By HPRS RD John Lacroix

Around this time every year I present our community with my “State of Our Sport” address. The address is a conversation that focuses on the realized history, and predicted evolution, of trail and ultramarathon running in the year that’s passed and the year(s) to come. This address seeks to present a variety of facts, such as links to articles and news stories, to paint a picture of the trends I am seeing in our sport most clearly. This is an opinion piece, an “op-ed,” that will not only discuss my opinions, but also provides evidence for some of those opinions along the way.

I recognize that not everyone will agree with what is written, or follow the same insight(s) shared, and that’s more than okay. I respectfully ask that those who disagree with anything written below, address the subject matter they disagree with by presenting their own facts in a rebuttal. Let’s have a respectful conversation about the subject matter, that includes evidence that backs up our positions, rather than simply attacking the individual providing the narrative.

Finally, while discussing the state of our sport below, I hope to highlight specifically my and The Human Potential Running Series’ position and direction in relation to each topic discussed. This is in no way an attempt to convince you that HPRS is right, or the only race series “doing it right,” nor is it intended as any form of commercial. It is to share with you our perspective and direction with regards to each area of discussion, which I hope will inspire other race directors and organizations to formulate their own unique directions; and that the runner will consider when signing up for events moving forward. 

—–

Let’s start by looking at the numbers associated with ultramarathon running in 2021*, with discussion comparing these numbers to 2020, and pre-covid 2019. These numbers are for The United States only.

 

Number of ultra-distance races in 2021: 2,126

Trend: This is an 89% increase over the 2020 number of races (1,128). If we were to ignore 2020 and focus on the 2019 pre-covid number, then this represents a 7% decrease below the number of races in 2019 (2,279).

Number of first timers finishing an ultra-distance in 2021: 26,119

Trend: This is a 123% increase over the 2020 number of first timers (11,714). If we were to ignore 2020 and focus on the 2019 pre-covid number, then this represents a 18% decrease below the number of first timers in 2019 (31,655). In our sport’s history, it is still the second highest number of first timers in a year and not by much over 3rd (2018 26,069).

Number of unique finishers of ultra-distances in 2021: 64,180

Trend: This is an 88% increase over the 2020 number of finishers (34,067). If we were to ignore 2020 and focus on the 2019 pre-covid number, then this represents a 17% decrease below the number of unique finishers in 2019 (77,262)

Number of total ultra-finishes in 2021: 95,476

Trend: This is a 113% increase over the 2020 number of finishes (44,752). If we were to ignore 2020 and focus on the 2019 pre-covid number, then this represents a 20% decrease below the number of finishes in 2019 (118,822). Outside of 2020, this is the lowest number of combined finishes since 2016.  This number also indicates that each unique finisher in 2021 completed an average of 1.49 races compared to 1.31 in 2020 and 1.54 in 2019.

The breakdown of total finishes by gender is: 66.46% Male and 33.54% Female.

Trend: The 2020 breakdown was 67.57% male and 32.43% female. The 2019 breakdown was 65.39% male and 34.61% female. 2019 was the first time since 2008 that the percentages of females within the total number of finishes had declined. If we are to ignore 2020’s numbers, the 2021 female percentage is lower than 2019, which would mark a 2^nd year of decline in the female finisher percentage.

 

Of the 2,118 races in The United States in 2021, these are the top 5 states for total number of ultra-distance races held:

1.) California = 164
2.) Texas = 121
3.) Georgia = 97
4.) Colorado = 95
5.) North Carolina = 86

 

Of the 2,118 races in The United States in 2021, here is the breakdown for each distance comparing 2021 with 2019, and the difference in growth or decline as a percentage.

Distance	2021 Number	2019 Number	Diff.	2021 Total Finishers	2019 Total Finishers	Diff.
50k	713	832	-14%	42,393	57,235	-26%
50-Miles	271	305	-11%	13,947	17,952	-22%
100k	140	150	-7%	5,049	6,308	-20%
100-Miles	181	176	+3%	8,448	9,800	-14%
200-Miles	8	11	-27%	130	306	-58%

This chart excludes numbers for timed events
*Source Ultrarunning Magazine at https://calendar.ultrarunning.com/stats/ultrarunning-finishes?distance=&country=USA

—

DISCUSSION

In 2021, the sport of ultramarathon running did its best to rebound from the Covid-19 altered year of 2020 by welcoming an 89% increase in the total number of events over last year. Many speculated that half, if not more, of all races cancelled in 2020 would never return. Yet, while many races did not return from the Covid havoc of 2020, some simply haven’t “yet,” and many new events came online. To only see a 7% decrease in the number of races from 2019 to 2021 speaks volumes towards the resiliency of our sport’s events. That said, we must also realize that some races were/are still being cancelled as a result of the Covid-19 Pandemic.

