I tried, I limped, I stopped. The end.
A list of my PRs in a misguided attempt to impress people that do not care.
It's not in your log so it didn't happen. Try again.
that's right! it shouldah been logged as an .012 mile default hobble at a 9:52 pace! LOG THEM ALL CREMAH!
In order to see the truth, sometimes you have to loose an eye.
http://www.runningahead.com/groups/Utri/
.012 might actually be too generous. FYI I have decided to shut it down for a few days, so I'm gonna miss the group run tonight. Nothing else seems to be working. I'll be baaaaack.
"Beep, Beep!"
I couldn't resist posting this....
If you and a taller friend walk the same distance at the same speed, who will use more energy? According to a just published study in the Journal of Experimental Biology, you will, at least on a per pound basis. Shorter people expend more calories on a per weight basis than their more gangly walking companions.The study took 48 individuals ranging between 5 - 32 years old, 15.9 - 88.7 kg, and 1.07 m (3'6") to 1.83 m (6'0") and measured their metabolic rates and gait mechanics at six different speeds. What they discovered was that the metabolic cost of each stride was identical, regardless of height. Therefore, taller people walk more economically because they take fewer strides than shorter people to cover the same ground.Note, however, that energy expenditure is measured on a per kilogram basis--not on a total calories required basis. So shorter people don't necessarily use more total calories than tall people when walking, they just require more calories per unit weight than their taller brethren. Additionally, the efficiency increase was directly proportional to the change in stature (eg, a 2-meter tall person walks twice as economically as a 1-meter person). Now you know why young children tire so easily on a hike!Interestingly, another finding of the study was that shorter and taller people have the identical gait mechanics, regardless of height. If you transformed a 3-foot tall child into a 7-foot tall mega-kid, the stride mechanics would still be the same.Here's a short summary of the study, or you can read the full article here.
Life's journey is not to arrive safely to the grave in a well-preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways thoroughly used up, totally worn out and loudly proclaiming ... WOW! What a ride!
If by shoutting it down you mean you are passed out drunk in your apartment, then well done. 10 people pounding on your door couldn't wake you.
cremah...let us know if you need any help with that jack.
11/18 log entry....for problems concerning auditory processing/executive functioning call 1- 800-therapy.
YES! great to see you back on the board dave!
i am planning a "running sabbatical" starting 1/1/11 because it really is all about the numbers.
derry will be a disaster and mid-winter will too. it's fine cause i can't run in the cold. not well anyways. hopefully it will help me.
derry will be a disaster and mid-winter will too.
Way to set the bar. At least you can bike in your living room and swim in the dining room.
i must break you.
Cremer come on your log looks pathetic.
MTA: better. And, agreed on some degree of pain being "normal" though I don't think I at all have what you guys deal with.
My salty dogs
Before I start a new thread for this-- does anyone know how to "plan" workouts?
I would prefer to details out the next 16 weeks but not have the miles show up already in the logs.
In another online program I could do that.
Otherwise I plan to start a tread with detailing the weekly plans. Having it in the calendar feature would be a lot better.
The log entry forces my to put in at least .01 miles and then enter the planned distance in the notes. That would be okay if the notes showed up in the summary.
second day hangovah strikes again....oh well...who cares.