Ultra-Trail du Mont-Blanc UTMB® 2016 Preview

Posted on August 22, 2016 by talkultra

I won’t be at UTMB this year, Trofeo Kima is happening the same weekend in Italy and I wouldn’t miss this high octane extreme event for anything, especially when it only happens every other 2 years.

But UTMB has a stellar line up this year. It’s going to be a cracking race.

Just in case you didn’t know, UTMB is a 170km circular journey that starts and finishes in Chamonix passing through France, Italy and Switzerland with 10,000+ meters of vertical gain on non-technical trails. In 2014 Francois D’Haene of France set the men’s course record 20:11:44 and the female course record is held by Rory Bosio (USA) who ran 22:37:26 in 2013. Rory in the process ranked in the top-10 overall that year!

Recently, UTMB has hit the headlines after a top 10 finisher in the 2015 race, Gonzalo Calisto, was tested and found positive for EPO. This came to light in June when the IAAF added Calisto’s suspension to its website. However, UTMB were not notified of this positive test? In recent weeks and months, many investigations have been made and you can read them all on this website HERE. Ultimately, this positive test has raised alarm bells and certain aspects of the testing and notification procedure need to change. I hope UTMB will have testing once again this year and they provide data and information to the media.

Racing for the main starts on Friday August 26th at 1800hrs local time and it looks like a great weekend of weather is in store for spectators, it may be a little hot for the runners. Please also remember that many other events happen in and around the UTMB, the PTL, TDS and CCC.

MEN

Luis Alberto Hernando is in a good place! He is a new Dad, has raced less and when he has raced he has been in top form. A repeat win at Transvulcania and dominant performance at the Skyrunning World Championships for a gold medal and world title and suddenly you begin to see everything clicking into place. Luis dropped from the 2014 UTMB and then came back, one year later to place 2nd. Luis does always race from the front and hard, he tempered this in 2015 but it still may well be his achilles heel in 2016? I hope not, Luis would be a popular champion!

David Laney third at UTMB and 8th at Western States in 2015 are two very significant performances and bode well for a great 2016 UTMB. What doesn’t bode well is the most recent 20+ hour finish at Western States. It leaves a huge question mark on David’s current physical and mental ability to take on the big dance in Chamonix.

Andy Symonds for me is the dark horse. It’s his first 100 miler and that is a huge disadvantage. But Andy knows how to race, prepares meticulously and I know he’s fired up for this race. In the past he has often played 2nd fiddle at the big races but a podium at Transgrancanaria, a victory at Lavaredo and 2nd (silver) behind Luis at the Skyrunning World Championships tells me that the time is right for the Brit who lives in France. Listen to the podcast here.

Zach Miller is relatively easy to write about… we will see one of two performances: 1. An all guns blazing early race that potentially will open up a gap that he extends and holds on to take the biggest victory of his life! 2. As 1 but a major blow up that sees him lose the lead and drop substantial places or a resulting DNF. Think Max King at Leadville.

Didrik Hermansen is a potential revelation in Chamonix and I do believe that he can win. I said that at Western States after I saw his run and victory at Transgrancanaria. He didn’t disappoint in the USA and he placed 2nd at WSER. UTMB is a different playground but this guy can run and hike – he is going to need all those skills in France, Italy and Switzerland. Listen to the podcast here.

Jason Schlarb was fourth at UTMB in 2014, won Run Rabbit Run, completed Marathon des Sables. skied the Hardrock 100 course, won the Hardrock 100 with Kilian Jornet and here he is, in Chamonix, looking to do an epic double – you know what, I think he can do it! I’m not sure that he will have those extra percentages for victory, Hardrock may well have but pay to that. But I do see a potential top 5 and even the podium if the stars align. Listen to the podcast with him here.

Gediminas Grinius 5th at UTMB in 2014 and what followed was quite a rise in the sport of ultra-running. Gediminas has an interesting back story of post-traumatic stress and it is running that helped. When you have been to hell, pain in an ultra is nothing. It’s worth remembering that this guy can dig deep. A win at Transgrancanaria, a win at UTMF and a string of top 2nd places certainly elevate GG for a top UTMB place. Listen to the podcast here.

Tofol Castanyer won CCC and was 2nd at UTMB in 2014. He has a string of top performances and results but his recent form seems a question mark. On paper, he’s a podium contender but I said that last year and he didn’t finish. We will have to see?

Ryan Sandes had a tough 2015 and has patiently come back in 2016 with a 3rd place in Tararwera and 4th place in Australia at the Ultra Trail. Ryan never likes to race a great deal preferring to train and prepare meticulously for key events. He has done that in the past, Western States for example only to not race at the 11th hour due to injury or illness. Apart from FKT records, Ryan’s career highlights are his win at Transgrancanaria and top results at UTMF and WSER. Ryan has been in Chamonix for some time training and I hope he will arrive at the line fresh. He has all the potential to shake up the podium. Listen to the podcast here.

Fabien Antolinus is an under the radar runner who is known in France and not many other places. A top consistent performer at Templiers and the Ice Trail Tarentaise, Fabien backed this up last year with a 6th place finish at UTMB behind a doping Gonzalo Calisto, so, he finished 5th really. I see a potential repeat performance.

Miguel Heras TNFUTMB 2013 ©iancorless.com

Miguel Heras could win, could finish in the top 10, may not start and if he does start, may not finish. Yes, Miguel is a class act when the stars align but neither he or us can predict when this will happen. A highlight for sure was his UTMB 2nd behind Xavier Thevenard in 2013.

Javier Dominguez just had a great run at the Skyrunning World Championships with 3rd place behind Luis Alberto and Andy Symonds. He also placed 3rd at Lavaredo. Although he will be in the mix he is potentially a top 5-10 finisher.

Julien Chorier has the long game, strength and persistence for a top UTMB performance. I’ve seen him time and time again grind out great results. His victory at Ronda dels Cims a few years back is still one of the most dominant performances of running I have seen. Julien has backed that up at Western States, Hardrock, Diagonale des Fous, UTMF and of course UTMB. His best UTMB was 3rd in 2008 and in 2013 he finished 6th.

Paul Giblin for me is a dark horse. Last year he missed UTMB and compensated with focusing on Western States in 2016, he placed 5th. That’s one of the UK’s best performances at the race. He’s a runner and the 10,000m of vertical may go against his natural abilities but don’t rule him out! Listen to the podcast here.

You have to draw a line somewhere but we also need to consider, Diego Pazoz who has illuminated several races in 2016, most notably victory at the Eiger Ultra Trail and Mont-Blanc 80km.

He could be a huge surprise as could Stephan Hugenschmidt from Germany who has had many notable results.

Zdenek Kris finished 9th at Ultra Perineu in 2015 and recently placed 5th at the Skyrunning World Championships.

Two Frenchmen, Arnaud Lejeune who was 2nd at UTMF in 2015 and Thomas Lorblanchet who has wins at Leadville and 4th at Western States will also mix things up.

Ryan Smith, Pau Bartolo, Jez Bragg, Aurelian Collet, Ludovic Pommeret, Armand Teixeira, Jordi Bes and Bertrand Collomb-Patton all have top 10 and certainly top 20 potential.

Needless to say there is a whole stack of other male talent that have experienced UTMB before somewhere in and around the top 50. Any of these runners who could make a breakthrough performance and venture into the high ranking top 20’s or even top 10. It’s what makes the race so interesting.

LADIES

Rory Bosio TNFUTMB ©iancorless.com

Rory Bosio holds the course record at UTMB – nuff said! Any lady that finishes in the top-10 overall rocks. But where has Rory been since her repeat victory in 2014? Well, believe it or not, she was filming a reality TV show… really, Rory is an actress! In 2015 she won the Atacama Extreme but other than that she has been relatively low key when racing. UTMB performances are backed up by 2nd, 4th and 5th at Western States so Rory needs no other boosting. I do wonder though if she is in the ‘A’ game frame of mind of 2013 and 2014? We will find out…

Caroline Chaverot for me is the lady that will win UTMB 2016. Caroline is a machine who smiles from beginning to end and her performances over the last 18-24 months have blown me away. She does race a great deal and I think that went against her at UTMB in 2015 when she DNF’d. This year though I have noticed a difference… she obliterated the Transgrancanaria course, she obliterated the MUT in Madeira and she became Skyrunning World Champion at the Buff Epic Trail – 2016 is Caroline’s UTMB year!

