17 days, 5 cities, 2 marathons, & a partridge in a pear tree

Or: The Travel Crazies.

As I said before CIM 2016, I don't understand people who dread taper. I love taper. I'm great at taper. I'm a freakin' pro over here.

But as I've learned with the two other races I've flown to, it's harder to properly taper when you have so many balls in the air getting ready to travel, and then actually doing the traveling, while also managing to hold down/wrap up a full-time job, get a cavity filled, manage 47 crises related to your house remodel and oh yeah, not forget to do your taxes at some point.

And in case you'd forgotten, this particular trip is a bit more involved than most. Let us review:

- April 13-17: Boston Marathon (with side trip to our sister dojo at MIT, because not enough sportsing going on that weekend already)

- April 17-22: NYC vacation side trip

- April 22-25: Speak at Math Conference in DC (& also hang out with my college roommate)

- April 25-26: Late flight home, one night in my own (actually not even my own) bed, & an early-morning road trip to Big Sur

- April 16-29: Big Sur Marathon (plus a bit of general Big Sur sightseeing)

Are you tired yet? This was all my idea & I'm already tired. (BUT WHAT ELSE IS NEW.)

What to Do with the Medals

Don't worry, this isn't a rant-y post about "always earned never given" or why we should or should not give grown-ass adults participation trophies. Take the medal. Don't take the medal. Wear it. Don't wear it. Put it a trophy case or a trash can or wherever makes your little heart the happiest. (File under: internet arguments I have no energy for.)

Emergy for a snarky gif, though? Always.

Clamoring back on the wagon....

In a way, the timing of my ill-fated 5K was good. My taper happened to coincide with some busy weeks at work, and the week after when I couldn't run because of my messed up calf, I was traveling for a kind of intense workshop with K-12 math teachers. I usually stop lifting the week or two before a race, which worked out well since there was no time for it anyway, and I didn't feel the need to jump right back into it the week after.

But now I'm back home, and not traveling for more than a day or two at a time (that I know of) for a good while, and work is a bit calmer, so it is time now to clamor my way back up onto the srsbzns training wagon and get my shit at least in the same general vicinity as together.

How the wagon feels sometimes

(Also, I ran just a few easy miles on Monday and Tuesday for the first time since the 5K and my leg feels back to normal, so hopefully it won't revolt again!)

I know that sometimes people lament their inability to do something consistently, day in and day out, but honestly, I've come to realize over the years that that's just life. It's impossible to train hard core day in and day out, to eat like a lean mean machine year round, to get in the strength work and stretching and rolling and whatnot come hell or high water. You just can't. Nor should you!

And that doesn't just apply to we humble age groupers. Even most professional and elite athletes make a real point of taking breaks and letting their bodies and minds fully recover before launching into another super intense training cycle (and the internet is littered with the cautionary tales of those have tried to go hard week after week and year after year and suffered physical setbacks, mental burnout, or both). So I don't feel bad about having had a few easy weeks and one completely off before I for-realsies put that 1:35 half marathon in the crosshairs & prepare to take a big ol' fatty swing at it come October.

While training for CIM last year, I kind of threw the time goal out the window & instead focused on process goals, which worked out pretty darn well, so that's what I'm trying to do this time around as well. (I mean; I still have 1:35 in the back of my mind, but on a day-to-day, week-to-week basis, I'm going to not worry about the numbers on the clock & instead concentrate on the process.)

So. Here are the goals:

On the subject of books: The Contenders

Please excuse the minimalist blog post, but I would very much like your votes for this year's monthly classics.

Here are the contenders*:

• The Five People You Meet in Heaven, by Mitch Albom
• Pride & Prejudice, by Jane Austen
• The Black Sheep, by Honoré De Balzac
• The Wasp Factory, by Iain Banks
• The Big Sleep, by Raymond Chandler
• The Awakening, by Kate Chopin
• The Woman in White, by Wilkie Collins
• Robinson Crusoe, by Daniel Defoe
• An American Tragedy, by Theodore Dreiser
• The Count of Monte Cristo, by Alexander Dumas
• As I Lay Dying, by William Faulkner
• The Tin Drum, by Günter Grass
• The Remains of the Day, by Kazuo Ishiguro
• Women in Love, by D.H. Lawrence
• The Rainbow, by D. H. Lawrence
• Sons and Lovers, by D.H. Lawrence
• The Naked and the Dead, by Norman Mailer
• Atonement, by Ian McEwan
• Tropic of Cancer, by Henry Miller
• American Pastoral, by Philip Roth
• The Little Prince, by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
• The Lovely Bones, by Alice Sebold
• Rabbit, Run, by John Updike
• Brideshead Revisited, by Evelyn Waugh

*Though if you really really love something that's not on the list, please feel free to suggest it! I've particularly been trying to seek out more classics by women and non-white people, but it's hard, since who gets put in the "classic literature" bucket has kind of a long history involving a lot of '-isms.'

Since I've been doing for a few years now, here's all the ones I've read in past years:

2014:

• A Canticle for Leibowitz, by Walter M. Miller
• Uncle Tom's Cabin, by Harriet Beecher Stowe
• Anna Karenina, by Leo Tolstoy
• A Room With a View, by E.M. Forster
• Catch-22, by Joseph Heller
• The Brief, Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao, by Junot Díaz
• To Kill A Mockingbird, by Harper Lee
• Madame Bovary, by Gustave Flaubert
• One Hundred Years of Solitude, by Gabriel Garcí­a Márquez
• The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, by Robert Louis Stevenson
• Journey to the Center of the Earth, by Jules Verne
• A Christmas Carol, by Charles Dickens
• The Sound and the Fury, by William Faulkner

2015:

• A Confederacy of Dunces, by John Kennedy Toole.
• The Bluest Eye, by Toni Morrison.
• A Tree Grows in Brooklyn, by Betty Smith.
• The Left Hand of Darkness, by Ursula K. LeGuin.
• The God of Small Things, by Arundhati Roy.
• Crime and Punishment, by Fyodor Dostoyevsky.
• A Prayer for Owen Meany, by John Irving.
• Jane Eyre, by Charlotte Brontë.
• The Jungle, by Upton Sinclair.
• The Picture of Dorian Gray, by Oscar Wilde.
• Great Expectations, by Charles Dickens.
• One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, by Ken Kesey
• The Virgin Suicides, by Jeffrey Eugenides
• The Cider House Rules, by John Irving

2016:

• Breakfast of Champions, by Kurt Vonnegut
• The Color Purple, by Alice Walker
• To The Lighthouse, by Virginia Woolf
• Memoirs of a Geisha, by Arthur Golden
• Lolita, by Vladimir Nabokov
• Middlemarch, by George Eliot
• Stranger in a Strange Land, by Robert Heinlein
• All The King's Men, by Robert Penn Warren

2016 Classics: The Contenders

In 2014 and 2015, I chose one classic book to read each month. It doesn't feel like a chore yet, so the tradition lives on for another year.

