Runs4Sanity
Okay, I am officially a trail convert as all but one of my 4 runs are on trails and I love it (Rocky loves it too). I am not sure if it is my obsessive OCPD (Obsessive-compulsive personality disorder), or that I enjoy checking out my improvements as far as mileage increases and stuff but I still aim for miles over time. I tried to shoot for an hour this morning, but ended up with 1:01:16 because in the end I wanted 6 miles instead of 5.87... I just have to have an even number. I think part of my reasons for this is:
*Do It For Yourself, Do It Because They Said It Was Impossible, Do It Because They Said You Were Incapable*
PRs
5k - 24:15 (7:49 min/mile pace)
10k - 51:47 (8:16 min/mile pace)
15k -1:18:09 (8:24 min/mile pace)
13.1 - 1:53:12 (8:39 min/mile pace)
26:2 - 4:14:55 (9:44 min/mile)
Soon you will start to forget to bring your garmin, next it will be your running aps left in the car, and suddenly your ripped clothes will feel like you are right at home.
You sound like you are quite crazy- so that means you are in the right place.
Welcome.
Wait...... I'm crazy? Who da thought!
Sue
Morning runs are dictated by time...as in I need to be home at a certian time to get to work. Weekends I go for a distance.
05/13/23 Traverse City Trail Festival 25K
08/19/23 Marquette 50 dns 🙄
flashlight and sidewalk
I said both. I record mileage and try to hit mileage goals, but I think time is a fairer measure of what I did for the week (I don't do a lot of speedwork which is the exception to the "use time method" in my head). You can also include cross training easily if you think in terms of hours.
note: if I run for "an hour" +/- 5 minutes counts the same.
**Ask me about streaking**
I voted for "both" as well. I too tend to be stuck in the mileage game, however, when training for Cascade Crest I ran most of my runs on rugged, steep trails. There were weeks where I didn't hit my arbitrary mileage goal, but given I was on my feet for FAR longer than I would have been if I were running the roads, then I didn't stress about it.
I said both because I start with a duration I want to run, and then define the loop to fit with that.
Isn't it strange that most of us agree that duration is what's important, but everyone always reports distance in the daily?
3/8 Way Too Cool 50k WNS
4/19 Tehama Wildflowers 50k
I voted for both. I tend to obsess over tracking my mileage. I like to know what I ran down to the tenth of a mile. The biggest reason I measure time is so I can track my speed. I get too caught up in trying to go faster with each run. This hurts me when I'm trying to increase my distance as I go out too fast. On some of my longer training runs this summer I had to keep telling myself that it was the distance and time on feet that mattered, not how fast I was going.
I like looking back on my mileage and seeing my gains (and losses) and what improvements I've made (races). According my training log summary, I ran almost 19 hours in September......... that just seems sad
I vote both.
As far as the distance and time things, your GPS will not be accurate on the trail. Get used to it.
Time can be a better indicator depending on the terrain. I have some trails around me that force you into 30+ minutes per mile.
Just keep running trails. Eventually the GPS, watch, fuel belt, etc. all become distractions. Go for a run without all that stuff and just enjoy the trail. Look at the trees, smell the grass, enjoy the clouds. The OCD gets a little less intense.
Trail and Ultra Running User Group
True
Uh oh... now what?
Time. I don't have fixed routes and don't have a means of measuring where I went unless I go back and wheel it.
rgot
If you were truly a trail convert, you'd be looking at how much uphill? or amount of elevation change (depending on goals - some races are uphill only).
Depending upon the run, the goal could be time, amount of uphill, or distance. Reality is that any given course intended to get whatever amount of time on feet will have a fixed vertical and distance - unless I do parts of it multiple times because the 1 hr or 2 hr isn't up OR I haven't reached 4000ft up.
One of my races is a 10-hr climbathon, where the finish results are amount of vertical. (distance is just collateral data)
In general, I probably go primarily by time - then pick a course that I think will get me that much time and vertical.
I wanted to vote Time because I believe it is the most important. But I voted both because I have not completely abandoned distance and probably never will grow to the level where I can let go of trivial things like that. Time is the key; mileage will take care of itself.
LB2
Not until I start running the trails at Hoosier National Forest and Lincoln State Park, and John James Audubon State Park, I've ran at JJASP and love their killer hills. The trails I've been running on mainly, I am lucky if my garmin says an elevation gain of 100 feet...... and that is around 6 or 8 miles. I normally do check the elevation changes whether on road or trail, the roads around my house have 5x more hills than and elevation changes than the trails I am running right now. I do like hills, I feel they build more strength in my legs and it's easier to do them than squats and lunges right now. Every time I try to do some squats and lunges, I am feeling it on my next run...... maybe I need to lighten up on the reps
If you were truly a trail convert, you'd be looking at how much uphill? or amount of elevation change (depending on goals - some races are uphill only). Depending upon the run, the goal could be time, amount of uphill, or distance. Reality is that any given course intended to get whatever amount of time on feet will have a fixed vertical and distance - unless I do parts of it multiple times because the 1 hr or 2 hr isn't up OR I haven't reached 4000ft up. One of my races is a 10-hr climbathon, where the finish results are amount of vertical. (distance is just collateral data) In general, I probably go primarily by time - then pick a course that I think will get me that much time and vertical.