Saturday, February 9, 2008

Day off

Friday was a day-off from going to work. But there was "work" still to do. No, I'm not talking about getting in a 1.5 hr work-out, or hitting the weights. That would have been perfect since a little Friday afternoon hit of endorphins always makes the end of another a week nice and mellow, a little more reflective.
I am massively grateful for every moment I have here, alive. That's what I'm talking about! But with a fairly quick assessment, I understand I can improve. In other words, there are issues that keep me from being as alive as I can be, beaming with a certain "it" energy. This death of sorts may be any distraction we have in our lives that hinders our being. Alive. So despite the sunshine, another fine Southern California afternoon (three free Gu's to anyone who can identify specifically where this picture was taken - before reading any further!), there's a layer of smog. Before I complete the big metaphor, the image here might represent what I'm talking about. It's a beautiful sunny day, but there are some elements that hinder beauty from reaching full term. There's smog. And there's a cage that sucks aesthetically. Back to the metaphor, one needs, somehow, in one's own life, to get rid of one's own pollution. Either way, it's a me problem (a you problem) where my personality needs a shower, or I'm being a victim. You and I can always be stronger (more flexible, fast, resilient, peaceful, etc.)

I've got some nice slick ones, flaws I should have marked as "BioHazardous." If I haven't paid a professional to "help," then I'm not going on and on about them here (so no worries). Athletically, one flaw I have is my scant recognition that "science" might enhance my training. I certainly look at data, but how much and how closely represent the blur I envision when I start to talk about science. Is that my cage?

Maybe it's what separated Armstrong from Ulrich, both supremely talented (maybe Ulrich more). Or Roger Clemens from a pitcher who never used performance enhancing drugs (allegedly, but unbelievable - i want him to go down if his numbers come up crap). I'm not implying Armstrong used drugs. The comparison to Ulrich simply refers to Armstrong's documented campaign to rewrite those records during which he was meticulously meticulous, and Ulrich's less scientific methods.

I am not coached, but have read casually and have always been athletic. Perhaps it's just my perspective (it's my life), but there's a lot of accessible health and fitness information being consumed on a daily basis by the culture at large. Watch Oprah (or look at her TV numbers), or cooking shows, or even reality shows (The Biggest Loser, etc.), and that's just a little sample of TV. Magazines, the web, the best sellers, it's the wave. If you're going to analyze us at all based on what kinds of things we consume for entertainment/information/education - you have the trend. The fat white male is out: Bring on Hillary and Barak. Look at the numbers, man!

On top of that, I have read multi-sport stuff (how about that sport being largely responsible for the boom in accessibility of training research/science), and other related things (Blogs!!), which have given me even more information than the typical typical white guy. But still, I'm not coached, don't have a power meter and simply don't prescribe to that approach in general. Which brings me to a quick note on my workouts since Mission Gorge. Last Sunday was big in terms of giving me a little test and marking the end of that crazy, kinda lame, build-up training-wise. The test was successful. Given the "conditions" I like my finish time and I recorded numbers; a pro gave me some quick feedback on what to do with those. Now I can get back to just working on some very real aerobic training. To summarize a lot of what I've been reading in this tight Blog community I've found, it's very important to get fit at lower HR before one gets fit at higher HR. I've never really looked at it like that. That's better than, "you need a good base." Seems smart despite the science! There's my science. Do I get an honorary degree or something? I want to be smart, so I'd better get smart. In the end, this particular focus on HR is such a nod to efficiency.

So, since Sunday I've weathered having trashed legs and gone for a few runs on flat courses (grass and urban trail), keeping my HR between "those numbers." My avg. for the two runs were 148 and 146 respectively. I'm excited to see how this "period" (4-5 weeks) goes numbers-wise.

Those of you who got lost, remember I said that I did not work-out yesterday, but still had "work" to do. . .

I took my 4 year-old to Disneyland and walked (with a fast 4 year old, or pushing a stroller) for about 6 hours. It was great! And the rides were cool too. That's my kind of "work."

1 comment:

  1. Matt-
    I averaged a HR of 161 for my marathon. I had wanted 165-170 but at that HR I was at 5:20 pace and my legs just fell apart.. not sure what happened. I think I could have run 2:20-2:24 if I had a good day.
    I don't know anything about the Kenyans in regards to % of max HR, but the science dictates that 4%-7% of lactate threshold is close to the limits of a well trained athlete. I would imagine that the Kenyans are running at ~165-170 HR's.. with their LT's being 180.. the big difference is that they are running 4:30 pace at their LT's!