Blog

Ironman vs. Ultramarathon

One question that I’ve thought about a lot over the last few months is: Which is harder, an Ironman or an Ultramarathon? I see the question posted on message boards like Slowtwitch, and everyone has their own opinion. I figure that now that I’ve done both, I may as well share mine.

First, though, a caveat. Ironman is a defined length – 140.6 miles. “Ultramarathon” is used more broadly to describe any running race longer than 26.2 miles. Obviously for this post, I can only compare the Ironman to a 50 mile ultra and I can only compare Ironman Lake Placid to the JFK 50. Someday maybe I’ll be able to make a broader comparison – :).

The first difference for me – and I imagine for most fit people who do an Ironman and a 50 – was the time it took to complete them. The 50 took me roughly three fewer hours (about 72% of the amount of time) to complete than the Ironman did. That’s a huge difference no matter what sport you’re doing for those three hours. Those three hours are really crucial ones. In any endurance racing, as you race longer, it gets progressively more difficult more quickly. (I know there’s a scientific term for this – is it exponential growth?) Even though I was still racing strong after eight hours of running, at some point, my muscle endurance would have really started breaking down and each mile (or half mile or quarter mile) would have quickly started becoming harder than the prior one. This definitely happened at the Ironman. I distinctly remember willing myself to start running again and willing myself to continue running for another ten or twenty paces once I’d started. It got more and more painful as the miles passed and it didn’t seem that the struggle was progressing (or regressing) at a ratio proportional to the amount of the race that I’d completed. For the first “X” hours my energy and strength had dripped out of me, but sometime during those last couple hours, it felt like the floodgates had opened and I was just draining. Also, speaking of energy, my stomach was fine for 8+ hours during the JFK, but I know that my calorie deficit would have started to catch up with me and eating/drinking and digesting and converting those calories would have become more and more of a struggle. To some degree this also happened at the Ironman. My stomach held up fine, but during the run I started getting hungry and I can only expect that the mild cravings I was experiencing at the aid stations were going to get worse and worse.

The bike to run transition is really tough in the Ironman, especially on a hilly course like Lake Placid. The six hours I spent on the bike at Lake Placid really took a toll on my legs. If you remember, it wasn’t too far into the marathon that my legs hurt too much to sustain a run for any material amount of time. I never hit that point at the JFK and I finished strong, still feeling like I could have trudged along at that pace for a while longer. But, as I wrote above, who knows how long it would have been before my legs wore out and stopped cooperating like what happened at Lake Placid? At the 8:14 point in the Ironman, I was an hour into the marathon, a little less seven miles done, 19 miles to go.

Another big difference about my experiences was the level of perceived exertion I experienced during each race. During the JFK, I spent nearly 5 1/2 hours talking with someone – first Zeke, then Zeke and Assaf, then Assaf and Elizabeth and finally Andy. And we really talked ; I mean full conversations. I would call my pace during the 50 a “conversational pace” – I wasn’t dogging it, but I was also much more comfortable just putting one foot in front of the other. [One question this raises, that I’m not even going to think about is whether I could have worked hard, talked less and finished faster…] On the other hand, there wasn’t a whole lot of talking during the Ironman, especially not in the waning hours. Part of that is because during the bike portion of the race, you’re never really riding “with” anyone else, but even during the run, when I could have been pacing with people (and was doing so at times), the only times I spoke with people was in short bursts of “Looking good!”, “Keep it up!” or “I can’t believe how much my friggin’ legs hurt!” My heart rate during the run portion of the Ironman was about the same as it felt during the JFK, but I felt like I was working harder to maintain a similar pace. Again, I think the six hours on the bike before starting to run are a killer.

In other words, after all that, it’s tough to compare the Ironman to ultras generally, but I would say that at this point in my life and comparing my two “A” races this season, running 50 miles was easier than doing an Ironman. There are so many factors to try to include in there that I can’t really make any strong conclusion about Ironmans and 50’s in general.

So, what’s next? It’s been a really long season of training and racing. Since May, I raced once every month except August. And that doesn’t include the smaller half marathons or other local running races. But now, I won’t be doing a big race again until the Boston Marathon in April. I’ve got the next five months to concentrate on building my base and preparing for my 2008 races. I’ll get back in the pool more often and start on some regular strength training, but what I really want to work on between now and next May is my cycling. I know that’s where I have the most room for improvement.

We had a great, long Thanksgiving weekend. We headed out east late Tuesday night and essentially did NOTHING for five days. It was great. There were a couple days when I pretty much never left the house. I managed to get a little bit of training in – a swim and some strength training – but the best “exercise” I got was doing sprints on the beach with my pint-sized running partner. Charlie and I went to the beach twice during the holiday and that little guy can move. I’d like to claim that it was just to get some exercise for him, but I think I had at least as much fun running on the beach as he did. Besides that, we spent most of the time relaxing around the house – napping, watching football and movies, and of course, eating. I really let it all go food-wise for those five days. My stomach will definitely thank me for getting back to my normal routine…

Strength/Core – November 22

Swim – November 24
Distance: 1,500 yards
Time: 30 minutes

Swim – November 26
Distance: 3,100 yards
Time: 1:00

Bike – November 27
Time: 40 minutes
Indoor ride

4 thoughts on “Ironman vs. Ultramarathon”

  1. afuntanilla says:

    i’m glad to read your post becasue i was gonna ask you how your felt after the run vs the ironman. thx for your thoughts. I still am curious though how felt emotionally after each one? did you feel happier or more satisified with one vs the other? just curious.

    looking forward to reading about your trainings!!
    I might need to get some feedback on cycling as riding 100miles will be a goal for 2008 since i didn’t accomplish for 2007.

  2. Jeremy says:

    I am still in awe! 50 miles of running just seems so unfathomable to me.

  3. Anonymous says:

    you are right that ironman distance is fixed. on the other hand, anything longer than 26.2 is called ultramarathon. but why compare 50 k ultramarathon with ironman? it’s no brainer because definitely in this case ironman is more challenging. you should try to run 3100 mile ultramarathon and i’m sure you’ll have a totally different opinion about which one is actually more challenging

  4. Vince says:

    Hi is it true A Full ironman 3.8km swim, 180km bike and 42km run is equivalent o 100km UltraMarathon?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *