Why do people on here hate ultra runners?

This is the type of response I have come to expect from elites that I have met on both sides of this concocted letsrun argument.

Keep at it. Best of Luck

Great question Spartanrunner97 and may I call you Spart? See the world is very robotic and systematic....and breaking that system and repitition makes the lizard people scared. The lizard robot people want a very specific structure to go by. And when a lizard decides one day to run up a mountain instead of staying right on the hal higdon elite marathon training program, all the other lizards gather around and sacrifice things. Mainly feelings. They get on forums and hurt peoples feelings. I honestly dont know if Dennis Kimetto could win any sky race. But I bet hed go top 10 at speedgoat if he didnt roll his ankle.

"Longer events are certainly not "harder" but there are more variables that can go exponentially wrong. "

I think this is precisely why I discount ultra races. I know a lot of folks that do these things, but because once you start going over the marathon AND when you start doing that kind of distance on a trail or mountain you have added so many variables that the running starts to become second to how you planned your neutrician, did your body process what you ate/drank to where you can even finish no matter what the pace.

It's not that ultras are a bad thing, at some point it's just a survival contest and not really a foot race.

Personally it just seems like a way to do two things poorly at the same time. You are trying to go too fast to enjoy a good long hike in the woods, but you are going too slow to really get into a great running groove.

i like office analogies wrote:

simple explanation wrote:

Ultra runners are the jazz musicians and road runners (i.e., LRCers) are the classical musicians of the running world.

Oh my god, no.

Ultra runners are Michael Scott.

Road runners are Jim, Pam, Ryan (PEDs included), Toby, Oscar, etc.

The highest level of the sport is on the track, so it goes:

Track

Road

XC

Trails/ultra

I didnt know they had trail tracks? Ive seen trail roads before. I ran a track xc race on a road trail once. I got beat by a trail track road runner that never did a track xc race on a road trail before.

Squatchua wrote:

I didnt know they had trail tracks? Ive seen trail roads before. I ran a track xc race on a road trail once. I got beat by a trail track road runner that never did a track xc race on a road trail before.

Your attempt at humor=fail.

Try again. That made no sense.

Remember the First rule of comedy: Be funny.

I have a recent example. I was talking to a friend the other week who was gloating about how his coworker is an amazing Olympic caliber runner because he does ultra marathons. And after I explained it to him that running 12 minute pace is essentially a swift walk he realized that ultra runners aren’t good runners, they are just persistent and never give up. My beef with ultra runners is they talk it up how fast they are when they really aren’t fast at all. If they admitted to be slow hard workers I’d be fine with them.

Kvothe wrote:

... its long slow plodding runs with food breaks and walk breaks

I read a post on fb by a pretty good ultra runner the other day saying how its ok and probably even the best strategy to walk up long hills.

T&/marathon require competing a distance as fast as possible. The goal in ultra seems to be just to run a further and further distance until you can win. Can't win a 100 miler? Well how about a 48 hour event!

You touch on a number of different points. The variable in any racing event is to get from point A to B as fast as possible. Seeing Jim Walmsley blow up at Western States is no less exciting than seeing Mary Keitany go out hard at NYCM and blow up (2011). The other format for ultras (which you reference) is fixed time where runners run in a short loop as far a distance as they can cover in a given amount of time. Historically, fixed time used to be raced frequently for sub ultra events (including the hour - which Haile G holds). the 48 WR is 294 miles held by the Greek god of ultrarunning Yiannis Kouros. True, most ultras aren't competitive. But, neither are most recreational road races, including the big and "prestigious" ones. Even the Majors rarely have any significant depth to them, for the races to be interesting beyond a few of the top contenders. Like anything else, ultras require an understanding of them. I don't follow gold or tennis, but I recognize that there is something to the sports even if I don't understand them.

Its because youre a dry lizard robot person who is structured by hal higdon performances. I am funny. I had 3 people laugh at this joke already. I win.

Quit being mean, old man!

post a picture of you and your legs. I want to see if your worth a good argument

Let's not forget that there are ultras on the track, and trails don't necessarily mean ultra. Running is running. I admit, the one bit of competitive running I don't follow is sprinting - and that's b/c I hardly understand it.

Well at a certain point (think Barkleys) it is pretty much a different sport. I consider what I do al the sport of "Distance Running" but the event focus is very, very different. If you are hiking with poles and having to worry about getting lost it is like a scavenger hunt in the woods (no doubt very hard though).

What I've found is that the runnable ultra trail races (by "runnable we'll say you can average within 3-5min/mile slower than your road marathon pace) there is a high correlation with road marathon fitness and ultra trail performance....esp at 50km-100km. 100-milers are a different beast, but if it's 100-miles on a track or flat/road then it would still correlate every well to road marathon biomechanics and ability.

