progress

In article <[email hidden]>,

Charlie Pendejo said:

While there is undoubtedly some basis in well-founded concern, mostly
it's Michelle's style - people want her to acknowledge "you're the
expert, I'm the beginner, you're right I'm wrong."

That's my perception too.

Quoted message said:

Stripping away style, I do agree with the content of e.g. Doug's post
from 7:10 AM today where he says, among other things, "Assuming you
get through this 1/2 alive and well, I hope your next effort is
another half with a more reasonable plan or better yet, some shorter
races and concentrate on building a base that will keep you at the
game."

My tentative race plans after the Nike half are
November 11: 10K
December 2: 10 mile
New Years Eve or Day: 5K (there are a number to choose from)
Feb 17: Half marathon.
Early or mid April (the date hasn't been set yet): 4.2 mile.

As I said, "tentative". Variables depend on whether I do the October 21
half. If not, I'll possibly substitute a half for the 10 mile on Dec
2nd. I also have the option of doing a 5K instead of the 10 mile on
that date. There is also the option of not going to MacWorld Expo in
mid January and running a half marathon then. That would happen only if
I did not do a half marathon before then. If I do the half in January,
then I'd not do the half in Feb and probably do a 10K or an 8K trail
instead.

I'll probably look for a short race or two in March.

--
Crossing the starting line is 90%.
Crossing the finish line is the other 90%.

"Elflord" wrote :
| She's going to be out there for nearly 3hrs.

I put my $1 on times, from 3:20 to 3:30.
(based on her current training pace and
not having run a long one close to 14 miles before the race.)

In article <[email hidden]>,

I2Run said:

I put my $1 on times, from 3:20 to 3:30.
(based on her current training pace and not having run a long one
close to 14 miles before the race.)

That will more than meet my secondary goal, and I'd be very happy with
that time.

If I could do three hours even, I'd be ecstatic.

--
Crossing the starting line is 90%.
Crossing the finish line is the other 90%.

Michelle said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

shinypenny said:

Quoted message said:

My only suggestion to get through race day with the least
discomfort is do the race with run/walk strategy from the start.
It's a conservation strategy that will increase your odds of
getting to the finish line and in the best clock time. If you try
running till need to walk, you will likely use up all your glycogen
and the last N miles will be agony. It's called hitting the wall
and is best avoided. Ignore those macho folks that bad mouth the
walking aspects. You know you are going to be out there for a long
time so run/walk.

Quoted message said:

I agree with this strategy too - even if you can complete the 10 mile
run in training without walk breaks.

That's been my plan from the beginning. I have been planning to walk
through the water stations and up the hills.

Quoted message said:

Also the course is not in your local area, right? It's somewhere you
need to fly to. I understand that you train on flat surfaces with no
hills. Will there be hills at this race?

There are some; it's San Francisco after all. <g> As I said, I have
been planning from the outset to walk the hills.

The course map is at
<http://www.nike.com/nikemarathon/media/pdf/nike_marathon.pdf>; the
steepest hill is from about ten feet to 295 feet over about a mile and a
quarter starting at about the six mile point.

Okay, if you're going to take pre-planned walks at every station, and
walk the hills, then I do think you can complete this, and I'm less
worried about your risking injury.

I know others were ragging about walk breaks before, but i don't agree
with them. I think it's completely sane to take walk breaks, in your
situation. I.e., your goal is to complete the marathon and to
participate in it, and also to be able to take the long-view with your
running, guarding against injury.

I'll tell you what - if someone offered me a chance to run the Boston
marathon for charity this coming year, I would throw all caution to
the wind, start training now, and I'd do it BUT I'd do it with prudent
walk breaks every mile. The experience would be worth it for me,
seeing as how I live near the course and watch it every year, and
there's no way in hell I'll ever qualify, because I'm too slow. But
the experience would not be worth it, if I ended up injured. And
anyway, I'm sure it'd be a lot more fun with walk breaks. :-)

Now maybe *someday* I'll run a full marathon without walk breaks, but
that would be a different thing entirely, with different goals and for
different reasons, and it would be after a few years of steady running
and competing in shorter races.

However, I personally would not attempt a race longer than a 10K
until my pace drops down under 10 minutes.... for me, it's that "time
on feet" thing. For comparison, I was running an 8:30 5K pace when I
ran my 10 miler, which I did at a 10 minute pace, which translates
into an hour and a half on my feet. Right now, I'm running about a 12
minute pace for my easy runs. So I have a little more to go there.

jen

Elflord said:

Injuries are not bound by a protocol that requires them to send "signals" a
long time in advance. The faster you make a change, the less chance of
receiving such signals. For example, if you were to attempt either a long
speed workout or the half marathon *today*, there would be a good chance
that you'd get injured, without getting a "signal".

Yep. Every time I've been injured, I haven't been able to point to a
specific run that caused it. It always creeps up on me. For example,
with the PF last year, I was just fine after the 5K, but a few days
later... ouch! I'm pretty certain it was the 5K though, because I ran
too fast down the downhills, slapping my feet.

Then again most of my injuries seem to involve ligament tears, and
according to my doc, those can start out as microtears. Minor things.
But then if you don't lay off on them, or for example you sit with bad
posture in an office chair or car after a run, the tear gets bigger.

jen

Donovan said:

I think her style is just fine.

Dammit Donovan, don't be reasonable and conciliatory. How are
Michelle and me gonna take on the rest of the newsgroup with guns
blazing if you won't stand and fight? C'mon, where's that penal
colony spirit?

If we're gonna get reinforcements from anyone, we'll accept aid from
lance. We don't want anyone too even-keeled on our side.

Quoted message said:

I didn't jump into a marathon

Yeah, you jumped into the eight hundred meters or some shiznit! For
all your calmitude in print you're crazier in your running than any
three of the rest of us.

Then again you got started young enough to still have some speed, ya
whippersnapper.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Charlie Pendejo said:

Quoted message said:

I think her style is just fine.

Dammit Donovan, don't be reasonable and conciliatory.

Hey, gee, we were just starting to wind down. It's time for others to
fight for a change--not that I was fighting, mind you. <g>

--
Crossing the starting line is 90%.
Crossing the finish line is the other 90%.

In article <[email hidden]>,

shinypenny said:

Okay, if you're going to take pre-planned walks at every station, and
walk the hills, then I do think you can complete this, and I'm less
worried about your risking injury.

Well, maybe not every station, although a friend who has run this race
twice before told me that with my position in the pack, I probably won't
have much choice but to walk the stations because they will be so
crowded.

Quoted message said:

I know others were ragging about walk breaks before, but i don't
agree with them.

Nor do I, obviously. It's not that I want to take walk breaks, but that
I'll need to, especially on that course.

Quoted message said:

I think it's completely sane to take walk breaks, in your situation.
I.e., your goal is to complete the marathon and to participate in it,
and also to be able to take the long-view with your running, guarding
against injury.

Bingo!

Quoted message said:

However, I personally would not attempt a race longer than a 10K
until my pace drops down under 10 minutes....

Well, I doubt that I'd ever be able to do that. I'll be happy when my
pace drops below thirteen minutes. But I did do a half mile today at a
12:48 pace--and it was the last half mile of a 4 1/2 mile run. (If you
saw my other thread, you know about this already.)

--
Crossing the starting line is 90%.
Crossing the finish line is the other 90%.

Michelle said:

Well, I doubt that I'd ever be able to do that. I'll be happy when my
pace drops below thirteen minutes. But I did do a half mile today at a
12:48 pace--and it was the last half mile of a 4 1/2 mile run. (If you
saw my other thread, you know about this already.)

You might be surprised!!

I think you and I started right around the same time, or thereabouts,
didn't we? I started out in October (with an unprepared 5K at 39:00),
after a year of fitness walking. I went back and did the couch-to-5K,
once I recovered from PF. I then ran a second 5K in March at around 33
minutes.

After that, I bumped up my program from 3x's a week to 4-5x's a week
(I run two days on, one day off). I'm still having a hard time running
for longer than about 70 minutes without starting to get some issues,
so I opted for frequency over distance. Since bumping up my frequency,
my average pace has dropped to around 12 minutes per mile. I can't
recall exactly when that happened... my pace sorta drifted downward.
And I sense that I'm on the verge of another drop soon - lately I've
been averaging more like 11-11:30 minutes per mile (despite or maybe
because I took two whole weeks off in August). But figure that's 11
months of continuous base-building to drop 4 minutes off my pace.

Knowing you're ex-Navy, I'm going to hazard to say that despite our
age difference you're probably in as good a shape as I was when i
started ... heck, maybe even *better* shape, because I had 20 lbs I
had to drop (and did), plus a host of old injury issues to contend
with, and then this pesky GERD stuff. I am hoping to break 30 minutes
at my next 5K, in October, which I think is realistic.

And if I keep things up - continue as I am going - next year I may see
24 minute 5K (which was my previous PB). I hope that's not wishful
thinking. Hmmm. Heck, if I could do some speed training maybe I could
best that, because I never did any formal speed training before. Speed
was never my thing... distance was. But that seems to be out, at least
for now.

So meanwhile you had a set-back and had to start at ground zero again.
If you don't have another setback, you will probably surprise yourself
6 months, or a year from now. I think we're pretty comparable, so it
wouldn't surprise me if you ended up faster than me. Especially
because you are certainly running longer distances than I am. IME,
long distance running always translated in naturally improved 5K
times. Don't know if there's any science behind that, but it worked
for me. It may be why you saw a 12:48 pace today. And also because
you're far more tenacious than I am. :-)

Of course, if you go and injure yourself at this half, then I will
manage to stay ahead of you awhile longer!

jen

In article <[email hidden]>,

shinypenny said:

Quoted message said:

Well, I doubt that I'd ever be able to do that. I'll be happy when
my pace drops below thirteen minutes. But I did do a half mile
today at a 12:48 pace--and it was the last half mile of a 4 1/2
mile run. (If you saw my other thread, you know about this
already.)

You might be surprised!!

I think you and I started right around the same time, or thereabouts,
didn't we? I started out in October (with an unprepared 5K at 39:00),
after a year of fitness walking. I went back and did the couch-to-5K,
once I recovered from PF. I then ran a second 5K in March at around
33 minutes.

I started the C to 5K program in March of last year; it took me eighteen
weeks to complete it, finishing in mid November. I injured myself in
January of this year, and redid the C to 5K from March through May.

My pace has not increased much since finishing it; my distance has
increased a lot, though. I have yet to complete a run as fast as 13
minutes per mile; the closest I came was New Year's eve, when I did
three miles in 39:02. My second closest was 13:14.

Quoted message said:

Knowing you're ex-Navy,

Ex army, please.

Quoted message said:

I'm going to hazard to say that despite our age difference you're
probably in as good a shape as I was when i started ...

I doubt that; I could barely pass the PT tests when I was in the
military, and I spent twenty-two years of sedentary life before I
started to run after retiring. I'm still classified as being
overweight, even though I've lost some twenty-six pounds in the past six
years, about sixteen of them in the past two years, and about ten of
them in the past three or four months, and four in the past four or five
weeks.

I have about four pounds to lose to get my BMI below 25. But in the
last four or five weeks, I've lost two percent body fat.

Quoted message said:

I am hoping to break 30 minutes at my next 5K, in October, which I
think is realistic.

My best 5K has still been over 40 minutes.

Quoted message said:

It may be why you saw a 12:48 pace today. And also because you're far
more tenacious than I am. :-)

Keep in mind that that 12:48 was only a half mile out of a four and a
half mile run. The overall pace for that run was 14:40.

-- Michelle

--
Crossing the starting line is 90%.
Crossing the finish line is the other 90%.

<TenKMan> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Damn Doug, I haven't seen this much drama for a single runner in a
single race in a while in rr. I have known legions of runners who
ramped up in a BIG hurry (I being one of them!!!) and bit it hard in
an early race.

And you were 60+ when you tried it? She is new to running and older
than me so I think the risk factors are high and we want to raise some
flags. We all tend to find the anecdotes that line up with our views
even if the majority suggests otherwise. Reminds me of a political
debate where each side claims their party got the upper hand. 🙂 It's
obvious that she will go forward and all we can do is wish her luck.

