Wolverine Plan Discussion
-
[old] ebolton
- Posts: 0
- Joined: March 18th, 2006, 10:32 pm
Training
For folks looking for a concise reference to bikes, cycling training, and riding fast, I suggest <u>Smart Cycling </u> by Arnie Baker, MD.<br /><br />My copy is a few years old, so the information on bike tech is a little dated, but the principals in it are spot on. He writes about making the choices to get a good bike for the money rather than paying for the best (lightest?) bike available.<br /><br />The 12-week trainer program he has in the book is highly regarded. Note it's actually a little late to start it for the upcoming North American season.<br /><br />Ed
-
[old] johnmcclellan
Training
<!--quoteo(post=58209:date=Mar 2 2006, 08:34 PM:name=mpukita)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(mpukita @ Mar 2 2006, 08:34 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>OK, now I find out all you guys have been <b>holding back </b> on me ... all this cycling knowledge, cross training, etc. Grrrrrr ....<br /><br />(just kidding, this is great)<br /><br />We might have to start another thread: Wolverine Plan: Cycling Adaptation<br /><br /> 
<br /> </td></tr></table><br />Now Mark, I just got here! I'll hold back nothing!<br /><br />In terms of looking for a bike, first question to ask is "What are you looking to do?" Just go long and have fun? Race? If race, road races, crits, or TT? Loaded touring or just day trips? Commuting? Etc. Everyone should have a bike for every possible purpose - I'll not share how many I own (why my wife wants to throw me out). <br /><br />Too many bikes are designed for racing and sold to people who will never race. Unless you are young and really flexible, they can be a pain after an hour of riding. So I would start with defining what you want to do - then we can focus on some paths. I wouldn't worry about brands - there are lots of really good frame brands, and at least two really good component manufacturers who have great gear - just pick your price point. But I would start with defining the kind of riding you want to do, that will determine the right frame geometry, and then frame material and components become a function of budget and terrain.<br /><br />Smart Cycling is a great book, covers everything. I've just purchased the new book on power training by Allen and Coggan - extremely good. For long distances, Simon Doughty's Long Distance Cyclists Handbook is the best.<br />
<br /> </td></tr></table><br />Now Mark, I just got here! I'll hold back nothing!<br /><br />In terms of looking for a bike, first question to ask is "What are you looking to do?" Just go long and have fun? Race? If race, road races, crits, or TT? Loaded touring or just day trips? Commuting? Etc. Everyone should have a bike for every possible purpose - I'll not share how many I own (why my wife wants to throw me out). <br /><br />Too many bikes are designed for racing and sold to people who will never race. Unless you are young and really flexible, they can be a pain after an hour of riding. So I would start with defining what you want to do - then we can focus on some paths. I wouldn't worry about brands - there are lots of really good frame brands, and at least two really good component manufacturers who have great gear - just pick your price point. But I would start with defining the kind of riding you want to do, that will determine the right frame geometry, and then frame material and components become a function of budget and terrain.<br /><br />Smart Cycling is a great book, covers everything. I've just purchased the new book on power training by Allen and Coggan - extremely good. For long distances, Simon Doughty's Long Distance Cyclists Handbook is the best.<br />-
[old] ragiarn
- Posts: 0
- Joined: March 18th, 2006, 10:32 pm
Training
<!--quoteo(post=58229:date=Mar 2 2006, 11:20 PM:name=John McClellan)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(John McClellan @ Mar 2 2006, 11:20 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--quoteo(post=58209:date=Mar 2 2006, 08:34 PM:name=mpukita)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(mpukita @ Mar 2 2006, 08:34 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>OK, now I find out all you guys have been <b>holding back </b> on me ... all this cycling knowledge, cross training, etc. Grrrrrr ....<br /><br />(just kidding, this is great)<br /><br />We might have to start another thread: Wolverine Plan: Cycling Adaptation<br /><br /> <br /> </td></tr></table><br />Now Mark, I just got here! I'll hold back nothing!<br /><br />In terms of looking for a bike, first question to ask is "What are you looking to do?" Just go long and have fun? Race? If race, road races, crits, or TT? Loaded touring or just day trips? Commuting? Etc. Everyone should have a bike for every possible purpose - I'll not share how many I own (why my wife wants to throw me out). <br /><br />Too many bikes are designed for racing and sold to people who will never race. Unless you are young and really flexible, they can be a pain after an hour of riding. So I would start with defining what you want to do - then we can focus on some paths. I wouldn't worry about brands - there are lots of really good frame brands, and at least two really good component manufacturers who have great gear - just pick your price point. But I would start with defining the kind of riding you want to do, that will determine the right frame geometry, and then frame material and components become a function of budget and terrain.