Foods and Farmers Market

My little hometown has a farmer's market, and it opens on Saturday. I can't wait. I am not an organic, eat what you grow, raw foodie type. I like meat, potatoes, vegetables, and fruit, and probably in that order. But recently I have been eating less meat (of all types) and more vegetables, and can't wait for the summer.

What made me miss the market the most is strawberries. Through the magic of modern agriculture, we can get Driscoll strawberries 365 days a year at our local grocery store. My toddler loves them, so we feed them to her. Except I can't taste them. I will eat one that looks like a strawberry, smells like a strawberry, but has no discernible flavor. To make it sweet enough to eat in a shortcake or macerate into a sauce, I had to add sugar. I call them fauxberries.

But the little strawberries, grown locally, that we get at the farmers market? Wonderful. They taste great, and I can eat handfuls at a time. Same with blueberries. And the tomatoes. The carrots have so much flavor and color that they look like something from a cartoon, not the lifeless bag of orange stalks in the grocery store. We are now entering the time when all of that goodness is a short walk away. Mmmmm.

Tempo Run

With a nod to the Running Laminator and a book I picked up "Run Faster", I changed my workout for today to a tempo run. My goal was a one mile warmup, 4 miles at tempo pace (which I defined at heart rate 85-90% (basically between 160 and 169 BPM), and then a half mile cool down. I ended up running the tempo pace at 7:30 on the treadmill, which my Garmin footpod had at 7:00 or so.


At the 7:30 pace on the treadmill (which Garmin had at sub 7:00), my heart rate was in high 150's and climbing. But I don't care what my heart rate monitor said, I knew was not going to make 4 miles at that pace. When I ratcheted down the pace to 7:45 on the treadmill, I hit a sweet spot -- comfortably hard. And my heart rate was perfect -- comfortably in 160's. I decided to extend the tempo portion to 4.5 miles, and shorten the cool down to 0.75 or so. Ended up with a 5.75 mile run on treadmill. Of course, Garmin had it my run both longer and faster than what treadmill measured. Unfortunately, I accidentally turned off my Garmin when I switched from tempo pace to cooldown mode, so I have no HR data for the last 6 minutes of the run (which I ran at 9:40 pace or so). Final data from the treadmill:

5.75 miles at 8:03 average pace

Garmin had it at 6.25 miles at 7:52 pace

I sweated like crazy, fwiw. I normally sweat a lot, but tonight was ridiculous.

It was a tough workout -- one of the harder ones I have done on a treadmill. I speculate that a tempo run on a treadmill is easier than one on the road because on the road it is up to the runner to maintain the pace. On the road, I know it would have been a challenge to go that fast --and maintain the pace. So, overall a success.

PFS...Uh oh

PFS -- Patella Femoral Syndrome. I had it in training for my first marathon and it scares me like no other injury. In sum, it is a chronic over use injury caused by putting too much stress on the legs and knees too quickly. Many runners and beginners have relatively weak quads and tight hips. Thus the patella (the kneecap) does not track exactly straight in its intended groove. As you run more and more, irritation develops under the kneecap, and for me anyway, resulted in debilitating pain. It almost ended my first marathon before it began. After visiting two "famous" running docs, an MRI and scheduled surgery, I instead opted for a month in physical therapy. (I had a great Physical therapist here in New York, and highly recommend him if anyone needs one. He was training various Broadway stars and the NY Rangers at the time, and it was kind of weird rehabbing next to those guys.) Anyway, the basic remedy was no running, stretching the hips and quads, and basic quad exercises. After a month or so I was back to to running, but truth be told, I ran a 20 miler about 8 weeks before my marathon and then not more than 12. I had no idea if I was going to make it. But I did.
Imagine my chagrin, then, yesterday when I rubbed my knee and felt IT. The soft spot that reminded me so much of the dull, almost bruise like pain of PFS under my left knee -- the same knee I had it before. It was one of the reasons I wanted to lift more weights, more core exercises this time -- to avoid exactly this problem. So today, I started gobbling Advil, and stretching every spare moment.
I was very nervous getting on the treadmill tonight.

But no pain! Maybe this is just a little tenderness, but I am not taking any chances -- ice on it, more Advil, more stretching. And a rededication to core, hip and quad exercises, thanks to Matt Fitzgerald.

