Ultramarathon Daily News | Tue, Jan 8

Excellent piece by Koop about what it takes to win an ultramarathon nowadays. Our sport is no longer a race won by attrition or “running your own race”…races are won by knowing when to chill, how hard to push, and when to push harder.

Wait, Pizza Hut delivers beer? Where was this when I was in college? (Another vote to move to Texas.)

“For ultrarunners, personal records, traveling, and racing with friends is more valuable than competing with other athletes,” lead study author lead author Zbigniew Waśkiewicz, Ph.D., told Runner’s World.

—Interesting results from a study that seeked to identify ultramarathon runners motivations.

Mario’s Morning Shakeout for this week. Good stuff as always. Marathons, fashion, coaching, and more.

This story baffles and saddens me, but I’m still not sure who’s behind it: People are mad that London Marathon doesn’t award medals to guide runners. As I wrote on Twitter, it sounds so tawdry and strangely self-promoting to have to say this, but guiding is a selfless act and the guide should expect nothing in return. Sighted guides shouldn’t be there for their own glory or recognition or medal count and whining about not getting a medal is just…fu(king…tacky.

The countdown has started! Ultrarunning Magazine lists Kaci Lickteig and Jared Hazen as #10 in the countdown to number one.

Wow, I can relate to this post on yoga so much! Tell me to lay down and be quiet and do nothing, and my mind goes into overdrive, creating a million scenarios to get me out of that situation. Anyone else relate?

Good lessons and tips on time management from a couple who have their plates full. Now though, add kids.

Speaking of kids, get them the hell outside. Here are some great ideas for water activities to do with the family.

And more on time management: The difference between speed and velocity.

Introspective and excellent writing from Amelia Boone about her 2018 and what she expects from the future.

Speaking of Ms Boone, both she and Timmy Parr are the latest athletes to sign on with Altra Elite.

Do me a favor: Hop on over to iTunes and review the damn podcast! I hate having to ask, but it’s been awhile. Thanks.

I love music as much as you do and I’m sure what you’re listening to is important and I’ll love it, but please, for the love of Lottery Gods, keep it to yourself in the outdoors.

24 hours on a 200m indoor track? Ooof.

Leslie describes 2018 as one of the toughest, but heck, I’d be thrilled to line up for as many races as she did–and what a great mix! Read her post here.

More from Coche Roche: Setting some good goals that will help you love running and life. You can do it.

Government shutdown affecting beer production. This must not stand!

Looking for a gift for someone or maybe just a cool way to support a good cause? Here’s some autographed paraphernalia from some of the sports’ top ~~women~~ athletes that’ll go towards bringing clean drinking water to those who need it.

Cool: Add weather info to your Strava data.

Good post at the right time. Though I’m lousy at moderating, I’ve been trying to change my family’s diet towards one based more on plants. Combined with my kids’ inability to consume dairy without farting for three days straight, and I’m faced with the horrifying prospect of becoming vegan. Ack! No way will I give up good cheese or ice cream or the occasional sushi or wild boar carnitas, but this semi-drastic change is something I think I can handle and something I need.

That’s it folks. This morning I’m chatting with a Dane living in Nepal about the trail running scene in the region. Can’t wait to hear more about it. Stay tuned.

###

18 Responses to "Ultramarathon Daily News | Tue, Jan 8"

Sarah Lavender Smith says:

January 8, 2019 at 6:13 am

Re the last article on going vegan — I very much respect veganism for environmental & ethical reasons. Eating lower on the food chain is better for the planet, period. But the article, while asking “what about protein?” (answer: yes, you can get enough protein from plants) fails to ask, “what about iron?” It is very difficult — not impossible, but very difficult — to get adequate iron from plant sources if you’re a high-level athlete, especially if you’re female and menstruating regularly. The body absorbs animal-based iron much more readily than plant based iron. Having suffered iron-deficiency anemia, which feels like running in slow-mo at high altitude with weights on, brought about by living for the summer with my hard-core vegan brother and trying to avoid eating meat around him, while also cutting out bread/cereal from my nutrition (thus losing that source of iron fortification) and training at high intensity, I can tell you that iron-deficiency anemia sucks! More info here: https://trailrunnermag.com/nutrition/daily-nutrition/iron-deficiency-running.html

Reply
1. Nicolas says:
  
  January 8, 2019 at 7:37 am
  
  Sarah, you’re right that it’s harder (but by no means impossible) to be a vegan female athlete for the reasons you mention. However, there are many get-arounds (iron rich veggies like dark leafy greens, lima beans and broccoli, cooking with cast-iron pans, Lucky Iron Fish, etc.). And it seems you’re introducing confounds if you also intentionally give up on iron fortified carbs. Honestly, this may be a larger factor than a plant-based diet. Bread and cereal are fantastic. And they kinda don’t inherently require harming sentient creatures and the environment.
  
  Now, full veganism may not be for everyone, and that’s fine. Since Eric is not menstruating, he should be fine, should he take the leap. But more importantly, it’s not an all-or-nothing matter. Cut down what you can, it’s always better than not doing anything at all.
  
