Dean Karnazes: The gig is up

This board is populated by a bunch of 16 year old virgins who have likely never raced farther than 5k much less even attempt a marathon. If you haven't even attempted a marathon then your opinion of ultramarathons means nothing. What % of this board has even attempted a marathon? I'd say no more than 25%. Unless you've ran a race that seriously takes your legs to the limit of survival then you have no freaking clue. Go back to PE class.

...football: 15 minutes of actual playing time in a 2.5 to 3 hour game.

I'm not so sure that's the same Dave Scott. I think if THE Dave Scott was doing some ultras a lot of hype would have been given to it and maybe I've missed it but I haven't seen it.

Population Dynamics wrote:

This board is populated by a bunch of 16 year old virgins who have likely never raced farther than 5k much less even attempt a marathon. If you haven't even attempted a marathon then your opinion of ultramarathons means nothing. What % of this board has even attempted a marathon? I'd say no more than 25%. Unless you've ran a race that seriously takes your legs to the limit of survival then you have no freaking clue. Go back to PE class.

Raced several Marathons and I still think Ultras are stupid.

Same here. I've raced the marathon 7 times.

Here's the difference between Dean Karnazes and myself. When I get beat in a marathon, I train more to try and run it faster next time. Karnazes just ups the distance to 200 or 300 miles.

I won't get into a pissing match about what constitutes a real sport or the sanity of ultrarunners. I will say that I am no longer impressed by ultrarunners. It is a pie-eating contest to me.

I'd rather run a sub-2:30 marathon than finish an ultra. I think running a fast marathon takes more guts and dedication than finishing an ultra.

I think the biggest issue for non-ultra runners with ultra runners is that almost none of them have proven themselves in the colligiate arena, or the roads.

I believe Alberto did and ultra and he won be a ridiculous distance setting a course record. This is just heresay, but even so, it is the type of result most elite or sub-elite runners might expect if they were to enter an ultra.

Of course the only way we would ever know (we'll never know) is if the elite and sub-elite tranc/xc/road guys made a run at the Ultra's.

BroBro

ps. Does anyone have a resource or any knowledge on any of these top guys. WHat have they done on the roads or track? I personally have tried to look up guys like Jurek and this ine dude from Utah, but never found their names in any results. It would be interesting to know.

No serious runner is going to waste his time with these ultras.

AlSal did the Comrades Marathon which is really more of a long marathon than a true ultra. I think any top marathoner would put up similar peformances in the 50K and 50 mile races. Also, I think Salazar raced Comrades when he was past his prime.

I just object to this stuff being called running. People make fun of Gallowalkers with their fanny packs and walk breaks. Yet, ultrarunners wear fanny packs and do walk breaks.

Here's the dirty secret of ultrarunning. You can take an untrained fat ass and with no training at all, that person can complete an ultradistance. They'll probably walk 100% of it, but the distance can be done. If you can walk to the refrigerator, you can walk 100 miles. We've already seen this with the marathon. You don't have to be in great shape to cover the distance.

Completing the distance is no big deal. These people want to test the limits of human endurance, but scientists already know the limits of human endurance. You need so much water, so many calories, and a steady core body temperature in order to live. The truest endurance athletes were the survivors of the Holocaust and the Bataan Death March.

Here's something for Dean Karnazes to try. How far can he go on just water? How about without water? Sound stupid? That's the essence of ultrarunning.

Back in the 19th century, pedestrianism was a big deal, but it died out. Why? What happened to the six day races for both pedestrians and cyclists? I think people realized it was stupid. It was a circus act.

For me, it is all about having fun.

How can people consider ultras to be fun? I'd love to do a 10K trail race or even a trail marathon. This stuff sounds like a real blast. Suffering sleep deprivation, bleeding and raw feet, depression, dehydration, etc. does not sound like fun at all.

I like to run a race hard, rest in the shade, and have a few beers. I think running should be something you enjoy not something you suffer.

Most ultra-runners don't have much love for DK either. Don't judge a sport by one person on the fringe!

Kouros, the Greek guy who holds WR's at almost every distance from 100 miles up, ran 2:16 for the marathon.

Ian Thompson, who ran close to former WR for 50 miles was a 2:09 marathoner.

I think Jurek ran a 2:36 marathon, but he didn't specifically train to improve that time.

To be competitive on the world 100K scene, you need to be able to run sub 2:25 for the marathon. But leg speed is only half the issue; there are also things like energy replacement that play a huge role. 100K is to the marathon what marathon is to the 5K.

