Last Hand: Cashing at the USATF Grand Prix

@ Dave - hadn't heard that, but that would make a difference. Surprised it took one of the real Fab 5 that long to trademark it.

If we're going to be critical of originality, though, Fab 5 is recycled, too.

Deb asked me this morning how last night's hill repeats went. I said "encouraging." Since she asked the question before I had coffee, I know that was an honest response, not measured at all. Mind filters wren't yet revved up and operational.

They WERE encouraging. Workout was 6 x 60 seconds on a pretty good slope, about 6%, with a 4 - 5 minute recovery including the run back downhill and some walking. Magill talks about the purpose of long hill repeats being to build intermediate fast twitch endurance, to run faster longer, which he calls the definition of the 5K. He also says that it's OK to do a long recovery on these because it's all about getting into a specific level of effort to build that specific muscle response. If the long recovery allows you to complete the workout as designed, then that's a good thing. Similar to other aspects of this workout plan, I don't know if that's 5K specific, and if a shorter recovery would be better in a marathon training plan. In my McMillan plan, the same workout on the same hill, the recoveries were half as long.

I figured a good pace target was 6:30 for 60 seconds, which is hard, but under control. I thought my lungs were going to explode on the first, which was at a 6:34 pace. But, they got easier from there - or was it that I was more familiar with the pain level I was going to have to endure? I ranged from 6:19 to 6:34 and averaged 6:28, so I met my goal. For recovery I ran back down and then about 1/4 mile more at about an 8:30 pace for 3 1/2 minutes, then walked for another minute. So I was fully recovered by the start of the second, but not standing around for 3 minutes either.

The Magill plan is a little lighter at times than I'm used to under McMillan, but it does include a steep progression, up to 6 x 90 seconds over the next 8 weeks in this instance, so they get tougher. I missed the first progression, 8 x 30 seconds, so maybe that's why the first one caught me by surprise.

And I will be honest with you, I did find myself wondering "what ARE you doing, Old Man, dragging your 54 year old carcass out here doing hill repeats. Most guys your age are home in their Barcalounger watching the Olympics." But I think the internal response was more pride than self-contempt.

Martin VW wrote:

And I will be honest with you, I did find myself wondering "what ARE you doing, Old Man, dragging your 54 year old carcass out here doing hill repeats. Most guys your age are home in their Barcalounger watching the Olympics." But I think the internal response was more pride than self-contempt.

Reminds me of when Jack ran along with me once to do my hill repeats....after the first one, he said "You've got to be effin' kidding me!! I'm too old for this sh**!!" (except he didn't say effin', exactly) He was 58 at the time. I told him that he could stop if he wanted to. He wanted to stop, but didn't. He did the entire workout.

This certainly gets harder as we get older, huh?

Martin VW wrote:Deb asked me this morning how last night's hill repeats went. I said "encouraging." Since she asked the question before I had coffee, I know that was an honest response, not measured at all. Mind filters wren't yet revved up and operational.

And I will be honest with you, I did find myself wondering "what ARE you doing, Old Man, dragging your 54 year old carcass out here doing hill repeats. Most guys your age are home in their Barcalounger watching the Olympics." But I think the internal response was more pride than self-contempt.

Hmm that would have been fun to be there for that responds. To be honest I was about to ask you is that you running in the first heat of 5000m and leading it and if you changed your citizenship to Australia?

@ Schuey - thanks for the post. Not sure what you're referring to, I must have missed the 5K.

Folks, I have HAD it with people floating into discussions to take pot shots at me, personally. It's effin' ridiculous to personally attack someone on a message board just because they disagree with what I have to say, don't like the way I say it, or just don't effin' like tall people. Whatever their motivation, it's driven me away from these Boards and the HH Boards enough times for me to say, you know what? it's time to go. There are enough small minded people in this little "club" that I'm never going to really be able to derive any fun from being a part of it.

And if it isn't fun, then why bother?

I've turned the other cheek once too often. You don't need me to be here, and it ain't going to erode the quality of my life to not be here. With 7 weeks to go in my running career, I think I've figured out what I'm going to figure out as a runner, and the pettiness in the attitudes of a few of you is pure, unadulterated BS. So, for the handful of you that insist on being dinks, go crack a beer and celebrate the good times ahead. You win. I've effing had enough.

Martin VW wrote:Folks, I have HAD it with people floating into discussions to take pot shots at me, personally. It's effin' ridiculous to personally attack someone on a message board just because they disagree with what I have to say, don't like the way I say it, or just don't effin' like tall people. Whatever their motivation, it's driven me away from these Boards and the HH Boards enough times for me to say, you know what? it's time to go. There are enough small minded people in this little "club" that I'm never going to really be able to derive any fun from being a part of it.

And if it isn't fun, then why bother?

