Hal Koerner who just wrote a book on how to run ultras drops early.
Timothy Olsen dropped because his body was tired. He is having a tough year.
Dakota Jones who is overhyped in my book. He has only run one solid performance at the 100 mile distance at Hardrock and his time is 2 hours slower than the course record. He dropped.
Anton Krupicka stopped to take a 3.5 hour nap because of stomach issues is back on course in around 50th place. I thought he would take it this year.
Shlarb took 4th. He finished over an hour slower than 1st place.
The UTMB curse for the men continues. We had the talent but we didn't produce a winner. Next year?
The American men get spanked at UTMB 100
Pro News/Info/Results
Distance
Report Thread
You are reporting this thread to the moderators for review and possible removal from the forum.
-
-
Hal is getting old, and has raced a ton. Pretty well past his best.
Olson needs to eat some damn carbs. Long term keto results in chronic fatigue, and he's showing it.
Dakota's better suited to shorter distance still, despite what he seems to want.
Anton... well, he's never really won a big 100, has he? Leadville twice in very weak years, a second at Western States. And those were YEARS ago.
Schlarb focused on this race, training in Europe for a while beforehand. It worked.
And Rory Bosio wins for the second year in a row. Maybe they should just ask her? -
Hal was never a "great" ultra guy, just an opportunist.
The game has changed. The days of Dakota Jones and Anton and Olson being world beaters is gone.
We need to see Rob Krar, Sage Canaday, Zach Miller, those dudes at UTMB. The new crop of talent. -
As an American I take pride in this result. Being good at ultras is like being good at dressage or boggle.
-
The top three - a Frenchman and two Spaniards - are all sponsored by Salomon and ran together for the majority of the race. Perhaps some team tactics would have helped the Americans.
I think it's mostly an issue of the different Euro style of racing and the fact that Americans psyche themselves out. -
I think Krar has the potential to win UTMB. Sage is smarter than people give him credit for in not moving up too soon. Respect the distance (and often more important, the terrain).
-
CDG wrote:
I think Krar has the potential to win UTMB. Sage is smarter than people give him credit for in not moving up too soon. Respect the distance (and often more important, the terrain).
I think we are seeing the upper end of what can be achieved having a philosophical prejudice against speed.
These faster dudes that have crossed over or any random fast 10K-marathon guys coming out later are our only realistic chance of competing with the euros. Not saying they will definitely succeed but its the difference between having potential and being limited by capacity. I think that is a good a thing as here in america we have a pedigree of running faster on the track and roads. I say use your strengths don't ignore it. -
Strange logic here. We lose to Euros on a mountain 100 course, so of course the answer is... better road/track speed? The Euro mountain runners seem to do just fine without that background.
-
Not strange at all. If what you think should be working but has never worked you might want to start with that evidence first. Who knows maybe the euro runners have a better playground for training maybe they train harder maybe they're mentally or physically tougher for ultras. Maybe its none of the above and they are just randomly winning all the time when we get a showdown opportunity. Either way we go over there we get waxed, they come over here we still get waxed doesn't sound very equivalent there hmm? So in the interest of not burying one's head in the sand I'm all for not trying to out-euro the masters and developing your own proven strengths like road and track speed (which by the way has not been too shabby and has gotten results in its very early introduction into the ultra world). You know what they say about doing the same things over and over again and expecting different results...
lfk wrote:
Strange logic here. We lose to Euros on a mountain 100 course, so of course the answer is... better road/track speed? The Euro mountain runners seem to do just fine without that background. -
Probably because we don't care about being competitive in jogging.
-
logical conclusion wrote:
Not strange at all. If what you think should be working but has never worked you might want to start with that evidence first. Who knows maybe the euro runners have a better playground for training maybe they train harder maybe they're mentally or physically tougher for ultras. Maybe its none of the above and they are just randomly winning all the time when we get a showdown opportunity. Either way we go over there we get waxed, they come over here we still get waxed doesn't sound very equivalent there hmm? So in the interest of not burying one's head in the sand I'm all for not trying to out-euro the masters and developing your own proven strengths like road and track speed (which by the way has not been too shabby and has gotten results in its very early introduction into the ultra world). You know what they say about doing the same things over and over again and expecting different results...
lfk wrote:
Strange logic here. We lose to Euros on a mountain 100 course, so of course the answer is... better road/track speed? The Euro mountain runners seem to do just fine without that background.
I do. But I also know that Rory Bosio - an American who trains specifically in the mountains, doing zero structured "speed" workouts, with no track background - has won UTMB twice in a row now.
Dakota Jones posted extensively on his switch to a more structured training program last year, with intervals tempos, etc. And frankly, he's been pretty bad since then.
Even Krar and Sage, the "track guys", now train specifically for the races they attempt. Trying to win in the mountains by doing 20 X 400 is a fool's errand. -
You miss the point anyone doing 20 x 400's training for ultras should be tarred and feathered. You should however increase the exposure and perhaps move the financial support for those with more "upper end" as they are the ones who will run the fast enough times to compete with the euros for the win IF they can translate. Even Kilian the pure mountain guy who will probably never set foot on anything flat has an incredible aerobic capacity. I just think if we try compete in the traditional way the euros are just better at it and we will never get there. Its all fun and games I'm just thinking we might want to try to win some of these things is all.
lfk wrote:
Even Krar and Sage, the "track guys", now train specifically for the races they attempt. Trying to win in the mountains by doing 20 X 400 is a fool's errand. -
US ultra runners have had some great performances in some bigger ultras over the past few years, but still not seeing the ultra interest like other countries. What's a joke to me regarding several US ultra runners is the 2:25 - 2:40 marathon guy who wins US ultra races due to the limited participation and minimal prize money, and then blogs about himself/herself, pimps products, pronounces himself/herself as a great coach, post every workout, lengthy detailed race reports of ever crap they took in their last race, etc. Some of these guys really need to get over themselves!
