Sliding toward my goals...

I need to post a photo of carrot planting here.  If we plant in the fall we plant seeds in August and harvest them 13 months later in September.  But we normally plant stecking carrots this time of year for harvest in September.  We haul in boxes and boxes of actual orange carrots that were grown in California or Arizona and then dug and shipped to Central Oregon.  Two reasons.  The varieties won't survive our harsh winters.  Or they don't know what the demand will be and it gives them more time to decide how many acres we need to produce.  Each carrot needs to be individually poked in the ground in a trench created by the planter and then covered and rolled with two different implements.  We also mark the rows before we plant so it takes a total of 4 passes to plant stecklings.

If we plant seeds we do have to thin them.  Technically the planter is supposed to meter the seed out correctly but it's never perfect and I think they purposely set it up to put in more seed than needed as it doesn't all germinate and survive the winter.  So we have a thinner that looks for the carrot plants and activates to remove a plant if they are to close together.  Technology!  If the plants are to crowded it drastically reduces seed production.

In a couple weeks we'll install drip tape right next to each row of carrots.  Thank goodness for GPS.  We also cultivate and spray using GPS.


So...not the best photo but this is the planter for the female carrots (4 rows). We only plant 2 rows of males.  We dump the carrots in the bins when we turn the planter around at the end of each pass.  It's kind of hard to see but 4 people are sitting directly behind the tractor and 4 people are sitting near the back of the planter.  Each worker grabs carrots from the slot at the bottom of the bin and pokes them...hopefully green side up...in the trench between their legs.  The theory is that the worker in the front pokes as many as he can.  The worker in the back fills in missing carrots.  Then we have 4 workers that walk behind with buckets.  They fill in any blanks, make sure the carrots are poked to the correct level and pick up any extra carrots.  These workers are all contract labor supplied (at our expense) by the seed company.  We also have two of our own permanent workers follow behind for quality control.  Every variety is different but this year we planted on 6" spacing.  Our rows are always 30" apart as that's how the equipment is set up.

Enough about carrots.  I'll put my run details in a separate post.

Mark B wrote:Playing catch-up on the blogs here as we remain incarcerated (er, in self-quarantine) in the condo.

Thanks for the explanation of how the carrot planting process goes. I can see how losing GPS would be a huge stress-inducing event. I'm glad you got it fixed. I think that the auto-steer function is nerdy, fun and a little nerve-wracking. The things we do for carrots!

So does the planter drop a single seed every so far, or does it drop several, or broadcast them? Trying to figure out how in the world you might to back and thin the carrots at some point. But maybe, since you're going for seed, you don't need to?

--

Sounds like Natalie is equally concerned about the kids, you and Marty. Nobody wants to be "that person" who causes some horrible problem for someone else. Well, except for those knuckleheads who video themselves licking toilets... only to get sick later. (Those are the folks the sabertooth tigers used to clear out of the gene pool, but now... ?)

---

Nice to see somebody running. I know we're about to go crazy here. We're interested to see what it did to Alita's lungs. Her blood oxygen was 99% in the emergency room, so that's good, but who knows if there are long-term consequences from the chest tightness. We shall see.

I'd say go for the short steps! That was the secret I discovered when doing low HR training. The goal is to find the most efficient way to move. It's easy to overstride, so why not see if you can refine it?

At the risk of telling you something you know, you being the editor of a major metropolitan newspaper, blood oxygen or also known as O2 saturation or "O2sat" has a normal range of 95-100%.  As far as chest tightness, I'm sure 2 months from now there will be data about it and 6 months from now the data will be more accurate, but bent more towards those hospitalized.

Oh.  Hi, Nancy!

My carrot post with a photo...see above...was so long that I decided to post my run details in a separate post.

So my goal today was a recovery run.  Low HR and slower pace.  But I decided to give increased cadence a try.

I hit the cadence perfectly.  The rest of the run was a complete failure.  

So here are the details of today's runs.
3 miles @ 10:58 HR 150  Cadence 160  NOT low HR.  NOT recovery pace!

So to compare to previous runs I'm going to post more details of each run including today.  Hope this chart comes through in a way that is readable.

Date  Miles  Pace    HR  Cadence  VO  GTC  Stride
3/18   3      12:48  151    150    10.2  318    .84
3/20   3      12:28  151    152     9.7   315    .85
3/23   3      11:56  146    154     9.9   304    .87
3/24   3      11:46  153    155    10.0  302    .89
3/25   3      11:34  155    155     9.4   300    .90
3/27   5      11:55  154    154     9.6   304    .87
3/28   3      10:58  150    160     9.9   286    .92

VO = Vertical Oscillation 
GTC = Ground Contact Time

Pace was a dismal failure.  That is not a recovery pace!
HR was actually pretty impressive considering the pace. 
I hit my target cadence perfectly!!
VO  I don't see an obvious correlation.  Needs work.
GTC  Nice improvement as the cadence goes up.
Stride   Oops.  No wonder my pace went up.  I thought I was taking smaller steps.  Looks like that's the area that needs the most work.

So...it's encouraging to see that I was able to maintain the cadence.  But it was mentally exhausting and took a lot of concentration.  I think counting my breathing helped.  Also encouraging to see that I was able to improve the pace that much and keep the HR lower than I would have expected...not that 150 is considered low.  I obviously did not take short steps even though it felt like I was.  This may be hard to get used to!!

So that gives me 17 miles for the week.  Tomorrow Marty and I plan to start back up with our morning strength workouts.  But I'll make the rest of the day an a rest day.  It was a good week!

This is what happens to me on cadence and I would be interested to see how yours compares to mine.

+My stride length is not something I monitor.  What it is is what it is, although your stride length is longer than mine.  That'll be an interesting thing to figure out and adapt somehow.  Michele's is on par with yours, however I think she's in the 180 spm range.

+If my splits all have the same cadence, then I can go faster or increase distance.  If my splits have a decreasing cadence as the miles add up, then I'm not ready to go faster or go longer.

+I think you might find that your cadence before measuring was lower for earlier runs.  If you increase cadence on the gnome, your HR will rise and your breathing will increase no matter the pace.  It's in effect, going harder, but you will adapt.  Typically HR will reduce, then breathing will be easier, then the legs FINALLY adapt.

I look forward to comparing our cadence splits.  I think I'll learn more than you.  This'll be fun.  I might even wear my Garmin to get a 163 report, instead of 81 on the polar.

ounce wrote:This is what happens to me on cadence and I would be interested to see how yours compares to mine.

+My stride length is not something I monitor.  What it is is what it is, although your stride length is longer than mine.  That'll be an interesting thing to figure out and adapt somehow.  Michele's is on par with yours, however I think she's in the 180 spm range.

+If my splits all have the same cadence, then I can go faster or increase distance.  If my splits have a decreasing cadence as the miles add up, then I'm not ready to go faster or go longer.