I've turned the other cheek once too often. You don't need me to be here, and it ain't going to erode the quality of my life to not be here. With 7 weeks to go in my running career, I think I've figured out what I'm going to figure out as a runner, and the pettiness in the attitudes of a few of you is pure, unadulterated BS. So, for the handful of you that insist on being dinks, go crack a beer and celebrate the good times ahead. You win. I've effing had enough.

Well, I for one, am going to miss you again. I'm also going to miss following your training for these upcoming masters events. Darn. I'll think of you whilst watching hockey with my daughter at BU this winter.

Michele "1L" Keane wrote:

Martin VW wrote:Folks, I have HAD it with people floating into discussions to take pot shots at me, personally. It's effin' ridiculous to personally attack someone on a message board just because they disagree with what I have to say, don't like the way I say it, or just don't effin' like tall people. Whatever their motivation, it's driven me away from these Boards and the HH Boards enough times for me to say, you know what? it's time to go. There are enough small minded people in this little "club" that I'm never going to really be able to derive any fun from being a part of it.

And if it isn't fun, then why bother?

I've turned the other cheek once too often. You don't need me to be here, and it ain't going to erode the quality of my life to not be here. With 7 weeks to go in my running career, I think I've figured out what I'm going to figure out as a runner, and the pettiness in the attitudes of a few of you is pure, unadulterated BS. So, for the handful of you that insist on being dinks, go crack a beer and celebrate the good times ahead. You win. I've effing had enough.

Well, I for one, am going to miss you again. I'm also going to miss following your training for these upcoming masters events. Darn. I'll think of you whilst watching hockey with my daughter at BU this winter.

Thanks, Michele, but in the interest of giving the dinks even more to gratify themselves with, the reason for the rant wasn't so people would say nice things. In fact, I wouldn't mind if Matt or Dave just pulled this blog in its entirety.

It's stupid that a small handful of people believe they can just keep poking someone in the eye with a stick and think that they aren't hurting the group. Internet forums are abut having intelligent debate. If everyone got along all the tiime or never said anything "contrarian" then it would be B*O*R*I*N*G and we would all be denied the opportunity to learn.

But for Jim Mulcahy to actually think he is somehow adding even one shred of value by saying I'm "being contrarian for contrarian's sake," well that's just imbecilic. I initially replied, deleted it, slept on it, and said, you know what? I've had enough. It's happened over and over and over, and I'm sick and tired of having to just look past these stupid little insults that serve absolutely no purpose in a group enviroment.

So, again, Matt or Dave, when you come across this, feel free to delete this blog. It serves no purpose any more.

If you truly want the blog deleted, I will abide.

But out of curiosity, what is a dink? Because I suspect I have a different definition then you and want to make sure before I say anything.

Dave-O wrote:If you truly want the blog deleted, I will abide.

But out of curiosity, what is a dink? Because I suspect I have a different definition then you and want to make sure before I say anything.

Besides the 1990s definition of "double income, no kids", a dink is actually an 70s word for a "jerk" or "dolt" or worse (but as a Wellesley woman, I never deliberately type nasty things on the internet ) Just VW and I dating ourselves, yet again.

Michele "1L" Keane wrote:

Dave-O wrote:If you truly want the blog deleted, I will abide.

But out of curiosity, what is a dink? Because I suspect I have a different definition then you and want to make sure before I say anything.

Besides the 1990s definition of "double income, no kids", a dink is actually an 70s word for a "jerk" or "dolt" or worse (but as a Wellesley woman, I never deliberately type nasty things on the internet ) Just VW and I dating ourselves, yet again.

Yeah, Britt and I use it as Duel Income No Kids all the time when our parents harass us about procreating.

Dave-O wrote:

Michele "1L" Keane wrote:

Dave-O wrote:If you truly want the blog deleted, I will abide.

But out of curiosity, what is a dink? Because I suspect I have a different definition then you and want to make sure before I say anything.

Besides the 1990s definition of "double income, no kids", a dink is actually an 70s word for a "jerk" or "dolt" or worse (but as a Wellesley woman, I never deliberately type nasty things on the internet ) Just VW and I dating ourselves, yet again.

Yeah, Britt and I use it as Duel Income No Kids all the time when our parents harass us about procreating.

Been there.

Michele "1L" Keane wrote:

Dave-O wrote:

Michele "1L" Keane wrote:

Dave-O wrote:If you truly want the blog deleted, I will abide.

But out of curiosity, what is a dink? Because I suspect I have a different definition then you and want to make sure before I say anything.

Besides the 1990s definition of "double income, no kids", a dink is actually an 70s word for a "jerk" or "dolt" or worse (but as a Wellesley woman, I never deliberately type nasty things on the internet ) Just VW and I dating ourselves, yet again.

Yeah, Britt and I use it as Duel Income No Kids all the time when our parents harass us about procreating.

Been there.

ditto