Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Chicked by Colleen: IMAZ 2nd *male* 50-54 race report
Quote | Reply
This was my fourth IMAZ and 15th IM overall. A bit of background: 52yo male, doing tris since 1983, but a lot of that time I wasn’t “serious” and certainly was never very talented. What’s happened in recent years is that I got the itch to become more competitive, and I also figured a few things out. I’m still not that fast, but I’ve maybe slowed down less as I’ve gotten older (easy when you weren’t fast to begin with). By virtue of all that, I did a 10:04 here in 2012 and got my first straight-up KQ (I did Kona twice before with XC) by getting 3rd in M50-54. I thought I may have reached my zenith there, but on the other hand there were some things I thought I could improve on: a weak 1:14 swim and some dehydration-driven cramps in the second half of the run. On the right day, I might have a sub 10 in me.

Fast-forward to 2 years later: I had some nice volume coming into the year, thanks to the mild Bay Area winter, but I started a new job in February and went into IM Los Cabos without my usual focus. I had a disappointing race there, “running” 4:51 and deciding then and there to quit chasing Kona for 2014. Instead, I did lower volume but some higher intensity, and raced my ass off at Olympic and 70.3 distances - that training was much more compatible with the new gig and with re-establishing a sense of fun. And I managed to break my Oly PR twice and do my three-fastest 70.3s ever (StG, Honu, Vineman). At 52, I was pretty happy with that.

But then IMAZ loomed. Even if my shorter races indicated great fitness, my TrainingPeaks volume numbers (especially CTL) were way lower than I would have liked. I’m talking under 10 hours per week for all but 5 weeks in the past 6 months; biggest week just under 15 hours. By mid September I knew there wasn’t much to be done - you can’t cram a bunch of volume in, but you can do some focused volume, so I did one key 100-mile ride that I probably did 10 times before IMAZ 2012, and it went well enough to convince me I could do this thing.

I did make one strategic equipment change: after 3 years on the nosecone Shiv, I switched to the Dimond. It took a few weeks to dial it in, especially in the cockpit (the Zipp Vuka Stealth bars required some tweaking to get things to my liking), but once I did I realized how fast it was. I tried it out in Challenge Rancho Cordova, and hit about the same split as I did in Vineman but at 7W lower, and I started picking up Strava segment PRs on routes I ride a lot - without trying. To say I’m a fan of the bike is an understatement - the only people I don’t recommend it for are males in the 50+ age category that are doing any races I am.

I wasn’t getting a lot of pool time, either (like 1x per week), but I did a lot of sessions on my Vasa to try to at least build some swim-specific muscular endurance in the upper body. It appeared to work, because when I did make the noon masters swim (I am not a morning person, unlike most triathletes), I was able to swim in my usual lane and sometimes up a lane with no problem. Also did our team’s “hour swim” and got 3800 yards in, drafting about 1000 of those, so I figured I was good for my usual 1:10-1:15 range.

Hydration issues in IM aside, the run has historically been my strength, so my only worry there was proper pacing - oh, and having the old body hold up. Oh yeah, another last-minute equipment change was to run in Hoka Cliftons (not brand new - had run in them a number of times) rather than the Newtons I normally wear. The IMAZ run is pretty flat, but the surface is hard, so I figured the extra cushioning would come in handy.

I had peeked at the bib list coming in, and the one name that stood out was Bill Macleod - I’d met him at Malibu and knew he was out of my league. He also always shows up to races prepared, so that was one slot likely gone. Anything can happen in IM, of course. I didn’t really know anyone else to be a “heavy hitter,” which didn’t mean that anything was in the bag but simply that I had as good a shot as anyone else at a KQ if I executed well.