+I think you might find that your cadence before measuring was lower for earlier runs.  If you increase cadence on the gnome, your HR will rise and your breathing will increase no matter the pace.  It's in effect, going harder, but you will adapt.  Typically HR will reduce, then breathing will be easier, then the legs FINALLY adapt.

I look forward to comparing our cadence splits.  I think I'll learn more than you.  This'll be fun.  I might even wear my Garmin to get a 163 report, instead of 81 on the polar.

I plan to start taking my gnome on my runs.  I'll stick with 160 cadence until it seems a bit more natural.  I know that I've always had a slower than desired cadence...not just in running but also in biking and swimming.  It's just a more natural cadence for me.  Some 'experts' claim a higher cadence is much more efficient but others claim that your body naturally chooses the most efficient form (including) cadence.  I'm going to give an increased cadence a try.  I'll work on my breathing at the same time.  We'll see.  I'll continue to track stride length as well and will include both cadence and stride length data in my posts.

***

Sunday Marty and I did our first core/strength workout since we paused to plant carrots.  We did another workout this morning.  Two in a row.    Will be tough to stay consistent as Marty gets busy farming...we're scheduled to start irrigation on the 8th.  We'll do what we can.

It's windy and nasty out there today.  We're under a high wind warning and it's also starting to rain.  May take a day off from running.

It's Spring in Central Oregon.  Yesterday we had wind, sunshine, wind, snow, wind, sunshine, wind, rain, wind, sunshine, wind, hail, wind sunshine...and that was all before lunch.  

After lunch I had a non-profit board meeting using Zoom.  High on the agenda was laying off our paid Executive Director (her suggestion) as all fund raising has come to a screeching halt!!

I haven't felt great the last couple days and I'm not sleeping well so I've been lazy...self full-filling prophecy I think.  It's not Covid-19 related so I'm sure it will pass. 

Speaking of Covid-19.  Officially our community still has zero cases but the rumor is that a child of one of the doctors in town has tested positive.  No one can figure out which doctor/child.  It will be interesting to see if it's just rumor or if it just hasn't been officially reported yet.

The lumber yard in our community is closing.  We assume that it's temporary due to the virus but who knows for sure.  That means that we have to drive 30 miles into a community that does have active Covid-19 cases instead of 3 miles into a relatively virus free community.  It will be interesting to see how many other businesses close their doors temporarily and/or permanently.

As we're considered an essential business we're still working and trying to keep ourselves and our employees safe.  It's not easy!!  I've been reading through some of the provisions of the CARE bill passed last week.  It provides lots of help for small business in the form of loans with the potential for forgiveness if people stay on the payroll.  Agriculture is specifically excluded from participating in any of the programs. ????

Should I nap or should I run...

nkrichards wrote:It's Spring in Central Oregon.  Yesterday we had wind, sunshine, wind, snow, wind, sunshine, wind, rain, wind, sunshine, wind, hail, wind sunshine...and that was all before lunch.  

After lunch I had a non-profit board meeting using Zoom.  High on the agenda was laying off our paid Executive Director (her suggestion) as all fund raising has come to a screeching halt!!

I haven't felt great the last couple days and I'm not sleeping well so I've been lazy...self full-filling prophecy I think.  It's not Covid-19 related so I'm sure it will pass. 

Speaking of Covid-19.  Officially our community still has zero cases but the rumor is that a child of one of the doctors in town has tested positive.  No one can figure out which doctor/child.  It will be interesting to see if it's just rumor or if it just hasn't been officially reported yet.

The lumber yard in our community is closing.  We assume that it's temporary due to the virus but who knows for sure.  That means that we have to drive 30 miles into a community that does have active Covid-19 cases instead of 3 miles into a relatively virus free community.  It will be interesting to see how many other businesses close their doors temporarily and/or permanently.

As we're considered an essential business we're still working and trying to keep ourselves and our employees safe.  It's not easy!!  I've been reading through some of the provisions of the CARE bill passed last week.  It provides lots of help for small business in the form of loans with the potential for forgiveness if people stay on the payroll.  Agriculture is specifically excluded from participating in any of the programs. ????

Should I nap or should I run...

I'd nap, then run.

Don't assume your community is virus-free. It's very likely that there are people who are asymptomatic or have mind symptoms out there. The safest thing, they say, is not to assume that everybody else has it and protect yourself -- it's to assume that YOU have it and take the steps to protect others. That's how we'll bend the curve and stretch it out until we can get an effective treatment and more importantly, a vaccine. I just hope places like your lumber yard can weather this and come out the other side. Not everybody will.

And oh, it stinks that there's nothing in the CARE bill for you guys. (Nothing for Alec, either, it seems. If you can be claimed as a dependent and are 17 and over, no check for you; but if you are claiming somebody AS a dependent and they're 17 and over... no check for you, either. This hurts a lot of high school and college students, and their families.)

One last thing on cadence: Yes, I've heard experts say 180 is the optimal cadence, and it happens to be my cadence. But that doesn't mean it works for everybody. Everybody's biomechanics are a little different... and if your slower cadence got you to the Boston Marathon (someplace my "optimal" cadence will never take me), then I'd say it's a safe bet that it's the right one for you.

nkrichards wrote:

Date  Miles  Pace    HR  Cadence  VO  GTC  Stride
3/18   3      12:48  151    150    10.2  318    .84
3/20   3      12:28  151    152     9.7   315    .85
3/23   3      11:56  146    154     9.9   304    .87
3/24   3      11:46  153    155    10.0  302    .89
3/25   3      11:34  155    155     9.4   300    .90
3/27   5      11:55  154    154     9.6   304    .87
3/28   3      10:58  150    160     9.9   286    .92

VO = Vertical Oscillation 
GTC = Ground Contact Time

And the experiment continues.  I forgot my gnome today.     What kind of experiment it that?  Apparently a very good one.  I decided I didn't want to mess with heading back to the house to get it after my walking warmup so I just took off.

4 miles @10:28 HR 156 Cad 161 VO 10.0 GCT 280 Stride .95
10:25 HR 142 Cad 162
10:40 HR 156 Cad 161
10:18 HR 162 Cad 160
10:29 HR 166 Cad 160

I kept reminding myself to keep the cadence up as it seemed like I was slacking off.  I counted my breathing to try and keep me on track.  I was much more successful than I thought!

Pace WOW
HR  Definitely not low but not terrible for the pace
Cadence WOW and without the gnome for help
VO Nothing of note
GTC Still going down. Woohoo
Stride Obviously I'm not getting this pitter patter thing. 

Not sure I'm accomplishing my goal of a low HR recovery effort high cadence run but boy is this interesting.  I've essentially raised my cadence from the mid 150's to 160 (not that big of an increase) and look where my pace has gone.  Yes, my HR is a bit higher but nothing like I would have expected.

We'll see what happens next.

***

Definitely assuming that we have active cases of corona in our community even though nothing has been officially diagnosed.  And yes, especially when I'm around anyone who is at a higher risk I'm assuming that I may be asymptomatic but a carrier!!