(If you're curious to see what I've read in past years:

The Classics: 2014

The Classics: 2015)

The hardest thing both years was narrowing it down to 12, so this is the time of year when I solicit input from the peanut gallery.

Here are the current contenders:

RETURNING FROM LAST YEAR:

Death Is a Lonely Business, by Ray Bradbury. I love Ray Bradbury.

The Alchemist, by Paulo Coelho. Recommended by someone.

The Woman in White, by Wilkie Collins. Recommended by lots of people.

Oliver Twist or David Copperfield, by Charles Dickens. Oliver Twist was on my list last year but I ended up reading Great Expectations instead because the consensus seemed to be that Oliver Twist was not his best. David Copperfield also came up as a better alternative, so maybe that. Or maybe since I just read Great Expectations I'll give Dickens a rest this year.

The Brothers Karamazov, by Fyodor Dostoyevsky. Gushed over by so many people, including several of you.

The Count of Monte Cristo, by Alexandre Dumas. People keep telling me to read this. It sounds like a fast & entertaining read.

Middlemarch, by George Eliot. Gushed over by several good friends. I'm thinking seriously of including this one this year, especially since I don't think I've ever read any Eliot.

Tess of the D'Urbervilles, by Thomas Hardy. Heartily lobbied for by several of you last year. Same as above.

The Maltese Falcon, by Dashiell Hammett. See "mysterious mystery." Though I think this is actually pretty short so it may not warrant its own month.

Stranger in a Strange Land, by Robert Heinlein. I like to read one or two sci fi classics per year & sort of can't believe I haven't read this.

The Old Man and the Sea, by Ernest Hemingway. Everyone says this is great, plus it's like 300 pages.

The Talented Mr. Ripley, by Patricia Highsmith. This one just sounds intriguing. Bonus points for a female author.

The World According to Garp, by John Irving. Another one lots of friends have recommended. Then again I've done Irving two years in a row so maybe I let someone new have his slot this year.

Ulysses, by James Joyce. I should probably be terrified of this one but I'm oddly intrigued.

Love in the Time of Cholera, by Gabriel Garcia Marquez. After One Hundred Years of Solitude, I still kind of feel the need to try another GMM. Or not.

East of Eden, by John Steinbeck. Several friends have been telling me for years to read this one. I haven't been big on Steinbeck in the past but I'm willing to give it a shot.

Twenty-Thousand Leagues Under the Sea, by Jules Verne. See sci fi classics. Also Journey to the Center of the Earth was unsatisfying.

Breakfast of Champions, by Kurt Vonnegut. Slaughterhouse Five is one of my favorites.

All the King's Men, by Robert Penn Warren. I find the summary intriguing. This one is one of the leading contenders, I think.

The House of Mirth, by Edith Wharton. Recommended by several of you in previous years.

A Streetcar Named Desire, by Tennessee Williams. I've never read any Tennessee Williams & feel kind of ashamed about it.

NEW CONTENDERS FOR THIS YEAR:

Pride and Prejudice, by Jane Austen. I really just need to suck it up and finally read this. I even own a copy that someone gave me for Christmas when I was like, 14.

Memoirs of a Geisha, by Arthur Golden. I saw part of the movie which for a long time convinced me that this book was Not My Thing, but lots of people have said it's super good, so maybe I'll give it a shot.

Far From The Madding Crowd, by Thomas Hardy. Also many rave reviews.

Lolita, by Vladimir Nabokov. I've heard that this is actually a well-written book, in spite of the decadent subject matter? I am definitely going to read it one of these days.

The Bell Jar, by Sylvia Plath. Lots of people have raved about it and said it actually does not necessarily make you want to shoot yourself in the face.

The Color Purple, by Alice Walker. I keep forgetting I've been meaning to read this.

To The Lighthouse, by Virginia Woolf. I've never read any Virgina Woolf and that seems like something that should be fixed.

Naked Lunch, by William S. Burroughs. Morbid curiosity, I admit.

Midnight's Children, by Salman Rushdie. Love me some Rushdie.

Thoughts? Which would you vote for? Are any of your desperate favorites missing? Anything from which I should flee while there's still time? MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD!

Garmin Updates / Solicitation of Advice

In the very near future I am going to write a for-real blog post with, like, actual updates about running and stuff. BUT, I haven't done it yet, and the GPS thing is time-sensitive, so I thought I'd just get it out there.

GARMIN UPDATE

When last we spoke of GPS devices, I was feeling like the proverbial thirsty sailor lost at sea: Garmins, Garmins all around, but not a one that works (reliably). Although I am not a fan of the FR220 overall, that's what I had been using for most of my Santa Rosa training this summer because it's still perfectly fine when you just need to get a long run or easy run in & don't care about much more than pace and distance. For the last few months that hasn't been much of an issue since my cardio activity has been mostly limited to elliptical and walk/run intervals by time & effort, and I had also been wearing the FR220 for that because one of its good features is the programmable interval workout feature, which is perfect when all you need to do is jog comfortably for x minutes & then walk for 10-x minutes, wash/rinse/repeat.

Unfortunately, about a month ago I noticed that it was starting to seriously drop mileage. And I'm not talking about a couple of tens over ten miles or something. I'm talking about registering 2.1 miles when I know I've gone three. (You know how you know exactly where every mile marker is within 10 miles of your house.) I'm still using it for the interval timing feature, but reliably, the mileage is now consistently off by 20-40% every time. I suppose it's possible it's not the watch and my entire neighborhood has recently fallen into some kind of GPS black-hole/vortex, but as I don't have another reliable watch to compare it to, I can't be sure. (Phone apps for me have always been wildly inaccurate. Not as bad as the FR220 has been lately, but still too far off to be useful.)

Speaking of other watches, I've pretty much given up on my other two every being useful again either. My beloved FR305 only turns on reliably about half the time, usually won't charge, doesn't beep at laps anymore, and the wristband is broken in two places. My FR310XT had been the most reliable of the three for a while, but now it won't turn on at all.

THE MISSION

Like I said, this isn't a super critical issue right now in terms of my running. I'm still walk/running it up using the FR220 interval timer, so I'm not even looking at pace, and I don't expect to be training in a way where I really need a reliable GPS watch until at least January. But the time of year for ridiculous sales on electronics and other consumer goods is upon us, and I have a feeling that if I'm on top of things I could probably get a good deal at REI or amazon or similar. But the trick is knowing what I want to get, so I can properly stalk it.