Nuria Picas has twice finished 2nd and I would normally talk Nuria up as the winner. Last year she dropped early and since has had very mixed performances. I do believe she has the UTWT curse of running and winning too many races in a short period of time which has left her drained. I have seen this in 2016 at Transgrancanaria and most recently at the Buff Epic Trail. Of course, Nuria may well have been savvy and kept her powder dry for Chamonix – I hope so! *August 24th, Nuria will unfortunately not run the 2016 edition due to an injury.

Magdalena Boulet will be there or thereabouts but for me, this course will not allow enough running which is Magda’s strength. No doubt she will be in the mix, her 2nd at CCC proved that but 170k and 10,000m is a big difference to CCC or Western States. Listen to the podcast here.

Uxue Fraille will be out of the mix early on and keep going and produce a solid finish. Uxue’s success is all about pacing and finishing. She lets the other ladies race and fade and then she sweeps them up in the final 1/3rd. Last year she placed 2nd at UTMB and she won UTMF.

Jasmin Paris is one lady who may well win UTMB one day. I’d love to say that 2016 will be the year but I don’t think it will happen. Jasmin runs a great deal and therefore rarely ‘peaks’ for any one race. This is sometimes a good thing but also a bad thing. Although Jasmin can run long, this will be her first big 100+ miler and the Chamonix experience may well overwhelm her. This year she blitzed the Bob Graham Round FKT to a new level and a week after getting married took bronze medal at the Skyrunning World Championships and then won Tromso SkyRace. Personally, I feel Jasmin’s forte and skill set will be best suited to the Skyrunner courses where her fell and mountain running background really shines. She will do well at UTMB but this year will be a learning curve. Don’t get me wrong though, top 5 and certainly top 3 is possible. Listen to the podcast here.

Andrea Huser like Jasmin is a non-stop racer and for me always lacks that extra 5-10% when required due to a constant element of fatigue. Her string of top 2nd and 3rd places for me confirm this. In this 2016 field, Andrea can better her 2014 7th and potentially will make the top 5 and may even challenge the podium but I don’t see a victory.

Fernanda Maciel is a another runner who mixes many sports, races regularly and is always in and around the action. Like Andrea Huser, I see her in the mix but not taking the top slot. If we look at recent results, the consistency is there – 4th at UTMB in 2010, 3rd at MDS, 3rd at Lavaredo 2016 and a string of other podium places at UTWT races. * Fernanda will not run 23rd August. News from her doctors: “They said I was in an advanced stage of injuries to my kidneys caused by my last 2 long races due to dehydration I suffered during the races. Now my blood tests from last friday done here in Chamonix seem normal but not 100% recovered, and of course I am thinking of the UTMB on friday… I’m really sad because they only told me it today!”

Emilie Lecomte has the long game, strength and tenacity for a 170km race but she lacks the speed of many of the other ladies. A top 10 is an almost guaranteed and as other ladies fade, we can expect Emilie to move up.

Francesca Canepa and Emilie Lecomte in many ways are similar runners and Francesca has a strong history with UTMB and Tor des Geants. On her day, she can be up there and in the mix. Recently her form has been questionable.

Amy Sproston has won Hurt 100 and placed 2nd at Western States. For me, Amy is a runner but then again, Hurt has some gnarly terrain on those 20-mile loops, so, is this the year that Amy puts UTMB demons to rest? Her history is not good with the race – three starts and only one finish when she placed 8th.

Aliza Lapierre is potentially the USA’s top contender behind Rory Bosio. Her list of results in all varieties of races bodes well for a solid UTMB. But at really specific races, Transgrancanaria for example the mountainous terrain has caused her to struggle a little. Aliza like to run and although UTMB has plenty of that, it also has plenty of hands-on-knee action.

Larisa Dannis likes a running race and like many of the American ladies the increased vertical causes an issue. On paper though, she has the racing pedigree for a top performance. you don’t get 2nd at Western States by accident.

Ester Alves is a good friend and races too much (sorry Ester). One day, Ester will pick a race and prepare meticulously for it and then excel. I saw this earlier this year when she won and dominated The Coastal Challenge in Costa Rica. I think what worked there was it was the first race of the season and she could therefore be specific over the winter. What has followed is a string of races in many varied locations with a list of good results but no stand out results! Ester placed 8th at the 2014 UTMB so the potential is there!

Gemma Arenas I know well in the Skyrunning circles but this will be her first 100 and it’s a tough one with strong competition. It will be a learning curve.

Like in the men’s race, curve balls will swing in and we can expect to see these ladies’ mixing it up, Silke Koester, Nicky Spinks, Sally McRae, Sarah Willis, Sophie Grant, Frederica Boifava, Joelle Vaught, Alissa St. Laurent and Manu Vilaseca amongst others.

Facebook/iancorlessphotography
Twitter (@talkultra)
Instagram (@iancorlessphotography)

Montrail FluidFlex FKT Shoe Review

Posted on August 13, 2016 by talkultra

Montrail call themselves, ‘The original trail running brand!’ And to USA based runners they may very well be. But to Europeans, they are just a name and in all honesty, I very much doubt that they have seen a Montrail run shoe, let alone used one. Of course, in the last 18-24 months that has all started to change and that is directly attributable to the UTMB.

Yes, when The North Face jumped ship sponsoring the big loop around France, Italy and Switzerland the American brand jumped it. Of course nothing is straight forward and UTMB sponsorship comes in the name of Columbia, Mountain Hardwear and Montrail. All three brands are under the same umbrella and are interconnected.

Topher Gaylord is president of Columbia’s Mountain Hardwear brand and ironically he was the man who originally set up the TNF sponsorship deal – what goes around, comes around.

As one commentator said, “Montrail was once the biggest brand in the American trail running scene, but many other brands have created more buzz in the past few years. This should certainly help create more traction for Montrail, which was acquired by Columbia in 2006.”

So as you see, a picture starts to form and although the above information doesn’t tell you if the Montrail FluidFlex FKT shoe is any good, what it does do is provide some perspective.

Dakota Jones, Ellie Greenwood and Max King have worn Montrail shoes in the past and I often looked on wondering how these shoes performed? Unfortunately, being based in Europe, the possibility to get hold of shoes was either extremely difficult or zero. With UTMB sponsorship, Montrail (Columbia and Mountain Hardwear too) are looking for increased exposure on a world platform.

Last year I tested and reviewed a limited edition UTMB Montrail shoe HERE and now I have the FluidFlex FKT and Trans Alps FKT (review to follow) shoes to review.

FluidFlex FKT

Out of the box, the shoes feel light especially when on first impressions they look heavy. Styling is somewhat retro and I have to say, this has always been the case with Montrail shoes. Current styling has definitely improved over older models but in today’s plethora of shoes, Montrail still look a little dated. Of course, looks don’t play a significant role in the performance of a shoe but it does play a huge roll if you are standing in a store, looking at racks of shoes and you are trying to narrow down which ones’ appeal.

My version of the FluidFlex FKT is grey with yellow and arguably, it’s one of the more attractive shoes in the range. I do believe Rocket Red and Super Blue versions are available too. Ladies shoes are Bounty Blue and Chameleon Green.

What’s noticeable immediately is that the shoe is ‘no fuss’ shoe. The toe box is clear of additional layers and moldings and has an adequate bumper for toe protection. The heel box has little to no reinforcing – just a patch on the very rear.

On the sides of the FluidFlex FKT, 6 -strips of pliable reinforcement have been applied that lead to the lace holes. These strips provide some structure and support to the upper when the shoes are laced up. The is a blast of fresh air, the FluidFlex FKT feels reassuringly thought out but not over engineered.

Opening the shoe up, I am happy to see that the tongue is padded but more importantly it is gusseted and stitched into the sides of the shoe. This for me is a real winner – it stops the tongue moving around excessively when running, provides a more secure hold of the foot and it also reduces what debris can enter the shoe.

