Simple running

I spent the last week geting rid of stuff. First went my heart rate monitor - I got slightly faster and finished with more energy to spare. I think concentrating on some arbitrary heart rate target instead of listening to what my body was trying to tell me was counterproductive. I found myself actually saying to myself things like, 'Why am a suddenly breathing so hard? I am well below my lactate threshold ...' Nonsense - if I am suddenly breathing really hard and feel the need to stop, or if I am getting burning in my muscles, then guess what? I am overdoing it and need to slow down!

Second, I dispensed with my metronome. I got faster again, and finished my first 5km. It seems the arbitrary 180 steps per minute I was aiming for was actually a bit slower than my comfortable rate of turnover. Now I seem to vary between 180 and 200 steps per minute as my run progresses, but I never know exactly at what cadence I am running at any particular time. Who cares?

Now I am thinking of getting rid of my stopwatch - but I admit I can't quite bring myself to do it. I feel I need some measure of how well I am doing. However, I have at least stopped looking at it while running, except at the end. It is quite a liberating experience. Maybe after a few weeks I can get rid if it entirely.

Now my run is spent just concentrating on keeping good form. I reckon distance and speed will come of their own accord as long as I avoid injury from doing Too Much Too Soon.

Even the good form part has got a lot simpler. Now I just concentrate on short steps, midfoot striking and fast turnover (180-200 steps per minute I suppose, but no idea exactly ...), and nothing else. I find if I picture my feet as a little set of wheels revolving (like the Roadrunner!), I seem to use less energy per step and run more lightly. To speed up I keep the rate of turnover about the same and increase the size of the wheel, and to slow down (e.g. when getting tired or running uphill), I just decrease the size of the wheel.

Sometimes I find I have zoned out completely and have run half a mile or so without realising it. Other times I find myself just enjoying the view. I begin to see what all the minimalist and barefoot runners are getting at. Runners get so bogged down in all these things they think they need to think about - HRmax, lactate threshold, cadence, posture, heel striking, which muscles they are using, which shoes to buy etc. etc. etc. Most of the time it all just seems to get in the way.

Eventually I hope the stopwatch will go as well - then I will know I am really on the right track ...

Just Run

Tonight's run was a bit of a puzzler. I forgot to take my heart rate monitor or my metronome when I left the house and couldn't be bothered to go back for them, so I just did my best to stick to 180 steps per minute based on my best guess, and regulated my heart rate by just shortening my stride whenever my breathing got too laboured. I was rewarded with my best time so far for this distance. I wondered if this is because I have been trying too hard to use all the available technology and training advice, when what I should have been doing is to 'just run'.

That got me thinking in a more philosophical way about what I am trying to achieve here. Sure, I want to get fit and lose weight, and also to measure my progress by running the odd race, but is that really what I am doing this for? I think I also want to get in touch with some more primitive way of moving about, which is why I found Born to Run so enthralling, and why I have enjoyed finding out about natural running form, and why I plan to give barefoot running a go at some point. If this is the case, then using heart rate monitors etc. is not really in keeping with this ethos, and if I get better times anyway without using technology, then maybe I shouldn't bother ...

I think an experiment is in order. I will do some runs with both the metronome and HRM, some with just the metronome and some with neither, and see how the results compare.

Weight control

I started thinking about my diet today. After the Easter holidays, I lost about 12 lbs by following a standard low fat diet, but after I took up running I didn't stick to it - I felt that introducing a new exercise plan would be difficult enough without adding the extra problem of dieting as well. Besides, most experts seem to agree that dieting at the same time as following a running training plan is not a good idea.

Anyway, this morning I got round to weighing myself, and was quite pleased to see that I have not put on any weight since I started running, but I was also a little disappointed to see that I haven't lost any either. This means that I am about 31 lbs (14 kg) overweight, based on the BMI measure.

I really want to shift this if possible, not just for general health reasons, but also because it should be easier to run when I am carrying less weight. Imagine running while carrying fourteen 1 kg bags of sugar - well you get the idea.

Now I reckon that as I increase my weekly mileage, some of that weight will naturally come off. My plan has me reaching 18 miles a week by October this year. That is about 2700 kcal per week, which is not far off 1 lb in weight per week (3500 kcal).

