Sunday, November 19, 2006
Pine Cobble
A few weeks ago when I walked into 9:00 math class, having woken up at 8:30 and barely gotten breakfast, C2 informed me that she had hiked up Pine Cobble that morning. It was a beautiful sunny morning, and I thought that was a wonderful thing to have done, and wished that I, too, had done it. So this morning I ran up Pine Cobble.
"Run" is not exactly the apt word to use, because Pine Cobble is quite steep in places, so much of the time I walked, mostly on the way up but also on the way down when mounds of rocks were covered in slippery leaves and it just wasn't worth it. I encountered a few people, six or eight, on their way up or down the mountain. It was kind of cloudy, so the view wasn't great, but it sure beat no view at all.
It was a nice run. It took me about 42 minutes to go from campus to the top, and a little less than that to get down and to Greylock.
When I came out of brunch, someone had taken my reflective vest. Here is a picture of me wearing my reflective vest. If you see it -- and it's very unique, considering the three strips of duct tape holding the shoulder together -- kindly inform the wearer that they are a terrible person for stealing my vest, slap them across the face, take back the vest and give it back to me.
Thanks.
"Run" is not exactly the apt word to use, because Pine Cobble is quite steep in places, so much of the time I walked, mostly on the way up but also on the way down when mounds of rocks were covered in slippery leaves and it just wasn't worth it. I encountered a few people, six or eight, on their way up or down the mountain. It was kind of cloudy, so the view wasn't great, but it sure beat no view at all.
It was a nice run. It took me about 42 minutes to go from campus to the top, and a little less than that to get down and to Greylock.
When I came out of brunch, someone had taken my reflective vest. Here is a picture of me wearing my reflective vest. If you see it -- and it's very unique, considering the three strips of duct tape holding the shoulder together -- kindly inform the wearer that they are a terrible person for stealing my vest, slap them across the face, take back the vest and give it back to me.
Thanks.
p posted by Diana @ 1:33 PM 0 comments 
Monday, November 13, 2006
The detraining effect
On Saturday I went on a run with Becca and Owen and was absolutely astounded at the amount that I was out of shape, in the sense that I was running along at a reasonable pace but it was very difficult, in the sense that my heart rate was over 180 the whole time, and then when I tried to run fast around the track, it was really hard and I could only run 200 meters. I was astonished enough that I decided to go for another run today to determine just how out of shape I am, and it turns out that it's not as bad as I thought. I did Blair (5.6) at a reasonable pace, with the last minute or so at tempo pace, and it took 48 minutes: not bad. I was really concerned about the speed part, though, so I did a lap around the track. It was 89 seconds (22, 22, 23, 22). This is not very impressive, but it is a lot better than I thought it would be. But it was sort of hard, so I did another one. That one was 84 seconds (21, 22, 20, 21). So I am not in great shape, but I am not in terrible shape, and I certainly have an acceptable base upon which to build.
p posted by Diana @ 5:06 PM 0 comments
Sunday, August 20, 2006
43 seconds faster, but paradoxically, less proud
Yesterday I did the same workout as a month ago or so, but faster. I didn't look far enough ahead in the training guide to see that there is a very careful progression of increasingly more distance at 5k pace, starting with 4-5 x 800, then 3 x 1000, then 3 x 1200, then 2-3 x mile, so I did 3 x mile after doing 5 x 800. My goal in the workout last month (July 22) was to run 100 seconds per 400, 6:40 per mile. I ran the three miles in 6:39, 6:38, and 6:32, adding on an extra 44-second 200 to make it 20:29 for 5k altogether. I was very pleased with this effort.
