Touch and Go #6

Barefoot/Forefoot runners have a “smoother” ride: Difference in collision forces:
Barefoot runners “take shorter strides and to run with greater vertical leg and ankle compliance (the lowering of the body’s centre of mass relative to the force of the impact). This serves to blunt the transient force and results in a less jarring, ‘smoother ride’.” (Jungers, 2010)

Basically this means that because of the footstrike difference, the body uses the lower leg in a more efficient shock absorbing way. The foot is more plantar flexed and the ankle is more compliant. This creates a situation where the collision is essentially absorbed and spread out better.

In heel striking the collision forces are concentrated in one area, and very sudden. Meaning a large amount of force in one place, very quickly. Meanwhile in a more flat footstrike, as mentioned above, the impact is spread out, absorbed better, and not so sudden. This leads to peak vertical forces 3x lower in barefoot vs. shoe wearing runners and a rate of loading that is half as much for barefoot compared to shoe wearing runners

This difference may lead to injury prevention, as some studies have suggested that it’s not necessarily the total impact forces but the high rate of force in a very short time. (Look at the drawings in my article below and remember that barefoot running doesn’t have the initial peak impact force). Still, the impact force debate can be VERY misleading. Just a word of caution to read my other blog post on running shoes and realize that peak impact forces do not relate to injuries

Concrete vs. Dirt:
Another interesting finding is the adjustment of impact forces that occurs based on the ground you are going to strike. The study found that barefoot running produced less collision forces on a hard surface than a cushioned shoe.

Similar to the conclusions I came to in the Running shoe article (see Steve’s blog), they found that leg stiffness was adjusted to control impact. This created a situation where there was no difference in rate or magnitude of impact loading based on the surface they were running on. As I have said many times, the body has a built in adjustment mechanism. It controls impact via adjustment of several different mechanisms.

So all those people who are worried about the impact forces of running barefoot on concrete should consider that when they stick a cushioning shoe on and heelstrike, there collision forces are higher!

from Science of Running by Steve Magness. To be continued...

Pam

Touch and Go #5

THE first big study on barefoot running in Nature : Death to Heel striking.
The barefoot debate is about to get a little bit hotter.

A new study released this year by Lieberman in Nature takes an evolutionary look at barefoot running. In the study, they compared barefoot and shoe running on a whole variety of factors in both regular shoe wearers, regular barefoot runners, and even Kenyans!

The study is entitled and I HIGHLY recommend it:
Foot strike patterns and collision forces in habitually barefoot versus shod runners

This is a timely piece as it adds more evidence to the article I wrote a couple days ago below. The implications are great as they extend beyond barefoot running to foot strike too (heel vs. forefoot, etc.) I’ll highlight some of the findings.

Foot strike and Elastic response and energy transfer:
 As I speculated in my article, footstrike greatly effects the elastic energy return. In their study, it was found that forefoot and some midfoot strikes “reduces the effective mass of the foot and converts some translational energy into rotational energy; the calf muscles control heel drop, and the FFS runner can take fuller advantage of elastic energy storage in both the Achilles tendon and the longitudinal arch of the foot.”

On this topic, Liberman speculates that the arch plays a key role in reduced oxygen cost of running in barefoot runners. Essentially during a mid/fore foot strike the arch can stretch over the entire first half of the stance phase, while during the rearfoot strike, it has to wait until the last part of this phase, thus decreasing energy storage and return.

Also, forefoot and some midfoot strikes allowed for greater energy transfer. When heel striking a large portion of kinetic energy dissipates. With forefoot striking, some of the translational kinetic energy converts into rotational energy.

from Science of Running by Steve Magness. To be continued...

Thea

Touch and Go #4

Tying it together with elites:
 Looking at elite athletes, when racing and training, they generally have higher turnover, minimal ground contact time, and a foot strike that is under their centre of gravity. Since the majority of elites exhibit these same characteristics while racing, it makes sense that this is the optimal way to run fast. So, why are we wearing footwear that is designed to increase ground contact, decrease turnover, and promote footstrike out in front of the centre of gravity? I have no idea.

Conclusion:
In conclusion, I’m not some fanatic saying everyone ditch shoes now. Chances are you’ve been running in shoes for 20+ years. Your bodies done some adapting during that time. You’ve got to gradually change if you want to undue some of the changes.

The purpose of this article wasn’t to talk about the benefits of barefoot running. Instead it was to point out the problems with Running Shoe classification. It’s based on a cushioning/pronation paradigm that simply is not as true as they want us to believe. That paradigm needs to be reevaluated. It’s not founded on good science but rather initial ideas that made sense with no science behind them, but upon further review may not stand up to testing. A recent study found that using the good old shoe classification system that everyone uses, had little influence on injury prevention in a large group of Army Basic Training participants (Knapik, 2009). They concluded that selecting shoes based on arch height (like all major running magazines suggest) is not necessary if injury prevention is the goal. I guess that means the systems broken…

Where do we go and how do we fix it? I have no idea. Sorry, no genius answers here. My inclination is that we aim for letting the foot function how it is meant to function, or at least come up with some shoe that may alter foot mechanics but while still allowing feedback/functionality of the body. The first step is looking at the foundation on which running shoes are built upon, the motion control, stability, and cushioning paradigm. My take is that it needs to be reevaluated. I’m going to end with something I’ve already said, but it’s an important concept to get across:

The body is more complicated and smarter than we give it credit.
The type of shoe and material of the shoe changes impact or stride characteristics NOT because of alignment of the lower leg or because of changes in cushioning. Instead it changes impact and stride characteristics because it alters the sensory feedback. The brain is a wonderful thing.

If you found this article to be informative, I'd appreciate it If you passed it along. The goal is to get research based data out there so people can be well informed.

from Science of Running by Steve Magness. To be continued...

Warrick

Touch and Go #3

Maria

Underestimating our Body: Impact forces as feedback:
Back to the question I asked earlier: How can impact forces not change based on shoe sole softness and why isn’t running on hard surfaces lead to more injuries?

The problem is, once again, we underestimate the human body! It’s an amazing thing, and we never give it the credit it deserves. The body adapts to the surface that it’s going to strike, if you give it a chance. The body adapts to both shoe and surface adjusting impact forces via changes joint stiffness, the way the foot strikes, and a concept called muscle tuning.
An example of this can be seen with barefoot running, the diminished proprioception (sensory feedback) of wearing a shoe negates the cushioning of the shoe. Studies using minimal shoes/barefoot have shown that the body seems to adapt the impact forces/landing based on feedback and feedforward data. When running or landing from a jump, the body takes in all the sensory info, plus prior experiences, and adjusts to protect itself/land optimally As mentioned above, it does this through a variety of mechanisms. Thus, you stick some cushioned running shoe on the bottom of your foot and the body goes “Oh, we’re okay, we don’t need to worry about impact as much, we’ve got this soft piece of junk on our foot.

One concept that needs to be further discussed is muscle tuning. It’s a concept recently proposed by Nigg et al. in 2000. He sees impact force as a signal or a source of feedback, as I stated earlier. The body then uses this information and adjusts accordingly to minimize soft tissue vibration and/or bone vibration. His contention is that impact force is not the problem, but rather the signal. Muscle tuning is essentially controlling these vibrations via a variety of methods. One potential mechanism is pre-activation. Pre-activation is activation of the muscles prior to impact. In this case it serves as a way of muscle tuning to prepare for impact and in addition can alter muscle stiffness, which is another way to prepare for impact. Pre-activation has been established with multiple EMG studies.

Shoes not only impact this, but surface type does too. As mentioned previously, the change in running surface did not impact injury rates. Why? Probably because the body adapts to running surface. In an interesting study measuring muscle activity, O’Flynn(1996) found that pre-activation changed based on surface. To prepare for impact, and presumably to minimize muscle/bone vibration, when running on concrete pre-activation was very high, when running on a soft track, not so much.

What all of this means is that the body adapts via sensory input. It has several different adaptation methods. A shoe influences how it adapts. The shoe is not doing anything to alter cushioning, it is simply altering how the body responds to impact. It’s a significant mindset jump if you think about it. Here’s the summary:

The type of shoe and material of the shoe changes impact NOT because of alignment of the lower leg or because of changes in cushioning. Instead it changes impact characteristics because it alters the sensory feedback

In conclusion on the cushioning concept. Well, what are we trying to cushion? Heel impact forces have not been shown to relate to injuries, in fact in one study low impact runners had a 30% injury rate compared to a 20% injury rate in high impact runners. Shoe midsoles do not change, or marginally change impact forces anyway. So, not only may cushioning not be the answer, the shoes might not even be doing their job. But what about those shoe cushioning studies showing improved cushioning with their new midsole?! Well, the majority of that testing is done by using a machine to simulate the impact forces that you experience during running. That means, yes it may cushion an impact more, but it doesn’t take into account the role of the body adjusting impact based on feedback.

The reason cushioning doesn’t work? Because the body adapts based on feedback and feedforward information. These results prompted one notable researcher(Nigg,2000) to call for the reconsideration of the cushioning paradigm for running shoes.

Barefoot running?
Quickly, this topic could not be complete without a brief mention of barefoot running. An interesting thing to note is that the initial peak impact force is absent in barefoot running when compared to running with shoes. What this means is that, the impact forces look like (A) for shoes and (B) for barefoot. That initial little blip in A is the initial impact force. There is a hypothesis that this initial impact force is related to injuries.

