| |
Main
Date: 07 May 2006 09:50:58
From:
Subject: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
RGEhCgrQn9CV0J3QlNCV0KXQngo=
|
|
| |
Date: 07 May 2006 17:09:33
From: Phil M.
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
CP wrote:
> Da!
Indeed!
> ПЕНДЕХО
Whatever. Is that your race report? Chip time: 1:04:47. Not bad. Congrats!
--
Phil M.
|
| | |
Date: 08 May 2006 21:46:08
From: steve common
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
"Phil M." <pmarg@charter.net > wrote:
>CP wrote:
>
>> Da!
>
>Indeed!
>
>> ПЕ?ДЕХО
>
>Whatever. Is that your race report? Chip time: 1:04:47. Not bad. Congrats!
Sorry for replying to you Phil but I didn't get Charlie's original - my
news server is seems to want to filter russian posts ;-)
Excellent news Charlie.
If you go by calculated VO2max, that'd predict you a 3:00:35
marathon ;-)
|
| |
Date: 07 May 2006 17:00:15
From: Ed Prochak
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
Charlie.Pendejo@gmail.com wrote:
> Da!
>
>
Congrats Charlie!!
I'd like to hear more details. Is a regular report coming later?
Ed
|
| | |
Date: 08 May 2006 00:40:08
From:
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
On 7 May 2006 17:00:15 -0700, "Ed Prochak" <edprochak@gmail.com >
wrote:
> I'd like to hear more details. Is a regular report coming later?
WTF Ed, did your dog die? Wife leave you?
|
| |
Date: 07 May 2006 16:58:25
From: Ed Prochak
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
Phil M. wrote:
> CP wrote:
>
> > Da!
>
> Indeed!
>
> > =D0=9F=D0=95=D0=9D=D0=94=D0=95=D0=A5=D0=9E
>
> Whatever. Is that your race report? Chip time: 1:04:47. Not bad. Congrats!
>
> --
> Phil M.
I think he was also going for the shortest race report record.
What were the rules again?
total number of letters in subject and body combined, right?
|
| |
Date: 07 May 2006 22:23:48
From: Dot
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
Charlie.Pendejo@gmail.com wrote:
> Da!
>
> ПЕНДЕХО
Way to go, Pendejo!! Practicing your Russian, heh?
(My poor Russian has degenerated to the point that given enough time, I
can pick out the letters and prounounce one word at a time with a great
deal of mutilation. ;) One of our snowshoe club members moved to Russia
and sent our leader an issue of their equivalent of RW, complete with a
picture from one of the club runs - that's why I know how rusty.)
Dot
--
"Success is different things to different people"
-Bernd Heinrich in Racing the Antelope
|
| |
Date: 08 May 2006 14:27:14
From: Tony S.
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
kudos charlie! how much is that a PR by?
-Tony
|
| | |
Date: 08 May 2006 18:22:57
From: Charlie Pendejo
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
Thanks all for the congrats. Yeah that was 1:04:47 chip, 1:05:01 (damn, but
I sure tried) gun.
Going in I thought 1:06:00 was my best-case goal.
Tony wrote:
> kudos charlie! how much is that a PR by?
My only prior 10 mile was my second race, and NYRR has that listed as
1:30:51. So I guess it's a 26:04 PR!
That one only lists a gun time, not chip, so I probably started 10 minutes
late. First few races I didn't have the hang of how much time the trains
took to Central Park. Heck, first few races I didn't have the hang of
getting up early - I was still quite the night owl.
Last year I ran a 16 km race in Helsinki in 1:09:37, call it one-tennish for
ten miles.
This year I think I split 1:08:low for the Brooklyn half; I calced it before
this race but misplaced the number and too hurried now to look it up. But
it's there in my race report in this ng.
So it's quite a PR no matter how you slice it. Undoubtedly my finest race
to date by a good margin. In fact I split both 4 miles and 10 km
(interpolating for the latter) within seconds of my recent PRs at those
distances.
It's flat (not quite Chicago-flat, but the mild hills are like 20 feet) and
straight - you only curve around the exquisite City Hall, otherwise it's a
perfectly straight shot down Broad St. Weather was just about ideal,
low-mid 50's with a slight breeze.
