Ecarpment at Night

"Doug Freese" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

If you think the Escarpment trail is tough in the summer,
try it at night. Catch
http://www.catskillregionguide.com/articles/article.php?id=9
24 No, I was not one of two veterans of the 100 referenced
in the article. I'm always invited but I'm too chicken [censored]
to hump that trail in snow, ice, bloody cold in the dark.

Yup, gotta be mighty brave to do that kind of stuff. Seems like
these stunts should have their very own newsgroup.... like maybe
rec.circus.freakshow.
_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

Funny story Doug. Yesterday I was in Central Park trying to run with
the Girlfriend...still very much rehab'ing...and ran into my racing
mentor (who is older than you) and running buddy who's been mentioned
on this NG several times John Samsel. As I've been unable to run &
race...we had not see each other since October...we had a lot of
catching up to do. He's never done an Ultra and is a short & middle
distance speed freak & one competitive mf'er (you're right, dif'rent
strokes for dif'rent folks...there's room for all).

So after we finish going through the previous nights Millrose races,
NYRR races, my rehab'ing, etc....I say, "Oh...by the way....I'm going
to race this Catskills Trail race...(and refer to it by name)...etc.
He looked at me, his face changed as if he just saw a ghost and he
immediately said, "Oh no Lance...you don't want to do that...you can
reinjure your knee". In sum...he highly cautioned me to be very
careful about engaging in such events.

This guy is such a hardcore road guy...he's never even done Van
Courtland Park Trails. Extremely unusual for someone of his
background & years in these parts. His posture was very different than
what's often said around here. He told me if you want to have a long
running career....stay away from those races with risky footing that
punish your body (in his mind this is XC & trails) (note this is said
from a guy who's about 5'8", 145 .lb and _perfect_ exclusive low impact
toe striker who runs about 50-60 mpw all road and aims for speed). I
believe he said this in the context that we're running/aiming for speed
& performance in running events....(not feat accomplishment). I
believe for him, the more controlled environment of road racing (sure
footing) & lesser muscular demands/fatigues translates to a more
prolonged running career....again...all assuming you strike great, as
he does. But he is an exception I agree...but this is what he shared
with me...that's enabled him to run injury free, competitively up into
his 60s.

<[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

He looked at me, his face changed as if he just saw a ghost and he
immediately said, "Oh no Lance...you don't want to do that...you can
reinjure your knee". In sum...he highly cautioned me to be very
careful about engaging in such events.

If you run within yourself so that you don't twist ankles and fall on your
knee, etc, most trail running is less stressful on the body, imo. I've only
fallen once in a trail race, when a rock moved as I was running across a
stream crossing (trying to keep my shoes dry).

(as one who has raced jillions of road and trail races over the last 27
years)

The fact that trail races force you to slow down (terrain, hills, mud, etc),
and the fact that most of the surface is soft and lets you slide a bit as
you make contact, results in less concentrated stress on the same part of
your body.

You need to see what causes you trouble -- in my case I cannot race on miles
of deep-V trails (eroded by mtn bikers) -- trying to do so turned an ankle.
Short segments are ok, but not miles of it.

I've had the whole panoply of injuries running on roads -- which is the main
reason I switched to trails, back in my speedster days (80.5% wava), before
trail running was very popular.

-- Dan

Quoted message said:

believe for him, the more controlled environment of road racing (sure
footing) & lesser muscular demands/fatigues

Lance, This is what we've been trying to tell you; that road speed
doesn't necessarily translate to trail speed. The trail determines how
fast you can run and experience on that type of terrain makes a BIG
difference. So someone who is way faster on roads my well get smoked on
trails by someone who is slower but runs trails all the time, i.e. you
and Tony :-)

--
- The Trailrunner

Anti-Spam Alert: If you wish to reply, cut the *BS*

Trails of the Diablo Valley
*Running - Hiking - Nature*
http://www.geocities.com/yosemite/trails/6016/

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I say, "Oh...by the way....I'm going
to race this Catskills Trail race...(and refer to it by name)...etc.
He looked at me, his face changed as if he just saw a ghost and he
immediately said, "Oh no Lance...you don't want to do that...you can
reinjure your knee". In sum...he highly cautioned me to be very
careful about engaging in such events.