Anyway, the race:

Swim: I hate this swim. Not because of the water or anything - just way too many people. I’ve tried both sides but had my best luck on the left, so I headed that way again, and it was the right call. Other than some of the paddlers trying to move us right too early (no way I’m moving into that melee, pal!), I was moving along pretty well, with the normal bunching up at the turn buoys. I got right in the scrum there, but people were pretty good in general, and after the second one I moved over to the shore like Bryan had suggested. Boom! No one other than a couple of other caps - everyone else was following the buoy line. My only regret was not staying right for longer; the buoys kept moving right, and I could have stayed near the shore almost all the way to the Mill Ave Bridge. Anyway, I looked at my watch on exit and saw 1:11, which equals my best swim here, so I was pleased enough. Score one for the Vasa!

Bike: I rode 5:04 here in 2012, but as soon as I hit the road it became apparent from the winds that that was going to be challenging to repeat. I had my wattage plan anyway - basically average between 190 and 195, which is what I did to get that time before. My first problem was my Garmin 510 - for some reason the display wasn’t showing power, and the only thing I had changed before race day was to set alarms every 15 minutes to remind me to drink. This clearly wasn’t going to work, but luckily it’s easy enough to change the data fields on the fly, which I did once things had settled down a little and I wasn’t surrounded by other riders. From there it was just a matter of being patient; I let myself go up to 205-210 uphill and into the wind and occasionally spike above that if I needed to pass someone quickly to avoid drafting, but otherwise I was Steady Eddie. I made sure to drink a lot. The first lap was a 1:42 - already a couple of minutes slower than I’d done in 2012, but it would get worse from there. I think my second loop was 1:45 or 1:46, but I was still mostly passing people. I didn’t see much, if any, drafting where I was. The real key was avoiding collisions with riders I was lapping, some of whom didn’t heed instructions to ride right. I did my best to announce myself as I was passing, but it was hard to hear with the wind out there.

My Garmin crapped out on the power data (and HR) around mile 80, so the last loop I was “riding blind.” This may have been a blessing in disguise, because it forced me to go by feel, knowing that I had a run that I really wanted to nail. Nail in a “don’t cramp up and lose a bunch of time” kind of way. I couldn’t wait to make that final turn at the top of Beeline, and once I did I really relaxed on the downhill and made sure to get a bunch of nutrition in. I was ready for the ride to be done, which was a good indication that my long-distance bike fitness wasn’t as good as it should have been. Still, I executed a decent flying dismount into T2 with a split of 5:19, my second fastest. A far cry from 5:04, but I’ll take it on the day.

For data geeks, luckily I was also running my 910xt, which didn’t crap out, so I got the stats. NP of 188W (5W less than in 2012), TSS of 286, avg HR of 127, VI of 1.03 - not 1.01 like in 2012, but with the winds and all this is pretty even).

Run: I felt ok running into T2, made a quick pee break (why don’t people push the locks when they’re in the portapotties??), and got out on the run course at 6:39ish into the race. I was pretty sure there would be no sub 10 at that point; my fastest IM run ever is 3:32 (from IMAZ 2008). That didn’t mean I wasn’t going to try, but I’ve gone out at 7:00 pace in the past and that didn’t work out so well. Plus, I didn’t feel particularly punchy in my running, so I figured I’d just settle in. First couple of miles were 7:40ish, then on the return with a tailwind I hit a 7:15 mile 3 and told myself to simmer the f*** down. This would turn out to be a run in which I never felt really good, nor really bad. I was trading places off and on with an XC guy I know - he would stop and I would pass him, then when he was running he would blow past me again. The 2-loop course was new to me yet had a lot of familiar stretches from the 3-loop course, including the climb up East Curry, but for Bay Area types it’s not much of a climb.

I was glad I had the Hokas, but after the first 10 miles or so even they didn’t feel that cushioned. I just kept focusing on nutrition and every once in a while on other runners (Colleen de Reuck flew past me at mile 16 with some guy in tow, so she was hard to miss). At mile 17, my wife told me that I’d come off the bike in 4th in the AG and might be as high as 2nd now, but that first was “out of reach” (that’s putting it mildly). That was the first update I had had all day, and to be frank I was kind of shocked. I thought I had blown it on the bike and was maybe running for top 10. Knowing how unreliable the live tracker can be, I didn’t fully trust the intell, but all the same my focus was now on maintaining - no way I was catching 1st, but if I blew up I could lose 2nd. Or whatever place I was actually in.