There is no substitute for prevention, preparation and attention now.

Memorial Day

Let us all remember the many servicemen and women, current and former, and all they do for us. We all owe a debt to them for their services and sacrifices. And they are a bunch of very dedicated and good people.
As for running, I had a great run today. That is true, despite the unseasonal heat here (81 degrees) and humidity (maybe 80%?). Also the barbecue and beer last night wasn't exactly on the nutrition plan. Maybe it was the day off yesterday, but I felt incredibly strong on the trail today. Over last two months, I have increased my pace by about 45 seconds per mile and decreased my heart rate about 10%. Love my Garmin, and it is nice to see how all the hard work pays off in physical changes.

Today I wanted to run longer, but a combination of a movie, a sleeping baby, rain and a trip to Whole Foods limited my run time...Oh well. I did sleep in this morning and can't really complain -- I got my free hour in middle of the day.

Now after a shower, I am watching the hockey game (go Wings!) and planning my grill strategy for tonight..steak, fresh asparagus, wild arugula, fresh parmesan...all healthy and yummy.

Happy Memorial Day to all.

First Interval

Today at the gym, I tried something new: an interval workout. After much reading, etc., the consensus is that interval workouts are a vital part of any training program. So, after plugging my 10K time into the McMillan Racing Calculator to get training times, I ran the following 5.5 mile workout in 44:51 on the treadmill:

2x400 normal (9:22 pace)
1x400 pace (7:03 pace)
1x400 normal (9:22 pace)

1x800 pace (7:03 pace)
1x800 normal (9:22 pace)

1x800 pace (7:03 pace)
1x800 normal (9:22 pace)

1x800 pace (7:03 pace)
1x800 normal (9:22 pace)

1x800 pace (7:03 pace)
1x800 normal (9:22 pace)

1x400 pace (6:20 pace)
1x800 normal (10:00 pace)

As per my last several workouts, my Garmin footpod registered a faster speed and pace than the treadmill, with an interval pace of around 6:45 and recovery pace around 9:00. This is a graph of heart rate and pace:




(I HAVE to get better at images in blogger...)

Anyway, the footpod had the workout right at 6 miles and not 5.5 miles as per the treadmill. It was a really tough workout and I am wiped out. Heart rate topped out at 164 (about 87% max HR). But it is true: it makes you push yourself. And the time went by faster, as I was counting down the time left in each interval or the time time left until I had to speed up. Not sure how many interval workouts I need a week, but this is a good workout for sure.

Back at it...

Tonight (Monday) I ran for the first time since the 10K on Saturday. The 10K left me tired, disappointed, with a heel blister and a bloody nipple. I had planned on running easy yesterday (Sunday), but all the reading I have been doing lately (books, blogs, RW, etc.) all encourage sufficient recovery time. If you feel like you need an extra day, take it. And I needed it. So I skipped yesterday.
Tonight, I felt a tad bit anxious getting back on the treadmill. Would my blister hurt? How would I feel? I set it at a relatively easy pace, put iPod on and away I went.
The answer: I felt great. Even Had to check heart rate a couple of times to make sure it wasn't too slow (it wasn't). An easy 5.4 in 44 minutes at an 8:17 pace.
It is workouts like this that let me build back the confidence for the harder races, the half marys and the marathons to come.
And I entered the 10K on June 13 in Central Park. I will re-run the race from Saturday better and smarter.

New Goals and Old Lessons

Having come close yesterday, and having run a hard race that really took a lot out of me, I have reflected some over the last day or so. First, I should be happy with my existing improvements. I am. I do have a blister on my feet, and that is a worry given it was in my new shoes, but the race was also a wet affair -- conducive for blisters.
Second, my goal was too ambitious given my training window. Having studied my heart rate and Garmin data, I now realize my heart was beating like a bunny on the back half. I compared it to the Scotland Run (2 minutes slower), and I was probably 7% higher on back side. I was running north of 90% HRM for almost all of miles 4-6. That is very hard. Part of that was because of my fast first half. (My 5K split was 22:40, which is really amazing for me, but way, way too fast if my goal was a 47:00 10K.)

