Ultramarathon Daily News | Wed, Feb 17

Do women have a physiological advantage when it comes to ultramarathon running? It’s common for women to take an overall win in an ultra, right? Women’s bodies are better built for longer events because the longer the event, the better the women do, right?

Here’s Jason Koop’s post on the subject. In this post, Koop dissects some of the misconceptions and emphasizes that speculation isn’t science. From the post: “Debate all you want to about maximal fat oxidation rates or how phosphofructokinase is the rate limiting step in glycolysis; at the end of the day what matters the most in these analyses is who gets to the finish line first.“

And here’s Corrine Malcolm’s approach to the subject. She writes “Despite popular belief, women do not on average perform better than men at ultramarathon distances. Not even close, really. The fastest men ever were faster than the fastest women ever in 50-mile (17.5% faster), 100-mile (17.4%), 200-mile (9.7%), 1,000-mile (20.2%), and 3,100-mile (18.6%) events. For the 10-fastest finishers ever, men were faster than women in 50-mile (17.1% ± 1.9%), 100-mile (19.2% ± 1.5%), and 1,000-mile (16.7% ± 1.6%) events (Zingg, 2015).

I’m anxious to see how trans athlete activists interpret these posts and my guess is that Stephanie Millinger will be impressed with the contortions of logic.

Apply this to training, home projects, or professional growth: How to do the things you keep avoiding.

For whatever reason—maybe a lack of a vocabulary around suffering, a poor cultural imagination for what toughness can look like in a well-ordered life, or the fact that we rarely read Plato before cross-country practice—the boundaries of productive toughness are not often discussed in our sport.

—Sabrina Little takes the “no pain, no gain” slogan and examines it through the lens of Platonic ethics. I’d generally give that subject matter wide berth (ahem, by skipping it), but like many times before, Sabrina makes it interesting and relatable.

Fun look back at the 2014 Lake Sonoma 50 miler through the eyes of Billy Yang…Krar, Harrison, King, Howe, Varner, Lickteig, Miller…what a race!

Robert Rhodes’ is a SF Bay Area race director, itinerant volunteer, filmmaker, and all around good guy. Unfortunately he found out recently he’s fighting cancer, and with his company shut down due to La Rona, he can use all the help he can get. Robert has spent hundreds of hours volunteering for us, now it’s time to return the favor. Here’s his GoFundMe.

The people at Peloton kinda seem like a-holes, don’t they?

An interesting look at the trail running shoe market with a global perspective. The space is seeing massive growth in all markets and is expected to continue. North America dominates the space when it comes to retail sales, with Asia/China right behind.

Trailrunner Mag has gone full hyper woke. The loud ones on Twitter and Instagram will applaud this while the rest of the community rolls its collective eyes.

Hoping for the best to all those facing horrible weather right now. Stay safe. Stay warm.

Quick Listen: A few important words from his dying dad sent this guy down the trail and into the world of ultramarathons.

Preparing for your first hundred miler? Here’s a video of Adam’s first run at Leadville, complete with preparation, aid stations, and the misery walk at the end.

Mark your calendars: Speedgoat is happening on July 24th. See ya there.

Canadian Running: Aliphine Tuliamuk is the first recipient of USATF’s new maternity grant. Cool program for helping new parents!

Boston Globe: More about the #Gamestop guy’s running story and resume. (Article is paywalled, but some of you may have subs.)

11 Responses to "Ultramarathon Daily News | Wed, Feb 17"

Rose says:

February 17, 2021 at 10:32 am

I think your description of the Trail Runner Mag article is a bit unfair. It’s an article about a real issue – Environmental Justice – that has been recognized for decades by people who work on environmental issues and public decisionmaking. It is not some sort of new “woke” thing. It is widely documented that BIPOC communities are more exposed to pollution and other environmental health risks based on many decades of public policy. Communities literally have shorter lifespans and higher rates of disease because of environmental injustice. I’d suggest giving the article a re-read with an open mind.

Reply
Nicolas says:

February 17, 2021 at 1:46 pm

Thank you, Rose.

