Every Man Endurance: 2013

This space is dedicated to the world of endurance sports. Although the focus is on Triathlon, the content has broad applicability, touching on subjects that are highly relevant to all endurance athletes from distance runners to rowers; pretty much all of the suffer sports. In addition to writing about this stuff, I compete too. If you are interested in learning more about me, browsing my writing that has been published on Xtri, or reading about some of my own athletic endeavors, just click on any of the tabs above.

Saturday, December 28, 2013

Thursday, November 28, 2013

Iron Math: Calories and Why The Back Half of an IM Marathon Is So Damn Hard

I was recently trying to explain to someone that has little-to-no familiarity with endurance sports why the back half of an Ironman marathon is so hard. In an attempt to put things in a more common and quantifiable language, I decided to frame my explanation in calories. I'd never thought through this on my own, and while the results certainly are not surprising, they illustrate why things tend to get so hard into the afternoon of an Ironman. Here is a summary of the conversation and the math. Please note I'm not a scientist and a lot of this is based on assumptions, which in turn are based on various articles I've read; so while my analysis is far from precise, I am confident it is directionally correct.

Race Morning: Let's say I nail my carb-load and pre-race nutrition pretty well and start the race in a fully loaded state. I am going to call this having 2200 calories on board. I've seen a whole bunch of research that seems to center on a 'maxed out' carb load state between 2000-2800 calories, and given that I don't live in a lab, I think the lower end of the range most likely reflects my reality.

Swim: For the hour and change (and a bit of change in my case) it takes to swim 2.4 miles, I am going to assume I burn 700 calories. Thus, I'll finish the swim with 1500 calories on board which probably explains why I feel so good getting on the bike!

Bike: Based on an accurate power meter reading, I'm fairly certain I burn 700 calories an hour while riding. I am consuming 450 calories an hour of straight carbohydrate. I am going to be generous and assume I'm actually absorbing 400 of those calories (research here says the upper limit of absorption per hour is 100 grams of CHO, or 400 calories, so this is a very aggressive estimate, but it's also a nice round number). So, 700-400 = 300 calories net burn in every hour. My IM bike took a bit under 5 hours, which means I had a net loss of 1500 calories (300x5) on the bike, so I'll finish the bike even. Not ideal for starting a marathon (just think about starting an open marathon after eating a low-carb diet for 3 days), but not terrible either, which explains why most (myself included) feel pretty good in those first few miles of the run.

Run: Now this won't be as accurate as the power meter data from the bike, but running at between 7:50-8:30 pace (my range this last IM) and in fairly hot conditions, I'll estimate a burn of about 800 calories per hour. Between sips of sports-drink at aid stations and energy gels, I probably consume around 250-300 calories an hour on the run...so I'll call it 275, and this is all carbohydrate. Let's say I absorb 250 of these calories (again, super generous, but keeping numbers round). With this burn and replacement, I'm running a net deficit of 550 calories an hour. Here is how that shakes out over the course of the run:

1 hour (7.5 miles) 550 calorie hole
2 hours (15 miles) 1100 calorie hole
3 hours (21.5 miles in, I've slowed down a bit) 1650 calorie hole
3-3.5 hours (to race finish) the hole grows to 2200 calories as it is becoming harder to take down anything, and the time it takes to absorb carbohydrate becomes greater than the remaining time left in the race.

Like I said in opening, this should not be surprising; the back half of an IM marathon is hard! But I do find this back-of-the-envelope analysis a nice and straight forward way to understand why most start to feel a big drop-off in overall energy around mile 13-15.

A few notes: This model assumes a lot, including that 100% of energy during the race is coming from carbohydrate stores. I'm sure (because I've seen Alan Couzens' charts) that some of the burn is coming from fat, but probably a pretty minimal amount at the watts I'm riding (200-215) and pace I'm running (7:50-8:30). Also, every individual is different in their metabolism and the strain that respective pacing places on their energy systems; so while this cannot be applied with any precision, from a thematic standpoint, this story holds true for any athlete that is "racing hard," whatever his or her hard might mean in watts, pace, etc.

What this means to me: I think Mirinda Carfrae said it best on the recent NBC Ironman special. When asked what is going through her mind during the run, she simply said "Eat. Drink. Run." The IM marathon is a beast with fangs, and all energy should be used on running, and if not running, making sure you eat and drink. Carfrae nailed it, and she is a total killer, and I have a mini-crush on her because of it (sorry Caitlin).

Final interesting thing: This type of approach to thinking about the IM marathon explains why when top-end professional's blow up, they often end up walking or DNFing, whereas for many age-groupers, at "blow-up point" the run turns into a jog which turns into a shuffle. For the former, with body fat % that is extremely low, there isn't a lot of fat on board so literally the tank becomes empty and the car stops. For age-groupers, even the pretty lean (e.g,. 7% body fat and up) there is enough usable body fat on board to fuel the end of the run, just at a significantly reduced pace.

Monday, September 23, 2013

The Slowest Generation and Cultural Impact on Competition

A recent editorial in the Wall Street Journal entitled The Slowest Generation examined a trend of slower finishing times in endurance events, going on to suggest that this is a bad thing rooted in a cultural shift in the way that younger generations approach competition. The author says "races are turning into parades," and that "performance related apathy" among younger generations is the culprit. He even suggests this could be underlying why the US hasn't won an Olympic Marathon medal since 2004.