So the key thing for me is not to force things by dieting now, but to keep eating sensibly and to let the running take care of the rest. I must not allow my calorie intake to increase to compensate for the extra exercise. I also need to be able to stick to my diet without feeling too hungry or bored. So here is my plan:

Breakfast: Porridge (oatmeal), or other breakfast cereal if I am in a hurry. Wholemeal toast & honey if I am very hungry. Fruit juice and/or tea.

Lunch: Sandwich with salad on wholemeal bread. Another sandwich if I am hungry. Water to drink.

Dinner: Normal meal with the family, usually something like pasta bolognaise or curry with rice,  Fruit for dessert. Water to drink.

Snacks: Fruit, occasional crisps or chocolate. Water.

I can't avoid going out for dinner sometimes, with friends or on social occasions, but I think this won't do too much harm as long as I don't overdo it.

Training zones

I need to rethink my approach on using my heart rate monitor. On last night's run, I was trying to stay at around 93-97% of my estimated HRmax for the whole run. This proved to be impossible. My target range was 164-171, but whenever I went above about 165 bpm, my breathing became laboured, and I felt as though I was nearing exhaustion and that I would need to stop running imminently. I then had to drop down below 160 bpm to recover.

So I have read up a bit more about heart rates and decided to try a new approach, based on Lactate Threshold. This is the intensity of exercise at which lactic acid starts to build up in the muscles, and can be estimated as the highest intensity that can be sustained without significant discomfort, according to this article. A method is suggested here for estimating your own lactate threshold, but based on my run from last night, I would say mine is around 165 bpm. Based on this assumption I can define a number of training zones:

Training Zones for Lactate Threshold = 165 bpm
		Range as % of LT		MinHR	MaxHR
Zone 1	Active Recovery		80%		132
Zone 2	Aerobic Threshold	81%	89%	134	147
Zone 3	Tempo	90%	95%	149	157
Zone 4	Sublactate Threshold	96%	99%	158	163
Zone 5a	Lactate Threshold	100%	101%	165	167
Zone 5b	Aerobic Capacity	102%	105%	168	173
Zone 5c	Anaerobic Capacity	106%		175

This seems to make sense - firstly my original estimate for HRmax (177) now looks to be around the limit of anaerobic capacity, which is what I would expect. Secondly, most of my run yesterday was in Zone 3 (Tempo), which seems reasonable as this should be slightly faster than a comfortable pace, or at the point where I am pushing myself slightly.

This gives me some new target zones. For the moment I will try to do all my runs at tempo (Zone 3). Once I move onto Phase 2/3 of my plan, where I am alternating between short and medium runs, I will do the medium runs in Zone 3, and push up to Zone 4 for the short ones.

Once I move onto Phase 4/5 of my plan (see earlier post), where I introduce long runs and build up the total mileage, I will modify my original plan to include runs at different levels of intensity:

Mon	Rest
Tue	Short Run	Zone 4
Wed	Medium Run	Zone 3
Thu	Short Run	Zone 4
Fri	Rest
Sat	Medium Run	Zone 3
Sun	Long Run	Zone 2

This plan means that the rest days come either after a long run or a fast one. I may also experiment with interval training on some runs, i.e. short bursts of Zone 5 running, alternating with periods of recovery at Zone 1. This technique is supposed to build strength.

At some point I will also try to come up with a more accurate figure for Lactate Threshold, and I will measure it regularly so as to update the training zones table, as LT is supposed to increase slightly as fitness increases.

Target heart rates

I used a metronome on my last run, which is suggested by several coaches as a way of monitoring turnover or cadence, that is to say the number of steps taken in a given time. The idea is that for maximum efficiency, we should run at around 180 steps per minute. This enables us to make use of energy stored in the muscles and tendons of the foot and lower leg, which would otherwise be lost. It also discourages overstretching and heavy pounding, both of which can lead to injury. I was surprised to find last night how much slower than 180 I was running without the metronome to keep me in time.

On the other hand, my pace was a bit slower than I expected, and it occurred to me that I did not know whether this was because of altering my cadence, or just because I was putting less effort in. In short, I don't have a good way of judging how hard I am working from one run to the next.