A recent study by Squadrone et al.(2009) compared running shoes, barefoot running, and running in Vibram Five Fingers. They demonstrated reduced impact forces, shorter ground contact and stride length, but increased stride frequency while running barefoot (and in Vibrams) as compared to running with shoes. This is not unexpected, but shows that running shoes do in fact alter our normal strides. An interesting point is the reduction in stride length but increase in stride frequency. Shoes tend to promote this longer stride at a consequence of ground contact times and frequency. This happens because of changes in feedback signalling, increased likelihood to land on heel stretched out, increased weight, all of which lead to longer times on the ground. It’s interesting to note that elite runners all have short ground contacts and high frequencies (as demonstrated by the often quoted Daniels study of 180 strides per minute).
Tying this to the discussion above on the body controlling things based on sensory information, when running barefoot, there is a higher degree of stiffness in the lower leg. Increased stiffness can result in an increased SSC (stretch shortening cycle) response, resulting in greater force on the subsequent push off (2001). Dalleau et al. demonstrated that pre-activation causing increased stiffness improved Running Economy. In his study, the energy cost of running was related to the stiffness of the lower leg (1998)

Another recent study found that knee flexion torque, knee varus torque, and hip internal rotation torque all were significantly greater in shoes compared to barefoot. What does all of this mean? Potentially, this means more stress on the joints in this area. Jay Dicharry put it best when he said:

“The soft materials in modern running shoes allow a contact style that you would not use barefoot. The foot no longer gets the proprioceptive cues that it gets unshod. The foot naturally accommodates to surfaces rapidly, but a midsole can impair the foot’s ability to react to the ground. This can mute or alter feedback the body gets while running. These factors allow a runner to adopt a gait that causes the elevated forces observed above.”

The one thing that non-barefoot/heel strike proponents use to dismiss midfoot striking/barefoot running is the Achilles tendon. They say, correctly, that the load on the Achilles is higher in midfoot striking runners. The Achilles is meant to take a large load. The problem is we’ve weakened the Achilles through years of wearing shoes with their elevated heels. Essentially, we’ve created the Achilles problem with the shoes meant to prevent it. The Achilles is designed to operate in a rubber band like fashion. . During impact such as the braking or contact phase of running, the achilles tendon stores energy and then subsequent releases that energy via recoil during the take off phase of running. The Achilles, can store and return approximately 35% of its kinetic energy (Ker, 1987). Without this elastic storage and return, the oxygen uptake required would be 30-40% higher! So, in terms of performance why are we trying to minimize the tendonous contribution? It’s like giving away free energy.

Running shoes do not utilise the elastic storage and return as well as barefoot or minimal shoes. More energy is lost with shoes than with barefoot running (Alexander and Bennett, 1989). In addition, in some models of shoes, the arch is not allowed to function like a spring. The arch of the foot can store around 17% of kinetic energy (Ker, 1987). Given these results, its not surprising that running barefoot when compared to running with shoes is more efficient. Several studies have shown a decreased VO2 at the same pace with barefoot running, even when weight is taken into account. This should be no surprise as I mentioned above, without elastic recoil VO2 requirement would be 30-40% higher. Running in a minimal shoe allows for better utilization of this system.

So, the take away message is that shoes change natural mechanics to one that creates mechanical changes that are not optimal for running fast (decreased stride frequency, increased ground contact, decreased stiffness of the system, decreased elastic contribution, and on and on).

from Science of Running by Steve Magness. To be continued...

Touch and Go #2

Katherine

Cushioning:
Impact forces are the other major scoundrel of running injuries. The thinking goes like this, the greater the impact force on the lower the leg, the greater stress the foot/leg takes, which could potentially lead to injuries. To combat this fear, running shoes, particular cushioning ones, are to the rescue. Let’s take a look.

The first question is, do cushioning shoes do their job?

Wegener(2008) tested out the Asics Gel-Nimbus and the Brooks Glycerin to see if they reduced plantar pressure. They found that the shoes did their job! But where it reduced pressure varied highly. Meaning that pressure reduction varied between forefoot/rearfoot/etc. This led to the interesting conclusion that there should be a shift in prescribing shoes to one based on where plantar pressure is highest for that individual person. It should be noted that this reduction in pressure was based on a comparison to another shoe, a tennis shoe. I’m not sure that this is a good control. Basically, this study tells us that cushioned running shoes decrease peak pressure when compared to a Tennis shoe.

In a review on the subject, Nigg (2000) found that both external and internal impact force peaks were not or barely influenced by the running shoes midsole. This means that the cushioning type does not change impact forces much, if at all. But how can this be? I mean it’s common sense if you jumped on concrete vs. jumped on a shoe foam like surface, the shoe surface is softer right? We’ll come back to this question in a minute.

Impact Forces: The picture gets cloudier:
But it’s not as simple as described above.

In an interesting study by Scott (1990) they looked at peak loads on the various sites of likely injury for runners (Achilles, knee, etc.). All peak loads occurred during mid-stance and push off. This led to an important finding that “the impact force at heel contact was estimated to have no effect on the peak force seen at the chronic injury sites,” and led to speculation that impact force did not relate injury development.

Further complicating the impact force idea is that when looking at injury rates of those running on hard surfaces or soft surfaces, there appears to be no protective benefit of running on soft surfaces. Why is this? Because of something called pre-activation and muscle tuning which will be discussed below.

Supporting this data, other studies have shown that people who have a low peak impact have the same likelihood of getting injured as those with a high peak impact force (Nigg, 1997). If you want to complicate things even further, impact seems to be the driving force between increased bone density.