So my question is, do you have a GPS watch that you're loving right now? (I know some of you love the FR220, but it is just not for me, so I'm looking for something different.) I've seen that some people like the FR620, but it kind of looks like it might be in the same mold as the FR220 so I'm afraid it will still have all the features I don't like about the 220. The 910XT sounds like it might be the closest thing to my old 310XT, and there may be some good deals coming up on it. (The 920XT sounds like overkill, I think.) Another option is to just by another refurbished 310XT, which has the pros of being something I'm familiar with and significantly cheaper.

On the other hand, I'm finding myself more and more open to non-Garmin options given all the trouble I've had with mine in the last few years, so I'd love to hear if anyone has had a better experience with another brand.

garminzzz, y'all.

I have three of them.

First up: The Forerunner 305. Purchased ca. 2010, this watch was my first foray into fancy-pants, GPS running device technology.

It was pretty much perfect in every way, up until about two years ago when it lost the ability to beep when it auto lapped (meaning if I wanted lap times, I had to keep checking it to be sure I didn't miss it) and soon after wouldn't charge without a ton of force pressing it against the charging cradle. (Like, it would charge if I sat there & squeezed it against the charger, but otherwise no.)

Fortunately, those issues coincided with a sweet sale at REI on the Forerunner 310XT at REI. The 310XT was far from new at that point, but since it was basically the exactly same watch as the 305 except for a bunch of triathlon stuff that was irrelevant me, AND it was cheaper than what I'd initially paid for the 305, this was a no-brainer.

Alas, last summer the band broke in a way that wasn't fixable & made the watch useless. Fortunately, REI has an extremely generous one-year replacement policy, so I was able to take it back.

Except...they no longer carried the 310XT at that point, and the closest thing they had was the Forerunner 220.

Friends, I hate this watch. HATE it. So. MUCH. The interface is dinkier, more confusing, and all-around less functional. It has almost none of the features you want and everything you don't. To name just a few issues...

• You can't set it to auto lap under .25 miles. Want to bust out some 200m's? TOUGH.
• When you first turn it on, it defaults to a 'locked' state, which requires performing some kind of insane Vulcan neck pinch of button-pressing to unlock.
• You can't manually lap if the watch is paused.
• You get three data fields--no more, no less.
• When you hit pause, it immediately reverts to a useless screen that shows only your ellapsed time, and if you want to know anything else, you have to hit the 'back' button.
• If you leave it paused for a certain amount of time, it goes into power save mode. Not the hugest deal ever, unless you happen to be standing in a start corral seconds before the gun.

On the plus side, though, it gives you a pretty little ribbon screen & a cute message any time it detects a PR or distance record!! :D :D :D Who the hell cares.

And, to add insult to injury, this piece of junk was like $90 MOAR expensive than the 310XT. (Yes, I got the 310XT on a big sale, but that was kind of half the point). But it was that, the barely-not-useless FR 10, or $160 more for a 610, which included even more features I didn't need.

Finally I got so fed up with the [**horribly offensive vulgar name that I will refrain from typing on the internet, but used to its face repeatedly, bonus points if you can guess what it was, it kind of sounds vaguely like 'Forerunner'**] 220 that I bought a refurbished 310XT on amazon (for the record, still more expensive than the sale price I got at REI). AND LO, my life was glorious.

Until about a month ago. When I plugged my < 1 year old refurbished 310XT in to charge, and nothing happened. I tried different outlets/powerstrips/USB dongels/etc., and no dice. Whatever the problem is, it seems to be either in the watch battery itself or the part of the charger that connects directly to the watch.

Teeth were gnashed and clothing was wrent.

Now, when we were getting ready to move, I had thrown that god-awful [horribly offensive nickname] 220 into the "stuff to go somewhere that is else" pile, namely, back to REI for a refund. But since I am such a good procrastinator, it was still hanging around in a box downstairs when the 310XT died. And since you don't go to the track with the GPS watch you want, you go to the track with the GPS watch you have, that shitty little travesty of a device once again found its way onto my wrist.

I would like to be able to tell you that this gave me an opportunity to practice #gratitude, to feel #blessed that I am fortunate enough to have access to this type of technology at all. Alas, while I remain fully aware of the insane levels of privilege I enjoy in virtually every aspect of my life, just a few runs with the [I hate you I hate you] 220 was enough to remind me what a god-awful piece of engineering failure it is. (If you engineered it....sorry. I'm sure you're still a good person; you just made a mistake.)

In fact, the experience of trying to use the [die in a fire] 220 for anything even remotely resembling an actual workout was indeed so traumatizing that on multiple evenings I found myself on the floor with the sad carcasses of my 305 & 310XT desperately trying to rehabilitate them. (I mean yes, I know I could send them back to Garmin for fixing, but from what I hear, they charge you almost what it would cost to just buy a new watch.)

With the 310XT, no luck. The thing just seemed dead all-around. BUT, after some trial and error, I found that if I took a sufficiently tight ponytail holder and twisted it twice around the 305 and its cradle, it applied sufficient pressure to get the thing to charge. #winning!

Friends, I can't tell you how excited I was to set out on a run with my beloved 305 for the first time in two years. It was just BLISS.

Except...It still doesn't beep when it auto-laps. And while I don't really care about that for easy or long runs, it's kind of key for speed & tempo/threshold workouts.

I wore the [son of a whore] 220 for my two track workouts last week and the thing was almost useless. In retrospect, I probably would have been better off with the 305, since at least you can set the damn thing to auto lap at intervals less than .25 miles.

When I got home from my Friday track workout, I plugged the [screw you & the horse you rode in on] 220 in to charge, & sort of half-heartedly messed around with the 310XT again, just, y'know, to see if something might magically happen. And then, AS IF A SOLSTICE MIRACLE (err...almost), the fucker suddenly started charging.

In the immediate future, this is good news. I *may* actually have a watch I can *halfway-kinda-sorta* reliably use for actual workouts. But it kind of gets me thinking about the harsh mistress that is a Garmin device, and it's tough to just go about your business, knowing what a fickle god you serve. I get that nothing lasts forever, but MAN, that's a lot of money for something that quits working properly after less than three years. I mean c'mon. A one year warranty? Basically I feel like as soon as I buy one, I have to start saving up for the next one.