He is good mentor as this race will cause all kind of torque to your
knees, ankles and that assumes normal forward motion and no miscues. I
would agree with caution and tuck you Big D Escarpment challenge until
you're totally mended.

Quoted message said:

He told me if you want to have a long
running career....stay away from those races with risky footing that
punish your body (in his mind this is XC & trails)

For races like Escarpment and some others there are lots of risky
footing and one should choose their races accordingly. There are many
more that are less punishing per step but still have the test of time
and endurance. As for punishment, I contend that roads are much more
unforgiving than trails. I feel I owe my longevity to running on softer
surfaces.

Quoted message said:

.(not feat accomplishment).

Don't start this [censored] again.

Quoted message said:

I
believe for him, the more controlled environment of road racing (sure
footing) & lesser muscular demands/fatigues translates to a more
prolonged running career....again...all assuming you strike great, as
he does. But he is an exception I agree...but this is what he shared
with me...that's enabled him to run injury free, competitively up into
his 60s.

And I claim it's trails that kept me going. Does that mean from one
discussion you will beg off your trail career before it even starts? I
only wish you would try a few, if for no other reason, to gain some
experience and maybe respect for endurance/trail running.

-DF

Doug Freese said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I say, "Oh...by the way....I'm going
to race this Catskills Trail race...(and refer to it by name)...etc.
He looked at me, his face changed as if he just saw a ghost and he
immediately said, "Oh no Lance...you don't want to do that...you can
reinjure your knee". In sum...he highly cautioned me to be very
careful about engaging in such events.

He is good mentor as this race will cause all kind of torque to your
knees, ankles and that assumes normal forward motion and no miscues. I
would agree with caution and tuck you Big D Escarpment challenge until
you're totally mended.

Quoted message said:

He told me if you want to have a long
running career....stay away from those races with risky footing that
punish your body (in his mind this is XC & trails)

For races like Escarpment and some others there are lots of risky
footing and one should choose their races accordingly. There are many
more that are less punishing per step but still have the test of time
and endurance. As for punishment, I contend that roads are much more

I dunno, it sometimes seems to me that you want it both ways. Are the trails
really difficult and dangerous, or are they a kinder gentler type of running ?

I mean, you suggest that a course like Vanny or even mudders and grunters is
exceptionally easy by trail standards.

If mudders and grunters is at the "easy" end of the spectrum, I'd argue that
trail running is actually a fairly hazardous activity. Actually, I suspect
the reality of the situation is that many trail races aren't like escarpment,
and that they probably aren't even that dangerous unless you try to bolt down
the hills.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

"Donovan Rebbechi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On 2006-02-05, Doug Freese <[email hidden]> wrote:
....

Quoted message said:

For races like Escarpment and some others there are lots of risky
footing and one should choose their races accordingly. There are many
more that are less punishing per step but still have the test of time
and endurance. As for punishment, I contend that roads are much more

I dunno, it sometimes seems to me that you want it both ways. Are the

trails

Quoted message said:

really difficult and dangerous, or are they a kinder gentler type of

running ?

Quoted message said:

I mean, you suggest that a course like Vanny or even mudders and grunters

is

Quoted message said:

exceptionally easy by trail standards.

If mudders and grunters is at the "easy" end of the spectrum, I'd argue

that

Quoted message said:

trail running is actually a fairly hazardous activity. Actually, I suspect
the reality of the situation is that many trail races aren't like

escarpment,

Quoted message said:

and that they probably aren't even that dangerous unless you try to bolt

down

Quoted message said:

the hills.

You're right, most trail race courses (that I've done at least) aren't
anything like escarpment.

There are various factors for each type of event:

Trail type: Road, cinder, jeep trail, atv trail, singletrack, game trail, no
trail (orienteering)
Trail footing: smooth, uneven, pitched, rocky, very rocky, muddy, etc.
Hills: short, short steep, rolling, long easy grade, long steep grade, cliff
sections, etc.
Length: < 2 hours, 2-5 hours, over 5 hours, etc.

Escarpment is difficult because it has singletrack the entire length;
uneven, rocky, very rocky footing; all types of hills mentioned; and a 3-5
hour length for most. In this case, the course really does challenge you.