Here is a SportTracks graph of the run. Any heart rate above 170 is in Zone 5, the 90%+ zone, and I was running at 180+ almost from the bottom of the Harlem Hill (mile 3) until the finish. HR is the pink shaded area; pace in blue; elevation in yellow on bottom.



In sum, my heart rate simply did not drop after the hill climb at the end of Mile 4, and continued at 180+ for almost 2 miles. And then I bonked in Mile 5.

What I am most disappointed in myself is that I had to take two short walk breaks in mile 5. (They are shown by the big blue spikes in pace during mile 5.) Looking at my data, they totaled about 1:30. I always have the fear in a race that "Hey, I am not going to make it, I can't do it" and then have to stop. And for me taking a walk break is about as bad as it gets. (I have never had to stop a race.) I had to walk in the NYRR 8000 on Mar 15, when I was totally out of shape. Before that, the last time I walked in a race was the 2007 Grete's Great Gallop half-marathon. (That race was on a very warm October weekend, the day before the 2007 Chicago Marathon that had all of the heat issues.) Anyway, looking at my Garmin data, I realize my heart rate was crazy, and it is no wonder I had to stop. Just before I stopped, I was at 94% of max just trying to cruise (albeit at 7:30 pace).

What I really should have done was follow my Garmy. I'll be honest, I wasn't paying attention to heart rates after I got up Harlem Hill. It was just numbers and rain and following the people I was with and being impressed with my split and I don't know. I was focused on just trying to get home and race with the crowd. But I look back at the data, and my heart rate never really recovered. So I was running with a HR north of 90% max, which I did for 15+ minutes until I cracked in mile 5. Trust Garmin. I should have slowed down, brought HR down, and I still would have made it in my goal. Smarter racing, better pacing and experience will get me there.

So it is back to original plan and original goal -- run a 60 AG time at Father's Day 5M on June 21. Smart training and smart racing....

Healthy Kidney 10K Race Report

Wow, what an odd race. First, its the same 6 mile loop as the Scotland Run last month - start on the west side at 62d, run the loop, and finish on about 68th street. The weather was misty, foggy and mild (in 60's I am guessing). The tops of the buildings around Central Park were shrouded in fog.
I picked up my number, and it was in the 3000's. What the heck ? I have finished recent races in top 1500 or so and yet my number keeps getting bigger -- thus I keep moving back in the corrals. That means a slower race group, more people to dodge, and harder to get a fast pace. Not a good sign for a PR. I was shooting for 7:30 miles.
Right as we started, I felt a couple of rain drops. By the end of the first mile, a full fledged downpour. Not as constant as Scotland run, but this was much harder rain. Mile 1 was good 7:27. Mile 2 is uphill and in middle of driving rain, 7:01. Wow - that's the fastest mile I've ever run in a race, and my heart rate shows it - average 172 Better slow down. Mile 2-3 is down Harlem Hill to East side. Easiest mile in the race. 7:04, but average HR 174. Just as in the Scotland Run, my Garmin had the course mile marker for the third mile as significantly too long -- by about 30 yards or so. (My split time is on Garmin, not the course, so it is the true mile per Garmin. As per the course, I bet my third mile was 7:25 or so.) Also ran through the 5K split in about 24 minutes (gun time, and my net time was about 1:30 behind gun), so I am on pace for sub 47:00 or so. But Mile 3 to 4 is the hard one. Up two big hills, and I did it in 7:55. But I feel bad. Really bad, and my HR is up to 178, which is 94% of max. Uh oh.

Now, though, all I gotta do is cruise home with 7:30 miles and I have my 47 minute goal time. It had stopped raining, but my glasses are completely fogged up - despite my rigorous application of Speedo no fogger last night. (I am going to write another review of anti fogger potions. In sum, none have worked for me.) Mile 5 was hard. 7:31, with average HR 178. In Mile 6, I really slowed down 8:18, average HR 174. Goodbye 47 minute time. The stub mile of 0.32 miles was 2:32 (7:56 pace), average HR 178. Final time: 47:45. Garmin had run at 6.32 miles for average pace of 7:33 per mile. I wanted to average 7:30, so not bad, and definitely a fast time for me. Nearly 2 minutes faster than my time in the Scotland Run, which was a month earlier.