I think it is hard to make snapshot judgments about a racer (and thus a race in totality) by looking at time alone, and it's certainly not slow finishing times that worry me about an apathetic generation when it comes to sport. If a finishing time is slow but it is the result of an individual giving it his or her all, than that is the most honorable thing that an athlete can do. What does worry me is when people would rather be apathetic (even going as far as to shun the whole notion of competition during a race) because it is easier to do that than to give an earnest effort and risk/expose oneself to failure. If you make a joke out of something, you can't fail. I do agree with the author of the WSJ piece that there is an increase in this attitude toward races, it is more prevalent in younger generations, and it is a sad and worrisome cultural reflection...especially because I'm afraid it expands well beyond sport. I'm not sure how vast the issue is, and I certainly don't know what to do about it...but I agree it is real.

As for the relationship between "performance related apathy" and US Olympic Marathon medals, I think the author is way off the mark. I've been fortunate enough to spend time with elite endurance athletes in Olympic Development Programs, and 'apathy' or a lackluster attitude toward competition are polar opposites to what goes on in those environments. A bunch of new-age hipsters drinking beer and purposefully going slow in a color run has *absolutely nothing* to do with what is going on in Colorado Springs, Eugene Oregon, Ann Arbor Michigan, etc., etc.

Monday, September 9, 2013

EPO vs. a Cortisone Injection and the Future of Sport

Between Lance Armstrong’s fall from grace, doping accusations against baseball’s Alex Rodriguez, and a flurry of recent reports suggesting testosterone use in the NFL, it’s clear that cheating is a significant issue in modern sport, and unfortunately, likely more pervasive than most think. This isn't just in the professional ranks either; more and more amateur athletes are getting popped for doping in marathons, triathlons, and cycling events.

I finally got around to reading Malcolm Gladwell's latest in the New Yorker; a predictably well-written essay raising questions about a 'level playing field' in sport and what it means to cheat. While I highly recommend reading the full article, the basic premise is to question why sport allows some advantages, both pre-determined and technologically driven (i.e., individuals with obscure genetics, cortisone shorts, Tommy-Jon surgery, Lasic, etc.), while disallowing others (i.e., EPO, blood transfusions, testosterone therapy). The article prompted me to think about how/why these lines are drawn, and what it means for the future of sports.

For instance, what would happen if EPO (i.e., blood doping) or some new equivalent of it became as 'safe' as a cortisone shot? The situation gets real murky. Both are mechanisms allowing an athlete to train and compete harder than their own physiology would let them...so why allow one but not the other? Who is to say that inflammation induced by going too hard is much different than a reduction in hematocrit levels induced by going too hard? Both are the body’s natural processes of telling an athlete to back-off. The former uses pain as a signal (cleared by a cortisone shot) and the latter causing massive fatigue (fought with EPO).

The downstream enforcement of cheating should be simple: if an athlete breaks a rule, regardless of his/her rationale, genetic baseline, etc., it is cheating, and the athlete must face that respective sport's penalty for breaking the rule. Things get more complicated further upstream, where decisions about what is and is not allowed are made, a process that will only get more complex as science and technology improve and athletes experiment with new ways of enhancing their bodies and minds. It used to be that pretty reliable guidelines could be used: if taking a certain substance had a great chance of harming an athlete, that substance would be banned. But with continual progress in the lab, it is extremely likely there will be an increasing number of substances and medical interventions that improve performance with minimal to no adverse health effects.

Things get even more convoluted when athletes present with a legitimate clinical diagnosis, but one that may have been contributed to or caused by excessive training. My favorite example is the 43-year-old amateur triathlete who trains 20 hours a week on top of a highly demanding job and three young kids. He starts to feel fatigued all the time (who wouldn't), and goes to the doctor where a blood work-up shows his testosterone values are clinically low. Should he be able to start on testosterone therapy -- the recommended medical action -- even though if he reduced training by 50% his lab values would probably return to normal? Should the governing bodies of triathlon count on physicians to screen for "endurance training" when deciding how to treat these disorders? Is it up to the sport to do this? The questions are endless.

This isn't just an issue for amateurs. Many elite endurance athletes are treated for hypothyroidism, a trend especially documented in elite runners. It seems an unlikely coincidence that the prevalence of hypothyroidism just happens to be so much higher in those that run for a living versus the general population. A recent article in the Wall Street Journal profiles a physician whose patient panel is dominated by professional runners, suggesting that perhaps it's something about the relentless training and physical stress inherent to their programs that causes hypothyroidism. So should treating this medical condition be considered cheating? And if it is, then what to do with someone who has underlying hypothyroidism unrelated to training? How to delineate between the two? Again, there are more questions than answers.

I could go on and on with examples, and they will only grow with continued progress in sports science, medicine and technology. In order to prevent an ‘anything goes’ circus in sports, it is extremely important that the governing bodies critically examine the process for deciding what constitutes cheating. It is a complex discussion and one that should be frequently revisited. No doubt, endless questions will be raised; the answers to which will define the future of athletic competition.