As a coach or trainer this should make sense. The bone responds to the stimulus by becoming more resistant to it, IF the stimulus is not too large and there is enough recovery.

from Science of Running by Steve Magness. To be continued...

Touch and Go #1

Jennifer

Why Running shoes do not work: Looking at Pronation, Cushioning, Motion Control and Barefoot running
The running shoe model needs to be fixed. Pronation, Motion Control, Cushioning, and Stability shoes? Get rid of them all.

It’s not just barefoot running and minimalism versus running shoes, the either/or situation many portray it to be. It’s much deeper than that. It’s not even that running shoe companies are evil and out to make a profit. Shoe companies may be accomplishing the goals they set out for, but maybe the goals their aiming for are not what need to be done. The paradigm that running shoes are built upon is the problem.
Running shoes are built upon two central premises, impact forces and pronation. Their goals are simple, limit impact forces and prevent overpronation. This has led to a classification system based on cushioning, stability, and motion control. The problem is that this system may not have any ground to stand on. Have we been focused on the wrong things for 40+years?

I’ll start with the customary statistic of 33-56% of runners get injured every year (Bruggerman, 2007). That is kind of mind blowing when you think about it. Since there are a ton of injuries going on, let’s look at what shoes are supposed to do.

Pronation:
As said earlier, shoes are built upon the premise that impact forces and pronation are what cause injuries. Pronation, in particular has been constructed as the bane of all runners. We have become inundated with limiting pronation via motion control shoes. The central idea behind pronation is that overpronating causes rotation of the lower leg(i.e. ankle, tibia, knee) putting stress on the joints and therefore leading to injuries. Running shoes are therefore designed to limit this pronation. Essentially, running shoes are developed and designed to put the body in “proper” alignment. But do we really need proper alignment?
This paradigm on pronation relies on two main things: (1)over pronation causes injuries and (2) running shoes can alter pronation.

Looking at the first premise, we can see several studies that do not show a link between pronation and injuries. In an epidemiological study by Wen et al. (1997), he found that lower extremity alignment was not a major risk factor for marathon runners. In another study by Wen et al. (1998), this time a prospective study, he concluded that “Minor variations in lower extremity alignment do not appear conclusively to be major risk factors for overuse injuries in runners.” Other studies have reached similar conclusions. One by Nigg et al. (2000) showed that foot and ankle movement did not predict injuries in a large group of runners.

If foot movement/pronation does not predict injuries or is not a risk factor for injuries, then one has to question whether the concept is sound or working...

Looking at the second premise, do shoes even modify pronation? Motion control shoes are designed to decrease pronation through a variety of mechanisms. Most choose to insert a medial post or a similar device. In a study by Stacoff (2001), they tested several motion control shoe devices and found that they did not alter pronation and did not change the kinematics of the tibia or calcaneus bones either. Similarly, another study by Butler (2007) found that motion control shoes showed no difference in peak pronation when compared to cushioning shoes. Lastly, Dixon (2007) found similar results showing that motion control shoes did not reduce peak eversion (pronation) and didn’t change the concentration of pressure.

This is sort of a double whammy on motion control shoes. If excessive pronation does not cause injuries to the degree that everyone thinks, and if motion control shoes don’t even alter pronation, what’s the point of a motion control shoe?

from Science of Running by Steve Magness. To be continued...

release the geese

What's on in the next couple of weeks:
Monday 31 May: Parliament House 4:30pm 8k jog; 5:30pm interval training.
Wednesday 2 June: 12:15pm BBQ Stakes 6k handicap
Wednesday 2 June: 5:45pm Parliament House, easy run, usually about 12k
Thursday 3 June: Dickson 4:00pm long run; 5:30pm speedygeese interval training
Friday 4 June: 12:15pm Customs 5k handicap, Stage 88
Saturday 5 June: 1:00pm ACTCCC Weston Park Longstaff 8k/Pennington 12k
Sunday 6 June: 9:00am Womens & Girls 6k Jogalong Weston Park
Monday 7 June: Parliament House 4:30pm 8k jog; 5:30pm interval training.
Wednesday 9 June: 12:15pm BBQ Stakes 6k handicap
Wednesday 9 June: 5:45pm Parliament House, easy run, usually about 12k
Thursday 10 June: Dickson 4:00pm long run; 5:30pm speedygeese interval training
Friday 11 June: 12:15pm Customs 5k handicap, Stage 88
Saturday 12 June: 1:00pm ACTCCC Goorooyaroo 8k
Sunday 13 June: 12noon High Noon meet (800m & 3000m)
Monday 14 June: Parliament House 4:30pm 8k jog; 5:30pm interval training as usual.

6 June is also the Christchurch Marathon in which Janene is competing. I will be in Brisbane running the Queensland Half Marathon that day.

