Term Limits?

Whew.  Warm day.  70 degrees at the start and 79 at the finish.  Nice breeze that was still cool, unless it was just cooler on my wet skin.  The sun was hiding behind some clouds and the pecan and oak trees on 17 miles of the course.  Only the last 3/4ths of a mile was fully sun exposed, however I wasn't dripping wet at all.  Just wore out from temps 15-20 degrees above normal.  My lips are a bit sunburned or just parched. 

I was pretty dehydrated, as it took the kidneys 90 minutes to get enough to pee, after the race.  As a comparison, in cold weather (32 start & 55 end) when I finish a marathon, it takes 90 minutes to generate a pee.

The effects of the heat showed up at mile 7 or 8, when my cadence started slipping (this is from memory).  I was doing fine, to that point.  Even had 4 miles of fun that I'll explain in another post.  Y'all know how wordy I can get. 

So about mile 8, I started walking.  Made my calculations on when I was going to finish, under a worst case scenario.  I didn't have much buffer, based on walking 20 minute miles.  So after I felt a bit rested, I started running a tenth, walking a tenth.  Rinse.  Repeat.  I pretty much did that for the remainder of the race.  That guaranteed me plenty of wiggle room.  I ended up finishing before 10:35 a.m.  11 a.m. was the drop dead time.

Polar 14.62 miles, 3:31:09, 14:26 pace, 155 avg bpm, 150 avg cadence
(Garmin 14.55 miles, 3:31:24, 14:32 avg pace, 138 avg cadence, 0.81 m avg stride length).
Going to list splits with Garmin time & cadence in parentheses.
1.  13:14 (13:21), 141 bpm, 162 spm (161)
2.  13:01 (13:06), 153 bpm, 162 spm (159)
3.  12:58 (13:09), 159 bpm, 162 spm (162)
4.  13:16 (13:27), 161 bpm, 162 spm (160)
5.  14:04 (14:06), 159 bpm, 154 spm (153) pee break
6.  13:38 (13:32), 161 bpm, 156 spm (156)
7.  13:31 (13:43), 161 bpm, 160 spm (159)
8.  14:21 (14:50), 161 bpm, 148 spm (146)
9.  16:18 (15:49), 151 bpm, 136 spm (118)
10.  14:55 (15:12), 150 bpm, 140 spm (123)
11.  15:28 (15:23), 150 bpm, 138 spm (123)
12.  15:21 (15:37), 153 bpm, 138 spm (123)
13.  16:38 (16:43), 152 bpm, 134 spm (104)
14.  15:34 (15:28), 156 bpm, 136 spm (111)
15.  8:49 (7:57), 161 bpm, 150 bpm (126)
Bold means split difference greater than 10 seconds on Garmin.
Italics means split difference greater on Polar.

I have a bit of chafing, but understandable with the walking. 

The difference is the two watches is more interesting, than anything else.

The first 4 miles of the run were fun.  The first 4 miles takes you to the 3-4.2 mile loops.

There were 3 of us that were the back of the pack.  They were stopping and starting.  I was just cruising along.  I ended up being dead last within a half mile.  I knew this because there was a Sugar Land PD Tahoe behind me, with a sergeant driving.  He was the course-opening cop.  Every time I passed a cop keeping an intersection blocked, I'd say something with reference to the Tahoe.  There were a lot of intersections, so there were a lot of lines at each one.  For example:

"He's involved in a slow-speed chase."
"Is he still behind me?"
"Could you distract him for a bit, so I can lose him?"
Then, there was a pair of black cops.  A male sergeant and a female officer.  I kinda took a risk on this one.
"He's chasing me."  The sergeant said, "I can see that."  I replied, "I think I'm being profiled."  He chuckled and the female officer just broke out laughing.

As his escort duty was ending, I turned around and motioned him forward to me.  I said, "That officer at the last intersection told me to tell you that you were going to take over for me, when we reach the loops."  He said, "I'm ready to do it!"  I told him, "Thanks for not nipping at my heels.  You have a good day."

On my way back to the finish line, the black, female cop asked me if they kept him long enough for me to get away.  I said, "no, but thanks for trying."

That was fun.

I'm sure that wasn't the run you were hoping for Doug but it sounds like it went pretty well.  You managed the distance well from the looks of it.

