Proposal for Pacer-free Pro Fields at WSER and Golden Ticket Races
This article is written by Canyon Woodward who leads a PTRA working group that addresses pacers. Canyon is a pro trail runner who secured a golden ticket to the 2026 Western States Endurance Run.
Editor’s note: Portions of this analysis previously appeared in Outside Run
Western States and associated Golden Ticket races should implement a pacer-free Championship Field.
Kilian Jornet, Jim Walmsley, and many other top pros have spoken clearly on this point: the use of pacers is no longer needed for professionals, and their continued use carries the risk of muling and outside aid.
I want to acknowledge upfront that pacers are woven deeply into the fabric of American ultrarunning. Many of my friends and fellow athletes have shared thoughtful perspectives on both sides of the topic. For most of us, sharing miles with a trusted friend or race experiences with a crew member represent some of the most meaningful experiences our sport offers. My hope is that this proposal honors that tradition while recognizing that what works beautifully for the majority of participants may not be what’s best for professional-level competition at these races. The two-division structure outlined later on preserves pacer tradition for those who want it while creating space for professional racing to evolve.
Many runners, myself included, were drawn to trail and ultrarunning because of “the spirit of the sport” and its grassroots, community-based vibes. Yet as elite fields swell, media attention balloons, and sponsorships and prize money grow, race organizations hosting top-level competitions must step up their professionalism to match the evolution of our sport. This demands higher standards, clearer processes, and retiring some of the outdated aspects of top races that worked when races were purely adventures shared among friends. Many of us now feel that removing pacers from the competitive field at WSER and Golden Ticket races - while continuing to allow them for the rest of the field - is a natural and necessary evolution.
Background
Before we go further, a little bit of background on pacers: The use of pacers is largely unique to American trail racing, with very few races worldwide permitting them. They are a relic of a time when there was very little proof of concept for racing 100 miles on foot, and thus pacers and other safety measures were considered paramount.
Craig Thornley, WSER Race Director, wrote of pacers in a 2009 blog: “So why do we have pacers in 100 milers? Of course, as with most of our traditions, it all started with the Western States Endurance Run. Shannon Weil, co-founder and original co-race director of WSER recalls, ‘The idea of pacers began back in 1978 of the WS100. Running 100-mile races lacked significant data and we felt it was prudent to allow entrants to have pacers after Foresthill to increase their chances of making it to Auburn. It was purely an optional safety measure in the beginning.’ That seems reasonable, but what is a pacer at Western States used for today?” Craig quotes several athletes and goes on to conclude that in today’s context it is no longer needed for safety and instead is all about competitive advantage: runners “use their pacer for competitive advantage. To help them get to the finish sooner.”
Time for Change
This topic has ignited passionate and thoughtful discussion amongst PTRA members on both sides of the issue. Most of us agree that we will continue to use pacers until the rules change, precisely because not doing so would be a competitive disadvantage. Amongst those of us who believe it’s time to drop pacers for these races, three key points have risen to the surface:
1. Pacers for elites are no longer necessary for safety.
Pacers for WSER and Golden Ticket races are just not needed at the top level anymore. As Jim Walmsley bluntly put it: “I don’t think elites at Western States should have pacers. Nobody competitive there needs them. Nowadays, with phones and tech, it can distort the race in a negative way. Professionals, which our sport has now, should be competent at America’s highest level. Figure it out.”
They are an outdated safety measure and it is time for change. For context, let’s consider another safety measure that was finally retired just within the past decade: scales.
For decades, WSER required runners to step on scales at aid stations, using weight loss or gain as a proxy for hydration and safety. The scales were a well-intentioned tool meant - like pacers - to help ensure runners were not putting their lives in jeopardy. But over time it became clear that the scales were no longer necessary for runner safety. In 2016, WSER finally fully retired the practice, marking a natural evolution of the sport. Of this evolution, Craig reflected:
“Dropping the scales and putting the responsibility back on the runners was a major shift in philosophy for WS. This is not meant to be an indictment on the past, but rather a good reminder that we need to stay open-minded and continually adapt and evolve our medical protocols to help runners get safely to the finish line. As my predecessor once told me, ‘sometimes change is … ok.’”
2. Pacers create an unacceptable risk of cheating (and gray areas) through illegal aid such as muling and other assistance.
