Interesting artical...

Support | Event Directors & Organizers

Search Cool Running Community

Browse Cool Running

CoolRunning.com > Cool Running Community > Basic Training >

1 2 3 Previous Next Go to original post

runawayjesse

538 posts since
Dec 14, 2007

15. Sep 8, 2007 3:32 PM

in response to: biketm

quote:<HR>Originally posted by leitnerj:
Someone who takes in more calories than
he burns will gain weight. Someone who gains weight taking in less
calories than he burns has a health-related issue. Has nothing to do
with arrogance.
<HR>

Yeah but lets look at what you really said-

"Incidentally, anyone who is consistently running more than
70 miles per week at mostly a very comfortable pace and still
has problem with weight control has (1) a thyroid problem or other
real health issue that should be checked out, (2) an eating disorder,
(3) a self control problem, or (4) very poor nutritional habits."

You didn't say anything about calories in vs calories out. What I get from this is- if you run over 70 miles per week and struggle with weight problems than you have something wrong with you. Again your implying something is wrong with someone if they don't have success with the same thing you did. Thats arrogant my friend.

You do this quite often. That is you say something than come back and try to act like you said something different.

Anyways since you are so hard pressed on actuall "real life data" here's a breif summary of my data as it pertains to the sublect.- I went from 150 lbs 25% body fat to 120 lbs 6% body fat. Thats more than 100% of my weight lost in fat(yeah I gained muscle in the process).

Now your turn.

gregw070

250 posts since
Dec 14, 2007

16. Sep 8, 2007 3:38 PM

in response to: biketm

I was stuck at about 165lbs when running about 60 mpw. I dropped down a little when using the Benji Durden marathon program in the spring, which generally had me in the low 50 mpw, but running intervals and tempo each week. My weight went down just below 160 (first time I'd seen my weight begin with a 1-5 since college). After the marathon, I went back to mainly running just miles for maybe six week or so (nursing a hamstring) and then started the Pfitz 70mpw. I'm generally running ~65mpw with one tempo a week and my weight is at 163. It's not scientific and I didn't track what I ate, but I feel it was easier to keep my weight down in the spring despite running less. I'm not sure why, but I attributed it either to doing a higher fraction of intense running or running 7 days a week. I thought that maybe that kind of running increased my appetite less relative to the calories burned, but it could have also been some sort of post exercise effect. Who knows?

By the way, I dieted before by counting calories to get down to my current weight (before gaining it all back) and running is way easier to me at least.

brianfie

316 posts since
Apr 6, 2001

17. Sep 8, 2007 4:30 PM

in response to: biketm

quote:<HR>Originally posted by runningsharp:
I was very frusterated when I hit my biggest plateua and frankly am so tired of hearing the calorie in calorie out phrase.
In my opinion ususally the people who are the quickest to say it have never had to lose weight and thnk that it is "easy".

It is not easy and not compeltely understood, if it were there would not be a thousand different theories and diets out there. <HR>

I can believe that when you get down to a low bodyfat percentage it suddenly gets hard to lose more fat. Say, around 7% for males. Could it be at these low bodyfat levels the rate of other tissue burning increases a lot? It would make sense that more sofisticated techniques need to be applied to keep muscle and use fat.

I can't believe people when that say they find it impossible to lose weight no matter how much they reduce calories and increase exercise - even though I read this often. We are talking miracles here. Has such a phenomenon been measured scientifically?

People claim that the body suddenly gets very efficient and hangs on to every calorie. The body is always very efficient but can't bend the laws of chemistry. For instance; "energy is neither created, nor destroyed in a chemical reaction".

I suggest that people hit a plateau because

They need less calories because they have lost a ton of weight, but keep eating the same as when they were bigger..
(ii) They get down to a very low body fat percentage and stop losing fat, but lose weigh from other tissue.
(iii) They reduce calories too much and become inactive due to lethargy.
(iv) They gain weight temporarily due to changes in climate or activity level (hydration, blood volume, muscle weight, etc.)

