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

tortoise wrote:

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.

I can walk all day, or longer depending on how long I can stay awake.

It is not a talent, as much as growing the longest finger nails isn't

S. Canaday wrote:

I'm not saying every sub 2:10 marathoner out there could smash an ultra record (some would definitely fail), but I'm thinking the "marathon speed" correlates directly to success in ultra running. So a lot could. Yes, sometimes the 2:20 guy beats the 2:10 guy, but get a big enough sample size and I'd bet there is a direct correlation. The thing is, not that many sub 2:10 marathon guys have ever even tried a 24 hour event on a track! So we have a very small sample size with a few outliers and a few 2:20ish kinds of guys who have even attempted this kind of event. Like I said it is a super niche part of MUT Running.

100% agree.

Sub 2:10 guys have done ultras well and they have done it badly, but not many, if any , have actually devoted themselves to that singular goal.

If you are sub 2:10, you have the aerobics ticked off and you have excellent running economy. But that doesn't mean you have 'race pace economy' until you have actually trained enough at those race paces and for that duration

That said...the fastest Comrades times now belong to a sub 2:10 (up run) and a 2:13 (down) , the latter of which hasn't really had a bash at faster marathons, and at the time raced a lot back to back (out of necessity $$)

I am Sam wrote:

Experienced 24 hour racer wrote:

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.

Where?

That was a track 100 miler in South Africa.

Wow, this totally took a different turn than I expected it.

I found my notes for this race. Unfortunately the system thinks I use profanity so I upload a photo of the text. The race was in April 2018.

https://ibb.co/BPvMqdx

Results here:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/15cSs4D6Pk5r3L9w_tOmTrid8_3Zy8EVPLWqUnO4-1U4/edit#gid=329133288

This was a great example, that if you let 2:11 to 2:20 Marathoners run a 100 mile race the outcome is not what you might expect.

I am Sam wrote:

tortoise wrote:

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.

I can walk all day, or longer depending on how long I can stay awake.

It is not a talent, as much as growing the longest finger nails isn't

I can lounge on a couch for a week. That's real endurance. It takes a lot of specialized skills that a fast runner doesn't possess.

Completely agree. I don't understand how people are quick to separate 400m from marathon because of different energy systems but not marathon (2hrs) vs 24hrs.

No way would kipchoge win UTMB sage. Agree running economy is biggest in the mountains (the longer and more vert the more it rules out fast marathoners). But I also think this is true of flat track when you stretch out time. K has it dialed-in for 2hrs flat out.

Everyone assumes that nutrition, blister/heat management is just a skill you can learn. To a degree it is but then again so is speed. If speed is limited by genetic factors then so is nutrition, staying power, staying alive. God knows what happens to the body at 24hrs of running. Organs must be on shutdown, blood is out of whack, the body is optimising energy in a different way to the way it does during a marathon. For all the will and training in the world, some will have this ability more than others. Someone like Kipchoge who is a fast carb burner during a 2hr race is unlikely to be the most efficient fuel burner at longer distances.

I know the pool is small but there is enough data and fast enough marathon runners in ultra and mountain/trail races that already disproves this. I know letsrun posters hate the sound of Kilian but he has smoked people way faster than him consistently for over a decade from ZL to UTMB and we're still waiting...

So the hundreds of 2.10-2.18 marathon runners that have been smoked at ultra distances is because they are not fast enough, even though slower runners constantly beat them and hold the records... But faster marathoners is the answer? Or not? Maybe they will be worse? Personally I think there is a sweet-spot of a really fast but tough 215-220 marathoner who is always going to be the best at ultra distance once experienced and well-trained. Some will be better in the mountains (kilian) some will be better at flats... But it won't be Kipchoge in either...

Just to add to the comrades records. I think this distance is the fall off point where fast marathon pace becomes less and less important. A fast marathon will translate well here, obviously. but again, probably a 2.08 guy rather than a 2.02 guy. Just like a 28min guy leapfrogs a 27min guy in a marathon and so forth.

Kouros today writes on FB more specifically about his issues with this attempt:

"Did I mentioned "shoes" in my post? Congratulations and many thanks to those with such incorrect interpretation!