<br /><br />Smart Cycling is a great book, covers everything. I've just purchased the new book on power training by Allen and Coggan - extremely good. For long distances, Simon Doughty's Long Distance Cyclists Handbook is the best.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />John makes a good point. Bikes are like cars, before you buy you need to determine what are you using the bike for. You wouldn't buy a race car unless you planned on racing ( or would you). <br />Racing bikes are not designed for comfort. <br /><br />In looking for a bike I would first try to find a good local bike store. The most important component of a good bike store is a good bike mechanic and an honest salesman.<br /><br />Bikes should be considered as 3 major parts- <br />The first is the frame- The frames are made by many different builders from small shops that make only a few hundred a year and on special order to major manufacturers like Trek and Cannondale. The most important thing to look for in a bike frame is the geometry. There is a racing geometry which is very stiff, tight and unforgiving. It is designed to maker sure that every ounce of effort is transferred directly to the wheel with very little flex- in the frame that might dissipate the effort. You feel every little bump in the road. There is the touring geometry which is more relaxed and giving and helps smooth out the ride. <br /><br />Frames can cost from a few hundred dollars to 5k or more depending on the material and who makes the frame. <br /><br />The second are the the components- the add on parts, brakes, shifters, rear and front derailers, cranks- also known as gruppo- There only a few major component makers- The most notable are Campagnolo (Italian) and Shimano (Japanese). <br />These gruppos can be found on most high end bikes- The cost of these gruppos can vary from several hundred dollars to thousands for the very best. A good gruppo can last you a lifetime and if you ever get tired of your bike can take the components off the frame and put them on another frame to make a new bike. <br /><br />The third part are the wheels- again these are made by many manufacturers and cost from $50-60 to hundreds of dollars. The more expensive wheels are generally racing wheels. Wheels are readily interchangeable and many cyclists have several sets of wheels depending on whether they are training, racing or touring. <br /><br />I purchased a racing bike in 1987 from Richard Sachs a well known bike builder in Connecticut. At that time the frame alone cost me $700, I had Campagnolo components put on the bike as well as racing wheels. the bike cost me between $1500-2000. When I was racing I would train 200+ miles weekly 8 months out the year. The bike and I have had several crashes during races and the bike always came out better than I did. <br /> I still have the bike and as a matter of fact I am presently using it on my wind trainer. <br /><br />Last year I purchased a Specialized Roubaix with Shimano compnents and it cost me $1700. The Specialized is more of a touring bike than a racing bike (a concession to my aging bones). I would have liked to upgrade my Sachs to the new components available but the upgrade would have cost almost as much a purchasing a new bike. <br /><br />As a first bike I would recommend the Specialized Roubaix and unless you are very serious about racing stay away from racing bikes. Bikes are like cars- you can buy a Ford, Buick, Cadillac, Mercedes or even a Ferrari. They will all get you from point A to point B. <br /><br />good luck in finding a bike<br />Ralph Giarnella MD <br />Southington, CT <br />
<br /> </td></tr></table><br />Now Mark, I just got here! I'll hold back nothing!<br /><br />In terms of looking for a bike, first question to ask is "What are you looking to do?" Just go long and have fun? Race? If race, road races, crits, or TT? Loaded touring or just day trips? Commuting? Etc. Everyone should have a bike for every possible purpose - I'll not share how many I own (why my wife wants to throw me out). <br /><br />Too many bikes are designed for racing and sold to people who will never race. Unless you are young and really flexible, they can be a pain after an hour of riding. So I would start with defining what you want to do - then we can focus on some paths. I wouldn't worry about brands - there are lots of really good frame brands, and at least two really good component manufacturers who have great gear - just pick your price point. But I would start with defining the kind of riding you want to do, that will determine the right frame geometry, and then frame material and components become a function of budget and terrain.<br /><br />Smart Cycling is a great book, covers everything. I've just purchased the new book on power training by Allen and Coggan - extremely good. For long distances, Simon Doughty's Long Distance Cyclists Handbook is the best.<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br /><br />John makes a good point. Bikes are like cars, before you buy you need to determine what are you using the bike for. You wouldn't buy a race car unless you planned on racing ( or would you). <br />Racing bikes are not designed for comfort. <br /><br />In looking for a bike I would first try to find a good local bike store. The most important component of a good bike store is a good bike mechanic and an honest salesman.