As Kilian and numerous other athletes have pointed out, the use of pacers introduces an unacceptable risk of outside assistance and muling (sharing water, fuel, or other supplies with the runner). Sometimes this aid isn’t even recognized as inappropriate - for example, in just the past three months I’ve heard two different elite athletes talk openly on podcasts about support from pacers that included being physically fed gels in one case and accepting minor medical aid in the other case. Beyond the instances of intentional and inadvertent violations, pacer use also opens up numerous gray areas, such as pacers assisting with cooling from bodies of water on-course, or filling their runner’s bottles in an aid station while their runner continues through and then catching back up to their runner to deliver the bottles shortly after the aid station. As the financial incentives around these races increase it’s only a matter of time until the use of pacers gets abused.
Note: This year Aravaipa has taken the positive step of implementing flagged boundaries for aid stations at Black Canyon to clearly delineate where pacers (and crew) may and may not render aid.
3. Pacers contribute to inequality of competitive opportunity due to economic capacity.
A treasured aspect of trail running is that anybody can line up and race their way to a Golden Ticket. All it requires is a pair of running shoes, dedication, and a whole lot of heart - or so the myth goes. In reality, racing at the top level of the sport is a very expensive endeavor. To illustrate this, let’s take an unsponsored American athlete in their twenties making the median income - we’ll say $3,400/month for a 25 year old. The costs of registration (~$300-600), flights from the east coast (~$400-600), rental car (~$150-300), and three nights of lodging (~$350-600) to take their shot at a Golden Ticket race can easily total a third or a half of their monthly income. Add to that the travel costs of one or multiple pacers making the same trip and expenses quickly balloon beyond what is feasible for the average person trying to put themselves in a position to be competitive at the top level. Trail racing suffers from a lack of socioeconomic diversity - to say nothing of the pressing issues of racial and gender diversity - and the competitive imperative to utilize pacers creates yet another economic barrier.
On a related note, Kilian and Francesco Puppi have both raised an important point that beyond pacers, crew support at aid stations ought to have some limits for the same reason. Without such regulation, teams with greater economic and personnel capacity can overwhelm aid stations and create additional competitive imbalances.
We can preserve the spirit of the sport while also promoting fairness, professionalism, and equitable opportunity.
Proposal
Western States and associated Golden Ticket races implement a pacer-free Championship Field.
In order to accomplish this, these races adopt a Championship (or “Open”) field model similar to USATF national championships, where all runners compete in the same race but only athletes who opt in to the Championship field - either by meeting auto-qualifying criteria or by voluntary election - are eligible for M1-10/F1-10 bibs, overall prizes, Golden Ticket qualifying spots, and recognition in the official championship standings. Any athlete may choose to opt in to this field. Athletes who already have Golden Tickets, M1-10/F1-10 bibs, or Elite ITRA Index scores (defined by ITRA as >700 for women, >825 for men) are automatically opted in. Athletes meeting these criteria may opt out if they prefer to race in the Standard Division with traditional rules. Participation in this field would require athletes to race under elevated standards and agree to Championship competition rules - most notably no pacers at any point - designed to ensure competitive equity, integrity, and a true head-to-head race environment.
Athletes who do not opt in would still run the full Western States course under traditional rules (including pacers from Foresthill), appear in the general race results by finishing position and time, remain eligible for age group awards and finisher buckles, but would not be counted in Championship standings. (E.g. A runner might finish 15th overall by time but be listed as “15th, Standard Division,” while the 16th-place finisher who opted into Championship would be “15th, Championship Division.”) This structure preserves the inclusive, mass-participation spirit of Western States while creating a clearly defined, rule-consistent professional competition within the same event.
Final Thoughts
In closing, I want to acknowledge that one of the beautiful things about trail running is its ability to be many things to many people. At its best this sport deepens our connection to self, to the natural world, and to community. At the top level it is also increasingly a vocation and legitimate professional sport. There is some inherent tension between preserving the integrity of the sport as it professionalizes and maintaining all of the traditions and grassroots quirks that give these events such a special feel. My hope is that this proposal honors the diversity of perspectives within the sport by offering a path forward which allows folks to choose the approach that works for them. Evolving the sport in this way does not diminish the adventure but clarifies it. It affirms that whether our goal is a Golden Ticket or a Golden Hour finish, we all deserve clear rules, fair equitable competition, and a race structure that honors what we are each trying to accomplish.
Giddyup! Great article! I so support this! I’ve only used pacers in a handful of my 55 100-mile finishes. Most of my 32 100 wins were no pacers. I know Karl Meltzer would agree too. He is always pacerless. We’ve had this discussion for many, many years! You don’t need them. Time to evolve if you want to compete. I fully support this.
This was so well written. I honestly worry about the schism between professional and not, but a division in name only (standard division) seems like a really great idea. Allowing people to run the same race, while listening to the pacers vs not argument, seems to be entirely addressed in this article. Well done, Canyon.