I did notice that dependent children over 17 aren't even eligible for the additional $500 that children get.  Does that make sense?  NO!  They are either dependent children or independent adults but they are humans and a part of our economy!!

Still have not been able to purchase TP.  I always have a cupboard full so I didn't worry about purchasing more but I'm going to need to replenish soon.

nkrichards wrote:

nkrichards wrote:

Date  Miles  Pace    HR  Cadence  VO  GTC  Stride
3/18   3      12:48  151    150    10.2  318    .84
3/20   3      12:28  151    152     9.7   315    .85
3/23   3      11:56  146    154     9.9   304    .87
3/24   3      11:46  153    155    10.0  302    .89
3/25   3      11:34  155    155     9.4   300    .90
3/27   5      11:55  154    154     9.6   304    .87
3/28   3      10:58  150    160     9.9   286    .92

VO = Vertical Oscillation 
GTC = Ground Contact Time

And the experiment continues.  I forgot my gnome today.     What kind of experiment it that?  Apparently a very good one.  I decided I didn't want to mess with heading back to the house to get it after my walking warmup so I just took off.

4 miles @10:28 HR 156 Cad 161 VO 10.0 GCT 280 Stride .95
10:25 HR 142 Cad 162
10:40 HR 156 Cad 161
10:18 HR 162 Cad 160
10:29 HR 166 Cad 160

I kept reminding myself to keep the cadence up as it seemed like I was slacking off.  I counted my breathing to try and keep me on track.  I was much more successful than I thought!

Pace WOW
HR  Definitely not low but not terrible for the pace
Cadence WOW and without the gnome for help
VO Nothing of note
GTC Still going down. Woohoo
Stride Obviously I'm not getting this pitter patter thing. 

Not sure I'm accomplishing my goal of a low HR recovery effort high cadence run but boy is this interesting.  I've essentially raised my cadence from the mid 150's to 160 (not that big of an increase) and look where my pace has gone.  Yes, my HR is a bit higher but nothing like I would have expected.

We'll see what happens next.

***

Definitely assuming that we have active cases of corona in our community even though nothing has been officially diagnosed.  And yes, especially when I'm around anyone who is at a higher risk I'm assuming that I may be asymptomatic but a carrier!!

I did notice that dependent children over 17 aren't even eligible for the additional $500 that children get.  Does that make sense?  NO!  They are either dependent children or independent adults but they are humans and a part of our economy!!

Still have not been able to purchase TP.  I always have a cupboard full so I didn't worry about purchasing more but I'm going to need to replenish soon.

If you didn't run from 3/28 to 4/2 like it appears, that's part of your pace improvement, I think.  If you run tomorrow with about the same splits, then it's a WOW moment to me.  Cadence increase for me will cause increased HR, until the heart is comfortable, much like going faster raises HR.  For me...HR reduces first, then breathing rate, then legs.

And big gratz on keeping cadence without a gnome!

I bought a 4 roll toilet paper.  I had 8 at home, but the wall was full of 4 roll at the store, so I purchased 1.  First time I had seen so many since the Great Toilet Paper Hoard of 2020.  And down here, we have a hurricane season for which to purchase needed stuff.

Have a good weekend.

ounce wrote:

nkrichards wrote:

nkrichards wrote:

Date  Miles  Pace    HR  Cadence  VO  GTC  Stride
3/18   3      12:48  151    150    10.2  318    .84
3/20   3      12:28  151    152     9.7   315    .85
3/23   3      11:56  146    154     9.9   304    .87
3/24   3      11:46  153    155    10.0  302    .89
3/25   3      11:34  155    155     9.4   300    .90
3/27   5      11:55  154    154     9.6   304    .87
3/28   3      10:58  150    160     9.9   286    .92

VO = Vertical Oscillation 
GTC = Ground Contact Time

And the experiment continues.  I forgot my gnome today.     What kind of experiment it that?  Apparently a very good one.  I decided I didn't want to mess with heading back to the house to get it after my walking warmup so I just took off.

4 miles @10:28 HR 156 Cad 161 VO 10.0 GCT 280 Stride .95
10:25 HR 142 Cad 162
10:40 HR 156 Cad 161
10:18 HR 162 Cad 160
10:29 HR 166 Cad 160

I kept reminding myself to keep the cadence up as it seemed like I was slacking off.  I counted my breathing to try and keep me on track.  I was much more successful than I thought!

Pace WOW
HR  Definitely not low but not terrible for the pace
Cadence WOW and without the gnome for help
VO Nothing of note
GTC Still going down. Woohoo
Stride Obviously I'm not getting this pitter patter thing. 

Not sure I'm accomplishing my goal of a low HR recovery effort high cadence run but boy is this interesting.  I've essentially raised my cadence from the mid 150's to 160 (not that big of an increase) and look where my pace has gone.  Yes, my HR is a bit higher but nothing like I would have expected.

We'll see what happens next.

***

Definitely assuming that we have active cases of corona in our community even though nothing has been officially diagnosed.  And yes, especially when I'm around anyone who is at a higher risk I'm assuming that I may be asymptomatic but a carrier!!

I did notice that dependent children over 17 aren't even eligible for the additional $500 that children get.  Does that make sense?  NO!  They are either dependent children or independent adults but they are humans and a part of our economy!!

Still have not been able to purchase TP.  I always have a cupboard full so I didn't worry about purchasing more but I'm going to need to replenish soon.

If you didn't run from 3/28 to 4/2 like it appears, that's part of your pace improvement, I think.  If you run tomorrow with about the same splits, then it's a WOW moment to me.  Cadence increase for me will cause increased HR, until the heart is comfortable, much like going faster raises HR.  For me...HR reduces first, then breathing rate, then legs.

And big gratz on keeping cadence without a gnome!

I bought a 4 roll toilet paper.  I had 8 at home, but the wall was full of 4 roll at the store, so I purchased 1.  First time I had seen so many since the Great Toilet Paper Hoard of 2020.  And down here, we have a hurricane season for which to purchase needed stuff.

Have a good weekend.

Yes, I did have a longer than normal recovery time between runs so that's a valid point.  But the reason was that I wasn't feeling well.  And I did a tough 30 minute strength workout before that run.  But as you can see...you may be right.

I had to drive dump truck for Marty yesterday so he could clean out a drainage ditch before irrigation water arrived and we didn't finish in time for me to squeeze in a run.  I don't like that job.  It's way above my pay grade!!!

