'03 Highs & Lows & '04 Goals



G

Globaldisc

Guest
I clocked 1600+ training miles in '03, missed several weeks due to injury.
High point was my 6:14/mile in a 5 mile race on 1/12/03. Had a major injury,
turned 40...and 6 months later I did the same distance at 6:53.....go figure.
Somewhat proud of the 5:27 I clocked in a 1 mile race and very proud of the
7:34 min/mike average I managed in a Marathon I did not train for.

'04 Goals: 1) To clock 6:10 @ 4 Mile / 5 Mile distance and sub 6:10 @ 5K.
7:1:00 Boston Marathon and or 1 hour or less under the winner's time. Sub 3 Hour NYC Marathon.

Also...to sneak up on and some how manage to beat the ng's "Donovan" at some race....any race....I
don't care which distance...1 mile, a marathon...I don't care.......just once :) hahahahahaha

Andrew...
 
In article <[email protected]>, Globaldisc wrote:
> I clocked 1600+ training miles in '03, missed several weeks due to injury.

I think I'm narrowly edging you out as the most woefully undertrained runner, having done around
1366 miles in '03. The good news is that about half of that came from the last 4 months of training.

> High point was my 6:14/mile in a 5 mile race on 1/12/03. Had a major injury, turned 40...and 6
> months later I did the same distance at 6:53.....go figure.
High points:

Race: Frostbite 10 mile Jan: Why I liked it: first NYRR race, brutally cold (7 degrees), made my
goal (finished under 7:00 pace by just 7 seconds), ran negative splits.

Race: Rabbit Run 5k April: Why I liked it: I beat Global (hahahahaha), major breakthrough (AG% 67.6,
compared with less than 65 in prior races)

Race: Race to Deliver 4M Nov: Why I liked it: Another breakthrough (69.3), negative splits, first
performance since the Rabbit Run that was a worthy successor.

Low point: Race: Run to Liberty 10k, Aug 03 Why it sucked: ran it at a 7:24 pace. 'Nuff said.

> Somewhat proud of the 5:27 I clocked in a 1 mile race

Don't be too proud of it. I almost beat you, and it was just one week after my low point.

> and very proud of the 7:34 min/mike average I managed in a Marathon I did not train for.

Your marathon was a good effort, despite the horrific pacing strategy.

> Also...to sneak up on

Sneak up on ? That's kind of hard to do when you start in the front line and run positive splits. By
the time you see me, I'm going to be moving at 6:00 pace or faster, so you'd better have some gas
left in the tank.

Anyway, I should be in all the club points races next year.

Goals for '04:
(1) enter the 70% club (fell just short at 69.9 this year)
(2) score for my club in one of the club points races (I think this actually implies (1))
(3) survive the year without unscheduled downtime

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/
 
>Goals for '04:
>(1) enter the 70% club (fell just short at 69.9 this year)

Say, where is there a calculator or chart for those numbers? One of the local clubs has a calculator
on their Web site, but I think it's not the same (it gives my latest 10K time as 77%, but I doubt
I'm ahead of you guys).

--
Brian P. Baresch Fort Worth, Texas, USA Professional editing and proofreading

If you're going through hell, keep going. --Winston Churchill
 
Couldn't wait for the Training Year thread, eh? :)

--
David (in Hamilton, ON) www.allfalldown.org "Globaldisc" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:20031227212236.19959.00001102@mb-
m01.aol.com...
> I clocked 1600+ training miles in '03, missed several weeks due to injury. High point was my
> 6:14/mile in a 5 mile race on 1/12/03. Had a major
injury,
> turned 40...and 6 months later I did the same distance at 6:53.....go
figure.
> Somewhat proud of the 5:27 I clocked in a 1 mile race and very proud of
the
> 7:34 min/mike average I managed in a Marathon I did not train for.
>
> '04 Goals: 1) To clock 6:10 @ 4 Mile / 5 Mile distance and sub 6:10 @ 5K.
> 3:08:00 Boston Marathon and or 1 hour or less under the winner's time.
Sub 3
> Hour NYC Marathon.
>
> Also...to sneak up on and some how manage to beat the ng's "Donovan" at
some
> race....any race....I don't care which distance...1 mile, a marathon...I
don't
> care.......just once :) hahahahahaha
>
> Andrew...
 
