Active Community: Message List

Re: Where do you put your cell phone?

Billiken on the Run — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 18:04:04 GMT

You could also leave it with the rest of your stuff at gear check (assuming they'll have a gear check at the race).

Joe

Re: New to the longer-than-26.2 scene...

Billiken on the Run — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:32:38 GMT

Thanks, Kat. I thought the plan on the left was a little daunting. The plan on the right is the one I used for marathon training only each run for the 50k version is 20% longer. (26.2 to 31 is almost 20% more - crude and probably overly simplistic method for stepping up in distance but it looked pretty good to me.) One of my concerns was that for marathons, my longest training runs were 20 miles and total weekly mileage maxed out at 38. I felt almost like I was doing the minimum to get to marathon distance when I would look at other plans. I definitely wouldn't classify myself as a high-mileage runner - I split time between swimming, biking and running.

I really like the idea of a marathon training run and you're right on about training in conditions similar to the race. It might be difficult to stay on trails during the winter though, but I'll give it a shot.

I feel like I should disclose that other than adding the 20%, I didn't actually make either of these plans. They're both internet finds (thanks to the St. Louis Track Club on the original marathon one).

Thanks again for the input and advice. Three 50k's would make you a seasoned vet in my opinion.

Joe

New to the longer-than-26.2 scene...

Billiken on the Run — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 18:53:35 GMT

As the subject line states, I'm new to the ultra area. I'm considering a 50k next spring and was wondering which of these two plans any of you more experienced folks would prefer or thoughts on both/either. The main difference is that one has back to back runs on the weekends. Any other plans or thoughts are greatly appreciated as well. The event I'm targeting is the Double Chubb 50k (http://www.stlouisultrarunnersgroup.net/doublechubb.htm). It's hilly and on trails.

Background notes: done 2 marathons (St. Louis & Chicago), a 25k (this was last year's Double Chubb), probably 10 half marathons, many other, shorter distance races, both trail and road. I've also done a few sprint distance tri's and an olympic distance.

Thanks,

Joe

running in the dark - flashlight? headlamp? other?

Billiken on the Run — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 18:25:54 GMT

Does anyone out there run in the dark and use either a flashlight or headlamp or something else? I've decided that it would be much safer to use some sort of light when running in the dark (to see cracks, roots, sticks, ice and whatever else might be waiting to turn an ankle). I'm pretty sure I would not like wearing a headlamp and holding a flashlight seems like it would put my hand in an unnatural and uncomfortable position for running. I thought about rigging up a headlamp by shortening the strap and wearing it across my knuckles, thus allowing it to point forward while in a natural running position. I mainly run in a park with street lights in some areas but not all. Some parts are just plain dark.

So, my questions are:

1. What are pros and cons of a flashlight vs. a headlamp?

2. If you use a headlamp, how many lumens and is it bright enough?

3. Is the headlamp-strapped-to-a-hand idea ridiculous?

I'll hang up now and listen to your response...

Thanks,

Joe

Re: Does everyone run on pavement?

Billiken on the Run — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 17:42:16 GMT

I think the surface makes a big difference. I never run on a track but try to get onto trails as often a possible. My normal route (in what I consider my "home park") is paved except for a couple paths that are gravel and one that is mulch. The difference between the mulch, which is soft and bouncy, and the pavement is unbelievable. It's a totally different feeling in the legs.

From a more technical perspective, I've read that typically you should be slower on a softer surface. Something about energy lost due to the ground giving way. Some of the power generated when you push off is lost on moving the ground underfoot rather than propelling your body. That said, softer surfaces are much easier on your joints.

Joe

Re: I need to set up new goals, any ideas?

Billiken on the Run — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 17:45:53 GMT

After my first marathon, I bought a bike and started swimming. Triathlons followed and I'm hooked. If that's not your speed, try some trail runs. I've been doing some of those as well and they're a lot of fun. I still run road races (currently training for Chicago Marathon) and enjoy them as well but wanted a little different scenery and some variety while still having goals/target races to train for. It sounds like you might be in the same boat. Of course, as the other poster suggested, take time to recover, etc.

Good luck next month!

Joe

Re: Anyone racing this weekend?

Billiken on the Run — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 17:33:33 GMT

I'll be racing myself on a 20 mile run in prep for the Chicago Marathon next month.

Good luck to you, too, if you're going out!

Re: What's more physically demanding: a half-marathon or Olympic distance tri?

Billiken on the Run — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 17:30:39 GMT

My vote is for the oly being more difficult. I've done a few sprints and just did my 1st oly in Chicago. I came in at 2:50 (30/80/50, s/b/r minutes, the rest transition) . I wouldn't classify my effort as maximum, but I was pushing pretty hard. My first half marathon (several years ago) was around 2:10 and have since set a pr at about 1:40. The run is definitely my strongest area, bike the weakest. For informational purposes, my 2:50 wasn't anywhere near a top 10 or even 10% in my age group (M24-29).

I'd bet you're in good enough shape to complete an oly. My only advice would be to not set your expectations too high, especially for your first one. Honolulu probably attracts some high-quality triathletes.

Good luck,

Joe

Re: Does anyone else take walk breaks?

Billiken on the Run — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 17:16:58 GMT

First off, good work on the ~10 min/mile pace over both distances. That's a great start!

By my estimation, you're pace while running is fairly fast. I'll assume you train at the same pace and are a little tired when you get to the walk portion. If you're not tired, I'd cut the walk completely as it's a mental hurdle, not physical, that could be omitted. If you are tired, you could slow down the run pace which should leave a little more in the tank and let you go farther distance/longer duration between walk breaks and ultimately scrap them all together. Just my thoughts.

Good luck,

Joe

Re: Chicago Triathlon, McDonald's Kids Triathlon and Fleet Feet SuperSprint Triathlon Reviews

Billiken on the Run — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 20:35:22 GMT

This was my first tri in Chicago. Overall it was great. I'll list specific pros and cons:

Pros:

-Volunteers were great

-The swim gear check is a great idea

-The course was beautiful

-The swim entrance/exit staircases were excellent. As my first time doing this race, I wasn't sure what to expect but they were great.

-There were plenty of aid stations along the run

-The mats lining the run from the swim to T1

Cons/suggestions:

-Too few portapotties and a lack of TP

-Although the volunteers were great, maybe a few more could be stationed around the run course near the transition area. There were a lot of spectators (and participants for that matter) that were obliviously walking through the run course. I didn't see any runners actually run into one of the walkers but saw a couple that were close.

-Have a section of portapotties near the swim start that is participant-use only

-Have someone sweep out the far turnaround on LSD

-The website is not very well organized

-Have the wave assignments and start times posted online

-There seemed to be a lot of people standing around chatting/collecting gear in the transition area. I noticed this heading out of T1 and into T2.

-The distance between the water exit and transition area

-The finish line could be closer to the transition area