What really allowed me to race this well was an involutary two week taper,
eight or ten days of which with minor cold symptoms which never got bad but
never went away sufficiently until the day before the race, that I felt
confident doing the kind of mileage or workouts I would've otherwise. So
like it or not I sacrificed some of my training toward July's Utica
Boilermaker 15km to run well a few months earlier at a race of just about
the same distance and size of field. With all I've got going on at the
moment, including a trip to Ukraine departing tomorrow evening (still gotta
unpack from Philly and pack for this!!) I'm happy it worked out this way:
the months ahead are really hazy at the moment but it's entirely possible I
won't race Utica or even be on this continent then.
Not all that much occurs to me right now to report from the race itself.
First few miles felt easy and I was very surprised by the pace my watch
reported. I noticed that I was able to sightsee for the first three or four
miles then my focus narrowed so that when my wife yelled for me around mile
6 I was fairly unaware of my surroundings. As the miles went by I began to
accept that 1:05:xx and then outright sub-1:05 might be within reach.
As I recall it seemed hardest to hold pace about 2/3 of the way in. After
the 7th mile marker or so it became easier psychologically - the finish was
getting nearer. Shortly before mile 9 they were playing the Rocky theme and
just how much of an emotionally manipulable sap I'm becoming really hit me
then, as my cynicism was nowhere to be seen and instead I actually felt
pretty charged at hearing this music in this city during a good race, and
sped way up a notch and passed a whole cluster of folks I'd been tailing the
last few miles.
Afterwards I stuffed my face with all kinds of good food and North America's
best ice cream (gelato and sorbetto) for the next 36 hours.
OK that's all for now. Here's my splits.
6:19
6:19
6:30
6:34
6:33 first 5 - 32:15
6:41
6:37
6:32
6:25
6:17 last 5 - 32:32
|
| | | |
Date: 09 May 2006 10:10:14
From: marko
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
Charlie Pendejo a crit :
> 6:19
> 6:19
> 6:30
> 6:34
> 6:33 first 5 - 32:15
> 6:41
> 6:37
> 6:32
> 6:25
> 6:17 last 5 - 32:32
Congrats for the PR Charlie, and the very good pacing!
You did almost even splits (I guess that 20feet 'hill' was on mile 6 ;-p
). It looks like you went sub-40' at the 10km mark?
Have a nice trip to Ukraine, and watch out for those ice-creams, they
did put me 2kg over my performance weight since my last marathon...
m
|
| |
Date: 08 May 2006 02:24:32
From: anders
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
Charlie.Pendejo@gmail.com kirjoitti:
> Da!
Huh? Short course? It just doesn't compute! Or did you finally read one
of the "It's all in the mind, stupid!"-books Lance recommended?
Anders
|
| |
Date: 08 May 2006 04:27:29
From: Dan Stumpus
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
...Predicts a 3:03 marathon (or a bit better), per the Gardner/Purdy tables.
Also a 39 flat 10k.
Vewwy nice.
Congrats!
-- Dan
<Charlie.Pendejo@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1147020658.450837.84680@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Da!
>
> ???????
>
|
| |
Date: 08 May 2006 11:46:38
From:
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
well he has a "formula". he writes for the audience...all of you in
this newsgroup, this is clear if you really read his post and connect
the patterns over the series of them.
generally he'll migrate to the same patterns (he's big on food, his
stomach, self doubt & reservation, etc.). American Lit fans, I place
him somewhere between Hawthorne and Melville. this posting is very
arrogant and i like it. i like the bravado and big dick achievement he
feels he's accomplished. that's the mentality he will need to run well
in NYC in the big race w/Mottram coming up in 2 weeks.
Think about it. Note the time of the race, the time he must of
finished and although he was out of town,...one of the first things he
felt the need to do is find or computer or use his handheld to post his
"big dick achievement" on this newsgroup sans words....almost as if
it's "breaking news". LOL. I love it.
Honestly...in the history of this newsgroup, this has got to be the
fastest, quickest posting after a race of some distance...ever.
