General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

race report: Al Gordon Snowflake 4M

Started by Charlie Pendejo · · Last activity · 29 posts · 662 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
25 February 2006
Last activity
28 February 2006
Original author
Charlie Pendejo
Posts
29
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
662
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 29
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. 4 miles, same course as three weeks ago (http://tinyurl.com/zeqw6).

    Since then, 2 weeks of decent 50+ mile base training, then this week
    I've had limited running, with the sort of tightness in my upper right
    leg (piriformis especially) which has preceded injury in the past.

    I had intended a slight cutback this week anyhow but took two days off
    altogether and ran less the others. Did some self-massage and received
    some therapist-massage. Need to get more diligent with the
    self-massage, and add some sort of piriformis stretch to my routine,
    now that I'm doing more faster running - I've been folding more quicker
    stuff in already, and my 24 week schedule says after one more week of
    base we begin reps, which also includes a smaller amount of
    unstructured intervals and some tempo stuff.

    So after 30 minutes of easy running, five or six strides, and a little
    bit of very gentle stretching once warmed up, I felt hopefully loose
    enough to give it my all without straining something. I had worn pants
    over tights on the train ride up to Central Park and for my warmup.
    Never ordinarily do this but figured I'd better try it to keep the legs
    warm and loose. I think it helped. I removed the pants for the race,
    and changed into IMO the prettiest pair of shoes worn by a male racer
    today: http://www.holabirdsports.com/cgi-bin/product?product=042275

    Lined up in much better position than the last time. There are banners
    labelled 5, 6, 7 ... up to 11, for your predicted mile/min pace. The
    vast majority line up further forward than they really run. I lined up
    right at 6, figuring to average about 6:30. Reckoned this was a bit
    further back than most 26:00 aspirants but as it turned out there were
    a lot more guys (this race has separate heats for men and women)
    between that 6 banner and the starting line than I realized, about 30
    seconds worth once the gun fired. This worked out OK: many in front of
    me were slower, but it just wasn't so many hundreds as last time and
    didn't slow me down as much. I wasn't too worried about gun time -
    certainly I don't compete for an AG place in these big races, placing
    118th in M3039 today.

    At the starting line there were four mats, one after the next. I
    started my watch at the first, unsure which one concealed the "start"
    sensors. Must've been a later mat since my official net time was 5"
    faster than my watch. So my first mile split - 6:49 by my watch -
    alarmed me a bit more than it might have. I picked it up a bit.

    Then at the second mile I was a little alarmed again, now at having
    made up nearly all the time I lost (vs. 26' pace) on the first mile.
    Too fast? Maybe not: I was more aware this time that what came up in
    the first mile went back down in the second.

    Plotting the course just now (http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=38280)
    helped clarify that the third mile doesn't just seem tougher because
    it's the third mile, but also because it's more uphill than down. And
    that third mile *was* tough once again, but I was relieved to finish it
    under 6:30. I was only a few seconds off 26' pace, by my watch, at
    this point.

    Found I didn't really have another gear for the first half of mile 4,
    but was able to take advantage of the negative slope of the latter half
    and surpass my goal handily. Less of a kick left at the end but
    neither did I die in the final mile. In fact I was a second faster in
    this mile than last race - which also means slower vs. my overall pace
    this time, but plenty good enough.

    Here's the splits and results, three weeks ago vs. today.

    05 Feb: 6:54 - 6:31 - 6:37 - 6:15 = 26:17, 66.8% WAVA
    25 Feb: 6:44 - 6:18 - 6:27 - 6:14 = 25:43, 68.3% WAVA

    Of course that represents a new 4M PR, and also a new WAVA high water
    mark. I'm happy with that.

  2. Charlie Pendejo said:

    4 miles, same course as three weeks ago (http://tinyurl.com/zeqw6).

    [a great and detailed race report went here]

    Quoted message said:

    Here's the splits and results, three weeks ago vs. today.