Last week in Williamstown I did the 3 x 1200 workout quite fast. I was aiming for one second faster per 100, 24 seconds per 100, 96 seconds per 400, 6:24 mile pace. I ended up going much faster than this, averaging around 23 seconds per 100 at the end, and I was very happy about that workout. Here it was:
(Friday, August 11)
4:45 (95, 96, 94)
4:36 (93, 95, 88)
4:34 (93, 96, 85)
So then yesterday I did 3 x mile again. I made a special effort to get to a track so that I could run an actual mile (there is no track on the island). My goal was to run the miles at the same pace that I had run the 1200s last week, 6:24 per mile, 96 seconds per 400. Here is what I ran:
(Saturday, August 19)
6:15 (93, 95, 95, 92)
6:16 (92, 95, 96, 93)
6:32 (95, 99, 100, 98) (7:15 1800)
Clearly, this is not the way that I like to run a workout. I prefer to run the first repeat at exactly goal pace, the second slightly below, and the third as fast as possible (if there are three). In this case, I ran the first two well faster than goal pace, and then the third was terrible. That was kind of sad. It makes me less proud of myself than I was for the first one in July. The problem is that the training guide sets one goal (5k date pace -- slower than 6:40, I think), and I set a goal that is faster than that (6:40 or 6:24) and then I set an actual goal to go faster than the goal that is already faster than the training guide (trying to beat 6:40 or 6:24). Then when I don't, I am sad. I suppose this is a good thing. The better thing, of course, would be to achieve the most difficult goal.
During the third mile, I felt very much like stopping after two laps, because my legs were tired and I was well off of the pace I wanted to be running, but I kept going. I kept going mostly because I had to do the workout, but also because, while I couldn't remember the pace I had run for the miles in the workout last month (because my brain gets all foggy when I am running hard) I was pretty sure that I was still faster than that time, and lastly (I actually did think these things while I was running) because the best condition to do a workout is when you're really tired and your legs are dead, because then you have to work very hard, and then you get a workout. So, I got a workout.
Altogether, this adds up to a 19:46 5k. This is a big improvement on the July workout -- 43 seconds faster for 5k, all of the miles faster except the last one exactly the same, with the last 200 one second faster. So it was really a good workout, except that it would have been nice for everything to have been under 6:24, and for my times to have been decreasing instead of increasing. Also, my legs were quite sore after the workout in July, but today they are not very sore at all, which is a good sign (except that I should have run faster!).
In high school we used to run the first half of the course, then rest, then run the second half of the course, for a workout at the beginning of the season. The idea was that whatever time we could run in two pieces -- adding the two times together -- at the beginning of the season, we could run it without stopping at the end of the season. So I hope that this time that I can run in three pieces in the summer, I can run for a race during the season.
Last week in Williamstown I did the 3 x 1200 workout quite fast. I was aiming for one second faster per 100, 24 seconds per 100, 96 seconds per 400, 6:24 mile pace. I ended up going much faster than this, averaging around 23 seconds per 100 at the end, and I was very happy about that workout. Here it was:
(Friday, August 11)
4:45 (95, 96, 94)
4:36 (93, 95, 88)
4:34 (93, 96, 85)
So then yesterday I did 3 x mile again. I made a special effort to get to a track so that I could run an actual mile (there is no track on the island). My goal was to run the miles at the same pace that I had run the 1200s last week, 6:24 per mile, 96 seconds per 400. Here is what I ran:
(Saturday, August 19)
6:15 (93, 95, 95, 92)
6:16 (92, 95, 96, 93)
6:32 (95, 99, 100, 98) (7:15 1800)
Clearly, this is not the way that I like to run a workout. I prefer to run the first repeat at exactly goal pace, the second slightly below, and the third as fast as possible (if there are three). In this case, I ran the first two well faster than goal pace, and then the third was terrible. That was kind of sad. It makes me less proud of myself than I was for the first one in July. The problem is that the training guide sets one goal (5k date pace -- slower than 6:40, I think), and I set a goal that is faster than that (6:40 or 6:24) and then I set an actual goal to go faster than the goal that is already faster than the training guide (trying to beat 6:40 or 6:24). Then when I don't, I am sad. I suppose this is a good thing. The better thing, of course, would be to achieve the most difficult goal.
During the third mile, I felt very much like stopping after two laps, because my legs were tired and I was well off of the pace I wanted to be running, but I kept going. I kept going mostly because I had to do the workout, but also because, while I couldn't remember the pace I had run for the miles in the workout last month (because my brain gets all foggy when I am running hard) I was pretty sure that I was still faster than that time, and lastly (I actually did think these things while I was running) because the best condition to do a workout is when you're really tired and your legs are dead, because then you have to work very hard, and then you get a workout. So, I got a workout.
Altogether, this adds up to a 19:46 5k. This is a big improvement on the July workout -- 43 seconds faster for 5k, all of the miles faster except the last one exactly the same, with the last 200 one second faster. So it was really a good workout, except that it would have been nice for everything to have been under 6:24, and for my times to have been decreasing instead of increasing. Also, my legs were quite sore after the workout in July, but today they are not very sore at all, which is a good sign (except that I should have run faster!).
In high school we used to run the first half of the course, then rest, then run the second half of the course, for a workout at the beginning of the season. The idea was that whatever time we could run in two pieces -- adding the two times together -- at the beginning of the season, we could run it without stopping at the end of the season. So I hope that this time that I can run in three pieces in the summer, I can run for a race during the season.
p posted by Diana @ 4:35 PM 0 comments
43 seconds faster, but paradoxically, less proud
Yesterday I did the same workout as a month ago or so, but faster. I didn't look far enough ahead in the training guide to see that there is a very careful progression of increasingly more distance at 5k pace, starting with 4-5 x 800, then 3 x 1000, then 3 x 1200, then 2-3 x mile, so I did 3 x mile after doing 5 x 800. My goal in the workout last month (July 22) was to run 100 seconds per 400, 6:40 per mile. I ran the three miles in 6:39, 6:38, and 6:32, adding on an extra 44-second 200 to make it 20:29 for 5k altogether. I was very pleased with this effort.
Last week in Williamstown I did the 3 x 1200 workout quite fast. I was aiming for one second faster per 100, 24 seconds per 100, 96 seconds per 400, 6:24 mile pace. I ended up going much faster than this, averaging around 23 seconds per 100 at the end, and I was very happy about that workout. Here it was:
(Friday, August 11)
4:45 (95, 96, 94)
4:36 (93, 95, 88)
4:34 (93, 96, 85)
So then yesterday I did 3 x mile again. I made a special effort to get to a track so that I could run an actual mile (there is no track on the island). My goal was to run the miles at the same pace that I had run the 1200s last week, 6:24 per mile, 96 seconds per 400. Here is what I ran:
(Saturday, August 19)
6:15 (93, 95, 95, 92)
6:16 (92, 95, 96, 93)
6:32 (95, 99, 100, 98) (7:15 1800)
Clearly, this is not the way that I like to run a workout. I prefer to run the first repeat at exactly goal pace, the second slightly below, and the third as fast as possible (if there are three). In this case, I ran the first two well faster than goal pace, and then the third was terrible. That was kind of sad. It makes me less proud of myself than I was for the first one in July. The problem is that the training guide sets one goal (5k date pace -- slower than 6:40, I think), and I set a goal that is faster than that (6:40 or 6:24) and then I set an actual goal to go faster than the goal that is already faster than the training guide (trying to beat 6:40 or 6:24). Then when I don't, I am sad. I suppose this is a good thing. The better thing, of course, would be to achieve the most difficult goal.
During the third mile, I felt very much like stopping after two laps, because my legs were tired and I was well off of the pace I wanted to be running, but I kept going. I kept going mostly because I had to do the workout, but also because, while I couldn't remember the pace I had run for the miles in the workout last month (because my brain gets all foggy when I am running hard) I was pretty sure that I was still faster than that time, and lastly (I actually did think these things while I was running) because the best condition to do a workout is when you're really tired and your legs are dead, because then you have to work very hard, and then you get a workout. So, I got a workout.
Altogether, this adds up to a 19:46 5k. This is a big improvement on the July workout -- 43 seconds faster for 5k, all of the miles faster except the last one exactly the same, with the last 200 one second faster. So it was really a good workout, except that it would have been nice for everything to have been under 6:24, and for my times to have been decreasing instead of increasing. Also, my legs were quite sore after the workout in July, but today they are not very sore at all, which is a good sign (except that I should have run faster!).
In high school we used to run the first half of the course, then rest, then run the second half of the course, for a workout at the beginning of the season. The idea was that whatever time we could run in two pieces -- adding the two times together -- at the beginning of the season, we could run it without stopping at the end of the season. So I hope that this time that I can run in three pieces in the summer, I can run for a race during the season.
Last week in Williamstown I did the 3 x 1200 workout quite fast. I was aiming for one second faster per 100, 24 seconds per 100, 96 seconds per 400, 6:24 mile pace. I ended up going much faster than this, averaging around 23 seconds per 100 at the end, and I was very happy about that workout. Here it was:
(Friday, August 11)
4:45 (95, 96, 94)
4:36 (93, 95, 88)
4:34 (93, 96, 85)
So then yesterday I did 3 x mile again. I made a special effort to get to a track so that I could run an actual mile (there is no track on the island). My goal was to run the miles at the same pace that I had run the 1200s last week, 6:24 per mile, 96 seconds per 400. Here is what I ran:
(Saturday, August 19)
6:15 (93, 95, 95, 92)
6:16 (92, 95, 96, 93)
6:32 (95, 99, 100, 98) (7:15 1800)
Clearly, this is not the way that I like to run a workout. I prefer to run the first repeat at exactly goal pace, the second slightly below, and the third as fast as possible (if there are three). In this case, I ran the first two well faster than goal pace, and then the third was terrible. That was kind of sad. It makes me less proud of myself than I was for the first one in July. The problem is that the training guide sets one goal (5k date pace -- slower than 6:40, I think), and I set a goal that is faster than that (6:40 or 6:24) and then I set an actual goal to go faster than the goal that is already faster than the training guide (trying to beat 6:40 or 6:24). Then when I don't, I am sad. I suppose this is a good thing. The better thing, of course, would be to achieve the most difficult goal.
During the third mile, I felt very much like stopping after two laps, because my legs were tired and I was well off of the pace I wanted to be running, but I kept going. I kept going mostly because I had to do the workout, but also because, while I couldn't remember the pace I had run for the miles in the workout last month (because my brain gets all foggy when I am running hard) I was pretty sure that I was still faster than that time, and lastly (I actually did think these things while I was running) because the best condition to do a workout is when you're really tired and your legs are dead, because then you have to work very hard, and then you get a workout. So, I got a workout.
Altogether, this adds up to a 19:46 5k. This is a big improvement on the July workout -- 43 seconds faster for 5k, all of the miles faster except the last one exactly the same, with the last 200 one second faster. So it was really a good workout, except that it would have been nice for everything to have been under 6:24, and for my times to have been decreasing instead of increasing. Also, my legs were quite sore after the workout in July, but today they are not very sore at all, which is a good sign (except that I should have run faster!).
In high school we used to run the first half of the course, then rest, then run the second half of the course, for a workout at the beginning of the season. The idea was that whatever time we could run in two pieces -- adding the two times together -- at the beginning of the season, we could run it without stopping at the end of the season. So I hope that this time that I can run in three pieces in the summer, I can run for a race during the season.
p posted by Diana @ 4:35 PM 0 comments
Tuesday, August 01, 2006
5:52: My second-fastest mile ever
Today was our last day of organized running class, so we had our final mile time trial of the summer. It was 100° out and very sunny, so we made the run optional. Of six students, four opted to do the run. Of four students, four ran 800 meters, two ran 1200 meters, and one ran the entire 1600 meters of the mile (the others were tired and hot and stopped before they were done). Of the two interns (including me) who ran, both finished.
I was trying to run sub-6:00, so I was pacing myself at 90 seconds per 400, which is 22.5 seconds per 100 and 45 seconds per 200. Of course I ran the first 100 too fast, in 19 seconds, but I evened it out after that and came through the 400 in 87. I ran the middle two laps perfectly, in 91 and 90 seconds, respectively, coming through the 1200 in 4:28. I ran the last 400 as fast as I could, sprinting the final straightaway, in 84 seconds, to finish in 5:52.
My best mile time is 5:45, achieved in winter track in my senior year of high school. My second-best mile time is 5:55, in outdoor track in my freshman year of high school, and I think my third-best mile time is 6:03, achieved last spring (junior year of college). I have run more 1500s, which can be converted to miles (my best 1500 is 5:17), but only in emergencies.
My point is that, given that it was 100° and that I had no competition around me, I think I am in quite good shape, especially for it still being a month before the start of the cross country season. So I am happy with the work that I have done, and I am pleased with today's effort.
I was trying to run sub-6:00, so I was pacing myself at 90 seconds per 400, which is 22.5 seconds per 100 and 45 seconds per 200. Of course I ran the first 100 too fast, in 19 seconds, but I evened it out after that and came through the 400 in 87. I ran the middle two laps perfectly, in 91 and 90 seconds, respectively, coming through the 1200 in 4:28. I ran the last 400 as fast as I could, sprinting the final straightaway, in 84 seconds, to finish in 5:52.
My best mile time is 5:45, achieved in winter track in my senior year of high school. My second-best mile time is 5:55, in outdoor track in my freshman year of high school, and I think my third-best mile time is 6:03, achieved last spring (junior year of college). I have run more 1500s, which can be converted to miles (my best 1500 is 5:17), but only in emergencies.
My point is that, given that it was 100° and that I had no competition around me, I think I am in quite good shape, especially for it still being a month before the start of the cross country season. So I am happy with the work that I have done, and I am pleased with today's effort.
p posted by Diana @ 11:08 PM 0 comments
Monday, July 31, 2006
My second Race for the Cure
Yesterday, I ran the Race for the Cure again with Becca. It went well. This year, Becca won the race for the fourth year in a row, as opposed to last year, when she won it for the third year in a row.
We ran the first mile in 3:31, the first 1.5 miles in something like 10:45, the first two miles in 14:52 (Becca claims it was 14:53, but I don't believe her), and the whole thing in 23:08 or 23:09, in the sense that Becca ran 23:08 and I ran 23:09. I take full responsibility for the bad pacing job. I had been too sick to do anything except sleep and blow my nose and take cold showers for the previous two days, and Becca hadn't eaten anything for 48 hours except for two oreos, and best of all, Becca had The Look, and those are all of my reasons for why we won the race by two minutes and yet ran slower than last year. And by "we," I mean "Becca."
[Here are the results from the 2006, 2005, 2004, and 2003 VT/NH Races for the Cure.]
We ran the first mile in 3:31, the first 1.5 miles in something like 10:45, the first two miles in 14:52 (Becca claims it was 14:53, but I don't believe her), and the whole thing in 23:08 or 23:09, in the sense that Becca ran 23:08 and I ran 23:09. I take full responsibility for the bad pacing job. I had been too sick to do anything except sleep and blow my nose and take cold showers for the previous two days, and Becca hadn't eaten anything for 48 hours except for two oreos, and best of all, Becca had The Look, and those are all of my reasons for why we won the race by two minutes and yet ran slower than last year. And by "we," I mean "Becca."
[Here are the results from the 2006, 2005, 2004, and 2003 VT/NH Races for the Cure.]
p posted by Diana @ 7:53 PM 0 comments