Well, I just looked up my Final Age Graded Time as per NYRR: 59.9. I barely missed my goal of 60! I am sure though if you add in the extra distance I ran (the 6.32 vs. 6.2 miles NYRR has the race), I had a 60. But that doesn't count. And I will have to look up what 6.32 miles at 47:45 produces for a VDOT and predicted marathon time.

Definite progress, and first time I have pushed myself that hard.

10K Pre-Race Thoughts

Tomorrow is the Healthy Kidney 10K. It is the first race in a long time (maybe ever) that I have really trained for and hope to see noticeable improvement over my last 10K. I have not trained for this race per se, but rather just training overall for last 2 months. Lost some, weight, ran regularly, tracked heart rate, and watched nutrition. Given that I purchased my heart rate monitor last year, this is the first cycle of races that I will run seeing the data, and more importantly, being able to compare workouts and races. I already know that compared to February of this year, I can run at a faster pace with about a 10% lower heart rate. In training, in February I ran 9:30 min/mile at a 90% of Maximum Heart Rate (MHR); earlier this week I ran 8:30 miles at less than 80% MHR. I would put up a graph from SportTracks showing the difference, but I'll save that for later this summer to show before/after. Also, given the various data I have been looking at I actually calculated VDOT and VO2Max and looked at predicted times.

All of that leads me to my goal: an age graded time of 60% or better. I have done that once, in a 5 mile race, where I ran 7:27 miles. If I believe the various calculators online (none of which seem to be the one used by NYRR), I need to run 47:00 for the 10K, or 7:30 miles. That will be a push, but that is what goals are for. So, I hope it is a good race, good time, good HR, and 60+ age grade time.

Garmin Gear Test

Despite my misgivings about the Garmin 405 (see here), I love the data it generates -- particularly after I discovered SportTracks and its ability to slice and dice the data. Because I run so many miles on a treadmill, I wanted the footpod so that I could track the indoor runs as well. A Garmin 50 -- which comes with a footpod, a watch, an extra heart monitor and extra USB stick -- is about $100 on ebay, whereas the footpod is $70. So I bought the Garmin 50 (except I got the world's worst deal at J&R). Note to all Garmin 50 buyers -- a Garmin 50 is actually sold in three different packages -- watch plus footpod; watch plus heart rate monitor; and watch plus heart rate monitor and footpod. I thought I was buying the third (all 3), and ended up with the watch and a footpod, but no heart rate monitor. And I spent more than I would have if I had bought the package on Amazon or ebay. And to boot, the battery in the footpod was dead out of the box. Garmin owes me 15 minutes of my life back trying to get the footpod to synch with the watch when the battery was dead, even though both were brand new.

Anyway, the footpod tracks the movement of your foot and sends the signal to your watch. Garmin suggests you calibrate it on a known distance such as a track. It does not recommend calibrating it on a treadmill.

On Saturday, I had a plan. I wore my Garmin 405 on left wrist which tracks distance on GPS. I wore my Garmin 50 on right wrist and footpod on. And I ran a course I have run before with a known distance. Thus, I could calibrate my Garmin 50 with the GPS distance generated by my 405! I was laughably geeked up running out the door -- two watches, a heart rate strap, a footpod, an iPod and headphones. (And a new pair of Gel Kayano 15's to boot.)

To cut to the chase: the Garmin 50 was consistent with my 405. Over a 5.8 mile course (previously measured by my 405), my 405 (GPS) had the course at 5.81 miles. The Garmin 50 (footpod) had the course at 5.9 miles. My single heart rate strap sent data to both watches and the data was identical. One interesting thing was to note that pace recorded by GPS (blue) was both slower and had greater variance than the pace recorded by the footpod (red):
So the Garmin 50 is pretty well calibrated out of the box. The Garmin 50 has many limitations, again frustratingly so, but I won't deal with those here. (For example, during a workout, the watch can't cycle through various data displays. Any basic treadmill cycles between, speed, distance, calories, etc. But not the 50 -- have to hit a button to change between heart rate, pace, distance, etc.) But I digress. My first gym workout with the footpod (pre-calibration) had a 5.1 mile run as measured by the treadmill come out to 5.25 miles on the footpod, and had me running on the treadmill at a significantly quicker pace (footpod had me approximately 0:40 seconds per mile faster than treadmill). Maybe I do "run" faster than what the treadmill measures and that is why I perceive I run faster in real life than a treadmill: I run faster in real life than on a treadmill because I actually run on a treadmill faster than the belt measures.

