Just wanted to let you know that I really have enjoyed reading your race reports.  They have been the source of two of my favorite qoutes:

"It doesn't have to be fun to be fun"

and

"Great results are not achieved through mediocre efforts"

or something along those lines.  Truly gems.

 

Thanks and keep up the great running and writing.

Thanks a lot!  The second quote, by the way, belongs to Eric Clifton (giving credit where it is due)

George,

It was known from before the race even started that people could switch between the 100-miler and the 24-hour, so it really wasn't a big deal.  And the RDs notified the leading guy on his very next time around, so I thought it was fair.

On that same note, though, there was a bit of an "upset" in the 50k.  The fastest guy out there, regardless of distance, was in the 50-miler, but mid-race, he dropped down to the 50k because he evidently figured he'd been out there long enough.  From what I *heard* (note it's third hand info as I wasn't there), the guy who thought he'd won was confused but very gracious about what happened.

There were a handful of other people who dropped down to shorter distances, but I don't know of any other instances where this got in the way of any awards.

I've seen RDs handle "drop-downs" differently in different races.  Some allow it flat-out, others with a caveat (like you'll get credit but won't be eligible for awards) and others don't at all (meaning that even if you do 96 miles of a 100-miler, you get a DNF, not even credit for the 50-miler).  Regardless of how RDs choose to handle them, the biggest thing is that I think all runners should know what the rules are in advance.  I haven't heard any negative feedback about how things were handled at BLU with regard to the drop-downs, so even though there might appear to be some issues, no one affected seem to have had a problem with it.

Katrina

What an amazing accomplishment!  Not only am I impressed by your race performance, but also by how well you wrote about your experience.  I have to admit I got misty eyed a few times.

Thank you for the very inspiring race report.  I have a few friends who run ultras, and have never imagined myself doing likewise, but after reading your reports, I wonder . . .

Julie, thanks for your response.  I hope you enjoy your first half!  You never know where it will lead.  All paths don't lead to ultras, and that's totally fine.  However, I don’t think anyone initially knows where they'll end up.  I know I was sure that once I did my first marathon, I would check it off my bucket list and be done, but for a handful of reasons, some of which were the result of random chance encounters with strangers, that didn't happen.  I was talking to someone over dinner last week, and even he reminded me that just last July, I was adamant that I would never be one of the crazy people who runs 100-milers.

Zentastic, thanks for your kind response.  All of my race reports tend to be long and detailed.  I write them as honestly as possible, for myself (when I look back) and also for others who might do similar things.  If bad things happen, I don't think I should hide them because I think they can serve as learning experiences for others, and likewise, if great things happen, I want to talk about those too.  It only has a few entries since I just started it after my first 100-miler at the beginning of February, but here's my blog if you're interested: http://runningtoabetterme.wordpress.com/ Eventually, I might move some of my older reports there, but no guarantees (especially about the timeline of that!)

Thanks, Coastal!

Ginny, While I could say ultras are totally out of the realm that any "normal" person could ever do, that's definitely not the case.  I feel like the marathon has been built up to be such a huge deal that 26.2 miles is seen as a boundary to a lot of people (even though the number is quite arbitrary and could have easily turned out to be something else, like 23.4, 28.9 , or something else entirely depending on Pheidippides's journey).  I believe most people could do an ultra... assuming that was actually a goal of theirs and that they put in the necessary effort/time/miles.  If it's something you're even mildly interested in, keep it in the back of your mind and think about it.  And there's no rush; a lot of people in ultras are "older" anyway.  It should go without saying, but *any* distance should be respected, which is even more important when the distance gets longer.  Like I said, I think most people are capable of doing an ultra, but this doesn't negate the importance of actually training for one.

Mitch, If the team 12-hour race is something you think you'd like to try, then you should do it.  I've seen stuff like this before; the one I was at I think had teams of 4(5?) and they took turns doing loops.  You might want to check the actual rules to figure out details like the size of the team, if people can run multiple loops in a row or need to hand-off every time, if the loops need to be split proportionately between team members, if there's any requirement for a team to always be on the course (or if the team as a whole could sit out for a bit), etc.  Regardless of the answers to most of those items, I don't think you'd necessarily be in over your head, unless, for example, only teams of 2 were allowed, the team members had to spend equal times on the course, and it was mandatory that a team member from each team must always be on the course... which I think is highly unlikely.  Fixed time events are awesome because they allow people to test their boundaries in a low-threat environment where there's no obligation to do a certain distance; while the relay option would be a bit different, I think it would still be an interesting experience for you.  I'd just caution you to pay attention to your body.  Depending on whether the focus of the event in question is teams or solo runners, you *might* not get to experience a true (I know that's up for interpretation) ultra setting.  I say this based on my two experiences with running events as a solo runner with teams present.  One was a 9-hour race that had predominantly teams and just a few solo runners; even though it was on a 1-mile loop, since there were so few solo runners, we rarely interacted with one another.  The setting catered more to the relay runners.  However, had I not done previous ultras, I likely would not have noticed the difference... and there really wasn't anything *bad*; it was just different.   The other event I did was a point-to-point 50-miler in which there were a few dozen teams and 5 solo runners.  This event was totally JUST a relay, with the "solo" category just added as a technicality... this was evidenced by multiple things, including the 27-mile gap with no water provided (and the complete lack of ANYthing with calories to fuel with the entire race).  If you want to get an idea of what ultras are about, I'd recommend finding a local one if you can and volunteering at an aid station.

Katrina

Thanks, Katrina and George, for your encouraging words. I used to say I didn't think I'd ever run a marathon, but I'll be 45 in a few weeks and will do my first half this year and am beginning to entertain the thought of running even longer. I used to think if I'm going to run a marathon I'd have to do it before I'm 50, but I'm realising I shouldn't make arbitrary cut offs like that. The youtube video that's gone viral this week about the 90-somethings racing is proof of that. And I'd really like to keep racing into old age.

Julie, it's funny you mention age because there are a LOT of older people in ultras.  I'm amused by this because people who shorter races tend to be much more focused on age barriers.  I've had to contain giggles during very well-intentioned announcements at shorter races when I've heard the announcer during the awards say things to the effect of, "John Smith completed the 10k in an hour and 20 minutes at the AGE OF SIXTY-ONE! Absolutely amazing!" I don't mean it as at all arrogant, but there is no reason that most people that age shouldn't be able to propel their body over that distance. It's only amazing because more people don't do it....There are lots of people in their 50s and 60s in ultras, even 70s.  I don't say this to persuade you to do ultras necessarily, but instead to provide evidence that since people can do much longer races than marathons at "advanced" ages, surely there's no reason people of those same ages can't do shorter ones.

 

Katrina

Some of us do. I've known a few who competed in the decathlon (all ten events including the pole vault and hurdles) into their late 80s or early 90s. I've also got a streak of over 20 years where I've "run my age" or better for a 10K, i.e. my time in minutes has been equal to or less than my age in years. This year should be easy since I'll have to run only an hour and 6 minutes.

I only skimmed thru the first page post before realizing I'm gonna be reading for a while so I just wanna post this now before I read.....

INSANE IN DA MEMBRANE!

As much as I am amazed at damaris's weekly marathons, this one always gets me too.

Girl, you are quite the runner, indeed.  Your first 100 miler had me speechless.  This just shows you can definitely call yourself a 100.25er!!