MOBYCARP   156,149
SparkPoints
100,000 or more SparkPoints
 
 
MOBYCARP's Recent Blog Entries

The Plan: A Modified Taper Week

Sunday, September 14, 2014

After yesterday's 10 mile run, I am 100% convinced I will be able to run the Rochester Half Marathon on September 21. That leaves me with the issue of what running I do between now and then. Common training wisdom dictates a taper; but I have not followed a typical training schedule. I have done very little speed work, and what I have done was rather gentle and designed more to test the recovery status of my foot than to actually work on getting faster. I have not had the full ramp up of long runs to culminate in 13 miles two weeks ago. Since I don't have the hard training that precedes the taper, I find myself having to make it up as I go along.

The first part of making it up was yesterday. The formal program for half marathon training called for a 6 mile run yesterday. I ran 10, because I'm still building mileage. The conversation I had with the half marathon rookie who tagged along for my last 4 miles has got me thinking about the reasons for long runs and tapers and what I should be doing for my current state of training.

Long runs are there to train the legs and feet to take the pounding for the length of a race. The taper is designed to let the trainee rest a bit and recover from the bumps, bruises, and minor strains of a hard training program. So where do I stand?

My legs feel totally healthy. My feet are as good as they've been since the injury, and probably better than they were going into Flower City last April. That leads Mr. Testosterone to whisper his claim that I can run the half faster than I had planned. I'm pretty sure I need to ignore Mr. Testosterone, though.

My reality is that I am newly recovered from stress fractures in the left metatarsals. Maybe I could run the half hard, turn in a PR result, win the age group, and be fine. And maybe not. I'm not willing to take that chance at this point. Definition of insanity, and all that.

The primary goal, as my sister would say, is to finish upright, with a smile on my face, and wanting to do it again. In my case, I'd add two more conditions to how I want to finish. I want to finish so that running an easy 4 miles two days later is No Big Deal. And I want to finish so that I can continue to run regularly, which is currently 4 days a week.

With the primary goal and my current state of training in mind, I think a modified taper is appropriate. I'm not going to chop it down to 4 days of an easy 3, like the training program had me do before Flower City. I'm not as beat up as I was at that point of the last training cycle, and I don't need to back off that far to be race ready.

However, it would be foolish to be pushing the envelope this week. I have in mind running 4 days, between 4 and 5 miles each time, at an easy pace. I'll allow myself to go up and down hills, but I will not run hard. That is the plan.

The first step of the plan was a 4.6 mile run today. At 2PM, in the heat of the day, it was 62 F and overcast. I ran my standard winter 4.6 mile route around the section to the west, where I typically speed up on the hills after mile 2. In near perfect running weather, I concentrated on keeping it easy. The result was 4.61 miles in 38:00, for an average pace of 8:14. Mile splits were 8:30, 8:18, 8:08, 8:13, and a pace of 8:10 for the last 0.61 mile. Those two hills did get me to speed up, but I was motivated to slow back down at the bottom of the hills.

So far, so good. The other three runs are planned for Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday. They should be a little shorter than this run, perhaps 4.3 miles each. The idea is to not run at all on Saturday, and be as healthy as I can be for the half on Sunday.

Then the plan is to stay with the 1:45 pace group (8:00 per mile) until such time as I'm certain I can run faster than that for the entire remaining distance on the course. That implies a total finish time somewhere in the 1:42 to 1:45 range, depending on whether I have the confidence (or foolhardiness, as the case may be) to leave the pace group behind around mile 10.

That's the plan. I will need to remind myself of what the plan is several times this week, to ensure I don't do something stupid on race day.

  
  Member Comments About This Blog Post:

STRIVERONE 9/15/2014 1:21AM

    Have a great week and enjoy the race.

Report Inappropriate Comment
ONEKIDSMOM 9/14/2014 9:51PM

    So we can expect pep talk blogs several times this week? emoticon

Seriously, sounds like a good compromise plan. Adapting to conditions on the ground! Good luck!

Report Inappropriate Comment
UKNOWITNOW 9/14/2014 9:28PM

  emoticon

emoticon

Hope all goes well for you.

Report Inappropriate Comment


Bonus Blog: Calorie Warning Rant

Saturday, September 13, 2014

I've ranted on this subject before, but I feel the need to do so again. Today I noticed a warning message at the bottom of my fitness tracker:



I don't know whether the text in the image will be legible, so here's the details: Today is Saturday. It shows that I have supposedly burned 9468 of my planned 8000 calories this week. That is highlighted by putting the planned fitness minutes and calorie burn numbers in red.

