Walsmley vs Krar at Hong Kong's Fast 100 (now changed to a 80k event)

I believe Matt actually ran sub 4:00 (or at least 4:00 flat) for the mile. So he is even faster than Walmsley ever was. My point was that Jim could have faced more competitive ultras if he stayed in the US this weekend.

champion of ducking competition wrote:

Wertner1 wrote:

Even USATF 50k trail champs at Fourmidable this weekend in CA had open prize money five deep. 2-time Olympic Marathon Trials Qualifier Tim Tollefson won there. Other competition this weekend stateside had sub 4-min miler Matt Daniels winning the Black Canyon 100km, 3:44 1500m runner Bobby Peavey winning Moab Red Hot 50km (to name a few)

Ultra fan trying to prove how "competitive" ultra is by referencing Tim Tollefson and a couple of borderline four-minute milers.^

I am sure these guys are great human beings, but ouch. I can see why Walmsley enjoys ultra so much and never raced on the roads.

waiting for it...... wrote:

champion of ducking competition wrote:

Gets it.^

If you offered a million US dollars for the winner of the comrades, do you really think some 2:04 Kenyan would win it?

These are the kind of questions worth asking!! I think that if the purse for winning Comrades was $1 million that the winner would not be an American trail runner. I think that Jim Walmsley could be in the running to win (maybe?) But in a race like Comrades, I don't think any other American ultrarunner is in competition? I mean there's other guys in the US that would race it, Zach Miller always is awesome to watch. But my bet for a $1 million Comrades would be on either an East African or a Takahiro Sunada (road 100k world record) or someone like that. The guy that's won Comrades the last couple years has a 2:23 marathon PB, so that doesn't point to anything extraordinary.

It is a valid point that Walmsley could have raced more competitive races here in the US. Black Canyon in particular. The Fast 100/80k/50 mile whatever in Hong Kong was a Hoka sponsored race, so obviously they paid him to go to that and get big exposure for them in a growing running market. I don't think the point of it was to find the most competitive race, the point was just a contract obligation by their biggest name athlete.

Bringing up Tim Tollefson and the USATF 50k "national championships" is a great example of why people aren't drawn to trail races for the money. Sure there was prize money, but 5th place got $100. Tim is a good runner. But I don't think the USATF trail championships mean very much.

Tldr: Lets crowdsource $1 million, set it as the prize for Comrades, and settle this argument once and for all!

Alrighty, we need to start a go fund me for this and get some sub 2:04 east Africans to agree to this.

I personally feel like this is the most constructive idea to ever come from a letsrun message board.

HobbyBoy wrote:

I personally feel like this is the most constructive idea to ever come from a letsrun message board.

I feel like that scene in step brothers when they realize they are best friends.

HobbyBoy wrote:

I personally feel like this is the most constructive idea to ever come from a letsrun message board.

No 2:04 guys is going to train for an ultra because traditional races will always dependably have more money in the long term, its a question of cost/benefit and choice. Remember the 100% characteristic of every star ultra guy that has become big in ultras. They failed at traditional racing and found success in ultras. So the best way to induce more competition in ultras is what's been happening anyway naturally: Keep running faster and faster in traditional races, thereby indirectly improving the competition in ultras as more faster guys see glory slipping away in traditional races and turn towards ultras because they have no choice.

let nature take its course wrote:

No 2:04 guys is going to train for an ultra because traditional races will always dependably have more money in the long term, its a question of cost/benefit and choice. Remember the 100% characteristic of every star ultra guy that has become big in ultras. They failed at traditional racing and found success in ultras. So the best way to induce more competition in ultras is what's been happening anyway naturally: Keep running faster and faster in traditional races, thereby indirectly improving the competition in ultras as more faster guys see glory slipping away in traditional races and turn towards ultras because they have no choice.

No 2:04 guys is going to train for an ultra because they can't run that long.

They are highly specialized runners. There is no way they would survive a 100 mile race.

Always funny that this discussion comes up on letsrun.com, where 95% of the posters here have never done anything longer than their Turkey trot 5k.

face the fax wrote:

Buttz wrote:

However, looking at it from your angle, of someone who is dropping down from a race distance that is ~4 times longer (80km/21km) we could think about a miler dropping down to the 400m.

This leads us to a very important question: how fast do we think Tefera could run 400m?

That is a good point about 1:04 being equivalent to a 47.

Nick Willis ran 47.4 without ever focussing on the 400. Kszczot ran 46, 1:43, 3:38. It is safe to say that Tefera could do at least 47.

That’s just not true. Willis has never run that. Tefera could maybe run that but I doubt it. Including Kszczot is pointless.