The overwhealming reason losing weight is difficult is because of appetite. We have the urge to eat more than is needed to maintain weight. This is the reason for the 1001 diet plans - trying to cope with this basic issue.

formationflier

989 posts since
Oct 13, 2007

18. Dec 26, 2007 6:01 AM

in response to: biketm

quote:<HR>Originally posted by Ewart Harris:
I use to run 70 miles a week for approximately 20 weeks all at LHR my weight did not budge an inch or preferably an ounce.
I recently I started to use the following Pfitzinger schedule which had me peaking at 70mph. http://runningtimes.com/rt/articles/print.asp?id=4432" target="_blank">http://runningtimes.com/rt/articles/print.asp?id=4432" target="_blank">http://runningtimes.com/rt/articles/print.asp?id=4432[/URL" target="_blank">

which had me peak at 70mph. This schedule had me doing a lot of intervals, which I have not done before. For the first time I have come down to between 168-170lbs. From some where between 190lbs and 184lbs. This occurred with no change in diet and after I had just given up trying to get my weight down. (I should also add that I ran for two weeks in Florida in the heat while on vacation, so that might have had a part to do with it)

I must add for jess (leitnerj) sake that in no way do I fall in any of these categories;
(1) a thyroid problem or other real health issue that should be checked out,
(2) an eating disorder,
(3) a self control problem, or
(4) very poor nutritional habits.

Luck for me I naturally eat healthy. I have little or no desire for most unhealthy food (maybe because of cultural background, habit from parents etc) I might occasionally have too much ice cream or eat too much nuts and that is mainly Almonds.

Most healthy things we are told to eat I do, not because of some fad or anything I have just done it naturally that way all my life.

I do drink pop literally never. Do not like them give me the Hic cups. I do not use salad dressing, Eat fruits and vegetables almost every single day for almost all my life. I could go on and on.

I am 6ft tall, naturally very muscular, and well toned.

http://This message has been edited by Ewart Harris (edited Sep-08-2007).<HR>

How many calories were you taking in? Did you keep records?
Did you keep an electronic running log that you can provide?
If you didn't lose weight, then you took in more calories than you
burned. Period. Unless you had a health condition. If you weighed
about 180-190 lbs, then you would have been burning about
145 kcal/mile, so around 10000 kcal/week just from your running
alone. Then sleeping, walking around, going to work, etc., another
several thousand. If you gained weight than you ate more calories
than you burned. If you stayed the same, then you just balanced.
It's very simple.

------------------
MyRunningLog[/URL" target="_blank">
MyStuff[/URL" target="_blank">
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ[/URL" target="_blank">
My marathons and ultras[/URL" target="_blank">
My races and reports[/URL" target="_blank">

Acb8d2044

66 posts since
Sep 22, 2004

19. Sep 8, 2007 5:40 PM

in response to: biketm

I've read so much on how to lose those last 5 lbs lately that my head is spinning. One minutes it's calorie in v. calorie out, then it's train at a lower HR, then it's eat the same amount of calories but in different foods, then it's do intervals, then it's run less and do other activities to stress the body.

I know when I originally lost weight it was a matter of calories in, calories out... but it seems that you get to a point where this isn't exactly the case. I think the idea that the body becomes more efficient must be true and thus I'm actually burning less calories now that I was originally.

Then again, I can see the idea that maybe eating 700 cals of spinach will have a different effect on the body than the 700 cal brownie.

Oh well, off to another run and another day of just doing my best!

------------------
It's never too late to be what you might have been
Run to Finish[/URL" target="_blank">

formationflier

989 posts since
Oct 13, 2007

20. Sep 8, 2007 5:51 PM

in response to: biketm

quote:<HR>Originally posted by runawayjesse:

Yeah but lets look at what you really said-

"Incidentally, anyone who is consistently running more than
70 miles per week at mostly a very comfortable pace and still
has problem with weight control has (1) a thyroid problem or other
real health issue that should be checked out, (2) an eating disorder,
(3) a self control problem, or (4) very poor nutritional habits."

You didn't say anything about calories in vs calories out. What I get from this is- if you run over 70 miles per week and struggle with weight problems than you have something wrong with you. Again your implying something is wrong with someone if they don't have success with the same thing you did. Thats arrogant my friend.

You do this quite often. That is you say something than come back and try to act like you said something different.

Anyways since you are so hard pressed on actuall "real life data" here's a breif summary of my data as it pertains to the sublect.- I went from 150 lbs 25% body fat to 120 lbs 6% body fat. Thats more than 100% of my weight lost in fat(yeah I gained muscle in the process).

Now your turn.

