Tuesday, August 17, 2010

Monday, August 16, 2010

Saturday morning, I had a throbbing headache. I took an aspirin and thought I would wait awhile before I ran. Well, I never made it out the door. Instead, I ate and watched TV all day. I thought I would try to run off some of that junk food on Sunday. Another plan that bit the dust. I did not get up in time to run before church, and after church, I didn't want to run. Another day eating and watching TV.

On Monday, the temperature was 89 degrees when I headed out for a 5 mile run. The humidity was not as bad as it has been lately and there was a nice breeze. It felt (to me) 10 degrees cooler than the 89. My legs seemed quite tired not to have ran since Thursday. I did Mile 1 in 9:02, and Mile 2 in 8:52. My legs began to loosen up during Mile 3, so I was disappointed to find out that I ran it in 9:49. I managed 9:17 for Mile 4.

Then I decided to try to kill myself. I had skipped the weekend's long run; I was just "going through the motions" of running today - I mean, I felt like I wasn't accomplishing anything. I was sweating, had aches and pains, and it did hurt a little, but I needed to do more. I thought, "If I was at practice of some sport with other teammates, I would be running harder than this. I need to run like that." So, I ran Mile 5 to the best of my ability. My mouth was now completely dry and my breathing was more like wheezing. Mile 5 in 8:16!

8:16 tells me one thing: I'm not pushing hard enough during miles 1-4. I don't want to start too fast and not be able to complete a run. And, it does feel good when you have a little extra to sprint at the end of a run - makes you feel like you dug deep and gutted it out, although you've been saving up energy just for this reason. However, the difference between my slowest mile (9:49) and 8:16 is a little ridiculous. The average of the fastest and slowest is 9:02. My pace for the entire 5 mile run was 9:03. Comparing the averages, I did okay. The thing lacking is consistency in the time of each mile. Also, if I hadn't pushed the last mile, my overall pace would have been closer to 9:30.

My heart rates: avg. 166, max. 189, rest 74. Recover: 186 to 128. I thought my max would have been higher. The 58 points between recovery tied for my second highest difference, but, of course, this was due to the push at the end.

3 comments:

  1. you are nuts. if you did curls 4 days a week you would not get stronger, your muscles need rest to heal, with our training schedules, we really don't give them much time to rest and heal and grow completely, especially you, you are like a big gorilla curling 300 pounds every other day for 30 minutes at a time. i wish i could run like you, i think you will be our family hope in the 5k!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm not sure what you mean... I did rest - no long run this weekend and 3 consecutive days off. Plus, only ran 3 days week before that, too. I think I'm gettting too much rest. I read about a woman that said she ran 120 miles/wk - that's just over 17 miles/day, 7 days a week. She said she would run 150 per week (about 21.5 per day 7 days/wk), if her trainer would let her. I know she's a pro, but I have a hard time running 5 miles 4 days a week. You're the one with greater distances and better paces at those distances! Consider the 5k a short sprint in a long run and you will own it!

    ReplyDelete
  3. yes, but that woman could be compared to a pro body builder and you are not (but i think are getting close). besides, she isn't as old as us and she doesn't have to work 8 to 10 hours a day (at least that is what i told myself when i read the article :))

    ReplyDelete