The insole of the shoe is a surprise and most certainly has been thought about. It is cupped at the heel to provide a little more hold and support and the ‘arch’ area is pronounced, again providing some additional support.

I am a neutral runner and found no issue with this ‘slight’ support, however, depending on your run style and preferences, you may wish an insole with more simplicity?

Cushioning is good with 15mm at the rear and 11mm at the front – drop is 4mm. The shoes name, FKT (Fastest Known Time) starts to make sense here as this shoe is designed to be fast, light, cushioned for a runner who bio-mechanically sound. I switch from 4mm, 6mm and 8mm drop shoes all the time and when running long, I will always prefer a shoe with 8mm drop as I firmly believe that the longer we run, the more our form fails and falters and that is when an 8mm drop shoe can be more forgiving. However, the FluidFlex FKT did ‘feel’ more forgiving and I do believe that this was directly attributable to the cushioning. They are simple shoes – No midsole gizmos, no gels, airbags or plastic parts. Just pure, responsive foam from heel to toe.

The outsole reminds me a great deal of Hoka One Ones’ original Bondi B shoe – a shoe that I used a great deal. Grip is at the front and rear but not in the middle. Grip is also split into two colours, grey and orange. the grey sections being more durable and hard wearing, the orange sections softer and provides additional grip.

The ‘Flex’ of the sole is incredible. You can clearly see 5 ridges across the outsole and this is where the FluidFlex name comes from. These ridges bend and flex with ease give the shoe an incredible feel, bounce and propulsion when running – it’s a real winner. Like many US ‘trail’ shoes, it’s clear to see that the FluidFlex FKT is for dry, dusty, rocky and hard trails. Don’t take them to mud – it will not be a great experience! I don’t own road shoes anymore and what I have found is that the FluidFlex FKT has become my ‘go to’ shoe if I want to pop out for 20, 30 or 40min road loop. Yes, they handle the road really well.

Slipping the shoe on, the shoe immediately has a slipper like feel, directly attributable to the gusseted tongue and secure feel. The toe box is roomy and allows for a free and natural splay of ones’ toes and the heel box is snug and secure. The padded tongue allows laces to be pulled tight without causing any discomfort on the instep of the foot. I often find that when using a wider toe box, I like to compensate by lacing my shoe tighter – it’s a personal thing.

In use, the shoe was out-of-the-box comfortable and the combination of a cushioned sole, the ‘flex’ ridges and the gusseted tongue, it felt like I was on my 10th run not a first run. As time passed this improved but only marginally as they were so comfortable from the off.

The shoe is cushioned and therefore if you really like a ‘feel’ for the ground, this is compromised with the FluidFlex FKT. But that is not a criticism, it’s just a warning shot to let you understand how this shoe runs. It is without doubt a shoe for dry, hard pack trail, rocks and road. Avoid mud, the grip just isn’t up to it. With a 4mm drop and the placing of the grip on the outsole, you need to bio-mechanically good. It’s a shoe that most definitely is designed for mid to forefoot striking. Having said that, the shoe is very comfortable to walk in. Should you heel strike, the grey section of outsole on the rear of the shoe would offer some protection and grip but let’s be clear, if you are heel striking, you shouldn’t be in 4mm drop shoes!

As mentioned, the middle of the outsole has no grip or protection and it’s in this area that you may well see some early wear and tear. This could come from abrasion when running over irregular and rocky terrain or from small stones sticking into the soft cushioning. Road use will obviously wear any shoe down quicker but if running on the forefoot, the grip of the outsole should last well. Remember though, this is a trail shoe that works well on road, not an out-and-out road shoe. On wet rocks and road, providing you land on the ‘grip’ section of the outsole the shoe is reassuring, the compromise comes in the middle of the outsole where no grip exists. On odd occasions, particularly on large and/ or irregular rocks I found the shoe to slip a little. The shoe is true to size but remember it has a wider toe box so I always recommend trying a pair 1/2 size up and down to make sure you have the ‘feel’ that you like.

In conclusion, the FluidFlex FKT has thrown me a curve ball. I wasn’t expecting to like this shoe ‘that’ much and I have to say, I have been pleasantly surprised at how good this shoe is and how pleasurable it is to wear. It’s a shoe that has specific use and if you keep away from mud and sloppy stuff, you will enjoy running in it. It’s a 4mm drop shoe so it will appeal to those runners who like to get closer to the ground but not at the compromise of cushioning. The fit is slipper like and the ‘flex’ in the outsole is superb for ‘toe off’ propulsion. Feel with the ground is compromised with the cushioning but this is a personal thing. The shoe works well on the road (surprisingly well) its low weight is ideal for faster/ shorter runs but if you have good form (and can hold it) there is no reason why you couldn’t run 50k, 80k, 100k or 100-miles in these shoes.

Montrail website HERE

Recommended!

What Montrail say:

A lightweight, yet supportive trail running shoe with enhanced flexibility for a smooth and nimble ride

Gryptonite heel and forefoot rubber traction zones incorporate 3-point lug shapes for multi

Directional traction

FluidFoam midsole with increased flexibility through deep flex grooves

Patented FluidGuide technology for enhanced midfoot stability on uneven surfaces and a smooth ride on the trail

Seamless upper construction with a thermoplastic midfoot cage welded against a breathable body mesh for protection and support

WEIGHT: 9.2 oz./264 g

RIDE HEIGHTS: 15mm heel/11mm forefoot

DROP: 4mm

#EPO #CALISTO #UTMB – Statement from COMPRESSPORT

Posted on August 12, 2016 by talkultra

CALISTO - PRESS RELEASE

Another week passes and it’s important not to let the momentum drop around the positive test of Gonzalo Calisto at UTMB in 2015. This is possibly even more important with the proximity of the 2016 event which is just weeks away.

If you are coming to this story new, you can read my post below:

Post 1 UTMB faces positive EPO test HERE

Post 2 Michel Poletti HERE

Post 3 IAAF HERE

Post 4 Update IAAF and Catherine Poletti HERE

Post 5 Gonzalo Calisto statement HERE

Post 6 ITRA statement HERE

Post 7 DRUGS in Mountain, Ultra and Trail #EPO #UTMB

I am pleased to say, today, Compressport have replied to my emails and forwarded me a press release that I assume will be distributed through the appropriate channels in due course.

I have been vocal that brands and sponsors MUST act accordingly when an athlete is found positive and I therefore applaud Compressport for stepping up to the plate and sending out a clear message. And I quote:

“Given the evidence surrounding Gonzalo Callisto’s alleged actions, we determined that our relationship with Gonzalo no longer aligns with out companies mission and core values.”

This is a big step for Mountain, Ultra, Trail and Skyrunning and as a fellow colleague said, “Nicely worded, clear and unequivocal and shows compressport in a really good light!”

Lets be clear here, Callisto’s positive test has never really been about the individual for me. At first it was about the system, how a positive test was almost hidden, how UTMB were not notified of the positive test and ultimately what the repercussions are/ were for the sport. This is not a witch hunt!

Our sport is potentially at the early stages of doping and I can’t stress enough how important it is that we all – runners, races, sponsors, brands and so on set and send a very clear message.

We now need MOVISTAR AVENTURA TEAM (web here) who sponsor Calisto to clarify their stance in regard to this positive test and the implications for their brand and race team.

The press release from UTMB, ITRA and now COMPRESSPORT set the example.

#cleansport

As usual I welcome your thoughts.

How Do We Keep Doping Out of Trail Running? by Outside Online

Posted on August 5, 2016 by talkultra

Calisto_OutsideOnline

I have been very vocal lately about the doping scandal around Gonzalo Calisto and his positive test for EPO at the 2015 UTMB. Outside Magazine contacted me and and asked for my input based on my articles and research as listed below.

Post 1 UTMB faces positive EPO test HERE

Post 2 Michel Poletti HERE

Post 3 IAAF HERE

Post 4 Update IAAF and Catherine Poletti HERE

Post 5 Gonzalo Calisto statement HERE

Post 6 ITRA statement HERE

Post 7 DRUGS in Mountain, Ultra and Trail #EPO #UTMB

********

You can now read an article by Meaghen Brown published on Outside Online

Over the past few years, rumors have swirled in ultrarunning circles about how some frequent podium finishers seem so resilient to the endless, hard, mountain miles. But when news broke in mid July that Ecuadorian ultrarunner Gonzalo Calisto had been busted in a positive EPO test and subsequently disqualified from the prestigious Ultra Trail du Mont Blanc, it marked an important turning point for a sport that has thus far maintained a pretty wholesome image.