In my conversations with other race directors around the sport, many of us agree with the sentiment that “ultra-running is not growing, trail running is.”  The only ultra-distance in our sport to grow its number of races through the pandemic is the 100-miler. Yet, the number of 100-mile runners in our sport does not support a necessity for growth of that distance (more races but fewer finishers).

I feel that the 200-mile is not the new 100-mile, as I have opined for a few years now. In fact, the 200-miler is becoming a tougher sell seeing as a few of those that cost $1,300+ to enter have been cancelled two years in a row, with no availability for a deferral or refund (not even partial). That’s become a tough pill to swallow for potential 200-mile customers and has greatly affected the growth of the 200-mile distance. This has become a bigger part of the reality for race directors around the country who note that around 65-70% of a races registrations are coming in 2-3 weeks prior to the race date. In other words, runners are waiting to sign up for events until they have relative reassurance that the event will actually take place. Why? Because our customers no longer trust us and that there will be a good faith effort to issue refunds or credits. This has become one of the bigger black eyes for our sport coming out of 2020.

I believe that the 100k is the new 100-mile, and we’ll slowly (hopefully) start to see a decrease in the number of 100-milers in the country. This decrease will be a result of race directors who host 100-milers realizing how difficult it is to obtain enough volunteers, the level of risk and liability involved, the enormous amount of hours required to host the distance, for only a few dozen runners to show up. Whereas the 100k distance still provides a race director the opportunity for a higher profit margin based on entry fees. We all get to go to bed at night, it requires less volunteers, and the risk and liability is much smaller than the 100-miler. Let’s be honest, a lot of folks coming in to race direction choose to host a 100-miler first because they see the perceived profit margin as a way to justify a side hustle. This is incredibly dangerous to our sport from a risk management perspective (more on this later). 

Despite all of this, I feel that our sport should focus more on producing more 50ks and 50-milers, to bridge in the newcomers to our sport looking to excel at shorter distances, before they ever even think about running 100-miles. Take another look at the percentage increase of first-time ultra-finishers in 2021 over 2020, a 123% increase and they’re not running hundreds (yet). Our sport had a 17% decrease in first timers, and an 18% decrease in unique finishers over 2019. As I mentioned in previous year’s addition of this address, the growth of our sport seems to be plateauing, and we cannot expect success of all events if new events keep coming online. The supply more than meets the demand, in fact there is more of a supply than the demand requires… especially for 100-milers.

I think there is no doubt that there has been a sizable shift in “the business” of race directing in 2021. I’m not sure how we could honestly account for all the race directors who did indeed decide to never come back, but instead of seeing their events no longer exist, alongside the demise of their will to continue doing the job, many race directors sold or freely transferred their events to the ownership and management of another race director/race series. This has allowed many events to continue even though those who oversaw the event in 2019 have since ended their time in race direction. This has also provided the corporate entities an opportunity to jump in and make offers that broke and/or tired race directors can’t refuse.

As predicted during the year 2020, the major reorganization of our sport has transpired within its leadership. If you look around our sport, you’ll see:

• that many of the race directors who held one or two events per year, have transferred ownership of their event to another RD with more bandwidth to continue to host the event, or to a bigger series with better cash flow and a community to rally around the event to keep it alive. In some cases, the race directors who have held on continue to struggle both financially and emotionally.
• a few race directors of larger series have decided to downsize their event count and have begun selling or transferring some of their events to other race directors or race series who may be looking to expand, and in some cases take their entire series over. At the same time, some of the race directors of larger series are retiring and getting out of race direction altogether.
• that 3-4 major corporations are now present in trail and ultrarunning event production. Those companies are LifeTime Fitness, Spartan Races, UTMB/Ironman, and I think some of us could argue Aravaipa. A small handful of race directors have been enticed by the financial offers presented by these corporations, and have subsequently sold some of their events, and in some cases their race direction services for a limited time. Both Spartan and UTMB have figured out that the best way forward for them is to craft partnerships with the highest attended ultras in the nation, hire the RDs of those events as their employees for a predetermined length of time, and at the end of the RD’s service they own (or will own) the race.