One way of solving this problem is to use a heart rate monitor, and to try to keep the heart rate within some predetermined range. As it happens I do have such a monitor, so I dug it out of a bottom drawer today.

Target HR ranges are normally worked out as some percentage of your maximum heart rate (HRmax). Runners World have some ranges in their training plans for different distances, namely: 93-97% of HRmax for 5km, 90-94% for 10km, 87-91% for half-marathons and 79-84% for marathons. There are several formulas for working out HRmax, usually based on age. The most well-known is:

HRmax = 220 - Age

although this study found that this formula, while simple, is not really very accurate. It suggests that of the formulas most commonly used, the one that is the least objectionable is:

HRmax = 205.8 - (0.685 x Age)

and I also found another study, which came up with a non-linear formula of:

HRmax = 191.5 − (0.007 × Age²)

Based on all these formulas, my own maximum heart rate would be 177, 176 and 178 respectively. Taking the middle of these values and applying the Runners World percentages, I get the following ranges:

5K      164 - 171
10K    159 - 166
20K    153 - 160
40K    139 - 148

My runs at the moment are less than 5K, so I will wear my HR monitor on my next run, and try to stay in the range 164-171. By sticking to this range for all runs, I should be fairly sure I am working at roughly the same level every time. I can then be more certain that any improvements in pace are down to improving fitness, rather than just a higher level of effort. This approach should have the added benefit of ensuring that I always have enough left in me to complete the required distance without collapsing with exhaustion.

Training plan

That hydration tip worked really well - last night's run was my fastest so far. However, I don't think I left it long enough after drinking as I could feel water sloshing about while I was running - quite uncomfortable.

I have been giving some thought recently to my training plan. Up to now, I have just been concentrating on running and on increasing my mileage, but more experienced runners have told me that it helps with to have a goal in mind and a plan on how to get there.

There are lots of standard training plans in books and on the web, but I find them all rather complicated and I fear this would make them hard to stick to. I decided therefore to create my own very simple plan, and here it is:

Phase 1 - run every other day, increasing mileage by 0.25 miles every three runs, until I can run 3 mi (5 km). This should be about three weeks from now.

Phase 2 - run every other day, on a pattern of Short Run/ Rest/ Medium Run/ Rest/ (repeat). The short run will stay at 3 mi, and the long run will progressively increase by 0.25 miles each run until I reach 6 mi (10 km). This should take until the middle of September.

There is a local 10K race coming up at the end of September - the Mortimer 10K. I haven't registered yet as I decided to wait until I can run 3 miles before doing so.

Phase 3 - investigating using minimalist shoes and a barefoot running style. For this I will stick with the same schedule as for Phase 2, and gradually increase the distance run in the minimal shoes until I am doing all my runs in them, or until I decide that they are not going to work for me. This should take until the end of 2011.

Phase 4 - switch to a more traditional weekly schedule: Mon - rest/ Tue - short run/ Wed - medium run/ Thu - short run/ Fri - rest/ Sat - medium run/ Sun - long run.

The long run will be twice the length of the medium run, which in turn will be twice the length of the short run. Gradually build up the long run until it is around 10-12 miles (25-30 mi per week). Should take until March.

At this point I hope to do the Reading half-marathon. Again, I haven't booked this yet, as I wanted to get to the point where I can run 10K first.

Phase 5 - gradually increase my weekly mileage as far as I can, adding a mile onto the long run each week, half a mile onto the medium runs, and a quarter mile onto the short runs. Overtraining will mean dropping back a week, and injuries will mean taking a break and dropping back a number of weeks equal to the break.

I prefer the idea of building up my base like this, rather than doing one of the standard training programmes, as I don't want races to be the main focus of my training, which is more about getting in shape than achieving fast times.

We have a local trail marathon/half-marathon in May - the Neolithic. I will try to do whichever one of these seems most appropriate, based on my weekly mileage at the time.

Effect of dehydration

I noticed on my last three runs that my pace has not been improving, but has slowed in fact by almost 2% over the past week, over the same distance. This is a bit disappointing, as until this week my pace has generally been improving on every run. At first I wondered if I could be overtraining. Even though my total weekly mileage is currently pretty minimal, it has been growing by about 12-13% per week, which is quite a quick rate of increase, and above the 10% that most coaches recommend. I am reluctant to change my training plan though, as I do have a 10K race to prepare for, and I need to get up to running 10K fairly comfortably before the end of September.

