2021 Hardrock 100 Preview

Kailas logoCome the morning of Friday, July 16, 146 lucky runners will set off for 100 miles of beauty and challenge through southwestern Colorado’s San Juan Mountains in the Hardrock 100. Along the way, they’ll climb (and descend) 33,000 feet, all at elevations of up to 14,000 feet. The course switches direction with each event edition, and 2021 sees the route run in a counterclockwise direction.

Despite the insistence of some that it’s a ‘run’ rather than a ‘race,’ there’ll certainly be some at the front of both fields going for the win or another top position. This year’s edition will feature strong women’s and men’s races for the win, even if there’s not the competitive depth that the larger fields of other events allow. In the women’s race, we’ll see defending champ Sabrina Stanley challenged by Hardrock newcomer Courtney Dauwalter and three-time winner Darcy Piceu. The men’s returning champion, Jeff Browning, may have even taller task in holding off a pair of talented Hardrock first timers in François D’haene and Dylan Bowman. We dive into the details of each field below!

Squirrel's Nut Butter - logoAhead of the race, we’ll publish interviews with some of the race favorites and, of course, we’ll be covering the race live starting at 6 a.m. Mountain Daylight Time on Friday, July 16. Stay tuned!

A special thanks to Kailas for making our coverage of this year’s Hardrock 100 possible!

Thanks to Squirrel’s Nut Butter for their support of our Hardrock coverage.

2021 Hardrock 100 Women’s Preview

Let’s take a look at the top women running this year’s Hardrock 100.

Top Women

Despite only 16 of the 146 runners slated to start this year’s Hardrock at the time I’m writing this, it wouldn’t surprise me if three of this year’s overall top 10 were women. In fact, we could see a pair in the top five if things play out just so.

It’s also worth keeping Diana Finkel’s course record of 27:18:24 from 2009 in mind. She set the course record traveling in the counterclockwise direction, the same direction as this year’s event. It’s also fun to note that the three-fastest ever women’s times at Hardrock were run in this counterclockwise direction.

Courtney Dauwalter

Courtney Dauwalter

Although she’ll be a Hardrock rookie, Courtney Dauwalter (pre-race interview) has to be the women’s favorite at this year’s race. In recent years, she’s won the 2019 UTMB, 2019 Madeira Island Ultra Trail, 2018 Western States 100, and 2018 Ultra-Trail Mount Fuji 100 Mile. Just a few week ago, she set a new course record at the San Juan Solstice 50 Mile, run not far to the east of the Hardrock course. What’s more, Courtney now bases herself up at 10,200 feet in Leadville, Colorado, so she’s plenty accustomed to the thin air she’ll find along the Hardrock course.

Sabrina Stanley (pre-race interview) returns to Hardrock as the defending women’s champion, having won the 2018 race in 30:23. Since then, she’s won the Hurt 100 Mile (2019) and Diagonale des Fous (2019) along with the shorter Mount Cheaha 50k in February 2020 and Quest for the Crest 50k this May. Last year, Sabrina managed to set the women’s supported FKT for Nolan’s 14—twice. A resident of Silverton, Colorado, she’s fully acclimated to the altitude and knows the course well.

2017 Hardrock 100 - Darcy Piceu

Darcy Piceu

If there’s a current Queen of Hardrock, it’s Darcy Piceu (pre-race interview) with her three Hardrock wins (2012-14) among her seven finishes while she continues to be a near lock for the women’s podium any given year. Indeed, she finished second in 2015 and 2017, her two most recent runs at the race. More impressively, she has twice as many sub-30 hour Hardrock finishes (six) than another other woman (Diana Finkel has three), and, as far as consistency, Darcy has finished all seven of her Hardrocks between 28:57 and 30:15!? Back in 2018, Darcy won both the Andorra Ultra Trail and Angeles Crest 100 Mile. Darcy did battle a serious injury earlier this year, but bounced back with a win at the Jemez 50 Mile in late May and a second at the Squaw Peak 50 Mile in mid-June.

Meghan Hicks has a pair of Hardrock finishes, with a rough 39-hour finish in 2015 and an improved 34:25 in taking fifth in 2016. In 2016 and again in 2020, she set the then women’s supported FKT for Nolan’s 14. This spring, she took third at Scout Mountain 50 Mile. More important, she’s been living and training on the course since March.

More Women to Watch

  • Marta Fisher – 4th 2016 Ultra-Trail Harricana
  • Olga Nevtrinos – 1st 2018 IMTUF 100 Mile; 7th 2016 Cascade Crest 100 Mile

For the small number of women in the Hardrock 100 field, there’s a trio that adds plenty of experience to the mix. Betsy Kalmeyer, Betsy Nye, and Liz Bauer come into this year’s Hardrock 100 with 19, 16, and 10 finishes, respectively.

Notable Withdrawals

  • Alyson Kirk – 1st 2019 Lone Star, Hellbender, Cruel Jewel & Old Cascadia 100 Milers. She withdrew due to injury.

In Memoriam

Switzerland’s Andrea Huser was to make her Hardrock debut at the 2021 Hardrock 100, but sadly passed away in a fall while trail running last year. Among her many accomplishments were taking second at UTMB in 2016 and winning the Diagonale des Fous in 2016 and 2017. Her passion for adventure and competition led her to insatiably race across numerous sports, always doing so with a humble joy. Andrea visited Silverton in 2019 when the snow pack led to the race’s cancellation during which time she showed love and awe for the mountains that surrounded her.

2021 Hardrock 100 Men’s Preview

Here are the top men running this year’s Hardrock 100. It would take good conditions and an exceptional run, but at least the snow-free course is favorable when thinking of Kilian Jornet’s overall course record of 22:41:33 from 2014. Keep in mind that Kilian’s overall course record was set in the clockwise direction, the opposite of this year’s edition. The fastest a man has gone in this counterclockwise direction is 23:28:10, also by Kilian but in 2015. Interestingly and opposite of the women, the four-fastest ever men’s times at Hardrock were set in the clockwise direction.

Top Men

Francois D'haene - 2019 Madeira Island Ultra-Trail champion

François D’haene

While this will be his first time running the race, that makes France’s François D’haene (pre-race interview) no less of a favorite to win this year’s Hardrock. Why? He’d be on a very short list of best mountainous 100-mile trail runners in the world with three wins at UTMB (2012, 2014, and 2017) and four wins at Diagonale des Fous (2013, 2014, 2016, and 2018). Without Kilian Jornet, Xavier Thevenard, or, maybe, Jim Walmsley (he knows these mountains well) here, it’s François’s race to lose outside of the San Juan Mountains and the challenges they hold taking it from him. After a light 2020, François tuned up for Hardrock in taking third at the 112k Ultra Cabo Verde Trail in May. It’s worth noting that when snow canceled Hardrock in 2019, he came over and spent a few weeks training on the Hardrock course anyway and he’s back in the area acclimating and scoping the course for at least two weeks again this year.

