GrooveTime!group - CLOSED!!! (Page 29)

That must've been great in Aspen! It really is beautiful up there. I'm eyeing another tri up in Colorado for mid-summer to take advantage of the landscape. But I figure for the first one I should use my altitude advantage for sea-level-ish areas, hence the choice of Vegas. Are you coming up again this year?

We flew into Aspen on a Friday and the race was on Saturday. Talk about an altitude adjustment from sea level to 8000 feet. My goal was just to finish the race, so I took it really easy, and ended up MOP. It was a very inspirational race for me, and made me so thankful for my health and that I could fly out there and participate.  My daughter is an actress and was working at Theatre Aspen for the summer, so we went up to see her show. If they cast her again this summer (fingers crossed, it was a pretty sweet deal for her), we'll definitely be back. We hiked every day and did some white water rafting. It was the best vacation I think we've ever taken (and a very welcome relief from our 100 degree days).

LISA -

I've heard that there are two ways to beat the altitude adjustment blues. One is to arrive 3-5 days in advance of the race and get fully acclinated. The other is to arrive as close as possible to the race and.....??.....I'm still not sure how it works, but I guess you do the race before the full effects of the altitude floor you. The worst thing is to arrive about two days pre-race, which is nor enough time to acclimate, but too much to fly under the altitude radar, as it were. Did you suffer much, getting ter a day before the race?

ARTHUR -

Eek! I apologize for fogetting about the shoes! I tried last week, but our pokey dialup system timed-out before I could get through.......and then I just forgot.

But thank you for reminding me, and those are two intersting shoes. The only adiZero I have ever seen in the flesh is the Tempo, but I didn't take the time to examine it. I would like toi see the Ace (also in the adiZero line), as it is a neutral perfomance show, but I haven't seen it, either.

As for the two you pointed me to, the Adios and the Kona, I'm curious about the former, wary of the latter. The Adios looks good, and I like the low profile and what appears to be a minimal heel drop. I want to find out what the "quickstrike" technology is, as that's a new one on me (but i have never paid much attention to adidas). The airmesh sounds good, but what I'd like to know is the weight; I couldn't find it.

For the Kona......well, with an absolutely perfect fit, it might work great. But I worry about the velcro closure. Sure, it would be fast putting on, but I wonder if it not having cinching from laces down the front would affect the overall fit. Maybe that's the job of those two bands that cross over the shoe, but then I would worry about those being too tight and hurting the tendons on the top of my foot. I would not take a chance on placing a blind order for these, as I think the only assurance one could have that they would work would be from trying them on in the store AND giving them a good test run. Yeah, I'd sit back and wait for the first couple of volleys of reviews to come in before I took the plunge!

But the Adios.......now that would be tempting!

I will try to find these tomorrow, although they might only be European models. But I'll see what i can see!

STEVE!

I found them on Amazon.com, so I suspect they not only a european model. Apparently the weight is only 7.8 ounces, or 221 grams.

The old adizeros I had were also incredibly light while having great cushioning all over...

Let me know if you manage to try a pair on...

Goodnight from Portugal everyone!

I use post-workout supplements when the training sessions are longer than 1 hour and are race pace or faster typer interval training.   

When I was looking to buy, I remember renting 2 or 3 different wetsuits (not at the same time) in early May for a June triathlon.   Can't get into the water much earlier - mid May is pushing it sometimes.   I kept each one for a week and swam for several hours in each to get a feel for them.   Initially, I hated them all and swore I would never buy one.   Can't remember the rental cost, but it wasn't much.   I weight a lot for my height but I am wearing an extra small quite comfortably, so I am sure you will be able to get one to fit.    However, when I first put it on before it gets wet, it is VERY tight, as Steve says it should be.  

Have fun trying them out.  

CATHY -

I've spent some time trying to get my head around modifying a training program to accommodate your schedule, and I can't decide whether it will require a massive overhaul, or will just be a tweak her, a tweak there. I will keep thinking about this -- as long as I don't forget! So, for you, keep tweaking me if I don't come up with an answer soon.