Another possibility I thought of was that I might be slightly dehydrated. According to this article, a reduction of only 1% in the body's water content below the optimum level may lead to a slowing in running pace of around 2%, due to factors like decreasing muscle endurance, decreased cardiac output and decreased skin cooling. If so, this alone could explain the recent drop in performance.

The article goes on to explain that the average daily amount of water consumed by someone of my weight is around 3 litres. I reckon my own consumption is quite a bit below this, even if I include other fluids like tea and coffee. So from today I am going to try to always drink this amount every day.

Apparently, I should drink additional water before and during exercise, at a rate of about 100ml for every 10 minutes of exercise. So for my typical 20 minutes or so of running, I should drink around 200ml of water. It hardly seems worth carrying a bottle with me for such a short run, so I think I will try the 'water loading' approach, which is to load up on about 500ml of water approximately 30 minutes before running, so that it has left the stomach and begun to enter the bloodstream before the run starts. I will try this tonight and see if my pace starts to improve again.

Once my runs get longer than about 50 minutes, I will start carrying a water bottle as well, so as to be able to continue the 100ml per 10 minutes rule once the water load has been used up.

Tibialis Posterior

No pain in my heel today, I am happy to report, but a slight ache elsewhere in my leg prompted me to do some web research. I had an aching muscle in the same place in each of my lower legs, and I wondered what the cause could be. Try as I might, I couldn't figure out exactly what muscle it was that was aching. It didn't seem to fit with any of the descriptions I found. There are a surprising number of muscles in the lower leg, by the way.

Eventually I tracked it down - it was a muscle called the Tibialis Posterior. This muscle is located for the most part in the middle of the lower leg, between the tibia bone and the big muscles at the back of the calf (not shown). From there, a tendon extends down and behind the Medial Malleolus, the bony lump on the inside of the ankle, and under the foot, where it joins onto one of the bones under the sole.

This muscle has three main functions. Firstly it is responsible for 'inversion' of the foot. Sit in a chair with your legs straight out in front of you and the soles of your feet pointing away from you. Now bend your right ankle so that the sole of the right foot is pointing inwards towards your left foot. The Tibialis Posterior muscle is what you just used to do that movement.

Secondly, it helps with plantarflexion, that is to say the pointing of the toes. Sit in the same position as before and point your toes away from you. The main muscle doing this movement is the big one at the back of the calf - the Gastrocnemius, but the Tibialis Posterior is assisting.

Thirdly, and most importantly from a running point of view, the Tibialis Posterior is responsible, with its antagonist, the Tibialis Anterior, for stabilising the foot. These muscles keep the foot stable and flat when running. Each time the foot is planted on the ground, your weight tries to evert the foot (the opposite of inverting it) and flatten the arch, and the Tibialis Posterior tenses and pulls back, supporting the arch and bringing the foot back into line. If you have flat feet, it is often this muscle that is underdeveloped. So the fact that mine is aching a little is a good thing - it just means it is doing the job it is supposed to be doing, and which it probably hasn't been doing for a while.

Heel pain

I woke up yesterday with quite a bit of pain in the back of my left heel. I checked out the symptoms on the web and as I suspected, it seemed as though one of the scourges of long-distance runners, achilles tendonitis might have struck.

I got up and gingerly did a few calf lifts, then stretched my calves. A few minutes later the pain had subsided, and by the end of the day it had vanished altogether. Today when I woke up there was just a hint of discomfort, but nothing too painful, and again it vanished entirely after a few calf lifts and stretches. However, I am worried this might be the start of something chronic and I am not sure what to do about it.

For one thing, I don't know quite what has brought it on. I haven't increased the length of my daily run very much, but the total for the week has increased quite a lot recently, so maybe it is overtraining. Perahaps my attempts to avoid running on my heel have pushed me too far the other way. Running too much on your forefoot is said to put strain on your calves and achilles tendons. Maybe it is just that my tendon has been weakened by years of shoe-wearing, as the barefoot runners would have us believe. Possibly it had nothing to do with running at all. I did play tennis for about two hours on Sunday before my run, so maybe the overall strain was just too much. Or maybe it is a combination of all of these factors.