<br /><br />Bikes should be considered as 3 major parts- <br />The first is the frame- The frames are made by many different builders from small shops that make only a few hundred a year and on special order to major manufacturers like Trek and Cannondale. The most important thing to look for in a bike frame is the geometry. There is a racing geometry which is very stiff, tight and unforgiving. It is designed to maker sure that every ounce of effort is transferred directly to the wheel with very little flex- in the frame that might dissipate the effort. You feel every little bump in the road. There is the touring geometry which is more relaxed and giving and helps smooth out the ride. <br /><br />Frames can cost from a few hundred dollars to 5k or more depending on the material and who makes the frame. <br /><br />The second are the the components- the add on parts, brakes, shifters, rear and front derailers, cranks- also known as gruppo- There only a few major component makers- The most notable are Campagnolo (Italian) and Shimano (Japanese). <br />These gruppos can be found on most high end bikes- The cost of these gruppos can vary from several hundred dollars to thousands for the very best. A good gruppo can last you a lifetime and if you ever get tired of your bike can take the components off the frame and put them on another frame to make a new bike. <br /><br />The third part are the wheels- again these are made by many manufacturers and cost from $50-60 to hundreds of dollars. The more expensive wheels are generally racing wheels. Wheels are readily interchangeable and many cyclists have several sets of wheels depending on whether they are training, racing or touring. <br /><br />I purchased a racing bike in 1987 from Richard Sachs a well known bike builder in Connecticut. At that time the frame alone cost me $700, I had Campagnolo components put on the bike as well as racing wheels. the bike cost me between $1500-2000. When I was racing I would train 200+ miles weekly 8 months out the year. The bike and I have had several crashes during races and the bike always came out better than I did. <br /> I still have the bike and as a matter of fact I am presently using it on my wind trainer. <br /><br />Last year I purchased a Specialized Roubaix with Shimano compnents and it cost me $1700. The Specialized is more of a touring bike than a racing bike (a concession to my aging bones). I would have liked to upgrade my Sachs to the new components available but the upgrade would have cost almost as much a purchasing a new bike. <br /><br />As a first bike I would recommend the Specialized Roubaix and unless you are very serious about racing stay away from racing bikes. Bikes are like cars- you can buy a Ford, Buick, Cadillac, Mercedes or even a Ferrari. They will all get you from point A to point B. <br /><br />good luck in finding a bike<br />Ralph Giarnella MD <br />Southington, CT <br />-
[old] mpukita
Training
<!--quoteo(post=58329:date=Mar 3 2006, 02:13 PM:name=ragiarn)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ragiarn @ Mar 3 2006, 02:13 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>As a first bike I would recommend the Specialized Roubaix and unless you are very serious about racing stay away from racing bikes. Bikes are like cars- you can buy a Ford, Buick, Cadillac, Mercedes or even a Ferrari. They will all get you from point A to point B. <br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Ralph:<br /><br />Thanks.<br /><br />Assuming I'm doing it for cross training, and long day tours, not races (unless they were some kind of distance event and only for fun, not too serious) ... would the Roubaix be a good choice? As well, would it be the kind of bike I could use if I got up the ambition to do a cross country ride? With packs? Without? For indoor training?<br /><br />(sorry about all the questions)<br /><br />Just trying to get a sense for the utility of the Roubaix. As well, what other makes/models would be similar?<br /><br />Thanks again ... regards ... Mark
-
[old] ragiarn
- Posts: 0
- Joined: March 18th, 2006, 10:32 pm
Training
<!--quoteo--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--quotec-->Ralph:<br /><br />Thanks.<br /><br />Assuming I'm doing it for cross training, and long day tours, not races (unless they were some kind of distance event and only for fun, not too serious) ... would the Roubaix be a good choice? As well, would it be the kind of bike I could use if I got up the ambition to do a cross country ride? With packs? Without? For indoor training?<br /><br />(sorry about all the questions)<br /><br />Just trying to get a sense for the utility of the Roubaix. As well, what other makes/models would be similar?<br /><br />Thanks again ... regards ... Mark<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Without a doubt the Roubaix would be the ideal bike for long distance rides. It comes in several formations with double or triple crank. I purchased the triple crank- with a triple crank you can have super low gears for the Rocky mountains or the alps and the high gears for fast riding. <br />Check out the website<br /><br />[email]http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCBkMode ... =06Roubaix[/email]<br /><br />I purchased the Roubaix triple elite. The difference in the models is the components- The higher priced models have Dura Ace components which are the top of the line components. The model I purchased was in stock and the bike shop gave me a club discount. I am perfectly happy with my purchase .<br /><br />Ralph Giarnella MD <br />Southington, CT