Quoted message said:

She will run the race (I give her better than even odds of fininshing)
and probably hurt for a while. There is a strong risk of injury but
halfs are relatively forgiving. I would worry for her sake if she
tried a marathon anytime soon as they can really bite you in the rear.

Quoted message said:

More than half the people I know that ramped up this quick, quit
within a year. It certainly isn't optimal.

And what many are trying to suggest with such a rapid ramp can cause one
to stop running. I guess we will have to see how this all plays out. If
nothing else we will get the blow by blow daily foot falls. 😉

-Doug

"Elflord" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

TenKMan said:

Quoted message said:

Damn Doug, I haven't seen this much drama for a single runner in a
single
race in a while in rr.

There's not much else going on here (excluding the trolls)

and they are soooo poor and infantile

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I have known legions of runners who ramped up in a
BIG hurry (I being one of them!!!) and bit it hard in an early race.
She
will run the race (I give her better than even odds of fininshing)
and
probably hurt for a while. There is a strong risk of injury but
halfs are
relatively forgiving.

She's going to be out there for nearly 3hrs.

She might want take food to keep up her energy.

-Doug

Michelle said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

As it is, I think you're making a really good case for dumping the
half and running a 5k or 10k instead. I still don't really
understand why you're using a training program that is appropriate
for a 5k or 10k, to prepare for a half marathon.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Cheers, -- Elflord

Quoted message said:

What he said.

Quoted message said:

He or she is going to start calling you names now.

That might be your style, missy, but it is not mine. Unlike you,
Donovan has been polite and courteous in his criticism of me; unlike
you, he has not acted like a jerk. So I have no reason to call him
names, dearie.

I offered reasonable advice. Name calling started by you.

"Doug Freese" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

<TenKMan> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Damn Doug, I haven't seen this much drama for a single runner in a single
race in a while in rr. I have known legions of runners who ramped up in
a BIG hurry (I being one of them!!!) and bit it hard in an early race.

And you were 60+ when you tried it? She is new to running and older than
me so I think the risk factors are high and we want to raise some flags.

Regardless of age, when have you known a new runner to take sound advice?
Most tend to need hard experience in order to learn. Michelle is no
different. Anyway, it sucks that you are retired and I have 20-25 years
before I can think about it. I wish prices would go up enough to force you
(and Mike Tennant!!) to work like the rest of us.

;-)

On Sep 14, 12:28 pm, Charlie Pendejo <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

TenKMan said:

Damn Doug, I haven't seen this much drama for a single runner in
a single race in a while in rr.

Funny, ain't it.

While there is undoubtedly some basis in well-founded concern, mostly
it's Michelle's style - people want her to acknowledge "you're the
expert, I'm the beginner, you're right I'm wrong." And she shows no
signs of yielding. She's a bad-ass.

Quoted message said:

I have known legions of runners who ramped up in a BIG hurry
(I being one of them!!!)

You and me both, and somehow I doubt we're the only ones or even in
the minority.

Offhand it seems to me quite a large percentage of long-term runners
started out with aspirations right at the edge of, if not beyond, our
realistic abilities to progress. I continue to believe that very
drive is often the biggest part of what will keep someone in the game
over the long haul.

Of course when not brought into balance, that drive results in
constant injury and frustration and dropping out. But also of course,
difficult experiences provide the feedback which informs future
approach, for anyone with the capacity to learn.

I'm thinking of Dan Stumpus, whose first race was an ill-prepared
marathon, qualifies as another someone who stuck with it a while,
learned to adjust his mindset, and became a decent (!!) runner. How
about Ozzie Gontang? I seem to recall a story about his difficult
first marathon following something less than a five year cautiously
considered buildup.

Stripping away style, I do agree with the content of e.g. Doug's post
from 7:10 AM today where he says, among other things, "Assuming you
get through this 1/2 alive and well, I hope your next effort is
another half with a more reasonable plan or better yet, some shorter
races and concentrate on building a base that will keep you at the
game." It seems not unlikely Michelle will reach similar conclusions
after her race. But for now of course she'll be focused on that race,
not the months and goals which come after.