Then there is the red text at the bottom of the tracker. It says: "*The number of calories you should eat to manage your weight depends on many factors, including how many calories you burn through exercise. It may seem counterintuitive, but eating too little while burning too much can actually hurt your weight-management goals and the outcome of your fitness program. If you are consistently burning more calories than recommended here, please update your fitness settings as soon as possible. This may adjust your calorie ranges (if necessary) so you can reach your goals in a timely and healthy manner."

Now, that sounds good. There's probably even scientific studies to support it. But there is one little problem with advice like this on the fitness tracker. Ready?

The calories burned numbers are garbage. It says I burned 1814 calories today. 1744 of them are reported by Fitbit, which arguably is the most accurate technical estimator I have, usually. Today was a long run day. Garmin (which had access to heart rate data) said I burned 853 calories while running 10 miles. I seriously doubt I burned more in my non-running time today than in my running time. Either the Garmin calorie burn number is inaccurate, or the Fitbit calorie burn number is inaccurate, or both are. I think both are.

Oh, and that 8000 estimated calorie burn number? I picked that number to make the low end of my calorie range come out where I need it to be in order to make my weight trend sideways. I have a nice 2+ year trend of the weight moving sideways, so I think I know what I'm doing in picking the calorie range.

I remember I used to get a similar warning while in the weight loss phase. I was happy with how fast I was losing weight, so I mostly ignored it. But what if I hadn't? What if I had chosen to eat more to avoid all the problems mentioned in the warning message? Maybe I would have lost weight more slowly. Or maybe I would not have lost weight. Or maybe I would have gained weight.

I know now that I am right to ignore that message. The indicator that tells me I need to adjust my calorie range is the scale. If my weight starts trending up, I need to adjust calories down. If my weight starts trending down, I need to adjust calories up. This doesn't happen every week, or even every month, but it happens often enough that I would call it a common occurrence.

I am troubled by the illusion of accuracy in the linking of calories burned to calories eaten on Spark People and every other online or high tech aid to weight management that I've looked at. None of the systems seem to have any respect for the chance of inaccurate measurement. Most, if not all, don't even mention the *possibility* of inaccurate measurement. That becomes even more troubling when the range of calories to eat automagically adjusts in response to fictitious calorie burn numbers.

It would be more honest of SparkPeople to present a best guess estimate of what someone should eat, then allow the user to override that calorie number while allowing the tracker to compute the macronutrient ranges as default percentages of calories. I achieve this by using the old (non-preferred) method of un-linking the nutrition tracker from the calories tracked by the fitness tracker, and changing the calories planned in the fitness tracker to produce the desired level of calories to eat in the nutrition tracker. That works, but it's a hack. If you're comfortable with hacking systems, you understand what I wrote and you could choose to do the same. If you're not comfortable with hacking systems, you probably don't understand what I wrote and if you grasp the concept you're not sure how to execute it.

So why do people fail to lose weight? There are many reasons. Some don't keep doing the things they need to do. Others track food inaccurately. But there are probably some who are doing everything right, and failing to lose weight because the answers depend on garbage inputs and the error is in the wrong direction.

If the error is small, it doesn't matter that much in the weight loss phase. You lose weight a bit faster or a bit slower, but you still lose it. However, any long term directional bias is unacceptable in the maintenance phase. My weight is trending sideways. At the standard estimate of 3500 calories to the pound, eating 1468 more calories per week at my current exercise level should have me gaining two pounds every five weeks. That is not acceptable in maintenance.

I have my solution. I know that calorie burn numbers are wildly inconsistent and inaccurate. I know to ignore them. I know how to hack the fitness and nutrition trackers to produce the ranges I need in the nutrition tracker.

But I'm troubled by the precision presented to new members as truth, when in reality it is a very rough estimate. I'm troubled by the absence of any discussion of why it's an estimate or what to do if it doesn't fit you as an individual. I suspect there are people out there who believed the numbers, did everything according to the system, and didn't see results. Worse, the standard SparkPeople answer is blame the user by saying this is due to inaccurate tracking.

Well, yes, it is due to inaccurate tracking. But the worst inaccuracy is not the member's fault. There is no easily obtained, accurate measurement of calories burned. That's a hard truth that ought to be proclaimed as prominently as SparkPeople proclaims that there are no quick fix, magic bullet answers to losing weight.