Now we get into the mountains with overnight 100s (UTMB) and then technical trail "Sky Running" stuff that is so steep you are going all-out doing 20-min miles up a mountain (think a mile with over 1200' of vertical gain) and the correlation fades. That is where you get 2:30 marathon guys beating 2:15 marathon guys. Variable Running Economy is everything.

A final note: Remember most "older" adults who aren't pros (and didn't run in school) can't really relate to what it is like to run a balls out 1500m/5km/10km on a track. Most can relate to road marathons and half marathons though and many (Even with OCR backgrounds) can relate to some element of "trail running."

I think the LRC community hate ultra runners b/c they are realize their spindly leggies can't handle the pounding mountain running takes. They look in the mirror and see a skinny, frail version of themselves and are jealous of the musculature of the ultra-trail runner.

Ultrarunners can actually climb a mountain. LRC'ers can only see pictures.

Guys, why are we fighting amongst ourselves when we have a common enemy: racewalkers.

Common Enemy wrote:

Guys, why are we fighting amongst ourselves when we have a common enemy: racewalkers.

Isn't that the same as ultra runners?

because it is non competitive and extreme for the sake of extreme.

non competitive - the money you win is not good and therefore, you don't see any top marathon runners even bothering with it

extreme - the marathon is already a race of who can outlast who and therefore not a speed race. the ultra marathon (let say 100 miles/24 hours/1 Week) is basically a marathon but with a lot more physical damage to your body. at the point of an ultra marathon , you're basically prioritizing running over your health.

the only people you impress by running an ultra marathoner are non competitors. they'll be like "omg! i can barely run 1 mile at 9 minutes!!!" but when you tell an actual competitive runner that you're an ultra marathoner, they'd be more interested in the time it took you to run the event, than about the "accomplishment" that you crossed the finish line in such a long race. What would you rather be, a 4:10 minute miler, or a 2:59 hour marathoner? i think most of us would rather be the 4:10 miler but to the non runner, they may see the marathon as a bigger accomplishment.

There is definitely an element of this, given the extreme length of the events. That said, I don't think that's especially true either, depending on your definition of "fast". There is little need for anything that would begin to focus on anaerobic capacity. Definitely not going to see fast 200s/400s/800s.

That said, while endurance is a major player at these distances, your aerobic power is still a huge issue. If you're best 5k is 18:00, you're, 7:00 is not really even as easy pace for you. No way are you going to be able to sustain intensities like that for ultra durations of 6, 12, or god forbid 24+ hours. By the same token, if you're a 16:00 guy, now 7' pace at least is an easy pace. Still not something that's going to be easy for 12 hours though. Get down towards 14:00...and now 7' pace is a legitimate recovery pace. You can do this all day, everyday, in your sleep. It's a HUGE advantage in an ultra to be a 65' half guy versus a 75' half guy.

Now, obviously your endurance is a much bigger factor, but that was a already an issue at the marathon, with Tadesse being the ultimate case in point. Guy, on paper, should be the WR holder in the marathon. He isn't. Why? He doesn't have endurance in that band of 90-95% of HMP. This is a quality that isn't related to aerobic fitness, and varies from athlete to athlete. It's why you can have one guy run 60' half marathon and 2:06 marathon and another does 60' and 2:14 marathon.

However, it's always an advantage to have a faster 10M/HMP (aerobic power). For an individual, 90% of HMP is always going to be sustainable for longer than 95% of HMP which is always going to be sustainable for longer than 100% of HMP...despite that all of these are to some extent theoretically sustainable indefinitely. The 75' half guy has to work at 83% of HMP to go at 7' pace. That can usually be sustained for 4-6 hours. A 65' half guy can go at 70% of HMP, which can usually be sustained for MUCH longer, probably 12+ hours in many cases.

Bottom line is that aerobic fitness still matters massively. How do you train for aerobic fitness? Basically what we all know. General overall volume/global fatigue, extension of duration at intensities just below threshold to pull up the percent of VO2 that can be sustained, then when those gains slow and that percentage approaches 90, you can do some more intensity and more on raises the overall VO2 to "raise the ceiling" for which your threshold can grow.

No fast intervals in the 800/mile type range, but a smattering of 3k/5k/10k work and a diet of stuff around HMP is what you'd expect to see. In my mind, plodding doesn't start until you approach something much slower than MP, basically somewhere into your easy/endurance run pace.

People don't run ultras to impress others but to enjoy themselves. Get over it, you morans.