Having a running log is something interesting because when the week is almost over and you review the log, it's hard to fathom that you haven't run more than is logged. Not that this is bad, but for example this week I was looking over my log and thus far I've logged 17 miles. It's not that I feel terribly sore and therefore feel as if I should've logged more, but there's something about it that doesn't feel right. As if I should be at least at 25 miles or so. This number of course will increase dramatically with tomorrow's run and Sunday's lighter run, but it's still hard to believe I've logged so few miles. I wonder if anyone else encounters this issue, even if in reverse (you feel as if you've run fewer miles than the log states)?
One thing I started doing is not being so concerned about distance, but more so with time spent running. I recently picked up a book titled The Ultimate Guide to Trail Running and here's an interesting thing it noted, and why I started on this time and not distance kick:
The measure of time is often more meaningful than distance because, assuming a relatively constant level of exertion, unlike the constant of time, the distance covered will vary dramatically, depending on factors such as changes in grade, altitude, footing, and weather condition.
This is somewhat comforting for me since there are days when I go a bit easier with my running than others, and I would like a way to convert that time into something more meaningful. Trail running is invariably slower than road running, so this makes a lot of sense to me. I also highly recommend this book to anyone who hasn't read it and has any plans of possibly converting to trail running. Great intro book.
Stay strong,
Mircea
0 comments:
Post a Comment