Kilian Jornet will try to break the toughest ultra record in the books

No he didn't knucklehead. Yiannis wasn't in the race that year.

coachescanbeuneccessary wrote:

Cliff Young ran from Sydney - Melbourne wearing wellington boots.

Beat Yiannis Kouros

No he didn't knucklehead. Yiannis wasn't in the race that year.

my favorite wrote:

My favorite part is actually seeing people who have never come close to nailing a long (100 miles or longer) race, telling others what it takes to do so. We're all still waiting for Sage to put all this knowledge to good use.

Exactly. I would never comment on track related posts ever here because I have no clue about that.

I respect Sage for most of his comments here on the LR forum.

But he probably should not talk about 24 hour races before he has done one. That is also true for many other posters here who probably have never done one ultra ever.

Getyourfactsright wrote:

coachescanbeuneccessary wrote:

Cliff Young ran from Sydney - Melbourne wearing wellington boots.

Beat Yiannis Kouros

No he didn't knucklehead. Yiannis wasn't in the race that year.

Yep

Sage did also come in 50th at UTMB in 2017 coming in at 26:12. So he has definitely run longer than 24 hours. Though I wonder how many guys/gals much slower than him at the marathon distance beat him there.

I have no problem understanding that 'running is running' but I wonder why so many others have issues acknowledging that there are so many other variables with these long races that discussing X fast runner could smash such and such record is totally pointless.

At least its a amusing to watch.

I see 24 hour expert moving the goal posts quite a bit.

Very few here are contending that a fast marathoner will automatically and immediately be a fast 24 hour runner. However, their points that the physical skills required are very strongly overlapped is absolutely correct. No one is saying that those overlapping physical skills are all that are required, and in fact acknowledge other aspects such as nutrition, training, mental skills, etc. They also correctly point out that a ridiculously small percentage of fast marathon runners attempt anything close to a 24 hour race so it is difficult to draw concrete conclusions with much certainty.

However, your comments that "other skills are way more important than the sheer running speed" definitely diminishes the running speed/skill required. If you have the best nutrition, mental focus, blister management, clothing choices, etc. but your physical peak will top out at a 3:00 hr marathon, your chances of breaking the world record are exactly zero.

The skills you list as way more important are effectively all things that can be learned/trained for. Of course you can train and improve your sheer running speed, but it's the only thing listed that is really limited by genetics. So the contention that it is the most important to have is quite valid. Yes, toughness of your skin, IBS syndrome, etc. can be genetic, but that pretty far in the weeds.

my favorite wrote:

I have no problem understanding that 'running is running' but I wonder why so many others have issues acknowledging that there are so many other variables with these long races that discussing X fast runner could smash such and such record is totally pointless.

At least its a amusing to watch.

Admittedly I didn't read every post, but who are are so many others that have issues acknowledging that there are other variables? I'm not seeing that. And stating that the think Kipchoge could smash the 24 hr record for example, is pointless, but doesn't necessarily diminish other variables. It doesn't seem like a stretch to believe that the world's fastest and most consistent runner over 2 hours would be able to beat a 24 hr record. That may or may not be the case, but is not an unreasonable contention as the main genetic and physical skills have so much overlap.

I mostly agree with this but I think the mental aspect is far more important than you are giving and is also something that can certainly be limited by a persons genetics or their general disposition which may not be flexible enough. I've been running long races long enough to witness some people just have it and some just simply do not. No matter what they do or how hard they try, some folks just continually come up short. I've beaten plenty of folks faster than me because of all these 'unimportant' things that apparently are really easy to train for, somehow. Its almost as if they are actually quite important when the difference is either winning or losing, finishing or not finishing.

The point is that those are not the 'main skills'. Acknowledging all the other variables as only secondary and 'not as important' or however you want to frame is dumb, when those are the very things that lead to folks unraveling and either completely blowing up or not finishing. Which is also why its pointless and it certainly does diminish those other aspects.

Sure, Kipchoge could certainly smash the 24 hour record if you remove all of the variables that make a 24 hour race a 24 hour race. Doesn't that sound stupid and pointless? That is what I am reading on here.