Interesting difference on the watches.  Makes me wonder sometimes.  I assume that if I always use the data from the same watch it will be good data to compare results between runs but maybe not.  Is the difference the watch (brand) or could there be a difference depending on the function of the watch at that particular time.  I worry to much about numbers anyway...

I enjoyed your commentary about those first 4 miles.  Glad to see that you enjoyed the race.  I'm sure the volunteers appreciated the humor and effort to communicate and break the boredom for them.

Enjoy the holiday season.

My package arrived this afternoon.  Your fudge is delicious!!!!  

Thank you for sharing.

nkrichards wrote:My package arrived this afternoon.  Your fudge is delicious!!!!  

Thank you for sharing.

Outstanding!  (I created the recipe.)

It's been known increase heart rates.

ounce wrote:

nkrichards wrote:My package arrived this afternoon.  Your fudge is delicious!!!!  

Thank you for sharing.

Outstanding!  (I created the recipe.)

It's been known increase heart rates.

Marty and I are both enjoying your fudge.  We're trying to limit ourselves to one piece a day.  We usually have a cup of tea and a small treat an hour or so before bedtime.  It's the perfect treat to go with our tea.

Thanks again for sharing!

Monday, I slept in.  Tuesday, I went to the gym and did the usual workout, except when it came to the leg lifts.  Usually, it's 4 sets of 25.  Tuesday, I stopped after doing almost 2 sets because the quads were beginning to get perturbed.  Guess that's a sign the legs had not recovered from Sunday's run.

Wednesday, I ran 4 miles in 32 degree weather.  I wore both watches, again.  This time for distance, they both were close.

Polar--4.06 miles & 56:05 grand total of run. 
4 miles, 54:18, 13:35 avg pace, 134 avg bpm, 160 avg cadence
(Garmin--3.99, 54:13, 13:35 avg pace, 161 avg cadence, 0.74 m avg stride length)
1.  13:59 (13:46), 118 bpm, 158 spm,
2.  13:20 (13:22), 138 bpm, 160 spm,
3.  13:49 (13:50), 138 bpm, 158 spm,
4.  13:10 (13:15), 143 bpm, 162 spm,
5.  1:47 (0:00)

The mile split vibration feel on the Polar is less than the Garmin, and I didn't notice it at mile 4.  Hence, the 6 hundreths overage at the end of the run.  For the mile 1 and 2 split vibration, it was very close, with the Polar first because I started the Polar first.  Like bam...bam.  Not bam...............bam.

The run itself went well.  I wanted to do 5, but it felt like 4 was proper.  Nothing hurt, but it seemed like my heart was beating faster than it should, now that I have a HR device that seems to work well.

This morning, I went to the gym and was able to do the 4x25 leg lifts easier than on Tuesday (mentioned above).  Legs recovered.

Tomorrow morning, I plan on doing another 4 mile long run at a heart-friendly pace (130s-140s).  Since I can finish a Half in under 4 hours (for an official finish), I can work on my diesel powerplant, rather than running at marathon pace on every run.  Temps in the mid-40s.

Monday, 8 miles at the same HR.  (EGAD!  No, Mark, I'm not doing Maffetone, but maybe my own take on it since I don't have to beat a deadline clock.  Sorry.)

-30-

I've pretty much concluded that my 10 year old HR Max of 202 bpm probably should be reduced some, because of the heart attack.  On Sunday, late in the race, I started to feel something at 164 bpm.  Back in August, my infarction pain was under the sternum and about the size of the palm of your hand.  Sunday, the 'something' was about the diameter of your pinky finger.  So, I backed off and just puttered when it was time for running.

164 bpm and 75 degrees.  Maybe the 202 will still work, if I have more aerobic capacity and enough time on my feet.  Something to watch.

Thanks for stopping by.

nkrichards wrote:

ounce wrote:

nkrichards wrote:My package arrived this afternoon.  Your fudge is delicious!!!!  

Thank you for sharing.

Outstanding!  (I created the recipe.)

It's been known increase heart rates.

Marty and I are both enjoying your fudge.  We're trying to limit ourselves to one piece a day.  We usually have a cup of tea and a small treat an hour or so before bedtime.  It's the perfect treat to go with our tea.

Thanks again for sharing!

Most welcome!

