Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [hr100] No balls, no levy for the next year.

Expand Messages
  • ken gordon
       Another  2 cents.   I don t understand the 5 time automatic finisher entry.  With a race as amazing and hard to get into as this why would you let such
    Message 1 of 11 , Jul 21, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
         Another  2 cents.   I don't understand the 5 time automatic finisher entry.  With a race as amazing and hard to get into as this why would you let such a large number of people in automatically?  In another year or two you will have half the slots filled by people who don't have to lottery in.  If you want legacy entrants then maybe make it a percentage (20%?) with the most finishes or 10 timers.  People who have 5 finishes already have a huge advantage in lottery tickets and most will get in.  Too little emphasis is put on people who have volunteered for the race over the years.  A dnf is worth more than someone who has worked at the race before the start, worked and aid station and paced many miles; all in the same year.  I have friends who have worked more hours out there than people who have finished the race but get no extra consideration yet have never been able to lottery in.  When we are at the awards clapping for those volunteers
      whose backs we run the race on why don't we figure out a way to get those qualified and willing a chance to run it also.
       ken g

      --- On Thu, 7/21/11, Steve Kral <bvstablemail@...> wrote:

      From: Steve Kral <bvstablemail@...>
      Subject: Re: [hr100] No balls, no levy for the next year.
      To: hr100@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Thursday, July 21, 2011, 3:06 PM
















       









      Fair enough Steve. Jean-Jacques has many fine attributes. I know--I was out in the sun with him pounding Rodger's tent stakes until our hands went numb. I think I did my share of work to make his Hardrock 2011 effort possible and he was out there last weekend at the Kendall Mtn Marathon making my run possible. I appreciate that.



      But I find his sense of entitlement about taking up a spot in this run to ensure himself another 3 years of eligibility offensive. So offensive in fact, that I'm not sure how any comment about it could be considered a cheap shot.



      All the best

      Steve



      --- On Thu, 7/21/11, Steve Pero <ultrastevep@...> wrote:



      From: Steve Pero <ultrastevep@...>

      Subject: Re: [hr100] No balls, no levy for the next year.

      To: hr100@yahoogroups.com

      Date: Thursday, July 21, 2011, 4:25 PM



       



      Guess I might as well throw my 2 cents in, as I do have an opinion. This



      last email just raised the hackles on my back...



      I am 2 for 8 at Hardrock...one of the reasons I continue to run this (when I



      do get in) is I find it to be the biggest challenge to me as an ultrarunner.



      I finished my first time in 2001 in 41 hours, I tried to "race" it the next



      several years and in the end the Hardrock course beat me up. In 2008 I



      decided to just walk out of town and stay around a 48 hour finish, showing



      some respect for the course and I won my own personal battle that year,



      finishing in 43 hours. 2009 I didn't get in, last year I gave up my spot to



      Deb and this year had some freaky medical issues...but I did DNF, so



      therefore I should step aside next year based on my DNF to let a younger



      runner in the race. I chuckle when I think what John Cappis' thoughts would



      be on all of this...wish he was still around during the Hardrock to hear



      them.



      This issue will always be thrown around and those who don't get in will say



      that we who do get in aren't deserving...but I agree with JJ that what goes



      on in the background with many of us in the "Tribe" (we like to call it



      family) doesn't get seen by the youngsters training in the mountains.



      Without us the course wouldn't be marked and many of the trails would be a



      mess...and if the "run" became a priority as a "race", then I guess I'd move



      on because what I love about Hardrock is the "spirit" of Hardrock. Someday



      when I can no longer finish within the cutoffs, you youngsters will see my



      face on the other side of a table at an aid station helping you get through



      it.



      My only thoughts on any changes in the lottery would be to eliminate the



      automatic qualification by starting Hardrock. One should have to go out and



      finish another qualifier (if they did not finish) in the calender year and



      by doing so will have shown that he/she is willing and able to complete the



      most difficult official 100 mile race in the country. I think we have the



      best lottery of all the 100's and other than the above change, should remain



      unchanged.



      See some of you at the Bear 100 in September, where I plan to re-qualify!



      ;-)



      Steve Pero



      PS: Your last sentence was a cheap shot at Jean-Jacques, who I consider a



      friend.



      On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 1:58 PM, Steve Kral <bvstablemail@...> wrote:



      >



      > For those who are wondering if the comments below are a joke, I can



      > assure you they aren't.



      >



      > A couple of years ago I was on a shuttle to the start of the Silverton



      > Alpine 50KM with this exemplar sportsman, and he told me point blank that he



      > would feel no compunction whatsoever about starting the Hardrock 100 Mile



      > Run with no intention of finishing if it meant ensuring his eligibility for



      > future years...damnation to any outsider who wanted to run the race and had



      > the ability to do it.



      >



      > Regrettably, sometimes I fear the "Hardrock Tribe" displays the morals of a



      > Bedouin Clan more than a family.



      >



      > It's funny how the concept of running 100 miles in the Hardrock 100 Mile



      > Run is now somehow called "elitism." Isn't it more simply, accomplishing the



      > goal? As far as "elitism" goes, I think this is a perfect example of "when



      > you point your finger, you got four more fingers pointing back at you."



      > Elitist non-finisher!



      >



      > Of course, Jean-Jacques does seemingly have the "Spirit of Hardrock" behind



      > him...when I questioned the Board about the ethics of Jean-Jacques comment,



      > they viewed his actions as entirely his own decision.



      >



      > Anyway, congrats on your DNF in 2011 Jean-Jacques!



      >



      > Cheers



      > Steve Kral



      >



      >



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



























      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Matt Mahoney
      Perhaps I misunderstand. If Hardrock is a run and not a race , then why is there a clock at the finish line? And why do they publish a list of finishers and
      Message 2 of 11 , Jul 21, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        Perhaps I misunderstand. If Hardrock is a "run" and not a "race", then why is there a clock at the finish line? And why do they publish a list of finishers and their times in order from fastest to slowest? And why are there trophies for the fastest runners? And why do we wear race numbers? And why are there cutoff times and a prescribed route and rules about pacers and crews and all these other things that determine whether or not your effort counts as a finish? Is it a race or not?

        Oh, I get it. Let's all congratulate Julien Chorier as the lucky winner for having his name drawn from a jar, vs. 8 or 10 guys who might have been faster but we'll never know.

        I know that I and 95% of the runners are just trying to beat the course and not each other. For a lot of people, just finishing a 5K is an accomplishment. That is why there are fitness walks where you get a T-shirt, a chance to work out, socialize, and eat afterward, but there is no clock, no awards, and no sorted list of finishers. So is Hardrock a race or a fitness walk?

        There are a lot of races where there are more people who want to run than there are spots available, such as the Boston and New York marathons, JFK 50, Ironman, Western States, and the Olympics. They all have different entry procedures. But what they all have in common is that they have a means to qualify so that if you are fast enough, you can get in without going through the lottery. Please note that I am suggesting a change that will make it harder for me to enter. I have 4 prior Hardrock finishes, mostly back of the pack. Why should I get 5 lottery tickets when someone like Killian Jornet, Anton Krupicka, Scott Jurek, or Goeff Roes would only get 1?

        Hardrock would have no trouble selling 140 "charity spots" for $2000 each. (The London marathon sells 80% of its 40,000 entries for a similar amount). I applaud the race committee to not succumbing to greed. But if we don't balance supply and demand by the laws of economics, then what I suggest is that the top 5% or top 5 finishers at one of the qualifying races, whichever is less, get an automatic entry. Everyone else would put their name on a multi-year waiting list. Enter any time, and you run when your name comes to the top.

        Opinions?

         
        -- Matt Mahoney, matmahoney@...


        >________________________________
        >From: Jean-Jacques d <jjda36618@...>
        >To: hr100@yahoogroups.com
        >Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 2:14 PM
        >Subject: Re: [hr100] No balls, no levy for the next year.
        >
        >

        >Horse crap to Popov and the rest of the "youth elitist movement:".
        >Since when has Hardrock's goal been to "ensure that everyone who enters, finishes"?
        >Jones and Grant and hundreds of young runners have a lifetime of experiences before them.  Should they push all the older and aging runners aside and deprive them of a few more years of experiencing the joy of Hardrock?  
        >As originally concieved Hardrock was not a "race" but a "run" to honor the miners of the area, not to furnish a contest where youth and speed are the goals.
        >What I hear is an echo of the moral morass of politics today where the rich get richer and the poor get more so.  Curses on all who would defile Hardrock in the same manner.
        >Jean-Jacques d'Aquin
        >
        >________________________________
        >From: Michael Popov <michael@...>
        >To: hr100@yahoogroups.com
        >Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 9:24 AM
        >Subject: [hr100] No balls, no levy for the next year.
        >

        >
        >First of all, thank you for all your hard work at the race organization and
        >execution. Despite the challenging conditions, I enjoyed every bit of it,
        >and think that the conditions/trails could be more severe or hard - be it
        >elevation gain or the nature's kinks - it is what it is and everyone is in
        >the same boat. Actually, I think that two of aid stations were unnecessary
        >on the course - if you're running Hardrock, you need to be prepared to take
        >care of yourself on your own. From what I experienced - there could be more
        >vertical, more talus, more pressure on the cut-offs, more snow, and more
        >creek crossings - more fun! The will to finish gets so much stronger.
        >
        >I think that there should be a formula for the certain percentage of
        >starters who DNF'd in the last year to get them less points in the lottery
        >for the next year. That would eliminate the wannabees who ran the
        >qualifiers, but failed to finish the Hardrock on the first try, and also
        >eliminate the repeat runners who are ageing and who will likely to DNF again
        >and bump up the Hardrock DNF stats. One way to look at it is to see the
        >trends in the previous years, for example - if you DNF'd at HURT, and then
        >DNF'd at Hardrock at the same year, should you be having a chance at another
        >hard hundred miler unless you get your training straight? Maybe you should
        >you let your spot go to young prodigies, like Dakota Jones, or Joseph Grant.
        >
        >The bottom line is that requirements could be more severe, to ensure that
        >everyone who enters, finishes.
        >
        >Michael Popov
        >
        >Pacific Coast Trail Runs
        >
        >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Julian Jamison
        Perhaps fruitless to reply, but here goes... Matt, for the record, I have absolutely no problem with the organizers taking 5-10 spots and handing them out to
        Message 3 of 11 , Jul 21, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          Perhaps fruitless to reply, but here goes...

          Matt, for the record, I have absolutely no problem with the organizers
          taking 5-10 spots and handing them out to fast guys, although obviously that
          would hurt my future chances as well. I don't think I would recommend it,
          given their stated goals, but it would certainly be a lot of fun to watch.

          However, to respond to your specific points (speaking for myself only, of
          course):

          1) Hardrock is a race. When I lined up in silverton two weeks ago, I wasn't
          especially trying to beat other people (although obviously the top guys
          were, and that's appropriate), but I was trying to finish and to finish as
          quickly as possible.

          2) The fact that it's a race does not imply that the organizers are
          obligated to accept or recruit or encourage all the fastest mountain
          100-milers in the world to be there. It doesn't imply that all participants
          are obligated to try to finish as quickly as possible. It only implies that
          there are rules and it will be timed, and that the faster you go the more
          you will be applauded (perhaps rewarded) by the organizers -- although of
          course they can applaud lots of other dimensions in addition to speed.

          3) Julien Chorier (nice name!) won the race not because his name was drawn
          from a hat, but because he ran the fastest among all those who entered
          according to the well-defined procedures. This is the same as any other
          race. Nobody, however fast, can show up on the morning of the boston
          marathon and race it without having followed all the proper procedures. Lots
          of people *might* have been faster on any given day for any race (at least
          any ultra - possibly not for a few olympic events - but who gets to decide
          that?).

          4) If a potential competitor is sick and can't race, does that mean the
          winner was only a lucky 'winner'? What if a sponsor wants them to race
          elsewhere? What if the fastest guy in the world misses his connecting flight
          in chicago? What if I decide to put on a 5k tomorrow, with a $20k entry fee
          and $1mil first prize (all comers gladly accepted, if you get this email in
          time) and only eight people show up? Yes, Western States has a way for
          [some] fast [50mi and 100k] runners to automatically qualify, and yes some
          races in some years end up being more competitive than others, but it's all
          on a continuum. Where exactly do you draw the line and why? How accessible
          does it have to be? Isn't the winner simply the winner?

          5) You and I have a better chance to get in to hardrock next year than
          Kilian Jornet or Geoff Roes because we are being rewarded for having
          participated in the past, and as an incentive system so that future entrants
          are more likely to maintain a connection with the race over time. This is
          what the organizers want; it does not contradict the definition of a race.
          This is not fair if speed is the only measure of worth with respect to the
          race, but it is quite fair if community is worth something. Ultimately the
          choice comes down to values, which are not objectively determined. So whose
          values carry the day? The people who are putting on the race, naturally.
          Your values may be different, and just as legitimate (if less relevant), but
          that doesn't make their values wrong.

          Good luck to both of us (and everyone else) in next year's lottery.

          cheers,
          julian


          On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 10:22 PM, Matt Mahoney <matmahoney@...> wrote:

          > **
          >
          >
          > Perhaps I misunderstand. If Hardrock is a "run" and not a "race", then why
          > is there a clock at the finish line? And why do they publish a list of
          > finishers and their times in order from fastest to slowest? And why are
          > there trophies for the fastest runners? And why do we wear race numbers? And
          > why are there cutoff times and a prescribed route and rules about pacers and
          > crews and all these other things that determine whether or not your effort
          > counts as a finish? Is it a race or not?
          >
          > Oh, I get it. Let's all congratulate Julien Chorier as the lucky winner for
          > having his name drawn from a jar, vs. 8 or 10 guys who might have been
          > faster but we'll never know.
          >
          > I know that I and 95% of the runners are just trying to beat the course and
          > not each other. For a lot of people, just finishing a 5K is an
          > accomplishment. That is why there are fitness walks where you get a T-shirt,
          > a chance to work out, socialize, and eat afterward, but there is no clock,
          > no awards, and no sorted list of finishers. So is Hardrock a race or a
          > fitness walk?
          >
          > There are a lot of races where there are more people who want to run than
          > there are spots available, such as the Boston and New York marathons, JFK
          > 50, Ironman, Western States, and the Olympics. They all have different entry
          > procedures. But what they all have in common is that they have a means to
          > qualify so that if you are fast enough, you can get in without going through
          > the lottery. Please note that I am suggesting a change that will make it
          > harder for me to enter. I have 4 prior Hardrock finishes, mostly back of the
          > pack. Why should I get 5 lottery tickets when someone like Killian Jornet,
          > Anton Krupicka, Scott Jurek, or Goeff Roes would only get 1?
          >
          > Hardrock would have no trouble selling 140 "charity spots" for $2000 each.
          > (The London marathon sells 80% of its 40,000 entries for a similar amount).
          > I applaud the race committee to not succumbing to greed. But if we don't
          > balance supply and demand by the laws of economics, then what I suggest is
          > that the top 5% or top 5 finishers at one of the qualifying races, whichever
          > is less, get an automatic entry. Everyone else would put their name on a
          > multi-year waiting list. Enter any time, and you run when your name comes to
          > the top.
          >
          > Opinions?
          >
          >
          > -- Matt Mahoney, matmahoney@...
          >
          > >________________________________
          >
          > >From: Jean-Jacques d <jjda36618@...>
          > >To: hr100@yahoogroups.com
          > >Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 2:14 PM
          > >Subject: Re: [hr100] No balls, no levy for the next year.
          >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >Horse crap to Popov and the rest of the "youth elitist
          > movement:".
          > >Since when has Hardrock's goal been to "ensure that everyone who
          > enters, finishes"?
          > >Jones and Grant and hundreds of young runners have a lifetime of
          > experiences before them. Should they push all the older and aging runners
          > aside and deprive them of a few more years of experiencing the joy of
          > Hardrock?
          > >As originally concieved Hardrock was not a "race" but a
          > "run" to honor the miners of the area, not to furnish a contest
          > where youth and speed are the goals.
          > >What I hear is an echo of the moral morass of politics today where the
          > rich get richer and the poor get more so. Curses on all who would defile
          > Hardrock in the same manner.
          > >Jean-Jacques d'Aquin
          > >
          > >________________________________
          > >From: Michael Popov <michael@...>
          > >To: hr100@yahoogroups.com
          > >Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 9:24 AM
          > >Subject: [hr100] No balls, no levy for the next year.
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >First of all, thank you for all your hard work at the race organization
          > and
          > >execution. Despite the challenging conditions, I enjoyed every bit of it,
          > >and think that the conditions/trails could be more severe or hard - be it
          > >elevation gain or the nature's kinks - it is what it is and everyone
          > is in
          > >the same boat. Actually, I think that two of aid stations were unnecessary
          > >on the course - if you're running Hardrock, you need to be prepared to
          > take
          > >care of yourself on your own. From what I experienced - there could be
          > more
          > >vertical, more talus, more pressure on the cut-offs, more snow, and more
          > >creek crossings - more fun! The will to finish gets so much stronger.
          > >
          > >I think that there should be a formula for the certain percentage of
          > >starters who DNF'd in the last year to get them less points in the
          > lottery
          > >for the next year. That would eliminate the wannabees who ran the
          > >qualifiers, but failed to finish the Hardrock on the first try, and also
          > >eliminate the repeat runners who are ageing and who will likely to DNF
          > again
          > >and bump up the Hardrock DNF stats. One way to look at it is to see the
          > >trends in the previous years, for example - if you DNF'd at HURT, and
          > then
          > >DNF'd at Hardrock at the same year, should you be having a chance at
          > another
          > >hard hundred miler unless you get your training straight? Maybe you should
          > >you let your spot go to young prodigies, like Dakota Jones, or Joseph
          > Grant.
          > >
          > >The bottom line is that requirements could be more severe, to ensure that
          > >everyone who enters, finishes.
          > >
          > >Michael Popov
          > >
          > >Pacific Coast Trail Runs
          > >
          > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > >
          > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          >
          >


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Matt Mahoney
          ... I am aware of the entry procedure. How would the results be different if the first 10 finishers put their name in a jar and we decide who gets the trophy
          Message 4 of 11 , Jul 22, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            Julian Jamison <julison@...> wrote:

            >3) Julien Chorier (nice name!) won the race not because his name was drawn
            >from a hat, but because he ran the fastest among all those who entered
            >according to the well-defined procedures.

            I am aware of the entry procedure. How would the results be different if the first 10 finishers put their name in a jar and we decide who gets the trophy by lottery, except that the other 9 don't get to run?

            >5) You and I have a better chance to get in to hardrock next year than
            >Kilian Jornet or Geoff Roes because we are being rewarded for having
            >participated in the past, and as an incentive system so that future entrants
            >are more likely to maintain a connection with the race over time. 


            Sorry, that's BS. Some of the members of the race committee have run Hardrock 10 or more times. I know they can use any entry procedure they want, but I think it looks bad when they write the rules to favor themselves over faster runners.


            -- Matt Mahoney, matmahoney@...
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.