The men's 100K WR is 6:13; the women's WR is 6:33. Try running sub 6:00 miles as long as you can and see how far you get... that's what might drive many ultra-runners. So you can run sub 2:25 for the marathon, but after a while don't seem to get any faster, so you start wondering... what speed can you run, say back-to-back marathons -- 2:40? 3:00? And so you find yourself pushed to a whole new level that you never knew existed. A whole new element of running. Not just fast, but fast AND long.

Back to the original subject, though, DK does not in any way represent ultra-runners. He's like that news reporter who "ran" the Vancouver marathon in 5:38. A side-show for non-runners at best.

Also, just because many ultra-runs have people who are "slow", doesn't mean the sport is stupid. The average time for the Bolder Boulder (all 45,000 runners) is well over 1 hr. For 10K! You could walk faster than the average time. But the serious action is up front... fast runners who take their race seriously. Same with ultra-marathons.

If we could get the Penguins and Gallowalkers to take up ultrarunning and leave road racing, this would be a good thing.

here\'s the answer wrote:

If we could get the Penguins and Gallowalkers to take up ultrarunning and leave road racing, this would be a good thing.

So you only pursue things in life at which you are elite??? Wow you must be a freakin\' OUTSTANDING human being. Humble, too.

And I\'m real sure the Kenyans and Ethopians wish all of us slow poke 31:00 10km folks would get the hell out of their 10 km races. This would be a good thing since the only meaningful reason to run is if you are at the top, right? We are nothing but slugs to them.

It is all relative my friend.

I'm with you. BTW didn't Meb and Deena get medals at the olympics by running smart races and PACING wisely while a lot of other biggers names dropped? Some people take that to a furhter extension. Ultras are just like any other event. You have your serious runners and your social runners

richie richbitchboy wrote:

Here's the dirty secret of ultrarunning. You can take an untrained fat ass and with no training at all, that person can complete an ultradistance. They'll probably walk 100% of it, but the distance can be done. If you can walk to the refrigerator, you can walk 100 miles. We've already seen this with the marathon. You don't have to be in great shape to cover the distance.

it's not so easy as you think. i'm in decent shape (4:08 1500) and recently tried to do a 24 hour race. i couldn't even walk the whole time and only made 80 miles.

if you're interested, i wrote a lengthy (~10,000 word) essay about it for the people at my school who were asking how it went. i'll go ahead and post it on here, too.

it seems like everyone who is bashing ultras could bash 5Ks thru marathons for the same reason.

if you look at the majority of the people who "run" big city marathons, they are clearly not serious athletes. they are doing it for the challenge. and maybe they are doing it to better their time. the same goes for most shorter road races. most of the people who run them aren't fast. they aren't "hard core." they are the people who run for the personal challenge. good for them. what they do on the weekend is their own business and i for one am glad that they are doing something active, even if they are running their 5k at 8 minute mile pace or run for social reasons.

last sunday i volunteered at the ohlone wilderness 50k (http://www.abovethefog.net/ohlone50k.html) working an aid station about 25 miles into the race. the first few guys (the top two for sure) were pretty serious and competitive about the race. the rest weren't so much. but they were still run/walking the 31 miles of serious hills in 90 degree heat. nothing to make fun of there.

there are plenty of GOOD athletes who are very serious about running the bigger ultras, both the trail variety and the flat "fast" road ultras. but MOST of the people who enter them aren't. just like with major marathons across the country. ultras aren't a freak-show event, it's just a different kind of challenge. and i think anyone who is serious about running a fast marathon should use a trail 50k or two as training at the end of their aerobic conditioning phase.

VAVoting,

Yes, it was THE DAVE SCOTT! It just goes to show how under the radar the sport was 10 years ago versus now.

Also, another top 10 Ironman guy, Paul Huddle did it as well, this is his article below.

Ronald Mexico, Esq.

Drop a $50,000 first place prize for a 50 mile ultra and see what kind of competition comes out. Not likely to see the top runners grazing at the goodies tables every few miles.

hey ronald, that link was a great read!

regarding dave scott, are you positive about that? there was a dave scott who dominated some ultras in california in the 90s, but he was 38 years old in 1996. THEE dave scott was 42 in 1996. of course, there could be two different dave scotts who were good ultra runners!

rip van racer wrote:

Drop a $50,000 first place prize for a 50 mile ultra and see what kind of competition comes out. Not likely to see the top runners grazing at the goodies tables every few miles.

based on that statement i'd venture to guess that you've never watched good ultra runners at a 50 miler. they are in and out of the aid stations as fast as possible.

richie richbitchboy wrote:AlSal did the Comrades Marathon which is really more of a long marathon than a true ultra....

Your post starts with such gross ignorance that it borders on stupidity.

Comrades is a little over 50 miles.

In the trivial world of ultramarathons it is easily the most attended and supported event anywhere. It is a major event in South Africa by any standard.

What is it you would define as a 'true ultra?'