I've played around with other models (Tom Tom, Polar, Timex), but none of them have ever had both the features & the ease-of-interface that made the 305 & 310XT so perfect. I WANT to stick with Garmin, but they're making it kind of tough. Is there anything out there comparable in features & interface that doesn't go tits-up after 2-3 years?

(Do not speak to me of Bia or iWatches because #no.)

Other questions I would be curious to have answered:

• Have you had any similar issues with these or other models?
• Have you ever sent something to Garmin for fixing? What's the dilly-o?
• Is there any way in Hades (in your personal opinion) to justify the bucks for newer models like the 620 or 920XT? My head says no, but my heart says "Sweet baby Jesus I just want something that works."

Also, random Garmin tip of the day: If your Garmin suddenly randomly won't turn on anymore, hold down 'lap' & 'mode' together for five seconds, then try turning it on again. I've had this issue with both the 305 & 310XT occasionally & it works every time.

Rub Some Snow On It (also, any blog suggestions?)

In this week's News of the Lame, my stress fracture started hurting again Tuesday morning. Like, three-weeks-ago, kind-of-limping-again hurting. I was going to try to get a little treadmill time that day, but as soon as the pain started I obviously nixed that plan. I tried to stay off of it as much as possible, but the pain never entirely went away until Saturday. It had never hurt during or immediately after my little interval runs, and it hadn't hurt on Monday, so I was kind of at a loss as to the reason.

Fortunately, I had an appointment with my PT on Friday, & his opinion was that it was just muscle pain from my Sunday run, since bone pain would have been immediate, not two days later. His theory has always been that the stress fracture was caused by muscle issues to begin with, probably partly by tight muscles putting torsional forces on the bone and partly by those same tight muscles becoming so tight after a certain amount of exertion that they basically stop working, which means they don't absorb force, which means more force is redirected to the bone.

So, I am likely not aggravating the healing bone by running, but I probably am re-aggravating the underlying cause. In theory the way to stop the cycle is just to grind the scar tissue out of that part of my calf muscle and continue stretching it as often as possible. Which kind of sucks, because ten minutes with the lacrosse ball & my leg is sore for two days. I am allowed to run on it even if it's a little sore, though he did caution me to pay close attention to what kind of pain it is and how bad is, and to err on the cautious side of running less often if I'm not sure.

He also reminded me that there are lot of other fun ways to be active & sporty in the world, so I took his advice & went up to Tahoe (ie, where they have winter) with Don over the long weekend to get some skiing in, which was AWESOME considering that I haven't been on skis since our trip to Breckenridge last March.

Kirkwood ski area in South Lake Tahoe. Kirkwood is awesome because in spite of being a fantastic mountain for just about all levels, it never gets crowded because it's so far away from all the bigger more touristy resorts. On Sunday, I never waited more than a minute in a lift line, & on Monday I don't think we ever waited more than maybe three minutes (which the staff were calling "really crowded").

Top of Buckboard run at the end of the day

Back side of Kirkwood at sunrise

Don at the top of Buckboard

Up on the summit somewhere

It's pretty amazing what hurling your body down a few black diamonds will do for your morale.

A brief cry for help: Lately, my favorite blogs keep doing one of the following:

• Dropping off the face of the earth
• Basically dropping off the face of the earth (ie, every post begins with some sort of apology for not blogging in six months)
• Turning into a litany of sponsored posts / giveaways (FUN FACT: the more sponsored / ambassador'd / brand name dropping / giveaway posts a blogger does, the more likely I am to delete them from my feed. I know people have their reasons for doing that stuff & there are plenty of people who enjoy reading about it; I'm just not one of them. It makes me feel like I am spending my precious precious free time reading ads, which is lame.)

Recently I went through my NetVibes & deleted every blog that hadn't had a new post with actual content in like 6 months (with a couple of exceptions), and BOY is it slim pickins.

So my question is, what are you reading these days that is interesting, funny, informative, well-written, updates more than once month, easy on the giveaway/sponsored stuff, and doesn't have a scary diet vibe about it? Five out of seven & I'll give it a shot! (In the right margin I have a list of the blogs I usually read semi-regularly for your perusal.)

(This is also the part where it is completely appropriate to be like, "Hey, I have a blog and it is AWESOME!" and I will probably be like "NEAT, I will check it out!")

* * *

Grand Total: 65.85 miles

* 31.2 easy (bike)
* 8 speed (bike)
* 11.25 tempo (bike)
* 14.5 elliptical

Monday:

Afternoon bike, 13.8 easy / evening karate.

Tuesday:

Bike - 3.4 warm up, 4 x (5:00 @ 5K effort / 2:00 easy), 2.4 cool down = 14.4 speed.

Tuesday was not the greatest day for a few reasons. First, that was when my leg starting hurting again. Second, I was up too late on Monday night, so when my alarm went off at 5:45 the next morning, my reaction was a swift and decisive "Oh heeeellllll no." I don't feel bad about trading 45 minutes on the elliptical for an extra hour of sleep. (Though that also meant I got to drive to work in commuter traffic, which is utter balls. That, I did kind of regret.)

Wednesday:

a.m. strength work / afternoon 7.5 elliptical / p.m. karate.

THE GOOD: Fastest forty-five minutes of easy elliptical ever? I will take it! Sick new bo kata to start learning at karate? Hell yes!

THE BAD: Leg pain. Thankfully it didn't hurt on the elliptical, but pretty much every normal walking step I took on Wednesday still had some amount of pain right in the outside upper left calf. It felt more like muscle pain than bone, but since I couldn't tell for sure, I didn't risk the treadmill.

Happily, we spent most of karate destroying pads with boxing gloves, which pretty much involves just standing in one spot and not moving around a lot. Working on bo kata did involve some walking / stepping, but when you're just first learning the sequence, it's pretty chill, and that was only about twenty minutes anyway.

Thursday:

a.m. bike, 10 easy / p.m. 7 elliptical

Ugh. Straight out of bed, the leg was still not happy. Pain after many hours of rest usually indicates soft tissue and not bone, but then again when the stress fracture was at its worst around Christmas, it just hurt insanely bad at all times, so I skipped the treadmill again, just to be safe.

Friday:

Bike - 2.5 warm up, 32:00 @ marathon effort, 16:00 @ LT effort = 14.25 tempo = 14.25

PT in the morning, so no strength work. The bike could have been a longer workout, but I had friends to make Valentine's Day cocktails for, & you know where my priorities lie.

Cinnamon-infused bourbon, ginger liqueur, pomegranate juice / molasses, grenadine, blood oranges, Aphrodite bitters, & Thai chili bitters -- all clutch Valentine's Day cocktail ingredients.

Homemade grenadine = de rigeur.