But anyway, aside from my overly teched out gear, it was a good run, and really wiped me out.

Nike Instant Karma commercial

I posted this TV spot awhile back, and went back and found out the clip had been stripped of audio. So here it is, with sound.


And here is my other favorite Nike Commercial too:


And to complete the trio of Nike greatness...

Sock Review

I buy lots of running stuff and gear. I have various shoes, shirts, hats and shorts. And I have seen lots of reviews of those things. But one thing I constantly buy (either because I need new ones or have forgotten them when packing my gym bag) is running socks. I must have 20 pair of running socks, with about 10 different makes and models. I have size 12 feet, so I am right at the edge of the sizing for "Large" socks. When I run, I wear running socks, and generally kind of expensive ones. I have tried others, and had some success, and some blisters too. Maybe the socks' fault, maybe the shoes, maybe me; but I buy running socks to minimize my chances.

On to my thoughts. All socks are left/right specific; the price listed is the price I paid (or close to it); and the pictures are what I found on the web, not pictures of my used socks (thankfully).

Gold Medal Selections

Asics Gel Kayano ($15)

The gold standard, in my opinion. But they are pricey and feel self indulgent and I feel a bit pretentious wearing them. They look and feel like socks a serious runner would wear, not ones worn by someone putting in 8 minute miles on a treadmill at the gym. And size Large fits a little small and snug for me. But they still feel great. A little padding in heel and toe, which is just right. Can be slightly hard to find. I recently found the socks in an XL size, which fits me very well. If I had to buy one pair for a marathon, this is it. (Rejected Asics socks include: Gel Nimbus and other cheaper 3 pair for $15. Nothing really wrong with them, but if I am running in Asics socks, I want these.) The Porsche of socks.


Under Armour Draft ($12)

I recently saw these in a store after I developed a massive set of blisters on my heels. They have a fair amount of heel padding, greater than my Nike socks, and feel more substantial. I liked them, and they fit great. Better than the Nike (IMO), but can be very hard to find (I have only seen them at one store.) Slightly cheaper than Asics; maybe a bit premature, but let's call them the BMW of socks.

Nike Elite Running ($12)

The Cadillac of running socks: high end, ubiquitous, and a good product. Nothing fancy, but a good sock all the way around. I probably have more pair of these than any others because it seems like every sports store in America that sells Nike shoes also sells these socks. Thus, if you hit an average Sports Authority, Modell's etc., this is likely your best choice. They wear OK, not exceptionally well, and can get a little thin after various washings. But still a very good running sock. Sometimes the "no show" model can slip a little and ride down into my shoe. I suppose it is because they are slightly short for my size 12 feet.


Thor Lo Experia Running ($15)


I generally don't like Thorlo socks. I always imagined that they are for burly hikers hiking mountains in the wilderness with backpacks on who need padding in their hiking boots. And they seem so big inside the shoe. Nonetheless, after the blister adventure several months ago, I saw these in the store and bought them. They are not your father's Thorlo's. They have a cushion heel and toe, but not much cushion elsewhere; thus they are much thinner and closer to the other running socks. And that cushion felt so nice on my heel blisters that I didn't know they were there. Would I buy again? Maybe, and they were perfect for what I needed. If you like padded socks, these are for you. I have only seen this model in one store, but it was a Champs, so might be available nationwide.

Total, Crazy Wild Card

X Socks Performance ($26) (But now on sale for $13 at Paragon Sports)



A $26 pair of socks? What could possibly justify a $26 pair of socks? I first saw this company at the NY Marathon Runners Expo, and nearly bought this $220 engineered running shirt/jersey. But it was $220, and I came to my senses. But I came across the socks at Paragon and couldn't help myself.

First, X socks are made in Italy and worn by the German Olympic team in 2002, so they have to be good, right? Claims from the packaging -- which was the most elaborate I have ever seen and had several typos in it:

"The X Socks Run Performance Sock is designed with distance runners in mind, these socks offer the highest level of protection found in X-Socks' running line. From the manufacturer:

* AirConditioning Channels, AirFlow ankle pads, AirCool stripes, and Traverse AirFlow Channels all work in conjunction to keep your feet optimally cooled and bathed in fresh air to prevent blisters and reduce the onset of fatigue.
* Anti-microbial Skin NODOR fibers retard the growth of unwanted bacteria without destroying the desirable natural bacterial environment of healthy skin."