B2B is the Nov. IM, right? Really flat bike and a current-enhanced swim make planning for that one a bit easier. And I don't know whether the run for next yar will be the double loop they've used the first two years, or whether it will adopt the marathon course that is being used for Quintiles in March. Quintiles is run by the same people (www.setupevents.com) who do B2B, and I guess I ought to check the B2B website to see what they're saying about the run. I've only recently looked at Quintiles because my sister-in-law is thinking of doing the marathon.

Is there a mid-summer race that is important to you, that might be considered an "A" race? I ask this because then your schedule would have two "A" races, the second one being B2B. that would be fine -- two "A" races is highly doable, and many people have three ---especially when one is as late as B2B, which is Nov. 14, I think?

Anyhow, I'm asking this stuff because how you set up your training for B2B will depend a lot on what you do during the summer. Just hypothetically, if you had no races planned until B2B you'd be looking at a very long Base period. You'd maybe want to do a mock Build-and-Peak, and then back off until, say, August, and begin the process again for B2B.

Along with long rides and runs, which really make up a raw endurance component, you'll want to do a gradual build to swimming about 75 minutes straight. What have been your times for oly and HIM swims? But wait a moment -- if B2B is once again going to feature a strong current through that channel (and I heard it was not as favorable in '09 as it was in '08...but still a BIG aid!), then you might be able to get by with a long swim of no more than an hour.

Beyond that, I think your focus would be on muscular endurance (the combination of force and endurance) and the aspects of speed skills that hone in on efficiency. For all three disciplines there are ots of workouts that are geared to both speed skills and muscular endurance, so as the season and off-season progresses, we can come up with quite a few things to keep you busy!

Final question -- During the 4 work days of your 9-day cycle, are they pretty much complete washes as far as training is concerned? (Another question -- After the four work days, do you need a day of mostly unstructured "down" time, just to get your emotional equilibrium back?)

....trolling...

DARREN -

That's a good point about having a history of training before trying to train with a herat rate monitor. That was certainly the way I did it, although I had no lofty thoughts going into it -- that was just the way it all transpired.

I'm not sure what your reason for saying that is, but for me it would be to (1) learn what your body is telling you without the "static" of an outside system, and (2) not become a slave to the HRM.

Thinking about #1, by the time I got around to using a HRM it almost served as a refinement of the system I'd been using (mostly successfully) for a few years, which was RPE. The HRM allowed me to fine-tune my training, and I actually had a context into which I could place my heart rate information. In hindsight, starting right off with a HRM is almost like putting the cart before the horse.........although many proponents of heart rate as a training essential would argue vehemently against me.

Any other thoughts on this, from any quarter? Should some history of training be established before a heart rate monitor is introduced into the mix? Pros? Cons?

NEIL -

Yo! Welcome!

If you are still in troll-mode, what do you think about when a HRM should be introduced into one's training? (See the post from BigDH on page 35 (4th from the top), and mine just above.)

Am I missing something at the other group? Guess I'd better shuffle on over there!














Edited by stevebradley 2010-01-08 7:55 PM

I am currently on a hiatus from the HRM, but...I think it is an essential tool for the newer triathlete.  At this point, I have a good feel for what 150bpm feels like, and what 185bpm feels like.  In the beginning, when training for first 26.2 this time last year, I found I was always running in the high 160's...much too high to be in the lower zone.  It taught me to slow down, and I started seeing greater gains in endurance because of it.

Using a HRM also shows you how heat effects you.  If you only train by pace, you can run yourself into the ground when it gets hot.  And I often see people write that HR's are affected by many things (heat, nutrition, etc) like it's a bad thing.  I take the other side of the argument, being the HRM doesn't lie...that is how hard your heart is working, so why not use it?

Over time it feels good to shed it for awhile just to not be a slave to it, but I do think it helped me.  Once I get back into IM training later this summer and on race day I will wear it for the bike/run.

NEIL -

Ah-ha! Here you are! I've been looking for you over at the other site, and all along you were here, creating a very thoughtful post. Many thanks!

GROOVERS -

That was Neil Saxon from CA, newly-minted Ironman at IMAZ in November!

I like the cameo appearances that happen here sometimes --- Mike Ricci, Neil Saxon.....who next?

And have you all mostly gone to bed? I just did a bike session on the trainer while watching "District 9". That's a good movie with which to while away trainer-time!