Gin, Amaro Montenegro, Aperol, lemon juice,
grenadine, & egg white, with cinnamon for garnish.

Saturday: Rest / drive to Tahoe.

Sunday: Ski like a mad woman. (Okay, maybe like a mildly disturbed woman. Still. Skiing. Which has REALLY been needing to happen this year.)

In Search of the Perfect Shoe

(Or, the one where I solicit recommendations.)

Remember the days when you didn't know that much about running shoes, and didn't run all that many miles anyway, & weren't yet convinced that some shoes were actually trying to hurt you?

I remember those days. I remember my uncle taking me & my sisters to the Reebok outlet the week before cross country practice started, & telling the saleswoman, "I am a cross country runner, please give me the BEST shoes for running!" and she was like, "No problem!" And she'd give me a pair, which did indeed look just like a stock photo of running shoes (see left). I'd jog around the store in them or a few minutes & then be like, "Sure do feel like running shoes!"

When there wasn't money for new shoes, I remember happily accepting & running in used shoes of dubious origins without giving it a second thought. (One year my next-door-neighbor was like, "Hey, I found these in my mom's pile of stuff from the seventies she didn't want. They look like they might be your size. They are called 'New Balance,' which I hear is the new hotness. Want 'em?" So for one season I ran in a pair of 20-year-old New Balance something-or-rathers.)

WOW, have things gotten complicated since then. In the last ten years or so I've been through heavy shoes and light shoes and thick-soled shoes and thin-soled shoes and shoes with stability posts and external actuator lugs and shoes with lots of cushioning or no cushioning, 12mm drop or 0mm drop, generic orthotics, semi-custom orthotics, prescription orthotics, and God. Dammit. Sometimes I really understand why people are like, "Just go barefoot already!"

I have it easier than most people. For the most part I'm able to run in just about whatever shoe I want, and it's pretty rare that something is so terrible that I can't wear it long enough to at least get my money's worth. (The 1st version of the PureConnect was the exception--those really were so narrow it hurt.) But "Eh, I can in run in this" is different than finding a shoe you really, really adore & just want to run every mile in. That's what I still haven't found. Many have come close--I have several pairs that I'm quite happy running in--but I'm still looking for my "forever" shoe.

What's Come Close?

Brooks Launch. This is the shoe I ran my last two marathons in. It's definitely the most traditional of the shoes I run in regularly, as well as the bulkiest & heaviest. That said, it really isn't particularly bulky & heavy as more traditional shoes go. Brooks markets it as a performance shoe suitable for races & tempo runs, & indeed, it's the lightest of their good ol' trainer, non-PureProject offerings.

I like it for marathons & long runs because for all that I am not a fan of extra cushioning, sometimes going on hour three of pounding pavement it's nice to have a little more of it. The 9.5mm drop also made the Launch a good choice for me when I was just moving away from shoes with more of a 12mm drop & didn't yet have the calf/Achilles flexibility to do longer runs in 4mm shoes. They aren't super responsive (I wouldn't run a 5K in them or anything), but past the 15 mile mark, that isn't much of a concern for me. I also like to run in these shoes when my feet hurt.

Saucony Kinvara. Right now this is kind of my "work horse" shoe. I have an older pair that I use for shorter runs and a newer pair that I've been wearing for medium/longer runs, and they work admirably for both. The Kinvaras are a little lighter and more responsive than the Launches, and also have a 4mm drop. (Saucony markets them as a "transitional" performance shoe.) Plus, they fit my foot super well.

Kinvara 3

Kinvara 4

I haven't run a marathon in this shoe, but I've worked up to being able to do longer runs comfortably with the 4mm drop, so I think at this point I'm sure I totally could--they certainly have plenty of cushioning. On the other hand, the one thing I don't love about these shoes is the stack height. For a performance shoe, they sure do have a LOT of midsole going on there.

This is also why I'm not a fan of the Altras & Hokas all the kids are wearing now: Too. Much. Foam. (The stack height on the Hokas in particular terrifies me. They are like the platform stripper heels of running shoes. I put a pair on once and seriously felt like I was going to tip over.)

For all that the Kinvaras are more responsive than the Launches, I really, really wish they had maybe *half* the stack height & cushioning & a bit more ground feel. Still, there are a lot of things I love about this shoe, and until I find something that fits & rides as well but has a lower profile, Kinvaras will probably still be my shoe of choice for most of my everyday runs & half marathons.

Mizuno Wave Musha. Sadly, this was the pair that got stolen with my duffel bag. Which is a real bummer because the Musha probably came the closest to perfect of any shoe I have. I liked them because they were light, 4mm drop, and *incredibly* responsive--there was no shoe better for a 5K/10K. I never got brave enough to wear them for a half, but I'm sure they would have worked fine.

Also, they are being discontinued. :(

My only complaints about the Musha were that it was on the heavy side for a mid-distance performance shoe, and that the sole was a bit hard & inflexible, so I'm interested in trying out some of Mizuno's other low-profile offerings to see if any of them might be a suitable replacement.

Mizuno Wave Universe. On the track, I love this shoe SO. MUCH. I usually warm up in whatever road shoe I'm wearing, then put on the Universes for my intervals; after that, putting the road shoes back on just feels weird & wrong. My dream is to someday have the foot strength to wear a shoe like this for all my runs because it's just so incredibly comfortable, but alas I fear that day is a long way off yet.

Can you beat a shoe you can pretty much wad up in a ball? No; not really.

Newton Distance. Originally my Newton of choice was the Motion/"Motus", but once I was told I didn't need to wear stability shoes anymore I switched to the Distance. Both are comfortable and reasonably light, and have the lower 4mm drop I prefer.

To be honest, though, I think I am getting close to done with Newtons at this point. They went through a period of being the hot new thing where everybody seemed to love them so much that I figured I'd give them a shot, plus I really liked the fact that the company adheres to ILO conventions in the manufacturing of the shoes, and uses some green manufacturing practices (100% recycled yarn shoe laces, webbing, insole topcover, 10% recycled outersole rubber, making boxes on-site from green materials). But given that they cost *at least* 50% more than my other favorite shoes (I have only ever bought them on sale & *still* never paid less than $120) and certainly don't provide me with 50% more value (I've yet to have a pair last past 250 miles), it's hard to see why I would continue to buy them.

If I really felt like they were my *perfect* shoe, I might be willing to continue ponying up. But they're not. Like the Kinvara, they suffer from the too-much-cushioning disease. For all that they're marketed as promoting a 'natural' running style, they are awfully hard and inflexible. Also, the website claims that "Newtons allow your foot to feel the ground as if you were running barefoot." No. Not even close. What Newtons allow your foot to feel are the giant slabs of rubber between your foot and the ground.