“To be honest, it breaks my heart,” says professional ultrarunner Mike Foote, who’s twice placed in the top five at UTMB. “The ultrarunning community prides itself on a deep we-are-in-this-together mentality, and Calisto being busted for EPO undermines this culture and this mutual respect and celebration of one another.”

You can read the full article online HERE

DRUGS in Mountain, Ultra and Trail #EPO #UTMB

Posted on August 3, 2016 by talkultra

EPO-Doping-Offers-No-Benefit-to-Athletes-286x300

Last week and the week before, EPO, DOPING and the UTMB was the hot topic after Gonzalo Callisto’s positive test. Everyone was talking about it… this week it’s all gone quiet. That can’t happen! You can catch up on my posts below.

Post 1 UTMB faces positive EPO test HERE

Post 2 Michel Poletti HERE

Post 3 IAAF HERE

Post 4 Update IAAF and Catherine Poletti HERE

Post 5 Gonzalo Calisto statement HERE

Post 6 ITRA statement HERE

There are far too many questions unanswered, there are far too many people being quiet and if we want to eradicate doping from Mountain, Ultra and Trail running – we need to keep talking and discussing.

I was approached by Outside Magazine and they asked me a few questions. I am pretty sure that what gets used or published will be an edited version and with that in mind here are my thoughts, un-edited.

In light of the latest news from UTMB, what you think this positive test means for the sport?

One has to embrace the positive test as a good thing as it confirms that preventative measures against doping are working. This positive was an ‘in competition’ test which only confirms the need for out of competition testing and blood passports. Of course, the answer is always that testing is too expensive. We have to act now and be proactive. I don’t have the answers but I do feel that we could start to address certain issues that would help. Maybe it’s time that we ask (for example) the top 100 male and top 50 female runners as listed on ITRA to pay for a regular medical? Sage Canaday recently released a full report on his medical status to ‘prove’ he is clean; that’s a good thing! (See below). Athletes of course may well say that they can’t afford it but this is where sponsors come in maybe? We cannot keep making excuses as to why we can’t but find ways to make sure we can! We are at the very early stages of doping in our sport and if we don’t act now it will only become worse and God forbid, we could end up like cycling or athletics.

Do you think doping is really becoming something to worry about, or is this a case of an outlier?

We need to worry, yes! This is not the first positive test, it maybe a high profile conviction, but it would be foolish to think that this is an isolated incident.

Are people starting to talk about doping more in ultarunning than before? Or maybe a better way of asking this is how are the athletes you know, talking about this subject and what it means for the sport?

I certainly have witnessed more discussion about doping and of course this was highlighted at the end of 2015 at San Francisco 50. This was a moment when the sport really looked at itself and many questions were asked. It actually became quite nasty at times and I think a sense of perspective was lost. For example, WMRA (World Mountain Running Association) and Skyrunning have been testing athletes for many years. They have very much paved the way but they acknowledge they can only do so much. In competition testing costs 1000’s of euros or dollars for one event and of course, only urine can be tested. Many say it takes an idiot to to be caught ‘in competition’ but it happens. I go back to blood passports – we really need them for elite, professional and sponsored runners. Some races do not have a ‘PED’ policy and San Francisco highlighted the need for races and RD’s to address this in the rules of the race. Western States for example has re-written its race rules to say that any runner who has had a positive conviction cannot race. Many runners have asked for a lifetime ban for any positive test and they have been vocal about this. I personally am reluctant to go down this route… I do believe that mistakes can happen in drug testing but I am not an expert. This creates a whole new debate and raises questions about the lasting effects of a doping program. For example, we used to have two positive tests and out, I liked that but apparently that has been deemed unfair?

Are people starting to test more for doping than in previous years? What has this looked like?

As mentioned previously, WMRA and Skyrunning have been testing for many years but not at all events. Skyrunning for example had its World Championships in Spain in July, they had three events, VK, SKY and ULTRA and WADA performed tests at all three race distances. The problem comes, once again with cost. At the Skyrunning World Championships, 12 athletes were tested. The make and female winner in each category (making 6) and then 6random tests. Let’s assume testing at an event is $10,000 – who pays? Do we add a surcharge on every runners entry fee? Does that race find a sponsor to cover the cost? Do we rely on a wealthy donor or do we approach all the major brands in the sport and say, you must pay! It’s a complex matter and this is why doping control is a rarity in contrast to the norm. Let’s look at races such as Speedgoat 50k, Run Rabbit Run and San Francisco 50 – these races have some substantial prize money, in some scenarios it could mean a pay check of $10,000+ for a win. Yet nobody has any idea if the winner is clean? Moving away from trail running and looking at ultra road running, Comrades in South Africa has huge prize money and it has a very chequered past with doping: Max King, Ellie Greenwood, Sage Canaday and Michael Wardian (amongst others) have all witnessed the impact of it first hand.

What is your own experience with testing?

I attend races as a photographer and a journalist so in reality, I have little experience of the drug testing process. However, I am a media partner for Skyrunning and I have been present and seen the processes undertaken at several major events where doping control has been in place by WADA. For example, I was at the Skyrunning World Champions on July, 22, 23rd and 24th. I also experienced doping control at Limone Extreme in 2015 and Mont-Blanc 80k in 2014 amongst others.

Do you think the tests, or the conversation about doping in general in ultras is lacking? What could be done better?

Certainly the positive test of Gonzalo Calisto has raised some major flaws in the communication process. I have done extensive research over the last weeks and my conclusions have been quite worrying. I will elaborate:

Gonzalo Calisto was tested after placing 5th at UTMB by French drug control – AFLD In August 2015.
AFLD have a written policy that a positive test is given to (in this case) the runner within three weeks.
The runner is then entitled to appeal and ask for a B sample test.
This process can then go backwards and forwards for several weeks and in this scenario (as I understand it) months. Don’t get me wrong, the runner has rights and it’s only fair that he or she has every opportunity to clear his or her name.
In June 2016 the IAAF released its current banned list.
On July 18/19th British Ultrarunner Robbie Britton noticed that Gonzalo Calisto was convicted of EPO and banned till March 2017.
I picked up the case and contacted UTWT and UTMB directly and asked were they aware of this conviction? I later found out, no!
Within 12 hours, UTMB released a press release disqualifying Gonzalo Calisto of doping.

The above raised so many questions for me:

1. How was it possible that Gonzalo Calisto had tested positive but UTMB did not know?

2. Why was his period of exclusion dated till March 2017 when he had been tested in August 2015?

3. Why had the IAAF only published this in June 2016?

I asked questions of the UTMB and the IAAF. In both scenarios they were both helpful.

1. To cut a long story short it would appear that when an athlete is tested positive, the testing control, in this scenario AFLD, are not required to inform the race. REALLY? A race has a runner place 5th, the runner is tested, the runner is found guilty, due process is run and then a positive is confirmed and a sanction is put in place without the race being told…. C’mon that HAS to change! Had it not been for the eagle eyes of Robbie Britton and me grabbing the bull by the horns, nobody ‘may’ have known?

2. IAAF explained the ‘due process’ to me and although they were not able to supply specifics, they did say that these things can often take much longer than we would all like and that 6 months is not unusual. Considering Calisto was tested on the last day of August, that potentially could take us to February or March the following year.

3. The IAAF then confirmed that an error had been made! As I pointed out to them, why was Calisto banned till March 2017? The answer: Calisto’s ban and records were amended from a memo dated March 2016 and it was therefore human error. Calisto’s ban dates actually run from March 2016 to March 2018. This coincided with point 2 above and a lengthy due process where one assumes Calisto tried to clear his name.

4. From the March conviction, Calisto’s records then entered the IAAF system and his conviction was uploaded to the ‘sanctioned athletes’ list in June 2016.