Sage for all his understanding of training, nutrition, living in Boulder etc... still comes up short in 100 mile races and beaten handily by people he would easily smoke at shorter distances. Why? Is it simply because of these secondary skills that are not as important as the fitness? In those races, they apparently were MORE important. Get it now?

If you turn the Kipchoge argument around, you could say that any world class 400 meter runner could beat Kipchoge at Marathon.

So far nobody has tried it yet, but if they would they would smash the 2 hour barrier.

Of course the won't happen as much as we will see any top Marathoner at any ultradistance.

I think it was last year when a bunch of good 2:10ish South African Marathoners tried the 100 mile distance. They all failed miserably.

Experienced 24 hour racer wrote:

If you turn the Kipchoge argument around, you could say that any world class 400 meter runner could beat Kipchoge at Marathon.

So far nobody has tried it yet, but if they would they would smash the 2 hour barrier.

Of course the won't happen as much as we will see any top Marathoner at any ultradistance.

I think it was last year when a bunch of good 2:10ish South African Marathoners tried the 100 mile distance. They all failed miserably.

Or take it another way and take a guy like Jeff Browning for example, who is no speedster but trains smart, races strategically and executes well. Give him Kipchoges genetics and speed. Well now he'd be pretty much unbeatable from the marathon up.

I think what it really comes down to is that ultra racing is growing in popularity and as it does, more and more, the spotlight is taken away from traditional running. LRC doesn't like that. So we have endless threads any time someone in the ultra world does something about 'small sample size' 'kipchoge would destroy them/that record' then Sage chimes in as the resident 'ultra expert' echoing all the other LRC trolls and throws in a sideways remark about ultra running not being clean.

Okay this really will be my last post on this thread as I see things have digressed.... Think about the energy systems and demands and limiting factors in these events. I'm purely looking at this from a physiological perspective...taking into account Running Economy and other limiting factors like glycogen depletion/fat burning %/hydration levels and sheer muscle fatigue/cramps. If you don't think world class marathon runners aren't "mentally tough" or don't know about dealing with some sort of nutrition/hydration issues or "blisters" then I think you are underestimating them. A few key points: 1. 100-miles (or even 24 hours) on a flat track I'd imagine is a lot more specific to road marathons compared to something like UTMB or any other "trail/mountain" race. A lot more variables in the mountains. For example at UTMB you could be powerhiking a 20-min mile in the middle of a snow storm in the dark up a mountain (with a 4lb back on)....at least in these track events an elite marathon runner could be maintaining solid 7-min miles with good footing and more typical running form. 2. I never said I was a good example of "Any Surface Any Distance"...and obviously I've never done a flat track or road ultra of any distance (I've only been a trail/mountain guy besides Comrades because it is more lucrative). So yeah, I'm speculating here. I've also failed miserably at 100-milers (the few I've attempted at WS100, Run Rabbit and UTMB). I've also failure miserably at shorter mountain races at 42km as well. So there's that. We aren't talking about trail/mountain running here though. That being said I also think a runner like Kipchoge could learn how to crush something like UTMB, but there are more variables at play there (compared to the controlled environment of a track). It's not so much the sheer distance (be it 100-miles or 24 hours)....it's the terrain and the elevation change that is a bigger variable. 3. Finally, the comparison to sprinters to moving up to the 5km or the marathon is null. Again Different energy systems. there is more difference between an 800m and a 5km than there is between a 5km and a marathon. Good 10km runners often make good marathon runners (yes, sometimes the 29-min guy beats the 28-min guy, but they usually beat the 31-min guy and they will pretty much always beat the 33min guy). More often than not, the best ultra runners (even on the trails) are at least pretty fast in the marathon...and I'd say there is a strong correlation between marathon PR time and success at pretty much all ultras. A guy with a marathon PR over 2:32 is not going to get this record (he doesn't have enough relative speed to be efficient for that long) whereas a guy with a marathon of 2:20 or 2:10 could very well get this record. Maybe the 2:20 guy gets the record over the 2:10 guy...but it's probably because the 2:20 guy was more likely to try the track ultra event in the first place! Still very small sample size and a very limited amount of data points in these niche ultra events. More often than not the faster marathon runner has "more wiggle room" and a lot of advantages in pretty much all ultras. The thing is people don't race ultras as much as shorter distances (less data points) and sometimes they totally bomb and have a really bad race. 4. The sample size of actual fast road marathon runners doing 100-miles on the track or a flat road is probably super small. Again, it is niche. A more lucrative career in ultra running is usually the trail and mountain stuff...unless it is something like Comrades (which is far from flat btw). Comrades and even UTMB have also busted top runners for taking PEDs...so there is that as well.