  Kudos Eric! Plant-power FTW.
  
  Reply
2. Nick says:
  
  January 8, 2019 at 11:26 am
  
  Just a thought re: environmental reasons, I often hear people state they are vegan to help prevent global warming, but as a climate scientist this has always been a head scratcher for me.
  
  The EPA emissions inventory states that agriculture – not just animal agriculture, but all agriculture – contributes to 9% of the US greenhouse gas footprint. Going vegan doesn’t reduce this to zero, as cropland emits greenhouse gases directly from the soil (crops like rice have an especially large impact), and you must replace meat with crops. I have heard realistic estimates that eliminating meat might reduce your total emissions by 1-4%. From a global warming perspective, going vegan does very little.
  
  Reply
  1. Nicolas says:
    
    January 8, 2019 at 12:00 pm
    
    IN THE US, yes. A few comments. 1. Methane and nitrous oxide have much more warming potential than CO2, at least on a relatively short time scale, and animal ag contributes a lot to these emissions (I know, rice production emits methane too). 2. Emissions related to animal ag include more than just US emissions. In particular, a major factor is deforestation, primarily for the purpose of growing animal feed, outside the US. 3. Globally, livestock produces over 14% of carbon-equivalent emissions (according to the FAO) (in comparison, all global transport contributes 13%). In fact, methane is so many times as potent as CO2 over 100 years that, in the short run, animal ag appears to be a critical area of concern.
    
    So, going vegan, in the US or elsewhere, does go *some way* (among other things of course) toward reducing anthropogenic forcing insofar as plant-based alternatives tend to emit less CO2-equivalent, in addition to requiring less land and water use. The environmental argument is not a knock-down case but it’s hard to argue with the general idea that shifting toward eating more plants is climate-friendly.
    
    Since arguments for going vegan only rarely tap into a single source, you have to add to climate concerns considerations of pollution, food justice, public health and, of course, animal welfare (I know this wasn’t your point). Again, not saying this is a knock-down case, but the head scratcher to me is why we should keep clearing rainforest to grow soy to feed livestock to feed well-off Americans.
    
    Reply
    1. Nick says:
      
      January 8, 2019 at 12:13 pm
      
      Greenhouse gas equivalent emissions I quoted take into account the radiative forcing and lifetime of the different gases, so it’s 9% when you consider the lifetime effects of methane, nitrous oxide, and carbon dioxide.
      
      In the US, the impact of going vegan will be small – sure, in the right direction, but we’re talking in terms of percentage points. You would do much better to minimize travel, especially to races, live in a small house, and minimize the “stuff” you purchase. Those will chip away at the major sources of emissions: transportation, housing/heating, and industry.
      
      Reply
      1. eric schranz says:
        
        January 8, 2019 at 12:23 pm
        
        That last graf. Thank You. My eyes are permanently stuck in the back of my head because of people demanding I make lifestyle changes while they fly around the world to run races.
        
        But wait, do we have two climate scientists named Nick? I’m starting to get confused.
      2. Nicolas says:
        
        January 8, 2019 at 12:40 pm
        
        Okay, but it still doesn’t account for the contributions of US animal ag outside the US or does it? If deforestation is not accounted for, there’s a big part of the picture that’s missing. That said, you’re right, in the US energy and consumer goods consumption and transportation contribute, in proportion, more than they do in other countries. In comparison, emerging countries contribute proportionally more ag-related emissions because they consume and drive less then we do. Sure thing, best thing you can do is stop (or reduce) driving and flying, not have a second child, live in a tiny house, and reuse, reduce and recycle anything you can. And eat some more lentils too. 😉
        
        Eric, ha! I’m not a climate scientist, but I do work on food and environmental issues.
      3. Sarah Lavender Smith says:
        
        January 8, 2019 at 2:52 pm
        
        For what it’s worth, I’m no expert, but I’ve long been concerned about the amount of water and energy consumption related to beef production. Yes, some crops are water-intensive too (as an avocado & almond lover, I worry about that in our drought-prone state), and I get that it’s a bad thing to buy out-of-season produce shipped from across the world due the pollution and energy in its transportation. These are all things to be mindful of and work on. But even setting aside the emissions issue, mass-produced beef is pretty darn bad for the environment, no?
3. Rich says:
  
  January 9, 2019 at 4:25 am
  
  Fuhrman and Ferrerri (Fueling the Vegetarian (Vegan) Athlete. 2010. Curr. Sports Med. Rep. 9:233-241) summarized the key concerns regarding a vegetarian diet and athletic performance. For iron this includes, as Sarah notes, a lower aborption efficiency for plant (10%, though more recent studies suggest it is higher than this) versus animal (18%) derived iron. With a conscientious diet that specifically includes iron-rich foods (they list as examples: spinach, asparagus, swiss chard, broccoli rabe, bok choy, tofu, lentils, pumpkin seeds, sesame seeds, and soybeans) research indicates most vegan athletes would consume sufficient iron – though some individuals (women with heavy menstural bleeding) may need supplementation. However, I think it should be added that this is true generally regardless of diet (for example, in one recent study from Germany, 60% of the female athletes had low iron, which was not connected to whether they ate meat/fish or not). More recently Lynch and co-workers (Cardiorespiratory Fitness and Peak Torque Differences between Vegetarian and Omnivore Endurance Athletes: A Cross-Sectional Study. 2016. Nutrients 8 art 726) compared a number of parameters in endurance athletes, and the vegetarian (some of whom were vegan, but they were not separated out in their presented data, nor were women and men separated) group had on average higher iron than the omnivore group (who, on average, were below the 18 mg recommended for women).
  