Results Sunday 30 May West Stromlo 7.5k
3 Tony Booth M70 42:12 gold
5 Rod Lynch M50 33:25
12 Warrick Howieson M40 36:21
20 Helen Larmour W50 36:35
25 Christopher Lang M55 42:06
52 Bronwyn Calver W40 41:27
60 finishers

Sunday 30 May West Stromlo 4k
2 Heidi Johnston W35 22:08
4 Jill Pearson W50 22:56
7 Rachelle Ellis-Brownlee W35 19:01
9 Gary Bowen M50 17:13
10 Katie Forestier 17:02
17 Neil Boden M55 21:23
19 Amanda Walker W40 19:36
21 Caroline Campbell W65 24:02
36 finishers

Birthdays:
5 June Alan 63
7 June Janene 46
9 June Tony 72

Program High Noon Meet Sunday 13 June
12:00pm Sprint Hurdles
12:10pm 60m
12:25pm 100m
12:45pm 800m (run and walk)
1:00pm 200m
1:15pm 3000m (run and walk)

“Release the Geese” – quoted on Doctor Who Confidential on ABC1 last night.

Speaking of the ABC, ABC2 had a special on Lovecraft featuring input from my favourite author Neil Gaiman. http://www.mousecircus.com/ (children) and http://www.neilgaiman.com/ (adults).

Last night I dreamed I was having a long conversation with Art Garfunkel. Later I dreamed it was my second last day at work and I had cut down a tree which caused someone’s computer program to fail because it used something in the treetop to determine where the program was being run, so I had to try and find the help desk, explain what I had done, and leave it up to them to resolve it. I never did find the help dek in the maze of corridors…. Ah, dreams are more real than life sometimes. I suppose this was stimulated by the very good Doctor Who episode, featuring an intelligent and complex storyline, for a change for this series…

Good weather for geese, the May rainfall in our backyard was 85mm so far, most of this in the last couple of days.

Geese you are released for two weeks before I round you up again.

"meanwhile..."

Running - on Friday I was happy to get well under 21 minutes again for the Customs 5k. Since then I have been a bit slack, yesterday we attending a wedding which took most of the day, and night, today the mud and rain did not look very appealing while staying warm and cosy did. Not to mention that arriving at church straight after a run, miserable and soaking wet, would not be a good plan.

I wonder if there are any more Customs sub 20s left in me?

Meanwhile... I might have to have a Plan D for Monday training if this rain continues. Not that we want the rain to stop... but did you see in the Canberra Times, the inaugural "Capital Punishment enduro" was a quagmire?

Meanwhile... What I am reading... The Wolves in the Walls by Neil Gaiman; The Club of Queer Trades by G. K. Chesterton; Odd and the Frost Giants by Neil Gaiman; Interworld by Neil Gaiman (again); Manalive by G. K. Chesterton... and what I am watching... Alien; M II B; Red Dwarf VI; Delicatessen.

And... I am getting ready for a half marathon race in seven days time. There is an interesting course map... looks like the course has been changed to make even more dog-legs...

Doomben

It's two laps.

back to Canberra

The four hour train in the National Capital marathon.

My theme for 2010 - "Touch and Go".

In 2009 the theme was "Transformation" for which I wrote a whole lot of stuff, which you can find via "Labels".

Before that the theme was "180 steps per minute" which I haven't gathered together via "Labels" but now that I have thought to do so, I shall.

2010's theme will be "Touch and Go". I foreshadowed it below in the post entitled "ground time",  where I said I would talk about how to change things so that you and I can run faster!

This time however I am not going to write it myself, I am going to reproduce it from a very good blog written by Steve Magness.

You may have noticed a new link in "My Blog List" called “Science Of Running” in "My Blog List". The author invites us to pass on his research, so I am doing that. I recommend that you read through some of his other articles, and keep an eye out for his new posts. This looks like the most valuable new resource to emerge for some time.

So for the next two weeks (starting on Tuesday) I am going to reproduce some of Steve's work. Please note that Steve Magness writes in his blog: "If you found this article to be informative, I'd appreciate it If you passed it along” and I have taken him at his word.

The three hour pacer

I have heard a lot of positive feedback about the marathon pacers, all three were very much appreciated.

Marathon running styles

With the "Touch and Go" articles, I will be publishing many of the photos of us running the marathon and half marathon. You can decide whether the various running styles look good or not!

a mild night at Dickson

Training at Dickson last night: mild with no breeze, perfect for running. Craig & I went early, then we were joined by Brett L, Brett M, Bronwyn, Colleen, Jen, Kym, Michelle, Nadine, Roger, Susan &  for the track session under lights. For the last time this season we ran 4 x 2 laps in lane 4, handicapped, on about 8 minutes. Most runners have reported some improvement over the weeks we have been doing that session. Next week we are going to move to shorter faster work with a higher proportion of rest between the repeats. Mondays too, under lights too!

Peter, Ruth, Roger at the Two Sisters restaurant, Dickson, two weeks ago.

Neologisms #7

I was sent these, thank you to the sender! If you want to see the full set of neologisms, check out "Labels", which you will find at the bottom of the right hand side column.