In the Vermont 50 mile run, by contrast, 95% of the trails are very easy and
seldom steep, despite nearly 9000' climb and descent. There are just a few
miles of what could be called somewhat low-to-medium technical trail, but
it's only a bit hard because it comes toward the end of the race. The
challenge there is feeding/functioning while running for 8 hours+.

If you try doing that same 50 miles (or even 100) over trails like
escarpment, you're talking physical abuse and high DNF rates. There are some
races like that, of which I believe mountain mascochist down south is one
(talked to a guy I ran with in the Vermont 50 about that one). Barkley is at
the extreme end of these types of events, but I believe some of that is
off-trail, bordering on orienteering.

Obviously, difficulty is a combination of what you put into it, and what the
event pushes back with. I agree with others that road running all the time
is very difficult because it isolates certain muscles and movements and
focuses the stress there. Even running on flat trails does the same thing to
me. Probably most trail runners either train on easy trails and/or roads
most of the time, and that makes it overall easier on the body than road
running. Some events, however, will definitely push back in a major way.

When I was orienteering, I very rarely saw anyone get injured from the
uneven footing etc., though it did happen from time to time. The difficulty
with orienteering is that it pushes your body in so many places that when
you finish a weekend meet, you sometimes feel like you've been through a
brutal football game, with leg scrapes and bruises sometimes to prove it.
IMO, this would be the extreme of difficult short-event type of running.
Long-course orienteering, and billy goat events take this punishment to
another level (I've done both). But for sheer brutality, running a 100 miler
or even a 50 miler over trails like the escarpment trail would be the
hardest.

-Tony

Quoted message said:

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

"Doug Freese" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

If you think the Escarpment trail is tough in the summer, try it at
night. Catch
http://www.catskillregionguide.com/articles/article.php?id=924 No, I
was not one of two veterans of the 100 referenced in the article. I'm
always invited but I'm too chicken [censored] to hump that trail in snow,
ice, bloody cold in the dark. Actually some bad experiences in my 20's
in Alaska loom in my mind.

-DougF

Great read, thanks. I loved the part about following the bobcat tracks on
the trail. I gather that was this year in January. 12 hours or 3-4 times
slower than racing it in summer heat - 1.5 mph - damn good for the
conditions, but could be as slow as 1 mph some years I think, since
conditions this year have been pretty mild. In years past the snow gets so
deep on those high Catskill trails that you'd crash through to your waist
sometimes, or sink in 1'+ with snowshoes. I can't imagine climbing blackhead
without crampons most winters; this year must have been pretty tame as far
as icefalls go up there.

-Tony

Tony S. said:

When I was orienteering, I very rarely saw anyone get injured from the
uneven footing etc., though it did happen from time to time.

The difference is what people are trained for. Orienteerers have trained
on and are adapted to uneven footing that might shred someone who has
only run on roads. I know flat roads (and flat trails) wear on me in
less than 1 mi.

Dot

--
Just wing it, it's an adventure; don't think about strategy.
~Julie Udchachon, in reference to the upcoming Susitna 2006

"Donovan Rebbechi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I dunno, it sometimes seems to me that you want it both ways. Are the
trails
really difficult and dangerous, or are they a kinder gentler type of
running ?

Quoted message said:

Actually, I suspect
the reality of the situation is that many trail races aren't like
escarpment,
and that they probably aren't even that dangerous unless you try to
bolt down
the hills.

They come in all flavors. Some people like extremes like Barkley, long
and hard, and the Escarpment which is short and hard. There are very
easy trail races like the HAT and Bull Run and both the Vermont 50 and
100(different courses). Easy at least with footing. There are always
people that fail to eat, drink or get adequate salt and get dizzy or
tired and fall but those are a different set if problems.

Personally, I found over time that the Escarpment ceased to be fun and
I found a different race albeit 5 times further which was more fun in a
perverse way. I prefer 50k to 100 miles of less ugly footing and fight
different battles.

-DF

"Tony S." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:E1uFf.2469$_I4.1085@trndny02...

Quoted message said:

Great read, thanks. I loved the part about following the bobcat tracks
on
the trail. I gather that was this year in January. 12 hours or 3-4
times
slower than racing it in summer heat - 1.5 mph - damn good for the
conditions, but could be as slow as 1 mph some years I think, since
conditions this year have been pretty mild.