G'night!

I went and got my feet and running checked out at the Shoe Dog thing at a Roadrunner Store, treadmill, place-mat, and all that jazz. Turns out my run is a lot different than I thought it was. All in all, it was totally worth going since I never knew how to buy running shoes and it was eye-opening to see my run frame-by-frame. Highly-recommended for sure.

Here are the results, everything was the same for both feet:

Arch Type: Medium
Foot Shape: Straight
Pronation Tendency: Under

Treadmill Analysis
Foot Position: Straight
Heel Strike: Lateral
Midfoot: Semi-flex
Toe Off: 1st/2nd
In-soles recommendation: cushioned-stability

I don't think I'll go with the insoles, but I did try on a few shoes at the store and these are the ones that I liked best:
Nike Zoom Equalon+ 4 Women's Wide
New Balance 1225 Women's Shoes (also wide)

The Nikes fit a bit snug, but I'm wondering if that'll stretch out/cushion a bit with breaking them in. The NB were looser (almost too loose), and I think I like that better, but I'm also worried they're going to be too big once I get a few miles in them. I'm mostly worried about the length on the NB because they seemed a little long visually (like, disproportional), while the Nike seems too short. Being in between sizes and shoe styles...story of my life. Generally, I tend to buy looser shoes when I can find them because usually they're hard to find for my wide feet, which is why I'm leaning towards the NB.

Any remarks/suggestions/comments? Do running shoes stretch/cushion down with wear? Or do they pretty much stay the same compared to when I buy them? Also, what is meant by high-mileage as compared to low-mileage? Lastly, can I get high-mileage shoes if I'm a low-mileage runner, or vice-versa?

Thanks,
Kasia


Edited by augeremt 2010-01-09 3:40 AM

KASIA -

Way to do your homework! What a keener!

Both of those models are pictured in my Road Runner catalog, so at least I can look at them and read the descriptions. They are both "a lot of shoe", meaning they have lots of features and carry a price tag to support that; both have good reps and have been around for a while.

Your concern about relative snugness and whether they'll stretch or cushion-out is valid. The short answer is that most serious running shoes (which both those models are) do not lose their inherent shape too quickly - if at all. I wouldn't want to go to the wall with that statement, but that's my experience. There is a lot of criticism about modern running shoes having so many overlays, but a benefit of this is that the more rigid material of the overlays tends to limit the amount of stretching a shoe can experience. So, if you love the 1225, that's a good thing; if you prefer the snugger Equalon, not such a good thing.

Historically, Nike is known for running slightly narrow, NB for running slightly wide. I don't really want to confuse the issue for you, but I third model to look at is Asics Kayano. It is the same catagory (Stability Plus) as the other two, but I mention it because Asics generally is not too narrow and not too tight, but somewhere in the middle.

In the RRS catalog, the recommendation for all three is to size up 1/2 size. I suspect you did that, but it might be worth playing around some with lengths. Too short and you'll end up with black toenails that will fall off (but they grow back; no big deal! ); too long and you might get blisters because your feet slide around a bit too much.

A final idea for tinkering with fit is to consider socks. I either use ultra-thin socks in winter or go without socks, so for me a shoe's fit has to close to perfect; that is, I can't count on socks filling out the volume if I need it. If you have typically done runs in more cushioned socks, and if that;s what you were wearing when you tried on those models, then that might be a vote against the 1225. But for the Equalon, it might be worthwhile to try a thinner sock and see if they fit dramatically less snugly.

Let me know how the decisions go!

KASIA again -

No, I don't think I have ever retired a pair of shoes because they lost their shape. And as for 'cushioning out", I don't think that has happened, either.

For most people, shoes will be retired when they lose their structural integrity -- when the midsole material breaks down some. This will result in some loss of stability and/or cushioning, but it will happen more from the outside in, rather than the inside out. That is, the runner will not sense that their feet are kind of "sinking", but just that the shoe itself is not as "giving".

Interestingly, i just read a review of Newton shoes yesterday, and the guy said that his only complaint was that with the several models he tested, he noticed stretching in the open mesh upper after a few runs. Well, I'm now on my 9th pair of Newtons, and I've never experienced that ---- or maybe I have, and have just adjusted to it through the fact that I use elastic laces. I guess if any shoe is going to stretch it would be Newtons, which have very few overlays and are highly meshy. But as I look at the photos of the Equalon and the 1225 and the Kayano, I wouldn't expect much stretching at all.

Just a few more thoughts.

Ay ay ay. Decisions decisions.

I didn't even think to go on the RSS site to check them out, but even if I did, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have understood much of what was said. I did find them on sale somewhere else online (around $110) so I may possibly be willing to fork over that kind of money to get a good fit and prevent injury.

Thanks for all that info regarding the shoes, Steve. I did try on a pair of Asics, but thought they were a bit too tight (I don't remember the style). My foot is about 7.5D women's, so I went a 1/2 size up on Nike and Asics, but had do go back down to 7.5 for NB. I thought even those were too long and slightly loose, but the sales lady refused to get me a smaller pair saying it'd be irresponsible of her as a runner to even show them to me cuz I'd be back complaining of black toe nails in a week. Guess she was right and I generally don't know what I'm talking about. She did show me a different way of tying them, which all but eliminated heel slippage.

And, really? They don't get cushioned down? That's shocking! In a good kind of way...no more guessing what my shoes will feel like in a month. I'm leaning towards the NB for the looser feel since I tend to use my running shoes for a variety of activities (some of them requiring a pretty hefty ankle brace) so that style would accommodate that. And like you said, I can always tinker with socks. I'll go try on the Asics you mentioned this weekend and see how those feel.

I also have no frame of reference for price, so if $110 is steep, what kind of quality cheap running shoes should I be looking for?

SHAUN -

I awoke this morning thinking about your interest in using a heart rate monitor while swimming --- and how poorly I did in those experimnets myself several years ago. I really want to hear what ARTHUR says about the following, which I'll mention here just to give you something to think about.

The first problem I had was in the pool, where I could not get the strap to stay put enough to make a cobnstant read of my heartbeat. I eventually gave up on any idea I had of monitoring my pool swims by using heart rate, but once the open water season came around I tried it under my wetsuit. That worked great, as the wetsuit was tight enough so that the strap stayed perfectly in place. But then I experienced the bigger problem.

It turns out that for me, I have no functional upper limits for my swim. If I try to push mtself through a zone or two, I either blow up or my stroke falls apart; it is that simple. And even when I would simulate speed sessions, I found that I was still in my Zone 1, based on zones set up by running and cycling. If I pushed myslef WAY, WAY hard and blew up, i might feel I was in about Z9......but I was really just still in Z1, or maybe just nudging into Z2.
So, there were "systems failures", and they were all within me -- either I would blow up, or my stroke would fall apart; in both cases, I would become a useless swimmer. So much for HRM and the swim and me!

What maybe Arthur or another experienced and proficient swimmer can tell us is if HRM can really work for swimming -- especially endurance-based swimming. My quick thought is that it might be useful for a competitive swimmer doing middle distances (200? 400?), but becomes less useful for sprinters (who are in the red zone from start to finish) or endurance swimmers (who generally need to stay at a steady pace). Maybe an exception to the latter would be a great swimmer in a sprint tri, someone who can actually "hammer" a 750m swim!

But for me, I cannot do a Z3 or - god forbid - a Z4 effort when swimming --- I just fall apart (SYSYTEMS FAILURES! SYSTEMS FAILURES!) well, well before I get to that point.

ARTHUR -

Any thoughts on what I just wrote to Shaun? And wish me well as I search around for adiZero models to check out for you. Let the foot fetish evolve!

KASIA -

When I said that good running shoes generally don't cushion out, what I was referring to is the stuff inside the shoe - the sockliner (aka insole) and the inner surface on which it sits. And yes, I think it's a good thing that this part of shoe doesn't break down quickly, if at all.

As for relative price, think of it the reverse way. Think of the least expensive running shoe (from a reputable company) as being good. Then stuff is added to another model, and the price is increased some. Finally, in a third model, more stuff is added and the price is increased further. Well, that's how it works in running shoes.

I'll use Asics as an example, just because I know them fairly well. For stabilty shoes, you start with the 1150 - a good basic shoe but not a lot of bells and whistles - $85. Then there is arguably the most poopular shoe in the entire running world, the 2150 - $100. The next model up - the 3010 - has more stuff added to it, and goes for $120. And finally there is the cadillac of Asics' stability line, the Kayano, at $140. BUT, the 1150 is still a good shoe, and "better" really becomes a matter of what all one wants in a running shoe, and what they are willing to pay for. (It's kind of like building a home from scratch -- add the jacuzzi, it'll cost this; add the in-ground pool, it will cost that; and so on.)

The bottom line is that at a place like Road Runner they won't sell a bad running shoe. All their shoes are good......it's just that some might be a bit better than others. (Like Orwell's "Animal Farm", where all pigs are equal, but some pigs are more equal than others!)

Are we having fun yet?








Edited by stevebradley 2010-01-09 7:26 AM

KASIA!

I just got a pair of shoes that I consider to be excellent value, and might just fit you. They are called Saucony Jazz XII, and you should be able to find them for $75 or less.

Arthur

STEVE, SHAUN!

I'm afraid I'm not much help on the swimming with a HRM subject, as I've never tried it. Chlorine and salt are said to play havoc with the transmission, so I've just been using RPE.

What Steve says makes perfect sense, but I suspect the zones are quite different for swimming. First of all the max rate is lower (at least 10 beats lower than running), because of the water's cooling effect and non-weight-bearing environment, the hearts higher efficiency when in a horizontal position, and using relatively smaller muscle groups than in running. Second, it takes years of dedicated training to maintain your stroke while increasing intensity (and breathing technique needs to be perfect to supply enough oxygen), and just a few weeks of sloppy training put you back months. I guess what I'm trying to say is, swimming is hard! On the upside, as I've said before, it's quite difficult to injure yourself compared to the other two tri sports.

Arthur

Steve,

G35 sedan or coupe (4 or 2 door)? Nice car either way!

If its the sedan, the rear seats should fold down. Take off the front wheel, slide the bike through then find somewhere for the front wheel (I put mine in the rear floorwell, between the seats). Downside is lack of room for other objects now.

STEVE,

I read with interest the above on swimming with a HRM, for a couple of reasons.   Before I get into it, I wanted to say that I didn't use a HRM at all during the first 2-3 years and just would go out and train as hard as I could all the time.   Never any easy stuff; just thought you always had to go hard and fast (except for swimming).   Was often dizzy, and light headed afterwards.   Don't know how I stumbled onto the HRM but when I did found that I was training way above my aerobic threshold and the HRM really helped to slow me down and keep me in line, especially on the bike.     Now I mix it up with RPE and HRM and I also think the HRM helped me to understand and get a feel for RPE.    Sometimes when I am biking or running I will think - I feel like I am at about RPE7 and then check my HRM and see I am bang on.  

Anway, the one place I NEVER pushed myself until recently is in swimming.   My big concern was finishing the distance and coming out of the water feeling great; the longest 'speed' work I would try would be for 50 meters.   I kept seeing how high alot of people's HR's were in the BT logs for their swims, so thought I would check mine.   Realizing there is NO comparison to running and cycling HR's, I was still flabbergasted to see my HR was way under 100.   No wonder I felt great when I got out of the water.   I had been told I needed to swim harder and faster by various 'coaches', so started to do some harder intervals and it was interesting seeing just HOW hard I had to push it to get the HR up to 132; no way would I be able to sustain that for a longer distance and come out feeling great for the bike.    Plus my husband said my stroke looked like crap. 

I do have alot of friends who do hammer it out for the 750 meters but that is about all they can do.   Even though they are faster than me, by that distance I am getting stronger, and faster and as we continue, can out pace them.   SO, I don't use the HRM for swimming now but it was an interesting exercise.   I think I need to find the happy medium between the two. 

I'm still 'scared' to swim hard and fast for longer distances.   My next big short term goal for swimming is to swim hard and fast for 200 meters w/o the stroke falling apart.   As I mentioned, even as recent as last year I would only swim 50's that way, and have recently mastered 100's (yesterday -   ).     Do you think it is just muscular endurance?   

Anne