I know there is the argument about how the lugs help you land on your midfoot, but since that's not a problem I have (and these days I am scrutinized on the treadmill just about monthly), I can't see why I should pay extra for it. Also, if you were wearing truly "natural" shoes without an inch of foam under your foot to begin with, believe me, you would have no problem finding your midfoot. The toughening-up process might not be as pleasant, but there is nothing magical about the lugs. You just can't argue that running in Newtons lets you feel the ground as if you were running barefoot. In these bad boys, the ground is a distant dream.

What Now?

Like I said, I'm happy enough with all of these shoes that I'll most likely finish out the pairs I have. But I'm also curious to try a few new things. I was super excited about Altras until I realized how thick & cushy the soles were--the wide toe box with lots of splaying room seemed promising. (Toe box width is another thing I don't love about any of the shoes I'm currently running in.) Thinking about what I don't like in a running shoe has helped me codify better what I'm actually looking for:

• Needs to last *at least* 300 miles (preferably 400+), unless it's built like a racing flat; in that case, I can deal with a shorter lifespan as long as it's priced accordingly.
• Under 7.5 ounces (preferably under 7)
• Wide toe box for foot-splaying
• Low drop (say, 6mm or less)
• Responsive, not too cushy
• Reasonably flexible
• Low stack height (I don't have an exact number in mind here, but half an inch of visible foam or less would be a good start).
• Some little bit of cushioning (I feel like there is a sweet spot somewhere in between the Musha & Kinvara).

With that in mind, here are a few shoes that seem to pop up again & again in terms of recommendations & strong reviews:

Newton MV3. If I get another pair of Newtons, it will probably be this one. The MV3 is marketed as a racing flat, but at 5+ oz, it sounds a bit heavy to me for that. BUT, perhaps that will make it a really nice road shoe for me. I'm encouraged by all the positive reviews; on the other hand, the racing flat build makes me wonder about the longevity of the shoe, and while $125 is peanuts for a pair of Newtons, it's kind of pricey for something that's only going to last ~200 miles. I would totally try them if I could get a discount or find them on a good sale, though.

Mizuno Wave Ekiden. Another racing flat-esque shoe whose rave reviews seem promising. From the Runner's World Review: "Our testers said it brought them back to when shoes were 'just what you needed and nothing you don't, for a fast, lightly cushioned ride that gently wraps your foot. Feels like 1980 again!' All the testers found it especially accessible for such a light racing flat and said they used it for more than track work and racing. They did shorter training runs and even half marathons in it." Sold!

Mizuno Hitogami. The Hitogami is the shoe with which Mizuno is replacing both the Musha & Ronin, & slots in between the two in terms of weight & heel drop. (So in terms of weight/support, the Mizuno lightweight family will go Universe, Ekiden, Hitogami.) It's supposed to be available on Jan. 4; I'll be curious to compare the Ekiden & Hitogami & see which one feels closer to what I'm looking for.

Saucony Type A5. This shoe has piqued my interest because of all the reviews that a) rave about it & b) describe it as fairly similar to the Kinvara in terms of fit. Like some of these others, it's billed as a racing flat, but many runners seem to like it just as well for training runs & describe it as totally practical for even a half marathon.

What am I missing? What other neutral, lightweight, thin-soled options are out there that I should try?

Marathon Stalking

Don't worry -- I promise I'm not about to do anything stupid. How far am I from being able to run a marathon with any reasonable amount of speed? Like, soooooo far.

Which is totally fine right now. I do enjoy the occasional marathon, but I doubt I'll ever really think of myself as a marathoner in the sense of that being the main distance I'm focused on. My true love has always been that middle 10K-to-half distance because a) I really enjoy that "comfortably hard" pace, b) it's where I feel like I have the most skill / genetic predisposition, and c) I can race those distances flat-out fairly often without taking too much of a physical or psychological hit.

Don't get me wrong, marathon training has its draws; there's something a bit sacred and ritualistic about it, and also something oddly satisfying about the amount of sustained focus that a full-on papa-bear marathon cycle demands. But like I've said before, marathon training is itself a marathon, and inevitably 8-10 weeks in the whole thing starts to feel like a bit of a slog. It's also tough to really "race"-race anything shorter during that time because of the mileage you lose to taper and recovery. By the time I ran Mountains 2 Beach at the end of May, I had been marathon training for basically nine months straight, so as I'm recovering and getting close to actually being able to train again, I'm feeling the urge to spend a few months, y'know, not marathon training and getting back to the type of workouts and races that I enjoy the most.

I can't say I'm not tempted to jump back in. CIM registration is drawing to a close, and as always, I have a lot of friends and acquaintances who will be running. Aside from the fact that it's such a hands-down awesome, well-run, runner-centered race, this is my favorite thing about CIM -- it ends up feeling like one big end-of-the-year runner bash. "To running! To marathoning! To pre-race pizza! To post-race pancakes!"

CIM 2012 - pre-race pizza at Pizza Rock

CIM 2011 - World's Best Spectators

CIM 2012 - gearing up for the monsoon

CIM 2011 - post-race pancakes

So I will admit that it has been really, *REALLY* hard for me to keep my finger off that registration button. (In fact....the more I look at old pictures, the more I'm tempted.) But in addition to the fact that I don't think it's a great idea physically for me to start marathon training any time soon, I also know that although I like the idea of running CIM, the training is just not what I want to do right now.

BUT. By the start of 2014, odds are good I'll be craving eighteen- and twenty-milers and 1200m intervals again rather than tempo runs and snappy little 400m's, so I'm scoping out candidates. The main limiting factors are 1) I'll likely be in New Orleans the weekend of 4/12 - 4/13, 2) we'll be in England / Italy from 4/20 - 5/9, and 3) I refuse to run anything organized by Competitor Group (which is is a whole other blog post that I will maybe get around to sometime).

Options so far:

Napa Valley Marathon (Calistoga, CA) -- March 2.

• Pros: Close to home, & I know enough people who have run it to know all the good & bad things about the course & that it is not utterly horrible.
• Cons: I'd prefer something a little later in March, or early April. It also has a reputation for terrible weather (ie, pouring rain, super hot, etc.), and kind of strikes me as a froo-froo rich people / ladies-who-lunch / overly precious kind of race. And also not cheap ($125 by 9/30 & up from there).

LA Marathon (Los Angeles, CA) -- March 9.