    05 Feb: 6:54 - 6:31 - 6:37 - 6:15 = 26:17, 66.8% WAVA
    25 Feb: 6:44 - 6:18 - 6:27 - 6:14 = 25:43, 68.3% WAVA

    Of course that represents a new 4M PR, and also a new WAVA high water
    mark. I'm happy with that.

    Very, very nice job. And those shoes *are* lovely. I'm tempted to get a
    pair.

    Karen

    --
    live! vicariously!

  3. good work pendejo. i've actually never raced this 4 mile route and
    it's a new thing the club is doing. i am curious as to how this route
    compares to the traditional exclusive 4 mile course though.

    a note worthy aspect to this race (that i see reflected daily in my
    training in central park) is of the 4700+ runners in the race, there
    were more women than men.

    I sense this is a progressive trend going forward everywhere. more
    women then men are running and racing. This looms as a hopeful sign
    that even guys like Doug can come to the City and instead of paying
    $200, he can simply enter a race and possibly get laid. Hope springs
    eternal.

  4. Charlie Pendejo said:

    4 miles, same course as three weeks ago (http://tinyurl.com/zeqw6).

    Since then, 2 weeks of decent 50+ mile base training, then this week
    I've had limited running, with the sort of tightness in my upper right
    leg (piriformis especially) which has preceded injury in the past.

    Nice run and nice shoes too btw. That course follows the "hard-easy" rule.
    Miles 1 and 3 are slow, because mile 1 is rolling and mile 3 has cat hill on
    it. Miles 2 and 4 are fast.

    Cheers,
    --
    Donovan Rebbechi
    http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

  5. joe positive said:

    Very, very nice job.

    Thanks for the encouraging words.

    Quoted message said:

    And those shoes *are* lovely. I'm tempted to get a pair.

    This time you can't have mine, so get your own. ;-)

    FWIW, it seems to me they run a tad bigger than most - I wear 7.5 in
    most street shoes, 8.5 in most Nike, Asics, Brooks, Saucony, and I got
    8.5 in these but would choose 8.0 if there's a next pair.

    No medial post, Donovan (who BTW was way the hell out in front of me -
    2:16 faster - this morning), and the wife sez it's exactly 7 oz in size
    8.5. I find them softer, I guess one might say less supportive, than
    other flats. At just a hair lighter than the Fastwitch, they seem like
    considerably less shoe.

    Durability? They're holding up beautifully after 7.4 miles.

  6. have you ever ran this route donnie? which do you think is the faster
    or more challenging, take it which way you want, route? i am used to
    comfortably rabbiting the 72nd transverse up cat hill and hitting the 2
    mi mark at the 102nd transverse at 12:04 - 12: 08 or so.....and then
    summarily tanking on the rolling hills @ mile 3.

    on first blush, i think i would have faster times on this new 4 mi as
    the most challenging part of the course for the runner i am comes at
    the start & when i'm fresh & springy. i'd rather take on that singular
    cat hill in mile 3 & flatten out than the rolling hills...seems less
    stressful & fatiguing...whaddaya think?

  7. Charlie Pendejo said:

    changed into IMO the prettiest pair of shoes worn by a male racer
    today: http://www.holabirdsports.com/cgi-bin/product?product=042275

    Did they go with the tights that's what I want to know. Looks like I shall
    have to bring an extra suitcase to fill with shoes :-)

    Quoted message said:

    I wasn't too worried about gun time -
    certainly I don't compete for an AG place in these big races, placing
    118th in M3039 today.

    300th overall, yes? Well into top 10%, nice.

    Quoted message said:

    05 Feb: 6:54 - 6:31 - 6:37 - 6:15 = 26:17, 66.8% WAVA
    25 Feb: 6:44 - 6:18 - 6:27 - 6:14 = 25:43, 68.3% WAVA

    Complements of 3 weeks ago reiterated. You're getting good at this pacing
    lark.

    Quoted message said:

    Of course that represents a new 4M PR, and also a new WAVA high water
    mark. I'm happy with that.

    Quite right too. Sub-25 after the speedwork eh?

