IRONMAN vs ULTRA (Page 2)

I have done over 30 ultras including 50k's,  50milers 100k's and 100 milers,  I have completed three ironmans and there is no comparison..   an ultra (over 50 miler)  would be much harder...  physically and mentally as well.   During an IM you are never alone and people are cheering you...  that helps.   During an ultra you are in most cases by yourself...  and at times I have questions my sanity..   But it is a great sport...     

Do you guys collect your toenails too?    

I guess I always looked at a half ironman to be about the same as a 50k because my finishing time were about the same.  So I figure a Ironman would be about that of a 100k or 61 miles. 

In all honesty a lot of it has to your strengths and weaknesses.  IF your a poor runner but an awesome biker it maybe even closer to 50 miler. 

This user's post has been ignored.

I've done a 50 and Ironman. They were different kinds of tough in my opinion. Duringt he Ironman ( run portion) I was gleaming because I KNEW I was going to finish, even if I walked the whole run I could make the cut off. During the ultra however, I was TERRIFIED the last 10 miles of falling ( it was dark) and breaking an ankle. It was me and my pacer friend. There were not thousands cheering me on. I cried at the finish line of both however. Very emotional. The Ironman toom me 14 hours, 39 minutes and the 50 took me 13.5 hours.

+1. yep. haha. I didn't have ONE blister after my 50, and my toenails were all good to go. I'm thinking that won't be the case for the 100 in october haha.