Y'all have more self-control than I.  Just having a bag of the morsels in the pantry is temptation enough to break it open.  There's a bag there now, but it's promised to another batch of fudge for Christmas.

I became the chocolate maker in the family, once it was too tough to on my mom to make the family favorite...chocolate cream pie on a homemade crust.  A decades old recipe...older than I.  I made my first one in 1980 with an all too willing set of parents to be quality control.  We have a rule about the chocolate pie on serving it.  However many people want a slice is how many are cut, whether it's 3 people or 8.  That first pie made 3 slices.

I can make crusts.  I started making crusts for pumpkin pie, last year.  Haven't baked an apple pie, yet.

Last Friday, I went off and ran 4 miles.  I don't remember much about the run, so I'll just post the figures.  Temp was 49 degrees.

4.04 miles, 57:50, 14:18 pace, 128 avg bpm, 164 cadence
1.  14:01 (14:06), 130 bpm, 162 spm
2.  14:00 (14:01), 131 bpm, 166 spm
3.  14:17 (14:16), 134 bpm, 164 spm
4.  14:24 (14:26), 131 bpm, 164 spm

This morning, instead of 8 miles, I did 6.  I'll be running on Christmas, so I figured that I can run either 8 or 10 because traffic will be light when I run.  Cadence was 162, HR goal was low 130s, and it was 40 degrees outside.

Whereas on a Garmin, the start/stop is the same button, this morning I learned on the Polar that the start button is also the lap button.  I already knew the stop button was a different button on the Polar, but that didn't stop me from hitting the start button again and again, as if it was a Garmin.

I thought I was going to have to do some math to figure out each mile split.  But the Polar 'Diary' of the run has an option to group the distance into mile splits or not.  Therefore, the program does all the adding and grouping for rookies like myself.

Polar --- 6.05 miles, 1:27:25, 14:26 pace, 130 avg bpm, 160 cadence
Garmin --- 6.01 miles, 1:26:38, 14:26 pace, 161 cadence
1.  14:33, (14:28), 124 bpm, 160 spm
2.  14:04 (14:03), 130 bpm, 160 spm
3.  14:19 (14:27), 132 bpm, 160 spm
4.  15:12 (14:55), 128 bpm, 158 spm
5.  14:16 (14:19), 130 bpm, 160 spm
6.  14:14 (14:25), 131 bpm, 160 spm

This was a much easier run than on Friday for 4 miles.  I don't know why.  Rest maybe.

I am pondering running HR based for a while.  Maybe I got spooked by what happened at the 30K and wanted to take it easy.  Maybe for 2020, I'll let HR rule the roost and run the Half in January, 2021.  Then do the marathon in 2022.  For a 130 HR, low 14's isn't too terribly pedestrian.  

Weights, tomorrow.  Might try another machine, too.  After the Half in 4 weeks, I'm going to work on loosening up my knees so I can get into Child's Pose again.

Hopefully, Santa will find Mark.

Those are pretty nice splits for a HR that low.  Impressive.  And not a bad cadence either.

I think we can all benefit from low HR training on occasion...maybe more often than not.

Hope you're enjoying the holidays.  Have a great Christmas Day run.

nkrichards wrote:Those are pretty nice splits for a HR that low.  Impressive.  And not a bad cadence either.

I think we can all benefit from low HR training on occasion...maybe more often than not.

Hope you're enjoying the holidays.  Have a great Christmas Day run.

I thought they were pretty nice, too.  Very surprising.  VERY surprising.  Not a bad time to bump up the cadence, as well.  If I truly wait 2 years to run my next marathon, that can give me the time to inch my splits faster for the same HR....as long as I don't have to be barefoot, too. 

Thanks, Nancy.  And I'll do my durndest to run well, in the morning.

-30-

This morning, I went to lift weights.  Christmas Eve is a dead time at the gym.  About a 1/4th of the usual number of bodies were there.  I increased one barbell, the bicep curl, and added another exercise, the Overhead Press.  The overhead press works the chest, shoulders (deltoids), triceps, and trapezius (upper back).  The trapezius is one of the main muscles used for chin ups and I was already working that muscle on another machine.  When standing, the overhead press also works the legs, lower back and abdominal muscles as stabilizers.  I could sure tell that.  Even though I chose a moderate lifting weight, I had to stop every 3rd rep to center myself.  That'll get better as I do it more.