Experienced 24 hour racer wrote:

If you turn the Kipchoge argument around, you could say that any world class 400 meter runner could beat Kipchoge at Marathon.

So far nobody has tried it yet, but if they would they would smash the 2 hour barrier.

Of course the won't happen as much as we will see any top Marathoner at any ultradistance.

I think it was last year when a bunch of good 2:10ish South African Marathoners tried the 100 mile distance. They all failed miserably.

my favorite wrote:

I mostly agree with this but I think the mental aspect is far more important than you are giving and is also something that can certainly be limited by a persons genetics or their general disposition which may not be flexible enough. I've been running long races long enough to witness some people just have it and some just simply do not. No matter what they do or how hard they try, some folks just continually come up short. I've beaten plenty of folks faster than me because of all these 'unimportant' things that apparently are really easy to train for, somehow. Its almost as if they are actually quite important when the difference is either winning or losing, finishing or not finishing.

You’re talking about people that are faster than you; not the best marathoners in the world. I have a feeling Kipchoge could figure out the nutrition and clothing. He could also pay someone to help him figure out those things. Someone at his level obviously is pretty mentally tough given the amount of miles he runs on a regular basis. It really wouldn’t be that hard for someone of his level to get used to running for longer times

Sure, sure. And Sage is going to win WSER any year now.

I'm one of the guys that can go all day if slow enough, especially if its not something like a track where you're working one muscle group only. I do consider it a talent because not everyone can do it even those faster than me. However I do consider the "all day" talent not as rare as someone for example that can run a sub 5 minute mile. Honestly I think there are many lazy big folks on the couch that can go all day if they would realize they have that "talent" and get into shape but will never be fast. Ultras ultimately are still niche so a helluva lot of regular guys have tried it but nowhere near comparable talented fast guys have tried it, though thas has definitely improved last few years.

At the end you can only race against the runners who show up at the starting line.

All these if "Kipchoge would show up" is just highly speculative.

And thinking about it some more, Sage as a 2:18 (?) Marathoner is actually a great example that Marathon greatness does not translate in to ultrarunning 1:1.

Ok so a 2:10 guy just needs to learn a couple things to dominate. Yet you have spent a good amount of time trying to learn these things but never had any success at 100 miles. After all these years you haven’t learned these easy things yet?

If it is that simple it shouldn’t require a large sample size. It is almost as if it is not that simple.

Experienced 24 hour racer wrote:

At the end you can only race against the runners who show up at the starting line.

All these if "Kipchoge would show up" is just highly speculative.

And thinking about it some more, Sage as a 2:18 (?) Marathoner is actually a great example that Marathon greatness does not translate in to ultrarunning 1:1.

Yes, it is the definition of speculative lol. I’m not arguing that.

I’m not too familiar with Sage’s career but Kipchoge is in a completely other level than someone like him. Not a knock on Sage haha. Only a handful that ever lived that you can say are in Kipchoge’s league. Kipchoge has so much room to underperform in the 24hr race and still beat the record. He also seems like he is the love of the sport that I don’t think the mentality part would be too hard for him.

I think the more interesting debate would be if someone like Bekele could break it. I don’t know if someone like him could ever care enough to both train for it and care about the race once he was 12hrs into it.

mutinate wrote:

1 - Rojo was 100% right to call out KJ. Dude is a fraud. This was a clear money grab for him, nothing else. All the crybabies complaining about rojo are sad and pathetic.

2 - Any insinuation that these ultra athletes are better than elite marathoners is complete and utter nonsense. Any elite marathoner would dominate these competitions if they wanted to, but there is no incentive to do it.

If KJ is a fraud then Eliud "Forever Young" Kipchoge is a scam way beyond all know-it-all asphalt runners can possibly imagine.

Second, why someone who never ran 100m keeps posting in here like some kind of an expert?