But this morning...
5 miles @ 10:52 HR 159 Cadence 163 VO 9.4 GCT 277 Stride .91
10:46 HR 141 Cad 169 Stride .88
11:00 HR 156 Cad 164 Stride .89
10:44 HR 162 Cad 161 Stride .93
10:49 HR 166 Cad 161 Stride .92
11:00 HR 167 Cad 161 Stride .91

So my pace while not as fast as Thursday was still pretty darn good for me at this point in time.
Definitely not low HR.  Not sure if/how I can manage a low HR with a higher cadence.
Cadence...I headed out with the gnome at 160 and realized that my cadence was faster than the gnome.  I adjusted on the fly and realized at the end that I set it higher than planned. 170!  That first mile was my best attempt at a pitter patter run.  Quite surprised that I maintained a 169 cadence for the mile and as you can see I did shorten my stride as a result.  Couldn't hold that cadence for long but was still better than runs recorded before my cadence experiment started.
VO was better.
GCT continues to fall which I'm quite pleased about.
Stride overall was a bit shorter mostly due to the first two miles.

They officially cancelled the PPP yesterday.  No one was surprised.  It was a foregone conclusion.  It's to bad because with the recent snowfall on Bachelor the snow conditions would have been pretty good this year.

We're preparing for rain.

nkrichards wrote:

Date  Miles  Pace    HR  Cadence  VO  GTC  Stride
3/18   3      12:48  151    150    10.2  318    .84
3/20   3      12:28  151    152     9.7   315    .85
3/23   3      11:56  146    154     9.9   304    .87
3/24   3      11:46  153    155    10.0  302    .89
3/25   3      11:34  155    155     9.4   300    .90
3/27   5      11:55  154    154     9.6   304    .87
3/28   3      10:58  150    160     9.9   286    .92
4/2     4      10:25  156    161    10.0  280    .95
4/4     5      10:52  159    163     9.4   277    .91
4/5     3      11:14  148    162     9.7   283    .88

VO = Vertical Oscillation 
GTC = Ground Contact Time

So...I added my recent runs to the chart above to make it easier to compare.  I feel like my run yesterday was about as close as I've been able to get to a lower HR run...not low but lower...with a higher cadence.  Don't tell Mark as he'll say "I told you..."  Note the shorter stride.  He's going to get a big head!

Anyway here's the details of that run.

3 miles @ 11:14 HR 148 Cadence 162 VO 9.7 GCT 283 Stride .88 Gnome @165
10:50 HR 130 Cadence 165 Stride .90
11:23 HR 156 Cadence 161 Stride .88
11:29 HR 158 Cadence 161 Stride .87

I will note that part of the reason the average HR for the run was lower is because of that first mile.  Not sure why it was so low and then jumped so quickly.  But it may have been a malfunction rather than actually accomplishing a lower HR high cadence run...

Not sure if I'll make it out for a run today.  Marty and I did workout again this morning so not a big deal if I don't make it.

Ultreya...

Nancy, I'll read your post tomorrow, but I thought you'd enjoy this 30 second video starring our mayor.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HXXjkHfTMG8#menu

ounce wrote:Nancy, I'll read your post tomorrow, but I thought you'd enjoy this 30 second video starring our mayor.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HXXjkHfTMG8#menu

They made fun of him on the snippet I saw on the national news earlier.  

nkrichards wrote:

nkrichards wrote:

Date  Miles  Pace    HR  Cadence  VO  GTC  Stride
3/18   3      12:48  151    150    10.2  318    .84
3/20   3      12:28  151    152     9.7   315    .85
3/23   3      11:56  146    154     9.9   304    .87
3/24   3      11:46  153    155    10.0  302    .89
3/25   3      11:34  155    155     9.4   300    .90
3/27   5      11:55  154    154     9.6   304    .87
3/28   3      10:58  150    160     9.9   286    .92 Gnome @160
4/2     4      10:25  156    161    10.0  280    .95 forgot Gnome
4/4     5      10:52  159    163     9.4   277    .91 Gnome @170
4/5     3      11:14  148    162     9.7   283    .88 Gnome @165
4/6     5      12:06  146    157     9.6   298    .85 left Gnome home

VO = Vertical Oscillation 
GTC = Ground Contact Time

So...I added my recent runs to the chart above to make it easier to compare.  I feel like my run yesterday was about as close as I've been able to get to a lower HR run...not low but lower...with a higher cadence.  Don't tell Mark as he'll say "I told you..."  Note the shorter stride.  He's going to get a big head!

Anyway here's the details of that run.

3 miles @ 11:14 HR 148 Cadence 162 VO 9.7 GCT 283 Stride .88 Gnome @165
10:50 HR 130 Cadence 165 Stride .90
11:23 HR 156 Cadence 161 Stride .88
11:29 HR 158 Cadence 161 Stride .87

I will note that part of the reason the average HR for the run was lower is because of that first mile.  Not sure why it was so low and then jumped so quickly.  But it may have been a malfunction rather than actually accomplishing a lower HR high cadence run...

Not sure if I'll make it out for a run today.  Marty and I did workout again this morning so not a big deal if I don't make it.

Ultreya...

Not sure if I should bother to record this run or not!  I struggled much more than the data reveals.

So...I wasn't able to run Monday.  Tuesday I was in the tractor most of the day but did finish in time to head out for a run.  Decided to take a break from the gnome...it's mentally difficult.  But tried to count my breathing.  Goal was an easy effort 5 miles concentrating on a fun relaxing run but keeping cadence in the back of my mind.

5.0 @ 12:06 HR 146 Cadence 157 VO 9.6 GCT 298 Stride .85
11:46 HR 134 Cadence 162 Stride .84
12:20 HR 142 Cadence 159 Stride .82
12:11 HR 146 Cadence 157 Stride .85
12:01 HR 153 Cadence 156 Stride .86
12:12 HR 155 Cadence 152 Stride .87

The first mile felt pretty good.  I was still feeling OK when I arrived at the turn around point and continued on making my commitment to 5 miles.  I could tell my cadence was slipping a bit but I was still counting my breathing.  That's when things fell apart.  Before I reached mile three I was wishing I could cut the run short but knew I couldn't.  I tried to continue to count steps but I was struggling.  My legs were the biggest problem but I was determined to keep on trucking...after all I needed to get home somehow.  During mile 4 I enjoyed a bit of downhill but was tempted to just stop and walk...  I kept reminding myself to count my breathing and keep my cadence up but I often found myself slipping into old habits.  The last mile I felt like I had two choices. 1) walk 2) run like I normally do...slow cadence.  I slipped into old running form and shuffled on.

So as you can see, my HR wasn't that high but boy mentally it felt tough!  And as a result my cadence and pace both suffered.  Not sure why but here are several possibilities.

• Marty and I worked out the last 3 mornings.
  
• It was late in the day.
  
• It was warmer than normal...mid 60's.  I like 40's.
  
• I'd been sitting in the tractor all day.
  
• I was a bit flustered and had a slight upset stomach at the start.
  
• I just plain had a bad day and mentally fell apart.
  

