In article said:In article said:In article <[email hidden]>, SwStudio
Quoted message said:Greetings, rec.runners! Please tell us about your training week and goals.
Recover base, run around, have fun. Sunday: off Mon : off Tuesday: 45 minutes, including some 6
400's. the tests proved that a) I do have _some_ speed left and
b) it isn't much even by my standards. Wed : off Thu : 60 minutes (my longest run in
several weeks) Fri : off Sat : 35 minutes (legs and lungs decided that either I
wasn't recovered from Thursday, or that there was too much humidity in the air, or
that there was too much pollen in the air. plan was 50 minutes)
140 minutes total.
What are your reasons for logging time instead of distance ? It strikes me as a good idea, what's
your take on this ?
Partly just that it had been mentioned here as an idea, so I tried it. It seems to be working out
well for me.
My take is that there are a few different good reasons to do the log by time rather than distance.
Mentally:
* Helps keep me from being enslaved by the log book
* Makes it easier to get out and try new routes, which is a good thing also for keeping the
running 'fresh'.
Training:
* Most training, in terms of your body, is really in terms of time anyhow. While we may cover very
different distances in 60 minutes, a 60 minute run is a 60 minute run for us both.
* By looking at time, rather than distance, I get more variety in my runs. It seems too common that
I wind up varying distance, but keeping the duration the same. This is a problem for me when I
race a duration longer than I trained. -- It's also bad for when I try to get a proper long run
done. If all runs are 50 minutes, even if they're at different paces, going to a 75 minute long
run is difficult.
But I confess that I do also record distances (whether measured or inferred) in the log book. For
the reports here, though, I think it's time that's most generally useful.
--
Robert Grumbine radix.net~bobgOpen ↗ Science faqs and amateur activities notes and links.
Sagredo (Galileo Galilei) "You present these recondite matters with too much evidence and ease; this
great facility makes them less appreciated than they would be had they been presented in a more
abstruse manner." Two New Sciences