Neologisms #7
Excommunicated: Received a phone call from a former spouse
Protestants: Worker ants out to overthrow the Queen
Fanatic: To cool off the extreme upper portion of the house
Cauterize: Made eye contact with her
Donkey: Object that unlocks door to Godfather's home
Icing: What I do when I shower
Understudy: Prepare inadequately for the exam
Current: The fee charged by Rent-A-Mutt
Paradise: What you shoot craps with
Store Detective: Counter spy
Cannibal: A guy who goes into a restaurant and orders the waiter
Infantry: A newly planted sapling

Yelena

The lovely Yelena says "Hi" to everyone! After 2.5 years of good health, she had to stop running to let her ITB recover, and now when it looked like she was OK to resume training, she got sick! We wish her a speedy recovery, after all, we ARE the speedy geese.

My personal take on the ACTVAC AGM

The annual general meeting of the ACTVAC was held last night. There were about 50 or so members present - a 10% turnout, which I guess reflected the lack of anything particularly contentious on the agenda. For most of the first hour Dick Telford addressed the meeting, telling us some of his story and amusing us with his stories. He is an engaging speaker. Then we heard and accepted all the reports without too much discussion; although there are always differences of opinion around the budget whenever it is proposed that fees and charges be increased. however trivial those increases might be. Last night was no exception, but discussion was not all that heated. Any opposition to the small increases was deflected, ironically I would say, by a proposed amendment to make the increases higher. The amendment was defeated and we ended up with Nick's budget accepted without change. A good result. Then we elected our new office bearers, and I am delighted that six of the ten are members of the speedygeese, which reflects well on our group in that so many of us have volunteered to serve the club in this way. Finally there was one bit of controversy, with some members strongly for the club running its own T&F championships, and others strongly for continuing to combine with AACT as we have done in the last couple of years. There are good arguments on both sides, and my personal view is (a) if we continue to combine with AACT there are a number of issues that need to be sorted out (b) if we don't combine with AACT we need to get up to speed with officials qualifications, and (c) we need to state both sides of the argument and put it to club members for feedback, and do this quickly, e.g. by end July.

The new committee for 2010-11 is:
President: Rachelle Ellis-Brownlee
Vice President: Craig Wisdom
Secretary: Paul Archer
Treasurer: Nick Blackaby
Committee:
Heidi Johnston
Janene Kingston
Christopher Lang
Duncan Macnicol
Roger Pilkington
Kathy Sims

Some potentially controversial subjects never came up, e.g. our new website wasn't mentioned except for a couple of trivial teething issues, there was no mention of any redevelopment issues. And there was no mention of our new uniform proposals. Nor any searching questions about subcommittee operations. I think this all means that people are very happy with the way the club has been managed under former President Christopher and the out-going committee.

It was quite a good meeting, as these meetings go. Some hilarious moments, but that's normal for AGMs.

ground time

For the last couple of years I have been suggesting that the many of the speedygeese focus on increasing their running tempo, with the goal of moving along at 180 - 190 steps per minute in their races whether they be short, middle, or long distance, and adjusting their stride length accordingly. This year I thought I might approach this from a different direction, and emphasise the desirability of minimising ground time; the amount of time the foot lingers on the ground when running fast. So stay tuned.

Last night we ran at Parliament House with light rain pending but never really arriving. Four of us ran early; Jen & Rachelle, who didn't stay for the later session; and Andy & I. Then we were joined by Bronwyn, Craig, Emma, Helen, Jodie, Julia (new), Karen, Katherine, Kathy, Neil,   & Warrick for a final session of 3 x 950m stopping at one or more exercise stations on the way around. Helen introduced everybody and remembered every single name, not stumbling once. Wow! Though I guess as she is a teacher, she has had practice recalling names.

Tonight is our athletic club's annual general meeting. I am looking forward to that one! I hope all the good guys get elected, it depends on who turns up to do the electing. All being well, you will read here tomorrow a report from my/our perspective.

Speedygeese in the ABS Fun Run Wednesday 19 May
26 Katie Forestier 29:06
46 Ken White 30:34
90 Bronwyn Calver 34:00
147 Neil Boden 37:05
574 finishes
Needless to say, given that I worked in the ABS all my working life and organised many of the first Fun Runs there, I recognised many of the finishers' names!

Brett, Nadine, Craig, Maria. Photo by Janene.

sixty candles

Happy Birthday Ruth!

Sixty today!

What's on this week: (updated Mondays)
Monday 24 May: Parliament House 4:30pm 8k jog; 5:30pm interval training.
Wednesday 26 May: 12:15pm BBQ Stakes 6k handicap
Wednesday 26 May: 5:45pm Parliament House, easy run, usually about 12k
Thursday 27 May: Dickson 4:00pm long run; 5:30pm speedygeese interval training
Friday 28 May: 12:15pm Customs 5k handicap, Stage 88
Saturday 29 May: 9:00am I run with a novice group from Acton Ferry Terminal
Saturday 29 May: 1:00pm ACTCCC Campbell Park 6ik
Sunday 30 May: 9:00am Vets Handicap, West Stromlo

Results BBQ Stakes 6k 19 May
Roger Pilkington 27:13
Gary Bowen 25:40
Helen Lamour 27:46

Results Customs 5k 21 May
Geoff Moore 20:27
Bronwyn Calver 23:52

Don't sit around

There's plenty of good we can do.