My thoughts are that the socks fit great. They also came in various sizes and tend to run large, which is good for me. Truthfully, I haven't run in them that much because I want to save them for special occasions. My thoughts are that the socks are a little hot because they have more fabric than the others. This is a review I read after I bought them and pretty much what I think. (It also has a bonus review of the $200 tshirt) But $26 for socks? No way. $13...maybe.

For those of you looking to spend more, there is a $35 model (now also on sale), whose footbed is made of 99.9 percent silver threads to decrease bacterial growth and prevent foot stink.

Emergency Gym Socks

Shortly after my two left feet shoe issue, I went to the gym only to realize I had forgotten my socks. ( They had actually fallen out of my bag on the way to the gym.) Anyway, I had to buy the socks Equinox sells for just this occasion. They were these $15 Falke running socks, which I had never seen before:

My thoughts: they were a little thin, and as I was running I could just imagine the blisters developing all over my feet. But they didn't. I don't think I will really use these socks that much because they just feel too thin and it kind of freaks me out. They feel different from the others. But if you want a micro thin sock, maybe this is it. I also have no idea if they are sold in retail stores, but I am sure you can order them online.

I also had a pair of Brooks running socks I really liked, but I lost the "right" one after the first washing. Thus, right has no mate. And they are kind of hard to find. But the "ankle" model fit nicely and did not ride down into the shoe.

In balance, all of these will serve you well during a run. Do they make you faster? Probably not. But they will help your feet avoid blisters. My only advice is to wear running socks and not normal cotton workout socks; that will make a huge difference in the way your shoes fit, the way your feet feel and in your running.

Product Reviews New Drinks (Mix One And Function)

Two new drinks that intrigued me and that I sampled. My thoughts on each:

Mix One High Fiber Antioxidant Drink Dark Berry Flavor





I like the original Mix 1 drinks. They are kind of a smoothie/protein shake combo, and taste is good. Plus I met the founders of the company after a race one time, and really liked the attitude and philosophy. I don't drink them much because they have 200 calories, and I just don't drink smoothie type things that often. If you are training, the original Mix 1 make an excellent post run recovery drink.

This, however, is a new drink with different taste and consistency -- a 100 calorie, high fiber tea berry drink. Here's what they say:

"So much to do, so little time. We could all use more balance in our lives. that's why our co-founder, dr. james, developed mix1, a balance of complete nutrition, great flavor, and convenience. before or after your workout, mealtime, downtime, anytime-mix1 provides sustained energy to get you through your busy day. So drink, enjoy, and get back in balance. Your body will thank you."

My thoughts: Lots of fiber (8g or 30% RDA) and protein (9g). Taste is a good, in a fruity tea sort of way. Kindof hard to describe. I paid $2.99 for it at GNC, which is a little pricey. I like the high fiber -- an easy way to get lots of fiber, and protein also. Would I drink again? Maybe, if I wasn't on a diet. It is 100 calories, and not sure it is worth that if you are on a diet. Otherwise, yes if I wanted a fiber drink.

Function Drinks: Lightweight

At the local GNC, I picked up a new drink, Function: Lightweight (Acai/Pomegranate flavor).



It was $1.99/500ml, so basically a little more than a bottle of water. 10 calories in the bottle, and flavored by Sucralose (basically Splenda). It claims it is designed by physicians to promote higher metabolism and "subtract calories from your daily total." Also has 30 mg caffeine. I had a Vitamin Water (one of the 25 calorie flavors) over the weekend, and it was terrible. This is much better.

From the label:

"Negativity. In co-workers, therapists and kindergarten teachers, negativity is generally a bad thing. In calorie counting, however, negativity is quite positive. Inside this bottle is a physician-developed formula of powerhouse ingredients designed to help ignite your metabolism and subtract calories from your daily total. EGCG is a Green tea extract proven to increase calories burned per hour and promote lean body mass. Gymnema extract limits the absorption of calories your body takes in from fat and carbohydrates. And red wine extract resveratrol, amps up your energy production, increasing your total calorie burn. Function: Make your drink work for you."

