The Western States trail in the California Sierras used to be where a 100-mile horse race took place that horse and rider had to complete in 24 hours. At some point in the 1970s one of the riders decided not to take a horse, and he finished in 23 hours on foot. Now it's an annual footrace that the winner finishes in about 14 hours.
Agree thay Goodr is a good option. My only complaint about them is that their lenses scratch too easily, but presumably prescription lenses would be sturdier so that should be fine.
The article seems to be based on a report from December of last year. Unfortunately I can't find a way to explore the underlying data in greater detail.
It's colder, there's less daylight, I'm busy at work, and I'm not signed up for any races. Even so, I got four nice runs in this week and I enjoyed them all. I'll probably sign up for a trail race because I do like working toward something.
I did two recovery runs since my ultra, and they felt good. Think I'll return to a normal volume again this week.
Sunday was marathon day and I spent almost three hours cheering on runners in the full and half races passing my house. That was fun. I hope that guy running right in front of the street sweepers still made it to the finish...
I'm mostly at 160, a bit higher if I go faster, and lower if slower. I think aside from speed, leg length is a decisive variable. I am tall and have long legs, so I don't expect I'll ever average above 170.
As for the magical 180, my own take is that the idea has persisted because it’s a good aspirational goal for many runners. Lots of runners overstride, crashing down on their heels and putting excessive force on their joints. Telling them to increase their cadence by, say, 5 percent results in shorter, smoother strides, and reduces loads on the knee and hip. But there’s a very big difference between saying “Some runners might benefit from increasing their cadence” and “All runners, regardless of what speed they’re running at, should take at least 180 steps per minute.”
I camped and raced as well. Luckily the weather was perfect. The 8 hours 46 minutes of running through forest and heath were gorgeous. Great event – and I placed 11th in my distance (75km but actually more like 78).
I'm about two weeks away from the ultra I've been preparing for. I had a few setbacks (plantar fasciitis, a few days lost to a mystery virus), and while I feel physically fit, I worry that at some point during the hours of running I will start dwelling on my less than optimal preparation. I'm trying to remind myself that nobody ever has a perfect race and that I should just control what I can. I suppose I should start tapering around this point, but I also feel like I should maybe plan one last really long training run to help with my confidence. We'll see if I can find the time this week.
Hard to generalize. I've had two pairs of Brooks Defyance shoes last me 1,500km. A pair of Brooks Ghost only made it to 1,000, and the top mesh of my Sauconys ripped after just 700 (though the soles would have still served me longer – maybe i should have tried taping them...)
They're great, but pricey considering the limited mileage you get out of them. That's a reason I decided to add a budget shoe to my rotation.