Very well, said, Chris. From my perspective, I was never a fan of huge commercially-driven events and always preferred smaller local ones driven by soul, no matter whether was it trail running, running, or cross-country skiing. People we meet are a huge part of the satisfaction and experience we get by taking part in races. Seeing how much soul and love locals, for example, put into preparing and making such events happen is a treasure on its own. Therefore I agree we as a community make a choice and supporting such local events by participating is definitely a good one.
Thanks for covering this topic. It's important that we runners think about how we spend our money and how we support the sport. One thing you didn't mention is UTMB's relatively new "stone" system that requires runners to run their branded events as qualifications to enter the UTMB lottery. This is really what's driving the monopolization. I hope you will check out the second half of this post, where I also write about the brand's homogenization of events. Happy new year. https://sarahrunning.substack.com/p/getting-loopy-on-long-runs
Happy Holidays! Thanks for another great read :) I know it's simplistic, but spend money on what you want to do, run where you want to run. Nothing is forever so if you really want to run something, do it while you can
Thanks for this post. I too am a glass-half-full person, and your hopes are similar to mine — that UTMB will realize they are drifting, and come back to us. The majority opinion when I wrote about this (https://rushofitall.substack.com/p/utmb-gone-astray) seemed to be that this was naive, that they knew full-well what they were doing, that money is the driving factor and they will drive on with their current approach, weather the storm, and be fine on the other side of it (even if some portion of their audience disowns them). That may well be right, but I still share your hope...
If UTMB did want to come back to us, what could they do? My thought is that the core issue is the "by UTMB" system that makes their branded races the only route into the main race. I understand the reasoning, but I don't think it needs to be that way. If they were to return to something like their old system, where there was a wide selection of well-vetted qualifying races to choose from (a system that helped rather than hurt the broader trailrunning community), I think a lot of us would welcome them back.
Why do they need that "by UTMB" monopoly anyway? Well-run races at prime venues are likely to sell out regardless of whether they are qualifiers for some other race or not. Are they saying that their races couldn't compete otherwise, that they require the monopoly to achieve sell-outs, that they wouldn't be able to attract a full field otherwise? That's certainly what it looks like.
In reality, if they were to return to something like their old system, with multiple paths to Mont Blanc, I think they would still sell out their branded races (and maybe the protest movement — especially if people like Zach decide to convene at other venues — has a chance of actually making them more likely to sell out in an open system rather than in a closed one). They could still be just as commercial, make just as much money... the only real difference is that we could view them as responsible citizens rather than a fallen pariah.
Very well, said, Chris. From my perspective, I was never a fan of huge commercially-driven events and always preferred smaller local ones driven by soul, no matter whether was it trail running, running, or cross-country skiing. People we meet are a huge part of the satisfaction and experience we get by taking part in races. Seeing how much soul and love locals, for example, put into preparing and making such events happen is a treasure on its own. Therefore I agree we as a community make a choice and supporting such local events by participating is definitely a good one.
Thanks for covering this topic. It's important that we runners think about how we spend our money and how we support the sport. One thing you didn't mention is UTMB's relatively new "stone" system that requires runners to run their branded events as qualifications to enter the UTMB lottery. This is really what's driving the monopolization. I hope you will check out the second half of this post, where I also write about the brand's homogenization of events. Happy new year. https://sarahrunning.substack.com/p/getting-loopy-on-long-runs
Happy Holidays! Thanks for another great read :) I know it's simplistic, but spend money on what you want to do, run where you want to run. Nothing is forever so if you really want to run something, do it while you can
Good summary. Thanks for wrapping up.
Thanks for this post. I too am a glass-half-full person, and your hopes are similar to mine — that UTMB will realize they are drifting, and come back to us. The majority opinion when I wrote about this (https://rushofitall.substack.com/p/utmb-gone-astray) seemed to be that this was naive, that they knew full-well what they were doing, that money is the driving factor and they will drive on with their current approach, weather the storm, and be fine on the other side of it (even if some portion of their audience disowns them). That may well be right, but I still share your hope...
If UTMB did want to come back to us, what could they do? My thought is that the core issue is the "by UTMB" system that makes their branded races the only route into the main race. I understand the reasoning, but I don't think it needs to be that way. If they were to return to something like their old system, where there was a wide selection of well-vetted qualifying races to choose from (a system that helped rather than hurt the broader trailrunning community), I think a lot of us would welcome them back.
Why do they need that "by UTMB" monopoly anyway? Well-run races at prime venues are likely to sell out regardless of whether they are qualifiers for some other race or not. Are they saying that their races couldn't compete otherwise, that they require the monopoly to achieve sell-outs, that they wouldn't be able to attract a full field otherwise? That's certainly what it looks like.
In reality, if they were to return to something like their old system, with multiple paths to Mont Blanc, I think they would still sell out their branded races (and maybe the protest movement — especially if people like Zach decide to convene at other venues — has a chance of actually making them more likely to sell out in an open system rather than in a closed one). They could still be just as commercial, make just as much money... the only real difference is that we could view them as responsible citizens rather than a fallen pariah.