Charles is clearly getting Cocky (and here we see his cock is "sub
1:05").
|
| |
Date: 08 May 2006 11:12:46
From: Phil M.
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
lanceandrew@aol.com wrote:
> Some achievements don't need or warrant context or words and this is
> clearly one. If I could do what Charles has, I too would just stick my
> dick out like this sans words or context and say "look at it". Is that
> basically not what this post amounts to?
>
> Sub 1:05, 10 Miles, "enough said", whoo-hoo!
I agree with you there. CP deserves a round of applause. But we've come
to expect a fairly lengthy tale him. Da? What is that? Even UJ would
give a more elaborate embellishment.
sub 65 fuw
--
Phil M.
|
| | |
Date: 08 May 2006 22:07:01
From: Charlie Pendejo
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
Phil wrote:
> we've come to expect a fairly lengthy tale him. Da? What is that?
Oh yeah, meant to say:
[a] I don't travel with anything internet-connected so I was sneaking a very
brief moment at a free terminal at the ING Direct Cafe between the race and
one of (lunch, gelato, shower, chamber music concert wherein two of the five
pieces were for BASSOON FREAKIN' QUARTET, nap, clothes shopping), I forget
what order that all occured.
[b] I was of course inspired by steve common's old race report, recently
referenced.
And thanks, Phil, for saying "fairly lengthy" even if you really meant
"mind-numbing and ridiculously verbose."
- - - - -
Speaking of verbosity, here's a few other things I meant to put into race
report or training week or somewhere.
- Lest anyone wonder if I'm really too stoopid to ever learn, I do in fact
connect getting the cold a couple weeks ago with too much stress - mostly
from a little too many hard workouts and not quite enough recovery, plus
extra other stressors, capped by the stunt of 4 mile race + long run in the
rain just as my wife's getting rid of a little cold that I had theretofore
managed to avoid. I'm certainly still learning what training in what
amounts works for me, and what's a little too much.
- I've dropped a few pounds the last two weeks, while running a third fewer
miles and eating just as much if not more. I wonder if part of that might
not relate to hormonal changes as the days get longer and warmer. Certainly
I can feel I respond to the sun and the warmth on some levels and maybe
metabolism is part of that. But also I've run across a few citations lately
from credentialed dietition type people about weight fluctuation sometimes
not exactly tracking calorie surplus or deficit. One online is at
http://www.active.com/story.cfm?story_id=12961
While a 700-calorie imbalance is suggestive of a 1-
to 1.5-pound loss per week, very few of the runners
were actually losing weight. Why? The human body has
an ability to adapt to a lower level of energy intake,
allowing for preservation of weight despite a calorie
shortage. Unfortunately, this means the body is less
efficient at using the calories and nutrients consumed
during training. A lack of calories also depresses
immune function, making the athlete more vulnerable to
illness and injury during intensive training.
I'm not at all inclined to track calories but I think I'll make an effort to
eat a little more especially when I return to 100 km per week, and see what
happens. Although all bets are off for both mileage and calories these next
couple weeks in a land where "sala" is a national dish.
|
| |
Date: 08 May 2006 10:33:26
From:
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
This is not a laughing matter Anders. Shame on you. There are now 2
milestones that man has broken in distance running unbelievably sharing
the same date, that will be heralded through history world wide.
May 6, 2006, Charles Anderson, Sub 1:05, 10 Miles, Philadelphia.
May 6, 1954, Roger Bannister 3:59.4, 1 Mile, Oxford, England.
Some achievements don't need or warrant context or words and this is
clearly one. If I could do what Charles has, I too would just stick my
dick out like this sans words or context and say "look at it". Is that
basically not what this post amounts to?
Sub 1:05, 10 Miles, "enough said", whoo-hoo!
|
| |
Date: 09 May 2006 08:47:29
From: Ed Prochak
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
Charlie Pendejo wrote:
> anders wrote:
> > If - and that's a big if IMHO - you've been short of realizing your
> > full potential on race day, it could well be that it wasn't a fear of
> > hurting but a sort of fear of letting yourself go that stopped you.
>
> Anders, I appreciate your feedback as always.