.<br /><br />Ralph Giarnella MD <br />Southington, CT-
[old] mpukita
Training
Thanks Ralph ... great information (as usual).<br /><br />Ralph:<br /><br />Another question ... sorry ...<br /><br />I bought some rather pricey Dura Ace pedals, along with carbon fiber shoes, for my current "ride". I know I can move them ... but do most higher-end bikes come with pedals, or without?<br /><br />Guess I'd just move the pedals from these to my old ride. Should I assume they'll provide new plates for the shoes with the new bike, or is that something I need to remember to procure as an add-on? I sense that the various pedals available do not have a standard connection mechanism ... or do they?<br /><br />Does this question make sense?<br /><br />-- Mark
-
[old] FrancoisA
- Posts: 0
- Joined: March 18th, 2006, 10:32 pm
Training
<!--quoteo(post=58406:date=Mar 4 2006, 01:20 PM:name=mpukita)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(mpukita @ Mar 4 2006, 01:20 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I bought some rather pricey Dura Ace pedals, along with carbon fiber shoes, for my current "ride". I know I can move them ... but do most higher-end bikes come with pedals, or without?<br /> </td></tr></table><br />Hi Mark,<br />Most higher-end bikes come without pedals.<br />Good luck for your race tomorrow!<br /><br />Francois
-
[old] FrancoisA
- Posts: 0
- Joined: March 18th, 2006, 10:32 pm
Training
To get more on topic 
, I have a question for you.<br /><br />Now that the racing season is over for most of you, what do you plan to do with the WP? Are you contemplating any shift in emphasis among the four levels? What do you do with the L4 now that you have reached the higher sequences? Would you advocate cross-training?<br /><br />If I remember right, Mike mentioned that he would do pretty much the same training but with less intensity. What do you think?<br /><br />Francois<br />
, I have a question for you.<br /><br />Now that the racing season is over for most of you, what do you plan to do with the WP? Are you contemplating any shift in emphasis among the four levels? What do you do with the L4 now that you have reached the higher sequences? Would you advocate cross-training?<br /><br />If I remember right, Mike mentioned that he would do pretty much the same training but with less intensity. What do you think?<br /><br />Francois<br />-
[old] johnmcclellan
Training
<!--quoteo(post=58405:date=Mar 4 2006, 08:12 AM:name=ragiarn)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(ragiarn @ Mar 4 2006, 08:12 AM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--quoteo--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE</b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><!--quotec-->Ralph:<br /><br />Thanks.<br /><br />Assuming I'm doing it for cross training, and long day tours, not races (unless they were some kind of distance event and only for fun, not too serious) ... would the Roubaix be a good choice? As well, would it be the kind of bike I could use if I got up the ambition to do a cross country ride? With packs? Without? For indoor training?<br /><br />(sorry about all the questions)<br /><br />Just trying to get a sense for the utility of the Roubaix. As well, what other makes/models would be similar?<br /><br />Thanks again ... regards ... Mark<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />Without a doubt the Roubaix would be the ideal bike for long distance rides.<br /><br /><br />[email]http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCBkMode ... =06Roubaix[/email]<br /><br />I purchased the Roubaix triple elite. The difference in the models is the components- <br />Ralph Giarnella MD <br />Southington, CT<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I agree that the Roubaix would be ideal for long distance day rides. I looked very seriously at the Roubaix, and what made me ultimately decide against it is that it doesn't have eyelets for mounting racks and fenders, which I really like for ultrarides, and would really be a necessity if you wanted to do extended touring with panniers and all that. Also, I wouldn't do a long tour on carbon - I know they hardly ever fail, but when they do, they do it big time - steel can be repaired - not sure that anyone makes a carbon touring bike, but there's always the "Franken-bike" converted to do something the make had not intended. But the Roubaix is a very comfortable bike. I would probably put on bigger tires (25 or 28 mm wide) - it makes a big difference in comfort, no real difference in rolling resistance, and the weight and aero penalties don't really matter if you aren't racing. Note that frame material is steel for the base model, but still w/carbon forks and stays.<br /><br />If you are seriously interested in touring, you should check out Rivendell, Bruce Gordon and Heron, and if you want something really neat and special, check out Hetchins and Bob Jackson at Worldclasscycles.com (I have a Bruce Gordon and a Hetchins). But if touring is a future maybe, you won't go wrong getting a Roubaix today.<br /><br />Note: Yukon John has just created a cycling thread, so we can all move this discussion over there.