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>, Globaldisc wrote:
> > I clocked 1600+ training miles in '03, missed several weeks due to injury.
>
> I think I'm narrowly edging you out as the most woefully undertrained runner, having done around
> 1366 miles in '03. The good news is that about half of that came from the last 4 months of
> training.

Gentlemen,

Way to go on good reports of another good year of running.

However, let me inject a personal observation and request: please be careful about how this
thread is going. Whining in a self-deprecating fashion about how you both suck as runners --
only accomplishing 1300-1600 miles training, only achieving miles around 6 min/mile and
marathons only around 3 hrs -- will make an awful lot of folks here feel so inferior as to be
alienated. One of the strengths of rec.running is that it caters supportively and
enthusiastically to runners at all levels and alienates no one. So keep on competing with
yourselves and each other, but please be careful not to boast of great accomplishments in a way
which will alienate others and thereby diminish rec.running.

Best regards,

-- Josh in Syracuse
 
Donovan Rebbechi <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Goals for '04:
> (1) enter the 70% club of straight people(fell just short at 69.9 this year)
> (2) score for my club in one of the club orgy races (I think this actually implies (1))
> (3) survive the year without unscheduled downtime or getting AIDS.
>
> Cheers mon amigos,Viva la difference!

You are a sick perverted little (gay) slimeball Rebechi.
 
In article <[email protected]>, Brian Baresch wrote:
>>Goals for '04:
>>(1) enter the 70% club (fell just short at 69.9 this year)
>
> Say, where is there a calculator or chart for those numbers? One of the local clubs has a
> calculator on their Web site, but I think it's not the same (it gives my latest 10K time as 77%,
> but I doubt I'm ahead of you guys).

You're too humble. What time at what age ?

What's the website ? There's a chart for the numbers in Glover's book, I might make my own calc some
time if I can reverse-engineer the formulas.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/
 
In article <[email protected]>, Josh Steinberg wrote:
> Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
>> In article <[email protected]>, Globaldisc wrote:
>> > I clocked 1600+ training miles in '03, missed several weeks due to injury.
>>
>> I think I'm narrowly edging you out as the most woefully undertrained runner, having done around
>> 1366 miles in '03. The good news is that about half of that came from the last 4 months of
>> training.
>
> Gentlemen,
>
> Way to go on good reports of another good year of running.
>
> However, let me inject a personal observation and request: please be careful about how this
> thread is going. Whining in a self-deprecating fashion about how you both suck as runners --
> only accomplishing 1300-1600 miles training, only achieving miles around 6 min/mile and

Well it all depends on how you do those miles and races, but if you do 1300 miles by doing almost 6
months of downtime or near-downtime, or if those race performances are substantially worse than
prior performances, of course it will be disappointing.

Of course someone else may well run exactly the same time (or slower) and it will be a
groundbreaking PR for them. Or they might run 1366 miles in a year via 12 months of exactly 113
miles, which really would be an impressive achievement. The point is that all these numbers are
relative to our (at times unstated) expectations. Neither me nor Global care a great deal about
absolute performances.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/
 
Josh Steinberg <[email protected]> wrote:
> Donovan Rebbechi wrote:

>> In article <[email protected]>, Globaldisc wrote:
>> > I clocked 1600+ training miles in '03, missed several weeks due to injury.
>>
>> I think I'm narrowly edging you out as the most woefully undertrained runner, having done around
>> 1366 miles in '03. The good news is that about half of that came from the last 4 months of
>> training.

> Gentlemen,

> Way to go on good reports of another good year of running.

> However, let me inject a personal observation and request: please be careful about how this
> thread is going. Whining in a self-deprecating fashion about how you both suck as runners --
> only accomplishing 1300-1600 miles training, only achieving miles around 6 min/mile and
> marathons only around 3 hrs -- will make an awful lot of folks here feel so inferior as to be
> alienated. One of the strengths of rec.running is that it caters supportively and
> enthusiastically to runners at all levels and alienates no one. So keep on competing with
> yourselves and each other, but please be careful not to boast of great accomplishments in a
> way which will alienate others and thereby diminish rec.running.