  
  Member Comments About This Blog Post:

ALICIA363 9/14/2014 9:09PM

    emoticon
for this blog, and thank you to all the commenters.
The trackers and I have been struggling since I sort of reached maintenance, and I have yet to find the answer that works for me. I suspect "what the scale does" and "meticulous records of what I eat" may be the answer.
It's important for me to hear that powerful truth: "There is no easily obtained, accurate measurement of calories burned."

Report Inappropriate Comment
JEANKNEE 9/14/2014 6:01PM

    Appreciate the rant Moby!

My fitness and nutrition trackers are unlinked and I have "hacked" the system as well. I have the SparkActivity Tracker and it appears to give conservative estimates of calories burned. Most of the time the calorie burn numbers from my SparkActivity Tracker are less than what I see from the heart rate monitor on my GPS watch. At other times their estimates have been spot on or vice versa.

Until I began my transition to maintenance, my tracking of calories in versus calories out was tracking the scale virtually to the pound. This alignment occurred for more than 6 months.

My transition to maintenance happened to coincide with beginning to run and trying to dial in an appropriate calorie range to establish a sideways trend on the scale has been more challenging than anticipated.

I will continue to ignore the warnings from the fitness tracker and continue tracking my nutrition and monitoring the scale. As needed, I will "hack" the nutritional ranges.




Comment edited on: 9/14/2014 6:03:14 PM

Report Inappropriate Comment
ONEKIDSMOM 9/14/2014 3:49PM

    Hmmm. Inaccuracy in estimating the burn is a pervasive problem... if your Garmin profile doesn't identify you accurately as a 58 year old dude who weighs what you do and is as active as you are IT will be incorrect, too.

Mine is wildly inaccurate today because I hit the wrong button in Transition 1 of my TRI, and it recorded my bike leg 26.5 miles as an open water swim of that distance in that time. It thought I burned something like 7000 calories swimming that distance in that time. Naturally, I am choosing not to believe it.

I share your concern about mis-guiding new members. Bottom line is, if I don't pay attention to how MY experiment of one is working, I'm going to fail to achieve my goals. THAT's the message that needs to be going out... these are general guidelines. Your results may vary!

Report Inappropriate Comment
CARRIE1948 9/14/2014 9:45AM

    I've stopped even looking at the estimates on calories on this site. If I ate the number of calories they recommend and in the nutrient categories they suggest, I'd weigh in at over 300 pounds.

The reality is, we all need to find out what works for us and use that. None of the calorie expenditures are accurate. At best, they are guidelines.

Report Inappropriate Comment
GABY1948 9/14/2014 7:36AM

    Great blog...I really learned a lot from this. I am one of those people that "just follows what I am told" my whole life....and it has NOT been good. So I shall watch this closely!

emoticon emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment
SWEDE_SU 9/14/2014 6:28AM

    also a fitbit user, and also see that red message every week - and i ignore it. the scale and the nutrition tracker tell the real story. i never even considered raising my calorie intake because i know that i have to keep to the minimum end of calories to even have a chance of losing. emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment
SLLYONS51 9/13/2014 11:18PM

  emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment
MT-MOONCHASER 9/13/2014 11:11PM

    And here's two or more cents' worth to add to your rant.

I'm not sure I had ever seen that little red message until I got a Fitbit that linked to Spark. Now, if it hasn't shown up by Wednesday, I figure it's a sluggish week.

I will admit that wearing a Fitbit, even though I got it for the sleep tracking, has goaded me into more activity than I was doing. However, I think that the way I was tracking before (intentional exercise and an estimate of daily spurts of more than casual effort) and the way Fitbit tracks create a dichotomy in the results. In my opinion the "Fairly active" Fitbit minutes should be deeply discounted by Spark (maybe about 65%?) while the "Very active" minutes should be taken at face value. (It really blows my mind that getting out of bed and coming downstairs and turning the computer on is worth 5 minutes of "Fairly active" time -- unless I'm kick boxing or some such in my sleep...)

I suppose I could just unlink my accounts and manually enter the Fitbit results for the day into Spark (discounting the "Fairly active" minutes suitably), but the siren song of letting the electronics do the work is too much for me. (And the Spark minutes that it racks up doesn't hurt my pride, either.)

After I had seen the little red message several weeks running, I did what Spark suggested and readjusted my nutrition tracker information, which then raised my calorie range. And then, eating within that range, I promptly started to GAIN weight. So, instead, I just went back and manually set my nutrition ranges to what I knew worked and let the little red message add a bit of brightness to my Activity Tracker.