My mile splits were consistently in the 8:30 range, and I had had no cramping yet, so once I hit that East Curry hill the second time to get to mile 23, I started my push for the finish. I had no idea where anyone was at that point, and I’d had no updates since mile 17, so my job became simply to make it very hard for any geezer to come by me. Those last 3 miles hurt. A lot. One or two younger dudes went by me in the last mile, but just before the final turn into the chute my friend told me he was pretty sure I was 2nd. I crossed the line in 10:15:50 (3:36 run), my second-fastest IM ever and indeed 2nd in M50-54. Kona, baby!

It just goes to show you that you never know. I was worried I didn’t have enough volume coming in; I knew early on in the bike that my sub 10 goal was likely out the window, yet I got my best Ironman AG and overall (117th) placing ever. And I’m old. :-)

Again, for 50+ guys, it wasn’t the Dimond. They’re sold out anyway; don’t even bother. :-)
Quote Reply
Re: Chicked by Colleen: IMAZ 2nd *male* 50-54 race report [sneeuwaap] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Great job! Congrats!
Quote Reply
Re: Chicked by Colleen: IMAZ 2nd *male* 50-54 race report [sneeuwaap] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Great race Ian - hope to get back there next year. Love your bike. Always curious just how much faster it is over conventional frames.....
Quote Reply
Re: Chicked by Colleen: IMAZ 2nd *male* 50-54 race report [albertboyce] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
albertboyce wrote:
Great job! Congrats!

Thanks, Albert. Looking forward, as always, to swimming out to the Coffees of Hawaii boat again next year!
Quote Reply
Re: Chicked by Colleen: IMAZ 2nd *male* 50-54 race report [sneeuwaap] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
sneeuwaap wrote:
This was my fourth IMAZ and 15th IM overall. A bit of background: 52yo male, doing tris since 1983, but a lot of that time I wasn’t “serious” and certainly was never very talented. What’s happened in recent years is that I got the itch to become more competitive, and I also figured a few things out. I’m still not that fast, but I’ve maybe slowed down less as I’ve gotten older (easy when you weren’t fast to begin with). By virtue of all that, I did a 10:04 here in 2012 and got my first straight-up KQ (I did Kona twice before with XC) by getting 3rd in M50-54. I thought I may have reached my zenith there, but on the other hand there were some things I thought I could improve on: a weak 1:14 swim and some dehydration-driven cramps in the second half of the run. On the right day, I might have a sub 10 in me.

Fast-forward to 2 years later: I had some nice volume coming into the year, thanks to the mild Bay Area winter, but I started a new job in February and went into IM Los Cabos without my usual focus. I had a disappointing race there, “running” 4:51 and deciding then and there to quit chasing Kona for 2014. Instead, I did lower volume but some higher intensity, and raced my ass off at Olympic and 70.3 distances - that training was much more compatible with the new gig and with re-establishing a sense of fun. And I managed to break my Oly PR twice and do my three-fastest 70.3s ever (StG, Honu, Vineman). At 52, I was pretty happy with that.

But then IMAZ loomed. Even if my shorter races indicated great fitness, my TrainingPeaks volume numbers (especially CTL) were way lower than I would have liked. I’m talking under 10 hours per week for all but 5 weeks in the past 6 months; biggest week just under 15 hours. By mid September I knew there wasn’t much to be done - you can’t cram a bunch of volume in, but you can do some focused volume, so I did one key 100-mile ride that I probably did 10 times before IMAZ 2012, and it went well enough to convince me I could do this thing.

I did make one strategic equipment change: after 3 years on the nosecone Shiv, I switched to the Dimond. It took a few weeks to dial it in, especially in the cockpit (the Zipp Vuka Stealth bars required some tweaking to get things to my liking), but once I did I realized how fast it was. I tried it out in Challenge Rancho Cordova, and hit about the same split as I did in Vineman but at 7W lower, and I started picking up Strava segment PRs on routes I ride a lot - without trying. To say I’m a fan of the bike is an understatement - the only people I don’t recommend it for are males in the 50+ age category that are doing any races I am.