I don't think the answer is all that important at this point.  Tomorrow Today is another day.

nkrichards wrote:

nkrichards wrote:

Date  Miles  Pace    HR  Cadence  VO  GTC  Stride
3/18   3      12:48  151    150    10.2  318    .84
3/20   3      12:28  151    152     9.7   315    .85
3/23   3      11:56  146    154     9.9   304    .87
3/24   3      11:46  153    155    10.0  302    .89
3/25   3      11:34  155    155     9.4   300    .90
3/27   5      11:55  154    154     9.6   304    .87
3/28   3      10:58  150    160     9.9   286    .92
4/2     4      10:25  156    161    10.0  280    .95
4/4     5      10:52  159    163     9.4   277    .91
4/5     3      11:14  148    162     9.7   283    .88

VO = Vertical Oscillation 
GTC = Ground Contact Time

So...I added my recent runs to the chart above to make it easier to compare.  I feel like my run yesterday was about as close as I've been able to get to a lower HR run...not low but lower...with a higher cadence.  Don't tell Mark as he'll say "I told you..."  Note the shorter stride.  He's going to get a big head!

Anyway here's the details of that run.

3 miles @ 11:14 HR 148 Cadence 162 VO 9.7 GCT 283 Stride .88 Gnome @165
10:50 HR 130 Cadence 165 Stride .90
11:23 HR 156 Cadence 161 Stride .88
11:29 HR 158 Cadence 161 Stride .87

I will note that part of the reason the average HR for the run was lower is because of that first mile.  Not sure why it was so low and then jumped so quickly.  But it may have been a malfunction rather than actually accomplishing a lower HR high cadence run...

Not sure if I'll make it out for a run today.  Marty and I did workout again this morning so not a big deal if I don't make it.

Ultreya...

Nancy, I had something written up for this post, when the battery went dead.  So, before I read the most recent one, I want to talk about this one.  If I can remember what I wrote 2 days ago.

On this most recent run and your comments, your mile 1 was lower because your heart was trying to get up to the effort you were expending.  I'll bet the latter parts of your first mile was closer to the mile 2 avg.

This run has you at the top of your running ability at this pace.  Your cadence dropped off a bit, while your HR was more than you wanted.  Now, running more three's at current pace, then longer distances at a slower pace will get the heart to beat slower and your 2nd and 3rd mile cadence up to mile 1's cadence.

For me, heart adapts first, then lungs, then legs.  That presumes your other decathlon activities and life are running along about normal or so.  Your stride will be what it is and sometimes you'll benefit from a split time match when a longer stride makes up for a slower cadence in a split.

Now, to compare the other runs with this 3 mile run.  To me, this 3 mile run shows unequivocally that your decathlon body can handle a 12 step increase in cadence.  I can only do 1 step at a time.  You did 12 and your HR reflects this.  So in THIS light of comparing 10 or so runs to this 3 mile run, your cadence slide is trivial.  TRIVIAL!  Or to put it in Accounting language 'rounding.'

AND you may not have hit your true cadence, yet.  Let your HR adapt to 162 spm, then increase your cadence some.  If you could do 12, increase it 5 to 167.  Don't worry about time.  You'll know when you've reached your first ceiling, when your 3rd mile cadence is around 90% of your first mile.  That's my world.

Way to go!

nkrichards wrote:

nkrichards wrote:

nkrichards wrote:

Date  Miles  Pace    HR  Cadence  VO  GTC  Stride
3/18   3      12:48  151    150    10.2  318    .84
3/20   3      12:28  151    152     9.7   315    .85
3/23   3      11:56  146    154     9.9   304    .87
3/24   3      11:46  153    155    10.0  302    .89
3/25   3      11:34  155    155     9.4   300    .90
3/27   5      11:55  154    154     9.6   304    .87
3/28   3      10:58  150    160     9.9   286    .92 Gnome @160
4/2     4      10:25  156    161    10.0  280    .95 forgot Gnome
4/4     5      10:52  159    163     9.4   277    .91 Gnome @170
4/5     3      11:14  148    162     9.7   283    .88 Gnome @165
4/6     5      12:06  146    157     9.6   298    .85 left Gnome home

VO = Vertical Oscillation 
GTC = Ground Contact Time

So...I added my recent runs to the chart above to make it easier to compare.  I feel like my run yesterday was about as close as I've been able to get to a lower HR run...not low but lower...with a higher cadence.  Don't tell Mark as he'll say "I told you..."  Note the shorter stride.  He's going to get a big head!

Anyway here's the details of that run.

3 miles @ 11:14 HR 148 Cadence 162 VO 9.7 GCT 283 Stride .88 Gnome @165
10:50 HR 130 Cadence 165 Stride .90
11:23 HR 156 Cadence 161 Stride .88
11:29 HR 158 Cadence 161 Stride .87

I will note that part of the reason the average HR for the run was lower is because of that first mile.  Not sure why it was so low and then jumped so quickly.  But it may have been a malfunction rather than actually accomplishing a lower HR high cadence run...

Not sure if I'll make it out for a run today.  Marty and I did workout again this morning so not a big deal if I don't make it.

Ultreya...

Not sure if I should bother to record this run or not!  I struggled much more than the data reveals.

So...I wasn't able to run Monday.  Tuesday I was in the tractor most of the day but did finish in time to head out for a run.  Decided to take a break from the gnome...it's mentally difficult.  But tried to count my breathing.  Goal was an easy effort 5 miles concentrating on a fun relaxing run but keeping cadence in the back of my mind.

5.0 @ 12:06 HR 146 Cadence 157 VO 9.6 GCT 298 Stride .85
11:46 HR 134 Cadence 162 Stride .84
12:20 HR 142 Cadence 159 Stride .82
12:11 HR 146 Cadence 157 Stride .85
12:01 HR 153 Cadence 156 Stride .86
12:12 HR 155 Cadence 152 Stride .87

The first mile felt pretty good.  I was still feeling OK when I arrived at the turn around point and continued on making my commitment to 5 miles.  I could tell my cadence was slipping a bit but I was still counting my breathing.  That's when things fell apart.  Before I reached mile three I was wishing I could cut the run short but knew I couldn't.  I tried to continue to count steps but I was struggling.  My legs were the biggest problem but I was determined to keep on trucking...after all I needed to get home somehow.  During mile 4 I enjoyed a bit of downhill but was tempted to just stop and walk...  I kept reminding myself to count my breathing and keep my cadence up but I often found myself slipping into old habits.  The last mile I felt like I had two choices. 1) walk 2) run like I normally do...slow cadence.  I slipped into old running form and shuffled on.

So as you can see, my HR wasn't that high but boy mentally it felt tough!  And as a result my cadence and pace both suffered.  Not sure why but here are several possibilities.

• Marty and I worked out the last 3 mornings.
  
• It was late in the day.
  
• It was warmer than normal...mid 60's.  I like 40's.
  
• I'd been sitting in the tractor all day.
  
• I was a bit flustered and had a slight upset stomach at the start.
  
• I just plain had a bad day and mentally fell apart.
  

I don't think the answer is all that important at this point.  Tomorrow Today is another day.

So as you can see, my HR wasn't that high but boy mentally it felt tough!  And as a result my cadence and pace both suffered.  Not sure why but here are several possibilities.

