Hey!! Even the NY Times confirms my training plan.

Sometimes you do things because you believe they are right.  You don't just start out doing them, it takes years sometimes to get 'in the groove',  and then you find yourself doing things in a certain way.  If you read over the last few weeks of my training routines you will see that I have been concentrating on repeats, and the mental and physical routines one must establish to improve.  So I would like to present to you this rather primitive and basic approach to training as found in the New York Times. Article

So, tongue and cheek, this confirms that reading my blog, and listening to what I have to say about training can reveal to you the secrets of champions.  God only knows when they are going to figure out and confirm that the rest of what I have to say is also correct and the stuff of champions. 

That bit of back patting aside,  I think it is an appropriate time to recover the essentials that the article mentions.   Repetitions are important.  They allow you to better understand the distance, and to get a handle on the terrain.  Finally there is a mental path you must also travel and this mental route is often the most difficult to negotiate.  You need to be training the distance, if possible, the terrain, and the mental path you will be facing.

 As the previous run summaries attest this often very wearing.  First off it can be boring for many runners who want a thrill everyday.  Going out day after day and doing much the same route is not exciting.  But it is necessary if you are to achieve your goals.  Quite frankly, how can you have a reasonable goal if you do not really understand what you are attempting to achieve.  And the only way to understand is to repeat.   For me this is just natural, as it how I got myself through my PhD.  Not being the brightest dude in the group I trained hard, I went into my exams in the same manner I do my runs.   It often meant that when the actual  exam was given I had already run the course and it was simply a matter to taking the right steps.   At the time I described it as having only enough time to write and not enough to think.   The thinking had to be done prior to the Exam.   I often said to people that if 'one had to think during and exam one was totally screwed.'. 

Running is different of course, but not that different.  I was running the Hogback this afternoon at a slower pace than I have been doing.  I have come down the Hogback a few times recently and realized that the downward line was quite a bit different from the upward line.  I took the line slowly the last time down and turned around to check out what the line looked like on looking up.   I've run that line a few times now and it feels good, but I probably have to do it with Fish, while he does his line, to see if I actually pick up some distance on him.    I'm going to have to test out the three sections I have begun to alter.  If it works I think it might save me 30 seconds or so on the up.   Not much on an individual up but almost three minutes during the 100 where I will be going up that hill five times.

At the same time I was doing the physical line calculations I was also aware that there are points on the Hogback where I lose concentration.  It is a subtle and devious mind wandering that takes me away from the pace, particularly when I am alone.   With Fish there, or another runner, I am more prone to be competing and less likely to let my mind wander, but alone, my mind diverts me from the pain of concentration on the up and I find myself mentally somewhere else moving at a slower pace.  So I have noted the places,  the beginning of Too Steeps, The middle of the Dark Side, and just past Tree Forts, and put mental sticky notes on those places that remind me to concentrate harder.

One final point.  The article does nothing to distinguish between hurting and being hurt.  As one trains one gets a very good idea of what a particular section, or distance can do to oneself.  Some days are great, and others are simply horrible with pain and anguish rising to high levels.  But because one has run the course many times one understands the hurt and pain of  trying and is willing to push it to get to the top of the hill or the marker at the end of the section.   It is the kind of pain that can bend you over and make you retch. 

There is however that other kind of pain, that sudden internal failure that speaks to something completely different.  It might be a sudden spasm, or the beginnings of a tendon tear, or a badly bruised muscle or bone.  Trained athletes know what is what and they are, or should be, ready to slow down to deal with what might be a real injury.  The point is that regular training helps you to understand the difference in the degrees of pain and their sources.   Without the training you may well rip something and continue on because you have been told it is 'heroic' to fight through the pain.   Unfortunately it may also lead to injury which is beyond redemption and your running career is ended.  This happens a lot to the unwashed masses who get their ideas from jerks who write news or companies trying to peddle gear but rarely go out on the trails. 

Also here is where I disagree with the main characters in the article.  Many of them expressed this really bullshit desire to be a winner all the time.  They claimed to be ready to do whatever was necessary to be that winner.  This is just crappy short sightedness that does not take into account the long term nature of our bodies and the short term nature of any particular race.  One needs to be able to push through understood pain, but must also be willing to face the need to quit when the pain is obviously doing damage to the body.  Again this is a hard line to find.  But if you train along the edge, then it is likely to be better understood.

Perspective means that each race is by itself unimportant, and that the goal is to be still running at eighty or ninety.  That is winning in my book!

So there you go with my lesson for the day.  Aloha,  Mike