After trying to get in for seemingly forever, Dylan Bowman (pre-race interview) will be another Hardrock rookie challenging for the men’s win. Bowman’s damn good at mountainous 100 milers and spent plenty of years living and training in the Colorado Rockies. Among the reasonably recent results that show his chops in the mountains are a third at Transgrancanaria in 2020, wins of Ultra-Trail Mount Fuji in 2016 and 2019, and a seventh at UTMB in 2017. While he lives in Portland, Oregon these days, he’s been living at altitude in Mammoth Lakes, California and training in the Sierra Nevada for much of the past month.

Jeff Browning - 2018 Hardrock 100

Jeff Browning

Jeff Browning (pre-race interview) returns to Hardrock as the defending champion, from winning in 26:20 back in 2018 following the disqualification of Xavier Thevenard. Among his three other Hardrock finishes, he took fourth in 25:42 in 2016 and fourth in 26:58 in 2014. Earlier this year, he won the Zion 100 Mile. Late last month, Browning dropped out midway through the Western States 100 due to dead quads and wanting to save something for Hardrock. In 21 years of running ultras, it’s only the second time he’s DNFed a race, with the other being due to a sprained ankle at UTMB 2015. Browning will be 49 years old on race day.

High-altitude 100 milers seem to suit Ryan Smith, who won Leadville in 2019 and High Lonesome in 2018. Going back a few years, Smith was eighth at UTMB in 2015 and 22nd there the following year. Other top results include fifth at the shortened to 47k Ultra-Trail Mount Fuji in 2016 and 16th at the 85k Trail World Championships at Penyagolosa in 2018.

One shouldn’t underestimate Trevor Fuchs on a mountainous 100-mile course. He’s won the Hurt 100 mile in 2020, taken second at the Bear 100 Mile in 2019, and won the Wasatch 100 Mile in 2016 and 2017. I’m looking forward to finally seeing Trevor race in person.

Although it’s been quite a while, Julien Chorier has twice run Hardrock, winning in 2011 in 25:17 and taking second to Kilian Jornet in 2014 in 25:07. This Frenchman may no longer be able to run that fast of a time, but he continues to have success, placing ninth at TDS and seventh at Ultra Pirineu in 2018 and finishing fourth at Transgrancanaria and 17th at UTMB in 2019. Earlier this year, Chorier took 13th at Transgrancanaria.

If you’re going to follow this year’s Hardrock, you should know Troy Howard, who finished third in 2018 after finishing second in both 2009 and 2013. One could be worried that he took 14th at the relatively small San Juan Solstice 50 Mile in late June, but he was 12th there in 2018 ahead of his third place at Hardrock. Troy simply knows what he needs to do for a good finish at Hardrock. I should add that Troy will be 48 years old on race day. That goes along with Browning at age 49, Smith at 42, and Chorier at 40. That’s a solid masters field right there!

Dominic Grossman

Dominic Grossman

More Men to Watch

  • Johnny Clemons – 1st 2017 Cruel Jewel 100 Mile; 3rd 2017 Pinhoti 100 Mile
  • Jamil Coury – 9th 2017 Hardrock; 4th 2018 Tahoe 200 Mile
  • Dominic Grossman – 3rd 2019 & 2017 Angeles Crest 100 Mile; 3rd 2018 Pine to Palm 100 Mile
  • Mick Jurynec – 10th 2018 Hardrock 100; 1st 2019 Superior 100 Mile
  • Nick Pedatella – 5th 2021 San Juan Solstice 50 Mile; 4th 2012 Hardrock 100
  • Aaron Saft – 1st 2018 Uwharrie 100k; 3rd 2019 Mount Mitchell Challenge; 2nd 2016 Canadian Death Race
  • Mike Wardian – 11th 2018 & 21st 2017 Hardrock 100
  • Bryan Williams –  6th 2016 Hardrock 100; Colorado Trail (Collegiate West variant) supported FKT

Notable Withdrawals

  • Grant Guise (New Zealand) – 13th 2017 & 10th 2016 Hardrock 100. He’s exercised the international deferral option until 2022.

Call for Comments

  • Who do you think will be the first woman and first man to finish?
  • Who do you think will surprise everyone at this year’s Hardrock?

There are 117 comments

  1. Celia

    Only 10% of the entries given to women is so disappointing. As a woman its hard to get excited about following Hardrock when the bias entry system hangs like a dark cloud over my perception of it.

    1. Dan

      Virtually the only way to get into Hardrock is to have already run Hardrock. Maybe someday they’ll change the lottery setup, but until then, there’s loads of other great hundred milers out there.

      1. Phillip

        Speedgoat maybe it is hard to imagine for you as a white male that an event which shows zero percent interest in an inclusive policy does not invite women to apply. Stop blaiming women (implicitly) for the low participation percentage. The underlying argument of “its their own fault if they don’t apply” which you present here, does not withstand causal mechanism of discrimination based on gender. We should be better than that as a running community.

        1. Joe G

          Can’t we just be sports fans who are jacked up to see Courtney presented with two real, big challenges in Sabrina and Darcy and the wildcard that is Meghan Hicks, and not focus on what the race doesn’t have? This is probably the most competitive upfront group this race has seen on the women’s side, isn’t that exciting?

          Hopefully it’s a barn burner and more women become interested in this race in future years, which will help the excitement build and continue that trend.

          1. Phillip

            Hey Joe,
            I could not agree more with you. Its an exciting race with an exciting field. I am looking forward to it.
            Nonetheless, if we call ourselves real sport fans that we owe it to the sport, to our community and to us to call out those issues who are not going the way we want it to. Because who is able to call themselves “just sport fans”? Its us who the sport is not discriminating against.

            And again as you are doing here, the issue is not that women need to be more interested. The barn burner would be a policy and mindset change. Its never the marginalized looking in from the outside who are at fault. Its us inside who need to push for change.

            1. Jesse

              Wow. You really are self-righteous. Pehaps you should do what you think is correct, and everyone else can do what they think is correct. Instead of lecturing the world and gesturing your own (supposed) moral purity for all to see, (which of course is self-aggrandizing) you can put your money where your mouth is, and stop telling others how to behave. Start your own race and set the parameters you see fit. Or do whatever else You might feel is appropriate. Until then keep your religion where it belongs; in your own personal life.

            2. SV

              I think there are some interesting points for the Hardrock board to consider here. The reality is that this is an individual event that is not really subject to any sort of governing body, so in the end all of this is totally up to the event organizers.

              Hardrock, it seems, is representative of a bygone era in ultrarunning. The sport was new, and niche, and it was pretty darn easy to get into any race that you wanted to. Times have changed, the sport has evolved, and increasingly it is no longer just a bunch of crazy idiots running really really far. There are sponsors, lotteries, race series, etc…

              The question that events like Hardrock, and the media that covers such an event, might need to ask themselves, is do they think that the sport is evolving in a way that is equitable for both women and men.