• Marty and I worked out the last 3 mornings.  Meh, doubt it.  You're a decathelete. 
  
• It was late in the day.  Somewhat
  
• It was warmer than normal...mid 60's.  I like 40's.  Somewhat more
  
• I'd been sitting in the tractor all day.  somewhat
  
• I was a bit flustered and had a slight upset stomach at the start.  Yes
  
• I just plain had a bad day and mentally fell apart.  YES!!!!!!
  

With the stride length shown, you can see were a little more stride and a little less cadence will give you close to the same split as a little more cadence with a little less stride.  A few less steps can save energy, when you can lengthen your stride juuuuuust a little bit and get the same split.

Personally, it's too much for me to even attempt to count the steps.  That's why I lean on the gnome because I can keep the cadence until the legs tell me to shut the durn thing off.

Your HR creeped up, but nothing improper.  And you maintained an acceptable cadence by counting.  Do you set your gnome for 162 cadence at 81 chirps or 162 chirps?

So, cadence slid but the stride length almost made up for it in miles 4 and 5.  You did well for the situations given.

Now, when you find your cadence and can maintain it over mid-teen miles, THEN you work a little on stride lengthening as an economy move to save steps in cadence OR, if you're running well, to drop your times.

Get some rest.

Date  Miles  Pace    HR  Cadence  VO  GTC  Stride
3/18   3      12:48  151    150    10.2  318    .84
3/20   3      12:28  151    152     9.7   315    .85
3/23   3      11:56  146    154     9.9   304    .87
3/24   3      11:46  153    155    10.0  302    .89
3/25   3      11:34  155    155     9.4   300    .90
3/27   5      11:55  154    154     9.6   304    .87
3/28   3      10:58  150    160     9.9   286    .92 Gnome @160
4/2     4      10:25  156    161    10.0  280    .95 forgot Gnome
4/4     5      10:52  159    163     9.4   277    .91 Gnome @170
4/5     3      11:14  148    162     9.7   283    .88 Gnome @165
4/7     5      12:06  146    157     9.6   298    .85 left Gnome home
4/9     4      11:09  153    160    10.0  283    .90 Gnome @165
4/10   3      11:18  149    163    10.1  276    .88 Gnome @165
4/11   4      11:34  145    161    10.0  280    .86 Gnome @165

VO = Vertical Oscillation 
GTC = Ground Contact Time

Decided that I needed a Mulligan for my Tuesday run...with a better mindset.  The numbers don't indicate how terrible that run felt!

I took Wednesday off.  My initial thought was to try to do 5 again but I decided that a well executed 4 was better than a disappointing 5.  I headed out earlier in the day and it was cooler.  I set the Gnome at 165.

4 miles @ 11:09 HR 153 Cadence 160 VO 10.0 GCT 283 Stride .90
11:01 HR 143 Cadence 163 Stride .89
11:21 HR 153 Cadence 161 Stride .88
11:08 HR 156 Cadence 159 Stride .91
11:08 HR 160 Cadence 159 Stride .91

Couldn't quite hang on to the cadence and I see that I let the stride lengthen out a bit.  But overall not terrible.  Still not getting close to a low HR run at a higher cadence.  I'll give it a bit more time.  Hopefully it will begin to feel more natural.

***
Thanks for your comments Doug.  It's nice to have another set of eyes analyzing my data.  I find this all very interesting...and very confusing.  If a higher cadence is more efficient then why does it make my HR higher?  If a few less steps is energy conserving then why is a higher cadence better?  I guess if I look closely at the data then I have to admit that while I'm not able to put together a low HR high cadence run I am running at a faster pace at the same HR as my low cadence runs but I do have more training under my belt now.

I do feel like I'm getting closer to Mark's suggested shorter steps but I'm still not getting the results I was hoping for.  I'm not ready to give up on this experiment...I gave up after just one or two runs in the past.

I've been setting the Gnome at 165, chirping on every beat.  I find it hard to concentrate on matching my footfall to the gnome unless I count my breathing.  And counting my breathing also reminds me to slow down and breath less often which is essential at a higher cadence.  I find it mentally exhausting.  When my mind wanders I find myself off the cadence and stretching out my stride.  This happens more later in my run as I'm beginning to tire mentally and find my mind wandering...as evidenced by the data.  This is going to have to become more natural if I'm going to be able to continue it long term.

Maybe a short run today...

***
Editing to add this morning's run rather than making a new post.

Later in the morning but before lunch.  Starting to warm up a bit.  Gnome set at 165

3.0 @ 11:18 HR 149 Cadence 163 VO 10.1 GCT 276 Stride .88
11:14 HR 137 Cadence 164 Stride .87
11:26 HR 151 Cadence 162 Stride .87
11:13 HR 157 Cadence 162 Stride .88

Not a bad run.  As you can see I still haven't achieved what I would consider a low HR high cadence run.  Obviously I'm able to hold my cadence and shorter stride better in a shorter run but still can't carry it into longer runs.  

Yard work beckons...

***
Editing to add my Saturday morning run to keep this post current without getting to long...

4.0 @ 11:34 HR 145 Cadence 161 VO 10.0 GCT 280 Stride .86 (Gnome set at 165)
11:37 HR 134 Cadence 164 Stride .84
11:46 HR 145 Cadence 162 Stride .84
11:29 HR 149 Cadence 160 Stride .88
11:24 HR 154 Cadence 159 Stride .86

Lowest HR run since I started this experiment.     Actually lowest HR since I returned to running in mid-March.  And while I didn't maintain the cadence all the way through the run I did OK.  If the goal is shorter stride then I did well in that aspect as well.

So now the question is... Is the lower HR today due to my effort to shorten my stride and increase my cadence?  Or is it merely the fact that my body is responding to the training I've been doing the last 3 1/2 weeks?  Remember the data above starts with my first run since February...

It's to windy to work in the yard today...

4 miles @ 11:09 HR 153 Cadence 160 VO 10.0 GCT 283 Stride .90
11:01 HR 143 Cadence 163 Stride .89
11:21 HR 153 Cadence 161 Stride .88
11:08 HR 156 Cadence 159 Stride .91
11:08 HR 160 Cadence 159 Stride .91

Couldn't quite hang on to the cadence and I see that I let the stride lengthen out a bit.  But overall not terrible.  Still not getting close to a low HR run at a higher cadence.  I'll give it a bit more time.  Hopefully it will begin to feel more natural.


No, not bad at all and you should stick with it.  Your cadence looks a lot like mine when I'm trying to break in a new cadence.  It would seem you may have found the cadence where you have to work at getting comfortable before increasing.

As your legs adapt, your cadence will come closer to 165 for each split.  It does, and has, for me.  If my cadence is set at 165, the garmin will record 164, 90% of the time.  Don't know why, but that's why a margin of error of +/- 2 steps is fine with me.  You will get there.  Ultreya.

(I've typed this twice, which is why I'm now saving as I go, since my laptop seems to require rests at the worst time.)

