Mountain/Ultra/Trail General Thread

Brandon Newbould wrote:

joecrunner wrote:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Mansfield

Woops! Yeah that was a big name I blanked on, btw this is the tallest mountain in VT.

joecrunner, gotta tease you about this post, have you ever run back East? I guess you're just stirring the pot a little. Sinclair lives in VT now but was in Flagstaff for most of his training this past year, from what I understand.

Athletes like Courtney Duwaulter (sp?) muddy the waters, but for most talented pros a dense ultra schedule will lead to mediocre results and/or burnout. And Sage is right on about drug-testing in the sport, this is another angle on it. If a prominent athlete races twice a month and keeps knocking them out of the park, but is taking drugs to aid recovery, others will follow the example without drugs and wonder why they keep tanking.

.

Yeah, Vermont ultras have a lot of up and down. Hell, the Vermont 50K has more vert than the Arizona mountain 50 miler I'm planning on doing.

As far as Dauwalter goes as an outlier - I have heard she runs less training miles relative to peers. This could account for the ability to race more.

I've seen at least 5 posts from Sage over the past week or two that include the same refrain about doping in ultrarunning - Maybe there's not big money, but lifestyle changes make it worth it to dope...

I don't doubt that this is the case, but why is he suddenly being so repeatedly vocal about it? Did he recently learn something new that he doesn't want to openly disclose? Is he simply tired of people dismissing he possibility of doping in ultras 'because there is no money in it."?

What do you guys think?

I'll take a shot in the dark and suggest Sage is alluding to certain athletes, but for legal reasons cannot drop names. What if it's another Hoka athlete?

I remember reading somewhere on the boards is that a big sign of doping is super short recovery, obviously not always the case though.

Most MUT runner make under 10k a year I believe, so if some suspected or known former doper beats you, I mean that must make you angry.

sleeeper wrote:

I've seen at least 5 posts from Sage over the past week or two that include the same refrain about doping in ultrarunning - Maybe there's not big money, but lifestyle changes make it worth it to dope...

I don't doubt that this is the case, but why is he suddenly being so repeatedly vocal about it? Did he recently learn something new that he doesn't want to openly disclose? Is he simply tired of people dismissing he possibility of doping in ultras 'because there is no money in it."?

What do you guys think?

Idk how dude keeps it all together but it is impressive, being as vocal as he is about sport, somebody has to though!

I'll play devil's advocate about PEDs, it's a blanket term and it's not as magical as people think. In theory, yes it adds up for the W. Being in athletics, not running specifically in my younger days, but other sports, football mainly, the use of HGH and various test boosters were pretty rampant. Let me tell you how well it worked for the unfortunate many that I knew of, not too well. I observed athletes that aesthetically looked the part in the off season, gains in the weight room and recovery time, the other side that is typically forgotten about, injuries and internal organ stress. Especially the younger the athlete, the higher the risk. Our T levels up until our 30s, short of some crazy health ailment, are too high for anything external to enter our system, which is why so many side effects can take place. Unless an athlete is under a very strict blood doping regimen, and being doped up by a skilled professional, chances are they're playing pharmacy in their own bathroom and the outcome in time can be very problematic.

I've never in my life taken anything stronger than creatine monohydrate and after my doc flagged my bloodwork for higher levels of creatinine, that scared the hell out of me. She warned me about kidney and liver stress, and mind you, I wasn't taking a high dose at all, which made me realize just how slippery of a slope supplements can be. That was 9 years ago, and I haven't used anything since, just not worth it IMO.

My experience witnessing fellow athletes using supplements was only my experience, but talk to trainers who have been in the industry long enough, I bet they're follow up will be pretty similar to what and others have probably seen.

When athletes make sudden and large leaps that go against their prior race performances and possibly racing a lot it's red flags for doping. You can compete in US trailrunning your whole career racing 50-100 milers every month, get major sponsors and a shoe named after you, and never be drug tested (ask Karl Meltzer). There is no out-of-competition drug testing in US trailrunning right now. Zero. It's known there's drug testing in Europe for Skyrunning, UTMB, and other major international competitions.

sleeeper wrote:

I've seen at least 5 posts from Sage over the past week or two that include the same refrain about doping in ultrarunning - Maybe there's not big money, but lifestyle changes make it worth it to dope...

