u/Curious-Craft8339

I do ultras that are hilly but generally runnable (or at least not super technical/scrambly). I'm fortunate enough to live in an area with lots of different options for hills/mountainsides to train on. I'm trying to figure out which is optimum to use.

There's one particular route that all the "big dogs" do laps on, while other routes are considered inferior. It climbs about 1900' in 1.25 miles, with the lower half being super twisty/technical. I am able to run maybe 5% of it. A light, nimble person with a big stride might be able to run a lot more.

I guess my question is, if the climbs in races are runnable (or at least hikeable at a decent rhythm using poles), am I better off training on similar terrain that allows me to move with a rhythm? Or does steepness trump all? Will I end up stronger for having trained steeper, even if there's not much rhythm to my movements? A lot of fast people around here say go steep or go home, but I'm not sure I agree. Thoughts?

(Yeah, of course a variety is best. Which type of terrain should I be spending *most* of my time on?)

Why is 500mL the standard soft flask size? I think it should be 750mL.

(By "standard," I guess I mean the size that comes with hydration vests you buy, the size that hydration vest pockets are designed to fit, the size most commonly sold at stores.)

To be clear: two full 500mL flasks ride a LOT better than two full 750s when you're running. Duh.

But:

1). Aid stations are often in valleys between higher areas. People are often walking for the first X minutes afterwards anyway.

2). You don't *have* to fill them all the way up. If you fill them 2/3 of the way, they ride like a 500mL flask.

If you are doing full 750s all race, you're getting 50% more water (and potentially carbs, sodium, etc) than the guy using 500s.

750mL soft flasks should be the standard. Rant over.

Lifelong runner, decided recently decided to start going to a nearby gym. I'm mainly just doing mobility and functional strength stuff. This means flopping around the astroturf area for about 30 minutes before I go use a few machines.

I see most people in that area using a mat on top of the turf. Is the mat to protect the user from what might be on the turf, or to protect the turf from what might be on the user? Is it poor form to go without one?

I find the mats annoying, and I have a pretty strong immune system (not real worried about germs).

Edit: To be clear. I prefer working out on just the turf, with no mat. I just want to know if going mat-less is a faux pas.

I did an ultra recently and finished in a decent place. The race had a published list of items that all runners need to carry (mostly safety items). I'm reasonably certain that the winner was not carrying these things, and this enabled him to not wear a vest or belt like everyone else. What's the right play in a situation like this?

I don't want to be all Walter Sobchak "This isn't 'Nam, Smokey, there are rules!" And I can't say with certainty that this lighter load made the difference in him getting the win. For this particular instance, there's nothing that can be done at this point anyway. I'm more asking hypothetically, and for the future.

Is there an unwritten rule in American ultrarunning that the folks racing for the win are exempt from carrying the required items?

Say I had finished 2nd, by a couple seconds -- a scenario where it clearly *did* make a difference. Would I have been out of line asking race officials to check his kit?

I have huge respect for race directors, and don't want to nag too badly. Now that the dust has settled, would it be wrong to send a brief, polite email about the situation, and asking for clarification for the future? Save it for the pre-race Q-and-A next year?

Again, I'm not looking to get this year's results changed. I just want to have a better understanding for the future of how these things work. Any other thoughts on the situation?

Edit: Sure, there's a tiny chance that this guy was super clever and he contrived ways to carry micro versions of the required items, compliant with the letter of the law but not the spirit. But either way, it seems like the obvious lack of *stuff* on his person ought to make requesting a check not too unreasonable.