I discussed this issue on an episode of Ultra Stories Podcast (Episode 87), “What Happens When Spartan Buys UTMB?” The discussion focused on the likely fallout of Spartan buying UTMB. While that deal never came to fruition, the deal with Ironman and UTMB is no different, just replace “Spartan” with “Ironman” and everything I said still holds water. They are utilizing what is known as the “Kona business model” in endurance sports. I’ll let you decide what that means for our sport, and you don’t have to look far into the sport of triathlon to see what it has meant there. (My discussion on this topic continued in Ultra Stories Episode 133: The Ironman/UTMB Deal & Money)

There are some truths I want to share here to paint a more accurate picture of the corporatization of our sport at current:

I believe that Spartan Races has a history of hiring folks, getting hundreds of man hours out of them, then never paying them for work performed. This is happening in the ultra world as has been openly discussed by Greg Lanctot of Pacific Coast Trail Runs (see image). Greg isn’t the first, only, or last person who will be screwed by Spartan’s unethical business practices in the race space, but don’t worry… Joe Desena has a new show coming out on CNBC.

UTMB/Ironman has started to announce their “partnerships” with United States ultra events. Here is how I understand that process to be going down: UTMB requires a race director to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) in order to discuss the possibility of them acquiring their race (yes, despite signing an NDA, some RD’s talk). They then offer the race director an up-front cash payment for their event, then hire them on as a full-time race director (salaried employee) for a predetermined length of time (usually 5 years). At the end of the 5 years, UTMB will officially own the previous, now employee of UTMB, race director’s event and can choose to extend their employment or let them go. When you see a race announcing this agreement, please note that this is a race director “selling out” (in my opinion) to the corporation as their escape plan from hosting an event. I notice that UTMB is making these agreements with the most attended ultras in the space. In my opinion, it’s a money grab all around; and no, if approached by UTMB with the same deal, I wouldn’t say “yes.” I know a few others who have told them to “pound sand” out of principal for our sport as well.

Finally, there is LifeTime Fitness. I understand that in Leadville, the land managers associated with the event have finally started to clamp down on the size of their events. For example, the permit for the Leadville Trail 100 used to cap them at 850 participants. That numbers has finally been slashed down to below 700. LifeTime is also required to do trail work to mitigate abuse of the trails they use for their events as a condition of their permit. Land Managers have also cited the concerns of negative environmental impact the event has on areas like Winfield and Twin Lakes; which is why crews are no longer allowed to access Winfield, and they have placed a limit on the number of crew vehicles and crew people you are allowed to bring to the even. Leadville has packaged this reality up, sweetly, into a statement about wanting to improve their environmental impact on the resource and local communities associated with the event. Then they turn around and say that for $150, you can purchase a spectator/crew pass which affords you the pleasure of additional people. I’m personally confused, you’re cutting the amount of vehicles, crews, and spectators unless we have enough money to spend on the privilege of having more? So is it about the environment or the money grab.

Yet, I feel they still don’t seem to get it… A Colorado Parks and Wildlife representative told me about the fiasco surrounding LifeTime’s new bike and running event in Trinidad (The RAD Dirt Fest). It was reported that LifeTime ignored land use regulations, and pronghorn hunting season/regulations, that resulted in a serious health and safety issue as well as a massive clash between land users. After just 1 year, LifeTime was told it will be denied their permit request to use CPW land in the Trinidad area for a run. Their website, now reads this: “Due to a number of factors, we’re taking a step back from The Rad Run while Trinidad develops more trails for all you rowdy runners. When the time is right and those Trinidad trails call, The Rad Run may return, but in the meantime, we’re directing our energy to The Rad Ride and producing one of the most eclectic off-road experiences in the country.”

Finally, despite Marge Hickman and Steve Siguaw’s amazing book accurately discussing the true origins of the Leadville 100 and the founder Jim Butera, LifeTime disgustingly continues to push the erroneous narrative that it was all Ken Clouber and Merilee Maupin with no mention of Jim at all. A move that highlights the fact that these businesses (not just LifeTime) are wolves in sheep’s clothing, selling you a bill of goods about who they are that is not an accurate representation of their disrespect to the “little guys” who keep this sport moving. 

