Is Mountain, Ultra and Trail running competitive?

Sideshow is a good description.

This crew is like Triathletes. Starving for recognition.

Recently, I've decided to get back into doing races and opted to focus on trail races rather than road races. For me, I love running around in the forest much more than pounding the roads, especially as I get older and can feel the miles a bit more. Plus, I get to spend a day or two camping for the race.

I think a lot of trail runners can handle traditional events, but they have other interests. In my opinion, being out there in the woods surrounded by nature is a superior experience to running around an oval or dodging traffic. Doing a trail half-marathon or marathon is brutal with all the hills and poor footing. Some of these races are run at slow paces because guys are walking up hills.

The guys that do 50k, 50 mi, ultras, that stuff blows my mind. I don't understand how folks can plod along for that long. Until you do something that long on rolling hills or up a mountain, I'd wouldn't knock it too hard.

Investing your life into the remote areas that cater to these types of running probably kill off any type of competition.

Youth run shorter faster events on a more level playing field.

Competition is less of a factor when it comes to Ultra running or Mountain/trail running, these races are more of you vs the course than the other runners.

That depends on what is meant by "couldn't handle traditional events". Does it mean they couldn't handle the rigorous track/marathon training? For the top ultra guys that is mostly a no. If it means they couldn't be competitive on that level, then I think you're getting at something, and that something is not necessarily derogatory in the usual way it is thrown around here. There are a lot of ultra guys who could run low 2:20s right now and some who could break that. But they aren't going to be going to the Olympics, WCs, winning US championships, etc. They might be able to if they dedicated themselves to it over a long time, but that's just not what they want to do. Now go to distances like the 50 miler, 100k, 100 mile, there's a lot more of an opportunity for these guys to compete at an international level, break records, represent their country, earn money, etc. So if I'm a guy out of college who enjoys competing at long distances and I've run say 2:29, I could choose to chip away for years with almost zero financial support and maybe run in the high 2:10s, win some smaller races, maybe qualify for and run in the Olympic trials. Or I could take my dedication to a sport that has a rapidly growing level of young talent, growing exposure, and growing financial support. On top of that, a high 2:20s guy like me has a real shot at representing my country on the international level and breaking records at big events. So yes, a lot of the top ultra guys couldn't handle the competition of the shorter distances But in the past where those guys would chip away for modest PRs or quit altogether, more guys are now continuing their running on the trails where they are breaking records and advancing a long ignored aspect of our sport.

A lot of people equate today's top ultra runner with those of 15, 20 years ago who in a lot of cases were just fast hikers. That couldn't be more wrong. If you want to see a good representation of today's trail runner, look at Max King. Here's a guy who goes and competes on the trails but still stays in touch with road speed and could spank 99% of the guys who bash trail runners.

true or maybe a little false wrote:

I know that this group is incredibly geeky...

They may be geeky, but as a group they are less geeky than road and track runners.

Thanks for that. That is exactly what I thought, Your response speaks volumes. I guess it is great when a Tier C guy like Max King can rule the sport. It is probably not coincidental that Max was a steeple guy. The steeple receives very little respect on the track as well.

It is. Very much competitive. The fact that not even Dean K. can win all races, and he was named fittest man on the planet, proves this.

east africans don't do it, if that's what you mean.

I live in an ultrarunning happy town. I can tell you these things to be true, in general:

- they own lots of gear ($$money$$)

- they go out of their way to publicize their latest, coolest adventure run. (narcissistic)

- they generally despise traditional runners. (elitist)

- they swear as though to seem cool. (immature)

- they like trendy shit. They were all over the Vibrams. (sheep)

- they carry shit like water bottles on most of their short runs (develop terrible form).

- they try to get people to do ultras and try to convince them that this is the cool, right thing to be doing. (evangelical christians).

A lot of the top ultra, mountain, trail runners out there are 14:30 5k, 2:20 marathon guys. they're fast in their own right. I'd say the ultra, mountain, trail runner with the fastest track credentials is probably someone like Ryan Bak.

true or maybe a little false wrote:

Thanks for that. That is exactly what I thought, Your response speaks volumes. I guess it is great when a Tier C guy like Max King can rule the sport. It is probably not coincidental that Max was a steeple guy. The steeple receives very little respect on the track as well.

Except he doesn't rule the sport - at least not ultras. What major ultras has he won? He won AR50 in 2009, but the next year he finished 3rd, about 11 minutes behind Roes. A lot of people have run faster on that course.

He has had a lot more success with mountain running and shorter trail runs.

Michael Wardian probably rates outside of the top 50 fastest American marathoners but he has a few USATF championship wins at ultra distances and a world championship medal. You could look at that and reason that if a C level guy can clean up at the ultra distances, just imagine what an A or B level guy could do. You could also look at Josh Cox as a B level American marathoner who's tried the ultra distances but hasn't done anything that would indicate he's as good, never mind better than Wardian at ultras. Saying ultras are for athletes who couldn't handle traditional events is like saying the 5000 is for athletes that couldn't handle the 1500, ergo Bekele is dodging the real competition. It's a different skill set.

That said, the incentives at the top level in ultra distances are much less than in traditional distances. It's fair to say the depth of competition is less at the ultra distances, but that's a lot different than saying it's "not competitive".

I think the top ultras (Miwok 100k, Western States 100, UTMB, etc.) are actually very competitive. However, there are a lot of smaller ultras that aren't competitive at all. I've been top three in four 100-milers (one win), but I know that I wouldn't be even the slightest bit competitive at a larger 5k or half marathon. I simply do the longer races because I enjoy them more - not to escape real competition.

Citizen Runner wrote:

You could also look at Josh Cox as a B level American marathoner who's tried the ultra distances but hasn't done anything that would indicate he's as good

Isn't he the 50K WR holder?

American record holder, I think he was going after the WR when he set it though.

I wouldnt quite say Cox is the record holder. That course was not a legit course. You must set the actual record on a looped course, plus he finished on a track for the last 8-9k. NOT LEGIT.

Its a shame he is called the US 50k record holder, anybody in the Ultra scene would say otherwise.

Nutella1 wrote:

Citizen Runner wrote:

You could also look at Josh Cox as a B level American marathoner who's tried the ultra distances but hasn't done anything that would indicate he's as good

Isn't he the 50K WR holder?

Though 50K is technically an ultra, the 50k run that he ran is not categorically different than a road marathon. Any marathoner of sub 2:20 ability is probably capable of a solid 50K over similar surface. Shoot, running a flat 50K to them is similar to a less talented runner running the marathon in 3 hrs.

The point was considering what happens when you're out there for hours beyond a normal marathon.

Max King is a "Tier C" guy?

The same Max King that took 19th in the Olympic Marathon Trials, 5:38 behind Meb?

Those are some small tiers.

notsofaster wrote:

I wouldnt quite say Cox is the record holder. That course was not a legit course. You must set the actual record on a looped course, plus he finished on a track for the last 8-9k. NOT LEGIT.

Its a shame he is called the US 50k record holder, anybody in the Ultra scene would say otherwise.

That's an interesting point that I haven't heard before but it makes sense because don't they hold world ultra championships on looped courses? Do you have a link to someone disputing Cox's claim to the record?