To Infinity and Beyond - Becoming a Better DopeyBadger (Comments Welcome)

Genuinely happy just to sit and hug the girl easter bunny.
Precious!!! (And I'm not talking about that rabbit!)

Overall, looks like I'm doing a pretty good job!
I'll say! You are rocking those numbers!! The BP change in addition to the resting HR decrease - so fantastic! And an HDL of 72?! Not much can really work to raise that but exercise! Love that you have a spreadsheet of these data points as well. :)
 
Precious!!! (And I'm not talking about that rabbit!)

Thanks!

I'll say! You are rocking those numbers!! The BP change in addition to the resting HR decrease - so fantastic! And an HDL of 72?! Not much can really work to raise that but exercise! Love that you have a spreadsheet of these data points as well. :)

Thanks! It's nice to see a big picture overview of the data over time. Almost a nine year span of time. First thing my wife said to me after having this done, "let's compare and see who won!" :P. Her HDL is even higher than mine at 76, and she doesn't exercise nearly as much. But my ratio was better.

:surfweb:

I might have a few spreadsheets!
 


61 Days to Go (Sometimes when you leap, you fall flat...)

diving-board-fail.gif

man trips over ever hurdle dr heckle funny *** gifs.gif

anigif_enhanced-buzz-25017-1386098965-9.gif

fall.gif

tumblr_mwl21fIl051s7y8efo8_400.gif

*We will hope everyone was uninjured in any significant way.

Date - Day - Scheduled Workout (Intervals within desired pace, Strength +/- 5 sec, everything else +/- 10 sec)

4/11/17 - T - 2 mi @ WU + 6 x 1200 @ I w/ 3 min RI @ WU + 3 mi @ CD (2/6)
4/12/17 - W - 7 miles @ 8:04-9:01 min/mile + 6 strides
4/13/17 - R - 2 mi @ WU + 6 x 1 mi @ T w/ 1 min RI @ WU + 2 mi @ CD (6/6)
4/14/17 - F - 7 miles @ 8:04-9:01 min/mile
4/15/17 - Sat - 7 miles @ 8:04-9:01 min/mile + 6 strides
4/16/17 - Sun - 4 mi WU + 10 miles @ M Tempo (4/10)
4/17/17 - M - OFF

Total (training) mileage = 56.8 miles
Number of SOS intervals within pace = 12/22 (55%)

There was no more superhero tumbling on Monday. So it was just quality G and dad time. We played on the Wii. G had fun with most of the activities but really like sword fighting (she figured that one out).

Tuesday was another I paced workout!

2 mi @ WU + 6 x 1200 @ I w/ 3 min RI @ WU + 3 mi @ CD

OOOF! Before I start, a little perspective. This run has 28.5 minutes of schedule I pace work. Last week Thursday's run was 21 minutes and every other I workout the rest of the cycle is 20-23 minutes. So I knew this was the unquestioned hardest run of the entire Daniels 10k cycle.

I pace = 6:04 min/mile (1200m = 4:32 minutes) *roughly 2 mile race pace
Interval window = +/- 3 seconds (4:29-4:35)

WC of 39F with 10 mph wind. The wind was tough to deal with.

1200m intervals - 4:37, 4:32, 4:36, 4:39, 4:37, 4:33

So without further ado, interval 1 I knew it was a bit of loosening up before I was ready to run that fast. The interval was 6:20s in the beginning and 6:02s towards the end. The second interval was more comfortable and easier because it had more tailwind than headwind. Things started to fall apart in interval 3. The last few seconds of it I started developing a lung/side stitch. UGH! Breathing rhythm got off and it lingered into the rest section of interval 3. Then it lingered into interval 4. About halfway through interval 4 it was starting to get really tough to breath. It was getting frustrating because it wasn't my legs holding me back it was my breathing. Honestly, about halfway through #4 I am almost tossed in the towel. But then I said to myself, race day could feel like this too, so unless something is actually wrong let's figure out a way to persevere. So I just tried to RELAX as much as possible and make it through #4. While it was a missed interval, I definitely count it as a success. Thankfully by the time #5 came up, the side stitch was gone and things started to turn around. By the time #6 came around I was feeling pretty good and hopeful I could nail it. Ending on a success was a confidence booster.

