win. Can't win a 100 miler? Well how about a 48 hour event!
Then you have things like the barkley where there is more walking than running.
Add on that most ultra runners are elitest and tend to look down on any fast training sessions or really anything that doesn't take place in the woods.
Its an entirely different sport. Also if you live in a suburban area, you probably can't do it. I can't even fathom where I'd go for a 6 hour run. To get a long run in, I have to run the longest trail available to me twice out and back and then do a portion of it out and back a third time, we just can't relate to spending hours and hours on technical single track slower than our warm up pace.
So is it ok for sprinters to have the same attitude for middle and long distance runners? You small minded pace snob.
Why wouldn't it be?
A bunch of minor league players think they're in the big league.
I like ultra runners fine and I'm not a very fast guy myself, but I can partially understand the disdain. Many people who do ultras do them precisely because they're too slow to be competitive at shorter distances. It's a way to get around needing speed. So all the speedy guys see them as slow guys trying to duck competition by moving to longer distances. I get it. But running high mileage can be a serious commitment and those guys deserve a lot of credit for how much they invest in the sport of running.
Shoebacca wrote:
I like ultra runners fine and I'm not a very fast guy myself, but I can partially understand the disdain. Many people who do ultras do them precisely because they're too slow to be competitive at shorter distances. It's a way to get around needing speed. So all the speedy guys see them as slow guys trying to duck competition by moving to longer distances. I get it. But running high mileage can be a serious commitment and those guys deserve a lot of credit for how much they invest in the sport of running.
This is kind of the way I view it, as well. I've also known "faster" runners that have moved on from the shorter distances simply because they wanted a new challenge and, in the words of one guy, "I'm sick of the road racing scene in general". Any true runner, regardless of distance, who is a student of the sport (racing, training, pacing, etc) has a tremendous amount of respect for the people who are faster and the ones who choose to go longer. As a good friend of mine says, "There's always someone out there who can run further than you or faster than you or both."
I just do them to get laid by the easy ultra chicks. I just make 'em shave and shower first.
simple explanation wrote:
Ultra runners are the jazz musicians and road runners (i.e., LRCers) are the classical musicians of the running world.
Oh my god, no.
Ultra runners are Michael Scott.
Road runners are Jim, Pam, Ryan (PEDs included), Toby, Oscar, etc.
This weekend, the leaders at The Two Oceans Marathon(actually 35 miles) reportedly hit the marathon split at 2:18...dont think they were wogging.
P.S. Autocorrect wanted to change wogging to pegging..
ultra dude wrote:
I just do them to get laid by the easy ultra chicks. I just make 'em shave and shower first.
DotD.
back to your basement wrote:
ultra dude wrote:
I just do them to get laid by the easy ultra chicks. I just make 'em shave and shower first.
DotD.
Sometimes they're up for a little D&D. Guess you're an ultra dude, too?