If a higher cadence is more efficient then why does it make my HR higher?  Because your heart hasn't adapted to the new cadence, yet. Once your heart decides you're serious at this cadence and pace, it will figure out a way to become efficient.  Then your HR will begin to drop.  I imagine your split cadence on a 4 mile run will level out before your HR does, which is just fine.  You've increased your cadence by 12 steps, so your heart is working harder.  I suspect your next incremental increase will be less than 12 steps, so your heart won't have to work as hard to become efficient again.


If a few less steps is energy conserving then why is a higher cadence better? Because the more times you make contact with the ground, the more propulsion you make.  Let me make a comparison.  In a 3 mile run on your last post, mile 1 and mile 3 are below:

1.  11:14 HR 137 Cadence 164 Stride .87
3.  11:13 HR 157 Cadence 162 Stride .88

Times are identical enough.  HR is not a factor in this comparison.  Cadence is defined as Steps Per Minute.  So in mile 3, you took ~2 less steps per minute than mile 1 or ~22 fewer steps for the mile (2 x 11 minutes) for the same clock time.  22 steps may not sound like much.  But when I am comfortable with my cadence on a sorta long run, I can extend my stride length a bit and I can tell that I am taking fewer steps.  It's almost like a short rest.  I can't do much more than 100 yards on the lengthening, but if I can tell it on such a short application, then I need to get work at it more.

I guess if I look closely at the data then I have to admit that while I'm not able to put together a low HR high cadence run I am running at a faster pace at the same HR as my low cadence runs but I do have more training under my belt now.  Ding!  This is where the reverse of Maffetone works.  We are running faster and letting the HR come to our pace, instead of the HR being the anchor to speed progression.


I've been setting the Gnome at 165, chirping on every beat.  I find it hard to concentrate on matching my footfall to the gnome unless I count my breathing.  And counting my breathing also reminds me to slow down and breath less often which is essential at a higher cadence.  I find it mentally exhausting.  When my mind wanders I find myself off the cadence and stretching out my stride.  This happens more later in my run as I'm beginning to tire mentally and find my mind wandering...as evidenced by the data.  This is going to have to become more natural if I'm going to be able to continue it long term.
I seem to remember not succumbing to the will of the Gnome, early on, or drifting my attention.  Resistance is futile.  Once you see your successes on pace and HR, it'll be easier to accept.  And since you don't have any races planned, this is the perfect time to work on something new.


4.0 @ 11:34 HR 145 Cadence 161 VO 10.0 GCT 280 Stride .86 (Gnome set at 165)
11:37 HR 134 Cadence 164 Stride .84
11:46 HR 145 Cadence 162 Stride .84
11:29 HR 149 Cadence 160 Stride .88
11:24 HR 154 Cadence 159 Stride .86

Lowest HR run since I started this experiment.     Actually lowest HR since I returned to running in mid-March.  And while I didn't maintain the cadence all the way through the run I did OK.  If the goal is shorter stride then I did well in that aspect as well.

So now the question is... Is the lower HR today due to my effort to shorten my stride and increase my cadence?  Or is it merely the fact that my body is responding to the training I've been doing the last 3 1/2 weeks?  Remember the data above starts with my first run since February...


See how your cadence on miles 2, 3, and 4 are coming closer to mile 1's cadence?  That's what happens at 4 miles.  And if you run a 5th mile and your cadence is lower than the 159 of mile 4, then you could conclude that you're not ready to advance your gnome cadence.  Conversely, if it's 159 or higher, then you conclude you could be ready to advance in mileage or cadence.

RE:  HR, YES!  This is what's supposed to happen.  Your heart is adapting and is becoming more efficient.

I do feel like I'm getting closer to Mark's suggested shorter steps but I'm still not getting the results I was hoping for.  I'm not ready to give up on this experiment...I gave up after just one or two runs in the past.
Well, you and I are doing the same thing (cadence), but with different striding technique.  We have the luxury to better our pace or cadence or HR or even stride, until we have something to train for.  We haven't reached our upper limit on cadence and we have time to tinker because we have no upcoming races.
 
I think that I can train for January's Half and still increase cadence.  But if I am training for a marathon, I would get to a cadence I can do and not change it until after the marathon.  That way I can work on pace and HR.

You're doing good on adapting, so hang in there and find your groove.

nkrichards wrote:
I did notice that dependent children over 17 aren't even eligible for the additional $500 that children get.  Does that make sense?  NO!  They are either dependent children or independent adults but they are humans and a part of our economy!!

Just dropping in (fun watching the cadence experiments - try it barefoot!) to add this one editorial comment to what you said above.

Mark B wrote:

nkrichards wrote:
I did notice that dependent children over 17 aren't even eligible for the additional $500 that children get.  Does that make sense?  NO!  They are either dependent children or independent adults but they are humans and a part of our economy!!

Just dropping in (fun watching the cadence experiments - try it barefoot!) to add this one editorial comment to what you said above.

It WAS a bi-partisan agreement.

I can hear each of our reps saying, "Yeah, I tried SO hard to get a 17 year old included, but it just wasn't to be.  You know, a passing a bill is like making sausag...."

But, are you sure all 17 year olds ARE human?

ounce wrote:

Mark B wrote:

nkrichards wrote:
I did notice that dependent children over 17 aren't even eligible for the additional $500 that children get.  Does that make sense?  NO!  They are either dependent children or independent adults but they are humans and a part of our economy!!

Just dropping in (fun watching the cadence experiments - try it barefoot!) to add this one editorial comment to what you said above.

It WAS a bi-partisan agreement.

I can hear each of our reps saying, "Yeah, I tried SO hard to get a 17 year old included, but it just wasn't to be.  You know, a passing a bill is like making sausag...."

But, are you sure all 17 year olds ARE human?

Can't speak for 17-year-olds, but 19-year-old college students with no job prospects and student loans seem to be the sort of human beings who might actually benefit from emergency help at this time. If aid isn't deemed appropriate to these fully fledged adults, how about to the parents who still provide sufficient levels of support (now doubled, since they were paying for college expenses and now have to pay for them at home) to be able to count them as dependents on their taxes? 

It's a bizarre and punishing oversight. Less for us, because we're doing okay and still have our jobs. But for others?  

Note: I didn't see any partisan inclination to my flaming head, and I haven't reviewed the legislation in question, so I can't say if it was an explicit omission by the bill writers or an interpretation by the executive branch of the legislation. It could be either. I can say with certainty, however, that it'd be nice if whatever it was is specifically rectified in the next bailout bill.

Mark B wrote:

ounce wrote:

Mark B wrote:

nkrichards wrote:
I did notice that dependent children over 17 aren't even eligible for the additional $500 that children get.  Does that make sense?  NO!  They are either dependent children or independent adults but they are humans and a part of our economy!!

Just dropping in (fun watching the cadence experiments - try it barefoot!) to add this one editorial comment to what you said above.

It WAS a bi-partisan agreement.