I wasn’t getting a lot of pool time, either (like 1x per week), but I did a lot of sessions on my Vasa to try to at least build some swim-specific muscular endurance in the upper body. It appeared to work, because when I did make the noon masters swim (I am not a morning person, unlike most triathletes), I was able to swim in my usual lane and sometimes up a lane with no problem. Also did our team’s “hour swim” and got 3800 yards in, drafting about 1000 of those, so I figured I was good for my usual 1:10-1:15 range.

Hydration issues in IM aside, the run has historically been my strength, so my only worry there was proper pacing - oh, and having the old body hold up. Oh yeah, another last-minute equipment change was to run in Hoka Cliftons (not brand new - had run in them a number of times) rather than the Newtons I normally wear. The IMAZ run is pretty flat, but the surface is hard, so I figured the extra cushioning would come in handy.

I had peeked at the bib list coming in, and the one name that stood out was Bill Macleod - I’d met him at Malibu and knew he was out of my league. He also always shows up to races prepared, so that was one slot likely gone. Anything can happen in IM, of course. I didn’t really know anyone else to be a “heavy hitter,” which didn’t mean that anything was in the bag but simply that I had as good a shot as anyone else at a KQ if I executed well.

Anyway, the race:

Swim: I hate this swim. Not because of the water or anything - just way too many people. I’ve tried both sides but had my best luck on the left, so I headed that way again, and it was the right call. Other than some of the paddlers trying to move us right too early (no way I’m moving into that melee, pal!), I was moving along pretty well, with the normal bunching up at the turn buoys. I got right in the scrum there, but people were pretty good in general, and after the second one I moved over to the shore like Bryan had suggested. Boom! No one other than a couple of other caps - everyone else was following the buoy line. My only regret was not staying right for longer; the buoys kept moving right, and I could have stayed near the shore almost all the way to the Mill Ave Bridge. Anyway, I looked at my watch on exit and saw 1:11, which equals my best swim here, so I was pleased enough. Score one for the Vasa!

Bike: I rode 5:04 here in 2012, but as soon as I hit the road it became apparent from the winds that that was going to be challenging to repeat. I had my wattage plan anyway - basically average between 190 and 195, which is what I did to get that time before. My first problem was my Garmin 510 - for some reason the display wasn’t showing power, and the only thing I had changed before race day was to set alarms every 15 minutes to remind me to drink. This clearly wasn’t going to work, but luckily it’s easy enough to change the data fields on the fly, which I did once things had settled down a little and I wasn’t surrounded by other riders. From there it was just a matter of being patient; I let myself go up to 205-210 uphill and into the wind and occasionally spike above that if I needed to pass someone quickly to avoid drafting, but otherwise I was Steady Eddie. I made sure to drink a lot. The first lap was a 1:42 - already a couple of minutes slower than I’d done in 2012, but it would get worse from there. I think my second loop was 1:45 or 1:46, but I was still mostly passing people. I didn’t see much, if any, drafting where I was. The real key was avoiding collisions with riders I was lapping, some of whom didn’t heed instructions to ride right. I did my best to announce myself as I was passing, but it was hard to hear with the wind out there.

My Garmin crapped out on the power data (and HR) around mile 80, so the last loop I was “riding blind.” This may have been a blessing in disguise, because it forced me to go by feel, knowing that I had a run that I really wanted to nail. Nail in a “don’t cramp up and lose a bunch of time” kind of way. I couldn’t wait to make that final turn at the top of Beeline, and once I did I really relaxed on the downhill and made sure to get a bunch of nutrition in. I was ready for the ride to be done, which was a good indication that my long-distance bike fitness wasn’t as good as it should have been. Still, I executed a decent flying dismount into T2 with a split of 5:19, my second fastest. A far cry from 5:04, but I’ll take it on the day.

