Competitive Jerks Racing and Training - 2023 (Read 502 times)

wcrunner2


Are we there, yet?

    wcrunner thanks for the link to the race reports. I just finished the 6 day one. He must have been some type of elite in the sport if he was trying to get the record, and had as much planned out. He mentioned his crew involving a western states finisher which is awesome, but I don't know who it was. I don't know the winners of THAT race either.

    Oh and I was thinking about you running with a timex yesterday. RB of mine is 'following hansons" and claimed he needed a newer GPS watch "because hansons uses miles for training." I told him to run for 15 minutes at a hard pace and he kept going back to "well it has to be a specific pace, and it has to be miles." I'm not sure how you trained for a marathon. The same person who previously mapped out runs and tracked the time it took to finish them.

     

     

    Bob holds/held numerous M50-54 and M55-59 U.S. ultra records and twice missed qualifying for the US 24 Hour National team by 400m or so. Only the top 6 in the country make the team to compete at the World Championship. He went as an alternate. He was the first, possibly still the only U.S. M50 runner to exceed 150 miles for 24 hours.

     

    Since the marathon has never really been a goal race for me except when I tried to qualify for the 100th Boston (DNFed qualifying race with stomach issues), I just did the normal training one would do for 5K- HM, with more speed work for the mile during indoor season.  Long runs topped out at 15-16 miles and I included good amounts of intervals like 12 x 400m at mile race pace. Despite racing almost exclusively ultras now, my forte was always the shorter distances.  My 800m to HM times are all significantly better than my marathon PB even when I was training 70 mpw.

     2023 Races:

          Racing on hold

     

         


    Mmmm Bop

      I think you're referencing Tiffany Newell here, who ran an 18:02,30 to set a new Canadian indoor AG record for the 45-49 bracket at the age of 49. That's faster than I ever was, but still not that fast. It age-grades to around 86% (using the calculator from runbundle which doesn't take into account that times indoors are usually a tad slower than outdoors). The Canadian outdoor AG record for the 45-49 bracket stands at 16:51, set by Marylin Arsenault at the age of 47 - age-grading to around 92%, so there is room for improvement. You have to take age-grading with a grain of salt anyway: The German AG record for the W60-64 bracket stands at 17:59,xx, age-grading to 100,5% .

       

      About the notion that in distance running it's hemoglobin that drives performance and thus lean muscle mass and strength gained over many years, in Newell's case several decades, don't play a decisive role?  I'm not sure. Why then is it consensus that distance runners should strength train, too? There seems to be an advantage there ...

       

      Sorry for chiming in without invitation .

       

      Ok Josh, that did actually give me a chuckle and I thank you for that. 

      5k - 17:53 (4/19)   10k - 37:53 (11/18)   Half - 1:23:18 (4/19)   Full - 2:50:43 (4/19)

      JMac11


      RIP Milkman

        It looks like you hit that Daniels converted time. Running a 6 mile tempo 2 days after a 5K would be very hard to me. I think you're in great shape!

         

        I also would say Newton is not the be all and end all. Many people are able to get to the top of Heartbreak, feel terrible, but recover on the next mile or two downhill. I was sadly not one of those 

        5K: 16:37 (11/20)  |  10K: 34:49 (10/19)  |  HM: 1:14:57 (5/22)  |  FM: 2:36:31 (12/19) 

         

         

        wcrunner2


        Are we there, yet?

           

          I also would say Newton is not the be all and end all. Many people are able to get to the top of Heartbreak, feel terrible, but recover on the next mile or two downhill. I was sadly not one of those 

           

          My first Boston I didn't realize I was at the top of Heartbreak until a spectator yelled out that it's all downhill from here. I was expecting a monstrous killer hill and Heartbreak wasn't any worse than many of the hills I trained on in CT.

           2023 Races:

                Racing on hold

           

               

          JMac11


          RIP Milkman

             

            My first Boston I didn't realize I was at the top of Heartbreak until a spectator yelled out that it's all downhill from here. I was expecting a monstrous killer hill and Heartbreak wasn't any worse than many of the hills I trained on in CT.