I don't doubt that this is the case, but why is he suddenly being so repeatedly vocal about it? Did he recently learn something new that he doesn't want to openly disclose? Is he simply tired of people dismissing he possibility of doping in ultras 'because there is no money in it."?

What do you guys think?

It’s a way for him to justify his own lackluster performances.

He keeps getting slower while the young guys keep getting stronger and stronger.

There have recent rumors about one of the very big names in the sport over the last few weeks.

Such as?

sage knows what hes talking about wrote:

There is no out-of-competition drug testing in US trailrunning right now. Zero. It's known there's drug testing in Europe for Skyrunning, UTMB, and other major international competitions.

This isn't entirely true. ITRA has a Quartz program which, although voluntary, does do out of comp testing to give at least a little comfort.

not exactly correct wrote:

sage knows what hes talking about wrote:

There is no out-of-competition drug testing in US trailrunning right now. Zero. It's known there's drug testing in Europe for Skyrunning, UTMB, and other major international competitions.

This isn't entirely true. ITRA has a Quartz program which, although voluntary, does do out of comp testing to give at least a little comfort.

No they don't drug test. It's a complete blood count like you'd do with your physician, not testing for drugs in urine or blood.

afsdfasfsadfd wrote:

There have recent rumors about one of the very big names in the sport over the last few weeks.

Oh, yeah... who, and where is this rumor coming from?

psychlown wrote:

seems pretty obvious that Alex ran it easy ...

I'm admittedly old-school about racing, so it isn't obvious to me.

She also doesn't run with a gps watch. She's probably going very easy in training which would increase longevity.

CD w wrote:

DadUltra wrote:

Yeah, Vermont ultras have a lot of up and down. Hell, the Vermont 50K has more vert than the Arizona mountain 50 miler I'm planning on doing.

As far as Dauwalter goes as an outlier - I have heard she runs less training miles relative to peers. This could account for the ability to race more.

She also doesn't run with a gps watch. She's probably going very easy in training which would increase longevity.

Courtney is perhaps the most interesting runner the world right now. Seems to be an incredible talent at what she does, and conducts herself almost entirely by intuition.

Uppp wrote:

CD w wrote:

She also doesn't run with a gps watch. She's probably going very easy in training which would increase longevity.

Courtney is perhaps the most interesting runner the world right now. Seems to be an incredible talent at what she does, and conducts herself almost entirely by intuition.

And it appears her winning streak is recent but she been running 50s and 100s for years before it all clicked.

Any discussion on UTMB???

Think Walmsley has a decent shot but I would not be surprised if he has overcooked it in the buildup. Gotta believe Killian is the hot favourite even if Byron Powell thinks that title belongs to Jim.

Thoughts????

I am really really interested to see how Walmsley does. Getting 5th last year is pretty surprising, just because I don't think of him as someone who is gonna grind out the elevation of UTMB. I just think of him totally ripping 50-100 milers that are flatter. But I know that he's putting in huge vert in his training though, so he could be really well set up to do well.

Killian is in insane form. Like, seemingly dominating every race he's done. But he ran a race on Saturday! And set a course record! Wtf?! Is he that cocky? I was super surprised to see that.

Even still, I'd love to see Jim win. And I'm rooting for him all the way. But I don't know if he will.

joecrunner wrote:

I'll take a shot in the dark and suggest Sage is alluding to certain athletes, but for legal reasons cannot drop names. What if it's another Hoka athlete?

I remember reading somewhere on the boards is that a big sign of doping is super short recovery, obviously not always the case though.

Most MUT runner make under 10k a year I believe, so if some suspected or known former doper beats you, I mean that must make you angry.

I've said it before and I'll say it again... usually when someone's racing or training seems too good to be true, that's because it usually is.

You gotta ask yourself: how is it that some runners can consistently do bonkers training week after week without ever getting injured? Or consistently race so much faster than other elites that have similar running backgrounds?

The differences at the top are so miniscule that it really stands out when someone is so unbelievably better than everyone else.