For data geeks, luckily I was also running my 910xt, which didn’t crap out, so I got the stats. NP of 188W (5W less than in 2012), TSS of 286, avg HR of 127, VI of 1.03 - not 1.01 like in 2012, but with the winds and all this is pretty even).

Run: I felt ok running into T2, made a quick pee break (why don’t people push the locks when they’re in the portapotties??), and got out on the run course at 6:39ish into the race. I was pretty sure there would be no sub 10 at that point; my fastest IM run ever is 3:32 (from IMAZ 2008). That didn’t mean I wasn’t going to try, but I’ve gone out at 7:00 pace in the past and that didn’t work out so well. Plus, I didn’t feel particularly punchy in my running, so I figured I’d just settle in. First couple of miles were 7:40ish, then on the return with a tailwind I hit a 7:15 mile 3 and told myself to simmer the f*** down. This would turn out to be a run in which I never felt really good, nor really bad. I was trading places off and on with an XC guy I know - he would stop and I would pass him, then when he was running he would blow past me again. The 2-loop course was new to me yet had a lot of familiar stretches from the 3-loop course, including the climb up East Curry, but for Bay Area types it’s not much of a climb.

I was glad I had the Hokas, but after the first 10 miles or so even they didn’t feel that cushioned. I just kept focusing on nutrition and every once in a while on other runners (Colleen de Reuck flew past me at mile 16 with some guy in tow, so she was hard to miss). At mile 17, my wife told me that I’d come off the bike in 4th in the AG and might be as high as 2nd now, but that first was “out of reach” (that’s putting it mildly). That was the first update I had had all day, and to be frank I was kind of shocked. I thought I had blown it on the bike and was maybe running for top 10. Knowing how unreliable the live tracker can be, I didn’t fully trust the intell, but all the same my focus was now on maintaining - no way I was catching 1st, but if I blew up I could lose 2nd. Or whatever place I was actually in.

My mile splits were consistently in the 8:30 range, and I had had no cramping yet, so once I hit that East Curry hill the second time to get to mile 23, I started my push for the finish. I had no idea where anyone was at that point, and I’d had no updates since mile 17, so my job became simply to make it very hard for any geezer to come by me. Those last 3 miles hurt. A lot. One or two younger dudes went by me in the last mile, but just before the final turn into the chute my friend told me he was pretty sure I was 2nd. I crossed the line in 10:15:50 (3:36 run), my second-fastest IM ever and indeed 2nd in M50-54. Kona, baby!

It just goes to show you that you never know. I was worried I didn’t have enough volume coming in; I knew early on in the bike that my sub 10 goal was likely out the window, yet I got my best Ironman AG and overall (117th) placing ever. And I’m old. :-)

Again, for 50+ guys, it wasn’t the Dimond. They’re sold out anyway; don’t even bother. :-)

On a run this spring with Rob Gray in San Jose I brow beat him into getting the Dimond...between that and the Hokas, I think we have the new "ultimate ST approved" IM kit.

Thanks for the inspiration...I am a few years behind you (next year is my first in 50-54) and hoping to get my stupid run back down below 3:50....one has to hope. Well done on the Kona Q. I really think that the lower volume, high intensity and racing a lot at the shorter distance works...with my technology based work and travel, that's basically the ticket these days....but if I had the option, I would train like a pro LOL! How much more padded did you find the Cliftons vs a Newton Distance?
Quote Reply
Re: Chicked by Colleen: IMAZ 2nd *male* 50-54 race report [scca_ita] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
scca_ita wrote:
Great race Ian - hope to get back there next year. Love your bike. Always curious just how much faster it is over conventional frames.....

I've only got the nosecone Shiv to compare directly to. TJ has wind tunnel data, of course, but yaw angles, etc don't mean as much as real-world data when *you* are on the bike. That's why I found the Strava segment PRs so interesting (and unexpected). BTW, I have no financial stake in Dimond (though I might like to), so take my positive statements at worst as the zeal of the converted, but *the* most pleasant surprise about the bike is how it handles. We have a lot of twisty descents in the Bay Area, and this thing handles like a road bike - I feel really confident descending on it, and I'm not the greatest descender there is (litotes).

