Training Log Archive: j-man

Event: US Sprint & UltraLong champs
 

A little time on the model with Dasha.

Good warmup before the sprint.

2009 US Sprint Champs.

Had high expectations coming in, but didn't deliver.



Just sloppy I guess. Speed seemed OK, but not overwhelming. Clean, effective orienteering would have been necessary to supplement things.

I thought the course setting was good enough, but I do question the terrain/venue selection. The terrain was just not that interesting or pleasant. Or dramatic. There had to be better in Rochester. Also, the jiggering with the finish chute to showcase the runners was kind of silly, but completely understandable given the small gathering area.

[Mapping was fine, I guess, although the blobs are weird. I did think the symbol sizes were all wrong, though. For instance, ISSOM spec (I know this isn't an ISSOM map, but anyway) specifies 1.2 MM width for the distinct tree symbol. The symbols on the map were ~4. Clearly, point features are 3 x the size of the 1:15 map. Not quite right.]

Anyway--the spectating was especially effective, i.e., the spectator control and final loop wasn't contrived and did not inject much lost distance or detract from the orienteering merit.

Perfunctory warmup before the middle.

ROC Mendon Pond Middle Blue.

A really bad race. Lost time on 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11. Time loss ranges from 20 seconds to several minutes on each of these. Not inclined to add it up right now.



Not sure what was going on. Seems like compass problems--again--to start.

Ran at a fairly consistent intensity.

Course was pretty good, but I had problems reading the map again. Didn't like #16 but I didn't really lose much time on it.

(Wore yellow glasses)

So, I'm not a fancy printer or anything, but I am convinced that the printing on Saturday was not that hot.

Obviously it is some sort of halftone technology. Not process or offset. Fine.

But, it doens't seem that great, either.

#1) This is a 400% blow-up of a scan of Saturday's middle map:



#2) This is a 400% blow-up of a scan of a map I printed from a .pdf for a park event last year (at the local print shop, with no jiggering or anything):



Setting aside the quality of the map itself, I personally prefer #2. Thoughts?

The Schiminator is brutally fast. #15 on the middle, a ~450M leg mostly through a field, on which I was pretty clean, he was 1:43 to my 2:12. Wow.

Sprint: M/F21 - Splits

Middle: Blue - Splits

I-90 NYS Thruway at I-390
1000 Lehigh Station Rd
Henrietta, NY 14467-9311 US
Phone: 585-359-1630

Ran the forest portion of the last leg of the US Relay Champs from Mendon.

Kept a solid pace, pushed up the hills a bit, and didn't make many mistakes. Had a really hard time reading the map because the contours were really light.

Did have occasional trouble reading up/down. Also, some of the forest had this nasty groundcover which made running tricky. Other forest was very nice.

Time is approximate.

(Wearing yellow lenses)

US Team training with Nate, Eddie, and Hammer.

First exercise was a head-to-head race. Nate was pretty fast but we both got tripped up at a misplaced control, whereas Eddie figured it out and finished ahead.

Second was a control picking. I tried to push hard and concentrate hard, but I was trying to hard to keep the flow and not stop. I had one disaster early, and another one later when I did everything I intended and saw the edge of the feature but didn't go into. Instead, I turned and went the other way.

The final was a memory, tag-off thing. One person (A) would memorize the leg to #1 and do it while the other person (B) would read that leg and the one ahead (#2), with the plan of swooping in and tagging #1 ahead of (B) who would presumably be hesitating, trying to figure out exactly where it was, and then put the map away and take off to #3.

This one was uber tough. I don't know if it was even constructive for me. First, there were no controls. Second, the map was hard to read.

The first time I got to memorize, I just took off. I even forgot I could use my compass. Needless to say, that was a disaster, and Eddie had to talk my way in.

We generally kept a good pace. Eddie seemed to do better at some of the memory things than I did. I would say I had two good legs, and two bad ones, whereas he was good on most of them.



(No glasses)

Tired, after the three exercises.

Mostly at 2%, until the last 5 minutes when I dropped it and increased the speed slightly. Much of this was at 6.5 mph, but then 7mph and a little at 8mph and 8.5 mph at the very end.

Level 8. Started out at 9mph then 10mph at 16, 10.5mph at 18:30, and 11mph at 19:30.

It was a bit tough, but I arrived at the goal of last spring. Now I get to go further.

420 calories. And a lot of sweat.

Exactly the same as last time: level 8 hills. 7mph through 48, and then to tempo.

10mph at 56, 10.5mph at 58:30, and 11mph at 59:30.

Didn't feel awesome, but at least OK. 1,035 calories--one more than last time.

Basic circuit. Same as last time.

This is going to hurt:

(1200, 1000, 800) x 2 @ 8K, 5K, 3K pace

All w/200 rest

To the track. Felt great on the run, but a little GI deterioration at the end. Luckily, the bathroom at Soldiers' Field was open, and things were put back in order.

Stretches and running drills.

Two laps with 4 x 100M strides on the straights.

My goal this week was to run more consistently, or rather not fade hard on the final intervals. Mission accomplished.

Largely, the same guys were here this week. But, the tall, 40ish, skinnyish guy was there (we'll call him "Bob"--not there last week.) He was to prove invaluable.

