Hoka Carbon X project 100k WR Attempt Official Thread (Sponsored by HOKA ONE ONE)

I think Steeltown is referring to 50k on the road, whereas you are talking about 50k on a trail with hills. Most high quality trail 50k races are won in the 3:15 to 3:30 range, but road pace is much, much faster than that.

Are you talking about using them as pacers? Obviously it would take a marathon distance runner quite a while to transition to 100k. It's like 2.5 x the distance.

100k wrote:

That women's 100k record is incredible. You'd think men would be at about 6 hours flat by now

Indeed, I believe that Tomoe Abe (women's 6:33 100KM WR holder) was a 2:27 marathoner racing the 100km in her prime. The US record is around 7 hours flat by 2:37 marathoner Ann Trason. Camille Herron with a similiar marathon PB has run pretty close to that for 100K as well. Those times all seem in line with one another.

No one expected Don Ritchie's mark to last as long as it did, though a number of performances at the classic Lake Saroma have turned heads, including Abe's and the slew of fast 100Ks this year among the men. ARRS only records top performances for courses where there isn't more than 30% separation from start to finish. The IAAF used to have the same provision, but relaxed the standard to 50%, which accommodates races such as Saroma. Looking at historic weather patterns (and this past year in particular), it seems likely that runners benefited from wind assistance. Regardless, they were all strong runs, and this is not to cast any aspersion on Abe or the other top Japanese athletes regarding doping or anything else.

sqandrews wrote:

This is a very cool event, and I hope Walmsley get the world record. But, it does seem sad that they couldn't recruit any really fast athletes. Looking at the iaaf rankings, 1,933 people have now run under 2:12 in the marathon. Sure, some times are older, but couldn't Hoka find one or two of these marathon guys to run a flat course as a hard training run. .

Calling 100km at this pace a hard training run grossly misstates the difficulty of a high quality 100K performance.

Raysism wrote:

google it chevin wrote:

Additionally, five teams of ten runners each will simultaneously participate in a 10x10K relay on the same course. A mix of HOKA athletes and athletes from select retail partners, these mixed-gender teams will also seek to break the 10x10K mixed-gender World Record.

Just because you invent some nonsense race doesn't mean you get to call it a world record.

Agreed, that would be the knock on this endeavor. This is somewhat of a poor man's ultra version of Breaking 2. There are however 5 runners potentially capable of running sub 6:30. The pacers diminish it IMHO, but it's still some sort of race, or staged concurrent time trials, etc. Nonetheless, it's intriguing and I believe it is being done in a manner that will address any record concerns. The 50K American Record was essentially a 5 mile solo time trial set up for Josh Cox after a marathon. That got ratified, and this is certainly no worse than that.

good to hear that people are acknowledging how great the women's CR is. nobody is gonna touch that this weekend.

reed wrote:

the trail isn't just closed for 2 events...it's 1 per month. but yeah, it won't be closed for this. keep in mind there will only be like 10 people running.

They're starting at 6am on a Saturday and will be down to the trail between Watt Ave and Guy West at around 7:40am. Hardly going to be much traffic from bikes before 7:30ish. I've done 1000s of miles on this trail and there is never a time of day that I wouldn't feel comfortable doing a tempo run on the paved trail. occasionally you step off to the side when groups of cyclists come. big deal. When the race will be onto the 4.7mi loop from Watt to Guy West, you will be on the south side for half the time, and will experience significantly less traffic on that side.[/quote]

It's closed twice per year: 1) Eppies Great Race and 2) Parkway 1/2 which was last weekend.

These are the only 2 events were rangers on motorbikes are making people exit the trail. This is the only safe way to run a race like this. While it might only be 10 people + the relay teams, the runners will rightfully be running the tangents and will be oblivious to anything but trying to hold pace taking the shortest course possible. this means they will come in direct contact with cyclists IF the trail closure is not enforced.