We weighed it at the shop, too - with cages and tubes/CO2 (no bottles) it came in at 19.2 lbs with Reynolds Aero 72s on it. I haven't weighed the Shiv in recent memory, but IIRC it was about a pound heavier. Not that that matters at IMAZ. :-)

Ian
Quote Reply
Re: Chicked by Colleen: IMAZ 2nd *male* 50-54 race report [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
devashish_paul wrote:


On a run this spring with Rob Gray in San Jose I brow beat him into getting the Dimond...between that and the Hokas, I think we have the new "ultimate ST approved" IM kit.

Thanks for the inspiration...I am a few years behind you (next year is my first in 50-54) and hoping to get my stupid run back down below 3:50....one has to hope. Well done on the Kona Q. I really think that the lower volume, high intensity and racing a lot at the shorter distance works...with my technology based work and travel, that's basically the ticket these days....but if I had the option, I would train like a pro LOL! How much more padded did you find the Cliftons vs a Newton Distance?


Dev, ping me next time you're in the Bay Area - I'm in Menlo Park. Have never met Rob, but he is one fast dude.

The Hokas are a running joke on Team Sheeper - Tim started running in them due to Ultraman-related foot issues, and now we just call them the "old man shoes." The Dimond may be the "old man bike."

Regarding the padding difference, the Cliftons are much more padded. Yet they have that same curved shape to the sole that just somehow makes you run at that quicker cadence, which is what I most love about the Newtons.

Good luck on your KQ. I get nervous every time I see you fast younger guys aging up! Almost makes me look forward to turning 55. :-)

Ian
Last edited by: sneeuwaap: Nov 18, 14 21:51
Quote Reply
Re: Chicked by Colleen: IMAZ 2nd *male* 50-54 race report [sneeuwaap] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
sneeuwaap wrote:
devashish_paul wrote:


On a run this spring with Rob Gray in San Jose I brow beat him into getting the Dimond...between that and the Hokas, I think we have the new "ultimate ST approved" IM kit.

Thanks for the inspiration...I am a few years behind you (next year is my first in 50-54) and hoping to get my stupid run back down below 3:50....one has to hope. Well done on the Kona Q. I really think that the lower volume, high intensity and racing a lot at the shorter distance works...with my technology based work and travel, that's basically the ticket these days....but if I had the option, I would train like a pro LOL! How much more padded did you find the Cliftons vs a Newton Distance?


Dev, ping me next time you're in the Bay Area - I'm in Menlo Park. Have never met Rob, but he is one fast dude.

The Hokas are a running joke on Team Sheeper - Tim started running in them due to Ultraman-related foot issues, and now we just call them the "old man shoes." The Dimond may be the "old man bike."

Regarding the padding difference, the Cliftons are much more padded. Yet they have that same curved shape to the sole that just somehow makes you run at that quicker cadence, which is what I most love about the Newtons.

Good luck on your KQ. I get nervous every time I see you fast younger guys aging up! Almost makes me look forward to turning 55. :-)

Ian

Actually I spent around 30 min at IM Tremblant with TJ chewing his ear off saying, "everyone has aerodynamics" you have the ultimate bike for the middle age guys who want to stay aero at mile 80 but their backs are too bad for it. I tried the Altra Paradigm old man shoes which were not bad. Fabulous race you put down!

I'm am in your area almost every month lately (was just there last week). Rob is literally down the street and works in Mountainview, so a few exits down the 101 from you. Last week I spent the week running laps around my hotel complex in Santa Clara as I was right in the middle of "nowhere" on Great America. It was great to come back home and run hill repeats on Parliament Hill on Ottawa...like any place there are the good places to work out and then if your hotel is in the wrong place, its either something mundane or the treadmill when one is on a schedule.