I really think that you are on the right track with this "rant".

emoticon

Comment edited on: 9/13/2014 11:14:11 PM

Report Inappropriate Comment
4A-HEALTHY-BMI 9/13/2014 10:48PM

    AMEN.

Separate exercise and BMR estimates are bullcrap. They are based on average numbers and have nothing to do with the reality of a single individual.

The best anyone can ever do is estimate the overall burn based on 1) what the scale does and 2) keeping meticulous records of what you eat.

This is the way I've been doing it for the past 3 years:

http://www.sparkpeopl
e.com/mypage_public_journal_ind
ividual.asp?blog_id=4636113

Comment edited on: 9/13/2014 10:54:47 PM

Report Inappropriate Comment
MSLZZY 9/13/2014 10:27PM

    I don't use those trackers for that reason. They are not accurate for the type of workouts I do and the numbers always seem too high.

Report Inappropriate Comment
GETHEALTHY2LIVE 9/13/2014 9:43PM

    I'm glad that you ranted, otherwise when I get to that point I may have made the wrong decision. I have enough trouble getting rid of this weight without inadvertently sabotaging myself by raising my calories more than I should!

emoticon emoticon emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment


Last long run before the Rochester Half Marathon

Saturday, September 13, 2014

It is 8 days till the Rochester Marathon. I had planned for this to be my first marathon, but injury and recovery being what they are this year I'm happy to be able to run the half marathon.

Today was the last preview run, a 6 mile route that had perhaps 3 miles on the half marathon route. All of a sudden, we have autumn weather. At 7 AM it was 47 F and overcast, with the promise of showers later. This turns out to be the low end of the temperature range where I can run with short sleeves and no gloves. It also let me run with so little sweat that I didn't need to mess with putting plastic bags over my car seat to drive home. :)

Once again, there was no 8:30 pace leader; he was off running a marathon elsewhere. The group was smaller this week; we only had 4 guys trying to hold an 8:30 pace. Two of them didn't have GPS watches. We started out right on pace, but pushed a bit as we went along. The miles splits were 8:27, 8:26, 8:24, 8:18, 8:17, and 8:13.

I wanted to get 10 miles in, so when we got back to the store I kept going on a long 3 route that has been used for public group runs. One of the guys came with me, and we pushed the pace a little more. He's running his first half in 8 days, and I suspect he should have quit at 6 miles. I did what I could for him, stressing the importance of following the taper even though it will feel like he isn't doing anything. I explained I'm not tapering because I didn't have the hard training before the taper, and I'm still building mileage. Today's 10 miles is the farthest I've run in one piece since April.

A bit past 9 miles, I took a steep hill detour to make my 10, sending the rookie back to start by the most direct route. My last four mile splits were 8:09, 8:17, 7:55, and 8:19; I likely wouldn't have been over 8 on mile 10 if it weren't for the hill detour. So much for pace control.

Got back to the store, used the restroom, stretched, and rehydrated. While I was stretching, the 15 minute pace group came in from their 6 miles. Then it started raining. Drove through the shower to get home, and went into the weekend routine.

Now comes the debate with Mr. Testosterone. The rookie thinks he wants to run the half at a 7:40 pace. Mr. Testosterone thinks I can do that. Last week's experience shows that I could tolerate a 7:15 pace for 3 miles, but probably not for 13. But how about 7:40? I've been at 7:45 on easy runs with no ill effects . . . Hmm.

My current thinking, and the plan I told the other runners, is to head out with the 1:45 pace group (i.e., an 8:00 pace per mile) and see how my feet felt after 10 miles. If they feel good, take off at about mile 10 and try to finish in about 1:42. If they're a bit iffy, hang with the pace group and finish in 1:45.

Mr. Testosterone is trying to talk me into 1:40. That sounds good, but . . . sitting on the bench is no fun at all. And 1:40 would still probably only be 4th or 5th in the age group. Hmm. I think I need to stick with the plan. Time enough in October to run a 15K as a race, let's run this half as a training exercise and social event.

Instead of listening to Mr. Testosterone, I need to think about the kid I saw while running at noon on Thursday. This kid yelled, "Why are you running?" I replied, "Because I can!" And that's a good answer. I run because I can. I should not run in a way the risks being unable to run. It is a blessing to be recovered enough to *think* about running the half for time, but the blessing is more likely to continue if I don't actually run that hard.