I don't think this would piss people off so much if there was notification. But the majority of the parkway users only use the trail on the weekends. Why did Hoka wait until 3 days before the race to let anyone know about it?

reed wrote:

good to hear that people are acknowledging how great the women's CR is. nobody is gonna touch that this weekend.

The inclusion of the two women is curious. Sabrina is an exceptional ultrarunner but the credential most relevant that she brings to this event is a recent 3:30 50km, but any 100km WR should be wholly out of her reach. The Japanese female has run a modest 2:5X marathon and sub 8 hour 100km. One of them might be chasing 50 miles, but that's certainly not what this is being billed as.

sqandrews wrote:

couldn't Hoka find one or two of these marathon guys to run a flat course as a hard training run.

I think it is highly likely that one of those almost sub 2:10 guys can or could have gone sub 6 in a 100km.

When is 100k a "hard training run" for a marathoner? Or anybody for that matter?

And how do you think a 2:10 marathoner can just run more than double the distance at the same pace? Are we still on earth? What planet are you living on?

Um, distance runs are aerobic. Fast and light runners excel at distance events, but very, very few people run ultas relative to marathons. If a larger number of these sun 2:10 guys ran ultras at least some of them would destroy all the records. I agree mountains and tough terrain change the equation a little bit (although probably not that much as many people elite African run on trails in training), but not for a flat and fast road course. Many of the too marathon runners are running well over 100 miles a week. Yes, I was exaggerating that a sub 6 100k would just be a hard training run, but, as you may now, 48 people now have run under 2:05 in the marathon. Fueling changes the equation a bit, but totally feasible to just use maurteen drink or gels as everyone seems to do these anyways. Matt carpenter when he ran Leadville used a very simple fueling approach, and it rally doesn't have to be that complicated. I love ultras and long distance, but that is because I enjoy it. It is fun reading about great athletes like Killian, Walmsley, Matt carpenter, Camille , Courtney, and, yes, Sage. But, that does not mean they are really world class runners.

What an original idea!

Is the 4/1 home page still up, this is a joke

sqandrews wrote:

This is a very cool event, and I hope Walmsley get the world record. But, it does seem sad that they couldn't recruit any really fast athletes. Looking at the iaaf rankings, 1,933 people have now run under 2:12 in the marathon. Sure, some times are older, but couldn't Hoka find one or two of these marathon guys to run a flat course as a hard training run. In terms of sub 2:10, I think there have been something like 930+ people. Again, an interesting record attempt that I will likely follow, but nowhere close to the same competition of hard marathons. Walmsley is good, but I doubt he could go under 2:12 in the marathon, and I think it is highly likely that one of those almost sub 2:10 guys can or could have gone sub 6 in a 100km.

This is a Hoka One One event...and they have just a handful of ~2:10 marathoners who would even be candidates for this event. You've got Cam Levins, the NAZ Elite guys, and maybe a few foreigners. Thinking about it now, it's too bad that Levins wasn't a few years older right now or he may have been a good prospect for this sort of race.

Sesamoiditis wrote:

SteelTownRunner wrote:

For many high octane runners, running much slower than 3 hours for 50K can feel inefficient and unnatural if not practicing that pace.

Could you explain this more? 3 hours for 50k (5:47 pace) and even 3.5 hours for 50k (6:46 pace) are well within the range of paces that any elite runner runs frequently.

I think he's saying that for someone who can attempt a record like this that running 3 hours for 50 k is not a pace they like to run. It's very inefficient.

They might be able to run much faster for something shorter and much slower for something longer, but it's just a weird pace (to maintain for 6 hours).

The more I think about it how the hell do you get used to a pace for 6 hours? No one probably runs more than 4 hours in training right? The pace could feel like a cakewalk for 2 hours but you've got to be able to not have muscle fatigue what not 4 hours later. At a marathon, I was maxed out at 18 miles and wondered if I'd make it to the finish.