Mark needs to show you the giant snow flake he found.

Enjoy the time off, y'all.  Come back again, just bring a receipt.

Merry Christmas, Ounce! 

Go barefoot!!!

Mark B wrote:Merry Christmas, Ounce! 

Go barefoot!!!

Thanks, Mark.  Back at y'all.

Maybe in the pool.

-30-

I did run the 10 miles, yesterday morning.  And it did answer a couple of questions I had about running lower and longer.  One answer was just because you're running at a lower HR doesn't mean your legs are going to last longer.
The other answer was I won't be able to maintain the lower splits as the weather gets warmer because the body has to still be kept cool.  However, I have a month or two before the weather consistently stays warmer.  I'll do what I can.

I'll post the splits when I can.  No running for me until New Years Day.

Your comments about your 10 mile low HR run were interesting...  Yes...your legs still tire even when you're at a lower HR.  I think the goal is to keep up the low HR training long enough to train those legs to go the distance.  Hopefully you'll be ready for the warmer weather when it hits.

Hope you're enjoying your brief time off from running.

Happy New Year!!

HAPPY NEW YEAR!

Resolutions/goals for 2020?

nkrichards wrote:Your comments about your 10 mile low HR run were interesting...  Yes...your legs still tire even when you're at a lower HR.  I think the goal is to keep up the low HR training long enough to train those legs to go the distance.  Hopefully you'll be ready for the warmer weather when it hits.

Hope you're enjoying your brief time off from running.

Happy New Year!!

So, here are the splits for the Christmas Day 10 miles.

10.01 miles, 2:30:38, 15:02 pace, 134 avg bpm, 156 avg cadence
1.  14:44, 124 bpm, 160 spm
2.  14:39, 133 bpm, 160 spm
3.  15:05, 135 bpm, 156 spm
4.  15:08, 133 bpm, 154 spm
5.  14:54, 134 bpm, 158 spm
6.  15:06, 134 bpm, 154 spm
7.  15:06, 133 bpm, 156 spm
8.  15:06, 135 bpm, 154 bpm
9.  14:50, 137 bpm, 154 bpm
10. 14:57, 138 bpm, 150 bpm

Looks like I was pretty durn consistent on keeping HR low at the expense of cadence and pace. 

Preview----
What's interesting to me is the HR on the January 3 and 6 (today) runs vis a vis pace versus the Christmas run.  Hint:  I had been keeping up with my scheduled runs for the past upteen weeks.

I didn't run on January 1 because I was tired from December 31.  So, I worked out on the 2nd and ran on the 3rd.  The 24 Hour Fitness box that I go to will be closing on February 7, probably due to not selling enough memberships.  The area is middle income, so using disposable income on a gym membership is not what this area's clientele does.  It's been open at least 20 years.

There are 2 other boxes fairly close to me, but driving time will be longer.  Oh, well.  I pay $76/year.  So I won't get that deal anywhere else.

Friday, the 3rd.
This would be the first run since Christmas or 9 days.  I was curious what a 3 mile shake out run would look like.  I wanted to do a really good run, not a moseying run.  It was a low humidity 54 degrees and the cadence was 162.

3 miles, 41:13, 13:42 pace, 130 avg bpm, 164 spm.
1.  14:00, 117 bpm, 158 spm  (bpm might be off about 10)
2.  13:32, 134 bpm, 164 spm
3.  13:36, 139 bpm, 164 spm

Yeah, amazing what 9 days rest and low humidity will do.  I pushed myself.  I was pleased, but couldn't maintain it for a longer distance.

This morning marks 13 days to the Half.  Part of the running weekend includes a 5K on the day before the marathon and half marathon.  They put out a call for volunteers for the 5K and I answered the call.  Standing 3-1/2 hours isn't going to mess with my relaxing.

As far as a 'race strategy,' I had been mulling splitting the Half into thirds.  4 miles at 135 bpm, 4 miles at 145 bpm, and 5.1 at 155 bpm.  In that vein, I was going to split today's 8 miles in half at the same bpm.  8 miles seemed to be a good long run, 2 weeks out.  It was a more humid 54 degrees, this morning, and I forgot to check the humidity.  I overdressed a bit, which sweated me more than I wanted.