> Best regards,

> -- Josh in Syracuse

--While I partially agree with your sentiment, part of me also feels that people need to deal with
their own insufficiency issues if they can't handle the fact that some people might be at a higher
level than them. I get me butt handed to me in most of the races I run, but I don't let that stop me
from trying. If someone is alienated from here simply because someone else (who might be 30 years
younger, not have a family to spend time with, etc) is doing better, then I hope they deal with the
issues that cause them to feel that way or they will be having a hard time with life. Andy Hass
 
>> Say, where is there a calculator or chart for those numbers? One of the local clubs has a
>> calculator on their Web site, but I think it's not the same (it gives my latest 10K time as 77%,
>> but I doubt I'm ahead of you guys).
>
>You're too humble. What time at what age ?

42:35 at 40.

>What's the website ? There's a chart for the numbers in Glover's book, I might make my own calc
>some time if I can reverse-engineer the formulas.

The one I mentioned is on the Plano Pacers site, http://www.planopacers.org/. However, I poked
around in Google and found one at http://www.usarunningclubs.com/age.html that evaluates the same
performance at 66.8%, which is more in line with your numbers. I suspect that one is closer to the
age-grading "mainstream".

--
Brian P. Baresch Fort Worth, Texas, USA Professional editing and proofreading

If you're going through hell, keep going. --Winston Churchill
 
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:

>> However, let me inject a personal observation and request: please be careful about how this
>> thread is going. Whining in a self-deprecating fashion about how you both suck as runners --
>> only accomplishing 1300-1600 miles training, only achieving miles around 6 min/mile and
>
>
> Well it all depends on how you do those miles and races, but if you do 1300 miles by doing almost
> 6 months of downtime or near-downtime, or if those race performances are substantially worse than
> prior performances, of course it will be disappointing.

And I'll contend that as long as you keep running all those races and balls to to wall rather then
picking and choosing, you will continue to ******** the injury Gods. Use the winter to build a solid
distance/power(no speed) base and stay the hell away from any races until spring.

Remember over reaching vs over training??? Study very carefully your last years log book!!!

--
Doug Freese "Caveat Lector" [email protected]
 
In article <[email protected]>, Doug Freese wrote:
>
>
> Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
>
>>> However, let me inject a personal observation and request: please be careful about how this
>>> thread is going. Whining in a self-deprecating fashion about how you both suck as runners --
>>> only accomplishing 1300-1600 miles training, only achieving miles around 6 min/mile and
>>
>>
>> Well it all depends on how you do those miles and races, but if you do 1300 miles by doing almost
>> 6 months of downtime or near-downtime, or if those race performances are substantially worse than
>> prior performances, of course it will be disappointing.
>
> And I'll contend that as long as you keep running all those races and balls to to wall rather then
> picking and choosing, you will continue to ******** the injury Gods.

Are you confusing me with someone else ? Total of 13 races this year, and only 3 of those were over
4 miles (10 miles, 10k and 5 miles)

> Use the winter to build a solid distance/power(no speed) base and stay the hell away from any
> races until spring.

Have one race scheduled for Jan and one for Feb. Also scheduled 4 weeks of nothing besides
easy running.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/
 
In article <[email protected]>, Brian Baresch wrote:
>>> Say, where is there a calculator or chart for those numbers? One of the local clubs has a
>>> calculator on their Web site, but I think it's not the same (it gives my latest 10K time as 77%,
>>> but I doubt I'm ahead of you guys).
>>
>>You're too humble. What time at what age ?
>
> 42:35 at 40.