  All-in-all with attention paid to diet – which applies beyond vegans, too – a vegan diet covers all of the critical categories such as protein, iron, zinc, but not B12. B12 is the one consistent recommendation for supplementation (I would add vitamin D, but that applies to all diet categories). For myself, the oat drink and yogurt we buy are fortified with both B12 and D.
  
  One issue with some people who switch to a vegan diet is that they achieve this only by eliminating animal products, and otherwise eat the same. It only really is effective if one makes a holistic change in food choices – not just eliminating animal products or finding simple 1-for-1 replacements (which often mean processed foods), but really start from scratch and fundamentally re-think about food choices. When I switiched to a 100% plant-based diet a few years ago I found that it made cooking fun again (and has been a fun dive into the research on diet, health as well as athletic performance).
  
  Reply
Nicolas says:

January 8, 2019 at 7:29 am

I’m tired of time-management articles, especially from people without kids. I love the Roches and David’s columns are usually great. But most people don’t live in families that consist exclusively of another partner who ALSO IS A PRO RUNNER.

Reply
1. eric schranz says:
  
  January 8, 2019 at 12:05 pm
  
  I’m not tired of them, but I wish more were written by parents.
  
  Reply
2. Running Man says:
  
  January 8, 2019 at 5:31 pm
  
  Couldn’t agree more.
  
  I also take issue with Koop’s article. I think guys and gals have been racing since the inception of the sport.
  
  Reply
Leslie O'Dell says:

January 8, 2019 at 8:22 am

Thanks for the shout-out, Eric. Although I can’t believe “Leslie Takes on 129 Ways to get a Husband” didn’t make the cut. Hahaha. Just kidding. Hoping 2019 is a good year. Thanks for all you do!

Reply
Milton says:

January 8, 2019 at 8:35 am

People are mad that London Marathon doesn’t award medals to guide runners…the article was highlighting a request from the Royal National Institute of Blind People charity to give medals to the guide runners. The guide runners were not asking for this, and I suspect they would never expect a medal themselves. Seeing as the guide runners have always been given a finishers medal anyway at London Marathon (unofficially), I assume their press release was designed simply to attract attention to guide running and perhaps encourage more people to try this fantastic role. The Telegraph is notorious for hyping a story.

Reply
1. eric schranz says:
  
  January 8, 2019 at 8:50 am
  
  And that’s why I was sure to point out that it wasn’t clear who was pushing this, and on who’s behalf.
  There were certainly people on Twitter over the weekend upset that they wouldn’t get their medals. Everyone had their own justification, but it all basically came down to not getting the recognition they think they deserved.
  
  Reply
  1. Milton says:
    
    January 8, 2019 at 9:26 am
    
    From the twitter storm it seems that all the people agreeing to the RNIB suggestion are at least not the guide runners themselves, and the one that is says he wouldn’t expect a medal, so that’s a relief. I guess one problem with London and the guide runners not getting a medal is that all the thousands of volunteers DO get a medal – same as winner’s but with ‘volunteer’ etched on it – this also seems slightly odd…who’s going to hang that on their ‘medal wall’?
    
    Reply
timsredbike says:

January 8, 2019 at 9:40 am

Link busted, too. Damn Republicans! Conspiracy!

Reply
Peter Andersson says:

January 8, 2019 at 9:46 pm

External music speakers saved me from a dog attack the other day. I was coming up on a dog that wasn’t leached, but didn’t know. Later I realised this dog’s gotten crazy on me before when 10 meters off. This time it heard me 100 meters off and started barking, which gave the owner enough time to call it in and step to the side. Music saved med.

Actually, it wasn’t music – it was a podcast! 🙂

Also, and this came as a surprise, I got to see some raindeers up rather close a few weeks back. There’s this place I know they hang out because I’ve been told, but I never seen more than one at at time, and they ran away right off. This time three, and the all stood there watching, while my podcast was playing.

My friend has this theory that deers associate sound with cars, i.e something that moves straight ahead and wont bother them, whereas a human sensed only by smell/vision might be a hunter.

So it’s quite (if not quiet, ha-ha) possible that external speakers will lead to enhanced experience of nature/animals. So much in life is contradictory to first impression, isn’t it? 🙂

Reply

Please use real name. Anonymous comments will be deleted. Thanks.Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.