Looking back though, I have a slight suspicion that I did not warm up quite as conscientiously before my Sunday run as I normally do, although I did do all my usual stretches afterwards. I didn't warm up much before the tennis match either, for that matter.

So for the moment, I will work on the assumption that this is the cause. Tonight when I run, I will make sure I do the full warm-up, including a couple of sets of calf lifts, and see if I have any pain tomorrow morning. If so, I will take two rest days instead of my usual one, and see if that helps.

Barefoot running

It seems almost impossible to look at a running website these days without seeing something about barefoot or minimalist running. There are a lot of strongly-held opinions on both sides of the debate, in fact often it doesn't seem to be a debate at all, but rather an exercise in mudslinging. See this example, and this one, for some of the arguments on both sides.

In a nutshell, the proponents of barefoot running (and here I also include the use of minimal non-cushioned shoes) say some or all of the following:

1. As a species, we evolved to run barefoot, and we have natural cushioning structures in our feet and lower legs that make cushioned running shoes unnecessary.

2. Cushioned shoes encourage us to run with poor form, because they protect us from our mistakes. Eventually, using them leads to inefficient running, weakened feet and chronic injuries like plantar fasciitis and achilles tendonitis.

3. Shoe manufacturers are well aware of this, but they only make money if we continually update our shoes for the latest hi-tech models, so they deliberately mislead us with tales of overpronation and so forth.

4. Podiatrists are almost as bad - they want to sell us their services, custom orthotics etc. so they support and add credibility to the shoe manufacturers' story.

As evidence for their point of view, proponents of barefoot running point to the many runners who have completed and even won long races in minimal footwear, and to the even greater number of runners who say their chronic injuries cleared up after they started running barefoot. These arguments are raised in the excellent Born to Run, by Christopher McDougall, by the way.

Opponents of barefoot running say that much of the talk about its supposed benefits is wholly unscientific, consisting of new-age claptrap, biased opinion and unsupported assertions rather than actual evidence. Also, they point out that those who buy minimal shoes are being just as misled by manufacturers' marketing ploys as anyone else.

For myself, I have to admit I am quite sympathetic to the barefoot idea, but I admit this is more because I want it to be true than because of any actual hard evidence. I can see how the cushioned shoes I use are indeed very forgiving of bad running form, and since improving my form has led to my running better than I have ever been capable of in the past, this does seem to suggest one possible reason why I should dispense with my Asics and buy something with less protection.

However, I can't quite bring myself to run completely barefoot at this point, or to buy some huaraches or other minimal shoes, as it is taking all my effort to build up my overall fitness at the moment, without having to build up my leg and foot muscles as well.

Also, the cost of the minimalist shoes just seems too high for what you get. If we are being asked to believe that shoe manufacturers like Nike, Asics etc. are conning us by pretending that all the hi-tech features in their latest £90 shoes are necessary when in fact they aren't, then how do the likes of Merrell and Vibram justify charging the same amount for shoes that have less material in them and required less development?

So for the moment I am sticking with my Asics, secure in the knowledge that if the barefoot brigade are right, then as the midsole cushioning starts to break down, the shoes will actually be better for me rather than worse.

Once I have my first race (Mortimer 10K) out of the way, I will have some time to think more about minimal shoes. If I can get hold of a reasonably cheap pair, then maybe I will give them a go and see if I can detect any advantages.

Running form

Looking back over previous times I have tried unsuccesfully to run on a regular basis, I have become convinced that part of my problem lies in my running form. It would be great if what had been holding me back all these years was simply a lack of knowledge of running technique. If so, and if I sorted this out right at the start, it would help me to make better progress and have fewer aches and pains (and fewer injuries). Then I could get down to the real work of increasing distance and pace.

There is quite a lot of information out there on the web about how to run properly. In particular there are quite a few 'branded' systems around, Chi Running, Pose Method, Good Form Running, Evolution Running, and so on. So I looked into these various systems on the web, and came to a couple of conclusions:

1. These competing systems are more similar than they are different (good news, as this implies there is broad agreement on what constitutes a good way to run, and that the differences are more on how to achieve this than anything else).