I think Jimmy played down some of the hardships. There was significant
ice and things got a little dicey at times. They went up Windham High a
little fast and got too sweaty. They could only pause for a minute or so
or risk getting cold.

Quoted message said:

In years past the snow gets so
deep on those high Catskill trails that you'd crash through to your
waist
sometimes, or sink in 1'+ with snowshoes.

I remember [censored] talking about some years where the trail markers on the
trees were hidden by the height of thre snow.

Quoted message said:

I can't imagine climbing blackhead
without crampons most winters; this year must have been pretty tame as
far
as icefalls go up there.

They had there share of ice. Is 2 inches worse than a foot? 🙂

-Doug

Doug Freese said:

"Tony S." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:E1uFf.2469$_I4.1085@trndny02...

Quoted message said:

I can't imagine climbing blackhead
without crampons most winters; this year must have been pretty tame as
far
as icefalls go up there.

They had there share of ice. Is 2 inches worse than a foot? 🙂

Maybe not 2 inches, but shallow ice can be worse than 1 ft if it's over
rocks - crampons can't dig in. 😉

Good story, thanks for posting.

BTW, if anyone else is wondering about hydration bladder tubes freezing,
one trick I learned this winter is to hold the tube overhead, pinch the
nozzle, and let the fluid drain back into the bladder. Works *much*
better than blowing.

The other standard tricks are to keep tube under jacket and drink fairly
frequently. I've got extra insulation on mine - besides what it came
with and still had trouble freezing in subzero F unless I kept it under
jacket. (although I might have started doing that at same time I learned
the pinch-nozzle-open trick)

Dot

--
Just wing it, it's an adventure; don't think about strategy.
~Julie Udchachon, in reference to the upcoming Susitna 2006

"Dot" <dot.h@#duh?att.net> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Tony S. said:

When I was orienteering, I very rarely saw anyone get injured from the
uneven footing etc., though it did happen from time to time.

The difference is what people are trained for. Orienteerers have trained
on and are adapted to uneven footing that might shred someone who has
only run on roads. I know flat roads (and flat trails) wear on me in
less than 1 mi.

True, and while I'm sure there are some orienteerers who only train in the
woods, or rough-trail runners who only train on rough trails, most mortals
get enough little random strains where they can't do that daily, which means
they have to train some in easier conditions, and that on event day, the
course can still push back pretty hard.

When I was doing summer road running and the occasional race in my late 20's
and early 30's the roads were fine, and never beat me up as bad as
orienteering; but past age 35, the roads started to beat me up much more
than trails, and I was glad to once again live in a place with easy trail
access.

My most recent orienteering effort was in '03 at west point. I ran the blue
course and it absolutely kicked the [censored] out of me, and I just ran blue on
Sat - I decided to run an easy orange course on Sun. While an ill-prepared
50 miler in '02 shredded my quads much worse, my whole body was sore for a
week after that west point meet. You would agree, would you not, that no
matter what training you're used to, a course like Barkley is going to shred
you? And scaling down from that, there are other courses that will
challenge.

I'm not arguing that trails are harder than road running. To me road running
not only over-stresses certain parts of the body more than other types of
running, it's so boring to me that it's a major mental challenge to run for
more than about 10k on a road. For training and racing, easy to moderate
footing on rolling trails are probably the easiest on the body and mind.
Rough trails or orienteering adds in a physically challenging element, not
unlike the added specific stress of road running, but different in that it's
random acute stresses that don't usually injure, but accumulate and need
rest through more moderate training.

-Tony

Quoted message said:

Dot
--
Just wing it, it's an adventure; don't think about strategy.
~Julie Udchachon, in reference to the upcoming Susitna 2006

Tony S. said:

"Dot" <dot.h@#duh?att.net> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

You would agree, would you not, that no
matter what training you're used to, a course like Barkley is going to shred
you?

Average person, yes. But for any course, I'd venture there's somebody
(with experience and training and desire) that could specifically train
for it and not be shredded. I know Cave Dog did his homework when he set
the Barkley record a few years ago, but I never heard any comments about
being beat or whatever (quiet guy). But he thrives on those kinds of
things. But, yes, if you're bushwhacking through brambles, there will be
some literal shredding, etc. Some of the difficulty at Barkley is the
navigation and weather and the time limit.