5. The IAAF confirmed to me that AFLD did not have to notify UTMB of a conviction but they would look into it?

So, for UTMB to be aware that an athlete had cheated at a previous edition of their race it would appear that the only option open to them is to check daily on the IAAF website for any additions to the sanctioned athlete list.

I could go on…

Why do you think the sport has stayed clean for so long, and what might be changing that would compel people to cheat?

The sport hasn’t been clean for so long. That is a naive viewpoint. Doping has existed in trail running for ages but if you don’t have testing or a blood passport, how would you know that…? I like to use an example and I must be clear here, I don’t doubt the integrity of the runner I use as an example. Karl Meltzer, my co-host for Talk Ultra podcast has won more 100 mile races than anyone. He has even won Run Rabbit Run and he took home $10,000+ He has been running ULTRA’s for 20+ years. You know how many times he has been tested for PED use? NEVER. Need I say more… This is why our sport has bean ‘clean’ for so long, no testing!

For the most part it seems like the conversation around doping in ultras is relatively new, and also that cheating might be a new thing too. Do you think there’s a chance for race directors, athletes, etc. to get out in front of this and keep the sport clean before it becomes the kind of large-scale issue it is in some other sports?

The Calisto case has raised eyebrows, we need to latch on to that momentum and we need to consider many of my points above but let’s be clear, Calisto is not the first!

On a final note we need to keep this discussion open, we need to keep asking questions and we need to find answers and solutions. It’s too easy to say it’s too expensive, too difficult and so on. We could start by:

Blood passports for runners
Regular in and out of competition testing
Positive results MUST be sent to a race or RD as soon as possible if a positive test came from a race.
IAAF need to find a way to communicate ‘new’ sanctioned athletes to the relevant sport discipline. This is where ITRA or maybe an athlete commission could be set up.

We, as runners, journalists, sponsors and so on must be loud and clear that doping is not welcome and we must do all we can to work together. In the Calisto case I have still not seen or heard any public statement from his sponsors, Movistar and Compressport. Compressport did contact me to say that they were ‘looking into it!’ What does that mean…? They also said that Callisto’s sponsorship with Compressport was with a local distributor and not the International division. As far as I am concerned, local or International, Calisto is still representing a brand and that brand gains attention. And also what about the races that Calisto has run and placed in in post August 2015? The IAAF now confirms the suspension dates back to that time and until March 2018. Not one word, not one public statement from any race that I have seen… do these races condone doping? What about the runners who placed top 5 or top 10 only to loose a place… come on, speak up!

Update August 12th and Compressport respond

A great place to start is here, Sage Canaday has just recently posted his results online for all to see. Let’s lead by example!

SageDopingReport

I welcome your thoughts!

ITRA release statement on #EPO positive for Gonzalo Calisto

Posted on July 26, 2016 by talkultra

©iancorless.com_TCC2016-1779

This morning I posted the long awaited statement from Gonzalo Calisto after testing positive for EPO at the 2015 UTMB. If you are new to the story, please read the posts below.

Post 1 UTMB faces positive EPO test HERE

Post 2 Michel Poletti HERE

Post 3 IAAF HERE

Post 4 Update IAAF and Catherine Poletti HERE

Post 5 Gonzalo Calisto statement HERE

Today, I have now received a statement and clarification from ITRA into the process that Gonzalo Calisto has gone through:

July 25th 2016

PREAMBLE

On June 29th 2016*, the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) published on its web-site in newsletter 174 a list of athletes who had been sanctioned for doping. On this list figures M. Gonzalo CALISTO for a positive test of EPO on August 29th 2015 at the finish of the UTMB®.

ITRA HEALTH POLICY

The term «health policy» designates actions which aim at increasing the prevention and the protection of the health of the sportspersons.

The ITRA, in particular, offers organisers the chance of setting up a preventative action concerning health matters. This action has neither the vocation nor the competence to be a substitute for current national and/or international regulations regarding the anti-doping fight but has the aim of strengthening the medical supervision within the framework of the health security plan set up by the organisation. This action is led by a Medical Counsel, uniquely made up of doctors, who are able to take advice from experts of their choice and who are charged with giving consultative advice to the Race Jury on the medical state of participants.

More information about the ITRA health policy : http://itra.run/page/261/Politique_sante.html

HISTORY AND CHRONOLOGY OF THE ITRA’S HEALTH POLICY

Within the framework of the health policy set up by the ITRA, M. Gonzalo CALISTO submitted a first blood sample on May 28th 2015 at 13:077 (World Trail-Running Championships in Annecy (France) organised by the IAU in collaboration with the ITRA)

M. Gonzalo CALISTO’s haematological profile presented several abnormal values which led to the athlete being summoned, on May 29th 2015, before the start of the race, to a meet with the event’s medical commission of 2 doctors and an expert from the Association «Athletes For Transparency» with a more specific responsibility for aspects concerning the anti-doping fight.

The Ecuadorian origin of M. Gonzalo CALISTO, which according to scientific literature, maybe be responsible for specific haematological profiles (Quito, altitude of 2850m), as well as the argument put forward by the athlete of having very regular exposure to very high altitudes (>5500m) were retained to classify his haematological profile as « atypical » (rather than « abnormal ») and so authorised him to take the start of the race for the World trail-Running Championships in Annecy.

The information relating to M. Gonzalo CALISTO’s « atypical » profile was transmitted by telephone on May 29th 2015 to an organisation responsible for the anti-doping fight. The two possible options were retained by the Association «Athletes For Transparency» to explain this « atypical » profile knowing that a specific genetical profile or the taking of EPO were then evoked.

The « atypical » profile of the athlete was once again brought up in a telephone conversation in June 2015 (no precise date) with an organisation responsible for the anti-doping fight.

M. Gonzalo CALISTO submitted a second blood sample on August 27th 2015 at 13:45 before the start of the UTMB® within the framework of the ITRA’s Health policy. His haematological profile once again showed several abnormalities.

With the reason, of the always possible specific genetic profile linked to his Ecuadorian origins, the athlete’s haematological profile was again classed as « atypical » and he was authorised to take the start of the UTMB®.

The ITRA learnt, on August 29th 2015 the urinary anti-doping tests at the finish had been able to specifically target M. Gonzalo CALISTO.

On April 21st 2016 information relating to M. Gonzalo CALISTO were sent by email to the Association «Athletes For Transparency» by an organisation in charge of the anti-doping fight.

THE ITRA’S MANAGEMENT OF A POSITIVE TEST

The role of the ITRA following a positive test is:

– To ensure the disqualification of M. Gonzalo CALISTO from events in which he would have been able to participate in during the period of disqualification (as from August 19th, 2015).

– To ensure the non-participation in any race which is a member of the ITRA during the period of M. Gonzalo CALISTO’s period of suspension, from March 17th 2016 to March 17th 2018. (The start of the period of sanction (March 17th 2016) is determined by the “test authority” in relation to the provisional suspension, interviews, appeals made by the athlete, etc….)

Patrick BASSET – President of the ITRA Health Commission

Pierre SALLET – President of the Association Athletes For Transparency

ITRA performance profile – Gonzalo Calisto HERE

ITRAperformanceprofile

******

I would welcome clarification and statements from Gonzalo Callisto’s sponsors, MOVISTAR and COMPRESSPORT. I would welcome clarification from races that Gonzalo Calisto participated in after August 2015 – how will they proceed?

As usual I welcome your thoughts in this story and process

Gonzalo Calisto releases #EPO #UTMB Statement (English Version)

Posted on July 26, 2016 by talkultra

©iancorless.com_TCC2016-1794

One week ago, the mountain, ultra and trail running world found out that Gonzalo Calisto tested positive after placing 5th at the 2015 UTMB. If you are coming to this new, may I suggest you read my posts in order as listed below as they will provide information and also chronologically provide an insight into my investigations.

Post 1 HERE

Post 2 Michel Poletti HERE

Post 3 IAAF HERE

Post 4 Update IAAF and Catherine Poletti HERE

Gonzalo Calisto has now released a statement via his Facebook page in Spanish and I have had a translation done. Please keep in mind that a translation may lose some of the uniqueness of the original, however, I do feel that what we have below provides an excellent insight.

As with all posts relating to this matter, I welcome your feedback.