>
> But I don't think this is the case. I've been racing at the same 100% or
> 99.44% (there's always the possibility that being chased by killer hornets
> might incentivize a few more seconds out of the ol' legs) just about every
> race for the last couple years.
>
> In fact my pacing's been pretty even for most of those - where I've been
> thrown off a few times earlier this year, it really seems largely to me that
> I've just taken a race or two to calibrate to the slightly increased
> capabilities of my legs and lungs.
>
> Regarding pain, this Broad Street race hurt less than most, not more.
> That's because of the distance: as you're well aware, 15km to half marathon
> (and probably up to 30 km, but I've never raced between 21 & 42 km), being
> run at or below LT, are relatively "comfortable" race distances - long
> enough to be slow enough not to hurt too much; short enough that you don't
> suffer any of the marathon slings and arrows of glycogen depletion,
> dehydration, muscle pounding. (Though believe me, my legs are still
> *plenty* sore this morning two days later.)
>
> My secrets this time out?
>
> [a] training works: I've possibly run enough 100 km weeks before this race
> to claim that figure as my base, plus some (but not enough yet!) fast reps /
> long intervals / threshold work
>
> [b] taper works: a couple weeks with substantially reduced mileage and no
> hard workouts really does freshen up the legs; it's not for nothing that we
> do this before marathons
>
> [c] weight loss helps: dropping a few pounds since my other 2006 races,
> whatever the cause, is a good thing; I was about 4 lb lighter yet for 2005
> NYCM but generally have been a kg or two heavier for most races
>
>
> > I suspect that what you call your cynicism was pretty much the same as
> > mine: I often found myself asking myself "What business does a guy like
> > me have trying to race as hard as the elite guys?"
>
> I think I read the right authors and sentiments early on in running. Or
> maybe more to the point, evolving from a sedentary smoker and lifelong
> non-athlete into a runner, I had no expectations of competing with the best
> in this area of life, have felt no pressure to compare myself to the guys at
> the front of the pack. It's actually been a pleasurable aspect of racing,
> this relief from feeling I ought to be right there with the very best of
> 'em, and shame on me for slacking if I've not already worked my way to the
> top of the heap.
>
> But all the same, dammit, I'm gonna squeeze out every second I can, even if
> it's not to outright win my AG but only to finish in front of every
> stone-or-more-overweight once-weekly runner wearing a fuel belt over ghastly
> flab-accentuating tights. And lately, and never more so than in Philthy, I
> am pleased to find myself passing some fairly legitimate looking runners in
> those last miles rather than chubby race dilettantes.
Another congrats.
And your comments about the race and training seem more interesting in
that they are spread over several posts in this thread.
Your consistancy in training is helping inspire me. I may currently be
closer to those
"chubby race dilettantes" but not for much longer. Your race attitude
seems like mine. I know I'm nowhere near a Gazelle on the plains of
running, so instead I imagine being a lion, chasing those gazelles.
Either way, we are all running.
Thanks for starting such a good thread.
ed
|
| | |
Date: 09 May 2006 15:52:29
From:
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
Shut up Prozac.
On 9 May 2006 08:47:29 -0700, "Ed Prochak" <edprochak@gmail.com >
wrote:
>
>Charlie Pendejo wrote:
>> anders wrote:
>> > If - and that's a big if IMHO - you've been short of realizing your
>> > full potential on race day, it could well be that it wasn't a fear of
>> > hurting but a sort of fear of letting yourself go that stopped you.
>>
>> Anders, I appreciate your feedback as always.
>>
>> But I don't think this is the case. I've been racing at the same 100% or
>> 99.44% (there's always the possibility that being chased by killer hornets
>> might incentivize a few more seconds out of the ol' legs) just about every
>> race for the last couple years.
>>
>> In fact my pacing's been pretty even for most of those - where I've been
>> thrown off a few times earlier this year, it really seems largely to me that
>> I've just taken a race or two to calibrate to the slightly increased
>> capabilities of my legs and lungs.
>>
>> Regarding pain, this Broad Street race hurt less than most, not more.