@SteelTownRunner why don't you like pacers? How long do pacers go in something like this?

And it sounds like Tyler Andrews and Walmsley will go different paces (Andrews faster than Walmsley). Say it's 5 seconds a mile different pace. How does someone gauge "Hey this is the pace for me for 6 hours?" It would seem so easy to get wrong. I'd think for sure Jim could run Tyler's pace early on, so in his head has he already somehow determined what he can do?

And road running for 6 hours has to be so different than trail.

Wouldn't the easiest thing to be to just target the 50 mile world record? But the 100k world record is more well regarded?

I just merged the other thread on this too.

Hoka  Senior Global Sports Marketing Manager Mike McManus who also lives in my neighborhood in NYC was our our podcast that just published and talked about Project Carbon X

https://www.letsrun.com/news/2019/05/london-marathon-recap-podcast-caster-semenya-decision-eliud-kicphoges-greatness-stanford-doha-diamond-league-preview-hoka-carbon-x-project/

If your benchmark is sub 2:10 it is slim pickings unless you want a doped up East African.

Sub 2:10s run last year:

North/South America: 2

Europe: 4

Asia: 20

Yes, that is how ridiculous the doping epidemic has gotten.

sqandrews wrote:

Um, distance runs are aerobic. Fast and light runners excel at distance events, but very, very few people run ultas relative to marathons. If a larger number of these sun 2:10 guys ran ultras at least some of them would destroy all the records.

Woulda Shoulda Coulda

But HAVEN'T!!!!!

I recommend that people check out Matt Carpenter's training philosophy: I am not the only one who think that his name should be in the hat for Goat, even if he likely should not win. Matt's pholsophy in short: If you want to be fast in ultras, you need to be fast at short distance. His trying was largely two hours of running everyday and two quality speed workouts a week. Really not all that different than many elite marathon runners, although perhaps he spent a bit more time on his feet. The year Matt won and set the course record at Leadville he also won the US 10k trail championships.

Back to my earlier refrain, people do know that 280 people have broken 28 minutes in the 10k. With proper motivation, financial or otherwise, I would wager a large number of those people could crush 100k and 100mike distances, especially if it is flat. As people know, Kipchoge has run under 27 and Gebraselassie was I think just a bit over 27 in the 10k. On the other hand, I don't believe Walmsley has ever broken 29. Read the below comments from one of the best ultra runners of all time as to why these 10k and marathon times really do probably matter.

http://skyrunner.com/story/2005lt100.htm

Training Philosophy

The main reason I had put off doing an Ultra for so long was because everyone said they make you slow. I now believe that is bunk! Instead, I think it is the way people train for them that makes them slow. I found that I could not do 30-50 mile long runs like most Ultrarunners and still be able to do quality speedwork. One of my other goals was to win the US 10K Trail Running Championships in Vail, CO two months before Leadville. The only way I could pull that off was to run fast. I decided if I was going to error, I would error on the side of speed!

In place of super long runs, I did back to back long runs. Both days I ran faster than I could had I just done one longer run. I also felt the second day better simulated the later stages of an Ultra because I was already tired. I took this concept even further in my day in/day out running. Heading into Leadville I went five months running 2 hours or more every single day and then another two months where the only days under 2 were the few days before my shorter races. All the while I was putting in two quality speed workouts a week—one in the flats and one in the hills.

In short, just like on the roads and in the mountains, there is a direct correlation in how fast we can go in an Ultra and how fast we are. Sure, food and other issues come into play, but there is no hiding from the clock when it comes to speed. That’s why I set Vail as a goal—it kept me from turning my back on my speed. For more on this concept check out Ultra legend Buzz Burrell’s piece at

http://www.trailrunner.com/trail_times/2005_trail_times_spring.htm

.

wejo wrote:

The more I think about it how the hell do you get used to a pace for 6 hours? No one probably runs more than 4 hours in training right?

?

You really don't know much about ultra runners.