Black On Blonde wrote:
The biggest reason to hate ultra hobbiests is their strange, seemingly insatiable, requirement to come on actual running websites looking for validation of their weekend pastime.
It's kind of pathetic - why bother continuously seeking reassurance from people who clearly don't, and never will, respect you...
I think the typical thing I find is that trail/ultra runners get way more attention. Why? Because in order to train for a mountain race....you have to train in beautiful mountains and you take beautiful pictures. Consistent road running photos are typically just not as sick. "Check out this track I run on every day and show in every photo". Trail runners are typically more connected by discussing how shoes work in certain terrains and sweet trails they know about. There is more camaraderie hands down.
People are drawn to something more primal and connected to the landscape. Running up and down mountains and super long distances isnt for slow people. When you look at the elite level of these guys they are not walking at all. I takes entirely different muscle groups to go up a mountain verse running flat. An uphill 8:30 min mile is equal to a 5 min mile on a flat road. It takes strategy on what to eat. It takes strategy on what shoes to wear to run down a wet rocky slope. I know countless successful short distance road and track runners that get into trail /ultra running not because they are slow but because they enjoy those aspects of running...the involvement. Its not about training and getting a robotic pace from start to end...its about understand your stengths and skills and making judgements. Its about develope strong hips for sharp downhill turns. Fast short road races are fun...but they are just plain boring compared to running a ridge for hours or pushing 50+ plus miles where you are in plain survival mode. If trails and ultras paid equal to short distance road racing....there would be a new level of speed. But if you took someone at the top of their game in road marathons and put them on a trail right now...they wouldn't come close to winning. Give them a year to train ....they absolutely would.
Black On Blonde wrote:
The biggest reason to hate ultra hobbiests is their strange, seemingly insatiable, requirement to come on actual running websites looking for validation of their weekend pastime.
It's kind of pathetic - why bother continuously seeking reassurance from people who clearly don't, and never will, respect you...
I'm not hijacking it. My main point is that I understand the appeal to turn to ultras. I said I wanted to hear stories from other people who might be similar to me. How is that hijacking. It is the opposite. You sir, are a douche. I'm just going to ignore any abuse I get. I'm not a rotten banana. I'm ripe as fukk.
I think somebody else said it, intensity. A lot of people on here train hard, which means suffering. And running is all about suffering and pain tolerance. No timeouts in racing right? I think a lot of people object to ultra running because there is so little intense training involved. And so it's seen more like professional hiking, jogging. Just speaking personally, the dozens of ultra runners I know do not do repeats of any kind. Now they'll go hike/jog/walk/run for 8 hours on a Saturday or Sunday, but if I ask them if they want to do mile repeats they cringe.
I think some people get jealous of all the time ultra runners seem to have. I'd like to be able to spend a lot more time in nature than I do, but I can't, so I run in the concrete jungle and around in circles on a track. To add another generalization to the mix, ultra running is a sport inhabited by more single/divorced/people with grown up kids who don't have as many restrictions in their life.
Finally, I think some of its confidence. Most ultra runners I know just don't give a crap about times or what people think about them. Whereas some people on here, wink wink, care quite a bit about every second of that 5K pr. People who are OCD about running perhaps subconsciously wish they could let go, and just enjoy a run through the woods, or running through the woods.
So I think you could sum up a lot of the hate as disguised jealousy. Ultra running is running without the intense training, done by confident people who have more time on their hands than the average person. And that pisses off a lot of people who train really hard, run painful repeats, care intensely about their 5k time and wonder if it's all worth it.
any surface/any distance makes sense from a disinterested point of view, but it seems the trucker hat/hydration vest crew is a bit too invested in their self-image/instagram account(s). So for that reason I think it's only logical to poke some light-hearted jabs in their general direction.
The ones that allow it to be a life-consuming/all-in/100% passion nay their life's purpose as it were? Well even more so. What is it about ultrarunners that makes this appear to be a front for some type of cult? And why do so many of the participants appear to be tenuously attached to the labor market or having a significant other basically paying the bills for their lifestyle?
Then finally, as typically experienced runners with a history of traditional running (tm) including track and road or xcountry, they tend to look down a bit on newer runners [this is true of all runners mind you, not just ultra types], so for this I'd give them a push as they pace shame/ridicule others in about the same frequency as far as I can tell. [your workout is my warmup!]
Anyways just some observations. Could I 'race' a 100 miler or a 48-hour thing or even a thon? Not really. Would I want to? Of course not, that's crazy talk.