ACTVAC annual general meeting.
Please come to the club’s Annual General Meeting with special guest speaker Professor Dick Telford OAM. Dick is one of Australia’s top coaches (currently the High Performance Coach in Long Distance Running for Athletics Australia) and in great demand as an entertaining and motivating speaker. Tuesday 25 May, Orion Room, Canberra Southern Cross Club Woden, 7:30pm sharp. I even have a job; handing out membership cards!

Canada Fun Run
Cancer Council ACT in conjunction with the Canadian High Commission will hold the annual Canada Fun Run on Sunday 20 June 2010. You are invited to assist in raising funds for cancer research by taking part this year. Without your fantastic support the Canada Fun Run would not be the success that it is, raising an incredible $33,000 in 2009.
Canada and Australia both share a dedication to cancer research and while advances are being made in both countries, it is vital that we continue to raise funds for this important cause. Cancer is a leading cause of death in Australia and ongoing research into this disease is our best hope of reducing the risk. All funds raised will go directly to Cancer Council ACT.
If you wish to participate please register online at www.actcancer.org
Should you have any questions please call us on 6257 9999.
We look forward to seeing you at this year’s Canada Fun Run.

2010 Bush Capital Bush Marathon Festival
Australian Mountain Running Association www.mountainrunning.coolrunning.com.au
Bush Capital Bush Marathon Festival, Canberra, 31 July 2010
Online registration at the above website is now available for this year's Bush Capital Bush Marathon Festival on 31 July 2010. The program of events is:
7.30am Early bird start for slow runners in 60km ultra and 42km marathon
8.30am Bush marathon 42.2 kms; marathon relay; 60km ultra; 25km bush walk
9.00am 25km bush run
9.30am 16km bush run and 16km bush walk
12.00pm 5km run and walk
12.40pm Under 13 years 2km children’s run
1.00pm 10km run and walk
The organisation and courses are basically the same as in previous years. However, there have been several improvements made this year:
1. If you have 2 or more family members or friends or relay team members you wish to enter using the one credit card payment, the online registration now offers the option of specifying how many persons (up to 5) you wish to enter and then registering all of them sequentially in the one entry process.
2. There is now a 20% discount for online family entry (2 parents & 1 or more children under 20, or 1 parent and 2 or more children under 20).
3. There is a 10% discount if you enter by 15 June. It will be greatly appreciated if you can enter as soon as possible as this greatly assists in race organisation planning for drink stations, portaloos, pre-event postage of chest numbers to all participants, and provision of race mugs and apparel.
4. Event T shirts: White Coolmax T shirts with navy blue panels are on sale as part of online registration for $35. These must be ordered before 12 noon on 19 July. No orders will be accepted after that date.
5. The 60 km ultra running course has been greatly improved, with last year's long bitumen section along Mulligans Flat road replaced with a scenic, fully off road trail in Mulligans Flat reserve, with the turnaround at the picnic area carpark entrance to the reserve in the suburb of Forde.
6. On the event website, an online VOLUNTEERS button has been added to make it easy for volunteers to register to help. An event like this with an expected 600+ participants needs many helpers. If you are injured/ill this year but would be happy to help out, please register as a volunteer online. You will be given a choice of a bottle of wine or an event T shirt plus a race mug for helping.
This is the principal fund raising event for the Australian mountain running teams each year and the organisation is on a fully voluntary basis to raise funds. The Australian teams receive no government financial support and this year the World Mountain Running Championships will be in Slovenia and the World Long Distance Championships in the USA, costing about $4000 per person. Please encourage friends and others to run or walk in one of the BCBM Festival events: 2k, 5k, 10k, 16k, 25k, 42k, 60k & 42k relay runs and 5k, 10k , 16k and 25k walks.
Training
The Australian Mountain Running Association organises free power walks and runs up Mt Ainslie (12.45pm, first Tuesday of each month, 2.3kms) and Black Mountain (12.45pm, third Tuesday of each month, 2.6kms) and everyone is welcome. See the website for full details.
The ACT Cross Country Club has a weekly program of events where everyone is welcome. See www.canberrarunner.com.au
Orienteering ACT has events each Wednesday and Saturday and most Sundays. If you don't know how to read a map or use a compass, you can try an easier course and a helper will give you instructions before you go out. See http://act.orienteering.asn.au/
The ACT Rogaining Association has a fabulous training event on 30 May, the 5 hour Metrogaine where you can stroll, walk or jog around the streets and bushland areas of South Canberra and the Woden Valley for up to 5 hours from 10am, either as an individual or in a team of 2 to 5 persons. See http://j15.act.rogaine.asn.au/ The start/finish is at a scout hall in Deakin.
Other events. See www.mountainrunning.coolrunning.com.au
In respect of Canberra events, the usual Canberra calendar of AMRA events late in the year has been re-arranged as follows:
23 October Mt Majura Vineyard 1/2/3 Peaks, 12k, 20k, 26k
7 November Deep Space Mountain Marathon events, Namadgi National Park: 8k, 19k, 25k, 44k
12 December Black Mtn Challenge, Canberra, 4.8k (a Woden Harriers event)
19 December Tour de Mountain, Woden Valley, Canberra, 9k, 17k, 25k
22 January Orroral Valley Classic, Namadgi National Park: 3k, 8k, 20k, 32k
Each event caters for walkers as well as runners
Other information
There are regular news updates on the AMRA website and a calendar of great trail running events around Australia.
John Harding
President
Australian Mountain Running Association (AMRA)
Ph 0427 107 033

