>I have no idea what that means but it’s on the cover of the German Runner’s World.
This month, Ultrarunning magazine did its 2008 review which includes the male and female runner of the year (Jorge Pacheco and Kami Semick), as well as many other race stats – the largest race, the fastest race, significant course records, finishes by location, and then the top times (male and female) for 100 miles, 100K, 50 miles and 50K races throughout the year. They also publish the names of those ultrarunners who had 4 or more wins through the year. I think that’s pretty sweet, so I may have to go for that one next year. In the meantime, I am happy to settle for my name being on the list for the top 50 mile times. I am #48 (listed goes to 100) with my 8:05 from JFK. I think I was #49 last year with 8:07, so that makes sense. When I achieve my goal of a 7:45, that would put me in the top 25.
More interesting, for those of you who may question the validity of that list, is that they do a separate listing for “graded” performances of each race. This year I made the list for the 50 mile, at #24 (they only list the top 25). A graded performance takes the winning time and divides it by the median finishing time. They acknowledge that this too is slightly imperfect as it assumes that all fields are of equal strength, and gives some advantage to winners of events with generous cut-off times that attract a higher number of slower runners. Nonetheless, it’s a bit more accurate than just publishing a list of the fastest times which merely highlights those who have chosen fast courses in good weather. Last year I didn’t make the list, so it was pretty cool to see myself there this time
My 100K time was not even close to making the list, although the races from the times that did make the list are considerably easier. It will fun to see where I stand in the 100’s after WS this year….