    PS You didn't say if Mrs P enjoyed her race (or indeed if she raced)?

  8. Donovan Rebbechi said:

    Nice run

    Your's doesn't look to sloppy either. About what you were expecting or
    not?

  9. Quoted message said:

    have you ever ran this route donnie?

    He did a 23:27 yesterday for 96th place overall.

  10. [previous copy canceled and resent]

    Donovan Rebbechi said:

    Nice run

    Yours doesn't look to sloppy either. About what you were expecting or not?

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

    Quoted message said:

    a note worthy aspect to this race (that i see reflected daily in my
    training in central park) is of the 4700+ runners in the race, there
    were more women than men.

    I sense this is a progressive trend going forward everywhere. more
    women then men are running and racing.

    I agree. Of the 8-12 that show weekly 80% are females and all of those
    are doing the 50k. The women have more moxy and dedication. Probably why
    they get to bring in the children. Then again it may be my angelical
    personality.

    Quoted message said:

    This looms as a hopeful sign
    that even guys like Doug can come to the City and instead of paying
    $200, he can simply enter a race and possibly get laid.

    I'm your basic philanthropist and would rather spend the money and
    support a good cause. All this free stuff is just that free. Support
    your local hookers!!!

    -DF

  12. Quoted message said:

    have you ever ran this route donnie? which do you think is the faster
    or more challenging, take it which way you want, route? i am used to
    comfortably rabbiting the 72nd transverse up cat hill and hitting the 2
    mi mark at the 102nd transverse at 12:04 - 12: 08 or so.....and then
    summarily tanking on the rolling hills @ mile 3.

    on first blush, i think i would have faster times on this new 4 mi as
    the most challenging part of the course for the runner i am comes at
    the start & when i'm fresh & springy. i'd rather take on that singular
    cat hill in mile 3 & flatten out than the rolling hills...seems less
    stressful & fatiguing...whaddaya think?

    Doesn't think make a whole lot of difference for me -- I see them as
    essentially the same course. The mile with Cat hill in it is very slow,
    but the rolling hills are hard too.

    Cheers,
    --
    Donovan Rebbechi
    http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

  13. steve common said:

    [previous copy canceled and resent]

    Donovan Rebbechi said:

    Nice run

    Yours doesn't look to sloppy either. About what you were expecting or not?

    My PR on that loop is 21:47, so I'm not quite in peak form right now. But
    that's OK. I was coming off a two week rest, so I didn't really know what to
    expect.

    Cheers,
    --
    Donovan Rebbechi
    http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

  14. steve common said:

    300th overall, yes? Well into top 10%, nice.

    And a considerably worse place than last race, this one I guess being a
    team pointer and bringing out the likes of DR. That's fine with me;
    after a few more years of aerobic base building, speedwork, and racing
    experience maybe I'll contend for AG awards at little races in
    Middle-of-Nowhere, Iowa or Podunk, NY or Helsinki, Finland; but there's
    just too damn much talent at the big races here.

    Quoted message said:

    PS You didn't say if Mrs P enjoyed her race (or indeed if she raced)?

    She did, and did. I thank you on her behalf for asking.

    At this point she's there for the experience and relatively
    uninterested in establishing the fastest PRs possible - plus the 4
    miles is just about her long run to date. So she made a few friends
    out there, and finished slower than she might have after jogging in
    place for a couple minutes to allow one of her starting-line companions
    - a woman at her first race, recovering from a respiratory infection
    and unsure of completing the race - to catch up, and then pacing her
    the rest of the way.

    I'd initially declined to mention her experience out of an instinct to
    protect her privacy, since that's not a respected commodity here.

  15. steve common wrote:
    1> Your's doesn't look to sloppy ...
    2> Yours doesn't look to sloppy ...

    third time's the charm: "Yours doesn't look too sloppy ..." ;-p

  16. Quoted message said:

    I'd initially declined to mention her experience out of an instinct to


    protect her privacy, since that's not a respected commodity here.
    ___
    amusing, complaining about not enjoying a "respected commodity" while
    you benefit, hide in, and enjoy the respected commodity of white
    privilege. pathetic.