>> That's because of the distance: as you're well aware, 15km to half marathon
>> (and probably up to 30 km, but I've never raced between 21 & 42 km), being
>> run at or below LT, are relatively "comfortable" race distances - long
>> enough to be slow enough not to hurt too much; short enough that you don't
>> suffer any of the marathon slings and arrows of glycogen depletion,
>> dehydration, muscle pounding. (Though believe me, my legs are still
>> *plenty* sore this morning two days later.)
>>
>> My secrets this time out?
>>
>> [a] training works: I've possibly run enough 100 km weeks before this race
>> to claim that figure as my base, plus some (but not enough yet!) fast reps /
>> long intervals / threshold work
>>
>> [b] taper works: a couple weeks with substantially reduced mileage and no
>> hard workouts really does freshen up the legs; it's not for nothing that we
>> do this before marathons
>>
>> [c] weight loss helps: dropping a few pounds since my other 2006 races,
>> whatever the cause, is a good thing; I was about 4 lb lighter yet for 2005
>> NYCM but generally have been a kg or two heavier for most races
>>
>>
>> > I suspect that what you call your cynicism was pretty much the same as
>> > mine: I often found myself asking myself "What business does a guy like
>> > me have trying to race as hard as the elite guys?"
>>
>> I think I read the right authors and sentiments early on in running. Or
>> maybe more to the point, evolving from a sedentary smoker and lifelong
>> non-athlete into a runner, I had no expectations of competing with the best
>> in this area of life, have felt no pressure to compare myself to the guys at
>> the front of the pack. It's actually been a pleasurable aspect of racing,
>> this relief from feeling I ought to be right there with the very best of
>> 'em, and shame on me for slacking if I've not already worked my way to the
>> top of the heap.
>>
>> But all the same, dammit, I'm gonna squeeze out every second I can, even if
>> it's not to outright win my AG but only to finish in front of every
>> stone-or-more-overweight once-weekly runner wearing a fuel belt over ghastly
>> flab-accentuating tights. And lately, and never more so than in Philthy, I
>> am pleased to find myself passing some fairly legitimate looking runners in
>> those last miles rather than chubby race dilettantes.
>
>Another congrats.
>
>And your comments about the race and training seem more interesting in
>that they are spread over several posts in this thread.
>
>Your consistancy in training is helping inspire me. I may currently be
>closer to those
>"chubby race dilettantes" but not for much longer. Your race attitude
>seems like mine. I know I'm nowhere near a Gazelle on the plains of
>running, so instead I imagine being a lion, chasing those gazelles.
>Either way, we are all running.
>
>Thanks for starting such a good thread.
> ed
|
| |
Date: 09 May 2006 02:42:56
From: anders
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
lanceandrew@aol.com kirjoitti:
> This is not a laughing matter Anders. Shame on you. There are now 2
> milestones that man has broken in distance running unbelievably sharing
> the same date, that will be heralded through history world wide.
I wasn't laughing at anyone - not even you:-)
Actually I assumed and thought that you and your "Tough Love"-stance in
your comments on his previous race was directly or indirectly to a
certain extent behind Charlie's reaching the milestone. You may not
have noticed it, but I refrained from panning you for once more being
too busy to get on your hobby horse without paying adequate attention
to the particulars you purported to criticize.
(Granted, I also thought that Dan's description of how he felt during
races and his tips were more crucial and more useful to Charlie.)
> May 6, 2006, Charles Anderson, Sub 1:05, 10 Miles, Philadelphia.
> May 6, 1954, Roger Bannister 3:59.4, 1 Mile, Oxford, England.
Remarkable coincidence - but I'm sure which one is more meaningful for
rec.running:-)
> Some achievements don't need or warrant context or words and this is
> clearly one. If I could do what Charles has, I too would just stick my
> dick out like this sans words or context and say "look at it". Is that
> basically not what this post amounts to?
I'd say that not only that post but almost every other post that is
written after a triumphant PB, it's just that normally people feel they
have to resort to a certain amount of words to hide their primal
motive.
BTW I'd still rank a real HM result higher than a virtual one based on
an underdistance result. I.e. your dick is IMHO just as stickoutable
as it was until Charlie actually runs sub-1:27:-)
> Sub 1:05, 10 Miles, "enough said", whoo-hoo!
