Occasional Runner
I just read this interview in UR with Karl Meltzer. I've been saying the same thing forever, so it's nice to also hear it from the man that's won more 100's than anybody else on earth.
UR: What would you change about WS?
Karl: Maybe some of the entry policies. Maybe have a list of say 20 mountain 100's where the winners get an auto entry, or also have a 100 mile finish to qualify for a lottery position. I think running an 11 hour 50 mile for a qualifier is silly. A 100 mile finish would weed out many folks who enter the lottery with a minimal chance of finishing.
Well said Karl!
A lot of trail runners consider the WSER to be our equivalent of the Boston Marathon, but it's NOT! You can't qualify for Boston by running a half marathon. You have to run the entire marathon distance and you have to do it relatively fast. The qualifying standards for Boston are much stricter, and frankly, much harder to achieve.
I'm glad Karl brought it up and I hope that this silliness stops someday.
I like something akin to the UTMB points system. Not all countries have 100 milers (or many of them), and it would be great to have international runners. Maybe there are more non-US 100 milers than I think ...
It will still be a lottery, so fast times (sub 24) in certain races should bump you up (depending on age group, perhaps).
It depends on what you want qualifying to achieve, though. If you just want to let people in who have a good shot at finishing, the current system is ok. Take the 11 hour 50-miler. I am not sure an 11 hour 50 miler is silly to determine whether someone can run 100 miles, depending on the 50-miler. Someone who was over 10:30 at Lake Sonoma this year has a sub 24-hour WS, two Leadville finishes and more than half a dozen Hardrock finishes on their resume ... I think it is silly in the sense that it is so hard to get into WS requiring a tough 100 mile finish seems fairer than the current lottery system.
My 2 Euro cents
I like something akin to the UTMB points system. Not all countries have 100 milers (or many of them), and it would be great to have international runners. Maybe there are more non-US 100 milers than I think ... It will still be a lottery, so fast times (sub 24) in certain races should bump you up (depending on age group, perhaps). It depends on what you want qualifying to achieve, though. If you just want to let people in who have a good shot at finishing, the current system is ok. Take the 11 hour 50-miler. I am not sure an 11 hour 50 miler is silly to determine whether someone can run 100 miles, depending on the 50-miler. Someone who was over 10:30 at Lake Sonoma this year has a sub 24-hour WS, two Leadville finishes and more than half a dozen Hardrock finishes on their resume ... I think it is silly in the sense that it is so hard to get into WS requiring a tough 100 mile finish seems fairer than the current lottery system. My 2 Euro cents
I guess having the 50 miler requirement would effectively weed out people that weren't even ultrarunners, but had heard about this bad ass race in the mountains, and were thinking about doing that or maybe a tough mudder or a highland games.....
Karl has a race and it is called Speedgoat. He can make whatever rules he wants for Speedgoat. WSER has a board and a different race director. Qualifying standards are ultimately their decision.
Karl's argument would be a bit stronger if he backed it up with numbers - which are totally available. One could look at all the starters and finishers of WSER for a given year, and then sort them by whether or not they'd run a 100 during the qualifying period as well. While it's certainly reasonable to think that running a 100 the previous year would be helpful, it might not make enough of a difference to justify changing the criteria.
Sue
I guess I only responding to his comment about needing to have a 100 mile finish to get into WS. Western States is also a local run for locals, we work the aid stations, run the trails and maintain them. We want the opportunity to get in too, even though we may never have run a 100 miles. I know it may be the Boston of 100s but unlike marathons which are a dime a dozen, there are not that many 100 mile runs and why can't my first one be at home?
I agree to more WS qualifier points for top finishes in some identified 100s is good. His last statement is demeaning that someone who ran a 11 hour 50 couldn't finish WS. I know many locals who have finished with such times. So now I am a little irritated.
Kelly don't rip me a new A.H. but didn't some guy who never ran a 100 just come in the top three at Hardrock this year? Why should that be a qualifier for entry.
By the way, the running group I am with runs an aid station. We get a free entry. We then ask who in our group of 150ish folks wants to be in our mini lottery to get into WS. Usually get 3 to 4 folks ask for the entry, they draw names and the odds are much better.
05/13/23 Traverse City Trail Festival 25K
08/19/23 Marquette 50 dns 🙄
2/3rds training
yeah, let's "weed out" the SECOND place mens finisher from this year...
My not-entirely-running-related 'Gram
Haha good point! I think this is a very interesting point of discussion. I don't have plans of running a 100 (this year) but I suppose it is nice that the average folks like me would have a chance to run this race. It may well be the "Boston" of 100s but I'm not sure there is the same elitest attitude. Having never attended either, I can't say that for certain, but it seems to me that WSER is more open and welcoming to regular folks than Boston, which obviously has strict standards and requires a certain level of competition.
Either way, the chances of getting into WSER are so slim now that I bet they will need to start enforcing stricter qualifying times soon.
Donate to my NYC Marathon fundraiser for Every Mother Counts!
NYCM: 11/4/2018
You can find examples like that all day long, but you're using an elite runner as an example.