Thus, today's pep talk. Remember that the primary goal is to be able to keep running regularly. Everything else - running with a rookie who is probably 3 decades younger than me, the pride of winning the age group, winning a jar of organic nut butter, or whatever other excuse there may be to run hard - is less important.

I'll probably need to remind myself of this periodically this week and again on race day.

  
  Member Comments About This Blog Post:

MT-MOONCHASER 9/13/2014 10:46PM

    Just keep reminding yourself that just going out and buying that organic nut butter is, in many ways, a lot cheaper than trying to "win" one in a race and getting injured...

emoticon



Report Inappropriate Comment
GABY1948 9/13/2014 5:44PM

    emoticon emoticon emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment
JEANKNEE 9/13/2014 5:41PM

    Sounds like a good run today and good judgment on your part. Keep it up.

Report Inappropriate Comment
ONEKIDSMOM 9/13/2014 5:21PM

    Amen, brother. And what I need for tomorrow's TRI, too. Across the finish line, upright, uninjured, and wanting to do it again. emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment


Sunday Half-Fast Run

Sunday, September 07, 2014

Ten days ago, on a Thursday, I tested running at tempo and had to back off after I'd gone a bit more than a mile. I told myself I wouldn't test speed work again for at least a week. The following Thursday it was 85 and humid when I ran, and I just did an easy run. I didn't feel like pushing things, and in the back of my mind I remembered the weather was like that when I got my stress fracture in a routine tempo run. I'm sure that's an irrational connection, but I was comfortable with an easy run.

This afternoon I had good running weather, 71 and sunny with reasonably low humidity. I wanted to run about 5 miles. I decided to start slow, let my speed build naturally, and see what felt good.

Before I got to mile 2, I was seeing some current pace numbers below 8 minutes. I thought about the speed test 10 days ago when I didn't warm up properly, and decided I'd deliberately pick up the pace at the 2 mile mark and see if I could hold a soft tempo for the last 3 miles of the run.

It went almost as planned. I picked up the pace when the Garmin buzzed for 2 miles, and then let the pace build naturally after that. A bit before the 4 mile mark, my left foot warned me to back off. So I backed off enough to make the foot happy. I thought I was backing off to a pace between 7:30 and 7:45, but it turned out I didn't back off that far.

The route was a bit short, so I just kept running down my street till the Garmin reported 5 miles, then stopped the recording and started my walking cooldown. The final numbers turned out to be 5.00 miles in 37:30, for an average pace of 7:30. The mile splits were 8:06, 7:46, 7:18, 7:03, and 7:16. It looks like I can sustain a 7:15 pace for three miles without bothering the left foot. I don't think I'm ready to try to run fast in a race yet, but I'm satisfied with the progress. I actually did run 3 miles at something approximating the easy side of tempo.

This does not change my decision to run the Rochester Half on September 21 with the 1;45 pace group, which would be an 8:00 pace. The pace leader might tell me to run ahead about mile 10, and if he does I might be silly enough to listen; but I am mindful of the fact that the longest run I've had since my injury was yesterday's 9.46 miles. I need to remind myself that playing with running fast in the last part of a 13 mile run might blow up on me. 1:45 is fast enough, even though it shouldn't place in my age group.

I am hopeful that I'll be able to actually run at race pace by October 18. Yesterday I paid the entry fee for the Finish Strong 15K on that date. The course is pancake flat, and the distance is certainly in my range; the only question is how race worthy I'll be in six weeks.

  
  Member Comments About This Blog Post:

MBTEPP 9/9/2014 7:33AM

    Building strength slowly always a good thing. Your doing emoticon .

Report Inappropriate Comment
JEANKNEE 9/8/2014 5:34PM

    Keep up the good work and "thanks!" for sharing your thoughts and running experience. As a new runner, I find it helpful. I hope to prevent injury and enjoy many years of running to come.

Report Inappropriate Comment
TALVARADO6 9/8/2014 11:22AM

    Sounds like you are doing a good job with balancing caution and pushing yourself at the same time. Staying healthy, listening to your body, and taking care of yourself is more important than placing, but I know you know that! Keep up the great work!

Report Inappropriate Comment
MSLZZY 9/8/2014 10:02AM

    You did pretty well pacing yourself and I hope all goes well in the coming weeks.

Report Inappropriate Comment
PLMITCH 9/7/2014 10:21PM

    Nice job!

Report Inappropriate Comment
TERI-RIFIC 9/7/2014 8:24PM

    All my runs are half fast.