<HR>

You're either not reading what I'm writing or you have weak analytical
skills. Let me make the connection for you:

Self control problem == cannot control calorie intake, i.e., can't
keep from taking in more calories than calories expended. I agree,
maybe this was a harsh way of putting it as it may have been
more of an issue of "didn't care enough to count calories" rather
than simply self control. I don't count calories at all because I just
can't eat enough to keep from losing too much weight, but I do know
that I now eat far more calories than I burn and I have difficulty
keeping weight on.

>Anyways since you are so hard pressed on actuall "real life data" here's > a breif summary of my data as it pertains to the sublect.- I went from >
> 150 lbs 25% body fat to 120 lbs 6% body fat. Thats more than 100% of
> my weight lost in fat(yeah I gained muscle in the process).

So you've lost weight and reduced your body fat. And that tells
me what? I went from 220 lbs, 31% body fat to 168 lbs, 10% body
fat. So, what does that mean? The fact that you lost weight and
reduced your body fat significantly does not provide one shred of
substantiation for your original post. That's not to take anything
away from the fact that you did. Now, what I would contend is that
useful information for you to provide is how much you ate before
and what your exercise regimen was (precisely) and how much
you ate after and what your exercise regimen was during the
increased fitness process. That's information people can use.
Then if you're saying that your regimen was also the key to
racing success, you identify your times before in the original
regimen and your times after your new regimen.

------------------
MyRunningLog[/URL" target="_blank">
MyStuff[/URL" target="_blank">
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ[/URL" target="_blank">
My marathons and ultras[/URL" target="_blank">
My races and reports[/URL" target="_blank">

Harper028

191 posts since
Jan 20, 2007

21. Sep 8, 2007 5:53 PM

in response to: biketm

I don't understand why it's such a tough issue for people. I agree with leitnerj. It's a basic equation: energy in vs. energy out. New research suggests that some people might metabolize foods differently such that 100 cals of something for me might be 115 cals for them, and so forth. So you can't necessarily take as immutable the published calorie content of foods vs. some calculation of calories per mile.

Anyway... A few years ago I weighed 20 lbs more than I do now. I was running 30 mpw, not losing very much. But what would I do? I would go out and run 15 miles, and then stop at Chipotle and eat TWO burritos. I was overcompensating. I kept expecting to lose weight but wasn't. I was just plain eating too much. And of the wrong kinds of foods.

Now I eat a very healthy diet of mostly plants, some lean meats and dairy, ample "good fats", lots of legumes. I eat no sugar, no white rice, no white flour, and stay away from high glycemic index foods. I eat a big salad about 5 days a week. I never go to bed hungry, but I probably eat less now than I did a few years ago, and I'm averaging about 60 mpw. I also weigh 20 lbs less than I did in 2005. The fat is slowing melting off.

streeetch

27 posts since
Sep 16, 2006

22. Sep 8, 2007 6:27 PM

in response to: biketm

quote:<HR>Originally posted by runawayjesse:
I have been posting about this for some time now. The fat burning zone myth is really only still believed by runners(maybe because they want to believe it). I pretty much got sick of arguing about it.

The problem is that people want to train for endurance, become better runners and drop weight at the same time. I always suggest if you want to lose weight do that first than work on the running. HIIT is the best and most effictive way to burn fat(as that article points out). I know scores of folks running upwards of 80 miles per week that still struggle with weight problems while I watch people running 3x per week for 40 min shed the pounds. It's not a quick fix but rather an optimal route to weight loss(I didn't say endurance training).<HR>

It appears that your saying that a person would lose more weight by running less distance but at a faster pace. Is that correct? Assuming equal diets and no other training?

Not sure how long "post workout burn" lasts, but the 80 mpw runner is exercising approximately 9 - 11 hours more then the 3x per week for 40 min runner.

------------------
stretch[/URL" target="_blank">

knifey

91 posts since
Dec 14, 2007

23. Sep 8, 2007 8:22 PM

in response to: biketm

quote:<HR>Originally posted by Harper:
I don't understand why it's such a tough issue for people. I agree with leitnerj. It's a basic equation: energy in vs. energy out. New research suggests that some people might metabolize foods differently such that 100 cals of something for me might be 115 cals for them, and so forth. So you can't necessarily take as immutable the published calorie content of foods vs. some calculation of calories per mile.