This all brings me to engage you with a thoughtful question: What kind of sport do you want trail and ultrarunning be in the future?

The reality is that after the previously failed attempts at corporate trail and ultra running by The North Face, Montrail, Xterra, and others; it seems as though the companies presently at play don’t seem to be interested in learning from the past mistakes of others. What they are banking on is that you, the runner, won’t care who owns a race or what the experience is like. I think that they only care about one thing, and that’s the fees you’ll pay to play. That you’ll also continue to notice the ways in which these companies’ nickel and dime you at their events for things like VIP aid stations, pay to park, pay for crew, pay for spectators, pay for oxygen, etc.

I see a trend in our sport surrounding money, and it’s one that I feel is dangerous for our sport. As these corporations start charging you for everything they can, many non-corporate events are starting to follow their lead. Why? Because they can. The more they see the runner willing to pay extra to have crews, extra to park, extra for a non-shitty race shirt; the more they too are starting to charge you for these same things. Most race directors are not businesspeople. They are hobbyists who enjoy the thrill of directing a race as much as they enjoy running in one. They are looking to the business/corporate people in our space to lead them in their business decisions.

For Example: Here in Colorado, the High Lonesome 100 decided to increase their entry fee $75 year over year until they now charge a $450 entry fee (The average increase year to year is $20-$30). That kind of entry fee is matched only by Western States 100 and Javelina 100 (Both UTMB related races BTW). Prior to High Lonesome raising their entry fee to $450, the average cost of entry into a Colorado 100-miler was $305. The average entry fee is now $356 for a Colorado 100-Miler, with now 3 events charging $400 or more (Hardrock, High Lonesome, and Mount Herman).

The sentiment, “Vote with your wallet,” has never been more important for our sport than it is now. The more money we keep pumping into corporate events, those who only care about the business and not the runner, and those who are only following their lead, the more our sport will run away from the roots and the values we’ve cared about and championed for so long. Our sport is at a crossroads where each one of us, needs to vote with our wallets, regarding what we want our sport to be. Do you want to go the way of Triathlon’s via Ironman? Or do you want our sport to continue to focus on real community, events where the runner matters more than the revenue? It’s time to take the blinders off and see each business for what it truly is.

 

AT HPRS

Immediately following the announcement that Ironman was partnering with UTMB, we announced that we would No longer host UTMB Qualifiers. We believe that this type of partnership, and the behaviors of Spartan, LifeTime, and others events who are now associated with these corporations; is detrimental to our sport. While there is still a way for HPRS to host UTMB qualifiers via our events, the way in which it has been structured makes qualifiers outside of the UTMB/Ironman World Series partnership irrelevant and diminished. This partnership has also made The International Trail Running Association (ITRA) irrelevant in the grand scheme of things, something that we cannot and will not support.

In 2021, while some race series around us raised their entry fees $30-$40 over 2020 rates, an unusually high amount from one year to the next, HPRS chose to keep our rates the same. After a thorough review of Colorado’s average prices in 2020, we recognized that HPRS is well below the industry average for entry fees at each distance. We decided to raise our rates in 2022, the standard $10-$20 per distance, to come up more in line with the industry average. Yes, we too have followed other’s lead. We have already noticed that our competitors are again raising their rates in 2022 despite their huge increases in 2021, still keeping us below the average.

HPRS has always celebrated itself as a “People Over Profit” race series, where we focus on the runner more than the revenue. Yes, this is a business and a for profit business entity at that. We have figured out the model that allows us to function as a viable business while also respecting runners as humans, and not just as bib numbers. Our races are all still self-capped at 200-300 runners at most and our main goal is not to sell every event out. This is based on the theories surrounding Dunbar’s Number, and our mission to build a better ultra-community. Simply put, there is a point at where runners stop being people and just turn into a bib number. The word “Human” is in our name and is a staple of our vision and mission. It makes sense for any business person that we try and keep up with the industry averages for entry fees, but know that we’ve started internal conversation with one main question in mind: When is enough enough?

We have made a shift at HPRS by adding “make sense” distances to our calendar. We added a half marathon to Endure, a 38-Mile to South Park, a 50k to Last Call, an 18-Mile to Razorback, and a new event designed specifically for those looking to dip their toes into trail and ultra with our Bingo! Trail Runs in November. We have long been the race series that does not hold your hand, or wipe your ass, at our events; however, we also recognize the need, and our responsibility, to educate and guide newcomers into the trail and ultra-space. Therefore, we’re going to be doing more educating and guiding of runners moving forward. We welcome your questions and inquiries. We want to welcome you to this sport by helping show you the way, in a way that is encouraging and responsible.

Earlier in the year HPRS partnered with Elevation Culture to purchase the three events of Off Road Pursuits in Southern California. We were excited to expand to the San Diego area to continue to provide our brand/style of ultrarunning. After getting to work, we recognized that while they are wonderful events, and a wonderful community surrounds them, neither the events or the community aligns with HPRS’ mission and values. The events we purchased were not events that aligned with the HPRS Brand of “physically and mentally challenging events.” The community that surrounds these events puts weight on the podium and the accolades that has never been a part of HPRS.

Purchasing these events seemed like a huge financial win for HPRS. The numbers would have doubled our registration numbers on a year-to-year basis and doubled our revenue on a year-to-year basis. But that’s not who we are. There’s of course more to this story, none of which will be discussed here. At the end of the day, we determined that these events were not in the best interest of HPRS, our brand, our community, or our mission and vision. We respectfully bowed out and transferred full ownership of these events to Elevation Culture, who has their own mission and vision for the events they now own in full.

Near the end of 2021, I caught wind that Trail Racing Over Texas was one of the larger race companies in the process of downsizing and transferring ownership. I have run several of their races in the past, one of which is The Franklin Mountains Trail Runs (FMTR). The event takes place in El Paso Texas, and several race directors approached TROT about their acquisition of the event. I’m one of the few who have run in the event and didn’t want to see it go away given how great it truly is. This event fits the HPRS vision and mission, and I am proud that we’ll be taking over the reins. TROT could have transferred this race to anyone, and to other companies’ who offered much more. TROT chose HPRS because of who we are, what we stand for, our mission and vision, and our ability to continue the traditions set forth by Rob and Rachael. Unlike others, we’re not finding ways to add more runners to our newly acquired event in order to increase our profit margin and make our money back. No, we’re shrinking the race’s cap and focusing on the experience, and the runners, instead of the money. That is who we are.

All of this is to say that HPRS sees the forest through the trees. We see the directions our sport is taking on various fronts. We see that while ultra-isn’t growing, trail running is. We understand our responsibility to those freshly entering our sport, and to our community that has always been here. While this is a business, it does not need to be a business that abuses the trust of the runner, treats everyone as a source of income, or that is detrimental to the resource that is a privilege to use, and not a right. HPRS stands firm in its mission to make our sport more inclusive and accessible regardless of any number of potentially limiting factors. The money is even less important than the race. We are in the business of transforming humans, not our pockets.

 

RISK & LIABILITY

The elephant in the room is the other crossroads our sport finds itself in. 2021 was the deadliest year in our sports history, this after only the first incident of the year compounded with subsequent incidents and close calls. Everything that has transpired in 2021 from a risk and liability perspective should be enough to wake up every single runner and race director in our space. Yet many are still choosing to remain asleep, and the negligent behaviors of individuals and race directors alike serves as the biggest enemy our sport faces today.

How many times have you personally been asked, “Has anyone ever died running in an ultra?” I’ve personally been asked countless times, and prior to 2021 my answer was typically “You know… perhaps there is, but not to my knowledge.”

In May there was “The China Incident” also known as “The Gansu ultramarathon disaster.” Twenty-one runners died, and 8 runners experienced non-fatal injuries, when an unexpected snowstorm inundated the mountainous 100k course that some 172 runners started. Many of the runners in the event scrambled all over the mountainside, searching for shelter that included caves used by area shepherds, with some runners collapsing due to hypothermia. All of those who died were in the lead pack. You can read a Wikipedia page (yes, it has its own wiki) detailing the account here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gansu_ultramarathon_disaster

This news story was picked up by CNN, BBC, Wall Street Journal, LA Times, and Vice. Anyone who was following along in real time was witness to just how wrong these news outlets get it as a story is developing. However, one thing that these outlets didn’t get wrong was the seriousness and far reaching affects this tragedy should/could have on our sport as a whole.

