Eight Slow Miles

Eight miles on the sand/gravel/dirt path along the railroad tracks. A train came through just before I got to the track, and no others showed up, but it was a wonderfully cool, delightful morning regardless.

I didn’t feel too energetic, so I did walk fairly often, but never for long. No pains, no problems.

Splits: 18:43 (2 mi), 20:19 (2 mi), 10:02, 10:04, 10:27, 10:47, total 1:20:21, pace 10:03.


Beef salad/dinner.

Fun In The Forest 5K

Thursday Evening, August 27, 2009, 7:00 pm:

This race is sponsored by OSI Physical Therapy, to benefit the Community Helping Hand Food Shelf in Forest Lake. It’s a good cause. This year it was a fairly small race, in a neighborhood so new that workers were actually troweling sidewalks as runners registered in a nearby parking lot. It was a fun race, too, lots of good spirit.

I like this kind of race, where there are few elite runners and lots of people who are there to support the cause. Many of those runners start out well, but slow down by mile one or two, and then I get to pass them. I hope it’s not discouraging for them to be passed by this grey-haired old man. One particularly studly guy, whom I passed about halfway through, couldn’t look me in the eye after he finished. :-)

No pains of any kind, despite Wednesday’s long run. All good! I wore the Nike LunarGlide shoes outdoors for the first time and they seemed just fine, making somewhat less noise on pavement than they had on the smooth-surfaced indoor track. I think they'll be OK.

Splits: 8:31, 8:20, 9:22 (1.1 mi), total 26:13, pace 8:27. I walked a couple of times in the last mile. The course was not certified, so I don’t know whether this pace is accurate. But I ran hard, so it was good enough.



Dinner: Salmon cakes. Yup there's a little cheese in there.

Eighteen Miles, No Problem

Friend Jim and I drove to the Gateway Trail bridge , ran to milepost 18 (Pine Point Park), then back past the car to milepost 9 near I-694, and back to the car again. At Jim’s suggestion we ran on the horse trails rather than the paved trail. I’ve never done that on the Gateway before, but I sure did like it. Those trails are a combination of sand, grass, and gravel, all of which are softer and more forgiving than blacktop. My feet feel just fine afterward, knees and hips too.

I do think that the softer surfaces take a little more work though - so 18 miles may be the equivalent of 19 or 20 on pavement in terms of energy output. So I believe. If so, 18 was the perfect distance for my long run for an upcoming marathon.

At my request, we ran two minutes and walked one, for almost the whole distance. Overall time was 3:07:54, pace 10:26. Not a good pace, but if I could keep it going another 8 miles, that would be a 4:34 marathon. I’ll take it! And I could have run another 8 today, though maybe not quite at that pace. The run-2 walk-1 system is a lot easier than just running.

Lovely, cool morning, 60 to 70 degrees, sunny with no wind, but the Gateway has a lot of shade. A feel-good morning and a feel-good run.

Gateway Trail users be advised: The trail is currently closed at Manning (Co 15). We went through, but on the way back we got yelled at! A bridge is to be built (reassembled) at Manning, and right now crews are building a bypass for us to use during that construction. Then they will start on the "embankments." While the bypass is being built, the trail is closed and may actually be impassible because of large machines working right on the trail. The workers really didn’t want us to go through this morning. The actual construction begins at about milepost 16 and continues northeast across Manning for perhaps a total of a half mile


Fruit bowl: Blueberries, home-grown raspberries, mango, organic strawberries, organic yogurt, a little dark chocolate. I love this after a long run. Plenty of nutrients AND hydration to boot.

Brooks Launch & Nike LunarGlide Shoe Review

Three shoe models: (1) Brooks Burn III (discontinued model), (2) Brooks Launch, and Nike LunarGlide. I’ve purchased 21 pairs of Brooks Burn shoes over the years (they really ought to make me a tester and give me shoes), and now I’m looking for a replacement. Brooks says the Launch is their replacement, and I've had very good luck with Brooks, but I’d sort of prefer to find a Nike model instead because my son works at Nike. I don’t really know if the LunarGlide is an appropriate alternative to the Launch, but I was baffled by the overchoice on the Nike web site and finally settled on that one. I am a neutral runner, a midfoot striker with an efficient stride. My feet are average width, size 11 to 12 depending on the shoe. I want a light but cushioned shoe for both training and road racing, up to marathon distances.