Anyway... A few years ago I weighed 20 lbs more than I do now. I was running 30 mpw, not losing very much. But what would I do? I would go out and run 15 miles, and then stop at Chipotle and eat TWO burritos. I was overcompensating. I kept expecting to lose weight but wasn't. I was just plain eating too much. And of the wrong kinds of foods.

Now I eat a very healthy diet of mostly plants, some lean meats and dairy, ample "good fats", lots of legumes. I eat no sugar, no white rice, no white flour, and stay away from high glycemic index foods. I eat a big salad about 5 days a week. I never go to bed hungry, but I probably eat less now than I did a few years ago, and I'm averaging about 60 mpw. I also weigh 20 lbs less than I did in 2005. The fat is slowing melting off.<HR>

I am just amazed that someone can go from eating TWO Chipotle burritos to eating "no white rice." That is will power my friend! A vegetarian Chipolte burrito bowl is my favorite post long run food (but I only eat ONE, and I get it in a bowl instead of the tortilla), and actually my favorite food, period.

I lost 30lbs awhile back...someone once asked me how I did it; the answer was pretty simple: I burned more calories in a day than I consumed (I think they thought I was going to divulge a huge secret fad diet). I too struggle to lose those "last 5 lbs." I don't think it is so much a plateau as everyone states, doesn't it make sense that if I weigh less I actually require less calories in a day than I did when I was heavier? I just can't get the will power to make the eating adjustments to lose those last 5lbs. Harper-your eating habits sound very healthy-wish I could adopt them.

Ewart_Harris

340 posts since
Dec 14, 2007

24. Dec 26, 2007 6:01 AM

in response to: biketm

quote:<HR>Originally posted by leitnerj:
How many calories were you taking in? Did you keep records?
Did you keep an electronic running log that you can provide?
If you didn't lose weight, then you took in more calories than you
burned. Period. Unless you had a health condition. If you weighed
about 180-190 lbs, then you would have been burning about
145 kcal/mile, so around 10000 kcal/week just from your running
alone. Then sleeping, walking around, going to work, etc., another
several thousand. If you gained weight than you ate more calories
than you burned. If you stayed the same, then you just balanced.
It's very simple.

<HR>

Jesse

Before I start let me tell you that I do not want to get into a quarrel with you are anyone for that matter over this issue. I neither possess the knowledge or training to comment with any authority on this subject. My reason for posting is just to share my personal experience.

I have most of my mileage run kept on this web site but I do not record my caloric intake. However. I was very careful always trying to maintain a calorie deficit. Sometimes I went overboard creating huge deficits that occasionally would result in a loss but it would just come back on.

I even tried fasting to loose weight and that I will admit worked especially in the beginning. But I was injured then and not running. I would like to mention that as incredible as it sounds on occasion I fast for as much as two days just drinking water and the scale did not budge. Fasting did bring me down to as low as 168lbs for a weekend but once I was running and eating again the weight came back to 180 and a little less on occasion.

Now I have NO scientific data to present but recently especially when I was in Florida running intervals. I just found my weight falling now without any effort (like counting calories) I do occasionally see 168lbs on the scale. I have since stop caring about my weight and just kept running if it?s up or down I do not care I even weight myself much less now. So maybe there is something psychological at work.

One additional experience I have is while lifting weights I find it difficult to loose weight. So in addition to interval training I have also stopped weight training. I should mention that my body fat percentage is between 6 and 8.

http://This message has been edited by Ewart Harris (edited Sep-08-2007).

http://This message has been edited by Ewart Harris (edited Sep-08-2007).

formationflier

989 posts since
Oct 13, 2007

25. Sep 8, 2007 8:58 PM

in response to: biketm

quote:<HR>Originally posted by Ewart Harris:
Jesse

Before I start let me tell you that I do not want to get into a quarrel with you are anyone for that matter over this issue. I neither possess the knowledge or training to comment scientifically on this issue. My reason for posting is just to share my personal experience.

I have most of my mileage run kept on this web site but I do not record my caloric intake. However. I was very careful always trying to maintain a calorie deficit. Sometimes I went over board creating huge deficits that occasionally would result in a loss but it would just come back on.

I even tried fasting to loose weight and that I will admit worked especially in the beginning. But I was injured then and not running. I would like to mention that as incredible as it sounds on occasion I fast for as much as two days just drinking water and the scale did not budge. Fasting did bring me down to as low as 168lbs for a weekend but once I was running and eating again the weight came back to 180 and a little less on occasion.