In August, a Czech runner died at UTMB’s TDS race. The immediate response to the accident by race organizers was entirely different than that of their Chinese counterparts. Race officials knew that there was an increased possibility of injury at the location the death occurred, and once there was a report of an injury, they jumped immediately into action greatly altering the event for the health and safety of all involved. It’s because of this, that the story about a death at UTMB was not more widely reported. It was “less newsworthy” due to the appropriate risk management protocols that were in place and ultimately utilized. Still, you can read about it on iRunFar.com, Reuters, RunnersWorld, Outside Online, and The Guardian.

Notice the difference between the names of those agencies who reported on the China disaster vs. the death at UTMB?

In October, a first year 50-Mile ultramarathon in Utah made the news due to hosting their race despite a predicted snowstorm that resulted in a major search and rescue operation. Headlines still read that “87 runners were rescued” when the reality is that no one was by definition “rescued.” This near miss was 100% avoidable, and many in our sport who had discussed the incident in the immediate aftermath declined to mention as much. I truly believe that we have an inability to see the risks and liabilities in our sport for what they truly are.

This specific scenario is that of first year race directors wanting to host their new event, on its intended route, at all costs. Admittedly, no contingency plan was created in case of a highly likely early snow event in the Utah mountains, which may have included a lower elevation “snow route” for the course and evacuation protocols in the event they are needed. The forecast for winter weather was present a week before the event even took place, and that forecast only deteriorated further as the week progressed.

Still, race organizers willingly started the event and sent participants into a potential life-threatening situation. Many of those runners did not take seriously their own personal accountability when participating in events like this, and much of the worry associated with runner safety was a result of the ill preparedness of many. Another mountain race without a required gear list, or a check on runner’s ability to be prepared for mountain weather at elevation given the season. By definition, this is a form of negligence. I personally add that it is a form of ignorance considering the lessons all race directors should be taking away from the incidents in China and TDS. 

An hour after starting the race, it was cancelled. A Search and Rescue operation in a driving blizzard was underway, and the SAR teams relieved all volunteers and race staff of their duties. While nobody died, and no one was seriously hurt, the race organizers comments after the events that unfolded was, “We spent time with the Sheriff’s office, talking about what we can do for future races. We plan to have a few SAR personnel out on the racecourse, they like it, and they want to be a part of [the race]. In the future, we are going to have a contingency plan, we will have a course that doesn’t go as high in elevation, so it will be just as beautiful and just as awesome, just not to 9,000 feet.”

It seems like these first-year race directors learned a tremendous amount about the risks and liabilities associated with race direction, but almost at the cost of others’ lives. This unfortunately is a huge reality within our sport at present, too many people wanting to be race directors without fully thinking through every detail of participant health and safety prior to saying “Go.” The number one job of every race director is Risk Management. Not the race, not the awards, not the awesome course. It’s ensuring that every runner can participate in the event with the highest capabilities of making it home alive and well. In my eyes, this was a 100% negligent decision by these race directors and had anyone died or been seriously injured, their comments post event would have had an entirely different tune.

You can read about what actually happened on iRunFar.com, or the various news articles from The Washington Post, CBS, CNN, NY Times, Fox News, and The NY Post. Again, do you notice the news agencies covering this event versus the UTMB fatality? This is from a near miss. Compare the news reporting to the iRunFar article on what really happened, and you’ll see how carried away news agencies get as a tragedy unfolds. What would the reporting look like if the China tragedy happened in the United States? What do you think the local and federal fall out on races like ours would be if the China Tragedy occurred in the United States? Don’t be naïve with your answer…

It was after the China tragedy that I hosted a series of Ultra Stories Podcast episodes on Risk Management and Ethics surrounding business and risk within our sport. I stand by every word spoken in these episodes which include:

Ultra Stories Episode 134: The China Tragedy and a Reality Check Stateside

Ultra Stories Episode 135: The Risk Management Changes Ultra Needs

Ultra Stories Episode 136: Ultrarunning’s Struggle With Being Ethical

Ultra Stories Episode 137: Continuing The Discussion On Ethics

The main point here is that the more prepared runners and race directors are for the unexpected, the unimaginable, and for the expected and imaginable, the better outcomes for our sport. Tragedy due to negligence will always make headlines, while tragedy that occurs when a sound plan is place will almost always seem more under the rug. It’s not going to take a tragedy the size of China to alter the ways in which land managers permit events such as ours.