Gonzalo introduces this by saying:

Thank you all for your support, I’ve taken a few days to be able to collect all this information and share it with you.
We will continue with the head held high, we’ll see you soon in the mountains!!!

I’m not a professional runner. I’m an amateur, with dreams which mantain my passion for adventure. Plainly, experiences in nature are my day-to-day targets, for every train and every run. I have never ran for prizes, or medal or recognizement, least of all for money. During these 13 years full of adventures I have filled my spirit with livings and learnings, and I have had the luck to share them with lots of generations of adventurers on lots of countries. During these years, I have witnessed exponential grow of trailrunning all over the world, and today trailrunning has lots of fans on my country on lots of running events.

Physiology: I have always been fascinated for the mountains, specially for the tall ones. I learnt to run there, to go up and down, walking and running, pushing myself and learning how the nature and strenght of the mountains fills our body and spirit. Ecuador, due to its geographical situation – Quito its capital 3000m above sea level – mountains with different heights and terraings and even different weather. Due to this, it is a privileged playground to train and go outdoors. Sport events are usually run on mountain and in zones, which go fron 3000 to 4500m+. Our bodies adapt to the high altitude and our blood is dense, which allows oxigenation. This process does not happen on sea level, and this training in altitude is scientifically known and used by lots of athletes to improve performance. It is called ‘altitude training’ and it’s a natural process. Legal At a country level, in Ecuador Trail running is not registered as a sport. No federation guides it, and it is not regulated by any ministery or govenrnment agency. Every trailrun event is private, and there are no licenses to ‘legally’ compete nor standarised rules. At an international level, Trail running is availed by the different athletic federations on the diferent countries, and runners have a local ranking to run on some important events. So, inside this called ‘elite’ they got licenses granted by their respective federations. These licenses somehow guarantee sport protocols between runners and sport event organizations.

IAAF is the organization which handles rules on elite athletics at a world level. IAAF runs an world ultratrail championship, but does not avail more trail events, as they are not considered ‘big events’ such as olimpic or panamerican games. This way, UTMB is not on their list.

AFLD: The French Agency against doping is the organization who takes care of doping on sport events on France.

ITRA: The Internationan Association of Trail Running, is an organization wich mantains a ranking based on an index generated based on the performance of a given athlete in different runs.

EPO: The eritropoyetin hormone, is an hormone which makes blood dense. It is naturally generated on hypoxic conditions, such as high altitude..

UTMB: UTMB is the most prestigious long-distance trailrun, which goes arond the Mont-Blanc. It is a private event, with no prices in money, which gathers 2500 runners from all around the world. 300 of them are ‘elite’ or ‘professional’. UTMB has its own ranking, based on the points gained for the participants in different sport events which UTMB avails.

CASE: During the UTMB I went on a doping control, before the depart and another after the run. This test marked positive, showing presence of EPO, but without specifying which kind of EPO was found, nor the EPO levels.

AFLD was the one who ran these tests and the one who reported the case to the IAAF.

I asked for the analysis, but I could never review the exact results. Altough IAAF regulates professional sport they have make public the results obtained.

However, they have not considered that I am not a professional athlete. I don’t have a license and I don’t belong to any federation, so the have no jurisdiction on ‘punishing’ me.

UTMB organisation had no knowledge on this case until it was public on social networks. This shows also the lack of coordination between these two organizations.

Positive test should be analized in the ‘B’ take to ratificate EPO presence. This second test should ratificate the first positive and its levels or mark the first test as a false positive. This second test is usually done upon solicitation from the federation which the athlete belongs to, which is usually the one who extends the license to the athlete. In my case, as I don’t have a license, UTMB should make me firm a provisional license to allow me to participate with the ‘elite’ ones. I never firmed that document. Besides, they should make sure that I got all the information and knowledge about all the ‘elite’ protocols; information that never was told to me.

In this case, I was without legal support from any ferederation or government; and to go agains the positive I should take all expenses on myself. These expenses are above my resources, as I’m a person from Ecuador against an international French agency.

With all these I want to point out that legal resources that have judged and sentenced me are not enough, as they lack of the ‘bases’ to coordinate events, regulators and rules to apply to non-professional athletes. We amateurs take the expenses on ourselves without no federation. So, I can’t use my right to defend myself, rigth that every juridic rule on the world has and I cannot use. To end In my country, we the ecuator runners must ask our Ecuator Running Federation to register trailrunning as a sport, to grant licenses to high-level runners who want to take part on international events and support and avail the main running events in Ecuador. Also, the Ecuatorian federation should take care also of the andti-doping tasks and generate a runners ranking at an international level, we must estabish compatible parameters between international event organizers and the federations; improve the information and make sure that the athletes know the category where they are going to run, and to make sure that they know the anti-pogind rules applicable.

I’m with the anti-doping. I like clean game and I have never intentionally used anything to artificially improve my performance. But we must be coherent with runner’s real life, specially on countries where these sports have no international rules, and work to create a clear and safe platform to run high performance sports on.

I wonder, are the anti-doping tests really fit? do they take into account genetic trace of the runners (feeding, origin, training) before publishing results?

Is it OK to judge a non-professional runner, which does not make a living with trailrunning the same way we do with a professional?

Is it OK to run anti-doping tests without the legal coverage for non-licensed runners which will have difficults to claim their rights?

Conclusion:

I’m probably the first case on this. I’m not a professional. I don’t have a license. I live and train between 3000 and 5000 masl. I have dense blood. I got a top-5 on an international running event with professional runners from all Europe which clearly know the rules. I came to the UTMB controls without the complete knowledge of high competition protocols. I have no license and no legal support fom a federation and I consider that methods used on me are not equity, transparent and impartial. There are other sports -such as the IronMan series- where they take into account the runner condition (amateur or professional) to skip these kind of polemic situation due to the lack of legal support and information on the professional protocols.

Questions

Why my case was reported by the IAAD and the UTMB organization had no idea on what was going on?

Why the rules from IAAF, AFLD and UTMB are not compatible with the positive anti-doping test from an amateur runner?

Under which authority IAAF punished me for 2 years?

I’m not a federated runner. Why the UTMB does not have a professional runner list?

Why UTMB is not registered with the IAAF avail?

Why they let me run without a federative license in a category where they are going to do controls which need this license?

I want my case to clarify and modify the trailrunning world rules.

*******

We welcome your feedback on this post?

For me, it raises many question marks and the most important is the fact that Gonzalo tested positive in August 2015. The AFLD/IAAF confirmed a ban in March 2016 and then this was published on the IAAF website in June.
Gonzalo Calisto will have known about this positive test for sometime and chose to do nothing! The above statement has come about because his positive test has been made public.
We still have no news from his sponsors, Movistar and Compressport.
Amateur or professional, rules are rules and doping is doping!
Gonzalo Calisto has raced since UTMB and July 2016 and gained results, why have these races not made a statement and why have they not disqualified him?

Many more questions will come….

Episode 115 – Jason Schlarb, Speedgoat Karl, Elisabet Barnes

Posted on July 21, 2016 by talkultra

This is Episode 115 of Talk Ultra and we have an interview with Hardrock 100 winner, Jason Schlarb. We also speak with Elisabet Barnes about her Richtersveld Transfrontier Wildrun and Big Red Run double. Speedgoat Karl is with us on the countdown to the AT and of course we have the news from around the world.

00:16:46 Karl on the AT – http://atrecord.redbull.com/karl-meltzer-mobile/p/1

00:32:00 NEWS

HARDROCK

Kilian Jornet and Jason Schlarb 22:58 – 2nd fastest time

Xavier Thevenard 23:57

Jeff Browning 4th and what a double with WSER and now the fastest accumulated time

Anna Frost 29:02 5th fastest

Emma Roca 29:36

Bethany Lewis 31:57

00:48:30 INTERVIEW JASON SCHLARB

EIGER ULTRA TRAIL

Results:

Diego Pazos 11:39 – appears to be on fire with a podium in Transgrancanaria, win at MB80k and now this!