But getting back to the 'any distance/any surface' concept, why not I guess? Maybe some sponsorship dollars will flow this direction and rather than seeing NBC coverage of boring 2-hr road races we'll see even more boring 24 hr trail wogging, won not by kenyans at 5'4 and 118# [males, of course], rather 5'6 135# 'real mericans' wearing a trucker hat and a full sleeve
:D
Have you ever did an ultra to be talking like this?because this is just stupid,you talk about it like it’s easy or like any body can do it?take guys like Sage Canaday a 2:16 marathoner who tried ultrarunning and couldn’t nearly compete with guys like walmsley and jornet..it’s way different from uptempo running yes..but it’s not easy
Winning wrote:
Because people think it is impressive to jog/hike for 12+ hours when it is not.
Heeeey, Amelia Boone is a legit runner! Started with OCR and attempted Barkley a few weeks ago
Here is why wrote:
Ultra runners are really competitive people who can’t compete on speed so they compete on distance instead.
I enjoy reading letsrun, but I usually just lurk, because I am not, and I never will really consider myself a runner. Over a decade ago, I finished in 28+ hours at Leadville, and I believe that I will finish sub-3 at Boston this month. I don't think people on letsrun actually hate ultra runners, or even dislike ultra runners any more than slow joggers. Every year over 23,000 high school kids run under 5 minutes in the mile, and I would wager a very high percentage, say >95% could run under 9 hours in a relatively easy 50 mile run. I say that in part, because I never ran under 5 minutes in the mile in high school, and right after high school I went and did a 50 miler on minimal training in a bit over 9 hours. I had a lot of fun, but I knew then and still know now, it was no big accomplishment, and likely less impressive than a 4:59 mile run, which would, understandably, get zero respect on these boards, because, it is damn slow compared to everyone else who actually runs.
Yes, comparisons are difficult, but any reasonably fit runner should be able to go under 6 hours in an easier 50 mile trail or road race. Jim Walmsley, for example, wasn't an especially fast college runner, sub-14 minute 5k, so not especially fast, but definitely very legit, and he ran a 5:21 at the JFK 50 miler. I haven't looked over the threads recently, but I believe that Walmsley has gotten some respect on letsrun for his performances. Yet, compared to someone like Galen Rupp, sub-13 5K, or Eliud Kipchoge, also sub-13 5K, he really is not a very fast runner, and I doubt anyone would believe for a second that Walmsley would not be totally destroyed by Rupp or Kipchoge in a 50 mile race.
So, in short, I don't think there is any hate for ultra runners on letsrun, I just think there is justified criticism of many ultra runners who think they are special- or actually, even runners, when many of them are really just out hiking. I hope they had a good time out on the trails, I know that I always do on ultra hikes or when playing and jogging in the woods, but I don't try to delude myself into thinking I am a runner or that I have done something worthy of attention or acclaim, in comparison to the many, many people on letsrun who have actually run under 4 minutes in the mile. The funny thing is, I believe that most "ultra runners," would actually be a lot faster (relatively) if they focused a lot more on running fast for short distance. Anyways, that is my hope going into Boston!
Why Not wrote:
I think somebody else said it, intensity. A lot of people on here train hard, which means suffering. And running is all about suffering and pain tolerance. No timeouts in racing right? I think a lot of people object to ultra running because there is so little intense training involved. And so it's seen more like professional hiking, jogging. Just speaking personally, the dozens of ultra runners I know do not do repeats of any kind. Now they'll go hike/jog/walk/run for 8 hours on a Saturday or Sunday, but if I ask them if they want to do mile repeats they cringe.
I think some people get jealous of all the time ultra runners seem to have. I'd like to be able to spend a lot more time in nature than I do, but I can't, so I run in the concrete jungle and around in circles on a track. To add another generalization to the mix, ultra running is a sport inhabited by more single/divorced/people with grown up kids who don't have as many restrictions in their life.
Finally, I think some of its confidence. Most ultra runners I know just don't give a crap about times or what people think about them. Whereas some people on here, wink wink, care quite a bit about every second of that 5K pr. People who are OCD about running perhaps subconsciously wish they could let go, and just enjoy a run through the woods, or running through the woods.
So I think you could sum up a lot of the hate as disguised jealousy. Ultra running is running without the intense training, done by confident people who have more time on their hands than the average person. And that pisses off a lot of people who train really hard, run painful repeats, care intensely about their 5k time and wonder if it's all worth it.
Ultra Trail Guy wrote:
I think the typical thing I find is that trail/ultra runners get way more attention. Why? Because in order to train for a mountain race....you have to train in beautiful mountains and you take beautiful pictures. Consistent road running photos are typically just not as sick. "Check out this track I run on every day and show in every photo". Trail runners are typically more connected by discussing how shoes work in certain terrains and sweet trails they know about. There is more camaraderie hands down.
