annapr wrote: » Lovely to see the 'welcome back to division one' signs going through Cavan today...
overpronator wrote: » Just realised who you are! Belated welcome back man and good luck with your goals. Heading up Cootehill way for a few beers tonight, always a good experience. Also youre dead right, at least it wasnt M***th.
Murph_D wrote: » I don't think leading the way for most of the race and getting out kicked by your nemesis is anything like quitting. Apart from that sounds like a decent tactical race to me (although I know absolutely nothing about racing on the track). Maybe let the nemesis do more of the work next time I guess.
Back in Black wrote: » Total weekly mileage: 39.80 [/B](nearly tempted to go out and do .2 of a mile :pac:)
Firedance wrote: » g'wan g'wan g'wan, if only to make me feel better
Back in Black wrote: » It was a combination of the time. Mcmillan puts me at 10:08 based on my 5k PB and I've gone backwards since Armagh in February (10:26) with 2 poor races where I mentally folded and to run a 10:44 when everything was lined up for me is tough to swallow. The minute things start to go wrong for me in races lately, I've crumbled. Getting passed again and not being able to react for the 2nd race in a row was the final kick in the teeth.
Dubgal72 wrote: » It sounds like I'm on a bit of a mission (probably because I am! ) but would you consider ditching the watch next time? If you want to race - really race - the nemesis, it sounds to me like you would perform much better focusing on that, and that alone. Thoughts and calculations on the hoof could be too distracting. Just a thought. I'm pretty sure your times will fall into place after that....
Back in Black wrote: » Not much to be said about this. 3rd 3k of the year and continued the trend of not getting within an asses roar of my target time.
Chartsengrafs wrote: » I'm a bit late in reading this report and thought I might share my thoughts. (Input from a slower runner isn't always useful but here you go anyway!) You've missed the 10 minute target a few times, and apologies if this sounds harsh, but the times you hit in training wouldn't immediately suggest to me that going 9:XX for 3k is on the cards. There is certainly leg speed in evidence, but 400s seem to be coming in around 80 seconds. I'm not sure what your background is (you seem to be a re-reg possibly or maybe I don't know your username from before), but.. it just seems a little ambitious. Ambition is great, but you were left disappointed last time, which is a shame for someone who clearly loves running/training and broadly gets the big picture . Perhaps I'm overestimating a sub 10 3k but to me, it sounds very fast. If you were to say you were aiming for a good 5k time, which I think you will be soon, your long miles I think will really pay off and I think you could kill it! Second observation (and back to 3k). Your training seems to be divided between a lot of slow easy miles and faster intervals. The tempo part seems rather slow for want of a better word (6:40 pace etc). Just wondering what the thinking is there? It stands out to me as an area that could support your endurance over 3k?
Back in Black wrote: » Hopefully I'll fare better when I get back on the road for a 5k tomorrow night as that's definitely my favourite distance!!
overpronator wrote: » You racing Enfield tomorrow? Hopefully see you there!
tang1 wrote: » No point turning up tomorrow, you'll be there on your own!!
overpronator wrote: » Ha, ill go down tonight so!
Back in Black wrote: » I'll see you there tonight so!!! You joining us Tang?
tang1 wrote: » Hope to, depends if the wee one gets out of hospital J.
Back in Black wrote: » 18:4x meh. Big steaming bucket of crap. It's done. Time to move on. Yes that's the race report there