Running Shorts

So I think I've been coming to the realization that I'm stuck in a bit of a rut, both mentally and physically. It all started a little when I pulled out of the Pig, but I was able to write that off to one of those external factors that you can't control. But now it's really come to a head since a disappointing 6th place finish (15:03) in the Lou Cox 5k this past weekend. I finished one place out of the money, ran horribly uneven splits, a couple seconds slower than the week before, and lost to some guys I know I need to able to run with. Now, I can always make the explanation that I've been doing marathon-specific training, so it's only natural that my 5k conditioning would slip. But even so...I know some of the guys who beat me run marathons (faster than I've run), so that's no excuse for me not to be up there as well. Looking back, this first year on the road racing circuit after graduating from college  has been less than satisfactory. In the two

Disclaimer: I'm not trying to be sexist here -- just trying to flesh out the psychology of the American sports fan. Ok, gotta get that out of the way. So my theory for another reason why track and field and road racing isn't popular with American sports fans and media is that the men and women compete together. I mean, not that they compete in the exact same races (except they generally do in road races), but rather that they compete in the same meet. And that means they get equal TV and spectator airtime. The best analogy I can think of is the NBA and WNBA. The NBA is a very popular league, one of the Big Three (or Four) in American sports. The WNBA? Exact same sport, zero popularity. And it's no question why. The hard truth: it's women playing, and that's not popular. Heck yeah it's more sexist than Rush Limbaugh and Don Imus at a gentleman's club. The difference is that a fan can watch (and the media can cover) the NBA but completely ignore the WNB

Bill Bowerman, the man who deserves much credit for America's elite track success in the 1960s and '70s, is also responsible for its subsequent decline in the 1980s and later. Yes, I am putting some blame on the single most legendary American track coach. Here me out: If you're reading this blog, I'm assuming you're coming in with some basic knowledge about the legacy of Bowerman and his storied U. of Oregon Ducks teams. (And if you want more info, Bowerman and the Men of Oregon is a great read) But there's more to his story than track and field. In the 1960s, he visited New Zealand coach Arthur Lydiard (proponent of high-mileage training and coach to several world record holders), where they showed him this new craze called jogging . Basically, Lydiard took the principles of training for elite athletes and applied it to everyday people, establishing jogging clubs as a means to general physical fitness for anyone. After stumbling through several run with th

...Titled "On Track." I couldn't come up with anything clever. It's going to be groundbreaking! Visionary! Controversial! Ok well probably none of those things. But it is going to be opinionated. Have you ever wondered why track and field and distance racing isn't popular in the mass media? It's popular in that a lot of people participate at various levels, but when it comes to coverage of the sport of running, there is virtually none. When I was in J-School for three days, I learned that track and field is a niche sport. The purpose of this series is to investigate why...why isn't track and field (and elite running in general) more widely covered? Track used to be one of the Big Four sports (baseball, basketball, football, and sometimes hockey). It wasn't all that long ago, even...40, 50 years ago. And the athletes have only gotten better since then. So what's changed? Why isn't track one of the Big Four anymore? And here's the c

If you look at the results for the Pig, I'm not there. Why? Well, let's just say that it didn't quite go as planned. Actually, it was going real well until about miles 10 or 11, heading into Hyde Park. My first mile was 5:30, right on pace. I was 27:30 at 5 miles. Perfect. I backed off going up the hills from downtown to Madison, but by the half I was back on 5:36 pace (1:13:17). Even better, the hills didn't take too much out of me...I was in cruise control, slowly bringing the pace back down to where I wanted it to be. My legs weren't feeling taxed, I was plenty hydrated and fueled, and I was primed to start negative splitting to the finish. Much better than Chicago. And to boot, I had second place wrapped up, with about a 10 minute lead over third. (First place wasn't gonna happen). Then there was a little hamstring malfunction. Left hamstring, to be specific. It wasn't a cramp, and it wasn't a tear either. It was just a little tweak. Nothing to

Big day tomorrow. 26.2 miles. Should be fun. Or, as fun as 26.2 miles can actually be (read: not fun at all). I can't believe it's finally race weekend. I've been loving the taper for the past few weeks, and tomorrow is hopefully when all the training and tapering come together. I know I've put this on here before, but just as a reminder (more for myself than anything) here's the goal: 2:25. That's 5:30 pace. Really, I'll be happy with anything sub-2:30, as long as I'm not crashing the last 8 like at Chicago. Here's a good incentive though: the qualifying time for the Boston Elite corral is 2:27, which I think comes out to about 5:37 pace.  So anyway, those are three general times that I'm shooting for. Anything faster would be gravy. I also don't know if I've ever put this up on here: the race plan. I'm not so much worried about place this time around; I know that if I run what I'm capable of running, place will take care