The near-miss in Utah has already sent shock waves throughout the West with how land managers assess and permit our events by increasing the safety requirements necessary for permits to be issued. This should be enough to wake our entire sport up into accepting that this is an extreme sport, and the onus to accept all risk and liability falls on every single one of us. We must do better, or the effects of another tragedy will be felt in excess. This will include smaller caps on participants, increased registration fees due to safety measures needed in place, fewer events, more lotteries, and fewer race directors. When the supply goes down and the demand goes up (or stays the same), entry fees will continue to sky rocket.

Finally, as I started writing this article another near miss occurred in Florida as a Tulsa, OK ultra-runner, who was participating in the Ancient Oaks 100, went off course and was unaccounted for, for about 36 hours. He was found safely, after a massive search and rescue effort transpired including the use of helicopters and line searches. During the event, the runner in question openly admitted that he has a “tendency to get disoriented and lost” while running ultras at night. The runner was ultimately found at a firearms manufacturing facility a half a mile away from the park, and he had to cross a highway (not a part of the course) to get there. The course he was on is a 3.46-mile loop that is run 29 times.

The runner in this incident is described as “well-known and respected in the sport with prolific experience in competition and administration.” Yet, this entire incident could have been prevented. Here is a runner who knows his own inherent risks while running at night yet ignored those risks and realities. When he was showing symptoms of fatigue and being a bit delirious, rather than sitting a lap out he carried on… into the darkness despite knowing the usual outcome. He got lost and for 36 hours, risked the health and safety of the countless others who would be looking for him in the Florida swamps, and the potential ability for organizers to host the event in the future.

True to form in our sport today, instead of speaking about the realities of this situation in a way that is honest and seeks to teach us all, we celebrate the missing runner as well known and experienced, and we end it at being thankful that he was found. Of course, these are all great things, but at what point are we going to seriously consider our accountability to ourselves? You can read about this incident on irunfar.com, Florida Today, Ultrarunning Magazine, and local Florida news outlets.

AT HPRS

HPRS has one of the most robust Emergency Action Plans (EAP) for trail and ultra-events in our country. Even still, following the China tragedy we began a thorough review of our EAPs for any holes, blind spots, or things that need expanding upon. At present, we are adding a tremendous amount of information to these EAPs for year 2022. It is our every intention to have the most robust EAP in the United States today, so that should an emergency arise, we can expertly care for every single runner and hopefully get them home to their loved ones.

American mountaineer and father of experiential education Willi Unsoeld was quoted by saying, “We used to tell them in Outward bound, when a parent would come and ask us “Can you guarantee the safety of our son, Johnny?” And we finally decided to meet it head on. We would say, “No. We certainly can’t Ma’am. We guarantee you the genuine chance of his death. And if we could guarantee his safety, the program would not be worth running. We do make one guarantee, as one parent to another. If you succeed in protecting your boy, as you are doing now, and as it’s your motherly duty to do, you know, we applaud your watchdog tenacity. You should be protecting him. But if you succeed, we guarantee you the death of his soul!” (Miles and Priest 1990)

No race, company, race director, volunteer, or Search and Rescue Professional can guarantee your safety. None. As a race director, it is not my job to guarantee your safety to you or your loved ones. What I can do and should do, is manage the all risks that I can associated with hosting one of our events. What you can do, is manage your risks associated with participating in trail and ultra-events on your own. We can all educate ourselves on the perceived, actual, and inherent risks involved with trail and ultras.

In January I’ll be taking a one-month intensive course hosted by Viristar, a company who supports organizations in managing their risk to the highest standards. “Viristar’s Risk Management for Outdoor Programs course provides a comprehensive training on safety management for professionals in the experiential, outdoor, wilderness, adventure and travel context. Topics include laws, safety standards, human factors, equipment, transportation, insurance, audits, systems thinking, and much more.” (https://www.viristar.com/)

At the completion of this course, I will be taking another step by acquiring my Road Runners Club of America (RRCA) Professional Race Director Certification. This is not something I ever personally put much value in, only relying on my own personal experience in having directed over 60 ultra events. I see the tremendous value this form of continuing education provides to the profession of race direction, and ultimately to our participants at HPRS. I want to lead by example by acquiring as much education as I possibly can for our community and our sport. It is my goal to be the most proficient in risk management for race directors in the ultra-space. I STRONGLY encourage all other race directors to engage in similar courses to better protect themselves, each other, and our sport. It is your duty and your obligation. Claiming ignorance and lack of knowledge can no longer be a viable defense when the shit hits the fan or after a near-miss.