• Pros: Mostly a known quantity in that it's a big enough race that if it was terrible, I would have heard about it. Also looks like a pretty decent course.
• Cons: Kind of on the early side, air travel / lodging required, kind of a big race, etc.

River City Marathon (Folsom, CA) -- March 9.

• Pros: Reasonably close to home (though I'd still have to find somewhere to stay), small event, flat course, reasonably priced ($95).
• Cons: Kind of on the early side, & a totally unknown quantity in terms of organization, logistics, etc.

Oakland Marathon (Oakland, CA) -- March 23.

• Pros: Close to home, familiar course, well-run event, small field, reasonably priced ($95 by 11/1).
• Cons: This is one of my favorite local half marathons, so I'd be missing out on that. Also it's still a *little* earlier than I'd really like. And....I'm not absolutely bonkers about the course. The awesome crowd support & variation in scenery is sort of off set by the twisty-turny-kinda-hilly nature of the course.

Modesto Marathon (Modesto, CA) -- March 23.

• Pros: Sorta close to home (would still need lodging), flat fast course, decently well-run from what I've heard, and CHEAP ($80 September early-bird special).
• Cons: Like Oakland it's a touch earlier in the year than I'd really like, but that is where the similarities end -- Oakland and Modesto could not possibly be more different. Where as the Oakland course is windy & somewhat hilly & urban & packed with spectators, the Modesto course would be utterly flat & exposed, with many long straight stretches, & very few spectators. This *could* make it awesome if all you care about is a fast time, but if it's sunny, hot, windy, rainy, etc., it could also really suck.

Irving Marathon (Irving, TX) -- April 5.

• Pros: My family is close to Dallas, so I'd get to visit them and would also have a place to stay. Also the course looks good, and the date is a little more in the range of what I'm looking for.
• Cons: Plane tickets from SF to Texas are expensive. Also I have never run a distance race in Texas, and I have no idea how the different climate, altitude, allergens, etc. would affect me.

Big D Texas Marathon (Dallas, TX) -- April 6.

• Pros: Same as above. (Irving is basically Dallas, so I have to say I'm kind of surprised there are full marathons there on back-to-back days. Seems weird.) Also, CHEAP ($75 until 11/1).
• Cons: Same as above. Also, they refer to Dallas as "Big D," based on which I can only assume that whoever is running this race is not from Texas, because no Texan would ever refer to Dallas that way. (Kind of like no one from San Francisco would ever call it "Frisco." *Shudder*)

I think that's kind of it. Unfortunately our vacation dates knock out a bunch of races in late April / May that I'd otherwise be really excited about (SLO, Flying Pig, Avenue of the Giants, Surfer's Path, M2B) but such is the way of traveling with reward miles. (It took us two hours on the phone with Alaska to find workable dates. I shit you not.)

Any other March / April marathons I should consider?

Do you have tips to share with me about any of these races?

A Single Step

My goals lately have been simple:

By June 15: Ditch the crutch - Done & done.

By July 1: Run some amount, at some pace, & don't re-injure anything - Check.

By July 15: Running regularly again (1-3 miles at a time) - Done.

My next self-imposed benchmark was August 1, by which time I planned to jump back into my training plan. I figured I would probably still need to cut some runs slightly short & might not be able to hit every pace second-for-second yet (ha!), but I wanted to at least start following the spirit of the plan and attempting every workout (barring yellow-flag pain in the hip flexor, which thankfully, I haven't been having).

So what's on tap for the first week of August?

August 1: 4 miles easy

August 2: 6-7 miles tempo (warm-up, 2 at MP, 1 at HMP, cool down). I'll probably cut the mileage down a bit on this one; how easy the paces are remains to be seen.

August 3: 4 miles easy

August 4: 6-7 mile "long" run. This just looks hilarious to me on the schedule, but if my legs feel alright, I'll probably give it a shot.

August 5: Cross training only

August 6: 3-4 miles speed (warm-up, 5:00 at 5K pace + 3:00 jog, repeat, cool down). Was I really running 10-12 mile track workouts three months ago? Yes; yes I was. Oy.

August 7: Cross training only

Doing the posterior chain stuff is still tough. My fitness is in the hole to begin with, and as critical I know it is to my getting healthy & injury-proof, really working on engaging my glutes & hamstrings takes even more work. Because of that, I'm a little torn on how to proceed training wise. Is it better to do as much as I can with perfect mechanics, knowing that will mean lower mileage for a while, or to try to do my planned mileage & alternate perfect mechanics with less perfect ones a la intervals until I'm better at it? Or maybe I should try 2-3 miles in the morning with perfect mechanics & another 2-3 in the evening? What say you, Internets?

I'm still sorting all that out. Meanwhile I'll probably also try to continue getting in some swimming & cycling, just because it's low-impact & can't hurt cardio-wise.

* * *

In other news, DC continues to entertain me.

DC Sculpture Garden

Jack Rose Whisk(e)y Saloon

Blood & Roses at Jack Rose

Union Market

Last run with Monica (this is my hunting-for-the-picture-button-on-the-back-of-my-phone smile)

Loving DC :)

The Pre-Marathon Crazies

With four weeks still to go, it does seem a wee bit early for that, doesn't it? (Well, I guess technically less than four at this point. I have been writing this post in 10 minute spurts for several days now, but it was still four when I started on Sunday.)

One of the things I've been talking with people in karate about lately is how our perceptions of how much we know & understand about something change as we learn more. As a blue belt (so say ~2-3 years into karate), I considered myself fairly knowledgeable and experienced in the martial arts. Sure, I was aware that there was a lot that I didn't know, but still felt like I'd learned TONS. A couple of years later as a green belt, I still recognized that I'd learned a lot, but had become significantly more aware of how much there was that I didn't yet know or understand. By the time I was a brown belt, and more knowledgable than my blue belt self by an order of magnitude, I was pretty much floored by the vastness of everything I had left to learn. Now, as a black belt, I feel like I've just barely got the basics out of the way. My current knowledge & skill is a grain of sand on the beach.

It's kind of the same way with running. After my first year or two of training for longer distances & running road races, I felt like I pretty much knew what I was doing training-wise. Several years later, I feel like I only really have a good understanding of the most basic principles, and there are a million more complex, involved pieces that completely mystify me.

That's what I've been thinking about since my long run this past Sunday. When I checked my schedule last week, my Sunday assignment was 16 miles, which made sense to me since the previous long run was my first 20-miler of the cycle. Later in the week, though, I saw that the distance for that run had been increased to 17-18. I don't know why that made me more nervous than 16, but it did. Just a little.