             

            I agree. What killed me more was that I was running a bit too fast given the temps that day (it was a hot Boston, shocking). Heartbreak just put the nail in the coffin.

            5K: 16:37 (11/20)  |  10K: 34:49 (10/19)  |  HM: 1:14:57 (5/22)  |  FM: 2:36:31 (12/19) 

             

             


            Mmmm Bop

              Is Heartbreak Hill at Boston more difficult than 5th Avenue at NYC? 

              I didn’t do my homework when I ran NYC and didn’t realise that 5th Avenue was a gradual uphill climb (which feels like a mountain at mile 23) and thought I was dying a slow death. But once I got to Central Park I recovered and managed a “sprint” finish to sneak under 3 hours!

              5k - 17:53 (4/19)   10k - 37:53 (11/18)   Half - 1:23:18 (4/19)   Full - 2:50:43 (4/19)

              DavePNW


                 

                I was expecting a monstrous killer hill and Heartbreak wasn't any worse than many of the hills I trained on in CT.

                 

                 

                I also would say Newton is not the be all and end all. Many people are able to get to the top of Heartbreak, feel terrible, but recover on the next mile or two downhill. I was sadly not one of those 

                 

                Yep. Training in Seattle, the Newton hills were nothing too crazy. It’s just where in the race they’re located (miles 17-21), and depends on the weather (with the late start, it can get pretty warm by then). Once I got to the halfway point around Wellesley, I was actually looking forward to the hills. I figured they might slow me a bit, but I could power through them and then ride the downhill the rest of the way. Did not quite work out that way. It was already warm, humid, and sunny by the time I got there, I struggled through it, and they broke me. Got a bit of a second wind right after heartbreak, since it’s such a steep downhill, but it was very short-lived. I death-marched pretty much the rest of the way in.

                Dave

                Running Problem


                Problem Child

                  JMac thanks buddy. Sometimes it's easier to do things when you don't know what you don't know. Stupidity, or ignorance, has an advantage sometimes. As for heartbreak, I would GUESS people who went out well beyond their abilities have suffered there more than someone who stuck to a plan like "don't run a half marathon PR in the first half of a marathon." Go out 10 seconds too fast for the first half of a marathon and you might live to regret your choices, or you just might be stupid enough to pull it off. Checkers or wreckers baby.

                  It DID serve as a good test to learn just how much it can hurt, and how much I could pull back to maintain marathon effort for a few miles just to get to the top.

                   

                  dave heat definatley has me concerned. Heck....today's 44F temps have me concerned about running marathon pace after work. I'm going to go drink some more water just to make sure I don't get dehydrated.

                  Many of us aren't sure what the hell point you are trying to make and no matter how we guess, it always seems to be something else. Which usually means a person is doing it on purpose.

                  VDOT 55.2

                  5k18:xx | Marathon 2:55:22

                  DavePNW


                     

                     

                    dave heat definatley has me concerned. Heck....today's 44F temps have me concerned about running marathon pace after work. I'm going to go drink some more water just to make sure I don't get dehydrated.

                     

                    Of course heat is always a concern at Boston or any spring marathon, if you live anywhere resembling cold-weather country (and/or are an early morning runner). In my lead-up to Boston, I don't think the temp got above the 40s for a single training run. I show up at Boston and suddenly it's 60 and humid at the starting line, warming up to 70 and full sun by the finish. It's hard to back off enough on pace to account for that. There's a reason my 4 fastest marathons were all fall races; they had starting temps in the 39-44 range.

                    Dave

                    Running Problem


                    Problem Child

                      dave I just saw your team went against mine last week in the 2023 competition. I guess it's a REAL good thing I went out and raced a 5k. SHEESH! dead tie for first place right now between your team and mine.

                      Many of us aren't sure what the hell point you are trying to make and no matter how we guess, it always seems to be something else. Which usually means a person is doing it on purpose.

                      VDOT 55.2

                      5k18:xx | Marathon 2:55:22

                      DavePNW


                        dave I just saw your team went against mine last week in the 2023 competition. I guess it's a REAL good thing I went out and raced a 5k. SHEESH! dead tie for first place right now between your team and mine.