Over the years I have called out other race directors for negligent race direction, and for near-miss incidents because of race director negligence. Not everyone has admired the fact that I have done this, and I have been publicly called a “bully” for having done so. I want to repeat something I stated in one of my podcast episodes on this issue. I do not, and will not apologize, for calling out any race director whose actions are/were negligent in nature and have placed a considerable risk on all our ability to host trail and ultra-running events. I stand by every word I have ever uttered about negligent race direction and am not responsible for the repercussions of a race director’s negligence; THEY ARE.

As I stated before, I feel that we are at a crossroads in our sport. We’re either going to choose to support the race directors who have their heads on straight and take risk management as seriously as they should; or our sport will suffer greatly from their negligence and ignorance. We’re getting dangerously close to big changes, that would ultimately be good for our sport but that few of us want to endure, due to the lack of personal accountability of runners and lack of responsibility of race directors. The more we all support events that while they may be fun, and in great locations, but lack any form of risk management by the organizers; the more we are all complicit in the threat we all pose on our ability to have these events to participate in.

This is why personal accountability is valued at the utmost at HPRS, and why it is a topic we don’t mince words on. It is why I may appear too blunt, direct, or salty during pre-race meetings when talking about the runner’s responsibility to know what they’re getting into, to prepare appropriately, and to do their homework. It is why we provide ample tools for runners to be able to care for themselves and each other during participation in our events.

We will continue to be transparent about our Emergency Protocols, and the expectations of ourselves and our runners, regardless of how sensitive some are about how this information is delivered. Simply put… your health and safety, and the future preservation of our events, is not a topic that deserves sugar coating or a bow on top. It deserves transparency, clarity, strong language, and everyone to put their big boy and big girl pants on to accept their responsibilities.

All of this is to say that I believe the state of our sport is “Fragile.”

I know many out there who read this, if you read this far, don’t have a care in the world about anything I’ve just said. True to form over the years, you’ll say that this is hyperbole or me just adding drama to a sport that doesn’t need any. To you I would say that this is very much the reality our sport lives in right now based on the evidence and reasoning I have provided, and it is absolutely something we need to be talking about. Fixing these issues after they break, will be too late. We must get ahead of these issues for the future preservation of our sports roots. We have a risk management issue that centers around the ethics and morals of runner safety being paramount to profit margins. Our sport is more a business than it ever has been before, and greed is guiding the decisions of many, while we walk away from and ignore our roots and traditions, and the many responsibilities bestowed upon us.

There are many awesome stories out there. Success stories of race directors growing as business owners, as leaders, as ambassadors of our sport. Success stories of runners coming back from injury or accomplishing feats they too once viewed as impossible. Stories of communities coming together to lift one another up rather than treating each other as competition or “the enemy.” There are countless stories of runners still stopping to help an injured runner on the course, throwing their race away to ensure they reach the aid station safely. These things are still happening, but they’re becoming harder to find. That is why our sport is Fragile, and why it is up to all of us to determine our direction from here.

So, what’s it going to be? Are we going to sell out to the corporations? Are we going to allow those who are all about the money to take over and drown out the little guys? Are we going to ignore and downplay our personal responsibilities as extreme athletes and race directors, then feign ignorance when something terrible happens? Are we going to allow ourselves to fall into situations where more government regulation and oversight is the answer from land managers? I hope you’ll make smarter choices with your money in helping to decide which way we go.

We’re not perfect at HPRS, and I’m not even saying we’re right or this is the only way. I am stating what direction we’re choosing, what we’re doing to play our part. We want others to think about their role and to play their part. We’re okay if this makes you less inclined to run with us, we just hope your choice isn’t to run with someone who is lackadaisical or naïve to the risks involved with what we all do. We hope you’re not naïve to who is here for you, and who is here for the money. We’ve provided some evidence, if you disagree, we’re open to see yours. We all have a voice, and all of our voices matter. Let’s work together to build a safer sport that cares more about each other than we do the profit margin. That’s who we’ve always been, that’s who we can continue to be.