Brooks Launch:
Men’s size 12, weight 22 ounces per pair, 11 ounces each. Sole curved upward beginning behind the ball of the foot, toe curved up significantly, heel curved up only slightly. The sole is flat from the arch all the way back through most of the heel. By contrast, the sole of the Burn is curved throughout, and the Burn has a "lateral arch lug" on the outside of the arch, not present in the Launch, though the heel of the Launch does come farther forward than the heel of the Burn. The tread has lots of narrow grooves which will pick up sand and small rocks.

Here is what Brooks says about it: "With an incredibly flexible outsole and seamless transition, this lightweight neutral trainer will get you from start to finish, whether for a tempo run or in a race. Add to that the lower-profile midsole and minimal upper, and it's 3, 2, 1 . . . blast off! Weight: 9.3 oz" Helpful, isn’t it? Marketing hype is so impotent when it replaces actual information.

The Launch is listed on Brooks’ web site under "neutral" and under "competition" shoes. List $90.00. I paid about $80. Made in China.

Nike LunarGlide:
Men’s size 12, weight 26 ounces per pair, 13 ounces each. Sole even flatter than the Launch, toe curved up less than the Launch, heel curved up only slightly. It does seem to have a structure similar to the Burn’s lateral arch lug, though the Nike web site doesn’t mention it. The tread is a bit more aggressive than that of the Launch, but with deep groves to pick up larger rocks and some small grooves to pick up sand.

Here is what Nike says about it: Boasting ultra-light, ultra-strong Flywire and the next generation of LunarLite system technology, the men’s LunarGlide+ combines a soft core within a firmer carrier to achieve a previously unattainable blend of cushioning and response from heel to toe." Equally helpful.

The LunarGlide is listed on Nike’s web site under "cushioned" shoes and under "stability" shoes. List $100.00. I got them at an unusual price of about $60. Brand new, though. Made in Vietnam.

I ran ten laps on an indoor track with my last pair of Burns to get warmed up, then ten with the LunarGlide shoes, then ten with the Launch, then LunarGlide again, then Launch again. Both pairs of shoes were perfectly comfortable and well-cushioned, fitting properly in the heel, arch, and toe box. Both felt smooth, with no hitches between footfall and toe-off. I felt no noticeable knee or hip twinges during any of the runs. The Burns were the quietest, the Launch next, and the LunarGlide last. The LunarGlide shoes were pretty noisy, in fact. Note that the noisiness seems to correspond to the flatness of the sole.

I’ve always assumed that the slap-slap sound indicated an inefficiency of some sort. Doesn’t it take energy to make sound? Truth be told, though, the LunarGlide shoes seemed to be as efficient as the Launch. I was surprised when I laced up the LunarGlide shoes for the first time and slapped through the first two laps nine seconds quicker (total) than I had averaged during the warmup in the Burns.

I tried to run with the same "perceived effort" throughout, resulting in a pace of 9:03 min/mi for the warmup laps (always slower), then an average of about 8:23 for the rest of the test. Perceived effort is iffy, of course. The result does not show a clear advantage in speed versus effort for either the Launch or the LunarGlide, no surprise. I’d be happy to run a race in either.

The LunarGlide shoes did, unaccountably, seem to want to propel me forward. Nike’s web site mentions "men's-specific flex grooves to encourage an efficient stride." I don’t know what that means, but if you already have an efficient stride, does that help make you more efficient, or does it just encourage you to run a little harder? I couldn’t tell in this short test. I'll try both pairs on the road - neither is going back to the seller.

Good stuff:

• Both pairs of shoes fit nicely and felt good.
• Both seemed as efficient as my old beloved Burns.
• The LunarGlide shoes have "Nike+" monitoring technology, if you care. I don’t.