    Why the swipe at me Charles? Was it necessary? I had buried the
    hatchet, went back to refering to you exclusively in your chosen
    character "Pendejo". I even congratulated you on your result in your
    race. These are facts for all to see. Was that not clear to you? It
    was clear to Doug, Donovan, Steven Common, and everyone else. You've
    chosen to ressurrect this Charles.....why?

    Why could you not sustain and maintain "letting it go" as I have?
    That matter was "buried" with me Charles. I had moved on, that's
    clear, and your fellow white privileged newsgroup friends will affirm
    that...it's undeniable. Was what I did not enough?

    After I tolerated 1) your talk, 2) your cowardly posture, 3) your
    hiding in the white privilege this newgroup embraces & extends to
    you.....after all this i took the high road, after all this, I let it
    go. But you could not avoid but take another swipe could you Charles?

    Why would you ressurrect this? Pendejo is dead. You are Charles
    Anderson from this day going forward. Blame yourself. If the white
    people on this newsgroup are honest with themeselves....regardless of
    what they think of me, they will concede and admit I made a good faith
    effort to "let it go" and "move on". What have you done Charles?
    After I take the high road, you take a swipe. These are the
    indisputable and clear facts Charles.

    However white privilege will excuse and protect you once again Charles.
    I am sure TKB, Doug, etc are unwilling to view the facts and say,
    "Lance let it go and moved on, Charles chose to ressurrect it with a
    swipe".

    I am not going to let it go again Charles. And when you wonder why I
    choose to recognize you by your name and not character.....remind
    yourself that when I "let it go" and "moved on".....you were not
    willing to do the same and had to get in a swipe.

  17. Charlie Pendejo said:

    third time's the charm: "Yours doesn't look too sloppy ..." ;-p

    Awwwww fuggid :-) I'd spotted it toooooo but forgot to bloody change it.
    Time I went for a run to blow the dust and cobwebs out of what's left of
    my brain ;-)

  18. lance said:

    Why the swipe at me Charles? Was it necessary?

    You're correct, it was unnecessary and I am sorry to have brought it
    up. My apologies.

  19. "Charlie Pendejo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    ...
    So after 30 minutes of easy running, five or six strides, and a little
    bit of very gentle stretching once warmed up, I felt hopefully loose
    enough to give it my all without straining something. I had worn pants
    over tights on the train ride up to Central Park and for my warmup.
    Never ordinarily do this but figured I'd better try it to keep the legs
    warm and loose. I think it helped...

    Good idea keeping the legs warm. Recently I often wear two pairs of running
    pants to help keep the muscles warm (should have also worn wind pants
    today). It sure helps things stay loose, and fairly even layering over the
    whole body seems to work better for cooling / staying warm etc.

    Quoted message said:

    ...
    Here's the splits and results, three weeks ago vs. today.

    05 Feb: 6:54 - 6:31 - 6:37 - 6:15 = 26:17, 66.8% WAVA
    25 Feb: 6:44 - 6:18 - 6:27 - 6:14 = 25:43, 68.3% WAVA

    Of course that represents a new 4M PR, and also a new WAVA high water
    mark. I'm happy with that.

    Nice race Charlie. Moving right up to that 70% marker. Nice to see you
    focusing on something measurable and competitive before you get seduced into
    the trail/ultra underworld - as seems to have happened to Phil M.

    -Tony

  20. Tony S. said:

    Nice race Charlie.

    Thanks, Tony.

    Quoted message said:

    Nice to see you focusing on something measurable and competitive
    before you get seduced into the trail/ultra underworld - as seems to
    have happened to Phil M.

    Ha! I'd be very happy indeed to become the runner Phil has.

    And in many respects I think Phil's more into "measurable" than I.
    "Competitive", I ain't touching. Trail ultra underworld? Absolutely,
    its gravity will get me too. An eventual escape from New York will no
    doubt hasten my degeneration.

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.