I was clear: talking about unofficially set running activity.

For those who disagree with me and for the female champion of the distance who believes is "official", I ask:

1. Are you representing the fair-play, athletic spirit and equality, or the sponsor's will?

2. Can anybody provide the rule that says a competitor is allowed to be in a place of a country and choose the date on personal basis and postpone it every now and then, awaiting for the ideal weather broadcast in order to choose the day that sweets him/her to perform????

(a. In the 24h race in New York, back in 1985, the event was not mine and not for me, but open to all competitors and the date set months before, as the rules demand. A cuple of days prior to the event there was an announcement that on the day of the race the hurricane "Gloria" will attack us! Did I -or any competitor- had the right to go back to our countries, homes etc and return to perform in ideal conditions? No way! We took it as it came and, this is the reason I end up with 178 miles, instead of 185-190...

b. In the 48h of Surgeres, France, back in 1996, on my last training in Athens I broke 4 ribs and I couldn't even sleep! I went to the race unable to breath... Again, did I had the right to tell the organisation to pospond the event, plus to the other international runners to go home and come back in a few months, when I could be recovered? No way! Thats way I end up with 473km -WR- and not 510 km that I was planing and able to cover...)

3. Are you pretend that you care about the other competitors? If so, why are only a few allowed to take part and only from the same country? How then can be an open event? Is it official when other athletes are not allowed to participate? ( People unaware of ultra-runing details they can't see that when you appear with 303.5km, 295 or less -especially on the track- your legs have covered 8-12km extra, depending on your speed and the number of participants in the field... The faster you run, the more covered distance you are losing, surpassing your co-competitors! And this is one of the many "shortcuts", that happens in an event unofficially set, I was referring to..., unless you run on your own, or to an unopen activity with a few selected runners, but, in such way equality and fairness are not fulfiled, and therefor the term "officiall" either... )

So the trick is clear: less field in order not to run the extra distance by surpassing runners...... Is it fair???

4. About labels: can you provide the rule that says that when participants appear to run 2minute/km, another year 260-320/h!!!!!, judges going home during the night and competitors cut the corners, course not measured officially, with multiple other irregularities.... do you continue to offer them labels as in many cases in Athens?

If some people unaware of the sport can't get my points, bad luck! I can't help them further than I have sacrificed my life to show the right way...!!!

Καλημέρα και καλό μήνα!

Have a nice day and good month!''

Kouros makes fair points.

Just a few years back you had to run records in real races.

Now with the start of the sub 2 project everybody comes up with his own "record race" where start times can get adjusted to the best weather.

Self organized races raise the question how good the rules will get followed.

Also keep in mind that the weather forecast is so much better now than even 10 or 20 years ago.

Anyway, I don't think we will see Kouros' 24 hour record get broken in the next 25 years.

His 48 hour record should be good for another 50.

Alavisca wrote:

Completely agree. I don't understand how people are quick to separate 400m from marathon because of different energy systems but not marathon (2hrs) vs 24hrs.

The marathon and 24 hour are both aerobic events with slightly different twists (i.e. being a good fat burner matters a lot more over 24 hours than the marathon). The 400m is an anaerobic event that has pretty much nothing to do with the marathon. But yes to some extent people are underestimating the differences. But right now if you were say a 2:05 marathoner whose best event was say the 100mi (i.e. you could run at the equivalent of a 2:02 marathon) would you train for the marathon or the 100mi?

Kipchoge might actually not be my first choice for an ultra guy. He is a really fast shorter distance dude that has run well over the marathon. Marathon might be close to his max. Give me one of those Japanese guys who is running 2:08 with 28:30 speed and see what happens. Get 100 of them, and a couple will have the rest of the factors line up.

And as people have pointed out if you start adding in surfaces and technical skills, you add one more thing that has to line up. How much of those are learned skills versus genetic but I don't think any of them would intrinstically hurt your marathoning ability(i.e. having a 44s 400m probably requires genetics that will be counter productive in running a 2:00 marathon)

Experienced 24 hour racer wrote:

I found my notes for this race. Unfortunately the system thinks I use profanity so I upload a photo of the text. The race was in April 2018.