People are drawn to something more primal and connected to the landscape. Running up and down mountains and super long distances isnt for slow people. When you look at the elite level of these guys they are not walking at all. I takes entirely different muscle groups to go up a mountain verse running flat. An uphill 8:30 min mile is equal to a 5 min mile on a flat road. It takes strategy on what to eat. It takes strategy on what shoes to wear to run down a wet rocky slope. I know countless successful short distance road and track runners that get into trail /ultra running not because they are slow but because they enjoy those aspects of running...the involvement. Its not about training and getting a robotic pace from start to end...its about understand your stengths and skills and making judgements. Its about develope strong hips for sharp downhill turns. Fast short road races are fun...but they are just plain boring compared to running a ridge for hours or pushing 50+ plus miles where you are in plain survival mode. If trails and ultras paid equal to short distance road racing....there would be a new level of speed. But if you took someone at the top of their game in road marathons and put them on a trail right now...they wouldn't come close to winning. Give them a year to train ....they absolutely would.
There's a lot of misunderstanding on both sides. People don't like things that they don't understand and that are foreign to them. It is hard to "relate to." So they become negative and lash out.
So a pure road/track runner "doesn't get" a 100-mile mountain ultra - Just like the "pure ultra-trail" guys who run ultras "don't get" what it is like racing a 5km/10km on a track (or in a lot of cases even a fast/flat road marathon). I've seen it from both sides.
There is so much variety in "MUT" (mountain-ultra-trail running) though. I don't think people realize how much a mountain 100-miler is different from a 100-miler on a flat course (or even a road/track/gravel path). Same thing goes with 50-milers and 50km for that matter. A lot of the most popular ultra runners (think Killian Jornet) don't even do ultras necessarily most of the time...they are doing VK mountain races, "SkyRunning" and 30-42km mountain events. But he is for sure known for Western States, UMTB, and his Hardrock performances (all 100-milers).
I've had some shaky results at ultras over the past 5-6 years, but my 50-mile PR is still only 6:07-6:09 (I forget, it was from winning the North Face Endurance Champs in San Fran on a muddy year though). Why so slow? Because the course had about 10,000' of climbing!
More flat and runnable ultras on "buffed out trails" or road/track with less climb correlate very very well to road marathon fitness and training. When Max King and I were in the lead pack at Comrades in 2015 (a lead pack of 30 guys!) we split the first 26.2 miles in under 2:40...which involved about 3500' of climbing at that point. But it was on a road. There were some 2:10-2:08 marathoners in that race.
Final note with "ultras": People also like niches. MUT Running is a very small niche of distance running in general...but niches get exploited of course. People are impressed with what society might call "extreme things." 100-miles in the Alps all-night through 3 different countries (UTMB) sounds lot more interesting and "extreme" (to some) than pounding the pavement in a big crowded city in another major marathon. I greatly respect both (because all distance events and the competition have humbled me), but I'm thinking in the mindset of The Marketing, The Hype and "The Why". People like struggle stories and experiences in these extreme events. They want to relate to something. The UTMB course is also beautiful for photos and drone video shots. People (from hikers to mountain bikers and even road runners ) can relate to beautiful nature and wilderness and outdoors. There is a reason why Barkleys ("Marathons") got so much attention online this year...it's not my cup of tea (I don't want to worry about getting lost and freezing in the backwoods of Tennessee with my hiking poles...I do horrible in the cold and with maps!), but I can see why it is a niche that fits a" narrative and theme" that resonates.
I am running a 50k in June , Is that Ultra enough to be hated more than I already am?!
People hate on ultra runners because so many of them are very average runners and have big heads from finally having success at something, over-exploiting it, and making others in that culture believe they are good when they actually suck. Most of them wouldn’t dare dip into competitive road racing at any distance and be proven to be a fraud. I respect those who do cross over surfaces, face the toughest competition, and succeed at both. If there were more competitive marathoners who stepped up and took on a course like UTMB (Tollefson for example), there’s bound to be a few who really do excel for mountainous 100 milers. Plus they’d have the competitive edge that guys like Walmsley never developed (because he skipped competitive road racing).
It's like with anything else. The ordinary has to bully the out of the ordinary.
Using this logic...10k runners suck because they couldn't make it as sprinters.
Cb wrote:
Using this logic...10k runners suck because they couldn't make it as sprinters.
Over the top statement, "An up hill 8:30 mile is equal to a 5 minute mile on a flat road." Another one, "I know countless successful short distance road and track runners that get into trail /ultra running not because they are slow but because they enjoy those aspects of running...the involvement." I saw what you did there. You broadened the category. I know guys whom are competitive in 5K and 10K whom also race 5 mile and 10 mile trail races. In aggregate, the 50K to 100 mile ultra participates are slow. When I state slow, I'm talking 200m/400m slow. Enjoy your activity.
