La Sportiva Lavaredo by UTMB - 80K - Race Analysis

Race Overview

Lavaredo 80K 2026 presented a very specific performance challenge: 80 km with approximately 4,600 metres of elevation gain, starting from Val Marzon and finishing in Cortina d'Ampezzo, in one of the most iconic environments of the Dolomites. The combination of long climbs, fast runnable sections and demanding descents makes this a race where pure climbing speed is not enough. The winner needs to combine vertical efficiency with the ability to maintain speed when the terrain changes.

The final results underline how competitive the front of the race was. Bart PRZEDWOJEWSKI (2002) won in 7:40:30, followed by Robin JUILLAGUET (2007) at 7:51:31 and Marcin RZESZÓTKO (2006) at 7:58:28. The first seven men all finished below 8:40, showing how little room there was for a significant performance error at the front.

But the women's race tells an equally interesting story. Elísa KRISTINSDÓTTIR (205) won in 8:59:57 and finished 9th overall, while Marie GONCALVES (2009) was second in 9:12:49 and 12th overall. Nicol GUIDOLIN completed the podium in 9:54:26 and 23rd overall. In total, 205 women started the 80K, making Elísa's position inside the overall top ten particularly significant.

The VTL data reveals why these results were not simply a consequence of one exceptional split. The leading performances were built across multiple terrain types. The strongest runners combined high VPI on the major climbing sections with competitive DMI on the descents, while the differences between athletes became increasingly visible as the race progressed.

Men's Race Analysis

1. Bart Przedwojewski: control from the front

Bart PRZEDWOJEWSKI (2002) produced the clearest example of what a complete 80K performance looks like. The official result shows a winning margin of 11:01 over Robin Juillaguet and 17:58 over Marcin Rzeszótko. But the VTL data makes the result more interesting: Bart was not simply fast in one discipline. He was consistently strong in both VPI and DMI.

In the early major climbing sections, Bart's VPI sits around the 1,150–1,200 m/h range, while his DMI is already around 16 km/h. That combination is important. A runner can compensate for a moderate climbing performance with exceptional descending speed, or vice versa. Bart was doing both. His early segment performances repeatedly put him at or near the front of the field, while his position remained extremely stable. There is very little evidence of a significant tactical weakness in the first half.

2. The difference was not just climbing power

The most interesting characteristic of Bart's profile is that his advantage did not disappear when the terrain turned downhill. His DMI remained among the strongest values in the field, frequently around 16 km/h or higher on the relevant downhill sections. This is exactly the type of profile that the VTL indices are designed to expose: high vertical output without sacrificing downhill efficiency.

Robin JUILLAGUET (2007) provides a useful contrast. He was also exceptionally strong, and in several segments his DMI was at least as impressive as Bart's. In some early sections Robin was running around 17 km/h DMI, demonstrating that the second-place finish was not caused by a lack of descending ability. The difference was the overall combination: Bart repeatedly paired high VPI with high DMI, creating a performance profile with very few weaknesses.

3. Rzeszótko and the battle behind the winner

Marcin RZESZÓTKO (2006) completed the podium in 7:58:28. His performance is another example of how closely matched the leading men were. He remained competitive across the major sections, but the VTL data shows a slightly different balance between climbing and descending performance compared with Bart and Robin.

The same pattern continues through the rest of the top ten. Stefan UNGERICHT (2015), Kellen BLUMBERG (2020), Lasse FINSTAD (2003) and Pierre-Adrien HIVERT (2030) all remained within roughly one hour of the winner. Official results place them 4th through 7th respectively. The VTL data shows that these positions were not separated by one dramatic collapse. Instead, small differences accumulated across several segments: a few minutes lost on a climb, another few minutes on a descent, and eventually the gaps become substantial.

4. The importance of terrain transitions

One of the clearest lessons from the checkpoint data is that Lavaredo rewards athletes who can change gears without losing efficiency. A strong climbing segment is followed by a descent, then another climb, then runnable terrain. The top athletes repeatedly returned to competitive pace after each transition.

This is particularly visible with Pierre-Adrien HIVERT (2030) and Genis PORQUERAS (2030). Their overall results — 7th and 8th — were separated by only three minutes, 8:38:04 versus 8:41:04. At this level, the difference is not "who is faster" in a general sense. It is who loses less performance when the terrain changes.

The back half becomes the separator

As the race progresses, the absolute values of VPI and DMI naturally fall in many athletes. That is not necessarily a problem: fatigue is expected. What matters is how much performance is retained relative to the competition.

This is where Bart's race becomes particularly impressive. His position remains essentially locked at the front while many of the other top-ten athletes show more variation. The race therefore becomes less about producing the single highest VPI or DMI value and more about repeating strong performances over successive segments.

That distinction is central to the VTL philosophy. A high peak index tells us what an athlete can do. The sequence of indices tells us what an athlete can sustain.

6. Men's race: efficiency over the entire course

The final picture is therefore remarkably coherent. Bart won because he combined elite climbing efficiency, elite descending efficiency and exceptional consistency. Robin had the tools to challenge him, particularly through his downhill performance, while Marcin and the rest of the top ten remained within striking distance through different combinations of the same abilities.