Sunday, August 25, 2013

Running for Total Health, Running to Be Whole

This morning I read mentor modern day philosopher Frank Forencich's latest Keep Your Eye on the Whole which focused on the importance of integration and cohesion for total health and living. It immediately triggered thoughts of running (and why I can't live without it), and prompted me to revisit some journaling I had done in the past. Running's most healthy attribute may not be lowering body weight, blood pressure, etc., but the fact it is a mechanism to achieve mind-body integration in a world where opportunities to do so are becoming increasingly rare.

When a runner sets out to train for a race, his or her body is the major tool at their disposal. This forces the mind to be keenly aware of how best to use it, resulting is a Zen-like harmony/integration between the cognitive mind and physical body that is constantly evolving with each and every training experience. As a practical example, in order for an athlete to avoid injury, let alone improve, the mind must be fully attentive to all the cues it receives from the body. In real time these signals determine how to approach the next stride. After a thoughtful post-workout reflection, they influence what the next training session might look like: should the runner push to build on gains, or pull-back, giving the muscles more time to recover? It follows that over a broader horizon, the build up of [physical] bodily cues and an athlete's [mental] reaction to them shape his or her training program, and ultimately, the outcome that training program produces. The more we run [in a mindful way] the more the mind and body become one.

Since the cognitive recognition [of] and reaction to these bodily cues is so central to successful training, it is ideal to approach each workout with full engagement and caring. Not only does this foster a mind-body integration within the athlete, it also yields the potential for a second level of integration; between athlete and sport. This embodies what I refer to as Quality; something that only occurs when an actor and his or her act are so seamlessly interwoven that they are hard to separate - they nearly become one [1].

There is hardly a form of engagement more intimate than that which occurs on a deliberate and mindful training run. Runners are inherently involved in every step of their act, acutely aware of muscle contractions, breathing, and the lactic acid that boils under their skin. As runners develop a closer relationship with running over time, they improve their [mental] understanding of how the body works when running, and as a result, with mindful attentiveness, they can often make it [the body] work better. Over the course of a consistent and routine practice, mind, body, and running -- three "separate" entities -- become one, given rising to a special experiential relationship.

Perhaps this is why one of the most common answers to the question, "why do you run," is "running makes me feel alive."

[1] This concept of "Quality" was first introduced to me by Robert Pirsig in his novel Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.

Tuesday, July 30, 2013

Proposal for Race Directors: Seed Your Swim Starts!

Proposal for race directors: seed your swim start waves instead of grouping them by age. It is safer, makes for a more fair/honest race, and would yield no additional costs. The current system of sending athletes off based on age-groups makes absolutely no sense, and even less so when the categories with [statically speaking] the fastest athletes go off last (e.g., starting the male 30-34 and 25-29 age-groups after sending off 60-64 women). This always creates a situation of high traffic, collisions, and athletes who are already likely to be the most uncomfortable in the water (e.g., the slowest swimmers) being in a position to get swum over.

Safer: Grouping waves best on expected swim times and starting the fastest waves first would lead to less traffic throughout the swim, and where there would still be inevitable traffic (e.g., toward the start) it would at least be more appropriate traffic given swimmers of a similar speed would be together. The less people being knocked into and swum over, the more everyone enjoys the race; from the beginner who might have a panic attack when all of a sudden someone is on top of them, to the athlete going for the win that is frustrated by needing to constantly fight through people.

More Fair: Fighting through crowded waters slows you down. If an athlete has the 'bad luck' of being in a later wave, a fast swimmer's time is going to almost always be slower than if they started earlier. There is no positive drafting effect since packs generally form early and within a wave.

No Additional Costs: At first I thought that perhaps some races start statistically slower age groups first in an effort to have the race finish earlier, and thus reduce permit, EMS, etc., costs. But then I looked into this a bit more, and it seems like there is almost always an athlete in every age-group that pushes the overall race time-limit. So, even if you are more likely to have 6 athletes in a 75-79 age group on the course for 8 hours, if you have just one 'bucket-list' athlete in the 25-29 age group go 8 hours, then the course stays open the same amount of time. Given these are not real-time decisions, I presume contracts/permits are signed ahead of time anyways, so starting slower waves first can't have anything to do with an attempt to reduce costs (which is why I am always befuddled when fast age-groups start last).

How it Would Work: During race-registration, simply ask athletes for a projected swim time (with some preamble about how one might do this). Take the distribution, and create waves based on this. Is self-reported data ever going to be truly accurate? Of course not! BUT, it will be a lot better than what we have today, and certainly addresses the biggest issue of safety since it will undoubtedly separate swimmers where there are big ability [and thus likely comfort] gaps. I would take this a step further and guess that swimmers more apt to 'deflate' their times are competitive (maybe they want a draft effect) so from a safety standpoint, I would be less concerned about having someone that swims 32 minutes start with the 28 guys if it prevents a 40 minute swimmer from being toppled 10 times. I am not arguing this system would be perfect, but it would be directionally correct and far better than what is currently in place.

Added Benefit: If anything, this would lead to a *faster overall race* since presumably, swim-start waves could be separated by less time since the faster swimmers would be going off first, creating a natural separation throughout the field.