[Why am I so bad with names?]

I decided to not worry about Terry and the rabbit (tallish dark haired guy). I couldn't do much about them last week, and there were other guys closer to my pace.

I really do think Terry speeds up on later laps. Also, he seems faster (relative to the rabbit) on shorter intervals. The rabbit was far out ahead on the first 1200.

Anyway, "Bob" was great. He seems pretty consistent. I would normally start out ahead of him (except that I drafted off him the whole first interval) but he would pretty consistently pass me on later ones at ~800M, whereupon I would draft on him largely to the end. I think he really kept me going, but not going erratically, as I would have done on my own.

408
139

323
211

240
214

410
146

322
222

237

Average lap times were:
82.67
81.20
80.00
83.33
80.80
78.50

No fade.

Back home. Felt very good this way, too.

I have some preliminary conclusions:

• I was never that great at HR. I haven't gotten significantly worse, but 2008 was especially bad.
• z-man wasn't that good at HR before, but really kicked it up a notch circa 2008
• Winning times at HR, assuming a top field, should be in the low 7s. Pace is largely invariant over length, control density (style), climb, and season (although the X variables don't express enough variation to really test the latter factors, or any factors, really.)
• I have been in the 7s twice, and won on those occasions. They were longer courses.
• More data is required and this analysis is more art than science.

Data is here: http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0ArbGb0BTV-...

It looks like there is some good CSU orienteering training tomorrow. It is really unfortunate that it is on the same night as the track workout, which is where I am focusing.

Level 8 hills. 7mph through 48, and then to tempo (2 minutes earlier than last time.)

10mph at 56, 10.5mph at 58:30, and 11mph at 59:30.

Felt ridiculously good. Let's see about tomorrow.

1,034 calories.

Mini core afterwards.

Picked up 3 night-O controls.

Orienteering at HR is surprisingly rewarding when done at a walking pace.

Warmup before the course.

Hickory Run Red.

Another disappointing run at Hickory Run. What is going on?

Well, it may not have been terrible. It just seems like it on a relative basis. Formerly, my runs at Hickory Run were good on a relative basis. Now, z-man is my daddy. And Ross is, too, should he run.

I took this race seriously, and I ran aggressively--from a physical perspective. But, I didn't orienteer great and lacked confidence. #1 was a little bogus, but #2 was a leg which I should have owned. Not only were we training in that area yesterday, I think I had seen that control, and saw some remaining contour streamers on the way into it. And yet I screw it up the same way everyone screwed up the contour warmup.

#3 I find, but I just kind of stumbled into it. I had lost contact and just pushing on on a whim and found it. The next couple controls were executed as I had planned.

My shoes come untied twice on the way to #7. That never happens, but it shows a lack of preparation. I did maintain my line and concentration on that control. But, #8 was a big problem. I had intended to go out to the road (which would have been stupid anyway) because I didn't have a good plan to go straight. But, I didn't take a good bearing out that way, so I found myself going more straight and decided to stay in the woods. But, I obviously didn't have a plan, and paid the price. This was essentially the same leg I messed up (in the opposite direction) at the last event.

9-11 were a bit raggedly as I was getting rattled by WPs. On #15 I decide to cut and do it as planned. But, I think it was poor decision.

As an aside. I think that HR mapping conventions are a little odd. I think medium green (typically laurel) is ofter less passable than dark green (rhododendron) which you can often stoop or crawl under. But, the rhododendron is visually distinct in the terrain, while the laurel is amorphous.

Anyway, like I said, z-man ate my lunch. Is he so very good and I am so very bad? A margin is defined by two points, so it is not clear.

As another aside... I don't know what I feel about this course. I feel like it was very tough. I think some control placements (2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11) were especially challenging. I think they are at the edge of the distribution of fair, legitimate HR controls. Which goes to show why HR is such a great place and it reaffirms its status as one of my favorite maps.

HR revealed the deficiencies in my technique. I could not execute certain legs at the speed I was attempting to take them at. This is not getting any better.

[Note]: So, the splits are up, and they confirm my expectations. Simply, z-man was better. But, I had a decent race.

The thing that surprises me is that I lost a lot of time on 4 and 5 which I executed as intended, if carefully. How do you take those controls harder? They are so subtle, and high penalty. I was basically 1:30 back of the best times on those two legs. And another :35 on 3, the end of which, as noted elsewhere, I started majorly hesitating on.

Also, 1 minute back on 6, which was pretty clean.

How do I orienteer faster here is this subtle stuff?

A very weird thing happened on this run. At the finish I notice that my right insole is just _barely_ tucked into my shoe. It was .5 inches from being gone. The left was sticking out sufficiently that I could easily pull it out.

I had almost lost both insoles of virtually new shoes, while they were tightly laced. I thought this may be some sort of violation of ambient isotopy. Maybe I should ask Neil. Needless to say, had the insole wholly worked itself out, and there was not hint of what had happened, I would have been quite bewildered.

I attribute this strange phenomenon to a combination of Trimtex socks, and new and wet Integrators.

Apparently I schlepped 56 pounds of crap from the garage home after the HR weekend.