What’s “easier”, XC or Endurance?

A40AF9F4-2B93-4900-A6D0-96E8E4B630F1.gif
 
The couch is easier.
seriously though, XC is easier. It requires more top end fitness but you need hours more focus for endurance. There are many more chances for mechanicals, crashes, nutrition, etc... to go wrong.
 
This is like comparing the Dakar Rally to an F1 race. I'm sure you can mix the drivers up, but don't expect one to win in the other event.

I would agree with Ryan @xc62701, from the racing perspective more people can train for an XC race and be competitive. Granted there are plenty of people that "do" endurance races, but it's not "racing". Riding gnar for 5 hours at full tilt - 2% takes huge focus. Most 50's I've done were XC pace with more places to fail.
 
Did you check out Matt Ackers last “endurance” ride? 540ish miles, 64 hours no sleeping.

By that example you sorta nailed it. He wasn't in the mix at all during unPaved because it was too short an event. He got beat by a roadie and an NUE racer because they're faster over short distances. (Like 100 milers)
 
By that example you sorta nailed it. He wasn't in the mix at all during unPaved because it was too short an event. He got beat by a roadie and an NUE racer because they're faster over short distances. (Like 100 milers)
He was with Bishop and Johnson at Wilderness finish so that logic is out the door. He won Marji Gesick 100.
 
Back
Top Bottom