I could certainly be missing something, but to me, this seems like a no-brainer.

Friday, July 26, 2013

Take Home Lessons From The First Half of 2013

During the process of aggregating my race reports from the first half of 2013, I did my best to highlight what I felt were some of the most important themes, things to keep in mind, etc. While every individual is so unique, I think many of these ideas could be applicable to a pretty broad range of athletes. Take em or leave em!

Always focus on bettering/beating yourself, and let the chips fall where they may on race day. The only thing you can control is your performance and how you react to the field. If you are feeling like crap out there, odds are everyone else is too so never be judgmental during a race. There is an enormous difference between 'finishing' a half ironman and 'racing' a half ironman; be prepared to make this desicion about a mile into the run, and understand the consequences of choosing the former and the potential for regret associated with it. The swim is no longer [and perhaps never was] marginalized in the half ironman distance; it's now easy to swim 'effectively' and still give up 4-7 minutes; pool time is often hard to come by for many age-groupers, but may provide the greatest net return. While it is very important to be specific in key workout sessions, sometimes the emotional gains from training with a group outweigh any exact specificity, and I find this especially true in longer workouts; in these situations, evaluate the overarching 'purpose' of a workout. For instance, if you have 4x30 minutes at 90% FTP baked into a 4 hour ride, the purpose of that workout is probably to go out and 'ride your bike hard,' but without totally killing yourself. You can accomplish this in a group of the right athletes, even if it means a slight deviation from that exact main set. "Success is doing everything you could the right way and saying man, I did the best I could - that's success." - Aries Merritt (The full interview is here and gold if you have the time)

Tuesday, July 9, 2013

Triathlon and Problem Solving

I am a big believer in approaching triathlon holistically, so it really resonates with me when well written coaches do the same. Think Matt Dixon of Purplepatch fitness breaking 'training' down into four pillars (e.g., endurance, strength, nutrition, recovery), or Jesse Kropelnicki of QT2Systems highlighting the importance of mental fitness (e.g., getting and keeping your mind in the right place during a race) or Alan Couzens recently writing about the importance of general health as a foundation for performance. All of this is great stuff and in combination, paints a pretty complete picture of what it takes to become a successful endurance athlete.

That said, I think the one thing that is missing and doesn't get explicitly called out enough (if at all) is the importance of problem solving (e.g., critical thinking). While on its face it this may sound similar to mental fitness, it's a completely different thing. While my understanding of the former is about fostering a state of mind that lends itself to success (e.g., strong, tough, calm, etc.), the latter is about being able to look at all the variables/levers (e.g., inputs) that impact triathlon and pull on them in a way that optimizes performance (e.g,, output); all within an individual's constraints. While problem solving is key for anyone involved in the sport, I think it becomes an increasingly important skill for age-group athletes since they often have more variables and constraints to deal with.

Problem solving has a role in nearly everything triathlon related, from traditional training trade-offs, to thriving on race day, to keeping the sport sustainable. I could go on forever, so I'll do my best to give just a few examples that capture what I'm talking about:

Do I try and lose 3 pounds for my hot weather race, knowing the risk of injury/illness will go up and power on the bike may go down?
Extra hour of sleep, extra hour of training, hour for massage? Over a day, a week, a month, a year?
Pacing strategy during a race; do I push on the bike and give on the run?
Gear choice: wetsuit vs. speedsuit in warmer water with a long transition, disc wheel versus deep wheel on very hilly terrain with sharp ascents, vented helmet vs. non, one bottle or two?
Race mishap prevention: the added weight/aero cost of of tire sealant, carrying tubes/cartridge?
Physical sustainability: do I complete huge weeks this year and carry great fitness going into an A-race, knowing that it may put me in a hole that lasts into the following year(s)?
Overall sustainability: extra hour of training, or time with family? Kill myself to get to the pool during lunch at work, or a less stressful lunch (and one likely involving more real food) in the cafe next door?

Like I said, the list goes on and on, but you should get the gist. While lots of this thinking can be outsourced to a good coach, at the end of the day, much of it falls upon the athlete too. Making things even more complex is the fact that although some of these puzzles can be empirically tested, nearly all of them are moving targets and change over time as an athlete's body, experience, residual fitness, relationship status, etc., etc., change too. For as much attention as the sport gets as being physically grueling, I think an equally neat aspect of triathlon is how mentally demanding the sport is too; and in a capacity well beyond being strong/tough. Triathlon is rife with trade-offs, and having the skill-set to approach and figure out the balance between them is key to racing well and racing for a while.

Friday, May 10, 2013

Top 10 Reasons You Know You Are A Triathlete

Race reports can be boring and all the philosophical stuff is a bit serious. A recent Powerbar Tweet about how you know you are an Endurance Athlete prompted me to have some fun.

10) You take the elevator to the second floor.

9) When your significant other reveals plans for a magnificent vacation to some exotic oasis, the first thing you do is go to the resort's webpage > pictures > amenities > fitness center.

8) You eat near perfect until about 8PM, and then its time for cereal.

7) You have to question the definition of "shoplifting" when in the bulk aisle of the grocery store.

6) You assign activities of daily living a purpose; dinner becomes a "recovery meal" and sleep becomes an "adaptation phase."