              Many of us were inspired to take up ultrarunning via the exploits of others. I know that Anton, and his blog, inspired me to test my limits on the trails. I am a man, and as such I would not pretend to know exactly what inspires women, but I would imagine that they are more likely to be inspired by someone who is more representative of themselves. Many of us are likely somewhat unaware of the sociological forces that lead us to ultrarunning, I’m sure that most of us like to think that we came up with the idea to run 100 miles all on our own.

              While there are many 100 mile races in the US these days, only a few of them receive extensive coverage. Hardrock is one of these events. It would seem like having more females participate at an event that garners national coverage would help to inspire other women to take up the sport. I know that watching the Giro D’Italia inspired me to take up cycling when I was a teenager (somehow, over 20 years later, there is still no 3 week tour for women).

              Hardrock does not have to change a damn thing, and I do understand the arguments to keep this historic event the same. Nevertheless, it would seem that some hard question need to be asked by both those who put on the race and those who cover the event.

        2. Josie

          So you think more women don’t apply to Hardrock because they are discriminated against? Who is doing the discriminating or are you implying societal gender discrimination affects whether or not a woman will apply to Hardrock? I don’t get this argument. These are not rhetorical questions, I’m truly interested in your answer.

          I know plenty of female runners, although most are in in their late 30-50s, and I have never once heard any of them say that they don’t want to apply for a race because of their gender or because they feel discriminated against.

          Sorry, but this argument sounds a little to woke to me. All of you white men are bad.

          The Hardrock old boys club bashing comes up every year. If you don’t like the way they run the race, find another. Every year that I don’t get drawn for Western States I get annoyed that they reserve almost 1/4 runner slots for sponsor, special consideration, etc. runners. I think this more egregious than than the Hardrock lottery system, yet very few people complain about it.

          Nice comment AJW. Advice we should all take.

          1. Sean

            I think the main argument to be made is that the way Hardrock’s allocates their entries is heavily skewed towards people who have ran the race before. Since the competitors in the initial years were all (mostly? I’m not fully up to date on the history admittedly) men, continuing to use past finishes as the main selection criteria results in the skewed gender ratio that we see today. It would be interesting to see (although probably very tough to gather) the breakdown of everyone who hypothetically qualifies for the “Veteran” and “Else” categories, regardless of if they apply for a specific year. Those two categories are given 90 of the 155 entries, and I would bet those who could be considered for them are VERY disproportionately male. This of course isn’t active discrimination, and people are welcome to make their qualifying criteria as they please (likewise, people can choose where to race) but the fact of the matter is that a repercussion of the current qualifying standards is a disproportionately gender skewed field.

        3. speedgoat

          geeeesh. people are just too sensitive. My 10% was a guess. I did not go thru the list and count em’ all. I have better things to do with my time. I don’t blame women for anything, I love women. I’m also wondering where I say, “it’s their own fault if they don’t apply”
          Hope everyone has a great race and women have a higher finisher percentage than the men do. I’ll end it with. “Geeesh”.

        1. Quinn

          Gina, is there any chance that the Hardrock Board will release data on the lottery for people to hack through? In 2018 I did a rough hand count, and it seemed that the lottery was roughly in line with percentage of applicants (M/F) for each bin (Vet/else/never). The law of small numbers would make me want to look at things over multiple years. Additionally, It seemed that there were a lower number of Female applicants in the “else” category than I would have expected based on the Vet/Never percentages. I have guesses, but…. Finally when are the new policies going to be officially announced? As a never, (and we all want to do Hardrock!) I guess I am curious and worried about how the gender policy (which seems pretty on point) interacts with the bins.

      2. Mary Prince

        Maybe b/c the ultra female runners I know have said”F***it I’m never getting into this race since they give the slots to all the former female runners who have done this race over & over & over again. They aren’t putting their names into the lottery. What’s the point? Never getting in.

    2. Paul S.

      16 women and 130 men sounds like an event from the 1970s. Organizers need to do something to get more women in the race.

  2. Frederic

    And here are the Counter clock wise course records splits for the men to beat (Kilian Jornet 2015 23:28:10)

    Cunningham (Mile 9.3) 01:53
    Maggie (Mile 15.4) 03:27
    Pole Creek (Mile 19.7) 04:14
    Sherman In / Out (Mile 28.8) 05:53 (1 min rest)
    Burrows (Mile 32.6) 06:34 (1 min rest)
    Grouse (Mile 42.2) 09:07 (5min rest)
    Engineer (Mile 48.7) 10:35 (4min rest)
    Ouray (Mile 56.6) 11:54 (6min rest)
    Governor (Mile 64.5) 13:29 (4min rest)
    Kroger (Mile 67.8) 14:31 (8 min rest) Didn’t it took so long to drink a shot of tequila ;-)
    Telluride (Mile 72.8) 15:27 (10 min rest)
    Chapman (Mile 82.1) 18:34 (9min rest)
    Kamm Traverse (Mile 89.1) 20:42 (4 min rest)
    Putnam (Mile 94.7) 22:21
    Finish (Mile 100.5) 23:28:00

  3. Beth

    Courtney for the win (and hey, let’s go with overall!), Megan in top 3, D-Bo for top man, Browning for top master and Jam-Jam top 10. Best of luck folk! I’m very much hoping someone takes some on the course footage

    1. Jonsie

      I agree. If François doesn’t have a great day, I can easily see Courtney with the overall win.

      My prediction.
      1. François
      2. Courtney
      3. everyone else

  4. Andrew

    I don’t understand how we still celebrate a race that so obviously disadvantages the admittance of women. I’m shocked that the Forest Service still permits what is essentially a men’s only race.

  5. Noah Simcoff

    If Francois and Courtney finish 1-2, thats it, I’m switching to baggy shorts. They’ll go great with my new bucket hat!

  6. Dan

    I appreciate that you do write that this should be considered a “run” and not a race, and that’s the insistence of the organizers. Hardrock has been and will continue to be a club for old white guys who run the race every year. The lottery so disadvantages Nevers and puts huge emphasis on repeat veterans to run. The truth that only 10% of applicants are women should be a wakeup call. While trail and ultra running continue to grapple with the fact that the sport is dominated by white males, some organizers like those for High Lonesome are trying to be more inclusive.
    If Hardrock is interested in diversity in both gender/race AND competition (the above preview shows it’s a race against a few long time vets and Dale’s personal picks), the current lottery setup needs to be scrapped and rewritten.

    1. JacobsA

      @Dan couldn’t agree more, it’s the country club and many longtime racers who fight to make cutoffs yearly should gracefully let the new generation enjoy it. They can contribute in so many other meaningful ways.

  7. Stephanie

    Too bad Alyson Kirk won’t be able to run. I think she’d shake up the women’s podium on a course like this. Hopefully she can recover from injury and come back for the 2022 race.

    1. Patrick

      Troll comment, but to state the obvious: this is true of most trail races, and there is clearly something special about running the race itself, as evidenced by the fact that thousands of people repeatedly spent hundreds of dollars and go through multiple lottery rounds to do it.

  8. AJW

    Dear Friends, I’d like to preface my comments by saying I have no official connection with the Hardrock 100 nor do I pretend to understand how and why they make the decisions that they do. However, I am also a two time finisher of the race who might be considered by some to be an “old white guy” who happens to love the event, the San Juans, Southwestern Colorado, and everything that the race stands for.

    I know that the Hardrock Board realizes that they have a disproportionately small number of female entrants every year and that they have attempted to address the issue of being ‘unfriendly to women’ by appointing two well known trail runners to their Board and striving to increase the number of female entrants by expanding their qualifying races. Additionally, in recent years, while continuing to strive to honor those who’ve run the race before by reserving a certain number of spots for them, they have also increased the number of “Never” spots several times over the past three years.

    Finally, I would like to respectfully suggest that we spend the next week celebrating the Hardrock 100 and not bashing it. The event has suffered two consecutive cancellations and as a result the “Hardrock Family” is gathering next week for the first time since 2018. Having just returned from a similar gathering at Western States, I am certain that the coming together of the community will be a moment of healing for everyone involved. This is a time to come together and celebrate not to continue to sow divisiveness and negativity. There is too much of that in other parts of the world these days.



  9. scott

    Withdrawal seems like an odd word choice for Andrea.

    “After trying to get in for seemingly forever, Dylan Bowman will be another Hardrock rookie challenging for the men’s win.”

    I can only imagine how hard waiting 2.5 years to get into Hardrock must have been…Truly personifying the spirit of ultra to be able to endure that long. :)

    1. Amy

      Scott – I would imagine Dylan Bowman has been entering the Hardrock lottery every year since his first qualifying 100 miler – which was likely years ago. So to finally get in after several years of trying, then waiting another two, probably felt like forever. That’s just my take. Anyways, GO D-BO!

        1. Bryon Powell

          Indeed, it would have been a bit over 2.5 years since Dylan’s name was first drawn for the 2019 Hardrock in December 2018 before he’ll finally be starting it in July 2021; however, he’s been putting his name in the lottery for plenty of years before that.

    2. Bryon Powell

      If you’ve got a better title than withdrawals for a category that broadly encompasses anyone who was at one time entered in a particular race but was unable to run it for whatever reason, let me know. I just used the term we’ve always used for that section with no disrespect meant to Andrea. Hell, I’d be running in her memory next weekend if I’d not withdrawn from the race.

      1. cory feign

        Here’s an idea for a better title: add a separate header called “In Memoriam” along with a note of honor and/or condolence, and mention that this person would have run this year.

  10. ET

    True ultra legend Scott Mills running for his 10th finish at Hardrock. Got his 2000 mile buckle at States in 2019. This will be the icing on the cake. Bring it home Scotty!

  11. Andy

    The woke bashing of Hardrock is truly insufferable. Without those terrible, selfish vets who supported the race in its infancy it wouldn’t exist today. Even if you made it a Western States style lottery it doesn’t change the fact there are 140 slots (less the 2 winners) and several thousand applicants, so it’s still going to be next to impossible to get into. Women, like everyone else, have always been welcome to sign up and enter Hardrock. If you want to run it, run a qualifier and toss your name in the hat. As a 5x Never lottery entrant who had never been drawn, it sucks, but you know what would be more unfair? Giving spots out based on gender to appease the loud (on social media) but in reality small woke crowd. I’d also be curious to know, how many of those bashing the race have gone down to spectate, volunteer, etc.? If you haven’t I recommend you do, it will give you a different perspective

    1. Josie

      Best post yet – especially the part about volunteering.

      Here’s another suggestion. How about any wokesters who are in Hardrock give up their spot in solidarity for the oppressed? Any takers?? I didn’t think so.
      I can’t wait until this movement dies.

      1. Somantha

        Just saw this on Twitter:

        “16 of the 146 runners” are women. I boycott this race, won’t enter the lottery unless they fix their outdated #OldBoysClub entry system. #HR100 @hardrock100
        (Note: The event itself is awesome & I support every runner in the field. But I encourage men to boycott, women to enter.)

        Solidarity? Maybe.

        Dear Mr. Pietari,
        Please keep boycotting the lottery. One less person to potentially take my place.

        1. Andrew

          What I don’t understand about this is that Kyle Pietari is running the Run Rabbit Run… 361 entrants. 63 women. Only 17% of the field. And I know of nothing that RRR is doing to specifically increase the representation of women.

          1. Frederic

            Ca$h is king :-)

            In all seriousness, it’s a good question. Maybe HR100 is an easy target and he forgot to check the RRR diversity stats ?

            1. Andrew

              Also, to be fair to Kyle, I just checked and my numbers are for Tortoise only. However, the full picture is essentially the same:

              Tortoise: 62/360 women -> 17%
              Hare: 21/114 women -> 18%
              Overall: 83/474 women -> 17.5%

              Considering the HR100 preference for veterans, which means its demographics lag 2021 ultrarunning trends I’m finding it more and more impressive that there are 11% women in HR100 when there is only 17% women in a major qualifier race.

              It is unfortunate that this does discourage some from the HR100 excitement, but the 11% number means that many women who run HR qualifiers are not discouraged, and are continually entering the lottery and eventually getting into the race!

    2. Olga King

      Plus 1 on Andy’s comment. ‘Nuf said.
      Olga, a real female, who paced, crewed, marked the course, swept the course, and spectated – and who wishes ALL involved in this thing a solid day lacking lightening on the ridges.

    3. Sarah A

      I have volunteered at Hardrock and just from observation I would say that 50% or more of volunteers are women, nearly all with the aim of getting extra tickets in the lottery so they can get into the race. The thing is that the only volunteers that get extra tickets are AS captains and guess who gets those spots? I would have loved to volunteer and spectate Hardrock again this year but I’m not putting my energy towards an organization where I don’t see women represented. I’m volunteering for other races that ACTUALLY put their money where their mouth is.

      1. Andy

        You’ve clearly never read the specifications around extra tickets for volunteering….Aid station volunteers (who aren’t captains) get an extra ticket for every 5 years of service. You can also get an extra ticket for participating in both days of trail work. I’d agree that these could/should be updated (e.g every 2 years of volunteering instead of 5 and more specifics around tickets for marking/clearing). However, your comment that aid station captains are the only people who get extra tickets is untrue.

        1. Sarah A

          Still, to volunteer for 5 years(!) with the hopes of getting a slightly better chance is ridiculous. We can say, they should do this and they should do that, but the truth is that they don’t. The boards recent concessions are all lip service with no teeth to fix the real problem. They don’t want to make any sacrifices that would jeopardize their ability to run the race in perpetuity. There is a protected class at Hardrock and it is not women.

          1. Andy

            The vet “protected class” you refer to does include women. It sounds like you just want special/preferential treatment simply because you’re a women. As I acknowledged originally, being a never sucks, but you shouldn’t get special treatment or preference in this (or any race lottery) because of your gender, period.

      2. Brad Bishop

        Sarah, can you tell me more about your perspective on gender equity in aid station captains at Hardrock? As the Aid Station Director, I have been the recruiter of aid captains since 2016, and 10 of the 14 aid captains that are currently in place are my recruits, so any problems in this area are directly my fault.

        Of the 14 aid stations in the field this year, we had 7 with male captains, 5 with female captains, and 2 with male/female significant-other co-captainship. It would have been 6/6/2, but one of my female captains had to withdraw 3 weeks before race day and nominated her (male) lieutenant to take her place.

        One other detail to note – I am also the one who successfully lobbied for the change starting with 2017’s lottery that aid captains can transfer their service ticket to a team member if they chose not to use it themselves. (I acknowledge this can cut both ways.)

        You perceive there is a problem with gender equity among Hardrock aid captains, which disturbs me. Either perception doesn’t match reality, or reality still falls short, and I appreciate anything else you have to share.

  12. Andy

    The woke bashing of Hardrock is truly insufferable. Without those terrible, selfish vets who supported the race in its infancy it wouldn’t exist today. Even if you made it a Western States style lottery it doesn’t change the fact there are 140 slots (less the 2 winners) and several thousand applicants, so it’s still going to be next to impossible to get into. Women, like everyone else, have always been welcome to sign up and enter Hardrock. If you want to run it, run a qualifier and toss your name in the hat. As a 5x Never lottery entrant who had never been drawn, it sucks, but you know what would be more unfair? Giving spots out based on gender to appease the loud (on social media) but in reality small woke crowd. I’d also be curious to know, how many of those bashing the race have gone down to spectate, volunteer, etc.? If you haven’t I recommend you do, it will give you a different perspective

    1. Alberto

      Great comment Andy. I was going to post something rude to the wokesters who like to make up a bunch of drama and ruin the vibe, but your comment was perfect.

    2. SageCanaday

      Andy I think you’d be surprised by how large the “woke” crowd (whatever that means exactly?) is in the MUT Running community these days. The sport inevitably evolves much like society and rules and procedures will constantly be questioned, addressed and changed. That is just a natural process. Sure, a lot of people generally don’t like a lot of change….they like to hold on to traditions and the nostalgia of the past and how things “have always been done.” Maybe bury their head in the sand and ignore how the rest of the world changes around them. Which is great (for some), but it’s simply unrealistic to think that people who might question the “status quo” are necessarily wrong or being “insufferable”. There is an interesting irony in the MUT Running community (especially the longer distance ultra crowd in the US) sometimes when it comes to niches of exclusivity while at the same time putting up a facade of being “open and welcoming to all.”

      1. SageCanaday

        And to all the commenters (above: “Andy” and “Jose”) who are complaining about people being “woke” and speaking up…what do you think the word “woke” actually means to a lot of educated people in society? People that care about social justice? Calling out inequalities? Having more diversity in the sport?
        Sheesh, tough crowd here. I feel like I’m posting on LetsRun.com.

        1. Andy

          Sage, how many ways do you want to cut people up? Gay, black, Hispanic, Asian, men, women, etc., you can go on forever. When will there be “enough” of them in this or any other race? If you want to sign up run a qualifier and toss your name in. I’m just sick of the constant whining. Also, being “educated” doesn’t necessarily mean you’re smart or possess common sense. By your logic, yoga studios should be holding a certain number of spots for men in each class since it’s an historically women-majority activity. Or is that ok since it’s not white men in the majority? By “woke” I’m talking about people who view themselves as perpetual victims. In the 1950s, McCarthism led people to think communism was hiding behind every corner. Now, it’s sexism and racism using behind every corner to be used as the excuse. I truly believe most people (especially in trail running) are trying their hardest to be welcoming and nice to others. If you spent less time looking for negatives and more time looking for the good in people, I guarantee you’ll be happier. On a side note, if you live in Boulder (I used to live there) you might want to take a seat for the diversity and inclusion debate as you choose to live in one of the whitest, wealthiest, and least diverse places in Colorado.

        2. TG

          Sage, in all seriousness I am curious about what you (and others who have posted here) have actually done to address the social justice issue. I see a lot of tokenism when it comes to athletes addressing this issue (ie. posts on Instagram, message boards, etc.) but very little action. You are a coach, have you volunteered your time to mentor/coach students on a track or xc team at an inner-city high school? I am sure North High School in Denver would love to have some help. If Hardrock (or any ultra) is the hill you want to die on in regards to social justice, I think you may be misguided in the cause. Caring about and calling out inequalities and social justice is easy, making true change is pretty damn hard.

          1. SageCanaday

            I wouldn’t underestimate the power of social media influence (and even posting online) in this day and age.
            It is interesting when people say “you need to take action” and “make change”…but isn’t posting online (especially if one has their largest influence/audience online) “taking an action?” Social media can be a powerful tool for change actually. Haven’t we seen that happen quite a bit in the last 5 years or so?

            I’m merely pointing out how defensive people are getting on here with their anonymous and fairly critical comments (and apparently not using the term “woke” in nearly the same context/understanding that many would…which adds to the misunderstandings IMO). But try posting under your real name if you want more credibility and actually take a stand for what you write.

            But since you ask me for specific examples of personal “action” though: The biggest charity donation that our coaching company makes most years is to “SOS Outreach”..helping provide opportunities for underprivileged youth for outdoor recreation activities that might usually be out of their financial reach. We try to support more minority groups in the sport in general that have more barriers to entry and have faced discrimination in the past. It’s a small step and never enough (and yes, I should personally donate my time as well [I haven’t]…but again I know providing free, educational content on Youtube can also reach more people too..even in lower socioeconomic areas and a way to “coach virtually” online). It can simply start with exposure, education and an inspiration/passion for the sport we all love.

            But this is way off point. The interesting dynamic I see above is mainly about the “traditional system” of the Hardrock lottery entry and how it yields a disproportionate number of Women that will be able to gain entry. Gina cited above that Women make up more than the 10% of lottery applicants. Karl said “about 10%”. The truth is, I don’t know the exact numbers, but I’d say (from a purely quantitative standpoint) the “lottery system” as it stands is very interesting in that of course it would continually yield disproportionately smaller numbers of not only females, but also “newbies” in general. That is just a fact.

        3. H.D. Thoreau

          “Educated people.” You gave your snobbery away. Stop spreading poison. Focus on love, Sage. Love does not countenance dividing us up — pitting “educated” and “uneducated,” black and white, female and male, gay and straight, etc. Christ, you live in the one of the most prosperous towns in the world. Get out and live in the hood for a while. You will see your tropes about blacks may not be so “educated.”. Treat everyone the same regardless of their differences. Not all of us are educated like you. Some of us like it that way. Have some self-awareness.

          1. Sage Canaday

            @ “Thoreau”…(so are you related to a Thoreau and that is your real family name?…or do you use that as a fake user name?). If the latter is true that would be kind ironic as you are telling me about being “snobby” and giving me a hard time for using the word “educated”? But I digress…

            Again, I’m going to respect people more that actually post under their real name and take a stand for what they say.

            But I agree with you! We should “Focus on Love.” For sure Running unites us all and is a great celebration and gift.
            But I disagree with what you said in that I was/am: “spreading poison.” Little harsh, no?

            I’m simply pointing out that people have a wide range here on what they think the word “woke” actually means…and that has lead to disagreements. And realize when I say “education” that does not imply a college or high school degree.

            I’m also here to support those that point out how the current lottery system of Hardrock would inherently (disproportionately) limit Women as well as Newbies upon gaining entry. Is that wrong? Can we not write about and question things?

            But then you question me by Where I Live [and What I’ve Lived For…yes, I know poor Thoreau reference there!]?. Do you know where I’ve lived? That really is beside the point. But I grew up in rural Oregon, lived in New York and also lived and worked in the Detroit Metro area. Again though, that has no relevance to the discussion and facts at hand.

            Listen, we’re all biased and we’re all influenced by where we live as well as our family/friends/peers. I may not be “self-aware” enough by your standards apparently…and if you want to question my “self awareness” by what I write on here that’s fine…fair game! Inevitably though, since Running is a microcosm of Life, there will be societal discussions outside of just a simple “Vibe”…and in my book that is okay.

            I wish you the best!

      2. Paul

        Very well said Sage. I just follow online and was surprised and amazed to see just 16/130 in one of the worlds top events? And to question that is to ‘ruin the vibe’?

        I’d be interested to know what irunfar’s position is? I can’t think of another event of this size (with global sponsors) that would think 16/146 is justifiable – is The Hardrock100 a special case?

        1. Bryon Powell

          I’m not sure that iRunFar has a position, but, personally, I think Meghan and I hope that in the relatively short term Hardrock evolves such that its starting line makeup reflects the gender breakdown of its applicants. Longer term, we hope the event will work on a community level to more generally work to help increase the number of percent of women who apply to the race.

  13. Fegy

    Hey all…I’ll be captaining the finish line aid station again and I can’t wait to see the finishers come through, as well as the greater Hardrock Family again. I’ve missed you all the past few years.

    Does anyone know if the post-race PhD (post hardrock depletion) mile will again be taking place on the track? If so, I’m definitely up for it again!

  14. TB

    I would really like it if the men stayed out of the ‘women in ultras’ discussion. As long time female ultra trail runner, it would be so nice if the guys just focused on trying to be men. We women are doing just fine. I think it is men we miss, real ones. I see Courtney running first or second. 3 women in the top 10 and WS… we’ll have at least three in the top ten in Silverton next weekend. Dudes! we clearly don’t need your help. To all the women running: run your hearts out. I know we always do. Thank you Meghan and Bryon for the discussion. Hardrock should stay hardrock and some people can create other races if they would like to change the methodology or rules. Have at it kids, and maybe eat a piece of meat – – you are after all in the Rocky Mountains. Peace out.

    1. SageCanaday

      But what does “eating a piece of meat” have anything to do with this discussion of “Men” and “Women”? – and why would that be influenced by being in the Rocky Mountains? Puzzled by this comment.

      1. TB

        Nothing at all…. I was totally being silly at that point. It was late on my hot long run day. I could/should have said have a beer instead :)

  15. Alberto

    Sage, I will agree with you about the comments resembling Letsrun. Letsrun is populated by trolls who log in anonymously and ruin the vibe of the original spirit of the site. I come to this site because I am a part of the large trail community and I enjoy reading about these awesome events. I support the people who come to this site and just want the good vibes and to live vicariously through the amazing performances of those who are doing the races. They just want it to be about the race. Why bring all this exogenous bad vibe into it? This past year has been tough enough for too many. If one is passionate about all of these social injustices, then be real about it and do something that actually makes a real difference rather than ruining the spirit here. I’m willing to bet that many won’t do very much outside of complaining.

  16. Alberto

    Thank you Andy. Some of us just want it to be about the race and running. Safe is right that the comments can be like reading Letsrun, but not in the way he may be insinuating. Most of us just want it to keep to nice vibe.

  17. Evan K

    Watch out for Ryan Smith, he’s had an amazing training cycle and just keeps getting fitter with age! Also, for the sake of accuracy, Ryan finished UTMB in 8th in 2015 (not 9th). It would be incredibly tough to bet against Francois for the win, as he’s so proven with the big mountain races. Otherwise, Nick Pedatella is also in great shape and I believe he’ll surprise some people come race day.

    On the women’s side, it will be amazing to see Sabrina and Courtney battle for the win. My guess is Courtney will go out fast and will be getting splits under CR pace. On the same token, it looks like it’s shaping up to be a potentially hot day for Hardrock standards, and so I think it will be a matter of who has the most resilience and ability to manage.

    1. Bryon Powell

      Corrected. Thanks for the catch. I’m guessing I based that placing on data that didn’t reflect Gonzalo Calista’s later disqualification from that race due to a doping violation.

  18. Paul

    Woah with all the gender stuff… how about-

    Anyone who puts Hardrock and race in the same sentence… it’s not a survival fest at some point?

    AND as Bryon has pointed out – it’s the baggy shorts edition. Guessing someone’s going to count how many of those hats are going to be seen. Francois had one 3+ years ago in a race I cannot remember – it was on an island. He wasn’t in a deck chair with chilled drink in hand at the time.

  19. Paul

    If you are against increasing female participation in Hardrock just come out and say it. Attacking ideas as “woke” or people as “wokesters” is just an ad hominin attack that contributes nothing.

    Obviously the field size is fixed so increasing female participation in an substantial way will likely mean fewer veterans and elses. Is that fair? I don’t know. I think so. The current lottery rules aren’t necessarily any fairer just because they are the current rules.

    I did a spot check of some of the 2019 Hardrock qualifier races finisher makeup:

    Angeles Crest 100: 25 women / 155 finishers (16%)
    Tahoe 200: 28 women / 149 finishers (18%)
    Bear 100: 44 women / 204 finishers (22%)
    Run Rabbit Run 100: 31 women / 178 finishers (17%)

    Other online sources suggest female participation in ultras (all distances) is about 20-25%. So Hardrock isn’t that far off. Only 10-15 more female participants needed to reach industry norms.

    It would be nice if the board came out and said something like “We believe female participation is critical to the long term success and growth of ultrarunning and therefore as leaders in the sport have set a goal to achieve 25% female participation at Hardrock by 2026 and here is our roadmap to get there.”

    1. Brian

      A logical first step would be to get rid of pacers and to add 50-100 more runners to the field. All of the additional slots would go to the “nevers” which would give the “nevers” a better chance of getting in and probably increase female participation.

      1. Frederic

        It’s a good idea that I have thought of for several years now but I always heard back that pacers = safety for the runners and that they would not modify that.

        The other argument is that adding runners means adding crews and vehicles for which the area cannot support.
        Though one could also suggest that they limit the crew (example UTMB) to remedy this issue

        1. Bryon Powell

          Also, not to argue either away, but adding 100 entrants would significantly change the runner experience. As it stands, those pacers are effectively paired with a runner, so late in the race, there are never more than 145 runner units on the course (and likely less than that). That results in some solitude on the course. That solitude would be lowered by 195 or 245 runner units (even if all solo) on the course.

