Thursday, May 17, 2007

Evidence that I don't run more just to blog more

I've been delinquent in blogging this week, but it's not because I haven't run. Turns out I had work to do. I told myself that I am not allowed to log in to Positive Splits until I finished writing a certain letter that would enable me to make rent and buy new Asics more comfortably. So finally, tonight, I sent out the letter. And here I am back, blogging, and happy.

While I was working, I decided that this blog will not become a running log. I keep track of my miles in a year on one 8" x 6.5" page of my calendar. That's good enough. Who wants to read about the 100th time I've run yet another variation of the gun loop? (Index finger on nose. Not. It.)

I do know the difference between something that's interesting to me and something that's actually interesting. The blog will be about both. My running will be part of it, as will my thoughts on a range of running-related topics. But not all of my runs will make it here. And you will never see anything about heart rate monitors, Vo2Max, or anything technical other than splits.

Oh, splits. I ran a another double on Tuesday. This time, easy 7.5 miles in the shade of Forbidden Drive in the A.M. + 4 miles of intervals on the track at night. I was curious to see how my legs would handle running in ovals at 5K pace after some moderate running. The legs did better. They did the 1-2-3-4-3-2-1 lap ladder at under 6:20mm, going faster on the way down. If anyone reads this and think, "boy, did Helen just prove negative splits?", you are geekier than me. Now help me fix the punctuation dilemma in the previous clause.

No comments: