Getting back to it ...
Call it a creative writing project, and don't continue if you don't
like long posts.
I'm getting back to my running (again). I'm taking a different tack*
this time. The thing is, since basically 4 years ago -- when I tore
my right rotator cuff (or, rather, when the torn rotator cuff inflamed
severely) -- I've gone through several 'restarts' to my running. Up
through that point, my running was going well, in that I was doing a
nice variety of sorts of running, training regularly, racing at whatever
distance/type interested me, and progressing through a nice batch of
PRs. That included my first long race, the HAT 50k trail run, as well
as most other distances from 50 meters up.
Since then, I've made several rounds of trying to get 'back' to
that level and sort of running. This has included, for instance,
several 10 mile races, a marathon, and a 24 hour relay. Most of
the longer ones, I ran on guts rather than training. That really
isn't a good way to do it. (Duh!)
Then about a year ago, I tore the other rotator cuff, which, unlike
the first, nixed all running for several months. During that spell
I kept up some aerobic level by walking for speed, including a 10k
race that I've done annually since 1999 (significant, since I didn't
start running until after its date in 1996). Then a fair amount of
up and down in running/not-running, and, especially, ramping up too
fast towards levels that I 'should' be able to do, and certainly used
to in the not-too(?)-distant past.
With the new year, and with noticing that this May marks my first
decade of running, I've decided to go to the new tack. What it is
is largely a return to what I did in getting started 10 years ago:
Keep the running distances short
Don't be bashful about walking, especially downhill (back then I was
extremely concerned about shin splints, which I'd had in droves in
HS track).
Concentrate on form
Permit the speed to be relatively high (my sustained runs are now
probably mostly at tempo effort)
Do a weekly hard effort at the track, progressing steadily from 200m.
There are a couple of additional things this time around:
Lose some weight (my mileage dropped faster than my eating a few years
back)
Do my shoulder exercises -- get to doing the full set with 15 lbs
(as opposed to what I had done -- stop when the shoulders didn't
bother me on a regular basis any more, which was around 6 lbs)
The last two of the running items are atypical, and I couldn't
recommend them in general. What makes the speed work is that the
relatively high speed is offset by the fact that I will (!) keep the
runs limited to 20-30 minutes while I'm still running at tempo-like
effort. Either I'll retrieve how to run at a lower effort level, or
I'll keep the distance reigned in.
The weekly hard efforts are probably the most unusual. The purpose
is 1) to give me some positive feedback on a regular basis 2) give an
added incentive to getting out regularly. As an added element to
both the reinforcement and the getting out, I have a set of times
to beat for everything from 200m to 5k -- based on a 2006 fathom race
on New Year's day. Since that is longer than almost everything on my
list, they're 'soft' targets. But, then again, since I've also, as I
did 10 years ago, put some effort into ignoring prior bests, there's
no real basis for targeting anything else. As long as I get out for
some regular running, each week should be a 'win'.
There's a different aspect, which works for me, to the weekly efforts.
That is, I'm going to run each distance (12 from 200m to 5k, inclusive)
as experiments. At the end of the 12, I'm going to go back and start
an 8 week program in a more standard way towards whichever of them was
the worst. But in any case, as when I started, I won't be running hard
over 5k until after the times for distances 5k and down have started
to plateau That worst will probably be the 880.
PRs So far:
2006 Fathoms: 19:48
200 m 38.5
440 y 92.3
880 y 3:36 (closest to not beating the target, 3:39)
1000 m 4:30
1320 y 5:24
1 mile 7:34
100m 16.7 (pretty night and I felt like going quick, not part of
the sequence. But nice, reassuring as this equates to
about 35.0 for the 200m, so an easy 10% is at hand.)
Between the 1320 y and the mile was about 10 days off as I
fought an infection from landing hands-first while running on
a sidewalk. (Then was some time off due to a sore shoulder
from snow shovelling, ...) (note that the pace was flat from
880y to 1320 y -- running more often around then)
Tomorrow night is 2200 y. The track is a quarter mile, so wrecks
some havoc on intercomparisons and the occasional distance that's
more meaningful in meters than yards/miles. (The 1000 m, I did at a
different track.)
Remainder of progression:
1.25 miles
1.5 miles
3000 m
2 miles (since I raced the 2 mile it a lot in HS, I'm doing both 3000 m
and 2 miles)
4000 m (actually 4400 y)
5000 m (actually 12.5*440 y)
It hasn't been as successful at getting me out other nights as I'd
hoped. Still, the 1-2 additional days, for 2-3 days/week, is a big
improvement from the end of last year (August onward) with 0-1.
Or February-May, with 0 (rotator cuff).
* net.peeve: The word is tack, a direction, not tact, graciousness of
expression.
--
Robert Grumbine http://www.radix.net/~bobg/ 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