5) When someone asks your age, you respond "25 to 29."

4) "Honey, I drunk ordered a new wheel-set."

3) You eat over 4000 calories a day, yet your friends and family question whether or not you have an eating disorder.

2) You look forward to Mondays because they are "easy days."

1) Everyone else knows your a triathlete!!

*** In full disclosure, # 3 I originally saw on a Slowtwitch thread***

Tuesday, April 9, 2013

Sponsorship of Amateur Athletes

The topic of “sponsorship” in multisport has been discussed repeatedly across venues from magazines to forums ever since I became active in the sport(s) some three years ago. There is a lot of variability in thinking/feeling (the latter being more decisive) on the topic, and for what it’s worth, I figured I would share my thoughts based on recent experiences working with a small number of companies in the industry:

Yes, I am an amateur athlete (e.g., I do not have a pro card) and am "sponsored" by a few companies...although I do not like to think of the arrangement as a "sponsorship" but more of a partnership or symbiotic relationship. I can't say what it is like among the pro ranks because I do not know, but I can say way too many amateurs have a mindset that they are super-fast, finish well, and therefore companies should be sending them free and/or heavily discounted product. In my opinion, this just isn't how it works. For one, in this day and age, way too many guys are super-fast and finish well so "standing out" because of good results is likely harder to do than it was in the past. And far more important, results are just one dimension of a total athlete that matter to companies, and for many companies in the industry, results may fall behind other things such as: prevalence and reputation in the multisport community, knowledge about their brand and product(s), and motivation and skills to communicate.

Sure, maybe some folks will see a logo on Craig Alexander's kit/blog and decide to try a product because of it, but unless you are Craig Alexander, even if you are killing it in the AG ranks, generally a conversation occurs about a logo on your kit/blog prior to someone trying it. So yes, while results matter, they are just part of the equation, and if anything, more often than not a conduit to shine as a spokesperson.

In my partnerships, I am so fortunate to get...comped and/or discounted product from the companies that I partner with, and I think this is the case for many age-groupers as I don't know of a single amateur who is getting cash, and it is my understanding that even just a minority of pros have cash sponsorship deals. Going into details about these arrangements would actually go against the spirit of a true partnership since to companies, athlete partners are likely thought of as parts of a broader marketing toolkit, and no companies that I know of openly share their marketing strategies with each other.

What I give...is a combination of multiple things that hopefully work together to help my partners out much like they help me out. First and foremost, I give an honest opinion about the products, and only use them if I think they work. Athletes that chase deals because they think it "sounds cool to be sponsored" makes *no sense* to me and epitomizes the sometimes negative stereotype thrown at triathletes. So the first thing I give is an endearing personal endorsement of a product because I use it and believe it works. After and because of that true personal endorsement and belief in the product(s), I share my experience with others in the triathlon community that could benefit and think of myself as an ambassador/spokesperson [in my triathlon circle, which is different from Craig Alexander's] for the companies I partner with. This involves writing product reviews and small-talk at my Masters swim group, on group rides, and at the track. As you'll see on my blog, I also post links to company websites, and use other social media vehicles (e.g., Facebook and Twitter) to help get the word out about these products. Finally, I wear their logo's on my body (e.g., on my Kit) at races, and strive for great results. That said, and as I mention above, I don't think anyone has ever tried out a product because they saw the logo on my uniform, but multiple people have asked me about a product because of this...which gets to the role of the importance of being a good spokesperson.

As an aside from helping in a marketing/branding role (as outlined above) I also try to act as a product-development and strategy consultant, constantly giving feedback on products (both based on my experience and what I am hearing from others) and also offering business ideas that are spurred from what I observe day-to-day "in the field." It's so great to work with companies that really value this type of engagement too, as some of these ideas have lead to a website re-design, new newsletter generation, etc., etc. Truth be told, I don't think I would be nearly as much of an asset to companies that didn't engage with their athletes in this manner.

So, to make a long story short, it's all about a partnership and mutually beneficial relationships, and as an athlete, it is important to see results as just a part of the equation. Make no mistake, when I evaluate myself as an athlete about the only thing that matters is how fast I go on race day...but when I evaluate myself as a brand ambassador, this is one factor among many. The good news is, I don't think very many companies look down upon good results...so the two most certainly go hand-in-hand.

Wednesday, March 20, 2013

Shoe Review: Quick Thoughts on Neutral Half Ironman Shoes

There are plenty of long, highly technical shoe reviews out there, so rather than repeat that [mostly] good work that has already done, I'll try to get right to the point and make this as useful/practical as possible for those looking for a neutral shoe appropriate for the Half Ironman (HIM) distance...and perhaps without the time to read scholarly reviewed journal articles on shoes...

To set the context, throughout my duathlon season in 2011 and most of my tri season in 2012, I raced in the Nike LunarRacers. Back in 2011 when I was first becoming more serious about running/duathlon, I trained in the Nike LunarFlys (which would now be too built up for me, even for training purposes, but back then they were a good fit) so the natural progression on race day was into the significantly lighter but similarly neutrally built LunarRacers. I loved everything about the LunarRacers -- the time period and my experience spans all models from the original to the 2 -- except for the upper, which I found to wear down and even tear somewhat fast, and the tongue, which was made of the flimsiest material ever and thus would always sink down into the shoe and rub against my forefoot during fast transitions. So, for those two years, I literally spent an extra 10-20 seconds in transition dealing with the "pulling up" the tongue, and this held true regardless of what lacing system I was using.

