Ryan Sandes's account of difficult race conditions offers older endurance athletes a perspective on adaptability without dismissing preparation.
In a September 25, 2026 profile from Eyewitness News, South African ultra-distance trail runner Ryan Sandes described how everyday hardship shapes his approach to racing. Seeing other people overcome difficult circumstances gives him perspective when competition becomes painful or exhausting.
The story connects a demanding desert-race result with a broader idea: preparation matters, but an athlete also needs a way to respond when conditions change. For endurance athletes over 35, that is a useful subject for reflection without turning an elite runner's outlook into a training rule.
Eyewitness News reports that Sandes finished fifth at the 40th Marathon des Sables, a 400-kilometre desert race in Morocco. The report describes harsh sandstorms and an ankle injury during that effort.
EWN frames the result as a return to the event where he launched his career 19 years earlier. That history gives the profile its wider context: this is a runner reflecting on a long relationship with the sport rather than explaining a single successful race.
Sandes told EWN that seeing fellow South Africans face daily challenges helps him keep difficult race moments in perspective. He describes drawing on that outlook when he feels pain, dehydration, or exhaustion. The emphasis is on how he interprets discomfort and uncertainty.
He also describes training circumstances that can involve limited facilities or funding. In his account, reaching a training location may itself require a long run. Insufficient food is another challenge he mentions. These are difficulties he describes within South Africa, not conditions to seek out.
Against that background, Sandes argues that athletes accustomed to conditions falling short of their plans may find it easier to adapt when something goes wrong in competition. His contrast is with athletes who expect extensive support and tightly controlled preparation. The central idea is adaptability rather than a rejection of planning.
This is an elite athlete's first-person account, not a controlled study. EWN provides no direct comparison of training approaches or independent sports scientist's assessment. It also gives no detailed training plan or personal sleep and nutrition data. The profile therefore does not establish that hardship improves performance or that athletes with fewer resources adapt better than others.
Its discussion of controlled routines offers no evidence for disregarding sleep, fueling, or recovery. Likewise, the reported ankle injury is race context rather than a reason for another athlete to continue while injured. Decisions involving pain, injury, or individual nutrition needs belong with qualified health or sports-nutrition professionals.
For an athlete balancing training with work and family, the useful translation is a question: what remains possible when the original plan is no longer realistic? The point is to consider the purpose of training alongside the circumstances in which it happens. That keeps the discussion focused on a sustainable endurance practice rather than a test of willingness to suffer.
Reendure's focus is evidence-based training and recovery guidance for athletes over 35. From that perspective, the appealing part of Sandes's story is the balance between ambition and adjustment. An ambitious goal and an adaptable approach do not have to be opposing ideas.
A practical reading of the profile is to begin with purpose rather than the exact shape of a planned session. When the original session becomes unavailable, the question is whether a safe and realistic alternative preserves its purpose. Sometimes the most relevant consideration will be recovery rather than completing more work.
That is an editorial application of Sandes's outlook. It asks the reader to think about the role of the session before treating its original format as non-negotiable. For a related discussion, Reendure's look at reducing friction around daily training offers another way to frame the relationship between a plan and everyday life.
The distinction matters: changing the plan is a decision about circumstances. It does not need to become a judgment about commitment. Equally, keeping a session exactly as written is not the only way to express ambition.
The EWN profile mentions sleep metrics and strict nutrition plans as examples of highly controlled preparation. The useful distinction for readers is between having information and expecting that information to remove uncertainty. Sandes's account is about responding when reality does not match an expectation.
A calm response to that tension is to keep metrics in the role of information rather than a verdict on the whole training day. The question becomes how a reading fits with the person's circumstances and the purpose of the session. Reendure's discussion of putting daily recovery signals in context considers that decision more closely.
There is no need to turn this into a choice between being data-informed and being adaptable. The more useful framing is preparation with room for judgment. An athlete can value structure without making every change of plan feel like a failure.
For readers in the 35 to 65 age group, the story offers a prompt to define what staying committed actually means. That definition can include race goals while also making room for work and family. It can also acknowledge that the available time or support will not always match the plan.
Useful reflection questions include:
These are prompts for judgment, not a scoring system. Their purpose is to keep the decision connected to the athlete's actual situation rather than an idealized version of the week.
Sandes told EWN that remaining in the sport and still loving it matters more to him than a particular result or achievement. Coming within a profile of a demanding race effort, that statement gives longevity a place alongside performance rather than outside it.
For the older endurance athlete, this is perhaps the most relevant part of his outlook. Wanting to race well and wanting to remain involved for years are compatible ambitions. The personal question is how those ambitions should shape decisions when a week becomes difficult.
A single disrupted session looks different when placed inside that longer view. The aim of reflection is to keep both the immediate goal and the continuing relationship with the sport in sight. Neither needs to erase the other.
Reendure's comparison of ways to organize a racing season offers a separate place to consider that broader planning question. Sandes's contribution here is more personal: he identifies continuing to love the sport as something worth valuing in its own right.
Take Sandes's account as a reason to value adaptability alongside preparation. Keep training decisions connected to purpose, health, and the realities of daily life. Leave room for ambition without making ideal conditions a requirement for feeling committed.
His reported race result provides the setting, but his view of staying in the sport gives the story its lasting relevance. For athletes hoping to keep competing for years, the useful question is not how much hardship they can tolerate. It is how to respond thoughtfully when the plan meets real life.
Follow ReEndure for practical insights on endurance training, recovery, nutrition and healthy aging. Stay connected for new articles, research led guidance and ideas to help you perform better for longer.
Read practical ideas on endurance training, recovery, nutrition and healthy aging to keep progressing for years to come.
Read the Blog