8 miles, 1:50:39, 13:47 avg pace, 139 avg bpm, 162 avg cadence, 1st half 14:14, 2nd half 13:20
1.  14:28, 129 bpm, 160 spm
2.  14:01, 133 bpm, 162 spm
3.  14:08, 136 bpm, 162 spm
4.  14:19, 135 bpm, 160 spm
5.  13:37, 137 bpm, 160 spm
6.  13:08, 144 bpm, 162 spm
7.  13:03, 147 bpm, 160 spm
8.  13:21, 150 bpm, 160 spm

Mile 8 was odd in that I was trying to go faster, which the bpm shows, but the time doesn't.  

The run made me think that rather than dividing the race into thirds, I would divide it into halves; 1st half at 140 and the 2nd half at 155.  Maybe 0-5 at 135, 6-10 at 145, and 11 to the end at whatever I can hold.

Input desired, please. 

At the end, I wasn't hurting anywhere, nor do I now.  Sweated a bit more than I would've like, but that was due to picking the wrong shirt combination.  Humorously, I'll have 2 shirt combinations for the race, depending on weather.

Nancy, I forgot to give my goals and resolutions for 2020.

Resolutions, when I make them, are a private thing for me.  Sometimes goals are resolutions.

So...
1.  Lose 30 pounds.
2.  Continue to lift weights.
3.  Work down the negative weight on the Nautilus Gravitron from 170 pounds to 90 pounds.  The result of losing 30 pounds accounts for 30 of the 80 pound reduction.
4.  Keep on running establishing an aerobic base of 20-25 miles.
5.  Work on quickening pace at some heart rate number, which may not be realized until November or December, 2020.
6.  Run the 2021 Half in January.
7.  Stay out of the cath lab.

Look like good goals to me!

Michele \"1L" Keane wrote:Look like good goals to me!

Moochus graceeus, Miche1e.

-30-

This morning, I went and lifted weights.  A cool front zinged through in the overnight hours and dropped temps 10 degrees. 

I group 3 exercise weights together around a chair, so I can do the 3 in succession, in as small a footprint as possible.  Two of the weights, a barbell and a dumbbell, were being used.  So, I picked up the next heavier weights for each.  Surprisingly, I executed the 3 sets of 10 for each heavier weight.  That means that I've sandbagged and should've increased earlier.  Oh well.  I think Thursday will be tougher on only 2 days rest.

Love the goals Doug...they are actually pretty similar to mine in many aspects.

I wish I'd seen and commented on your race plan before Michele stopped by.  I like your plan to start off a bit easier...lower HR...and then ramp up the effort later in the race.  I have two questions.

1. Is a sudden increase in your HR goal 1/3 or 1/2 way through the race optimal?  Or are you planning to gradually increase your HR goal and just use those miles for checkpoints.  I worry about a sudden shift of gears and also increasing your effort to soon.  I think it's a good plan if executed cautiously.
   
2. The bigger question...and the one I wish Michele or Mark would weight in on is...how on earth do you monitor your HR while running...especially in a race.  I tried setting my alarm once and it drove me absolutely batty.  I think my HR shot up 10 beats every time the darn thing went off!
   

Good to hear you're making progress with the weights.  Just make sure you slack off next week as you prep for the race.

Stay healthy...I'm not seeing any signs of taper madness yet...

nkrichards wrote:Love the goals Doug...they are actually pretty similar to mine in many aspects.

I wish I'd seen and commented on your race plan before Michele stopped by.  I like your plan to start off a bit easier...lower HR...and then ramp up the effort later in the race.  I have two questions.

1. Is a sudden increase in your HR goal 1/3 or 1/2 way through the race optimal?  Or are you planning to gradually increase your HR goal and just use those miles for checkpoints.  I worry about a sudden shift of gears and also increasing your effort to soon.  I think it's a good plan if executed cautiously.
   
2. The bigger question...and the one I wish Michele or Mark would weight in on is...how on earth do you monitor your HR while running...especially in a race.  I tried setting my alarm once and it drove me absolutely batty.  I think my HR shot up 10 beats every time the darn thing went off!
   

Good to hear you're making progress with the weights.  Just make sure you slack off next week as you prep for the race.

Stay healthy...I'm not seeing any signs of taper madness yet...

Thanks, Nancy. 