Toward the end of 2012 I realized it didn't have to be this way, and that the time, energy, and stress cost of transition in the LunarRacers outweighed how much I loved the shoe (which I would still wear for an open road race any day). After seeking the opinion of some friends in the shoe industry and the Slowtwitch community, I tried out some comparable New Balance Options, the MR 1400 and the MR 1600.

I found the MR 1400 to be extremely comfortable and durable, and started using this for nearly all of my training runs. At a listed weight of just 7.1oz, the shoe was still really light, but felt more like a trainer than a racing flat. Some of this may have to do with the 11mm drop, so the shoe is indeed quite a bit built up. In any event, the upper and tongue had none of the problems of the LunarRacer, and although this shoe had a less cushioned feel, I was starting to really work my way into it enjoying the springy sensation off the road, and feeling like I found a solution with New Balance!!

Because I thought "lighter is always better," I went with a similar approach that I had done when I first came into the sport with the LunarFly/LunarRacer combo, and opted to order a pair of the MR 1400's lighter brother, the MR 1600. I raced a reverse triathlon in these bad boys and had one of the fastest and best feeling run splits [10K] of my life...so why not wear them off the bike a few weeks later at the HIM distance? Mistake! My shins and calves lit up wearing this, and simply could not handle the stress of such a minimal shoe after biking near threshold for 56 miles. Again, no problems with the tongue in transition, but just not enough shoe there for me at this distance, and I suffered my way to a slower than usual 13.1 off the bike.

So, 2013 rolls around and I am thinking that the NB 1400 would be my HIM shoe...until I hear that Nike is releasing a new version of the LunarRacer (3+) with a completely redone upper. Fast-forward to now, and while I only have a training run under my belt in the 3+, I can say that this shoe is basically everything I loved about the older version (light-weight but extremely cushioned ride) with a more durable upper and traditional tongue that - although in the comfort of my living room - didn't slip at all during a mock transition. I obviously still need to try these in a race situation before I can really say more, but for those of you on the edge, if you liked everything about the older versions except the upper (a la, me) then this could be the best thing since sliced bread...minus the price differential between the two, or refined crap in your sliced bread...but I digress...

So, all of that said, I am not yet convinced that I will explicitly race in the LunarRacer 3+ and certainly not for all distances. I think the best part of this process hasn't been discovering the perfect shoe, but rather, finding a trio of shoes that should meet all of my needs, can be mixed up, and also used with some specificity.

New Balance MR 1600: Lightest of the 3, and something like a 7mm drop. I'm not at all into any of that barefoot stuff, but you literally feel the ground in these shoes. Hardly any cushioning. I'll wear these for open running races 5K to 10K (maybe a half-marathon if I was willing to hurt bad in the lower legs for a few days post), and could see myself playing with these in multisport races with 10K or less total running (Oly and down and distance).

New Balance MR 1400: Although lists as 1oz heavier than the LunarRacer 3+, in my hands, there is no weight difference at all. I think the biggest plus to this over the LR 3+ is that there is a bit less cushion so you have more of a feel for the ground, and thus actually feel a bit springier while running. The con here in my opinion is the significant 11mm drop, which provides some comfort, but also left me wondering if a recent heel injury (more on this to come once it's fully behind me) had something to do with these shoes. If "feeling" springy is important and you are not a true midfoot striker (and/or need to protect calves) then I would say this is the perfect HIM shoe.

Nike Lunar Racer 3+: Initial reaction is positive, but like I said, I still need to race in these. In comparison to the MR 1400, same weight, much more cushioning (maybe too much, as my first run in these after being in the MR 1400s actually felt kind of clunky) and the lowest drop of the three (good for encouraging midfoot striking).

All 3: Durable uppers and solid tongues, likely fine in transition with any good lacing system. In conclusion, MR 1600 for short stuff and road races knowing my lower legs are going to take a beating, MR 1400 or LunarRacer 3+ for HIM distance...for those that don't mind a bigger drop but like a springy feeling, I'd say the MR 1400, and for those that want a very cushioned ride with little drop, the LR 3+. I still need to figure out which case optimizes my racing, and will certainly rotate these in training.

Hope this helped a bit!

Friday, February 22, 2013

My Fueling Strategy: Drink From Your Bottles, Eat From Your Pockets(ish)

I am totally pumped to be partnering with Nuun as an athlete ambassador for the amateur triathlon market in 2013!! But this has led to I guess a rather obvious question coming from more than a few other athletes: How is it that you can be linked up with two sports drinks? Isn't there a clear conflict of interest?

The short answer is no. The longer answer is that Greater > Than and Nuun serve completely different purposes in support of my training and racing. This got me thinking that I would share some further detail...not to clear up confusion about my partner support (because c'mon, who really cares) but more-so to reiterate the point that when it comes to high performance endurance athletics, there is no one-size-fits-all approach to fueling and nutrition, and minor differences can go a long way.

In short, I subscribe to a fueling strategy (e.g., my hydration and nutrition while actually training and racing) coined by nutritionist Stacy Sims: Drink From Your Bottles, Eat From Your Pockets. Basically, I use liquids as a source of hydration and electrolytes, and solids and semi-solids as a source of calories; mainly carbohydrates. This took me over a year and tons of diarrhea while running to figure out, but for whatever reason (and there are tons of reasons in the scientific literature if you are interested and search) my stomach simply can't tolerate calorie rich liquids while going hard. So, Nuun is my go-to hydration source given it contains virtually no calories, but a perfect (literally, because it is customizable by breaking up the tablets) balance of electrolytes that compliments the calories (again, mainly carbohydrates) that I get from solids and semi-solids (Clif shots and shot-blocks, chunks of Clifbars, etc). This is not at all about brand loyalty, price, or anything like that. The combination of Nuun and Clif solids is the only thing that works for me when my HR is above 120 BPM and there is running involved after biking. Even if I got no support from these companies, I would still use their products exclusively...or end up spending a quarter of my race in the Porta-Jon, and nobody likes that.

When it comes to recovery and prep (e.g,. what I consume right after workouts and in the lead-up to races) Greater > Than is a critical part of the equation. For recovery purposes, the electrolyte balance with a heavy focus on potassium plus the Sucrose carbohydrate source jump-starts the body's adaptation process and quickly gets things moving back toward homeostasis. I've actually heard more than a few times now that Coconut Water is second to intravenous fluids when it comes to immediate recovery after hard physical efforts. I pair this with Extreme Endurance XEcute which provides protein and lactate to help stimulate muscle repair. In terms of prep, in the days leading up to a longer race when I am shooting for massive amounts of carbohydrates, being able to get some of these carbs from a liquid source helps me avoid bloating and a feeling of total heaviness, and also, given Greater > Than still doesn't have as much sugar as the other leading performance sports drinks, I don't get the adverse blood sugar effects that have left me feeling crappy during carb-loads in the past when using other products.

So, there you have it. Not conflicted at all, and so fortunate to have the best products in my corner!

Thursday, January 24, 2013

Triathlon and Being Happy, Purpose and Passion

As Featured on Xtri

I've been doing a lot of targeted reading lately -- thank you Twitter, which is truly a great tool for developing daily reading lists -- and have started to notice a common theme surrounding individuals that tend to be, in the broadest sense, mostly happy. They are highly motivated and engage in activities that give meaning to their lives. They go about their days with what I am starting to realize are two key ingredients: purpose and passion. When I stepped back to examine how I fill my days against the two P's, naturally I put my involvement in triathlon under the lens. At this current point in my life, the results were overwhelmingly positive, so I'll continue to spend a good amount of time swimming, biking, and running.

From a "purpose" standpoint, the most simplistic evaluation is that I want to be as fast as possible. But, as I peeled back the onion a bit, I realized that this has more to do with the process of becoming as fast as possible; the things I learn about myself at the end of strenuous workouts, the intimate relationship I continue to develop with with my body, and the ability to hold myself accountable for results both positive and negative. The sport adds meaningful complexity to my life, and it forces me to grow and discover new things both physically and mentally... characteristics I can't say hold true for even the best reality TV...

In terms of "passion," this is less empirical and far more intrinsic. Does triathlon make me tick? Yes.

I think it is hard to disconnect the two P's. If you do things with [and that have] purpose, it's a lot easier to be passionate about them.

So, given that triathlon can consume a lot of our most precious resource (time), it is important to step back once in a while and test involvement in the sport against the two Ps. If you pass the test, odds are you'll not only be a happier person, but also a better triathlete since I think we tend to perform best at things that make us happy. If you don't pass the test, it could be a warning sign for the antithesis of happiness -- going through the motions -- and a cue that maybe it's time to pivot to something new.

I'll end by sharing a few things that inspired these thoughts, and although not as explicitly, do a far better job expressing what I'm going for above. I highly recommend reading the interviews.

A) In response to more recent articles about intense endurance sports and general health, someone posted on a forum, "I don't do this to add quantity to my life, but to add quality to my life."

B) I couldn't help but notice the striking similarities in the lessons offered between two extremely different people, both of whom seem quite happy:

Interview with endurance sports junkie and founder of Art/Apparel company Endurance Conspiracy Tony DeBoom:

http://www.slowtwitch.com/Interview/Inside_the_Endurance_Conspiracy_3323.html

Interview with the esteemed Harvard Business School Professor Clay Christensen:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/danschawbel/2012/06/05/how-will-you-measure-your-life/

Friday, January 18, 2013

Morning Masters Swimming Trajectory

I've noticed a very typical cascade of emotions that regularly accompanies my early morning 5K Masters swim workouts. For my peers in the sport, maybe you can relate. For anyone else, maybe you experience this with other exercise challenges. Either way, I got a good laugh out of it, and it's pretty insightful as to why "just showing up" is really half the battle...

Night Before Sad. This is an improvement on what used to be "anxious" when I first joined the group, but only marginally. When I worked for a consulting firm I often had to travel from Monday-Thursday, catching a very early morning flight. On Sunday afternoons, I would get what I called the "Consulting Blues" when packing my suitcase for the week. This is significantly less, but slightly reminiscent.