          Having experienced that (with and without a pacer), it’s meaningful.* Meaningful enough for that to be a deciding factor? Maybe not, but certainly at least a small consideration.

          * I think the solitude also makes the interactions with other runners all the more meaningful. It’s possible that I remember every one of them from Virginius (~mile 35) on during my 2018 Hardrock.

  20. Noah

    For those interested, there’s a Trail Sisters women of Hardrock discussion Wednesday July 14 3pm? that will be live streamed on the TS Instagram account. I’m looking forward to it and excited to hear their thoughts.

  21. Evan K

    Because so many comments have asked about this, here are the crude stats I saved from the 2019 Hardrock lottery (may not be perfect, but pretty close):

    Male: 2,106 applicants (84% represented in the lottery, 89% in the ’21 race), Female: 410 (16% in the lottery, 11% in the ’21 race)

    Nevers: 2,223 (89% represented in the lottery, 31% represented in the race, 2% of applicants to race slots)
    Else: 227 (9% represented in the lottery, 46% represented in the race, 29% of applicants to race slots)
    Veterans: 37 (1% represented in the lottery, 23% represented in the race, 89% of applicants to race slots)

    The 3 lottery groupings are of course intentionally designed (by the HR board) to ensure that all race experience levels are represented in the actual race. However, invariably by that design it will massively favor veterans and massively underfavor those that have never run the race (given the size of these groups in the lottery are vastly different). Because the current lotteries are only split by race experience, other demographic variables (such as gender) can naturally fall in or out of proportion to the lottery size since there are no assigned quotas or separate lotteries to any of these groups to ensure representation.

    Like WS, HR has been dealing with a math problem for years…..a tiny numerator (race size) to a massive denominator (# of qualified lottery applicants). Now, they could switch to one big lottery like WS, but then they would need to be ok with and adjust their philosophy with valuing race tenure as the most important variable for race representation (knowing that “else” and “veterans” will end up with the same probability since everyone would now be in the same pool). I will say in fairness that even if the 3 lottery groups were combined into 1 the probabilities would still be massively difficult, but there wouldn’t be any extra favoring to tenure.

    Then of course there could be a decision to separate lotteries by gender (or some other demographic category the race board deems important), which on the gender equation would ensure an x number of females (and males) get into the race. High Lonesome has implemented this practice.

    It’s a complicated problem. I personally prefer the WS lottery (one big lottery, building probability the more you qualify and apply). The math issue will always make probabilities difficult, but it’s really a decision for the HR board to identify what is most important to them (right now with the lottery design ensuring representation by race tenure is the most important thing, whereas a race like High Lonesome has made the decision that gender representation is a priority).

  22. Matt

    I know many good people are involved (including iRunFar) but Hardrock is the ultrarunning equivalent of Augusta National. Best of luck to the 16 women who are lucky enough to be graced with an entry.

  23. r

    Interesting discussion. I just checked the Ouray 100 entrants list (a race of similar difficultly / location / terrain / scenery) and there are 25/125 female entrants, or 20% of the field. This race is many multiples easier to get into than Hardrock (no lottery) and even has a larger cash prize for the top female ($1250) vs the top male ($1000).

  24. Definitely not a white male

    High Lonesome’s lottery system is kind of a joke. Over 90% of female applicants got in, and around 20% of male applicants got in. They needed a PHD in stat to do that? For that reason, I’ve dropped off their waiting list. Why can’t we just run without regards to gender, race, age, weight, height, or any other non running related divisions?

  25. Stephen Patterson

    Simply create an equal amount of female and male positions in the event: 73 male and 73 female positions, by allowing the entry system too accommodate for this. Two separate lotteries? This makes sense as there is a winner for each gender, so there should be an equal amount of female and male entrant opportunities. If after a specified cut off time, one or both are not filled, then allow any extra male or female runners to fill the gap. My two cents worth.

    1. Andrew

      Is there a reason you feel that HR should address just one protected class with your lottery change proposal?

      There are 0 entrants under the age of 30, despite strong past performances by young folks such as 21 year old Dakota Jones placing 2nd in 2011 or 26 year old Mike Foote placing 3rd in 2010.

      In fact there are only 29 entrants (20% of the field) under the age of 40. Other major HR100 qualifiers such as Run Rabbit Run has 55% of the field under the age of 40.

      1. Frederic

        Agree with Andrew here.
        Why separate the lottery just between women and men ?
        What about indigenous ? or even international runners (the only international I can think of are F d”haene and J. Chorier) ?

        1. Bryon Powell

          I don’t know how many, but there were a bunch more international runners who had entry into this year’s race. Due to the ongoing challenges around Covid, they were offered deferment and at least some took it.

  26. Gary Aronhalt

    I love Courtney, but to call her the out and out favorite over and against the defending champ who lives and trains on the course year round? I don’t know…

    Sabrina has shown an ability to thrive in big, tough events.

    I think the women’s race is where it’s at this year.

    Don’t be surprised if that record comes way down, and it’s a close one throughout, and that both of them might sneak into the top 5.

    1. Scott G

      I agree – the women’s race is where it’s at! Sabrina ran 30:23 in 2018, which was the slowest winning time since 2008 (and slower than any of Darcy’s finishes – a true credit to her consistency!). Certainly she has accomplished a lot since then, and it will be interesting to see what she can do. But Courtney has perhaps even more impressive results in the past couple of years – and has proven she can win at some of the biggest events (UTMB, Western States).

      1. Gary Aronhalt

        Yes, @Scott G! That’s a great stat to observe about Sabrina’s winning time… I sense a ferocity of focus in her, though, not just from the iRunFar interview, but even going back to conversations she’s had with others, too.

        I’m stoked to watch it unfold!

  27. Andrew Roberts

    Skimmed through this, and I gather as a result that a poster’s claim that 10% of applicants are women is too low – do we know what the true figure is?

    Also if someone uses the term ‘woke’ it’s a sure sign that they are being asked to reflect on their own privileged status and find the experience unpleasant.

    1. Frederic

      What does “woke” mean anyway ? True genuine question…. UrbanDictionary gives a clue but I dont understand exactly how people use it here towards HR100

      1. Andrew Roberts

        I think it means roughly what ‘politically correct’ meant a while back. I think the term began in the black community so it’s particularly egregious that it’s been co-opted as a derogatory term by, generally, white people

  28. Delia

    Please, let’s all cool it with the ad hominem attacks. It doesn’t make for a productive debate, no matter what you believe about the proportion of women’s representation in the race. Please remember I Run Far’s comment policy, and generally try to represent yourself in the way you’d like to be known in real life – would you talk to your friends that way, or would you make that comment to Meghan and Bryon’s face? (Would you say it to Meghan’s face during her taper week??) I will however respectfully disagree with AJW’s request in content, but not spirit – it’s not bashing the race to have a substantive debate about its values. Races are one of the public expressions of the values of the ultrarunning community, so we all have at least a tiny stake in that. (but let’s keep it to debate and discussion, and not bashing)

    As a spectator/fan, I just don’t find it that exciting to follow a race that has so few women, and where the top competition is drawn predominantly from members of a club that’s nearly impossible for outsiders to join. That limits the field of top competitors, as well as the rest of the pack. I still want to see every one of those amazing runners have an awesome day (or days) out there, and I can’t wait to see what Courtney can do. I know that I Run Far will do an amazing job covering the Run, but the exclusivity of the field makes it look more like a royal wedding than an exciting sporting event. I’ll glance over and take a look at the hats, then wander off.