2. These systems are all rather expensive for what you get (bad news, as I hate paying for anything, especially when I don't feel I am getting value for money).

Similarities of all these systems:

1. Keep your posture tall and your head up when you run
2. Land on your mid/forefoot, not on your heel
3. Bend your knees slightly so your foot lands under your centre of mass
4. Lean forward slightly from the ankles so you are not fighting gravity
5. Use a higher cadence (steps per minute) and a shorter stride to make the most of stored energy.

 So I put these principles into practice when I started running again, and I must admit they did seem to make a difference. I can state categorically that I have never run with less muscle and joint pain before. Whether my recent improvements in pace will continue remains to be seen, but so far it looks good.

In the end I went and bought the Chi Running book by Danny Dreyer. It was on special offer at Amazon ... what can I say?

Some of my fears were realised. At least two-thirds of the book is just not worth having. New age mumbo-jumbo and self-publicity. Nonetheless, the parts of the book that deal with technique are interesting, it is just that you can get much of this information from the web for nothing.

The other day I got hold of Ken Mierke's Evolution Running DVD (for free - I wasn't going to pay the £50 it costs on Amazon UK). Chris McDougall recommends this system and used it himself to great effect. This is much more useful ... no fluff, just solid step-by-step explanations, firstly on what most runners do that is wrong, and then on how to correct it. It is now safely on my iPod where I can watch it any time I need reminding, and as I didn't pay for it, I can hardly complain about value for money ...

Why running?

So after my last visit to the doctor, and determined not to go onto Amlodipine if I could possibly help it, I started looking around for some form of exercise that I thought I might stick to. I mentioned before that I am not too keen on team games, so running seemed a possibility.

After a bit of web research, I began to think that there were a couple of reasons why I had never enjoyed running in the past. Firstly, my joints and muscles always seemed to suffer far more than they ought to for the amount of work I was doing. Secondly, no matter how often I ran or how slowly I tried to build up the miles, I never seemed to improve. Both these facts had always sapped my morale and led eventually to me losing interest.

Looking at others' experiences on the web, it seemed the reason for this might be that I had forgotten, or possibly never learned how to run properly, I had always assumed that running was something we all know how to do, and that if I was suffering I must be down to some physical limitations on my part. I started going on a few short runs - initially walking when I felt tired, and adding a little bit to the distance every few days.

I came across the book 'Born to Run' (by Chris McDougall) at this point. I read it cover-to-cover in two days, and I can honestly say it was truly inspiring stuff. By the end of it I was fully signed up to the idea that we are all of us natural runners (thanks to evolution) and that if this doesn't appear to be the case, it is because years of wearing shoes and travelling in cars has made us forget how to do it. I urge anyone who is thinking of taking up running to buy this book and read it. Chris's blog is worth a look too.

So it has now been about seven weeks, and I am running every other day, adding 1/4 of a mile after every three runs. See the Dailymile panel on the top right for the current totals. I only started recording the runs after I reached 1 mile - it just seemed too embarassing before that.

What's so bad about being unfit anyway?

I suppose I should come clean and say that exercise and I have not been the closest of friends in the past. I like watching some team games (cricket mostly), but I have never much liked playing them, and running has always conjoured up unpleasant memories of cross-country runs at school.

However, a couple of months ago I went to the doctor about some trivial problem, and while I was there he took my blood pressure. It was seriously high, and after a series of tests for various things like diabetes, high colesterol and so on, it seemed it was likely to be down to nothing more than generally low cardiovascular fitness and possibly stress.

So there I was, a 43 year old couch potato with hypertension and a doctor suggesting I needed to go onto blood pressure reducing drugs. Not something I was prepared to do, at least not without trying some alternatives first.

Newbie runner

I started this blog as a way of recording my attempt at transforming myself from the archetypal couch potato into a Runner. I don't really expect anyone else to find this interesting, but I hoped that recording this stuff might help me stick to my Plan. I started with short runs, less than a mile, and started recording them on Dailymile as soon as they stopped being too embarassing.

First target - Mortimer 10k at the end of Sep 2011, then the Reading half-marathon in March. Then we will see what else is possible.