Results here:

This was a great example, that if you let 2:11 to 2:20 Marathoners run a 100 mile race the outcome is not what you might expect.

Come on...how's that a great example?

A road running club wanting to bolster the 100mile image invited some guys who ran Comrades, dangled R100,000 (your report has one extra zero), i.e. about $8,000, still significant enough for these guys. They had no specific lead up, or transition to 100 mile training. Then they had a shot, and when they realised they are not going to go under the record, they said 'why bother'. That's what I would have done.

These guys want to pick up pay checks, and its 7 weeks to Comrades. What do you think they will do after a good training distance, and outside record pace?

But you shoot yourself in the foot, because listed there is Oleg Kharitinov who is the best Comrades performer in that list, I recall his massive sub 32 min last 10km one year. He is the guy who had the WR for 100 mile at the time, and still managed to jog to the win

I am Sam wrote:

But you shoot yourself in the foot, because listed there is Oleg Kharitinov who is the best Comrades performer in that list, I recall his massive sub 32 min last 10km one year. He is the guy who had the WR for 100 mile at the time, and still managed to jog to the win

Why is that?

Oleg Kharitinov was a world class 100k runner and had the 100 mile worlds best.

Experienced 24 hour racer wrote:

I am Sam wrote:

But you shoot yourself in the foot, because listed there is Oleg Kharitinov who is the best Comrades performer in that list, I recall his massive sub 32 min last 10km one year. He is the guy who had the WR for 100 mile at the time, and still managed to jog to the win

Why is that?

Oleg Kharitinov was a world class 100k runner and had the 100 mile worlds best.

Actually Oleg should still be considered the world record holder as Zach Bitter's performance was indoors in a temperature controlled environment. He should only be referred to as the indoor 100 mile record holder.

How far back would KJ be at Comrades? 30 minutes? An hour?

the real truth wrote:

How far back would KJ be at Comrades? 30 minutes? An hour?

Well I guess his first task would be to at least do better than Sage and beat the first lady !

That said if he really had to train and focus for it probably anything from 10-30 minutes I would guess

Jim Walmsley was going to run it this year with proper training which would have been very interesting to give an indication

Experienced 24 hour racer wrote:

Kouros makes fair points.

Just a few years back you had to run records in real races.

Now with the start of the sub 2 project everybody comes up with his own "record race" where start times can get adjusted to the best weather.

Self organized races raise the question how good the rules will get followed.

Also keep in mind that the weather forecast is so much better now than even 10 or 20 years ago.

Anyway, I don't think we will see Kouros' 24 hour record get broken in the next 25 years.

His 48 hour record should be good for another 50.

Sub-2 was a closed time trial to see if it was possible, no official records were attempted or set in that one.

the orange state wrote:

I am Sam wrote:

I can walk all day, or longer depending on how long I can stay awake.

It is not a talent, as much as growing the longest finger nails isn't

I can lounge on a couch for a week. That's real endurance. It takes a lot of specialized skills that a fast runner doesn't possess.

Absolutely! that's the whole point, some people CAN lounge on a couch all week where some fit guy will get a blood clot and die in the 5th week. Sure its funny but its quite literally some people have better endurance in specific things. I guess my main point is saying don't be proud of yourself one way or the other, super fast guy or slower ultrarunner, you're all basically nothing but a product of your genetics and you didn't work harder than anyone else. If there is a difference I would say there's more competition in faster stuff so faster guys win by virtue of that alone if you want to argue at all.

adsfdasfasfsafadfa wrote:

And as people have pointed out if you start adding in surfaces and technical skills, you add one more thing that has to line up. How much of those are learned skills versus genetic but I don't think any of them would intrinstically hurt your marathoning ability

This is kind of a pet peeve of mine. As much as I think of myself as a good trail runner skipping over rocks and root (obviously technical downhill is not included here), it is not a freakin skill of the calibre people make it. What I mean by that if you actually run like 9 minute miles when you can run 8 minute miles with no problem on flat trail simply because you have no "surface" skills you probably couldn't drive a car right. I consider it an affront to our cavemen ancestry hunting saber toothed tigers if we are going to argue over this as a win or lose skill lol.