As I understand it, runners are being asked not to train on the course
to appease the powers that be in Tenn, so a repeat of Cave Dog's may not
be reasonable. Although I'm sure there's some other talented folks that
might be able to do it with less homework.

One thing I'm not sure of with Barkley topography, if it's a bunch of
50-100 ft hills that you're constantly up and down, or whether they're
longer climbs (say 200-500 or 1000+ft) where you can at least run a few
minutes in the same gear.

AFAIK, most people train for Barkley the same as any other race. I'm not
convinced that's specific enough. OTOH, maybe I've been crawling around
in underbrush on steep slopes for too many years to be suitably
impressed 😉

Quoted message said:

And scaling down from that, there are other courses that will
challenge.

Again, depends on the person, training, and if hard racing. If hard
racing, 5k's can beat people up. Yes, all courses will challenge at some
level - whether it's topography, speed, temperature, support, or
whatever (gee, where have I heard this).

Quoted message said:

For training and racing, easy to moderate

Quoted message said:

footing on rolling trails are probably the easiest on the body and mind.
Rough trails or orienteering adds in a physically challenging element, not
unlike the added specific stress of road running, but different in that it's
random acute stresses that don't usually injure, but accumulate and need
rest through more moderate training.

Agreed.

Dot

--
Just wing it, it's an adventure; don't think about strategy.
~Julie Udchachon, in reference to the upcoming Susitna 2006

"Dot" <dot.h@#duh?att.net> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Tony S. said:

"Dot" <dot.h@#duh?att.net> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

You would agree, would you not, that no
matter what training you're used to, a course like Barkley is going to

shred

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

you?

Average person, yes. But for any course, I'd venture there's somebody
(with experience and training and desire) that could specifically train
for it and not be shredded. I know Cave Dog did his homework when he set
the Barkley record a few years ago, but I never heard any comments about
being beat or whatever (quiet guy). But he thrives on those kinds of
things. But, yes, if you're bushwhacking through brambles, there will be
some literal shredding, etc. Some of the difficulty at Barkley is the
navigation and weather and the time limit.

So your point is that it's no different from a person adapting to road
running for the marathon distance, for example. I suppose, if you happen to
be such a specimen.

Quoted message said:

As I understand it, runners are being asked not to train on the course
to appease the powers that be in Tenn, so a repeat of Cave Dog's may not
be reasonable. Although I'm sure there's some other talented folks that
might be able to do it with less homework.

One thing I'm not sure of with Barkley topography, if it's a bunch of
50-100 ft hills that you're constantly up and down, or whether they're
longer climbs (say 200-500 or 1000+ft) where you can at least run a few
minutes in the same gear.

Don't know really. http://www.mattmahoney.net/barkley/ says there's 52,900
feet of climb. Given the location, I'd say some of the climbs are well over
1000' and looking at some of the pictures on this site, they're extremely
steep. Interestingly, in '05, nobody finished the full 100 miles. What does
that tell you?

Quoted message said:

AFAIK, most people train for Barkley the same as any other race. I'm not
convinced that's specific enough. OTOH, maybe I've been crawling around
in underbrush on steep slopes for too many years to be suitably
impressed 😉

Ok, you're not, but I am impressed with 52,900 feet of climb.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

And scaling down from that, there are other courses that will
challenge.

Again, depends on the person, training, and if hard racing. If hard
racing, 5k's can beat people up. Yes, all courses will challenge at some
level - whether it's topography, speed, temperature, support, or
whatever (gee, where have I heard this).

Agreed. I was just trying to give some comparison of event types. The more
extreme the terrain, the less the average person can fully adapt to and be
prepared to race in it. People's individual limitations most probably vary
with event type also. For some that would be a paved marathon might be
harder than the escarpment trail.

-Tony

Quoted message said:

For training and racing, easy to moderate

Quoted message said:

footing on rolling trails are probably the easiest on the body and mind.
Rough trails or orienteering adds in a physically challenging element,

not

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

unlike the added specific stress of road running, but different in that

it's

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

random acute stresses that don't usually injure, but accumulate and need
rest through more moderate training.

Agreed.