Mathis Dippacher 12:04

Jordi Gamito Baus 12:08

Notable – Ueli Steck was 26th in 14:35

Andrea Huser 13:09

Kathrin Götz 13:39

Juliette Blanchet 13:43

ANDORRA ULTRA TRAIL – Ronda dels Cimes

Nahuel Passerat 31:33

Kenichi Yamamoto

Nicola Bassi

Lisa Borzoi 37:25

Missy Gosney

Marta Poretti

DOLOMITES SKYRACE and VK

Tadei Pivk 2:03

Stian Overgaard 2:04

Martin Anthamatten 2:05

Laura Orgue 2:28

Elisa Desco 2:30

Celia Chiron 2:32

Philip Goetsch set a new CR once again in 31:34 and Laura Orgue won the ladies race in 38:31, just 17 seconds shy of her own CR.

SPEEDGOAT 50K

Hayden Hawkes 5:25:04

Alex Nichols 5:27:42

Taste Pollmann 5:51:52

Abby Rideout 6:50:41

Kelly Wolf 7:13:46

Magdalena Boulet 7:30:10

Robert Young of the U.K. the controversy goes on…

Gonzalo Calisto, 5th at 2015 UTMB tests positive for EPO see the posts HERE

http://d.pr/i/12FWJ

Timmy Olson – American Tarzan…. Discovery Channel HERE “When Tim gets low on energy, he goes into his trademark “Animal Mode,” and enters the “Pain Cave” to get through it – training which will serve him well in the jungle!”

Coming up – Skyrunning World Champs this weekend HERE

02:07:00 INTERVIEW ELISABET BARNES

03:10:16 AUDIO – the meaning of life see the post HERE

UP & COMING RACES

Australia

Queensland

Flinders Tour – 50 km | 50 kilometers | July 24, 2016 | website

River Run 100 | 100 kilometers | July 31, 2016 | website

River Run 50 km | 50 kilometers | July 31, 2016 | website

Canada

Quebec

Pandora 24 Ultra X Trail 100M | 100 miles | July 23, 2016 | website

China

Les Foulées de la Soie en Chine | 56 kilometers | July 31, 2016 | website

France

Drôme

86km | 86 kilometers | July 23, 2016 | website

Haute-Corse

Via Romana – 62 km | 62 kilometers | July 31, 2016 | website

Haute-Garonne

52 km | 52 kilometers | July 24, 2016 | website

52 km Relais | 52 kilometers | July 24, 2016 | website

Haute-Savoie

Trail du Tour des Fiz | 61 kilometers | July 31, 2016 | website

Isère

Défi de l’Oisans | 200 kilometers | July 23, 2016 | website

Trail de L’Etendard | 65 kilometers | July 24, 2016 | website

Jura

Tour du Lac de Vouglans | 71 kilometers | July 30, 2016 | website

Savoie

La 6000D | 63 kilometers | July 30, 2016 | website

Ultra Trail du Beaufortain | 105 kilometers | July 23, 2016 | website

Germany

Bavaria

Chiemgauer 100 k Mountain Ultra Run | 100 kilometers | July 30, 2016 | website

Chiemgauer 100 mi Mountain Ultra Run | 100 miles | July 30, 2016 | website

Brandenburg

Berliner MauerwegNachtlauf | 62 kilometers | July 23, 2016 | website

Guadeloupe

Rèd Mammel | 50 kilometers | July 22, 2016 | website

Ultra Transkarukera | 120 kilometers | July 22, 2016 | website

Iceland

Hengill Ultra 50km | 50 kilometers | July 30, 2016 | website

Hengill Ultra 81km | 81 kilometers | July 30, 2016 | website

India

Himachal Pradesh

The Himalayan Crossing | 353 kilometers | July 26, 2016 | website

The SPITI | 126 kilometers | July 29, 2016 | website

Indonesia

Mount Rinjani Ultra | 52 kilometers | July 29, 2016 | website

Italy

Aosta Valley

Monte Rosa Walser Ultra Trail | 50 kilometers | July 30, 2016 | website

Sicily

Etna Trail | 64 kilometers | July 23, 2016 | website

Trentino-Alto Adige/Südtirol

Südtirol Ultra Skyrace – 121 km | 121 kilometers | July 29, 2016 | website

Südtirol Ultra Skyrace – 66 km | 66 kilometers | July 29, 2016 | website

Veneto

Trans d’Havet Ultra | 80 kilometers | July 23, 2016 | website

Kenya

Amazing Maasai Ultra | 75 kilometers | July 30, 2016 | website

Madagascar

Boby Trail | 80 kilometers | August 05, 2016 | website

Isalo Raid – Grand Raid | 80 kilometers | July 30, 2016 | website

Namoly Trail | 50 kilometers | August 05, 2016 | website

Mongolia

Mongolia Sunrise to Sunset 100K | 100 kilometers | August 03, 2016 | website

Philippines

TransCebu Ultramarathon 105 Km | 105 kilometers | July 23, 2016 | website

TransCebu Ultramarathon 55 Km | 55 kilometers | July 24, 2016 | website

Russia

Elbrus Mountain Race by adidas outdoor | 105 kilometers | August 04, 2016 | website

Golden Ring Ultra Trail T100 | 100 kilometers | July 24, 2016 | website

Golden Ring Ultra Trail T50 | 50 kilometers | July 24, 2016 | website

South Africa

Griffin 50 Mile | 50 miles | July 23, 2016 | website

Washie 100 | 100 miles | July 22, 2016 | website

Spain

Aragon

Calcenada Vuelta al Moncayo – 104 km | 104 kilometers | August 05, 2016 | website

Gran Trail Aneto-Posets | 109 kilometers | July 23, 2016 | website

Vuelta al Aneto | 58 kilometers | July 23, 2016 | website

Catalonia

105 km | 105 kilometers | July 23, 2016 | website

55 km | 55 kilometers | July 30, 2016 | website

Ultra | 104 kilometers | August 05, 2016 | website

Principality of Asturias

Ultra Trail DesafíOSOmiedo | 86 kilometers | July 30, 2016 | website

Sweden

Tierra Arctic Ultra | 120 kilometers | August 05, 2016 | website

Switzerland

Grisons

Swiss Alpine Marathon K78 | 78 kilometers | July 30, 2016 | website

Valais

La Spéci-Men | 72 kilometers | July 23, 2016 | website

Turkey

Gökhan Türe Ultra | 90 kilometers | July 22, 2016 | website

Long Course | 75 kilometers | July 22, 2016 | website

Medium Course | 60 kilometers | July 22, 2016 | website

RunFire Cappadocia Ultra Marathon | 220 kilometers | July 23, 2016 | website

United Kingdom

Cumbria

Lakes Sky Ultra | 50 kilometers | July 23, 2016 | website

East Riding of Yorkshire

The Montane Lakeland 100 | 100 miles | July 29, 2016 | website

The Montane Lakeland 50 | 50 miles | July 30, 2016 | website

Hampshire

Oxfam Trailwalker GB (South) | 100 kilometers | July 23, 2016 | website

Scotland

Run the Blades | 50 kilometers | July 23, 2016 | website

USA

Arkansas

Full mOOn 50K | 50 kilometers | July 23, 2016 | website

California

Harding Hustle 50K | 50 kilometers | July 30, 2016 | website

Ragnar Trail Tahoe | 136 miles | July 22, 2016 | website

Salt Point 50 km | 50 kilometers | July 23, 2016 | website

San Francisco Ultramarathon | 52 miles | July 31, 2016 | website

Colorado

50 Mile | 50 miles | July 30, 2016 | website

Grand Mesa 100M | 100 miles | July 30, 2016 | website

Grand Mesa 37.5M | 60 kilometers | July 30, 2016 | website

Grand Mesa 50M | 50 miles | July 30, 2016 | website

Never Summer 100km | 100 kilometers | July 23, 2016 | website

Ouray 100 Mile Endurance Run | 100 miles | August 05, 2016 | website

Wild West Relay | 200 miles | August 05, 2016 | website

Maine

Down East Sunrise Trail Team Relay | 102 miles | July 22, 2016 | website

Maryland

Rosaryville 50k Trail Runs | 50 kilometers | July 24, 2016 | website

Minnesota

Minnesota Voyageur Trail 50 Mile Run | 50 miles | July 30, 2016 | website

New York

50K | 50 kilometers | July 29, 2016 | website

North Carolina

The March | 50 kilometers | July 23, 2016 | website

Oregon

Cascade Lakes Relay | 132 miles | July 29, 2016 | website

Relay | 132 miles | July 29, 2016 | website

Siskiyou Out Back Trail Run 50K | 50 kilometers | July 23, 2016 | website

Siskiyou Out Back Trail Run 50M | 50 miles | July 23, 2016 | website

Texas

50K | 50 kilometers | July 30, 2016 | website

Washington

White River 50 Mile Trail Run | 50 miles | July 30, 2016 | website

West Virginia

Kanawha Trace 50K | 50 kilometers | July 30, 2016 | website

Wisconsin

50K | 50 kilometers | July 30, 2016 | website

Hilloopy 100+ Relay | 100 miles | July 30, 2016 | website

03:14:00 CLOSE

03:17:15

ITunes http://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/talk-ultra/id497318073