Answers...
1.  Well, it's not aimed to be a 'sudden' increase.  Part of the increase is cardiac creep (beating harder as the distance increases).  I'm going to gradually increase it and bounce between 143 and 148.  I'm just now learning how to balance the HR during a run.
2.  I will not ever set a range of HR on a watch that will beep me.  But the answer is, I just look at my watch for the number.  Being in a race setting with more people than I never run with, there's a lot of pull on the leash to go faster.  That's what I have to control.  Of course, walking through an aid station lowers the number, too.

I think the 0-5 at 135, 6-10 at 145, and 11-13 at whatever seems on the surface the most workable.  Monday's run (shown below) has me doing the 0-5 @ 135 and 145 average, when you delete mile 8 for running faster to the end.

8 miles, 1:50:39, 13:47 avg pace, 139 avg bpm, 162 avg cadence, 1st half 14:14, 2nd half 13:20
1.  14:28, 129 bpm, 160 spm
2.  14:01, 133 bpm, 162 spm
3.  14:08, 136 bpm, 162 spm
4.  14:19, 135 bpm, 160 spm
5.  13:37, 137 bpm, 160 spm
6.  13:08, 144 bpm, 162 spm
7.  13:03, 147 bpm, 160 spm
8.  13:21, 150 bpm, 160 spm


The HR fluctuates a lot in 1 mile.  It may be that my goal should read 0-5 < 140, 6-10 < 150.

Thanks for the suggestion to to slack off on the weights.  I probably would've done Tuesday and hoped for bad weather on Thursday.  Now, I'll sleep in both days. 

ounce wrote:

nkrichards wrote:Love the goals Doug...they are actually pretty similar to mine in many aspects.

I wish I'd seen and commented on your race plan before Michele stopped by.  I like your plan to start off a bit easier...lower HR...and then ramp up the effort later in the race.  I have two questions.

1. Is a sudden increase in your HR goal 1/3 or 1/2 way through the race optimal?  Or are you planning to gradually increase your HR goal and just use those miles for checkpoints.  I worry about a sudden shift of gears and also increasing your effort to soon.  I think it's a good plan if executed cautiously.
   
2. The bigger question...and the one I wish Michele or Mark would weight in on is...how on earth do you monitor your HR while running...especially in a race.  I tried setting my alarm once and it drove me absolutely batty.  I think my HR shot up 10 beats every time the darn thing went off!
   

Good to hear you're making progress with the weights.  Just make sure you slack off next week as you prep for the race.

Stay healthy...I'm not seeing any signs of taper madness yet...

Thanks, Nancy. 

Answers...
1.  Well, it's not aimed to be a 'sudden' increase.  Part of the increase is cardiac creep (beating harder as the distance increases).  I'm going to gradually increase it and bounce between 143 and 148.  I'm just now learning how to balance the HR during a run.
2.  I will not ever set a range of HR on a watch that will beep me.  But the answer is, I just look at my watch for the number.  Being in a race setting with more people than I never run with, there's a lot of pull on the leash to go faster.  That's what I have to control.  Of course, walking through an aid station lowers the number, too.

I think the 0-5 at 135, 6-10 at 145, and 11-13 at whatever seems on the surface the most workable.  Monday's run (shown below) has me doing the 0-5 @ 135 and 145 average, when you delete mile 8 for running faster to the end.

8 miles, 1:50:39, 13:47 avg pace, 139 avg bpm, 162 avg cadence, 1st half 14:14, 2nd half 13:20
1.  14:28, 129 bpm, 160 spm
2.  14:01, 133 bpm, 162 spm
3.  14:08, 136 bpm, 162 spm
4.  14:19, 135 bpm, 160 spm
5.  13:37, 137 bpm, 160 spm
6.  13:08, 144 bpm, 162 spm
7.  13:03, 147 bpm, 160 spm
8.  13:21, 150 bpm, 160 spm


The HR fluctuates a lot in 1 mile.  It may be that my goal should read 0-5 < 140, 6-10 < 150.

Thanks for the suggestion to to slack off on the weights.  I probably would've done Tuesday and hoped for bad weather on Thursday.  Now, I'll sleep in both days. 

Based on your 8 mile run stats it looks like you've got this HR/pace/effort thing dialed in pretty well.  Nice job.  It bodes well for your race.