Yes! Prima, klasse, superspitze!
Anders
|
| |
Date: 09 May 2006 02:18:59
From: anders
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
Charlie Pendejo kirjoitti:
> So it's quite a PR no matter how you slice it. Undoubtedly my finest race
> to date by a good margin. In fact I split both 4 miles and 10 km
> (interpolating for the latter) within seconds of my recent PRs at those
> distances.
It is indeed so fine it's almost ridiculous, but that's how it can be:
progress is gradual in the long run, but it often advances in large
bounds in the short run. First you train for a few months, then you get
a race result that is okay at best (and may require you to justify it
to yourself with "Well, I didn't taper for it this time" or some such
explanation) and then you have a race which makes a complete mockery of
your previous race efforts (and possibly makes you ask yourself whether
it was just the taper that made things click or whether you've been an
underachiever).
> As I recall it seemed hardest to hold pace about 2/3 of the way in. After
> the 7th mile marker or so it became easier psychologically - the finish was
> getting nearer. Shortly before mile 9 they were playing the Rocky theme and
> just how much of an emotionally manipulable sap I'm becoming really hit me
> then, as my cynicism was nowhere to be seen and instead I actually felt
> pretty charged at hearing this music in this city during a good race, and
> sped way up a notch and passed a whole cluster of folks I'd been tailing the
> last few miles.
If - and that's a big if IMHO - you've been short of realizing your
full potential on race day, it could well be that it wasn't a fear of
hurting but a sort of fear of letting yourself go that stopped you. I
suspect that what you call your cynicism was pretty much the same as
mine: I often found myself asking myself "What business does a guy like
me have trying to race as hard as the elite guys?", "What is the point
of trying to pretend it is a big deal how fast you finish?" and "Do you
really want to become just the kind of middle-aged mid-packer trying
too hard in a small race you used to find so pathetic?" - and it wasn't
until I learned to escape such thoughts (or they simply became
meaningless to me) that I truly began to race, with a couple of hugely
dramatic (to my very own self) improved races as a result.
(OK, the immediate next step in my case was a sort of hubris: I began
to believe I was a much better runner than I was and I already saw
myself as an even better one in almost no time at all. )
> OK that's all for now. Here's my splits.
Two out of the five fastest at the end, three in the beginning; no
significant sagging in between, Well done, old chap!
Haroshi morozhi, too - but remember that the local varietiess probably
don't include lo-fat:-)
Anders
|
| | |
Date: 09 May 2006 07:51:19
From: Charlie Pendejo
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
anders wrote:
> If - and that's a big if IMHO - you've been short of realizing your
> full potential on race day, it could well be that it wasn't a fear of
> hurting but a sort of fear of letting yourself go that stopped you.
Anders, I appreciate your feedback as always.
But I don't think this is the case. I've been racing at the same 100% or
99.44% (there's always the possibility that being chased by killer hornets
might incentivize a few more seconds out of the ol' legs) just about every
race for the last couple years.
In fact my pacing's been pretty even for most of those - where I've been
thrown off a few times earlier this year, it really seems largely to me that
I've just taken a race or two to calibrate to the slightly increased
capabilities of my legs and lungs.
Regarding pain, this Broad Street race hurt less than most, not more.
That's because of the distance: as you're well aware, 15km to half marathon
(and probably up to 30 km, but I've never raced between 21 & 42 km), being
run at or below LT, are relatively "comfortable" race distances - long
enough to be slow enough not to hurt too much; short enough that you don't
suffer any of the marathon slings and arrows of glycogen depletion,
dehydration, muscle pounding. (Though believe me, my legs are still
*plenty* sore this morning two days later.)
My secrets this time out?
[a] training works: I've possibly run enough 100 km weeks before this race
to claim that figure as my base, plus some (but not enough yet!) fast reps /
long intervals / threshold work
[b] taper works: a couple weeks with substantially reduced mileage and no
hard workouts really does freshen up the legs; it's not for nothing that we
do this before marathons
[c] weight loss helps: dropping a few pounds since my other 2006 races,
whatever the cause, is a good thing; I was about 4 lb lighter yet for 2005
NYCM but generally have been a kg or two heavier for most races
> I suspect that what you call your cynicism was pretty much the same as
> mine: I often found myself asking myself "What business does a guy like
> me have trying to race as hard as the elite guys?"
