I've been doing a lot of talking about the 2010 Atomic Adventure Race with some of the race's veterans.  Since we have already done extensive vetting of the first half of this year's course, the common question is, "How does it compare to last year's course?"  I know what people are asking when they ask that question.  They really want an answer to the question of, "Is it accomplishable?"

I've shared my vision for what makes a good race course, and I believe a strong portion of that to rely on two factors:

• clearability
• balance

A few things on clearability:

1. It's a FACT that not everybody who enters a 24 hour adventure race will be able to even make it to the finish line.  There will always be those that bite off more than they can chew, learn from their experience, then come back to overcome the challenge another day.  Or perhaps they don't come back.  It's an iterative process for some, and a failure for others.
2. There are those that come not fully knowing what they are getting into but have good heart, strong legs, and a bit of luck.  The course should be finishable by them.
3. There are the veterans, who know how to race and what it takes.  They should be able to clear the course.  No, this shouldn't be limited to the top dogs.  I'm referring to the trailing pack, who suffer the same, but without all the glory.  These are the folks that make or break a course.  They are the ones that RDs should focus on, because their success is not a foregone conclusion, and so neither is the course's success one.  They care very dearly about how they do, in spite of the apparent lack of incentive to care.  They are always lingering on the edge of disappointment.  Making decisions that will either result in "I wish we had" or "I'm glad we did" after the race is over.  So we focus on them when we think about clearability.

For the 2009 course (see course overview videos here:  1 | 2), it was balanced and it was clearable by a large portion of the field.  We balanced the course by allowing physically strong teams to excel in portions where weaker teams could not, good navigators to bushwhack through forests where poor map-readers could not, and wise teams who knew their limits to judge wisely where the brash would make foolhardy decisions.  We balanced the largest portion of the race's mileage--the biking portion--to be equally on road, forest service/4WD trails, and single track (in time, though in mileage they were not).  We balanced road hiking, trail-following, and bushwhacking while on foot.  Heck, we even threw in some running and stair climbing!  And on the paddle, we balanced day-time and night-time paddling (if you were a top 5 team at that point, I believe you got to miss the night time river paddle--we'll get you!).  All the legs changed over frequently as we had a huge volunteer hoard managing all the TAs and so the race seemed to fly by.  In fact, the only thing that was admittedly not well balanced was the brevity of the paddle (3-4 hours), but that was partially due to the high water levels.  Result:  1/3 of the teams cleared the course and 2/3 make it to the finish line, with the bulk of the finishers coming in 22-24 hours.

Was the race physically demanding?  Yes.  Was it mentally demanding...at parts.  And therein lies the basis of my answer to those who ask how the 2010 race course compares to the 2009 Atomic Adventure Race's.  Prepare yourself.

The physical portion of the race will be equally demanding to last year's course.  However, the mental rigor that competitors face will be an order of magnitude greater. So what specifically am I talking about when I say it will be mentally tougher?  Well, if you know how I operate you'll know I do not go into specifics until after the race.  But here's my attempt at clarifying what are my observations from racing in the sport.

• Anything that requires uninterrupted focus for long periods of time, especially during physical exertion, requires mental toughness.
• Anything that brings people to a point where they feel they've lost some control over their environment or circumstances (or realize that they never had it in the first place) requires mental toughness. 
• Factors that add stress to an already stressful situation, or environments that are very dynamic/interruptive requires mental toughness.
• Significant obstacles require mental toughness, especially when there is insufficient experience in overcoming them.
• Being faced with hard decisions, where the stakes are high, requires mental toughness.

But with the additional mental fatigue component, there will certainly be an impact on the course design.  In fact, I believe the mental aspects of adventure racing, because they often take a physical toll themselves, to have greater consequences on the clearability of race courses.  Nevertheless, our goal for clearability of the course is the same as last year.  How will we give the racers an opportunity to realize it?  Rest assured, we have a plan.   On May 15th, experience it for yourself.