Now I have NO scientific data to present but recently especially when I was in Florida running intervals. I just found my weight falling now without any effort (like counting calories) I do occasionally see 168lbs on the scale. I have since stop caring about my weight and just kept running if it?s up or down I do not care I even weight myself much less now. So maybe there is something psychological at work.

One additional experience I have is while lifting weights I find it difficult to loose weight. So in addition to interval training I have also stopped weight training. I should mention that my body fat percentage is between 6 and 8.

<HR>

Honestly, it has nothing to do with a quarrel. If there's not a physiological
issue, losing weight is a simple equation. However, most people tend not
to realize how many calories they are actually taking in without actually
tracking and counting them, even if eating healthy foods. Before I started
running, I ate little more than lean cuisines, rice cakes, and water and
I was steadily gaining weight. Was there some physiological issue?
Perhaps. Starvation mode? Maybe. Now, I have to eat way more than I even want, just to keep from losing weight. HOWEVER - I don't attribute
any of it to low HR training - it's just from putting in the miles. Period.
If I did all of my miles at 10, 20, 30% faster pace, but did the same
mileage, I would expect to have the same results. Slightly boosted
calorie consumption per mile? Maybe. Highly significant? I doubt it.
The fact is that most people around here simply run at intensities
beyond what their bodies can handle. Injuries are very common.
How many posts do you see from people who have some major
pain 2-3 weeks before their marathon? The bulk of people here
burn out at mile 18, 19, or 20 in the marathon. I can guarantee
you that most every one of them runs most of their runs beyond
what they should be doing in training. Can some people get away
with doing nothing but intense mileage? Sure! Can some people
run a fantastic marathon on 3 days of intense training a week,
very low mileage? Absolutely. Not most of us, that's for sure.
Most of the new runners (and even not so new ones) will not
do well with an aggressive "advanced marathon" training by
Pfitzinger. Truly advanced marathoners with strong running
backgrounds and solid running bases will probably see some
very substantial results with such a program.
The only reason I prodded you for more specific information is
that I simply doubt that you really know whether you were operating
under a calorie deficit or not, and I believe you were completely
innocent and non-provoking about it.

------------------
MyRunningLog[/URL" target="_blank">
MyStuff[/URL" target="_blank">
Low Heart Rate Training FAQ[/URL" target="_blank">
My marathons and ultras[/URL" target="_blank">
My races and reports[/URL" target="_blank">

runawayjesse

538 posts since
Dec 14, 2007

26. Dec 26, 2007 6:01 AM

in response to: biketm

quote:<HR>Originally posted by leitnerj:
Honestly, it has nothing to do with a quarrel. If there's not a physiological
issue, losing weight is a simple equation. However, most people tend not
to realize how many calories they are actually taking in without actually
tracking and counting them, even if eating healthy foods. Before I started
running, I ate little more than lean cuisines, rice cakes, and water and
I was steadily gaining weight. Was there some physiological issue?
Perhaps. Starvation mode? Maybe. Now, I have to eat way more than I even want, just to keep from losing weight. HOWEVER - I don't attribute
any of it to low HR training - it's just from putting in the miles. Period.
If I did all of my miles at 10, 20, 30% faster pace, but did the same
mileage, I would expect to have the same results. Slightly boosted
calorie consumption per mile? Maybe. Highly significant? I doubt it.
The fact is that most people around here simply run at intensities
beyond what their bodies can handle. Injuries are very common.
How many posts do you see from people who have some major
pain 2-3 weeks before their marathon? The bulk of people here
burn out at mile 18, 19, or 20 in the marathon. I can guarantee
you that most every one of them runs most of their runs beyond
what they should be doing in training. Can some people get away
with doing nothing but intense mileage? Sure! Can some people
run a fantastic marathon on 3 days of intense training a week,
very low mileage? Absolutely. Not most of us, that's for sure.
Most of the new runners (and even not so new ones) will not
do well with an aggressive "advanced marathon" training by
Pfitzinger. Truly advanced marathoners with strong running
backgrounds and solid running bases will probably see some
very substantial results with such a program.
The only reason I prodded you for more specific information is
that I simply doubt that you really know whether you were operating
under a calorie deficit or not, and I believe you were completely
innocent and non-provoking about it.

<HR>

I agree with you on your points about people running too fast and all. I wouldn't reccomend 3 days of intense training for a marathon either.

