4500

I ran ten miles at better than 10:00 pace yesterday, and I am pretty much fully recovered from Twin Cities.

Here's some exciting news: Since I formally began tracking miles in October 2004, my personal odometer has now passed 4500 miles! That's approximately the distance (as the crow flies) from Chicago, Illinois to Zurich, Switzerland. I may someday go "around the world" like two of my work colleagues, but that's still a long way off. For now, I'm happy just to be able to keep on running!

Three weeks apart

Today's recovery run featured two miles to the north (against the wind) and two miles to the south (with the wind). The splits were 11:12, 10:59, 10:30, and 10:31. I'll rest tomorrow and run at least six miles on both Saturday and Sunday.

Some of you may have noticed the next race on my calendar -- the Grand Rapids Marathon on October 28. Yes, running marathons three weeks apart is a bit crazy, but given my history, it's not that much of a stretch. I ran marathons four weeks apart in March (Little Rock and Waukesha). I also ran a half marathon in the South Milwaukee area just ONE week after the Waukesha race.

Wish me luck!

Twin Cities Details

Miles 1-5	9:00	8:34	8:55	8:57	8:53
Miles 6-10	9:09	9:12	9:26	9:00	8:57
Miles 11-15	9:48	9:49	9:21	10:02	9:18
Miles 16-20	10:44	10:18	12:12	11:09	15:30
Miles 21-25	10:50	12:53	11:48	14:52	13:17
Miles 26-End	12:48	2:21

• Average Pace: 10:34/mile
• First half: 2:00:07    Second half: 2:36:56
• Fastest Mile: #2 (8:34) Slowest Mile: #20 (15:30)
• As you can see, I held things together fairly well in the first half, but the heat made it difficult to keep up the pace in the second half. Until next race!

"New Stuff" 5K

It was a lovely 46 degrees outside this morning. Though my quads were still a bit sore, I managed to turn in a slow but steady 3-mile effort in my first run since the Twin Cities marathon. I wore a record number of items for the first time, including the jacket and winter hat I bought at the expo, the free TCM knit gloves, and a new pair of shoes.

My mile splits were 11:48, 11:35, and 11:08. I'll probably be under 10 minutes a mile in a few days.

Finishing Time: 4:37:02

It was a HOT day in Minnesota. With temperatures nearing 80, I could not
put together a very fast race. Once I knew that I couldn't set a personal
record, I took it easy, finishing with a time of 4:37:02. Oh, well --
there will be always be opportunities to race again!

Update: While one results page has my chip time at 4:37:02, another source says 4:37:03. I'll go ahead and consider the slower time the official one. :)

Weather Update

Temperatures are going to be in the 70s for the Twin Cities marathon.
While that's great weather for watching a marathon, it's a bit too hot for
RUNNING a marathon. I may have to reduce my pace from the targeted
8:45/mile to 9:10/mile -- it will be a game time decision. In any case,
it's going to be fun, as my brother, his wife, and several other family
members will be cheering me on. Wish me luck! :)

FINAL UPDATE (5:30 a.m. on Sunday): It's going to be a warm one! Runner tracking is supposed to be available here -- I'm bib number 3564. See ya!

About 41 hours...

I didn't run at all yesterday, and I'm taking today off as well.  After a gentle two miles tomorrow morning, I'll be heading to Minnesota.  The weather looks a bit on the warm side, but it might also be rainy, which could actually help.  We'll see how it goes!

Early Riser

Yesterday morning, I was originally planning to get up around 7:30, which is sleeping in by my standards, since I'm usually up at 6 (or earlier) on weekday mornings. For whatever reason, I woke up at 5:40 and couldn't fall back asleep, so I got four easy miles in, stretched a bit, did some crunches on our fitness ball, took a shower, and got back to bed ALL BEFORE 7:30 a.m.

I was up early again this morning to run eight miles with Mark (a friend who lives about a mile away). We kept the pace nice and easy.

Things are looking great for Twin Cities, now less than 167 hours away! I'm already checking the weather. It might be rainy, but the temps should be comfortable.

New Look, Same Fast Pace

I'm about eight days away from the Twin Cities Marathon, and I'm definitely in the "taper madness" stage. For those who don't know what this means -- basically, I am reducing my weekly mileage to build up strength for the marathon, and it can make a little bit excited. So, I used some of that energy to update the template of the blog. I hope you like it.

Also, check out this map that I made with all of my marathon results to date. Pretty neat, eh? :)

Kenosha Firecracker 10K

Almost two months after the race took place, it's time to tell everyone about the run in Kenosha on July 1, 2007. Here's a map of the (planned) course:

You might want to click on the picture so it opens in a new window while you read the recap.

There was a higher-than-expected race day turnout, so the 10K started 5-10 minutes late. Once we were off and running, though, things seemed fine. I reached the first mile marker in 7:23. At point "A" on the map, the 10K runners go slightly further south than the 5K runners before turning back to the north. None of the 5K runners, who started after us, had reached this point yet, so there was no trouble at all figuring the right way to go.

As I headed back to the north, some of the lightning-fast 5K runners passed me by. I clocked mile 2 and 3 at 7:38 and 7:48, respectively, and I was still feeling pretty good.

Then, things got interesting. At point "B", 5K runners were supposed to turn left toward the finish, and 10K runners were supposed to turn right. What actually happened is that EVERYBODY turned right -- good for 10K runners like me, but bad for the 5K folks.

Things got even stranger at point "C". Course volunteers were turning participants around at this point, apparently to make up for sending 5K folks the wrong way at point "B". However, they were turning EVERYBODY around. So, 5K runners were now back on track (sort of), but 10K runners would get to the finish way too soon.

Somewhere between points "C" and "B", another race official was shouting that 10K runners needed to head further north. Now feeling very flustered, I turned around again, passing a few runners as I reached point "C" again, and this time I went further east and was back on course. I reached the 4-mile mark 9:54 after the 3-mile mark, which means I lost a couple of minutes in the confusion. Oh, well, at least I was on the correct course.

As I continued north, I put a bit of distance between myself and other 10K runners. I soon realized that there was no one in front of me. All of the faster runners had gone toward the finish prematurely, and I was leading the pack of runners on the right path. As I reached the rest stop at point "D", I asked, "Has anyone been by here yet?" A volunteer handed me a cup of water and said, "Nope, you're the first!" This gave me a bit of a rush, and I kept up the pace, clocking miles 5 and 6 at 7:31 and 7:36.

I managed to hold off all of the other runners in my "group", and I crossed the line with a chip time of 49:22 -- a new PR despite the lost time between points "B" and "C".

Let's take a look at the unofficial results -- as you can see, the first 47 runners went all the way to the finish after turning around at point "C", and their mile paces are (of course) unrealistic -- 3:41 for a mile would be world record.

So, what about the official results? Some might argue that I won the race, having been the first to complete the entire 10K course. As it turns out, the only thing I got was this letter from the Kenosha YMCA, basically stating that there were no official results, and that everybody gets a medal. I wasn't overly satisfied with this. I was hoping they'd give out two sets of awards -- one for the "short" 10K and one for the "long" 10K.

Anyway, I'll probably run it again next year because it's one of the few Kenosha races available throughout the year. Hopefully, things will go much more smoothly in 2008.