The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom. - William Blake

Doesn't seem like a race but a walkfest

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

That might be your style, missy, but it is not mine. Unlike you,
Donovan has been polite and courteous in his criticism of me;
unlike you, he has not acted like a jerk. So I have no reason to
call him names, dearie.

I offered reasonable advice. Name calling started by you.

Reasonable advice is not "You run too slowly; take up another sport,"
which is essentially what you wrote in your first message to me. And
every message you wrote to or about me contained a put down.

As I see it you started the name calling by referring to me as "he or
she". Show me where I called you names before then.

--
Crossing the starting line is 90%.
Crossing the finish line is the other 90%.

<TenKMan> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Regardless of age, when have you known a new runner to take sound
advice?

Good point but we can try. 😉

Quoted message said:

Anyway, it sucks that you are retired and I have 20-25 years before I
can think about it.

I thought that after I retired that my old work friends would not talk
to me. Instead they insisted that I return because it gives them hope.
Now my waking hours are filled with things that I want to do. Since I
took a lot from the running community when I was working and giving very
little back, I'm now a very active member. I took on membership and the
monthly newsletter and mentor some of the ultra wan-a-bees. I'm on the
stewardship committee for a local land Conservancy building bridges and
laying out a network of trails all in my back yard. There are other
clubs but I won't bore anyone.

< I wish prices would go up enough to force you (and Mike Tennant!!) to
work like the rest of us.

I think 31 years was enough dues to pay. I do worry about the economy
and the severe deficit and who knows, I may have to go back to work. By
the way I do gets calls about once a year from my old to job to come
back as a contractor - i.e, double dip. The money is egregiously high
but I could never return to a life style driven by unrealistic dates and
power hungry suck-ups, unless I was forced to drink Bush beer.

While you're suffering on the job keep that 401 or whatever maxed and
invested in something with reasonable growth. I'm happy to say that
there is life after work.

A friend called the other day that was doing a multi-hour run today but
was unfamiliar with a 5 mile subsection that was not on any maps. At
10am we met and did an out-n-back for the main trail and showed him
alternatives for future runs. We finished up with breakfast at the local
swill hole.

You were probably at work. 🙂

As for Mike, he has not checked in here for a long time. I have to send
him a note to see how he is. I'll bet the influx of dorks like Allass
and TBR, be they one or many people, grew real old and found some forums
that have moderators to keep out the mental midgets.

-Doug

"Doug Freese" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I think 31 years was enough dues to pay. I do worry about the economy and
the severe deficit and who knows, I may have to go back to work. By the
way I do gets calls about once a year from my old to job to come back as a
contractor - i.e, double dip. The money is egregiously high but I could
never return to a life style driven by unrealistic dates and power hungry
suck-ups, unless I was forced to drink Bush beer.

I'm just kidding about retiring and yanking your chain. I might be the only
one around here that loves their job and will find it somewhat difficult to
retire.

Quoted message said:

As for Mike, he has not checked in here for a long time. I have to send
him a note to see how he is. I'll bet the influx of dorks like Allass and
TBR, be they one or many people, grew real old and found some forums that
have moderators to keep out the mental midgets.

Say hi to Mike. He is a good egg.

Quoted message said:

-Doug

In article <[email hidden]>, <TenKMan>

Quoted message said:

I'm just kidding about retiring and yanking your chain. I might be
the only one around here that loves their job and will find it
somewhat difficult to retire.

I retired when I stopped loving my job and it became just a job. That
was eighteen years after I retired from the army.

--
Crossing the starting line is 90%.
Crossing the finish line is the other 90%.

<TenKMan> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I'm just kidding about retiring and yanking your chain.

I knew that. Sorry if I sounded too serious. I was stoking the retired
fire.

Quoted message said:

I might be the only one around here that loves their job and will find
it somewhat difficult to retire.

I also enjoyed my work but sad to say once your climb the corportate
ladder the BS overtakes the fun. If you love your job then by all means
hang in or maybe cut back to 1/2 time.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

As for Mike, he has not checked in here for a long time. I have to
send him a note to see how he is. I'll bet the influx of dorks like
Allass and TBR, be they one or many people, grew real old and found
some forums that have moderators to keep out the mental midgets.

Say hi to Mike. He is a good egg.

Will do!

-Doug