I think I read the right authors and sentiments early on in running. Or
maybe more to the point, evolving from a sedentary smoker and lifelong
non-athlete into a runner, I had no expectations of competing with the best
in this area of life, have felt no pressure to compare myself to the guys at
the front of the pack. It's actually been a pleasurable aspect of racing,
this relief from feeling I ought to be right there with the very best of
'em, and shame on me for slacking if I've not already worked my way to the
top of the heap.
But all the same, dammit, I'm gonna squeeze out every second I can, even if
it's not to outright win my AG but only to finish in front of every
stone-or-more-overweight once-weekly runner wearing a fuel belt over ghastly
flab-accentuating tights. And lately, and never more so than in Philthy, I
am pleased to find myself passing some fairly legitimate looking runners in
those last miles rather than chubby race dilettantes.
|
| |
Date: 09 May 2006 19:29:19
From: Tim Downie
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
Charlie.Pendejo@gmail.com wrote:
> Da!
>
> ???????
Charlie, I'd just like to add my belated congratulations on your excellent
race. I've rather dropped out of the rec.running scene as I'm currently
moping around with a metatarsal stress fracture.
Four and a half weeks since I last ran a step and not much likelihood of a
quick resumption of running any time soon. :-( May well have to drop out of
the West Highland Way race.
Still, my swimming and cycling are improving greatly and you should see me
aquajog!
Once again, d*mn fine running!
Tim
|
| | |
Date: 11 May 2006 09:44:04
From: Anthony
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
"Tim Downie" <timdownie2003@obvious.yahoo.co.uk > wrote in message
news:4cc5btF150b10U1@individual.net...
> Charlie.Pendejo@gmail.com wrote:
>> Da!
>
> Charlie, I'd just like to add my belated congratulations on your excellent
> race. I've rather dropped out of the rec.running scene as I'm currently
> moping around with a metatarsal stress fracture.
Me too! On both counts. Great race Charlie! Breakthrough races are
the best. Take you to a new level. Great to see rewards for consistent
training.
I'm also out with what was first a hamstring strain on the right, and then
achilles problems on the left. Doing more cycling than usual, but I''l be
damned if I'm going back to the pool running - with no immediate important
races I'm happy to stay out of the water.
>
> Four and a half weeks since I last ran a step and not much likelihood of a
> quick resumption of running any time soon. :-( May well have to drop out
> of the West Highland Way race.
Hang in there! I was off a couple of years back for about 4 months with
foot problems but came back OK...
>
> Still, my swimming and cycling are improving greatly and you should see me
> aquajog!
Rather you than me aquajogging....
Anthony.
|
| |
Date: 09 May 2006 10:30:09
From:
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
Ed Prochak wrote:
> I may currently be closer to those "chubby race dilettantes"
No offense intended.
The only chubby half-assed racers to whom I object are the ones with so
much natural talent that they finish ahead of me despite all my hard
work. The ones who finish behind me, I applaud 'em for being out on
the course.
Just please, my fellow male racers, if you're more than 10 kg over your
ideal racing weight, don't wear shiny thin super-tight tights. Shorts
are OK, loose pants are OK, or something a little thicker in a matte
fabric maybe if it must be tights.
(Women, I'm not about to tell you what to wear.)
> I imagine being a lion, chasing those gazelles.
Have you read Bernd Heinrich's book _Why We Run_ aka _Chasing the
Antelope_ yet, Ed? It's a good read, speaking of gazelle-chasing.
Found myself thinking of it while looking at dioramae of proghorn
antelopes and dahl sheep and migrating birds and even live frogs, at
Philadelphia's Academy of Natural Sciences yesterday morning.
|
| | |
Date: 10 May 2006 00:16:36
From: Dan Stumpus
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
<Charlie.Pendejo@gmail.com > wrote
> Have you read Bernd Heinrich's book _Why We Run_ aka _Chasing the
> Antelope_ yet, Ed? It's a good read, speaking of gazelle-chasing.