running is for the birds

There seem to be "too many birds" around on these early Canberra morning runs. ;) Galahs squawking, cockatoos screeching, ducks and ducklings feeding next to the lake's running paths, Currawongs fighting over food, and so on. It was such a beautiful morning today for running along a serene Lake Burley Griffin, taking in the sights and sounds of nature.

Yesterday was a 20:23 5k Customs run; that's better! Tomorrow I am meeting a group at 8:30am at the rowing shed on Black Mountain Peninsula for a quick run around West Basin. It's all good!

lights will guide you home

Last week's Customs 5k times
Geoff Moore 21:43
Yili Zhu 21:46
Kym Chisholm 21:54
Bronwyn Calver 23:27
Caroline Campbell 27:03

I will have another attempt at running a decent time today. It's always a challenge after Thursday night training! Last night Craig and I ran long at 4pm, then at 5:30pm the group did its two-lap handicap intervals. For some reason the numbers were well down; I am not aware of what took some away, except for Ruth doing a Ewen and avoiding us around her birthday time. Speaking of birthdays, happy birthday Kathy Sims, 59 today! Last night conditions were excellent for running and the lights were bright! Surely not too cold to play outside for an hour or so. Training were Bronwyn, Craig, me, Janene, Jen, Margaret, Maria, Michelle, Neil, Roger &  . Roger ran along at the speed of sound and I had to keep re-handicapping him. Talk about speedy, Roger also did a Ewen and took off without returning to Maria her car keys before she could intercept him.

Maria after her marathon. I hope she and her little green car got home alright last night.

I do not see too well in the dark. On Wednesday it was a good thing Jennifer Bright had her torch, and that she was prepared to wait for me at the hardest parts to show me the way.

Jennifer Langton had her 39th birthday a few days ago. She sent me some funny pictures which I will post, starting with ...

Brett - school champion

Dickson training tonight and next week will be the last of the "two lap handicaps", before we move on to the next phase of training. Here is the current list of start times:
0:30 Caroline, Margaret
0.40 Ruth, Susan, Yelena
1.00 Alan, Colleen, Neil, 
1.10 Craig, Janene, Maria
1.20 Bronwyn, Kym
1.30 Brett M, Nadine, Roger
1.40 Brett L, Michelle
1.50 Jen, Karen
2.00 Joel, Troy

Subject to Change
And as people get faster and slower from week to week, the starts vary accordingly. We do four handicap runs altogether, the finish time for everyone should be about 5 minutes, and the clock starts again after about three more minutes.

Young Brett has been doing well, especially considering he is less than half the age of the next youngest participant on Thursday nights. Brett won his school cross country and has got through to ACT schools which will be held on 31 May at SFP. He is keen to keep his training going!

Brett L

Brett's Mom

more marathon finish images

Roger bringing home the 4 hour group

Ruth running in. Not quite keeping up with Roger, maybe next time!

When Ruth runs her next race she will be a W60. Happy birthday!

And I have heard a report that Sharene completed the North Face 100 in 22:22.18. Amazing!

pond, flood, ocean

Amy Pond is my new pin-up girl. I would hate to think she might be phased out before the end of this series of Doctor Who?

But Kelley Flood is my hero!

Great Ocean Road 45k official results
Kelley Flood 3:43:02 (marathon split 3:26:48)
Michael Thompson 3:47:01.77 (marathon split 3:29:33)
Elle Knight 4:05:26 (marathon split 3:46:29)
Mick Horan 4:16:20 (marathon split 3:58:41)
I was telling the training group last night that Kelley had run 3:48 but actually it was 3:43! I also said she won the W50s but actually she won the W45s. Not my error, what can you rely on these days when the official website tells lies??? Kelley, winning the W45s is even better than winning the W50s! What a performance.

Thorn between two roses

Last night we enjoyed another great training session, 19 runners at Parliament House. First we were warned not to train on the fore-court, we never do, that's only the personal trainers doing their thing; then we ran the second last of our 950m intervals around the exercise circuit; a couple of runners opted out and ran under the lights on the road rather than risk running off the lower track in the dark. Christopher did well remembering names as he did the introductions this week. Participating were Andrew, Bronia, Bronwyn, Caroline, Christopher, Colleen, Craig, Emma, Ewen, me, Helen, Jennifer, Jodie, Joel, Neil, Rachelle, Richard, Ruth &.