Keep in mind we were talking about weight loss not marathon training.

In the case of running as the goal it would be completely different than that of a weight loss regime.

http://This message has been edited by runawayjesse (edited Sep-08-2007).

Ewart_Harris

340 posts since
Dec 14, 2007

27. Sep 8, 2007 9:50 PM

in response to: biketm

quote:<HR>Originally posted by leitnerj:
The fact is that most people around here simply run at intensities
beyond what their bodies can handle. Injuries are very common.
How many posts do you see from people who have some major
pain 2-3 weeks before their marathon? The bulk of people here
burn out at mile 18, 19, or 20 in the marathon. I can guarantee
you that most every one of them runs most of their runs beyond
what they should be doing in training. Can some people get away
with doing nothing but intense mileage? Sure! Can some people
run a fantastic marathon on 3 days of intense training a week,
very low mileage? Absolutely. Not most of us, that's for sure.
Most of the new runners (and even not so new ones) will not
do well with an aggressive "advanced marathon" training by
Pfitzinger. Truly advanced marathoners with strong running
backgrounds and solid running bases will probably see some
very substantial results with such a program.
The only reason I prodded you for more specific information is
that I simply doubt that you really know whether you were operating
under a calorie deficit or not, and I believe you were completely
innocent and non-provoking about it.

<HR>

I can see your point on this issue in fact I might dear say its indisputable. I am sure on occasion you will turn up in a gym running on the thread mill and almost like the sun rising as sure as ever some guy or even lady come beside you and start to run like **** sometimes trying to out do you with his or her breathing echoing at the back of the room. One winter I went in doors during a snowstorm to do an 18 miler and no less than four persons came by trying to match me. They all slowly faded. Finally, one of them mustered the courage to come up to me and ask. ?Aal aal all you do is ruh ruh run? I smiled and said I am doing 18 miles. I just kept a steel face when his jaws dropped. I kept going for about 3 weeks at the time doing LHR and they all thought I was an animal. I am sure a few of them got sore trying to compete with me. Slowly they made friends with me and I eventually let them in on the secret. I showed them my HR reading on the mill and then asked them to check theirs. You can imagine the amount of shinning eyes I saw.

However, I digress ? want to say I have heard the story a few times about HIIT helping in getting weight off and so far I have met with what appears to be some initial success. Interesting to here what other posters have to say.

brianfie

316 posts since
Apr 6, 2001

28. Sep 9, 2007 3:04 AM

in response to: biketm

quote:<HR>Originally posted by Ewart Harris:
Jesse

I even tried fasting to loose weight and that I will admit worked especially in the beginning. But I was injured then and not running. I would like to mention that as incredible as it sounds on occasion I fast for as much as two days just drinking water and the scale did not budge. Fasting did bring me down to as low as 168lbs for a weekend but once I was running and eating again the weight came back to 180 and a little less on occasion.
<HR>

Edwart

I agree that you can fast for a couple of days and not lose weight if you drink enough. I my experiments on one subject (me), I often find that any abrupt change in diet or exercise can cause the opposite effect on weight to the one expected. This weird effect lastes until a new routine stabalises. For instance, bumping up training intensity can briefly increase weight. Stopping all sports activity can briefly reduce weight. Fasting may not cause any weight loss at all in the first day or so.

I assume all these phenomena are due to a change in my water consumption or in my body's preference to hold on to water, for some reason, in response to a new level of stress..

I have done some fasting myself and am 100% sure that everyone will lose weight if they continue to fast. I base this on several water-only fasts of 7 days; a no-water, no-food fast for three days (silly, but I knew no better at the time); lots of shorter, water-only fasts; several juice fasts of varying lengths - some while runing. I lost a huge amount of weight on every fast longer than a day or so.

A you say, the problem with fasting for weight loss is dealing with the cravings to eat after the fast. These can be intense and persistent and consequently most people succumb and put all the weight back on - and often more.

-b

tommy14277

205 posts since
Jun 20, 2006

29. Sep 9, 2007 6:07 AM

in response to: biketm

It sure seems the LHRT gospel has it's fingers in several threads.What works for one, doesn't always work for another. And that can be applied to just about anything, huh?

1 2 3 Previous Next Go to original post

Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Security
Advertising
Careers

New Runners

Training

Competition

Age Groups

Fitness

The Lighter Side

Feedback

Related Links