> Found myself thinking of it while looking at dioramae of proghorn
> antelopes and dahl sheep and migrating birds and even live frogs, at
> Philadelphia's Academy of Natural Sciences yesterday morning.
Hey, CP, the last die-o-rama I saw was when I passed a couple hundred people
at the end of my last marathon.... :-)
|
| |
Date: 10 May 2006 12:02:33
From: Ed Prochak
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
Charlie.Pendejo@gmail.com wrote:
> Ed Prochak wrote:
> > I may currently be closer to those "chubby race dilettantes"
>
> No offense intended.
>
> The only chubby half-assed racers to whom I object are the ones with so
> much natural talent that they finish ahead of me despite all my hard
> work.
I understand that.
> ... The ones who finish behind me, I applaud 'em for being out on
> the course.
>
[]
>
> > I imagine being a lion, chasing those gazelles.
>
> Have you read Bernd Heinrich's book _Why We Run_ aka _Chasing the
> Antelope_ yet, Ed? It's a good read, speaking of gazelle-chasing.
> Found myself thinking of it while looking at dioramae of proghorn
> antelopes and dahl sheep and migrating birds and even live frogs, at
> Philadelphia's Academy of Natural Sciences yesterday morning.
I've heard of the book and that's where my comparison comes from, but I
haven't read it. I only have seen posters and some messages here. The
comment that goes something like this:
A Gazelle wakes up and knows he must run faster thn the fastest Lion to
live. A Lion wakes up and knows he must run faster than the slowest
Gazelle to live. Either way they both run.
Thanks Charlie. Now that you reminded me of that book maybe I'll try
to read it next month when I'm on vacation.
ed
|
| | |
Date: 10 May 2006 19:29:23
From: Dot
Subject: Re: broad st. 10 mile - sub 1:05
|
Ed Prochak wrote:
> Charlie.Pendejo@gmail.com wrote:
>
>>Ed Prochak wrote:
>>
>>>I may currently be closer to those "chubby race dilettantes"
>>
>>No offense intended.
>>
>>The only chubby half-assed racers to whom I object are the ones with so
>>much natural talent that they finish ahead of me despite all my hard
>>work.
>
>
> I understand that.
>
>
>>... The ones who finish behind me, I applaud 'em for being out on
>>the course.
>>
>
> []
>
>>>I imagine being a lion, chasing those gazelles.
>>
>>Have you read Bernd Heinrich's book _Why We Run_ aka _Chasing the
>>Antelope_ yet, Ed? It's a good read, speaking of gazelle-chasing.
>>Found myself thinking of it while looking at dioramae of proghorn
>>antelopes and dahl sheep and migrating birds and even live frogs, at
>>Philadelphia's Academy of Natural Sciences yesterday morning.
>
>
> I've heard of the book and that's where my comparison comes from, but I
> haven't read it. I only have seen posters and some messages here. The
> comment that goes something like this:
> A Gazelle wakes up and knows he must run faster thn the fastest Lion to
> live. A Lion wakes up and knows he must run faster than the slowest
> Gazelle to live. Either way they both run.
Every morning in Africa, a gazelle wakes up. Every morning in Africa, a
gazelle wakes up. It knows it must run faster than the fastest lion or
it will be killed. Every morning a lion wakes up. It knows it must
outrun the slowest gazelle or it will starve to death. It doesnt matter
whether you are a lion or a gazelle. When the sun comes up, you better
start running.
I couldn't find the source of the quote (definitely not in Why We Run),
but google most often comes up with African proverb or Roger Bannister
after breaking 4-min mile or unknown. It was amazing how many different
places use that for inspiration - including many corporate execs, like
Sam Walton.
>
> Thanks Charlie. Now that you reminded me of that book maybe I'll try
> to read it next month when I'm on vacation.
It is a good book. I read it before it changed titles (originally Racing
the Antelope) to avoid confusion with another similarly named book. I'm
currently reading one of Heinrich's book on how animals survive winter.
Really interesting.
Dot
--
"Success is different things to different people"
-Bernd Heinrich in Racing the Antelope
|
|