That works out as 65.5% on the nyrrc website.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/
 
Josh Steinberg <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
> > In article <[email protected]>, Globaldisc wrote:
> > > I clocked 1600+ training miles in '03, missed several weeks due to injury.
> >
> > I think I'm narrowly edging you out as the most woefully undertrained runner, having done around
> > 1366 miles in '03. The good news is that about half of that came from the last 4 months of
> > training.
>
> Gentlemen,
>
> Way to go on good reports of another good year of running.
>
> However, let me inject a personal observation and request: please be careful about how this
> thread is going. Whining in a self-deprecating fashion about how you both suck as runners --
> only accomplishing 1300-1600 miles training, only achieving miles around 6 min/mile and
> marathons only around 3 hrs -- will make an awful lot of folks here feel so inferior as to be
> alienated. One of the strengths of rec.running is that it caters supportively and
> enthusiastically to runners at all levels and alienates no one. So keep on competing with
> yourselves and each other, but please be careful not to boast of great accomplishments in a
> way which will alienate others and thereby diminish rec.running.
>
> Best regards,
>
> -- Josh in Syracuse

Hi Josh,

Just to provide a little of that balance, I'll post. I wasn't going to since things have gone so
badly the last couple years. First the down factors: my training and milage had been decreasing and
my weight increasing for several years due to work. Then in '02 hurting my hip caused a total
stoppage of running for several months. getting back to it seems to be harder that starting new. And
then being out of work, you would think would allow me time to get back into it. But the stress of
job hunting dropped my motivation even more.

Okay, so it's '03 and I struggled without work for the first 5 months of the year. Then starting
work I feel like I need to put the job as top priority.

So for the year I haven't lost much weight (but stopped the weight gain pattern) I haven't gain back
any speed (typical easy pace is now about 12minute miles where I used to be able to count on
10minute or better pace) I ran one race (5k turkey trot) Mileage for the year will be about 350.
(Yes that's about 1,000miles less than some others posting here)

So, am I upset? No. I know I can do better. And that is my montra for '04.

That is the one lesson I've gained from running. Most folks take up New Year's resolutions and
expect to instantly change from January 1 onward. That's not how life works. Pick a resolution that
you will achieve at the end of next year, IOW a goal line, not a target.

So since you've drawn me out Josh, here's some specifics. I plan to achieve these goals in 2004:
* Lose at least 10 pounds
* Increase milage back up to about 20 per week, or at least 500 for the year.
* schedule several races, including a fall half marathon (I'd really like to do a spring one, but
I'm trying to be conservative).
* stretch every day (I still have a habit of only stretching after a run. I need to separate these
somewhat.)

The first three goals are pretty much tied together, the running will help the weightloss which will
improve my pace which will improve my distance. I'm going to try a variation of the timing golas for
a couple months for increasing mileage. The pattern is: run an out and back course, outbound for
10minutes at slightly above conversation pace, and try to beat that time back. When I can run the
split negatively three times in a row, then I'll up the outbound time by about the difference (ie if
the difference was 30seconds, I'll make the next run 10:30 outbound).

I've started this already. I'll start posting in the weekly thread on my progress next week (year).

So any other slower runners can post now. Mine should be near the back of the pack, if not last. 8^)

So Josh, what's your goals?

Enjoy the run. Ed
 
>> 42:35 at 40.
>
>That works out as 65.5% on the nyrrc website.

I've looked on the NYRRC site for a calculator or chart. Where did you find it? Thanks!

--
Brian P. Baresch Fort Worth, Texas, USA Professional editing and proofreading

If you're going through hell, keep going. --Winston Churchill
 
In article <[email protected]>, Brian Baresch wrote:
>>> 42:35 at 40.
>>
>>That works out as 65.5% on the nyrrc website.
>
> I've looked on the NYRRC site for a calculator or chart. Where did you find it? Thanks!

Haven't been able to find one either. One of these days, I'll use Bob Glovers book and put a
calculator based on that on my website.

What I did was look up the results for a 10k race and find another 40 year old male with a
similar time.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/
 
On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 22:33:50 +0000 (UTC), Donovan Rebbechi
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Haven't been able to find one either. One of these days, I'll use Bob Glovers book and put a
>calculator based on that on my website.

Try here: http://www.personal.rdg.ac.uk/~snsgrubb/athletics/runcalc.html

You can use the web page itself, or you could just grab the javascript (all the calculations are client-
side, and the author encourages people to use his code). Or you could download the spreadsheet
listed on the page, and use (or reverse-engineer) the VBA functions in it.

I'm not much of an Excel/VBA head, but I've started writing a "front" sheet to my copy that lets you
enter all your race info, and the functions will automagically calculate your age-graded
percentages. It's sort of a fun exercise.

Karen
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back