As for the Function drink, taste is pretty good to good. Not something I could drink a case of, but not too sweet or artificial tasting. Definitely refreshing from water. And it has caffeine in it, which I view as a positive.

As for the health benefits, who really knows? But it is a way to stay hydrated, and get some acai, green tea, caffeine and reservatrol, and that can't hurt.

Would I buy again? Probably, if I wanted something other than water, but I wouldn't make an effort to hunt it out and find it. All in all, not bad.

Garmin Rant

I own a Garmin 405. This is my experience and opinion. I love getting the data, the heart rates, the elevation, the pacing. It adds a whole new dimension to running, and evaluating workouts. I do not love my 405. It is a beautiful piece of hardware - sleek, incredibly powerful and compact. But it has problems. Oh, does it have problems.

Any Heart Rate Monitor has three components: the watch, the chest strap and software to analyze the data. A chest strap is a chest strap, so I suppose Garmin's is fine. As to the watch, well it is like a Ferrari: beautiful, but it has a life of its own that is simply not controllable. First, Garmy has two buttons, but mainly navigates through a touch bezel around the edge of the watch face. Thus, a finger touch is supposed to move the menus from screen to screen. That is a great idea. Except mine doesn't work that well. First, when the bezel gets wet (which, umm, happens often during an activity in which people perspire), the bezel won't register a touch. Second, when the bezel gets moist, the watch has a tendency to timeout -- after failing to receive any input for a period of time it will assume it is turned on in error, and to save power, it will stop whatever it is doing (including a workout), go back to home screen and go to sleep. And because the bezel is wet, you can't touch the bezel to navigate back to your workout screen. And when you finally do get to the workout screen, you have to start a new workout, which you later can't combine with the one Garmy aborted). Aiiiirrrgh!!!! This has happened several times to me, about 10% or so of my workouts or so (it happened during my bad Friday workout). I used to think that this "timeout issue" was my fault -- I figured that I must have hit the bezel somehow or maybe my shirt did or earphone cord or maybe a strong wind, or it was somehow related to the moisture issue, but it isn't that. After software issue (see below), I updated the software for my 405 watch last night, and in the release notes, one of the updates was an option to turn off the "timeout" option. This is incredibly important. If you own a 405, update now! And the bezel will often feel a touch without anything touching it (My electric current sets it off?) And the watch can't find the GPS signal while running in Central Park, as I found out during a race. And the menus on the watch can be difficult. There is no way to check the battery level, and the battery power signal appears seemingly at random.

And then we have the Garmin software. To make sense of the data, Garmin provides a USB stick to communicate wirelessly with the watch and two programs: Garmin ANT and Garmin Training Center (GTC). To use the data, one plugs in the USB stick, and the ANT agent programs reads the data on the watch and uploads it to your computer. Garmin Training Center then displays the data so you can view it and work with it. Garmin Training Center has nice displays with logging, graphs, etc. GTC has a big display window to show a map, and your route on it. Except Garmin's "map" data is at such a high level that it basically only has highways and major roads -- unless you buy a map package from Garmin. Thus, on the Garmin maps, my runs appear as circles on blank empty space.

And the Garmin Training Center program is limited as to how you can edit and view the data. For example, you can't edit runs. I run on a treadmill, and it would be nice to enter my distance and pace. Can't do it. Also, you can't edit a workout. At the end of my workouts, I often lift or walk to cool down. To keep the heart rate monitor going, the stopwatch has to be running. Thus, at the end of the workout, I'd like to be able to delete the last 15 minutes or so of data. Otherwise, my average pace, average heart rate, elevation, etc, will all be skewed. Can't do it. You can't export or print the graphs. To put the ones in my blog, I have used the ancient "print screen" key and then created a jpg file from the saved data to create a file to upload.