    Hardrock is a private entity and gets to do what it wants within the confines of the law, and has no obligation *to me* to create a fascinating spectator experience with amazing competition, etc etc. But like any race, the entry procedure communicates the Run’s values to the rest of the world. Hardrock communicates the value of maintaining continuity of the experience from year to year, including continuity of the pool of participants. High Lonesome is communicating a different set of values with its entry procedure, mostly around gender inclusivity and rewarding volunteerism (which is not limited to the race itself). Western States communicates the values of tough competition (for the front of the pack) and patience/perseverance (for the rest of the field). Barkley… who the heck knows. How you judge each of their values is up to you, but I know which of them looks more interesting to me. I wouldn’t even try to get into Hardrock because I know the chances are so small – it’s just not worth it. (I would be down for a Softrock 100, though)

    It’s probably impossible to satisfy all the potential desires for a race that can only accommodate ~150 entrants. So I think it would be fascinating for the Hardrock to do the entry procedure differently on alternating years. Some years could be veteran-only – call it the Hardrock Reunion. Others would be elite by application/invitation only, call it the Hardrock 100 Race, not Run (or perhaps the Hardrock Run of Champions?). Another edition could be limited to first-time hardrockers (“nevers”), where veterans are invited to return as pacers – that could be an amazing way to mentor new runners into the Hardrock family. That edition would certainly be worth watching for the action at the front of the field, and would definitely contain some surprises.

    1. caper

      I quite like your take on this. Balanced, logical and while disagreeing with the premise of how HR invites attendees, its not an attack on others in the community. I also enjoy a race with multiple avenues to cheer for, meaning a strong womens & mens field. When one is short changed in having the best present, it takes away from my personal enjoyment. I vote with my viewership, and frankly I won’t follow along this weekend. What I won’t do is start calling others ‘woke’.

  29. Frederic

    I personally have no problem with how HR100 does its race. Afterall, it’s their race, their rules etc….
    It’s debatable for sure but they shouldn’t feel forced to do something and not another one just because there’s a new trend or movement.
    What I have been wondering over the last years is that they always make a point to call it a “run”, a “reunion”, a HardRock family, yet they advertise the race and the event itself quite a bit, they have substantial sponsors….. In summary, for such a small group people, it feels weird to want to grab so much attention while at the same time wanting to keep it as much low-key as possible.
    But maybe i’m mistaken and it’s not incompatible ?

    At any rate, I’m excited to follow this year’s race

  30. Andrea

    The Hardrock entrants list is shocking for what some people call a “world class event.” Not just the gender disparity but the age breakdown. It’s much more in the realm of a local fatass event. I highly respect older runners, and will soon be one, but can a race really be called competitive when we have to wonder which 5ish men or women might come out on top because they are the only ones of elite caliber? To be fair, I don’t know that Hardrock bills itself as world class, rather this is hype that the ultra trail community has assigned to it.

    As an ultra runner and big fan and follower of the sport, I lump Hardrock in the same category as Barkley or Biggs- niche and kind of interesting to watch, but with nowhere near the appeal of Western States, UTMB, or even golden ticket races.

    1. H.D. Thoreau

      So they no longer call it a “world class event.” You will just find something else to be “shocked” about. “OMG, look what they’ve done now – I am mortified!!!”

  31. Brian

    Saw this on Instagram, but not from #HR100, “Today at the @hardrock100run women’s panel in Silverton, CO, the event announced a new policy to increase women’s participation. Starting in 2022, the percent of women’s entrants will be no less than the percent of women’s lottery applicants.”

    Seems more reasonable then just doing a 50/50 split like High Lonesome.

  32. Mike Miller

    Bottom line is this folks. The Hardrock board isn’t going to change. Folks have been raising their issues with the lottery process for years with only minor changes that didn’t really make a difference. But despite the opinions that some have expressed here, it is not “their” event that they can do whatever they want with. They do not own the land that the course passes through, we do. It is public land and that is something that is important to me. Personally I feel that the lottery system is an affront to everything that public lands mean. If the race directors want to have a private party with their friends they can do it on private land somewhere. As an example the Born to Run ultramarathons occurs on a private ranch in California and much of what occurs there would never be allowed to happen on public land, nor should it be. On a private ranch however it is perfectly acceptable and a lot of fun. But if you want to seriously effect change, complaining on social media or even to the HR board won’t work. Get organized and take your concerns to the public lands managers who permit the event. I lived in the area for 15 years and worked with many of them and can assure you that they take the ethics of public land management seriously. That is the only way that change will occur.

    1. H.D. Thoreau

      Wrong. The answer is to start your own race. Do the work. Stop whining. I believe that is an official Hardrock rule. You are free to start your own race. Include a mandatory whining rule. It will be popular in this day and age. Then you can deal with demands to cancel your race.

    2. Mr. Cranky

      “Bottom line” my foot. Yes, it is “their” event. Public lands, Mike, means that anyone (you f’r instance since you are affronted) can organize their own “private party” on those same lands. It does not mean that any activity on those lands is subject to veto power by any and every one that happens along with a reason to be “affronted”.

      What would help you to not be affronted? Will you not be affronted when HR has 50% XX chromosome presentation? How about if we go all the way and died the field as: 50% XX, 50% XY, 50% under 30 years old, 50% between 30 and 40 years old, 50% each for white, black, brown; 50% for US and non-US, 50% differently abled…. Oh, wait a sec.

  33. Gary Aronhalt

    I swear I’m not trolling, this is an honest and sincere question…what’s the DNF rate of veterans?

    If there’s a “habit” of veterans using their privileged spots to start the race and then DNF, then that’s kind of crappy.

    I could also see it the other way, that those vets know how to get around the loop and their rate could be lower?

    Has anyone ever done an analysis of that data?

  34. Guy Cheney


    I have no idea about the finish rate of vets (my guess is that it is higher?), though there is a provision of the lottery that bumps vets down to the “else” category if they DNF two years in a row. They then have to apply as an “else” and regain vet status with a finish. You can’t just show up as a vet and DNF year after year.

    As a general statement to this thread of comments which I unfortunately read through:
    Perhaps we can all agree that a race lottery is a necessary bummer, and while reasonable people will have different opinions about how to shape a race lottery, the name calling/ad hominem attacks don’t contribute to the spirit or practice of running in the mountains.

Post Your Thoughts