Intro
The text below is not trying to be deliberately
provocative. What I am trying to do to is to see both sides of the debate
and to bring a global perspective into the context of the recent exchanges, manifestations,
boycotts, etc.
It's not about Skyrunning vs trail running either.
They are not the same thing and they don’t necessarily need to conflict. They
are set on different terrain and they have different values. I am a big,
big fan of Skyrunning. For me it's the coolest version of running around, but I
know many a trail runner at the World Trail running Championships in Annecy who
wouldn't be seen dead on a real Skyrace course, like Kima, for example.
Let's just accept that and let’s give both of these versions of off-road
running a future. They can both have World Championships, Skyrunning can be
more branded, with more money, cash prizes etc, whilst the World Trail Running Championships
can be run by a separate non-profit federation with its heart closer to
the original Olympic values. Like those held for other sports, the World Trail
Championships are about countries competing against each other in a big
international event. Whilst Skyrunning and trail running are separate in the
nature of terrain and perhaps their respective financing, parallels can also
exist - both should not stray into lapped courses, wide tracks or tarmac,
for example. And both need a proper system for drug testing.
As sports evolve organisations and federations form.
Companies also jump on the band wagon. A growing sport does need to be controlled
and organised to a certain level, we all agree on that. As the federations set up their respective series
and championships they inevitably don't get it right first time. Take Skyrunning
for example. They tried to go global a bit too quickly and as a consequence
ended up bringing inappropriate races into their circuit. (Les Templiers is a
pure and classic trail race. It has nothing in common with Skyrunning, yet
it was included in one of the early world Skyrunning series). The ISF
recognised their errors and are now returning to their (originally Italian
Alpine) roots with races like the Glencoe Skyline. This
evolution however takes time, organisation and a certain amount of trial
and inevitably error.
What do I think personally? I think having a World Championships
is very good thing. It brings credibility to the sport. National competitions
are great. It would be a shame to limit ourselves to “team” competitions being about shoe
maker X vs shoe maker Y. I also think that a separated (elite /
mass) start is a natural and correct approach for such an event. And finally, I believe that the best races
are the most natural ones with lots of small paths, mountains, nature...
They can be rough, rocky and a bit dangerous and fit into the Skyrunning
category and they can be smoother and more undulating, without necessarily big
mountain summits and ridges, and fit into a trail running category. I'll be on
the start line of both.
Finally, why am I not in Annecy? I was too late in
submitting my request to be considered for GB, and you know the protocols! :-)
So, now for the
crux of the debate: Certain "trail celebrities" are boycotting
the World Trail Champs this weekend. Why is that? And what is my perspective?
(in bold are some of the arguements we’re hearing. In
italics are my thoughts)
Because the Championship start is separated from the mass race start!
- Trail races
are about single track. If hundreds or thousands of enthusiastic trail runners
funnel straight into a single track it gets messy!
Because I can't
wear my branded clothing!
- Is it not a
proud moment to represent one's country? Don't worry; the countries don't have
to supply the shoes! A Championship race is about one country vs another, it's
not about Make X vs Make Y. Clogs vs Wellington boots.
Because it's
"elitist" and controlled by an independent Federation!
- The sport is
getting more financial backing; top athletes make money out of it. The sport
does need some regulatory bodies and importantly it needs doping control! The
IAAF, IAU, etc.. may well have some suit-clad odd-bods who may not be best
positioned to determine trail running's future (I’m not saying that necessarily
the case :-), but importantly, and contrary to some of the suggested
alternatives, it IS an independent organisation. The preference proposed by
many athletes seems to be a sport controlled by the shoe and gear
manufacturers. Now that feels like a more dangerous future to me. It means a
money-controlled future and with money comes mess, we know that. Remember that
when certain top trail runners speak, it is not necessarily their natural
voice, they could have been hypnotised by their marketing managers.
Because it's
too flat and easy!
- The 5 laps of
a forest in Wales were a joke and a slap in the face for the sport. Not
representative and certainly not a good advert. Trail running is not hamster
running. The Annecy course may have been modified, but it is nonetheless one hell of a step
in the right direction since the last Championships i.e. no laps, steep mountainous,
lot's of single track and some nice views!