Report Inappropriate Comment
GABY1948 9/7/2014 6:40PM

    I'm so glad you are happy with your progress! And I know you are cautious so just wait and see how it goes...and I am praying that you have come to the point you want to and won't have anymore problems!

emoticon emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment


Pace Group Run with No Pace Leader

Saturday, September 06, 2014

It's two weeks till the Rochester Marathon. On the two Saturdays before, the local Fleet Feet training program has preview runs, which it opens to the public. Based on recent experience, I expected that there would be no one showing up for the non-preview public group run at 8, so I went to the preview run at 7. As I expected, there was a crowd containing many familiar faces.

Looked around, and didn't see anyone holding up a sign saying 8:30. Asked one of the coaches, and was assured that there ought to be an 8:30 pace group. I ultimately saw a guy I knew had run 8:30 in the spring, and went over to hang out with him. It turned out that the current 8:30 pace group leader was off doing a triathlon today, so there was an 8:30 pace group with no pace leader.

Okay, we're all adults here. Most of us have GPS watches. We might not be as good at holding an 8:30 pace as the leader is, but we can have a group run. The organizers declared us to be an informal 8:30 pace group, and started our group first. It turned out to have 7 or 8 guys in it. Everyone but me was training for a marathon.

The weather was reasonable, 71 F and overcast, with no more humidity than you'd expect in late summer. Se started out quite slowly before finding our stride. By the time we'd run a mile, it was clear that this was a group of guys who tend to push the pace. We had to keep reminding each other to slow down.

Chatting with the other guys was just like training last spring, only warmer. It felt like Old Home Week. I don't particularly want to run a half or a marathon in January, but I might pay for a pace pass to run with the training group next training cycle anyway. This was fun.

The overall stats, per my Garmin: 9.46 miles in 1:18:59.7, for an average pace of 8:21 per mile. The mile splits were 8:48 (the slow start), 8:16, 8:21, 8:08 (telling each other to slow down), 8:14, 8:56 (mile containing the water stop), 8:18, 8:11, 8:04 (more warning each other that we were too fast), and a pace of 8:10 for the final 0.46 mile. Yes, this was definitely a group I fit into. It felt like my solo runs struggling to keep it slow, except we were closer to 8:30 as a group than I've been managing on solo runs.

We stopped for water at fleet feet at this point, and I was done. The rest of the group took a short break then went out for more miles to get their 15 or 20 miles in today, for their particular training requirements. Shortly after they left, it started raining. It wasnt' a hard rain; I would have been okay running 6 miles in it, if 15 miles had been my plan today. But between 9 and 10 is what I needed, and I knew better than to go 6 more for pleasant conversation.

I think I could have gone another mile today, but it doesn't hurt to stop when there's still a mile in the tank. Absent any unpleasant surprises, I will run the Rochester Half on September 21. My target finish time is 1:45, with the pace group for that time. Then I'll need to think about what I'm doing for the fall season.

Life is good.

  
  Member Comments About This Blog Post:

MSLZZY 9/7/2014 8:48AM

    Sometimes quitting while you are ahead is the way to go. Save a little energy so you don't overdo a good thing.

Report Inappropriate Comment
MT-MOONCHASER 9/6/2014 11:51PM

    It looks like you've picked up a few tricks for your bag this past year. Have a good week!

emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment
JEANKNEE 9/6/2014 10:00PM

    Although I don't have the experience running that you do, I already relate to stopping while one still has something in the tank. My running buddy's hubby tells us its good to stop feeling hungry for more.

Yes, life is good.

emoticon


Report Inappropriate Comment
GABY1948 9/6/2014 4:47PM

    emoticon emoticon emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment
SPINNINGJW 9/6/2014 3:52PM

    Glad that as a group you kept each other on pace. Sounds like you had a nice run, and I like your point about stopping before the tank is empty.

Report Inappropriate Comment
KRISZTA11 9/6/2014 3:19PM

    Sounds great!
emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment
ALICIA363 9/6/2014 2:51PM

    emoticon
Sounds like ... dare I say it ... Fun!

Report Inappropriate Comment
TERI-RIFIC 9/6/2014 2:30PM

    emoticon

Report Inappropriate Comment
ONEKIDSMOM 9/6/2014 1:58PM

    Sometimes in training, "less is more"... counter intuitive to Mr. T and Polly P., but true for our all too human bodies!

Picked up my shorts & bib for tomorrow. This year I grabbed a blue pair! Time to take myself in hand again.



Report Inappropriate Comment


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 Last Page