Dot
--
Just wing it, it's an adventure; don't think about strategy.
~Julie Udchachon, in reference to the upcoming Susitna 2006

"Dot" <dot.h@#duh?att.net> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Doug Freese said:

"Tony S." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:E1uFf.2469$_I4.1085@trndny02...

Quoted message said:

I can't imagine climbing blackhead
without crampons most winters; this year must have been pretty tame as
far
as icefalls go up there.

They had there share of ice. Is 2 inches worse than a foot? 🙂

Maybe not 2 inches, but shallow ice can be worse than 1 ft if it's over
rocks - crampons can't dig in. 😉

Ice is ice, but yea, on the Catskill steep rocky trails you see crampon
scratch marks all over the rocky ledges on the steeper climbs. My point was
that when there's a whole lot more snow, I would imagine that it often
results in much longer icefalls simply because there's more water available
to produce such on melt days.

Quoted message said:

Good story, thanks for posting.

BTW, if anyone else is wondering about hydration bladder tubes freezing,
one trick I learned this winter is to hold the tube overhead, pinch the
nozzle, and let the fluid drain back into the bladder. Works *much*
better than blowing.

Great trick, thanks. I have the camelback insulated tube with the cap over
the mouthpiece. Even in low 20's it will freeze up if you don't drink
frequently.

-Tony

Quoted message said:

The other standard tricks are to keep tube under jacket and drink fairly
frequently. I've got extra insulation on mine - besides what it came
with and still had trouble freezing in subzero F unless I kept it under
jacket. (although I might have started doing that at same time I learned
the pinch-nozzle-open trick)

Dot

--
Just wing it, it's an adventure; don't think about strategy.
~Julie Udchachon, in reference to the upcoming Susitna 2006

Tony S. said:

"Dot" <dot.h@#duh?att.net> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Tony S. said:

"Dot" <dot.h@#duh?att.net> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

You would agree, would you not, that no
matter what training you're used to, a course like Barkley is going to

shred

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

you?

Average person, yes. But for any course, I'd venture there's somebody
(with experience and training and desire) that could specifically train
for it and not be shredded. I know Cave Dog did his homework when he set
the Barkley record a few years ago, but I never heard any comments about
being beat or whatever (quiet guy). But he thrives on those kinds of
things. But, yes, if you're bushwhacking through brambles, there will be
some literal shredding, etc. Some of the difficulty at Barkley is the
navigation and weather and the time limit.

So your point is that it's no different from a person adapting to road
running for the marathon distance, for example. I suppose, if you happen to
be such a specimen.

yep - but fewer people meet the right "specimen" criteria 😉 And I
certainly don't claim to be one willing to try.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

As I understand it, runners are being asked not to train on the course
to appease the powers that be in Tenn, so a repeat of Cave Dog's may not
be reasonable. Although I'm sure there's some other talented folks that
might be able to do it with less homework.

One thing I'm not sure of with Barkley topography, if it's a bunch of
50-100 ft hills that you're constantly up and down, or whether they're
longer climbs (say 200-500 or 1000+ft) where you can at least run a few
minutes in the same gear.

Don't know really. http://www.mattmahoney.net/barkley/ says there's 52,900
feet of climb. Given the location, I'd say some of the climbs are well over
1000' and looking at some of the pictures on this site, they're extremely
steep.

Here's a description that also points out why it's not just the
elevation. Yea, a few of the climbs are over 1000ft so you get to keep
going up or down for awhile instead of constantly switching gears.
http://www.lehigh.edu/dmd1/public/www-data/dave.html

Our problem in mimicking some of that is we get above treeline on long
climbs and they become more rock climbing than just scrambling, except
where we have trails between rocks.

Quoted message said:

Interestingly, in '05, nobody finished the full 100 miles. What does
that tell you?

What's more telling is the DNF's on the fun run or how many even start a
2nd loop.

There's only been 6 finishers since it started (20? yrs), iirc - and #2
and #3 teamed up in 20xx (?); #4 was 2003, #5&6 were in 2004; and one
person did start on lap 5 in 2005. That's half the finishers in the last
3 years. In recent years, more (relatively speaking) people have been
finishing or almost finishing than in the past. Better training or
studying the course or luck with the weather?