Stitcher You can listen on iOS HERE, Android HERE or via a web player HERE

Libsyn – feed://talkultra.libsyn.com/rss

Website – talkultra.com

NEWS UPDATE – IAAF response and UTMB® response re EPO

Posted on July 20, 2016 by talkultra

Many questions have been asked about my initial post (HERE) re the positive EPO case with Gonzalo Calisto at the 2015 UTMB®.

Gladly, UTMB® responded very quickly and issued a disqualification and removal of Gonzalo Calisto from the 2015 UTMB® ranking. It is clearly explained in the press release HERE

Last night I posted a response from Michel Poletti (HERE) when I asked some specific questions. The response from Michel Poletti did make me ask additional questions and today I received a response and clarification from Catherine Poletti.

1. Why are you not informed of a positive test?
Only the “testing authority” responsible for the legal treatment of the results are able to communicate about a period of suspension; the organiser, no more than any other structure, doesn’t have to be informed directly about a positive control during their event.

2. Which authority took the test and on who’s authority?
 Once again, the organiser does not have access to this information. The “testing authority” (= the structure which asks the organisation for the control and thus which is in charge of the legal treatment of the results) is mentioned in the mission order. This information is therefore only known by the doctor taking the sample, and by the athlete himself. In this precise case the ‘testing authority” maybe the country’s National Anti-Doping Agency(AFLD for France), an international federation, the Anti-doping World Agency, or another National Anti-doping Organisation (NADO).

3. Who does Gonzalo Calisto approach to review the test? 
Again, it is the classic procedure for an anti-doping test. The laboratory responsible for the analysis of the samples is unknown by the Organiser.

4. Under who’s authority is Gonzalo Calisto suspended from racing?
 Under the authority of the IAAF. The jurisprudence says that an athlete suspended by an international federation cannot participate in any other event under the aegis of another international federation. For exemple, Armstrong who was suspended by the ICU was unable to participate in the Ironman circuit which is none the less a private circuit.

Obviously this does raise some questions and it goes back to my post this morning when the IAAF replied to my questions HERE. I say it again, It’s time to lobby for a change and YOU as runners, followers of the sport or whatever capacity you have as a fan need to ensure that we all act now and make sure that the following happens:

Positive tests are confirmed to the athlete asap
Due process is allowed for a B sample
The race, race director and management team are notified immediately
A press release is issued by the race and or organisation
IAAF, WADA, AFLD and so on list and make results public asap

I did also ask the question as to why Gonzalo Calisto is only banned till March 2017 as shown here:

Apparently, the IAAF have confirmed that this is a mistake. “It appears that this is a typo as it was transcribed from the official memo…. The correct start date is March 2016 (with end date in March 2018). The athlete will have also had any results from the day of the test through to March disqualified as well.”

The IAAF have also confirmed some of the issues as to why the UTMB® was not notified of the positive test: “The main issue seems to have been the non-notification of the event organiser at which the test occurred. We will follow up with AFLD on that matter.”

Finally, many have asked why it has taken so long (August 2015 – March 2016) for Calisto to be banned and confirmed for EPO doping?

As much as we would like quick results and management processes, unfortunately this is not always the case. This is especially so when dealing with athletes from countries (in this scenario Ecuador) the relevant authorities may have very limited experience in dealing with the results management for a case such as this. Doping related cases are quite often lengthier than the general public would expect as athletes choose to exercise their rights to various hearings and appeal options. While this may seem protracted, athletes do and should have their rights protected to ensure this process is fair and subject to appeal.

At this stage it would be good to hear from Gonzalo Calisto and find out his version of events and his thoughts in regard to the positive test and if he feels the process has been correct.

IAAF response re EPO positive test at UTMB®

Posted on July 20, 2016 by talkultra

It has been a whirlwind 36 hours and I would like to make one thing clear, I have grabbed this positive EPO test at UTMB® by the horns not because I wish to humiliate the guilty runner, cast doubts on UTMB® or UTWT but because this is the first official EPO test of a runner in a trail running event (as far as I know).

I believe strongly that if we get it right NOW then this can only help in the future. For me and yes, I may be naive, but it appears that the current process has huge flaws!

See my original post HERE

The positives are obvious:

Testing at the world highest profile event
Finding a positive test ‘in competition’
This test being confirmed, listed on the IAAF website and a ban put in place.

However, the test was taken on the day of UTMB® and ‘we’ the public have only found out on July 18th/ 19th and this was down to the eagle eyes of UK ultra runner Robbie Britton.

I picked up the case and contacted all the relevant people and within 24 hours we had a UTMB® release stating disqualification. See HERE.

The above are positives but how was it possible that the UTMB® did not know of this positive test? I asked for clarification and Michel Poletti at the UTMB® provided a response HERE.

Michel Poletti eluded to the facts:

Indeed, the anti-doping procedure is so discreet that :
The organizer has no information about the doping controls operated on his race.
When a national or international federation make a decision, this decision is published on the web site of the federation, with no other announcement.
Thus, if an organizer want to know something about the anti-doping controls which were made on his race, he should need to look every day on the web site of the federations…or to wait to be warned by someone else…

It seems crazy to me that a race (any race) would not be informed of a positive test. How are the race meant to action on this? Like Michel Poletti implies above, he or the race would need to check monthly, weekly and/ or daily for results to be posted? This is a major flaw and I hope that we can somehow instigate from this a better procedure so that races and those in charge receive results asap!

I must stress that I don’t think that this positive test is a negative thing for UTMB®, on the contrary, it’s a positive! They have had tests, the tests have worked and the sport is a little cleaner.

What I am worried about is the protocols and procedure.

This morning I emailed the IAAF and I also found out that AFLD provided the testing procedures at UTMB®. The procedures are HERE but importantly look at the screen shot below:

AFLD_aftercontrols

By the above ‘After Controls’ one has to assume that Gonzalo Calisto was informed of his positive test in September 2015 (the above says, within 3 weeks maximum.) Calisto lives in Ecuador so if he requested a B sample this would take us to the middle of October but lets assume the worst and it was November.

What has happened since November 2015?

Luckily as I was asking theses questions (somewhat bemused and flabbergasted) the IAAF emailed me and they clarified the following points:

Information regarding the positive test and sanction for Mr. Calisto was included in the June 2016 IAAF newsletter. http://www.iaaf.org/about-iaaf/documents/iaaf-newsletter

The athlete is also added to the IAAF list of athletes currently serving a suspension: http://www.iaaf.org/about-iaaf/documents/anti-doping

In this case, the Testing and Results Management process was performed by the French Anti-Doping Agency (AFLD): https://www.afld.fr/ Normally we would expect that they would have informed the organisers but in this case as it was handled at a national level we do not have confirmation of this.

As you will see, some major flaws in my opinion. This is bad for the UTMB®, UTWT and ALL runners who want to compete on a level playing field.

It’s time to lobby for a change and YOU as runners, followers of the sport or whatever capacity you have as a fan need to ensure that we all act now and make sure that the following happens:

Positive tests are confirmed to the athlete asap
Due process is allowed for a B sample
The race, race director and management team are notified immediately
A press release is issued by the race and or organisation
IAAF, WADA, AFLD and so on list and make results public asap

I am still struggling to understand how it has taken till July for us all, UTMB® included to find out of a positive test and a ban that must have taken place in November, December at the latest.

I welcome your thoughts