-
[old] ragiarn
- Posts: 0
- Joined: March 18th, 2006, 10:32 pm
Training
<!--quoteo(post=58421:date=Mar 4 2006, 11:38 AM:name=FrancoisA)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(FrancoisA @ Mar 4 2006, 11:38 AM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>To get more on topic , I have a question for you.<br /><br />Now that the racing season is over for most of you, what do you plan to do with the WP? Are you contemplating any shift in emphasis among the four levels? What do you do with the L4 now that you have reached the higher sequences? Would you advocate cross-training?<br /><br />If I remember right, Mike mentioned that he would do pretty much the same training but with less intensity. What do you think?<br /><br />Francois<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I am shifting my training focus to cycling while trying to maintain my rowing endurance. The one thing I learned when I hurt my back and could not row for two weeks is how quickly high intensity endurance is lost. 
<br /><br />For now I plan to row 3-4 times weekly with emphasis on levles 3&4 and occasionally do a 2 or 1. As the weather improves and I can shift my cycle training outdoors I will increase my time in the saddle, especially on the weekends. <br /><br />On my indoor cycle trainer I have finished my first full week of serious training and I am presently doing the equivalent of level 3&4 workouts on the bike for 50 minutes- Once I reach 60 minutes I will just increase the intensity. I can only take so much on the bike indoor training. I will extend my endurance when I can go outdoors and ride for 3-5 hrs at a time. Time goes by much faster when outdoors especially if you can ride with others of comparable goals.<br /><br />My primary forcus for all training is #1 fitness, #2 fun #3 racing. Training for racing just gives me impetus to train harder rather than just putting in the time.<br /><br />Ralph Giarnella MD <br />Southington, CT <br /><br /><br />
, I have a question for you.<br /><br />Now that the racing season is over for most of you, what do you plan to do with the WP? Are you contemplating any shift in emphasis among the four levels? What do you do with the L4 now that you have reached the higher sequences? Would you advocate cross-training?<br /><br />If I remember right, Mike mentioned that he would do pretty much the same training but with less intensity. What do you think?<br /><br />Francois<br /> </td></tr></table><br /><br />I am shifting my training focus to cycling while trying to maintain my rowing endurance. The one thing I learned when I hurt my back and could not row for two weeks is how quickly high intensity endurance is lost. <br /><br />For now I plan to row 3-4 times weekly with emphasis on levles 3&4 and occasionally do a 2 or 1. As the weather improves and I can shift my cycle training outdoors I will increase my time in the saddle, especially on the weekends. <br /><br />On my indoor cycle trainer I have finished my first full week of serious training and I am presently doing the equivalent of level 3&4 workouts on the bike for 50 minutes- Once I reach 60 minutes I will just increase the intensity. I can only take so much on the bike indoor training. I will extend my endurance when I can go outdoors and ride for 3-5 hrs at a time. Time goes by much faster when outdoors especially if you can ride with others of comparable goals.<br /><br />My primary forcus for all training is #1 fitness, #2 fun #3 racing. Training for racing just gives me impetus to train harder rather than just putting in the time.<br /><br />Ralph Giarnella MD <br />Southington, CT <br /><br /><br />-
[old] tennstrike
- Posts: 0
- Joined: March 18th, 2006, 10:32 pm
Training