4:30AM Indifferent. At this point, I have tunnel vision toward coffee. My task is to make it and drink it, and that is where all my focus is.

5:15 Creative. I find myself thinking "Maybe today should be a rest day," or "I haven't prioritized a run in a while, I wonder what Coach would say if I ran first and just did my own swim after."

5:30 Cold. What's nice about this is that much like the coffee that came before it, en route to the pool, I'm just focused on trying to get warm, so there are no negative emotions, simply a primal drive to warm up.

5:50 Rushed. Funny how after everything I laid out above, I hurry up and rush in the locker room to ensure I don't miss 100 meters of warmup.

6:00 Anxious. Oh the warm-up. Can't go without it (trust me, I've tried, miserable result) but it's literally equivalent to needing to stare at the 6-inch needle (Coach Mohammad) prior to the Epidural (the main set).

6:20-7:25 On. This is the beauty of swimming with a group, most of whom are faster than you. I have no choice but to just swim. The god-honest truth is I generally don't have enough time in between intervals/sets to do any thinking, so I just swim.

7:25-8:00 Euphoric. My arms feel like rubber, my form is lost, but I'm cooling down!!

8:00-8:15. Rushed. Got to get to work, whether that be another shorter training session or the office.

Post Training for the Morning: Happy. Hungry. I've never done a Masters workout I regret, and I've never not been pretty ravaged at 10AM on a Mon/Wed/Fri.

Sunday, January 6, 2013

My Theory on the Lance Armstrong Confession

Sharing here because I haven't heard this theory on Lance Armstrong's potential confession with conditions anywhere else yet, and it makes sense to me. Disclaimer, I'm not a psychologist or cycling insider, and put these thoughts together in the middle swimming with an ankle band on (pure misery), so take em for what they are worth...

1) Lance Armstrong Understands the Evidence is Too Much to Overcome: Self explanatory. The case against him is so strong, and will only get stronger over time as more cyclists/doctors/friends need to rid themselves of having the weight on their chest. Lance doped, and we don't need him to tell us.

2) Lance Armstrong (LA) Liked being a Public Hero: Hard to be a public hero, let along be out in public, given his denial in the context of the mounting evidence mentioned in #1.

3) For Lance, It's Not Enough to Apologize and Walk Away: A "confession" (in quotes since we all already know what he is speculating telling us which makes the whole thing a bit odd to me) and true, heart-felt, very well written apology may enable LA to show his face in public, but I don't think he would have hero status; certainly not in the minds of the people, and probably not even in his own mind, which matters a lot to a guy who loved nothing more than being the man.

4) Confession with Conditions Ripe for Redemption: All the reports thus far say that LA is considering speaking with authorities if there is potential for his lifetime band from competition to be reduced...this is the golden nugget in my opinion, and gives Lance a chance to continue his fight even after admitting he doped. The story will change slightly from "I never cheated" toward "Everyone was doing it and I am really the best against a level playing field," but the point is it allows LA a big huge "but" each time he says "I cheated." More details on what I mean by this in the next points...

5) Hey, I was Pretty Good at this Triathlon Thing: Say what you want, but when LA entered the sport of triathlon, he showed potential promise at racing long-course events; enough to draw Macca and Crowie back to Kona (in their own words). I can't stay definitively but I highly doubt Lance was doping during his recent return to triathlon; it would have been downright stupid given the level of scrutiny and testing. If he was not in fact doping during the return, then one could say Lance was a FOP professional triathlete clean.

6) Confession that Lets LA Race Triathlon Gives LA a Chance At Redemption, At Least in His Own Mind: I would bet that LA's thought process may go something like this: "Well, I'm certainly damned right now, but c'mon, everyone in the peleton was doing it. I can tell the public that everyone was doing it and I was the best against that level playing field, and then train my ass off and try and win/place highly at Kona to be able to show the public that I am the best against a clean -- God, I [Brad, the author] hope so anyways -- playing field too." This at least allows LA to be a hero in his own mind, and will help him sleep at night because he can still tell himself he is the best before his head its the pillow.

A lot of folks have said that LA wants the conditions because he loves racing and seeing himself ranked against others, but I think it is actually because he think he has a legitimate chance of winning in triathlon and using that as his "but" after he has to say he cheated.

Potential Problems: Aside from everything logistically and legally (e.g., civil suits against him, etc.) there are a few other problems with the above theory.

Personally, I think it is a long-shot that LA can really compete with the top dogs at Kona. Triathlon is not a 112 mile time-trial, and running a marathon after biking for 112 miles is different than running a hard tempo run after 56 miles (the latter, something LA showed us all that he was pretty good at).
Even if Lance were to do something so crazy as win at Kona, what about the compounding effects of his doping? Again, I'm not an expert, but I bet some experts will say that what he was able to do while doped up in training years ago triggered physiological adaptations that still help him today in a clean state.
Finally, while this may give him a chance to be the best in his own mind, I think those that have closely followed the sport and subsequently this saga will have a hard time taking any confession seriously when LA did things like this on Twitter after the evidence was made public

Every Man Endurance

Pages