My time was OK wasn't it!
I've just been looking back at times I've set on the road for the 5km, and I just realised that my 17.56 compares very well. My fastest 5km time set in a road run is 17.55 - but that was on the Imperial Palace course, which we all know is not really 5km. I let myself keep that time because of the hill on the course - I figured it makes up for the lack of distance. But 17.56 on a flat, correctly measured course is perhaps a better run. I went through 3km at 12.37, but just after that my stomach started cramping (I spent the previous day suffering nausea and stomach cramps - something I ate I think).
Today I ran 35 minutes. Just a leg loosener. My knees felt excellent at the start, but after 20 minutes the ITB problems were back.
I'll keep doing the recovery program and hopefully my knees will adjust to regular running.
posted by GKK @ 11:34 am
3 Comments:
Wow! Despite the modest load, that would suggest that just by sticking to fairly regular running you have improved your aerobic system. For many of us, it is not raw speed we are lacking, but speed endurance. That comes from improving the aerobic system. So we can make a lot of improvement before needing to turn to speed workouts. That's what I *think* I take from your result.
Yes, I wonder - or is it a sort of combination of muscle memory and the base I've acheived over the past two years? Am I on the way up or down?
I ran in an odd way - bursts of speed followed by recovery pace then a burst of speed. It's a cycling tactic - but works better on the bike where you can recover in a slipstream. But it seemed to work for me on Sunday.
By the way Stephen, I was trying to play devil's advocate with the above comment, but perhaps it sounded a bit negative and ungrateful. An improvement in my aerobic capacity would seem to have been indicated by my time - I hope.
Post a Comment
<< Home