The official results confirm the final hierarchy — Bart, Robin, Marcin, Stefan, Kellen, Lasse, Pierre-Adrien, Genis, Bogdan and Moreno — but the VTL analysis adds the explanation: the front of the Lavaredo 80K was decided by the ability to repeatedly convert strong VPI and DMI performances without creating a significant weak section.

Women's Race Analysis

1. Elísa Kristinsdóttir: a performance that belongs in the overall conversation

Elísa KRISTINSDÓTTIR (205) produced one of the most impressive performances of the entire Lavaredo weekend. Her final time of 8:59:57 placed her 9th overall, not merely first woman.

The VTL data explains why. Elísa's performance is not based on an extreme single metric. Instead, she maintains a very high level across the course. In the early sections her VPI is already around 950–1,000+ m/h, reaching above 1,100 m/h on some of the more favourable climbing sections, while her DMI remains in the 12–15 km/h range depending on the terrain.

That combination is particularly impressive because she is competing against the overall men's field while also maintaining a substantial advantage over the women's competition.

2. Marie Goncalves: the closest challenger

Marie GONCALVES (2009) finished second in 9:12:49, only 12:52 behind Elísa, and 12th overall. Her VTL profile shows that this was not a conservative second-place performance. Marie produced strong climbing numbers and, on several sections, very competitive DMI values.

The difference between the two becomes clearer when looking at the sequence rather than individual checkpoints. Marie remains competitive, but Elísa's performance is more stable. The winner repeatedly returns to strong output after major terrain changes, while Marie experiences slightly larger variations. Over 80 km, those small differences accumulate into the final 12-minute gap.

3. Nicol Guidolin: a different performance profile

Nicol GUIDOLIN (bib not legible with sufficient confidence in the supplied image) finished third in 9:54:26 and 23rd overall. Her result is especially interesting because she is in the 40–44 age category and still produced a top-three women's performance against a much younger front field. The official UTMB results confirm the 23rd overall position.

Her checkpoint data shows a more moderate overall speed profile than Elísa and Marie, but she remains remarkably consistent. Instead of matching the leaders on every climb, she avoids major losses. That is an important distinction: podium performances are not always built by having the highest index; they can also be built by eliminating weak segments.

4. The battle behind the podium

The next group — Kinga KWIATKOWSKA, Sylvie GEISSLER, Giulia MARCHESONI, Agathe BES and Viva DE MOUSTIER — demonstrates just how compressed the women's race became after the podium. Kinga finished fourth in 9:57:39, Sylvie fifth in 10:07:50, Giulia sixth in 10:10:00, Agathe seventh in 10:10:48 and Viva eighth in 10:15:43.

Only around 18 minutes separated third from eighth. The checkpoint data shows that these runners had very different strengths. Some produced better climbing numbers, others stronger descending performances, while others showed better retention of pace later in the race.

This is precisely where looking only at final ranking becomes misleading. Two athletes can finish within a few minutes of one another while arriving there through completely different performance profiles.

5. The women's race was also an endurance story

The strongest women's performances become increasingly interesting when the second half is considered. Elísa's advantage was not simply that she could climb fast early. Her ability to maintain competitive speed later in the race is what allowed her to finish inside the overall top ten.

The data therefore supports a broader interpretation of her race: high VPI + solid DMI + sustained performance. That combination is more valuable over 80 km than an isolated peak in either index.

And the overall result confirms it. Elísa finished ninth among the entire field of finishers represented in the official classification, while Marie finished 12th.

6. A historically strong overall result

The final women's picture is therefore unusually strong. The top two women were not simply separated from the rest of the women's field; they were competing directly with the leading men. Elísa's ninth-place overall finish and Marie's 12th demonstrate that the front of the women's race operated at an extremely high performance level.

From a VTL perspective, the most important finding is that Elísa's overall performance is better explained by balance than by specialization. Her numbers show the ability to climb efficiently, descend efficiently and — most importantly — continue doing both as the race progresses.

Vertical Trail Labs Insights

Lavaredo 80K is a particularly good example of why VTL looks beyond final rankings.

The first major insight is the importance of multi-dimensional efficiency. Bart's winning performance combines VPI and DMI at an elite level. The same is true, to different degrees, for Robin and Marcin. A runner who is excellent uphill but gives away several minutes on every descent will struggle to dominate a course like Lavaredo. Conversely, a great descender cannot recover enough time if the climbs repeatedly expose a weakness.

The second insight is that consistency matters more than peak performance. The checkpoint table shows that the best athletes repeatedly return to strong values after each terrain transition. This is particularly relevant to ER. The ability to preserve effective performance through successive sections is what converts individual strengths into a successful ultra result.

The third insight is the importance of terrain-specific interpretation. VPI should not be read in isolation from the elevation profile. Likewise, a DMI of 16–17 km/h on a major descent is much more meaningful than the same number on a gentle runnable section. The VTL indices become powerful when they are connected to the terrain that generated them.

And then there is Elísa Kristinsdóttir.

9th overall. 1st woman. 8:59:57.

Her performance is perhaps the clearest demonstration of what the VTL model is trying to capture. She did not simply produce a spectacular climbing number or an exceptional descent. She combined vertical efficiency, descending ability and sustained performance over the entire course.

At Lavaredo, the winner was not necessarily the athlete with the highest peak.

It was the athlete who could keep being excellent when the terrain changed.