We faced a practical application of the UTMB question last week, after Eastern States 100 was cancelled because flooding from the hurricane. My wife went looking for a replacement hundred-miler, one that:
- still had openings,
- fit our schedule,
- near an ES100-level difficulty,
- is a Western States qualifier
There are plenty of races out there, but there were only two that checked all those boxes, and they both had that annoying "by UTMB" after their names. She had to decide just how much that mattered, and while it wasn't the only factor, it was important. She ended up letting go of the Western States ticket, and chose Mogollon Monster (an Aravaipa race in Arizona that will give her a Hardrock ticket instead of a WSER ticket). I know this will be a good race and a worthy challenge (I ran it myself in 2016), and it will be a good trip for us, but the process of getting to that choice was uncomfortable — how nice it would be to just forget about the politics of it (and lotteries, and everything...)
Oh for simpler times! I think for most runners the politics doesn’t matter, they’re not aware of it. They just see a local 50km and go for it. For our sake though, i do sometimes yearn for a consolidated calendar - would make annual race planning a heck of a lot easier!
While there was a big social media controversy re UTMB, remember social media is a bubble that looks mainly at itself. Because meanwhile, applications to all UTMB Group events were going up 40%. So I'm not sure how much of a non-media controversy there was.
The World Finals is a fantastic race! And the minority purchase by Ironman made the business model of the UTMB Group suspiciously predatory. Notice these are two different aspects - one (actually 7) race(s) are highly credible and authentic, while the overall business model is suspect.
I've written previously: MUT (Mountain/Ultra/Trail) running has a peculiar revenue model: it's all about sponsorship. Company's pay runners for Impressions they generate. Professional trail runners are billboards - very fit, very good people - but they are simply marketing tools. So they go where their employers feel they will generate the most Impressions.
I'm in Chamonix now - just finished my own solo TMB by a new route variation yesterday. All of trail running media is descending here now - which means I'm leaving tomorrow! For me, more fun things to do in Scotland and Wales next two weeks.
Yes Buzz! I hear you’re in my neck of the woods doing the Dragons Back on Monday! Wish you all the best of luck pal, might even see you at the finish line (which is 100m from my front door!)
In my opinion it‘s still a positive aspect that there is no real governing body in ultra trail running. Almost all governing bodies in sports are stodgy, have arbitrary rules or make headlines through scandals. The discussions about the worldwide growth of the UTMB group are good for the sport and the north american voice is important and will always be strong.
"If it weren’t for the invisible hand of brand sponsorship dollars influencing where athletes competed, the racing landscape would look a lot different."
This parallels MMA, which has a similar age to ultramarathons. Until the top guys are willing to sacrifice money, significant changes can't happen. Collective power in MMA (actual unions) and ultras (PTRA) have both been at the forefront of conversation the last year.
Would Hoka (or Salomon) athlete managers allow contracts to not include UTMB? Similar to the previous post here on UR Mag, there is a consolidated power of only a few people that now have control of the competitive side of the sport. An apparel brand that sponsors an athlete isn't going to want to allow their athlete to publicly disavow one of the brand's sponsored events.
Hoka currently controls the elite races of both North America and Europe and also controls some of the top runners.
Jim can tweet how he wants to go somewhere else but in the words of Conor McGregor: "You'll do what you're told."
We faced a practical application of the UTMB question last week, after Eastern States 100 was cancelled because flooding from the hurricane. My wife went looking for a replacement hundred-miler, one that:
- still had openings,
- fit our schedule,
- near an ES100-level difficulty,
- is a Western States qualifier
There are plenty of races out there, but there were only two that checked all those boxes, and they both had that annoying "by UTMB" after their names. She had to decide just how much that mattered, and while it wasn't the only factor, it was important. She ended up letting go of the Western States ticket, and chose Mogollon Monster (an Aravaipa race in Arizona that will give her a Hardrock ticket instead of a WSER ticket). I know this will be a good race and a worthy challenge (I ran it myself in 2016), and it will be a good trip for us, but the process of getting to that choice was uncomfortable — how nice it would be to just forget about the politics of it (and lotteries, and everything...)
Oh for simpler times! I think for most runners the politics doesn’t matter, they’re not aware of it. They just see a local 50km and go for it. For our sake though, i do sometimes yearn for a consolidated calendar - would make annual race planning a heck of a lot easier!
Right.
While there was a big social media controversy re UTMB, remember social media is a bubble that looks mainly at itself. Because meanwhile, applications to all UTMB Group events were going up 40%. So I'm not sure how much of a non-media controversy there was.
The World Finals is a fantastic race! And the minority purchase by Ironman made the business model of the UTMB Group suspiciously predatory. Notice these are two different aspects - one (actually 7) race(s) are highly credible and authentic, while the overall business model is suspect.
I've written previously: MUT (Mountain/Ultra/Trail) running has a peculiar revenue model: it's all about sponsorship. Company's pay runners for Impressions they generate. Professional trail runners are billboards - very fit, very good people - but they are simply marketing tools. So they go where their employers feel they will generate the most Impressions.
I'm in Chamonix now - just finished my own solo TMB by a new route variation yesterday. All of trail running media is descending here now - which means I'm leaving tomorrow! For me, more fun things to do in Scotland and Wales next two weeks.
Yes Buzz! I hear you’re in my neck of the woods doing the Dragons Back on Monday! Wish you all the best of luck pal, might even see you at the finish line (which is 100m from my front door!)
In my opinion it‘s still a positive aspect that there is no real governing body in ultra trail running. Almost all governing bodies in sports are stodgy, have arbitrary rules or make headlines through scandals. The discussions about the worldwide growth of the UTMB group are good for the sport and the north american voice is important and will always be strong.
"If it weren’t for the invisible hand of brand sponsorship dollars influencing where athletes competed, the racing landscape would look a lot different."
This parallels MMA, which has a similar age to ultramarathons. Until the top guys are willing to sacrifice money, significant changes can't happen. Collective power in MMA (actual unions) and ultras (PTRA) have both been at the forefront of conversation the last year.
Would Hoka (or Salomon) athlete managers allow contracts to not include UTMB? Similar to the previous post here on UR Mag, there is a consolidated power of only a few people that now have control of the competitive side of the sport. An apparel brand that sponsors an athlete isn't going to want to allow their athlete to publicly disavow one of the brand's sponsored events.
Hoka currently controls the elite races of both North America and Europe and also controls some of the top runners.
Jim can tweet how he wants to go somewhere else but in the words of Conor McGregor: "You'll do what you're told."
That’s probably the first comparison trail running has had to MMA and i love it! Lots of parallels.
I'll be in town. Would be fun to meet up.