Even though I'm qualified to enter the lottery with my Rocky Raccoon 100 finish, I won't do so unless I finish Cascade Crest. Finishing the latter race is WAY more indicative of my ability to finish a tough race such as WSER.
Refurbished Hip
I have no interest in the Boston marathon, nor I do care about getting into WS. I like my low key races a lot better and there are tons of other 100s I would rather do.
I do think they have a bit of a cluster fuck going on right now though and need to do something about it.
Running is dumb.
Le professeur de trail
There is a large difference in qualifiers for Boston than for WS. (stating the obvious) all qualifiers for Boston are 26.2 and even among various marathons course don't change much - road is road. Maybe some have a few more "hills" but ultimately there is not much variation. 50 milers on the other hand can have an incredible amount of variation. For example JFK50 versus Manitou's Revenge 50 <or insert tough West Coast 50> doesn't even compare. Avg. finish for JFK is what? - 9-10 hours. Manitou's Revenge has a 24 hour cap. - fastest time was around 12 hours this year. Plenty of very difficult 50's (I can't namemany of them but I know they are out there). So to say a 50 miler can't be a qualifier for WS - I don't get it. Having said that - I don't understand how the powers to be at WS have whatever process they have to include qualifiers. Why are JFK 50 or Stone Mill 50 (both I am familiar with) on the qualifying race list? They don't translate to the "difficulty" of WS. (btw - Manitou - not on the list and probably will never be).
On another note - that picture on the WS website of the feet - just plain nasty.
My favorite day of the week is RUNday
Well, one can absolutely do better than that - take the whole list of finishers and DNFs and see what they qualified with. Then see if qualifying with a 50 miler really is a liability to finishing, rather than qualifying with a 100 miler. If Karl's going to make the claim that a 100 mile finish would improve the number of people that got to the finishing line, he can totally back that up with numbers. But he doesn't, and I don't know why anyone listens to him. He's just making this stuff up.
Marty Hoffman at UC Davis has been publishing a lot of research on the physiology of participants in WSER. If you read the papers, one thing that becomes apparently clear is that runners are showing up to the starting line appropriately trained (or at least, claiming to be appropriately trained, which means that they are aware of how they at least should have trained). Nobody's hacking it. If that's why the organizers want a qualifying race - to ensure that participants show up adequately trained to run a safe race - then the mechanisms they have in place are indeed sufficient.
Requiring a 100 miler would certainly reduce the number of entrants - but fairly? In my area, there are very few qualifying races, and the only 100 sells out within minutes. Definitely the bottleneck for qualifying wouldn't be running a 100 miler, but registering for it. That's not something I'd consider "fair".
It seems to me that this discussion needs to separate two issues:
1) What kind of a race should WSER be, and
2) What should the qualifiers be?
I personally have no stake, but it does seem to me that WSER is transcending from a local race to become the place where the elite goes to compete. I think that's OK. It can't be wrong that a sport has a few races for the elite runners, and it is probably actually beneficial in a sport where the best people so rarely get to compete on the same course.
One idea could be to imitate what the Swedish 90km ski competition Vasaloppet is doing. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasaloppet . The week before the race, they run an "open track" race: you are timed, but you can start whenever you want, and the support is still there. Obviously for WSER, that would entail difficult logistics, and probably the need to pay people to be in aid stations.
3/8 Way Too Cool 50k WNS
4/19 Tehama Wildflowers 50k
Thread killer ..
Our club has the same thing ( they run Foresthill ) last year two people applied for the space , they have to have been in the WS Lottery and not be drawn to qualify for the Club entry . I think they then decide based on volunteer service to the Club .
Our Club race is also a WS qualifier if anyone is looking for a race next year
Why couldn't they put together another run that is first come, first serve on the same course later or earlier in the year and call it something else?
LB2
It seems to me that this discussion needs to separate two issues: 1) What kind of a race should WSER be, and 2) What should the qualifiers be? I personally have no stake, but it does seem to me that WSER is transcending from a local race to become the place where the elite goes to compete.
I personally have no stake, but it does seem to me that WSER is transcending from a local race to become the place where the elite goes to compete.
Agreed that I have no stake... but disagree on WSER becoming the place where elite go to compete - it seems that this is the race director and board of trustees discretion, and they've been pretty stalwart about NOT letting every elite that wants in get in. Win or 2nd in a Montrail race, top ten at WSER, or it's lottery for you. Now maybe the plan here is to increase the elite traffic at the other Montrail Races, and if that's the case, I think it's pretty cool of them.
It doesn't seem that the board at WSER is terribly interested in making their race exclusive to high-performing athletes, and that's really their call because it is their race. They added a new qualifier in my area a couple of years ago - the Pineland Farms 50 m. Why add it? Well, because the other qualifiers in my area were selling out, and Pinelands doesn't have a cap. Or maybe it does but the cap is ridiculously high. But the course is super easy - almost everyone makes it in by 11 hours. They knew this when they added it. It seems like they are more interested in giving more people a chance than they are at raising the caliber of their field.