OK, so maybe this should be on the "Brag About" thread, but it's Mike and the WP who get the credit every time I get a little faster.<br /><br />Old 2K 7:27.4 Jan 09, 06<br />New 2K 7:22.1 Mar 10, 06<br /><br />This is particularly satisfying since 7 days ago, going for 7:20 I simply gave up with 600 meters to go when I was shifting from 1:50 to 1:49. I just didn't have it in me. So I figured since I was doing my 500's at 1:50.5 I should be able to do 7:22. The easiest way I figured was instead of shifting at 1200 600 and 200, I planned to shift on the 500's.<br /><br />Goal Actual<br />1:52.0 1:51.8<br />1:51.0 1:51.2<br />1:50.0 1:50.1<br />1:49.0 1:49.0<br /><br />Feel really good after also setting my 1K two days ago. That good feeling lasted a day until my younger son said "That's kind of sad that I can hold a second better split time on my 6K than your new 1K PB, isn't it." He was just needling me, but it made me think what a long way still to go. Fortunately my goal is not sub 21:00 on my 6K but sub 7:00 on my 2K.<br /><br />Thanks Mike.<br /><br />Jeff <br />
-
[old] johnmcclellan
Training
<!--quoteo(post=58973:date=Mar 10 2006, 08:13 PM:name=tennstrike)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(tennstrike @ Mar 10 2006, 08:13 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Goal Actual<br />1:52.0 1:51.8<br />1:51.0 1:51.2<br />1:50.0 1:50.1<br />1:49.0 1:49.0<br /><br />Jeff<br /> </td></tr></table><br />Jeff,<br />Nice improvement and amazing pacing! <br /><br />And re: mouthing off son, didn't Yoda say something to Luke Skywalker like "When old as me you are, row as fast you will not." I'm lucky it's my daughter who rows - on pure height I should be able to hold her off for a while.
-
[old] mpukita
Training
<!--quoteo(post=58973:date=Mar 10 2006, 08:13 PM:name=tennstrike)--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'><b>QUOTE(tennstrike @ Mar 10 2006, 08:13 PM) </b></div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>OK, so maybe this should be on the "Brag About" thread, but it's Mike and the WP who get the credit every time I get a little faster.<br /><br />Old 2K 7:27.4 Jan 09, 06<br />New 2K 7:22.1 Mar 10, 06<br /><br />This is particularly satisfying since 7 days ago, going for 7:20 I simply gave up with 600 meters to go when I was shifting from 1:50 to 1:49. I just didn't have it in me. So I figured since I was doing my 500's at 1:50.5 I should be able to do 7:22. The easiest way I figured was instead of shifting at 1200 600 and 200, I planned to shift on the 500's.<br /><br />Goal Actual<br />1:52.0 1:51.8<br />1:51.0 1:51.2<br />1:50.0 1:50.1<br />1:49.0 1:49.0<br /><br />Feel really good after also setting my 1K two days ago. That good feeling lasted a day until my younger son said "That's kind of sad that I can hold a second better split time on my 6K than your new 1K PB, isn't it." He was just needling me, but it made me think what a long way still to go. Fortunately my goal is not sub 21:00 on my 6K but sub 7:00 on my 2K.<br /><br />Thanks Mike.<br /><br />Jeff<br /> </td></tr></table><br />First, congratulations on the new PBs ... they took some work, I know.<br /><br />Second, I actually feel good that I'm as slow as I am, because I know there are YEARS of training ahead that will lead to improvement of my times ... EVEN AS I AGE. Thus, there will always be something to shoot for in terms of raw improvement of my times ... at least for a reasonable period of time.<br /><br />I feel for guys like Mike, who are older, yet at the top of the rankings ... he's said it before ... it's got to be tough to train hard knowing that all you're trying to do is get <b>slower </b> as <u>slowly as possible</u>.<br /><br />That will be an interesting bridge to cross, assuming I ever get there. I know I was a bit "flat" with my training for a few weeks after reaching my first million meters, which was a big goal for me. That's why you'll see me encourage people who post their accomplishing their first million to set a new goal ASAP ... to hopefully skip the down cycle that can occur. I've heard this from a number of people, so I feel it's a common occurance that people need to be aware of and try to proactively combat.