Had a lot of enquiries today about the NDW100/50/26.2 races in August. It feels like interest is picking up a lot despite having a good number of entries already in. We need a lot more to make it a sustainable entity in the first year but I think the UTMB lottery in the morning will leave a few people looking for a challenge around the same time. I hope some of those people pick the NDW as the place to race.
I had a guy e mail me today with the CV of a champ, Ironmans, a Double Ironman and going for Quintuple Ironman at the Enduro races in June. He asked if he was fit to race 100 miles yet? This is a question I get asked a lot, how does an Ironman stack up against an ultra. Well to this point I've only ever raced 1 triathlon and it was only a half Ironman so I am not really fit to judge. I would put that half on a par with running a 50km - 35 miles both time wise and overall fatigue wise. I have read plenty of articles and blogs in the past who have likened an Ironman to a 50 mile run in terms of equivalent difficulty. Most fall on the side of 50 miles being a little easier but not significantly so. On average I would say an Ironman would take the same person around 20% to 30% longer to finish than a 50 mile so that is a deciding factor. Relatively, therefore a 100km or 60 mile run would sit on par with an Ironman. There are a whole myriad of factors that make this a very sketchy estimation including weather, terrain, amount of climb/ descent, elevation, temperature etc etc. But if I was asked that is what I would say. Perhaps a small affirmation of that estimate is the interview Runners world ran with David Goggins. Goggins response to where Ironman Hawaii ranked in terms of races he had completed was that he 'tabbed every 100 mile plus ultra he has run as 1 through 15, all ahead of Ironman Hawaii and all ahead of the Ultraman Triathlon (Double Ironman)'.
A couple of years ago, ultrarunning magazine published a very interesting article listing out the relative difficulty of ultras across North America vs Iron distance events. I cannot for the life of me find the list but the outline in principal was to take a group of runners, all of whom had completed one of 9 of the biggest 100 mile races held that year, and ask them to benchmark other ultra races they had done against them. The results were normalized against Western States ie. WS = 1.00. I've sketched out some of the key ones below. The sample size was 667 people:
Badwater 135 miles: 1.57
Hardrock 100 miles: 1.55
HURT 100 miles: 1.31
Wasatch Front 100 miles: 1.17
Angeles Crest 100 miles: 1.08
Leadville 100 miles: 1.03
Western States 100 miles: 1.00
Javelina Jundred 100 miles: 0.89
Old Dominion 100 miles: 0.88
Vermont 100 miles: 0.84
HURT 100km: 0.81
Rocky Raccoon 100 miles: 0.81
Umstead 100 miles: 0.81
Zane Grey 50 miles: 0.48
Miwok 100km: 0.46
White River 50 miles: 0.37
American River 50 miles: 0.33
Avalon 50 miles: 0.32
So in summary Badwater is 57% harder than Western States and was elected the toughest race in the US, pipping Hardrock by 2%. The hardest 100km race, HURT, was ranked as difficult as both Rocky Raccoon and Umstead 100 milers, the voted the least difficult of the 100s. The hardest 50 miler, Zane Grey was voted as 48% as difficult as Western States 100.
I have tried to explain in the past just how much harder a 100 mile race is than a 50 mile or even a 100km race. Something happens in that last 30 - 40 miles to stretch even the best prepared to breaking point.
In summary I would say to any Ironman, yes you are in a great position to have a crack at a 100 mile run, but expect it to be much longer and much harder, probably up to around twice as hard depending on the terrain. Having raced a number of those in the list above, I would put the NDW100 somwhere around 0.82 to 0.84 given the elevation change of around 12000 feet and the probable temperatures of an August day in England.
More tomorrow....
No comments:
Post a Comment