                         

                        It's on! And I came up 0.7 miles short of getting the point for highest mileage, that would have put us in first!

                        Dave


                        You big Dosser

                          I’m looking forward to destroying all the plants in the garden this Spring!

                          darkwave


                          Mother of Cats

                             

                            You and DK, however, are the people directly impacted by this as it is you who could be losing a podium, an age group award, sub-elite entry discount, etc due to competition from them. And if you do not feel outraged by it, then it'd be silly if were to get offended/outraged for you.

                             

                            I'm outraged with some aspects of the discussion - generally the views expressed by those on one far side of the debate.  I have multiple non-running friends who believe that the women's division of all sports should be open to all who identify as women, independent of physiology.  Some of those friends believe that there is truly no difference in performance physiology wise, and that any difference that does appear is either minimal or the result of cultural factors.  Others believe that inclusion should be the highest priority in sports.

                             

                            That latter point really ticks me off, honestly.  I think that's because I grew up in a time where women were encouraged to be active and play sports (thanks, Title 9) but we were encouraged to do them for fun, for the physical benefits, and for the joy of interacting with our peers.  Being competitive against anyone except yourself - i.e. wanting to win - was a social faux pas.

                             

                            So when someone tells me that women's sports are about inclusion, and that I should be fine with losing to someone who identifies as female but has male physiology, I get really angry.  Because it sounds like a return to an earlier era I thought we had moved past, where men are encouraged to want to win and to demand fair competition, but women should welcome and nurture everyone.

                             

                            At the same time, as I've noted before, I do think that defining what is physiologically female is much harder than having someone drop their pants.  And that it is possible, for someone who was born physically male to transition to a different sex.

                             

                            So I take a middle position, which pretty much aligns with where World Athletics has currently fallen.

                            Everyone's gotta running blog; I'm the only one with a POOL-RUNNING blog.

                             

                            And...if you want a running Instagram where all the pictures are of cats, I've got you covered.

                            darkwave


                            Mother of Cats

                              DW: Thanks for that detailed explanation. I'm somewhat familiar with Dr. Harper's work, more through other people referring to it than reading her actual studies.  I've definitely seen differences between events, though I'm somewhat perplexed that World Athletics doesn't extend the criteria down to the sprints, since that's where I would expect testosterone to have the largest influence.

                               

                              I think that's coming.

                               

                              The current WA standards stem from the CAS litigation that involved Caster Semenya and Dutee Chand.  Essentially World Athletics proposed a testosterone standard, and CAS said "you don't have support for that - come back with research and then we'll talk."

                               

                              So WA went away and came back with research covering a certain range of distances.  And then CAS said "OK, you've convinced us, you can use that testosterone standard for that range of distances."

                               

                              WA's research was limited to the middle distances, which is why the current standard only covers those distances.

                              Everyone's gotta running blog; I'm the only one with a POOL-RUNNING blog.

                               

                              And...if you want a running Instagram where all the pictures are of cats, I've got you covered.

                              darkwave


                              Mother of Cats

                                 

                                About the notion that in distance running it's hemoglobin that drives performance and thus lean muscle mass and strength gained over many years, in Newell's case several decades, don't play a decisive role?  I'm not sure. Why then is it consensus that distance runners should strength train, too? There seems to be an advantage there ...

                                 

                                There is a minimum level of strength that all runners should have, and many don't hit that standard.  But, unlike power lifting, strength is not a more-is-always-better thing for running.  Aerobic ability is the "more is always better" thing for distance running.

                                 

                                Equestrian sports also require physical strength - more strength than running does, frankly.  But the amount of strength needed is still a level that can be met by men (easily) and women (less easily).  And once you've got that strength, more is not better.  Skill is then the deciding factor in competition, and skill is the "more is always better" aspect of the sport.  And that's why men and women compete equally in equestrian sports, despite the importance of strength in that sport.

                                Everyone's gotta running blog; I'm the only one with a POOL-RUNNING blog.

                                 

                                And...if you want a running Instagram where all the pictures are of cats, I've got you covered.