Reply
jimmy says:

February 17, 2021 at 2:10 pm

Eric, why is the trail runner mag piece so triggering to you? Can you explain more about why you call the magazine “full hyper woke” for offering this overview of environmental justice, why you are opposed to learning about environmental justice, and why an article discussing this topic would be deserving of a collective eyeroll? As a trail runner I’m receptive to learning about issues associated with the lands where I recreate, whether it’s public lands advocacy, access, open space, stewardship, etc. No eye roll here.

Reply
JONATHAN says:

February 17, 2021 at 6:04 pm

i read the trail runner piece…not triggered, but yep, i agree with eric, rolling my eyes and wondering….sadly, articles like this just continue to exacerbate the division….

Reply
Andrew says:

February 17, 2021 at 7:13 pm

The concept of environmental justice existed decades before “wokeness.” Your increasing use of buzzwords like “woke,” “cancel culture,” and “virtue signaling” adds nothing to the conversation and only hurts your credibility.

Reply
Dillon says:

February 18, 2021 at 4:03 am

Don’t worry about climate change, it’s all those trans athletes trying to ruin your good time, you need to worry about.

Reply
Jimmy A says:

February 18, 2021 at 5:40 am

Just to back up Rose’s point, a very well-known example is the industrial pig industry in rural North Carolina. Here is a paper about the subject: https://doi.org/10.2307/3454438

You could also look at some documentaries about it, but basically pig feces from industrial pig farms enters the water system of communities (mostly black communities), and because there is little regulation around water standards and these towns can’t afford new water systems, nothing is really done about it. I hope you read this paper and look into this example and others and see that the subject isn’t full of the “woke left” trying to stir the pot.

Reply
1. eric schranz says:
  
  February 18, 2021 at 9:17 am
  
  Sounds appalling. I’ll check out the article. Thanks.
  
  Reply
Shawn says:

February 18, 2021 at 6:44 am

I’m not loud on social media, am mindful of virtue signaling, and am not rolling my eyes. Dismissing and attempting to marginalize such perspectives on social justice as ‘wokeness’ conveys zero humility and understanding around the issue.

Reply
Jimmy A says:

February 18, 2021 at 11:59 am

Of course, I feel like it’s always good to provide some actual sources in the conversation. That is just one of many examples.

I read your response from today, and I think a lot of the frustration and disagreement comes from assumptions that go into the conversation (from both “sides”). In general, people want the best for others. I think you and Zoe can both agree that protecting our environment and ensuring everyone has high quality food, water, and shelter is important. Zoe’s article, from my perspective, hones in on the connection between trail running, environmental protection, and POC. This is just one perspective on the issue. Your perspective on the issue may not include POC, and that’s totally fine. I don’t think Zoe, or any other sane person thinks everyone must view an issue through the same lens. However, it seemed like there was an assumption on your end that Zoe and people that subscribe to her “woke” perspective on the issue insist that it’s the only way to view environmental justice. Similarly, people like the “Boulder Squad” might have assumed that you don’t care about the subject matter in the article. In both cases, assumptions about the other person’s view hindered any productive conversation, and I think this could be mediated by remembering, in general, people are coming from a morally just perspective.

This isn’t to say that we can’t disagree on articles or anything, but I think the way in which it is done is important. Perhaps the criticism could emphasize the subject matter is important, but the semantics or the perspective on the issue is what is being discussed (which based on your reply from today, seems to be the case). This would lead people to seeing you’re not an ignorant or bad person and hopefully lead to more productive discussions. Granted, I am not on social media and I also am foreseeing a lot of people’s intensions, including your own. For reference, I probably would fall into the category of “woke” and really enjoyed Zoe’s article. I thought it brought up some good points, so I could also be off the mark when it comes to how you’re feeling about this. I would love to hear some of your thoughts on this, and if I mischaracterized any of your thinking, I apologize in advance. Thanks for reading.

Reply
Bala says:

February 23, 2021 at 9:25 pm

Hmm, not sure why the Trailrunner mag article provoked an eye roll? I found it to be pretty informative without being overly judge or preachy. Your friend Kevin Beck also did a massive eye roll about this one without any explanations. I would love to hear why!

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.