Complaints:

• The LunarGlide shoes are too noisy. I really don’t like that.
• Both shoes have treads that will pick up rocks and sand. We mostly run on roads and trails, not tracks, and these shoes will drop sand & gravel in the house and, what's worse, into each other. Why don’t shoe manufacturers get that?
• The Launch is not quite a direct Burn replacement because (a) It has no lateral arch lug, and (b) The sole is flatter. I don't think it's made for a midfoot striker, as the Burn was.

Despite the drawbacks, I haven’t found anything better yet. I may end up settling on one of these, without a lot of enthusiasm. But road testing is yet to come. Perhaps these will seem better with some road miles on them.

Splits for ten laps (0.74 miles): Burn 6:41, LunarGlide 6:10, Launch 6:20, LunarGlide 6:13, Launch 6:07.

Placebo Effect is Real!

The oncologist has reduced my dosage of dexamethasone (DEX) from 8 mg to 4 mg once per week. As a result, I was able to run faster today. Paul even mentioned, before we were half done, that I was doing better. He was too, actually.

Except, I take DEX on Sundays, and I’ve never even taken the reduced dosage yet. Just the thought of maybe getting a little of the lost muscle back was enough to make a difference. Paul and Wayne dropped me in the last half mile, but I still finished the five miles in 42:12, for an overall pace of 8:26. Last week it was 9:09 - this is SO much better. And that same pace for a 5k would be a time of 26:07, far better than I did last Saturday. Maybe I could run a 25-minute 5k.

Other things were going on too. The weather was perfect, 57 degrees with little wind, and I had not run since Wednesday night’s Tartan Terrible race, so I had three nights to rebuild and refill muscles. It all helped.

No pains, no problems. Coming up: some shoe testing Sunday, then maybe a long run Tuesday.

Really Ugly Shoes

I bought 21 pairs of Brooks Burn shoes, over five years or so, before they were discontinued. Brooks waited a year, and then offered up the new Launch as the Burn replacement. Meantime, my son works at Nike, so I would like to find a Nike shoe to replace the Burn. A few days ago I ordered a pair of Nike LunarGlide shoes and also a pair of the new Brooks Launch.

They are both so ugly! I can't believe it. I don't really care - I'm old and can take it if people point to my shoes and laugh, but I'm surprised at the lack of good taste at both shoe companies. Admittedly, there are other color choices for each of these shoes, but those were not available in my size at the time I ordered.

Enough whining about color - I'll try these out and "review" them sometime soon.

Tartan Terrible 5k Race

Tartan Terrible 5k Race. This is a favorite little race for me, not too far from our home, on grass, trails, roads, and even through water on an ancient submerged road some years. In the past it has been four miles, two 2-mile loops, but the route changed this year because of pipeline construction, and this year it was a one-loop 5k. Roughly. Just short of a 5k, says the race director.

The weather was AWFUL leading up to the race, including tornados that struck Minneapolis and an inch of rain in our gauge, but the skies cleared for the race and, except for wet grass, the weather was delightful and the running was fine. Even the abandoned road through the little lake was above water this year. People say it’s been chest-deep under water some years, but I’ve never run in water more than thigh deep there.

I finished in 28:09, according to my watch. Results were not available when I left, and will not be posted on the web. Tsk. That would be a pace of 9:05 IF the distance was 5k. I should still be able to run a flat 5k at an 8-minute pace, and I wish I could have run even this more-difficult 5k a little faster, but I ran 14 miles yesterday and just didn’t have more in me. Besides, it’s supposed to be a fun race and it was actually fun.

I’m at Mayo Clinic as I write this, waiting for the oncologist to interpret the results of today’s blood tests. Hopefully we will be able to cut back on the dexamethasone from here forward - that might help me regain a little of the lost speed.



Recent lunch: Sunshine's veggie dish with cheese & gluten-free pasta, organic nectarine, organic Brazil nuts, parmesan cheese.