I have a lot of respect for anyone that survives any amount of Barkley.
But I think a lot of the challenge of Barkley is different - no nicely
groomed trails, no aid stations, etc. It takes the lesson that the
trails control the speed to the utmost. How many races can you run and
win with 36 min/miles.

From the RD: "secondly, the barkley is a running event. as the course
grows in the minds of those who failed (arent we all this way?), the
difficulty reaches epic proportions. the truth is (at least if you
believe in math) 45% of the course is flat out runnable, jeep/logging
roads, well maintained hiking paths, and even a little bit of pavement.
and, if the will is there, the entire thing CAN be run. as a matter of
fact, two different runners have run every step of a single loop. it
just did not contribute to a successful outing. "

But as we've mentioned before, most runners like to do multiple races in
1 yr. Very few want to concentrate on one race.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

AFAIK, most people train for Barkley the same as any other race. I'm not
convinced that's specific enough. OTOH, maybe I've been crawling around
in underbrush on steep slopes for too many years to be suitably
impressed 😉

Ok, you're not, but I am impressed with 52,900 feet of climb.

It's a lot of elevation to be sure and is definitely tough for the
person that doesn't do lots of hill work, but that's only one of the
issues there, as indicated in the link above. The mountain race we have
locally is 14mi, 9k ft (2 hills). Run that 7 times (Barkley is 5x around
a loop) plus up to the picnic table and back, and that's about 100 mi,
65,000 ft - although the trail is obvious and no bushwhacking through
the brambles, no ditches, and no books to find pages in, etc. (although
if it's raining, the trail is really greasy, like a sliding board)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

And scaling down from that, there are other courses that will
challenge.

Again, depends on the person, training, and if hard racing. If hard
racing, 5k's can beat people up. Yes, all courses will challenge at some
level - whether it's topography, speed, temperature, support, or
whatever (gee, where have I heard this).

Agreed. I was just trying to give some comparison of event types. The more
extreme the terrain, the less the average person can fully adapt to and be
prepared to race in it. People's individual limitations most probably vary
with event type also. For some that would be a paved marathon might be
harder than the escarpment trail.

exactly.

Dot

--
Just wing it, it's an adventure; don't think about strategy.
~Julie Udchachon, in reference to the upcoming Susitna 2006

(From Dot's referenced link)

"The very first Barkley was run in 1977 by one man. He ran it with no
aid stations, no map, no light and no provisions beyond a bag of wheat
germ"
___

I note this link in context and consistency with examining the language
& descriptions of this thread about these events. It appears the
pendulum of characterization swings away from "running events" and
toward "orienteering events". The language bathes in environmental
factors. Now added and coupled to this....is the factor of a field of
"one". That's what makes it "personal challenge/feat accomplishment",
and not a competitive race. (and noted is the mentioning of the
omission of a map, light, and provisions).

Is this a competitive racing or personal challenge? Is this running a
race or orienteering? This strikes clearly with me to be in the domain
of feat accomplishment. This is not the only event wherein the origins
are from a field of "one".

All I am illustrating is many of these events emerge from what is
clearly feat accomplishment/personal challenge and to this very
day...that remains the central foundation/purpose of many of these
events. I am sure they are fun and that's great....

Doug's race in the Catskills. It's said many runners wear gloves of
some sort out of necessity. When events mandate the use of gloves (to
manage handling obstacles)...at what point do they migrate away from
running events and toward "orienteering"? I am not talking about
using your hand/arm to guard from tree limbs/brush....I am talking
about having to use your hands/arms for lift of some sort.

Not that any of this is a bad thing....but do any of these races
migrate a bit into what would be characterized as orienteering?

"Tony S." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:r7AFf.2591$Zy3.1524@trndny08...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

BTW, if anyone else is wondering about hydration bladder tubes
freezing,
one trick I learned this winter is to hold the tube overhead, pinch
the
nozzle, and let the fluid drain back into the bladder. Works *much*
better than blowing.

Great trick, thanks. I have the camelback insulated tube with the cap
over
the mouthpiece. Even in low 20's it will freeze up if you don't drink
frequently.

One of the guys on this night run not only kept his camelback under his
jacket but had it mounted in the front. I have no idea how awkward or
difficult this was. He said he had no problems freezing up while others
did. It's not clear to me if it was the forward mounting or his warmer
layers.

-DF