Circumstances going into this run could've been better. I didn't sleep well Saturday night, woke up early Sunday morning & couldn't get back to sleep, then came home after brunch with friends and crashed. I kinda-sorta woke up at 3:45 pm, didn't really want to get up, but started doing the math in my head & knew that if a long run was going to happen, it needed to happen NOW. (Thankfully it's late April & not November -- I *hate* finishing a long run in the dark.)

When I read blogs, I often get the sense that the "normal" thing is to hate speed work & adore long runs. Not me; not even close. In fact if I could magically eliminate one piece from distance training, it would be long runs. (The irony of this is not lost on me.) On Sunday it was worse than usual. Getting dressed, sun screening myself, & digging out gels kind of felt like walking to the gallows. There may or may not have been some quiet weeping. I felt tired & slightly ill as I started out, and even a few miles in, I wasn't convinced things were going to get much better. I could not have been less concerned with pace--my only goal was to maintain my usual easy effort & get the damn thing over with.

So I was kind of surprised to see that my 3rd mile, uphill & into the wind through the Panhandle, was sub-8:30, because I didn't feel like I was running all that fast & at an easy effort I usually do that section in the 8:40s or so. "Eh, I should probably try to rein it in a little," I thought to myself, considering how much farther I had to go; I have never in my life failed to negative split a long run & I was not about to start now.

A mile later, cruising through Golden Gate Park at a slightly easier, more relaxed pace, an 8:02 split popped up on my watch. For a second I was sure I must be reading it wrong. "Casual / easy" for me usually falls into the 8:30-8:50 range, maybe a little faster going downhill or with a tailwind. I still felt kind of sleepy & ill, but certainly not like I was pushing very hard. Nevertheless I knew that this was not an appropriate long run pace in any way, so I tried again to breathe deep and relax and sloooooow it down.

Mile 5: 8:10 ("Whut")

Mile 6: 8:22 ("Ok that's slightly more like it.")

Mile 7: 8:08 ({blink blink})

Mile 8: 8:10 ({face palm})

Mile 9, uphill: 7:59 ("OK SERIOUSLY???)

Don't get me wrong; I'd love to think that low eights are a responsible, sustainable long run pace for me. I would. That would be just awesome. But they aren't. 7:50-8:10 is basically my marathon goal range. My long runs should really *never* be averaging faster than 8:30ish. If I'd been consistently hitting 8:2x's at an easy pace, I would've been thinking, "Wow, this is a ridiculously fast long run!" These felt absurd, though, & had me slightly panicked.

I know there is a school of thought that says significant chunks of long runs should be done at race pace, but with one exception every person I have ever asked about it who works with competitive runners for a living has kind of given me that "Really, this again?" look & been pretty clear that they consider it a rookie mistake. A few miles here & there at race pace during your long run, fine. The last 20-25% on occasion, even--probably okay. But otherwise the consensus seems to be that the purpose of long runs is to get time on your feet & teach your body to fuel itself aerobically for longer and longer periods of time, not work on race pace. That doing all or most of long runs at race pace, although it boosts our confidence to prove to ourselves we can do it, is essentially putting your body through near-race effort every week or so & making it impossible to get the most out of the rest of your training because you just can't recover fast enough.

I wonder about this from time to time when I think back to when I was training for CIM '12. Yes, there are many reasons why I didn't have a stellar race, but I have a hunch that a too-fast 21 miler three weeks beforehand played a role in both my feeling exhausted from the very beginning and also pushing my injured foot from mildly-annoying-but-bearable into potential DNF territory. I mean, seriously -- you would never race a fast marathon, then three weeks later expect to be able to do it again even remotely as well, and that's really not all that far off from what I did.

All that in mind, I kept trying to slow it down to a pace that felt both easy effort-wise and comfortable on my body. I tried and tried and tried, but the 8:30-40ish pace that normally feels both comfortable and nicely efficient felt impossibly slow, like I was taking plodding, mincing little strides. When I didn't think about it & just tried to run at a nice, easy, comfortable pace, the numbers magically gravitated back to that way-too-fast marathon pace zone.

I'll probably slow down on the uphills, I thought. Nope.

I'll probably start to get tired towards the end & slow down a little, I thought later. I did get tired, but it didn't seem to have any noticeable effect on my pace. Usually on an easy run, even if I get going a little faster than normal, I slow down again once I get back into my neighborhood & have to deal with lights, pedestrians, dogs, etc. But even that last mile was faster than I think I've ever run it (with the exception of a couple of ill-advised tempo runs. Don't ever try to do tempo miles in the Mission / Castro / Noe Valley).

Yes, I was tired after. But I'm tired after even a slow long run; that's just how long runs work. In addition to feeling tired, though, I also finished feeling strong, which is rare for me post-long run. I could feel my legs. My feet weren't throbbing. My form felt good. Usually I have jello-legs & just want to go sit in an ice bath with a beer.

Before I discovered regular-people running blogs, I used to read Coach Jenny's blog at Runners World fairly frequently, where I learned a lot of the basic principles of distance training. In response to the recent spike in interest in the Boston Marathon, she wrote a post last week entitled "How to Qualify for the Boston Marathon." There's probably not much on it that would surprise most folks who have been doing this a while, but one quote in particular stuck out for me:

"American 50K record holder Josh Cox said it best when I asked him how he trained to break the 50K world record: 'It takes years of training to race at your peak. The marathon itself takes years and years of training to perform your best. You’re not racing off the last six months of preparation. You’re racing on the foundation that was built over many years of training. It’s the cumulative effect that allows me to continue to perform stronger for longer.' "

I'd never thought about it before, but it makes total sense. My three marathon cycles have started more or less from the same spot fitness-wise and included about the same amount and type of training, but with each successive one I've found myself magically able to run longer, stronger, and faster when it comes to long runs, and feeling less and less like death after. Clearly something cumulative is going on, even without dramatically changing my training, or starting the cycle off in particularly better shape.

Or I was just hopelessly out of touch with my effort level & running way too fast.

Or I've peaked 4 weeks early, ran too fast on Sunday, & it's all down here from here.

Or I've made some kind of insane quantum leap of fitness and/or genetic make-up in the space of a couple of weeks & should obviously shoot for a 7:40 pace on race day.

Orrrrr the night before the marathon I should clearly stay up late, barely sleep, & have a giant brunch right before the race.

Yep. Probably that.

See what I mean about feeling completely clueless?

Obviously I'm hoping it's the first. I know I'm approaching the most critical part of marathon training -- that period where there isn't a ton you can do to get faster, but there is still AMPLE time and opportunity to screw things up by overtraining or getting hurt.

Or go crazy worrying about it.

Always professional.