I have done one 24 hour run (the obvious one!). It is the GPS thing which sounds seriously crap to me. Yes, I can well understand that after 80 miles oor so your brain is mush and you don't want to navigate, and I can't see anything wrong with flagging such a course at the relavent junctions etc. However I bet that these guys haven't asked a single land owner for permission, hence the use of public rights of way and insistence on GPS, as they can't mark the route.Originally Posted by IainR
But the WHW doesn't mark the route, neither does Round Rotherham hence the need for strip maps?
Re your BGR, you probably used pacers and navigators as you weren't sure how reliable you'd be after 20 odd hrs. On the WHW one year I wanted to head off, cross country as I thought we were wrong, luckily my wife saw sense, but then on my PBR I stayed fairly mentally alert for the whole route, you never know.
insisting on technology is a very retrograde step for fell running in my opinion. Thats one of the attractions - hardly any rules and a minimalist approach. The UTMB is one thing, but a 100 mile route in the lakes isn't quite the same. I rather doubt whether 1000s of people will turn up to clap you round a bridleway and I can accept some rules for such a big event which would be a logistical nightmare without, but a relatively small event in the Lakes?
Anyway, as it doesn't appeal I won't be there and if enough people are happy to run in this style, then thats fine and I don't begrudge it - mjust doesn't seem to encapsulate the spirit of british fellrunning.
Which really is what I meant to say, but put it rather more crudely.
I am clearly a tight git and on another planet to you lot who are quite happy to shell out the best part of a 100 nicker to endure pain for 24 hours plus. I reckon I can get all the pain I need for far less.
I couldn't agree more. All the challenge is in navigating. Running 100 miles is not worthy. I was considering doing this, but I'm glad somebody has put me right.
Presumably all you hardcore fellrunners never do an event twice. I mean, if you became familiar with the course you might not need to use your map and compass and the whole thing would be utterly pointless.
Some of us, less pure runners, like a variety of events. I enjoy KIMM/OMM but equally I enjoy a long off road race in glorious surroundings where I can be more relaxed about navigating.
In any event a GPS is not quite as foolproof as you might imagine. I would never do an unfamiliar and rely on a GPS alone. A map is always needed.
I do agree that making GPS mandatory seems to be a mistake, but I don't know what the insurance and risk assessment insisted on. Race organisers have to consider the possibility that some idiot will get lost and freeze to death overnight.
I think this race is a cracking idea. I have no issue with the cost. I can't do it this year, but 2009 is a definite possibility
Colm
I understand that the Lakeland 100 is not intended to be a 'fell race' as such, but is intended to be more a 'long distance cahllenge' kind of thing much like the Tour du Mont Blanc or the Verdon Canyon Challenge.
I did the CCC last year and at no stage was it necessary to get a map out as the route is well established and signed with markings clearly visible overnight. It also helped that there was generally lots of headtorches to follow! Essentially, we were on someone elses route choice and all following in a line - the challenge was the distance / terrain not the routefinding.
As far as I understand, this is what the Lakeland 100 is aiming to do, hence the choice of decent footpaths / bridleways for the most part, rather than 'proper' fell running terrain. The reason us Brits trot off to France for these types of races is that we do not have an equivalent kind of event here so I'm all in favour of something like this. This may put off 'fellrunners' but will encourage other runners seeking a challenge.
From comments on this forum it's clear that several people have issues with carrying the GPS, but the idea is for it to be used as a back-up. The intention is to put the GPS in your sack and run / walk the route using your map / compass and some common sense.
With it being the 1st running of the event it's not going to be able to provide the same level of facilities / catering / back-up / marshalling as something like the Tour, but give it a chance and hopefully it will develop.
Just to clarify the purpose of the GPS and answer a few questions raised earlier, the event is indeed intended to mimic events such as the TDMB as is entirely on public footpaths and bridleways, our first step was to contact the national parks and explain the concept and the route, we will continue working with them and following their advice.
If runners have excellent map reading skills they should use them and keep the GPS for back up purposes, as we aren't able to guarantee everyone's navigation skills, we prefer to fall back on the GPS. For those runners who don't have great navigational skills, they can follow the GPS. I think that during a 100 mile event most competitors will welcome the ability to switch off and follow GPS for at least a short time. Aside from the navigation, the GPS also enables us to set a track log and download this to ensure that no short cuts were taken during the event (mistakenly of course!).
The event will not be everyone's 'cup of tea' and we fully understand that the 'trail running' nature will prevent many fell runners from participating but having seen the route first hand it visits some pretty spectacular places and every single person who enters will agree that the route is a blinder! The guys who planned the route are fell runners themselves and have compelted BG, elite mountain marathon categories and they are getting a bit giddy by the whole thing..
Hopefully see you in August
Regards
Lakeland100
Reading the coments posted on this thread regarding the Lakeland 100, I feel the need to make the following comments;
It seems that most ultra runners agree that the UK needs 100 mile+ ultra to step up to the mark and give a valid alternative to the UTMB and the other continental/US stateside events that are hard to get in and are expensive to get too.
If this is the case the Lake District, geographically, offers the perfect venue, allowing a stunning runable route linking the local comunities of the classic radial valleys. Circumnavigating it is approximately 100 miles and the valley roads allow support to be offered around the whole course.
Organising an event like this poses several problems,
You are in a national park so can't go round spaying rocks and trees and hammering way markers in. You also have to keep the National Trust happy as the major land owner.
You then have the sheer scale of the route to provide marshalling and support all way round.
On top of that you need an event HQ for the regestration/camping etc.
No offense to the person who put the maths on and came to the conclusion they were getting ripped off BUT to put a well organised fully supported 100 mile Ultra on you need tens of thousands of pounds.
Without this finance (a la North Face UTMB) I think its a fantastic effort to epic events for putting the event on.
I imagine the GPS issue that seems to be at the centre of the disgruntlement, is a way of tracking competitors movements if you don't have the ability to donate to enough Mountain Rescue teams/local clubs ect to marshal checkpoints around the whole course.
Still I hear Petzl, Montane, and Inov-8 are interested in getting involved in the event, as they have the vision that, if this race works with the local comunities, The Natonal Park, Rescue Teams, and Businesses, we too can have a UK ultra to be proud of that will draw the continentals onto home turf so we can give them a good spanking.
If it counts for anything, count me in!
i think this sounds great, this country needs more 100's and one in the Lakes will be groovy. £75 doesn't seem too bad, there is one in the pennines which is £125'ish, and that covers people who may be out there for 40 hrs!
also i dont know what all the fuss is about GPS's, reading the website info it only mentions that they would recommend one, its not on the kit list.
i'm going to enter the 50 this year i think and, if its on next year, then the 100.
it gets on my t*ts sometimes how people can slag an event off before its got off the ground. well done i say.
I think GPS were originally part of the kit list, this has changed.
re your second point. It's free advertising on the FRA forums, people are free to comment too, I don't think anyone was that harsh. It was Hardly 'slagged off'. I do think ultras are getting picey.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote