|
Aug 2014
12:32pm, 17 Aug 2014
2,341 posts
|
FenlandRunner
Without exception nobody eats the L100
|
|
Aug 2014
1:28pm, 17 Aug 2014
67 posts
|
nuttyficket
For what it's worth, I got in to the 100 (for 2014) with just one 50 miler - a Hardmoors 55 (sub 12 in 2012) - so I guess one faster finish is better than many slower ones. No idea what defines fast or slow, of course.
|
|
Aug 2014
1:31pm, 17 Aug 2014
68 posts
|
nuttyficket
Also: V'rap - ta for link to the Mountain Goatess blog, looks a top read 
|
|
Aug 2014
1:38pm, 17 Aug 2014
53 posts
|
pedro
DT FR, I agree with your comments. Personally, I don't think a fast 50 time is a particularly good indicator to a successful 100 completion on any course. There are just too many variables. If you are aiming to complete then I would think that being strong in body and mind from a good and varied running base is what's important. He hopes
|
|
Aug 2014
1:46pm, 17 Aug 2014
69 posts
|
nuttyficket
Sorry - my comment above about faster vs slower - that was just to pass the pre-qualification criteria to get in. Agree with others here that speed over 50 miles is far from the only factor governing success in the 100, let alone the most important one.
|
|
Aug 2014
1:51pm, 17 Aug 2014
2,343 posts
|
FenlandRunner
OK, perhaps I was trying to suggest that a fast time is no guarantee of success, just look at the amazing athletes that haven't completed. But perhaps more to the point, the task is made that much harder is you struggle around the 50 in say 15 hours......
|
|
Aug 2014
1:57pm, 17 Aug 2014
2,344 posts
|
FenlandRunner
In a matter of fact, just do the maths, 15 for the 50, x 2 = 30 hours + the extra 5 miles in say 2 hours (being generous) results in 32 hours. So that's 8 hours contingency. EASY
|
|
Aug 2014
2:51pm, 17 Aug 2014
20,801 posts
|
Dave A
New thread started for next year
|
|
Aug 2014
4:09pm, 17 Aug 2014
12,105 posts
|
Derby Tup
|
|
Aug 2014
1:17pm, 18 Aug 2014
493 posts
|
MOUNTAIN GOATESS
Hey glad you like my blog Velicoraptor
FR: They say to multiply your 50 time by 3 for a realistic L100 time. This worked out fairly accurate for me...12.24 L50 x 3 = 37 hr 12min. I completed in 38hr 39 min so given that I hadn't had a good few months in the run up to it and nasty blisters slowed me down hugely. Its pretty accurate. Was hoping for sub 35 really but hey, just completing my first one is more than a bonus, especially since I very nearly didn't get to the start line due to my Achilles.
I'm not sure where its written about the sub 15 hour qualifying time, but that's what I was told last year.....when I said I would never ever ever put my body through the 100! ha ha ha
|