Overall, the workout was a failure with only 2/6 intervals within window. I'll take note of this and move on. I mean it's 28.5 minutes of 2 mile (or 12 min) race pace. That seems tough on paper and in reality. The average pace was 6:10 min/mile and the average HR (visual inspection discluding the build-up) was a 159.

Wednesday was an easy day. T+D of 95 with a light wind and clouds. Nothing really to note.

Thursday was another Threshold day.

2 mi @ WU + 6 x 1 mi @ T w/ 1 min RI @ WU + 2 mi @ CD

Originally, this run was scheduled for Thursday (today). It marks the first time the two Daniels speed workouts are Tues/Thurs instead of Tues/Fri. But my daughter has sports class on Thurs night, so moving the Fri speed days to Thurs instead impacts my attendance on those classes (or makes for a late night). So I altered my schedule to attend the sports class and do this speed workout on Friday instead. But mother nature decided not to agree with this plan. As of right now, there are thunderstorms predicted for afternoon/evening which puts any run in jeopardy. I'd do it Friday morning instead, but I have a wellness appointment that requires a 12 hr fast so I can't eat post-workout if I did it Fri morning. So that made me move the workout back to Thurs. But then I noticed an ankle pain towards the end of Wed's run. It was slight, but I was hoping it wouldn't be something bigger. I knew the ankle hurt because of Tues speed workout. At the top of the bunny ear is a high turn that I always leaned into my right leg. This probably carried over some pain into Wed run that went unnoticed until the very end. So then it became a question of do easy on Thurs (because of the ankle) and then risk the hard workout on Fri. Then my daughter said she really wanted me at sports class (we played tag!) so I couldn't resist that request. I ended up making the final decision to just make it a late night and complete the workout after sports class. If the ankle didn't feel good, then I'd just convert it to an easy day instead,

T pace = 6:38 min/mile
Interval window = +/- 5 seconds

Admittedly, I was looking for a better performance in this run after Tuesday's 2/6 showing. The warmup felt fine. Little twinges here and there but I was confident it was just a mental game. As I started the first interval, I could feel the residual fatigue from Tues workout, but it still felt comfortable to stay on pace. Thankfully, this comfortable feeling stayed throughout the run.

T set - 6:40, 6:40, 6:37, 6:40, 6:38, 6:39

A very consistent workout and it never felt like too much. Even with the residual fatigue from Tues I felt I had much more to give. I wonder how many consecutive miles I could actually do at this pace. To avoid causing my ankle to feel any worse I decided to reverse the direction on the bunny ear and lean less into the turn. No issues what so ever (either during or post run) so I'm hopeful that's behind me now. Very happy to hit 6/6 paces so comfortably.

The other thing that was remarkably consistent was the HR. A solid 155 for the last five intervals at an average pace of 6:39. Plugging this into my HRvpace graph has it between Marathon and Half Marathon pacing. I find that hard to believe since Threshold pacing (T pace) is suppose to be at or near Lactate Threshold (or around 60 min race time). The prediction calculator has now moved by marathon to 2:58-3:04. Also, got a new garmin VO2max of 58 based on my HRmax being 180. But again, I'm finding it really difficult to even get my HR anywhere close to 180 no matter how hard I'm running. Technically, I pace on Tues is 95-100% HRmax (per Daniels), but for me this was only around 159 (when eyeballing the average without the build-up). Regardless, I'm pretty stoked with a 155 average at 6:39. Roughly two years ago that same HR (155) was a 9:00 min/mile.

Temp + Dew of 99 and wind was 13mph (thankfully for today's speed workout it was from the East which meant it effected mostly just the 0.6-0.8 mark of each mile).

Friday was another easy day. It was a race against the rain, which I won. Could have ended up doing the Q2 speed work on this day after all. But no worries! T+D of 113 but little wind.

Saturday was another easy day. The run felt really smooth and comfortable. I might or might (ok I did) try on some new Saucony Freedoms for my upcoming birthday. Guess I'll just have to wait and see if that's what I get...:thumbsup2 Originally, I asked for a VO2max analysis from the UW Hospital. But my wife was informed that they don't offer it anymore. There's another place in town that offered it, but I didn't like their results output as much.

Sunday was a marathon tempo day.

4 mi WU + 10 miles @ M Tempo + 4 Strides

It's the one day a year my strava art actually makes sense (pogo bunny!). Happy Easter!

The T+D was 113 (so a tad higher than the last few weeks for a longer run) and the wind was swirling at 20-30mph. Hard to find a direction that it didn't feel like a headwind. The wind definitely wreaked havoc on my pacing. We also had almost full sun. So needless to say this felt like the real first "spring" run of the cycle.

M Pace = 7:02 min/mile
Interval = +/- 10 seconds

M Tempo - 7:26, 7:23, 7:05, 7:15, 7:18, 7:07, 7:18, 7:07, 7:18, 7:29, 7:02, 7:14

It's pretty obvious from the pace graph when there was a headwind and when there was what seemed like a slight tailwind. About halfway through, I stopped trying to fight the wind so much and switched to an effort based pacing system, thus the 7:29. But it's pretty obvious from the graph that when I could go fast I was hitting pace. Average HR for the M Tempo section was 146, which still puts it on the trend line even with the slight slow down (historical marathon 148-152). A solid end to the week!

The HRvpace graph is still on track. It seems to be getting really difficult to get my HR up high enough (per the suggested HR ranges for Daniels paces and my historical HR data). But I can also tell it would be really difficult to go much faster physically right now. I think I'm entering a phase of training where my HR improvement has surpassed my muscular improvements. Eventually the muscular should catch up. I'm also wondering if I'm starting to push the easy too hard. The HR is low, the duration is around 60 min, the resting HR suggests I'm recovering appropriately, it feels easy, but I'm wondering if backing off a touch more will help with the hard days. On to the next week, only 4 weeks left of Daniels before the unofficial Bunny Head 5k!
 
I had my annual health assessment this morning. Insurance gives us $150 for completing it, so why not? I'll use the money to pay for race fees anyways, so it's like a big healthy circle. This is in addition to the $200 my insurance is giving me for running Dopey!
Very cool that your insurance gives you money for running Dopey.
 
When you wrote about it feeling like a real spring run...I couldn't agree more. This weekend I was sweating during mile 1 right off the bat which is when you know the warm weather is here.
I've also had the "should I back off more from the easy" thoughts in my head Especially on my Saturday runs that are right before my Long runs, so I get where your mindset is at with that. It's hard to remind myself it's ok to slow it down down when I'm just like "Weeeeee Nice Weather!!!!!" But then I have to like remind myself over and over "you'll be happier during your long run if you slow your roll today."

Hope that your ouches are short-lived!
 


Very cool that your insurance gives you money for running Dopey.

Agreed! You essentially get $200 for doing healthy things. Signing up for races, CSA, going to the gym, etc.

When you wrote about it feeling like a real spring run...I couldn't agree more. This weekend I was sweating during mile 1 right off the bat which is when you know the warm weather is here.

::yes::

I've also had the "should I back off more from the easy" thoughts in my head Especially on my Saturday runs that are right before my Long runs, so I get where your mindset is at with that. It's hard to remind myself it's ok to slow it down down when I'm just like "Weeeeee Nice Weather!!!!!" But then I have to like remind myself over and over "you'll be happier during your long run if you slow your roll today."

I think it'll help because I feel cardiovascularly there's a lot left in the tank.

Hope that your ouches are short-lived!

No worries, as they're all gone. I'm feeling quite good physically right now.
 
Runners world posted an interesting article using Strava data from BQ and non-BQ runners. (LINK)

Most of the data makes sense to me.

BQ'ers - Run more total miles, peak higher, duration is more, train overall slower (relative to fitness).

Screen Shot 2017-04-19 at 3.37.38 PM.png

All of my stats from their data are in yellow (thus not in the paper but calculated based on information they gave). But here's where I am confused. The BQ's average pace is 7:45 min/mile, yet only "15% of runs" is at BQ or faster. How do they define "15% of runs"? Is that total time spent at BQ or faster during all training? Is that average pace for a run ended at BQ or faster? Because the numbers between them being faster (7:45 min/mile) and yet only 15% don't seem to add up. Mostly because the nonBQ are slower (8:50), yet 57% of their runs are at BQ or faster. How does that work mathematically when 15% and 7:45 vs 57% and 8:50. Must be a weird way of defining "15% of runs" or the datasets are greatly skewed. I've rattled my brain trying to solve this one. Anyone got an explantation? I'm thinking it must be that the totality of a single entry has to be below BQ pace for it to count towards the "% of runs at BQ pace or faster". I could see this because most of my fast runs (speed/tempo) have a WU/CD associated with it, thus I think I'm probably at 0% of runs at BQ or faster if defined this way. But for some people running marathons, running 64% of training runs at BQ or faster and not being able to BQ?

Average BQ Time is merely the average of the categories from 18-34 through 80+. An admittedly horrible way to come up with an "average BQ time", but since I've got no idea how their dataset is comprised it was a compromise. In all likelihood, the average necessary BQ time/pace is much lower than what I came up with since there are unlikely an equal number of runners in each of the age categories in their dataset.

One day I wish someone would give me their dataset. Oh the things I could come up with off 31,000 runners datasets!

Anyone got any thoughts?
 
Anyone got any thoughts?

A few. First, I'd wonder how accurate their data is, based on my own use of Strava. It has never been my primary log, so I never bothered to add in my treadmill workouts until this year. Only my outdoor runs would be entered, since those uploaded automatically from my watch. Obviously, this would invalidate my data, since a lot of my winter runs would be on a treadmill (maybe 25% of annual mileage?). I wonder how many other people had similar practices?

As for the rest, it's not much of a surprise that BQ'ers run more miles, run longer, and peak higher. It's also not much of a surprise that they run slower relative to fitness - if you're running more miles, I would imagine your perceived fatigue would be higher. That's certainly been the case for me as my average mileage has climbed. The faster runners I know almost always have a wider range of training paces than the newer/slower runners, who tend to run the same pace range for most workouts. I've always found it interesting that my 'easy' runs (paced purely on perceived effort) are barely 30 second faster than easy efforts 5 years ago, even as my race paces have dropped by 2 minutes or more.
 
Strava has access to age data, maybe they altered the data to compare across age groups. I'm only guessing though, because it seems odd to me too.
 
I thought it was odd as well. I'm guessing it has to do with how they train. There are people who stick to running very fast 5ks and the like so their training would be very different than those who are aiming for BQ. If they run say 6:00-7:00min/mi during a race and train at a 7:00-8:00 minute pace but only for short distances that would lead to a lower total weekly mileage and faster training paces? At least that would be my guess.
 
A few. First, I'd wonder how accurate their data is, based on my own use of Strava. It has never been my primary log, so I never bothered to add in my treadmill workouts until this year. Only my outdoor runs would be entered, since those uploaded automatically from my watch. Obviously, this would invalidate my data, since a lot of my winter runs would be on a treadmill (maybe 25% of annual mileage?). I wonder how many other people had similar practices?

That's a very good point! And did they include manual entires or only GPS enabled uploads?

As for the rest, it's not much of a surprise that BQ'ers run more miles, run longer, and peak higher. It's also not much of a surprise that they run slower relative to fitness - if you're running more miles, I would imagine your perceived fatigue would be higher. That's certainly been the case for me as my average mileage has climbed. The faster runners I know almost always have a wider range of training paces than the newer/slower runners, who tend to run the same pace range for most workouts.

Agree with all points! The data makes sense from my understanding of ideal training.

I've always found it interesting that my 'easy' runs (paced purely on perceived effort) are barely 30 second faster than easy efforts 5 years ago, even as my race paces have dropped by 2 minutes or more.

That's interesting. This would suggest to me that your VO2max has likely remained the same through this period of time (slight increase due to the 30 seconds), but that you have greatly increased your Lactate Threshold pace and your Running Economy (or ability to maintain your LT at a set pace for a longer duration).

Strava has access to age data, maybe they altered the data to compare across age groups. I'm only guessing though, because it seems odd to me too.

Maybe, seems like an odd choice.

I thought it was odd as well. I'm guessing it has to do with how they train. There are people who stick to running very fast 5ks and the like so their training would be very different than those who are aiming for BQ. If they run say 6:00-7:00min/mi during a race and train at a 7:00-8:00 minute pace but only for short distances that would lead to a lower total weekly mileage and faster training paces? At least that would be my guess.

Agreed, but the problem is then shouldn't the non-BQ average pace be faster than the BQ average pace if they spend so much time at BQ pace or faster? How can they be 57% at BQ pace vs 15% at BQ pace, yet be an overall 1 minute slower average pace? Seems like those are contradictory? It must mean there is a large discrepancy for the "BQ" time for BQ'ers and Non-BQ'ers (hence, maybe a big average age gap in the two datasets).

Runner A - 40 miles per week, 15% @ BQ of 7:00 min/mile (6 total miles), average pace is 7:45 min/mile, thus remaining mileage (34 miles) at 7:53 min/mile average.
Runner B - 20 miles per week, 57% @ BQ of 7:00 min/mile (11.4 total miles), average pace is 8:50 min/mile, thus remaining mileage (8.6 miles) at 11:16 min/mile average.

Something just seems off about these "average" BQ and Non-BQ runners. Wouldn't this suggest that the Non-BQ (runner B) is actually the one doing the super easy mileage (11:16 min/mile vs 7:53 min/mile). Granted they're doing much less of it (8.6 miles vs 34 miles). Presumably doing anything faster than 7:00 min/mile (my imaginary BQ value) would suggest that the "remaining mileage" would have to be done even slower. Maybe Runner B is barely under BQ, whereas Runner A is WAY under BQ as training paces.

Runner A - 40 miles per week, 15% @ BQ (or faster) of 6:00 min/mile (6 total miles), average pace is 7:45 min/mile, thus remaining mileage (34 miles) at 8:04 min/mile average.
Runner B - 20 miles per week, 57% @ BQ of 7:00 min/mile (11.4 total miles), average pace is 8:50 min/mile, thus remaining mileage (8.6 miles) at 11:16 min/mile average.
 
Agreed, but the problem is then shouldn't the non-BQ average pace be faster than the BQ average pace if they spend so much time at BQ pace or faster? How can they be 57% at BQ pace vs 15% at BQ pace, yet be an overall 1 minute slower average pace? Seems like those are contradictory? It must mean there is a large discrepancy for the "BQ" time for BQ'ers and Non-BQ'ers (hence, maybe a big average age gap in the two datasets).
That all makes sense. I didn't consider it in reference to the average pace. I wonder if there's a failure to account for outliers in the dataset? Like if there are runners who run say a solid 15:00-16:00 minute mile and therefore don't train at a BQ pace ever versus those two do most of their training runs at a BQ pace but tend to hit their lactate threshold during the marathon itself and don't qualify. I'm not doing the math on that but it's possible that some combination there of messed it up, or perhaps age data was inaccurate.
 
That all makes sense. I didn't consider it in reference to the average pace. I wonder if there's a failure to account for outliers in the dataset? Like if there are runners who run say a solid 15:00-16:00 minute mile and therefore don't train at a BQ pace ever versus those two do most of their training runs at a BQ pace but tend to hit their lactate threshold during the marathon itself and don't qualify. I'm not doing the math on that but it's possible that some combination there of messed it up, or perhaps age data was inaccurate.

It's a very good point that it could be a combination of 0% BQ pace runners at 15-16 min/miles and 100% BQ pace runners at 7:00 min/mile but very short distances. This huge discrepancy could account for the 57% and the average pace being slower.
 
I doubt it would be that, I feel like you'd have to disclose "normalizing" results for age group. I regretted sending this as soon as I did... forgive my dumb response lol.

LOL, no worries. It's a possibility for sure because something with the numbers seem off.
 

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!











facebook twitter
Top