We can all live with software that is less than ideal. But losing data is the worst possible result. Friday, after my bad workout, my Garmin Training Center crashed. When I tried to open it, I got this error message: "Error: Encountered invalid data type." Then, the box told me to call or email the log file (which it provides a button to copy) to send to Garmin tech support. I was not pleased. I hoped my data -- my 100+ workouts -- was secure. I couldn't get into GTC to check the data, and had not backed up in about a month. (Note to self -- backup every day.) This is on top of my 405 watch crashing last year and losing about 5 workouts. Over the weekend, I searched the various bulletin boards, and spent hours uninstalling, reinstalling, etc., the Garmin software. All in vain. This is not unexpected -- when I installed the product a year ago, I had very difficult install issues and spent over an hour with Garmin tech support. Anyway, as of now, I can't boot Garmin Training Center.

My run data was still on my computer, however. Thus, I could upload my data to the Garmin website, which allowed me to breathe easier and relax that my data was fine. And apparently Garmin ANT Agent is working fine (the watch is talking to my computer and transferring data to my computer), but Garmin Training Center can't open and use that data. Garmin's website has a simple logging program, Garmin Connect. Garmin Connect, though, is more limited and it takes away much of the charm of the 405 and the data.

So in the year I've had the watch, I have had my watch crash and lose data; Garmin's software won't open on my computer; and the watch crashes during about one in ten workouts, and whenever it gets wet.

But I can't give my 405 up. It looks too good, and I love the data.

So, after seeing a couple of references on other blogs, I have switched my data logging program from Garmin Training Center to SportTracks. SportTracks is a free shareware program. Thankfully, my data is there. Between my last backup and my watch, I have all my workouts. And Garmin ANT Agent is reading the data.

SportTracks has beautiful display and ... maps! It is ironic that SportTracks -- a free program -- uses Google maps, and has great map tools, whereas the mapping function on Garmin is not helpful. Anyway, I am still getting used to SportTracks. Because it is free, there isn't much introductory documentation, and I am still learning the ropes. It does have many neat features, and seems to be incredibly powerful.

And I am backing up my data every day.

Did I mention the Garmin 405 watch looks great? And I won't give it up.

UPDATE:  a lengthy and outstanding review.  Many of the comments also discuss issues with the 405 when wet...

What a Bad Workout Feels Like

Well, that sucked. I had planned on running 5 miles at 8:30 pace at the gym. Very doable. Except I didn't.
I was late getting to the gym for various reasons, and thus didn't have time to really go 5 unless I did it at 8 minute pace. Then, I had forgotten my water bottle.
My pace was hard, and my heart race was racing. I was sweating like crazy. My Garmy stopped. (My Garmin 405 has this tendency to shut off when it gets wet; the bezel just gets unresponsive and it decides to stop working. A serious issue for me because of my sweating.) My music didn't lift me; it annoyed me. And I felt like crap. I ran 4.5 miles in 39:40, and ran out of time. Good thing it wasn't a true training run.
Looking back, I had a bad night's sleep. I didn't eat much during the day and missed my mid-afternoon snack. I didn't feel well going to the gym and don't feel good leaving.
Oh well, its Friday, and the beer is still just as cold.

Treadmills

I run a lot on a treadmill. The majority of my miles, in fact. I have one at home, and I belong to a gym. I can run late or early, and when it rains or snows. And I can watch sports at the same time.

I have lots of opinions about treadmills. First, I run slower on the mill than I do on the road. Most people think a treadmill is "easier" because all you do is lift your legs and the "road" passes underneath. I disagree. First, I know I run slower on the mill. I can compare heart rates and paces and I can runner faster on the road than on the mill. Second, as I have read, your body gets no forward momentum from the mill. Think about running a 7:00 mile and trying to stop suddenly. That is the benefit of the forward motion. I am no physicist, but the forward motion has to create momentum, which is not present on the mill. I suppose the effect of these two forces (loss of momentum vs. reduced effort to create the momentum) vary based on running style, form and fitness, but for me I run slower on the mill.

And please, please do not set the incline on the treadmill to 2% to compensate for not running outside. First, there is nothing to compensate for as far as I am concerned. Second, as I have been told, it increases the chance of knee injury. On an incline, your foot and heel don't land flat. In fact, they land at an angle, and thus prolonged running at an angle produces unusual stresses on feet heels, hips, backs etc. I have had several doctors and therapists tell me to never, ever run on a treadmill with an incline. If you want to increase the workout from a treadmill, run faster, not at an incline.

I am curious if others have similar experiences. I know there are threads about this on Runners'' World, and no definitive answer, which I find shocking, really.