I can hear each of our reps saying, "Yeah, I tried SO hard to get a 17 year old included, but it just wasn't to be.  You know, a passing a bill is like making sausag...."

But, are you sure all 17 year olds ARE human?

Can't speak for 17-year-olds, but 19-year-old college students with no job prospects and student loans seem to be the sort of human beings who might actually benefit from emergency help at this time. If aid isn't deemed appropriate to these fully fledged adults, how about to the parents who still provide sufficient levels of support (now doubled, since they were paying for college expenses and now have to pay for them at home) to be able to count them as dependents on their taxes? 

It's a bizarre and punishing oversight. Less for us, because we're doing okay and still have our jobs. But for others?  

Note: I didn't see any partisan inclination to my flaming head, and I haven't reviewed the legislation in question, so I can't say if it was an explicit omission by the bill writers or an interpretation by the executive branch of the legislation. It could be either. I can say with certainty, however, that it'd be nice if whatever it was is specifically rectified in the next bailout bill.

I wouldn't hold my breath.  Not sure if/when the next bailout bill will pass...and will it be a bailout or just a conglomeration of pet projects with just enough of frosting to call it a bailout???

Date  Miles  Pace    HR  Cadence  VO  GTC  Stride
3/18   3      12:48  151    150    10.2  318    .84
3/20   3      12:28  151    152     9.7   315    .85
3/23   3      11:56  146    154     9.9   304    .87
3/24   3      11:46  153    155    10.0  302    .89
3/25   3      11:34  155    155     9.4   300    .90
3/27   5      11:55  154    154     9.6   304    .87
3/28   3      10:58  150    160     9.9   286    .92 Gnome @160
4/2     4      10:25  156    161    10.0  280    .95 forgot Gnome
4/4     5      10:52  159    163     9.4   277    .91 Gnome @170
4/5     3      11:14  148    162     9.7   283    .88 Gnome @165
4/7     5      12:06  146    157     9.6   298    .85 left Gnome home
4/9     4      11:09  153    160    10.0  283    .90 Gnome @165
4/10   3      11:18  149    163    10.1  276    .88 Gnome @165
4/11   4      11:34  145    161    10.0  280    .86 Gnome @165
4/14   4      10:44  152    164      9.9  270    .92 Gnome @165

VO = Vertical Oscillation 
GTC = Ground Contact Time


Darn it Doug.  I was ready to end this stupid experiment and then you have to go and execute a more than perfect run and post comments that make continuing seem more logical than not. 

So...I emailed my data to my triathlon friend Maura.  She often used to comment that my run and bike cadence was low and encourage me to increase it.  I assumed she was a bit of a number geek.  Turns out her HR monitor has been broken for years and she didn't even know what some of the numbers posted above meant.  She does everything by feel.     That wasn't any help.

Then I looked at a couple articles on-line.  The one I liked the best was a McMillan article.  He explained that if you learn to run slow/long you'll naturally develop a slow but efficient...for you...cadence.  That's me!  If you start running on the track you'll develop a fast, efficient cadence.  He says you can change it but it is hard.  He recommends that you shoot for something between 170-190.  His suggestion is to do some striders with the metronome once a week or so to get the feel of it and then see if it carries over to your other runs.  I liked the sounds of just a few minutes of that annoying chirp each week instead of all the time...


So I decided to put the Gnome away and just bring it out once a week for a couple striders.  Then I read Doug's comments...and saw the post of his WOW run.  I grudgingly put the Gnome (@165) on and headed out this morning.

***

4 miles @ 10:44 HR 152 Cadence 164 VO 9.9 GCT 270 Stride .92
10:42 HR 140 Cadence 166 Stride .90
11:06 HR 150 Cadence 164 Stride .88
10:32 HR 156 Cadence 163 Stride .94
10:34 HR 161 Cadence 163 Stride .94

Damn it!  Tough to argue with those numbers.  OK HR...not so good...but I maintained the stride pretty much the entire time.  And lengthened my stride while I did it!

Don't tell Fast Freddy about the Gnome or I'm really going to be in trouble...

Nice to see progress! 

I promise I won't tell Fast Freddy.

(And I'm not holding my breath on funds for Alec's age group, either. A good object lesson to his generation that sometimes, somebody else gets the gold mine — and you get the shaft.)

Date  Miles  Pace    HR  Cadence  VO  GTC  Stride
3/18   3      12:48  151    150    10.2  318    .84
3/20   3      12:28  151    152     9.7   315    .85
3/23   3      11:56  146    154     9.9   304    .87
3/24   3      11:46  153    155    10.0  302    .89
3/25   3      11:34  155    155     9.4   300    .90
3/27   5      11:55  154    154     9.6   304    .87
3/28   3      10:58  150    160     9.9   286    .92 Gnome @160
4/2     4      10:25  156    161    10.0  280    .95 forgot Gnome
4/4     5      10:52  159    163     9.4   277    .91 Gnome @170
4/5     3      11:14  148    162     9.7   283    .88 Gnome @165
4/7     5      12:06  146    157     9.6   298    .85 left Gnome home
4/9     4      11:09  153    160    10.0  283    .90 Gnome @165
4/10   3      11:18  149    163    10.1  276    .88 Gnome @165
4/11   4      11:34  145    161    10.0  280    .86 Gnome @165
4/14   4      10:44  152    164      9.9  270    .92 Gnome @165
4/15   5      11:40  147    158      9.8  293    .87 Gnome @165 mile 1 & 5 only


VO = Vertical Oscillation 
GTC = Ground Contact Time

Not a stellar run today but kind of what I was expecting.  I've been hoping to get a 5 mile run in for several days and it just hasn't happened.  I decided to do it today no matter what.  Not the best plan after a pretty hard 4 yesterday.  I got dressed for my run at 10:00.  Life got in the way and I wasn't able to head out till well after 1:00.  It was warm, breezy, to close to lunch and I was flustered.  But determined!  Set the Gnome @ 165 and headed out without great expectations.

5 miles @ 11:40 HR 147 Cadence 158 VO 9.8 GCT 293 Stride .87
10:46 HR 137 Cadence 164 Stride .91
11:37 HR 145 Cadence 158 Stride .87
12:08 HR 147 Cadence 154 Stride .86
12:30 HR 151 Cadence 153 Stride .84
11:18 HR 156 Cadence 162 Stride .88

I realized early in the 2nd mile that if I kept up that effort I wasn't going to be able to finish my 5.  I couldn't hold my cadence and my legs were already complaining.  I turned the Gnome off and just ran without worrying about anything other than finishing safely.  I enjoyed a gorgeous view of the mountains and I saw my fox...good thing I was running slowly.  Once I completed mile 4 I knew I could make it home so I turned the Gnome back on.  Wasn't able to get back to the pace or cadence of that first mile...or yesterday's run...but I did finish well.  

Not sure if I made the right choice or not but I'm pleased that I didn't give up and cut it short.

Tomorrow is another day.