-
Okay, I'll bite.
First off as far as "speed" goes...well, I haven't touched the track this entire year! 20 by 400m? yeaaaaaaah right, I wouldn't even do that training for a road marathon. The fastest I go is about 5:10 pace doing short tempo runs and 2-mile repeats (it doesn't feel good after climbing/jogging up 14,000' peaks). For sure there is something to be said about developing muscle tension and leg strength through fast running (as well as the obvious cardiovascular stimulus)..that helps with some climbing ability on the trails.
I also know where i stand when it comes to speed (mid-pack at the last Olympic Trials). I'm a 14:29 5km runner. My Vo2max sucks.
In my very limited experience of racing in Europe (and granted I haven't run any 100s) the mountains just seem very different. There's a reason Max King and I got totally waxed at Sierre-Zinal (like brought to a crying walk). That's only a 20-mile race. Something about the transition of very steep ups and downs to flats and weird grades on uneven trails. It's about how the hills come at you, when they come at you, and what percent grade you have to grind up and down...
Now that being said, Jason Schlarb (who does come from a more traditional "speed background" did get 4th). He's been training on the course there all summer. Coincidence? I think not... I have no idea what Rory does to do so well, but I've seen her run and she's got really smooth and "speedy" looking form and is built like an elite 10km runner.
As far as the sponsorship plugs and shameless self promotion goes. It's really the name of the game (if you want companies to notice). I have contracts that require a certain number of Instagram, Twitter, Facebook and blog links each month. I don't always think it's good marketing, but a lot of ultra runners get deals this way.
As far as the future of MUT (Mountain-Ultra-Trail) Running goes. The key is Running Economy over variable terrain. Having a high Vo2max helps, having a well-trained lactate threshold helps...but what really matters (besides getting in food as it's an eating contest as well) is if your legs can hold up. Then again, I haven't run that far yet so take all that I just I wrote with a grain of salt... -
Dude if we could get predominantly 2:25 runners into the sport crazy enough to run 100 miles that would better than anything I could expect for proper competition. Problem is this hip-hooray and ballyhoo that north of 2:40 is the way to go the slower the better. The philosophical prejudice against speed is the reason we haven't showcased the full speed of american ultra running.
Sparkplug wrote:What's a joke to me regarding several US ultra runners is the 2:25 - 2:40 marathon guy who wins US ultra races due to the limited participation and minimal prize money -
logical conclusion wrote:
Dude if we could get predominantly 2:25 runners into the sport crazy enough to run 100 miles that would better than anything I could expect for proper competition. Problem is this hip-hooray and ballyhoo that north of 2:40 is the way to go the slower the better. The philosophical prejudice against speed is the reason we haven't showcased the full speed of american ultra running.
Sparkplug wrote:What's a joke to me regarding several US ultra runners is the 2:25 - 2:40 marathon guy who wins US ultra races due to the limited participation and minimal prize money
Nobody is saying slower is better, in terms of talent. Of course, in general, faster runners are faster. We get it. And companies support the fast guys, the guys who win races. They're not gonna go dig up some random 2:15 guy and start begging him to run ultras. It might never translate. He might hate it. Who knows?
As far as the training goes, like every other distance, specificity counts. -
Man I agree with everything you say! Was I arguing with you I must have misunderstood sorry about that.
lfk wrote:Nobody is saying slower is better, in terms of talent. Of course, in general, faster runners are faster. We get it. And companies support the fast guys, the guys who win races. They're not gonna go dig up some random 2:15 guy and start begging him to run ultras. It might never translate. He might hate it. Who knows?
As far as the training goes, like every other distance, specificity counts. -
I will also add it appears Rory also spent the last 7 weeks leading up to the race training in France.
A lot of fast marathon guys can move up and crush ultras. Some won't though. It's kind of like the fast 5km-10km guys when they move up to the marathon (although in MUT Running I will say more variables are at play because of the course profile, eating etc.) some do well and some never seem to have the metabolism or ST muscle fiber endurance to pull it off. Think of all the sub 14min 5km guys that can't crack 2:20. Injury, not being able to handle the training/mileage, bonking, poor pacing all play a role..etc. -
I feel bad for krupicka. Unfortunately it seems like he is always the safe bet for a DNF/DNS, except for today obviously.
-
lfk wrote:
Trying to win in the mountains by doing 20 X 400 is a fool's errand.
you don't get it.
train 2 guys ultra-style, one with 1:51/3:45 speed (Krar's PRs) and the other who can barely crack 2:00/4:00. assuming they respond similarly to the training, of course runner #1 with crush #2.
you can train the endurance in any runner, but you can't just give someone 1:51/3:45-type talent and natural speed. and speed is the limiting factor in any race at any distance, as the goal is to cross the finish line first (shout out to Renato).
