Ultra running: shallow field or different sport?

both!!

Still amazes me that not a single half decent marathon runner has taken a stab at running some ultras and making a decent living rather than being a pointless 2.10 runner scratching a living.

It's almost as if it's not so easy or something.

Or not that interesting.

Walmsley is not the best ultrarunner in the world. Best in the US? At his chosen distances and terrain, sure. World class? Sure.

That said, marathoning and trail ultra are too different. I think he did okay, all in all. The "2:10' fitness" was vintage Walmsley trash talk, but he ran a decent time considering the course. He represented his sport well.

The difference is there is minimal dope testing in ultra running. A USA Championship race has doping controls. It's easier to dope in the off season.

Abeneziel wrote:

The best ultra runner in the world tries the marathon.

Can't finish in the top 20 of US trials.

Probably not top 1 000 in the world at marathon.

Does it prove that the ultra field is shallow and weak or does it show that it is a different sport than distance running and even marathon?

shallow field without enough money to attract the top athletes. once the money is right, you will see a huge move of east africans and actual fast runners move that way.

right now the ultras are where the roads were back in the 70s, before the pros and before those events were seen as desirable.

You do realize sub 2:10 marathoners run ultras right?

NotPC wrote:

shallow field without enough money to attract the top athletes. once the money is right, you will see a huge move of east africans and actual fast runners move that way.

right now the ultras are where the roads were back in the 70s, before the pros and before those events were seen as desirable.

The problem is that the money will never be right. There is no revenue from either ticket sales or TV.

no money involved. Where's the incentive to move to ultras?

I think Ms. Goucher has demonstrated that the transition isn't exactly easy, either.

I've done both (started in roads, moved to ultras when I got slow and old), and it's definitely a different kind of sport.

Abeneziel wrote:

The best ultra runner in the world tries the marathon.

Can't finish in the top 20 of US trials.

Probably not top 1 000 in the world at marathon.

Does it prove that the ultra field is shallow and weak or does it show that it is a different sport than distance running and even marathon?

Honestly, it's pretty much just a different sport. Ultrarunning involves covering long distances on your feet but is more akin to a pursuit like the 50K race walk than professional marathoning.

The ultrarunner guy in the race today did well for an ultrarunner, that's about it. Not even remotely close to being relevant in this USA race and, frankly, the US does not have a deep pool of marathon talent in comparison to the best in the world at present.

Biggest difference is probably nutrition in an ultra is way harder than a road race. Also all the hills in Atlanta combined still have less gain than the first 2-3 miles of Western States. Very different sports. Beat you up in different ways. Much harder just to finish a 100 than to finish a marathon. Both are hard to be fast in but due to course variation and lower participation there is some doubt on the strength of certain course records in Ultras when thinking about what a top road marathoner would do on them. Silly really because most road marathoners would likely do well if they could adjust to the nutritional requirements and more technical running. Nutrition is what usually gets people. It isn't fun to go 8 or 10 or 24 more hours if your stomach feels bad and you don't feel like eating or drinking anything.

The distances and lengths of time it takes to train properly for and complete ultras are a barrier.

Relatively fewer people have an interest in any race as the distance increases.

Unless you live in S. Africa, where Comrades is huge, there is little incentive for most to spend the extra time to train for and run an ultra, This is especially true for runners that have had some level of success at a relatively shorter distances.

Ultras receive less media attention and interest.

Although the skillset, genetics and efforts of top ultrarunners may be slightly different than those of top marathoners., why would top marathoners bother to try ultras?

The best road ultra runner is a lady from South Africa her name is Gerda Steyn she smashed the Comrades up record by ten minutes beating the 50 mile world record by 8 minutes having climbed 5000 feet! She earned 100000 dollars so there is money if you win and break records in the Comrades. Oh and she ran 2:27 in New York after Comrades beating Aliphine in the process. Jim will have to watch his back in June as she will be gunning for the down run record.

A little bit of both.

Fields have to be shallower given the lower number of overall competitors, even given the (now significant) number of races.

But, having several decades of experience in both, ultrarunning is just a different sport. The types of effort involved, the problems you have to solve, and the time periods over which both the effort and problems are maintained are just dramatically different. Certainly, the marathon and 50k are similar enough in distance that those are in the same ballpark of racing, but when you think about it in terms of time (races lasting 5, 6, 10 hours, or one or two days), those are pretty different beasts). So many things can go wrong in an ultra, which must be addressed for racing success, that are not often happening in "normal" racing.

Ultrarunning is a couple of different sports with different skill sets needed.

Since ultramarathon running distances go from 50k to 3100 miles there is quite a spread different talents needed.

100k had some transitioning Marathon runners in the 2:13-15 range. But usually they don't last long. My guess is, that's because they have exhausted their life limits on hard training already.

Usually runners with a 2:25 -2:30 Marathon best best in ultramarathons. But of course that doesn't mean that every 2:30 Marathoner will do great in ultras.

CapeEpic wrote:

The best road ultra runner is a lady from South Africa her name is Gerda Steyn she smashed the Comrades up record by ten minutes beating the 50 mile world record by 8 minutes having climbed 5000 feet! She earned 100000 dollars so there is money if you win and break records in the Comrades. Oh and she ran 2:27 in New York after Comrades beating Aliphine in the process. Jim will have to watch his back in June as she will be gunning for the down run record.

So, basically you have to be the GOAT to make $100K.

I've got a better question.

Hundreds of road marathon specialists finish behind the best ultra runner in the world. They can't finish in the top 20 of the US trails, probably not top 1000 in the world at marathon..... why aren't they doing something else.... like running ultras...?

Its clear that these runners will never be fast enough to make the Olympic Marathon team, or earn a living on sponsorship as a road runner.... but in the still developing and growing world of trail and ultra running they still have a chance for a career and for growth.

And I answer:

1) Many young people still don't even know that trail and ultra exist.

2) But many do, and an growing number actually are choosing trail/ultra over the mainstream system in recent years, rather than giving up running altogether.

3) There is a weird disconnect between types of people. Some are drawn to the mainstream, popular, financially lucrative thing. Others are drawn to the counter culture.

The main reason is that most don't want to run ultras. It's appealing to only a small percentage of runners. WS 100 seems like a miserable experience and isn't there a high risk of injury in training and racing ultras?

It is a different event altogether. The physical and mental demands are unique, as is the training. There is no crossover to road or track racing. In terms of popularity, who knows? It may take off in the future.