What are some things you DON'T like about ultra racing?

Ultras involve running slow.

I don't like running slow.

Anything over a 5 minute km is a waste of my time.

Also, the sleeping in a van thing seems dumb.

I prefer 50k through 50 miles. 100 is too long for me. I may do a 100k but that will be my top. I ran roads for the first 15 years of my running and then changed the trails just to add some variety. I've got to say I'm much prefer trails even if it's just for short half marathons.

I like that it's not just flat out speed for the race and you have to plan for hills and stream crossings and train. My first trail half Marathon was two loops and my strategy had me pass five runners on the final loop because I took hills easier on the 1st.

I did a 50 miler in the early 90s. Partially tore my IT band during the race but didn't feel it until after.

The training was an experience. I did a long training run of 38 miles. But, I've now done that plus a 40 miler up a mountain and back down, and I have no interest in doing that again. No interest in running a marathon again either though I could change my mind on that.

You are right on with your observations.

Ultrarunning is not for everybody. It requires a lot of different skills. It's not just running.

And that's why I like it. I am doing ultras for 30+ years without crews and pacers and I am still enjoying it.

But I don't like all the hype about it, these days.

That I have to train through an AZ summer to run any of them.

You don't really have to have a crew, it's certainly doable to solo a 100 miler.

Limited entries, especially in the more known events, means lotteries and gimmicks like Golden Tickets.

Looks boring. I really don't see the point. Why not just run it on a treadmill in your home? No need for a crew.

I've done many 100-milers and other ultras and I completely understand your position. However, I enjoy them more than anything because I get to be alone for long periods of time, both in the race and in training. I have some OCD-type tendencies as well, and running long satisfies them immensely.

The fact that they're addicted to exercise im already unofficially addicted to everything.

What I don't like about ultras is when members of the general public give ultrarunners credit for being tough and hard-core just because they jog-walked all day. It totally eats me up inside. Don't those people understand how difficult it is to run a hard 5K on the track, i.e. REAL RUNNING?

Typical LRC Poster wrote:

What I don't like about ultras is when members of the general public give ultrarunners credit for being tough and hard-core just because they jog-walked all day. It totally eats me up inside. Don't those people understand how difficult it is to run a hard 5K on the track, i.e. REAL RUNNING?

Don't get me wrong, doing a 100-mile ultra is TOUGH. The last 30 or so miles were really miserable. But it's "tough" in such a different way than non-ultra running. With distances up to a marathon it's all about your ability to run fast and hard the entire time. In the ultra I 'ran', the last third was about being able to keep walking quickly on extremely tired legs and blistered feet while trying to keep food down and not tripping at night (better hope your headlamp doesn't go out and you've practice running in one). It was such a different experience that it's almost hard to calling it a 'running' event... more like trekking or adventuring? There's just too much non-running stuff to deal with in 100-mile races (hydration, nutrition, gear, equipment, drop bags, clothing/shoe changes, headlamps etc.) that it really turned me off from doing one in the future. I just want to run!!

So many people that have started running them recently are doing it because it’s the new thing and they don’t want to experience FOMO. Those people have ruined the sport. It used to only attract a certain type of weirdo (including myself). We didn’t need all the hoopla and we weren’t all heroes. We ran long to get away from everyone. Now these noobs have changed the whole dynamic and it sucks.

fat guy in a little coat wrote:

So many people that have started running them recently are doing it because it’s the new thing and they don’t want to experience FOMO. Those people have ruined the sport. It used to only attract a certain type of weirdo (including myself). We didn’t need all the hoopla and we weren’t all heroes. We ran long to get away from everyone. Now these noobs have changed the whole dynamic and it sucks.

100% agree.

It doesn't seem like something that a physically/mentally healthy person would do. Running fast in anything from sprints through the 10km or even the half feels like something a healthy human being would do. In the longer normal races the competitive athletes might be skinny or a bit frail looking but they are usually still healthy looking, certainly more healthy than the average person on the street.

On the ultramarathon people just look unwell, the sport destroys the body rather than building it, and I think they would have to have some kind of mental illness to enjoy it. This is even true of the marathon to some extent but obviously a lot less than 100+ miler ultras

Do not like,because a fast runner can lose due to poor course marking.

BILL SLOWSKY wrote:

It doesn't seem like something that a physically/mentally healthy person would do. Running fast in anything from sprints through the 10km or even the half feels like something a healthy human being would do. In the longer normal races the competitive athletes might be skinny or a bit frail looking but they are usually still healthy looking, certainly more healthy than the average person on the street.

On the ultramarathon people just look unwell, the sport destroys the body rather than building it, and I think they would have to have some kind of mental illness to enjoy it. This is even true of the marathon to some extent but obviously a lot less than 100+ miler ultras

You can say the same thing about climbing Mount Everest, skiing to the south pole (a friend of mine, Ola Skinnarmo, did), rowing across the atlantic etc. It´s a completely different activity. You can´t judge that by the same standards as standard distances. I also wonder why the Letsrun crowd seems so threatened by such a niche sport as ultra running.

well,, wrote:

You can say the same thing about climbing Mount Everest, skiing to the south pole (a friend of mine, Ola Skinnarmo, did), rowing across the atlantic etc. It´s a completely different activity. You can´t judge that by the same standards as standard distances. I also wonder why the Letsrun crowd seems so threatened by such a niche sport as ultra running.

Because they have aged out of their track years. The 5k PR they set was done long time ago and now the only thing which is "improving" is the beer belly.

100 is just too long IMO. For me the sweet spot would be 50 mi, long enough to be a cool experience without getting into total grind territory or requiring special attention to gear/nutrition.

If I'm going to complain about something, it's that WAY too many courses are like a 5-10 mile loop. What's the point? The attraction of ultras to me is covering a huge variety of trail and nature.

Ha, this is amusing to me because whenever I run a fast 10k or shorter distance it certainly does not feel healthy. I feel like I am going to die the whole way and then when I finish feel like I am going to throw up and it takes the rest of the day for my lungs to feel normal again.

Not saying ultras are not hard on the body. But still not sure what you are talking about with body types either. If you compare elite traditional distance runners with ultra runners, a good portion of distance elites look like straight up skeletons. Ultra runner body types seem far more varied and many of the best have a good amount of muscle.

Because they have aged out of their track years. The 5k PR they set was done long time ago and now the only thing which is "improving" is the beer belly.

There has never been a more accurate statement on this site!