Withdrawals: Where Are Top Trail Runners Pulling Out

UTMB, the cathedral event of trail running, and the 174 km UTMB category is hailed as "the jewel on the crown" — yet claiming that jewel is no easy task, even for elite athletes.

Three-time champion Courtney Dauwalter, 2024 champion and "best product manager" Vincent Bouillard, China's leading 100-mile runner Xiang Fuzhao, as well as Canyon Woodward and Chris Myers — none of them ultimately appeared at the finish line.

Spectators' lasting impression of those elites years from now may be summed up by three simple letters: DNF (Did Not Finish) / DNS(DNS — Did Not Start)。

We believe: choosing to withdraw from a race is brutal for these athletes who trained for months. But is the person who ultimately decides to cut off the race bib necessarily the athlete themself?

Or put another way, as trail running becomes more professional and both athletes and events mature,decisions to withdraw or to persist can no longer be judged simply by "passion" or the "victory of spirit"; instead, a clearer, more rational chain of factors is influencing and guiding athletes' choices to stay in or drop out.

Athlete autonomy takes priority

They are also the first person responsible

The athletes mentioned at the start of the article were elite competitors who dropped out of this edition of UTMB, but there were even more big names who didn't even line up at the start.

For example, three former champions — Jim Walmsley, Kilian Jornet, Tom Evans — in other words DNS.

For these professional runners who make a living from trail running, DNS is often a harder choice than DNF.After all, giving up even the chance to try means all prior effort goes to waste — equivalent to "cutting losses" in the stock market.

As their own primary person in charge, athletes naturally need to think longer-term about their careers. After all: 174 km, nearly 10,000 meters of ascent, and huge sunk costs...They are responsible for more than a single race; the wins and losses of one event cannot be prioritized above a long-term career.

So, Jim Walmsley chose DNS before this UTMB due to persistent knee problems; Killan Jornet felt pressure in his knee after a high-intensity test run before the race and likewise chose to withdraw ahead of the event.

Faced with the possibility of mistakes or irreversible injury, these long-time "kings" of trail running calmly left the course.

When an athlete's decision is made, everyone should respect it.

Coaches and teams: set an upper limit for "giving it a try"

The situations athletes face are complex; sometimes they can't fully understand their own condition, and being undecided is also normal.Chinese athlete Xiang Fuzhao was in that situation before the start of UTMB.

According to Trail Runner, Xiang Fuzhao spent the entire summer dealing with an ankle injury, and before the race she was even unsure whether she should line up at the UTMB start — more importantly, her coach had advised her to skip this year’s UTMB.

However, an athlete’s expectations for a race are not easily erased, as Xiang Fuzhao said after the race — “You never know the outcome unless you try.”

In situations where “opinions are divided” like this, dynamic, consultative decision-making between the athlete and coaching team becomes particularly important. “Run or not” — once a yes-or-no question — becomes, depending on the individual’s situation, a more detailed set of choices.

Ultimately, Xiang Fuzhao withdrew at Les Contamines, at 32 km. That 32-km point was not a spontaneous choice but a staged decision by the team based on a risk assessment.

Rather than running until you physically can’t go on,withdrawing at 32 km both gave Xiang Fuzhao a chance to try and ensured the athlete could cut losses in time during the race. This is precisely the quality a mature professional team should possess.

The athlete’s medical team

raised a warning “red line”

If Jim Walmsley’s self-directed judgments and Xiang Fuzhao’s team decisions represent one level, American athlete Chris Myers entered another level of discussion.

The first two concerned whether one could still run — more of a competitive issue.

But Chris Myers faced a medical problem. His issue touched on a more dangerous area than simple muscle or bone pain — the risk of systemic infection.

©Chris Myers

A week before UTMB, Chris Myers developed open blisters on his foot; four days before the race the local swelling worsened, and the day before the race he had to start taking antibiotics.

Under those circumstances he still insisted on lining up and at one point was in the top three, but ultimately withdrew at 127 km due to his foot condition worsening.

While sport itself values persistence, and for professional athletes race pain can often be managed, it should be noted thatonce infection is involved, it concerns the body’s systemic safety margins and can even become uncontrollable.

©Chris Myers

Perhaps one could sayprofessional athletes have the “freedom to accept known risks.”，But this kind of "freedom" itself needs a reasonable boundary.。

Otherwise, when an athlete becomes disoriented or experiences cognitive distortion due to severe dehydration, altitude sickness, hypothermia, or neurological fatigue, a declaration to "keep racing" no longer demonstrates that the athlete possesses the capacity for rational decision-making.

Therefore,an important function of an athlete's medical team should be to establish the race's risk red lines and to promptly stop athletes from crossing them — in other words, these teams should hold a veto power that overrides the athlete at aid stations.

Officially grantingmedical "enforcement authority,"

to uphold the safety bottom line.

With the development of UTMB events and the acceleration of the professionalization of trail running, there have already been changes in how participant safety is secured in this extreme sport.

In its 2026 competition rules, UTMB explicitly states that race medical staff, medical personnel, rescue teams and designated race personnel possess the following rights:

· Participants judged unable to continue the race will lose their race eligibility;

· Require athletes to use mandatory equipment;

· Evacuate athletes who are in danger;

· and transport athletes to an appropriate medical facility.

If an athlete receives treatment from doctors or rescue personnel, they must comply with the professionals' decisions.

This means race medical staff have the final safety veto; they become the most critical link in the DNF decision chain and the most important safety safeguard.

True, mature "professionalization,"

DNS/DNF decisions should not be made by a single person.

UTMB has become the undisputed "top-tier IP" in trail running not only because it gathers the world's highest competitive level, but because it has almost defined the sport's degree of professionalization.

For athletes, a stronger training system is the foundation, while a more complete health decision-making system is the backing.

From athletes to coaches, then to medical teams, and finally to the race's official medical staff — at every link in the health chain, each layer should shoulder responsibility, offer advice, and make the final decision.

Who ultimately decides an elite athlete's DNF or DNS? Clearly it shouldn't be decided by just one group of people.When an athlete stands on the start line, they're not just choosing a race — they're choosing a career.

DNS and DNF shouldn't simply be seen as "failure"; sometimes they're a form of protection.After all, a 174 km trail race is extremely long. But compared with a long career, those 174 km can feel "insignificant."

[End-of-article interaction]

#Which of these reasons for DNS or DNF is most common?#

Text/Editor: David/Cavendish

Image sources: Pao Ye Da Bao Zha, Instagram

Visuals: Max

RUNYEAH 跑野大爆炸

Withdrawals: Where Are Top Trail Runners Pulling Out — and Who Are They Negotiating With?