Quote Reply
Re: Chicked by Colleen: IMAZ 2nd *male* 50-54 race report [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
devashish_paul wrote:
[
I'm am in your area almost every month lately (was just there last week). Rob is literally down the street and works in Mountainview, so a few exits down the 101 from you. Last week I spent the week running laps around my hotel complex in Santa Clara as I was right in the middle of "nowhere" on Great America. It was great to come back home and run hill repeats on Parliament Hill on Ottawa...like any place there are the good places to work out and then if your hotel is in the wrong place, its either something mundane or the treadmill when one is on a schedule.

You and I lead parallel lives, it seems. I've been to Ottawa a few times in my software past. What a beautiful place...at the right time of year. :-)

I'm on the west (280) side of Menlo; that and my office in Los Altos are both near lots of good trails (and riding routes). One shouldn't have to run on a treadmill in California...

Ian
Quote Reply
Re: Chicked by Colleen: IMAZ 2nd *male* 50-54 race report [sneeuwaap] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
sneeuwaap wrote:
devashish_paul wrote:
[
I'm am in your area almost every month lately (was just there last week). Rob is literally down the street and works in Mountainview, so a few exits down the 101 from you. Last week I spent the week running laps around my hotel complex in Santa Clara as I was right in the middle of "nowhere" on Great America. It was great to come back home and run hill repeats on Parliament Hill on Ottawa...like any place there are the good places to work out and then if your hotel is in the wrong place, its either something mundane or the treadmill when one is on a schedule.


You and I lead parallel lives, it seems. I've been to Ottawa a few times in my software past. What a beautiful place...at the right time of year. :-)

I'm on the west (280) side of Menlo; that and my office in Los Altos are both near lots of good trails (and riding routes). One shouldn't have to run on a treadmill in California...

Ian

LOL...west of 280 is much better than East of 101 by Great America :-) Also good for biking. I would like to run up Page Mill some time that I am there but need a lift down....no interest in trashing my knees and back!

As for time of year, it gets like this in winter...best place to run hill repeats in the winter as the entire place is clear of snow a few seconds after the snow falls and thankfully they have not locked down the place after the recent craziness!!!


Quote Reply
Re: Chicked by Colleen: IMAZ 2nd *male* 50-54 race report [sneeuwaap] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
sneeuwaap wrote:
Again, for 50+ guys, it wasn’t the Dimond. They’re sold out anyway; don’t even bother. :-)

How is it that you managed to mention your Dimond and not post a picture at the same time?

Congrats, man.

@christopher_borden •
Spinning Spoke • Dimond Bikes • Flo Cycling • Castelli Cycling
Quote Reply
Re: Chicked by Colleen: IMAZ 2nd *male* 50-54 race report [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Hi Dev,

If you were out near Great America, do you know about the San Tomas Aquino Creek trail? Head north and you can connect with the Bay Trail which goes for miles. If you have time, jump in the car and drive over to Rancho San Antonio; the PG&E trail is a good hill workout...

John
Quote Reply
Re: Chicked by Colleen: IMAZ 2nd *male* 50-54 race report [Borden] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I agree. This race report is incomplete with some Dimond Pjorn....sheesh, amateurs man...amateurs.
Quote Reply
Re: Chicked by Colleen: IMAZ 2nd *male* 50-54 race report [frosty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
frosty wrote:
Hi Dev,

If you were out near Great America, do you know about the San Tomas Aquino Creek trail? Head north and you can connect with the Bay Trail which goes for miles. If you have time, jump in the car and drive over to Rancho San Antonio; the PG&E trail is a good hill workout...

John
Coming back to Ian's point about being tight on time some of these workouts on business trips become a trade off between sleep and being able to perform well at work and training. So often it is a 20-40 min run. In that case the hotel parking lot is often not bad....2-3 lap warmup than "parking lot" intervals (in this case the parking lot was 600m) for the rest of the time...if it is longer 60 min run, head back into the hotel treadmill and run hills for the final 20 min. It seems silly, but very time effective and a GPS turns any hotel parking lot into a track of sorts and usually it is lit. The problem with the canal trails is that I might be running in the dark some mornings. I have not been running over at Rancho for year, but probably should next time over. Thanks for the tips....and I probably should get my ass out of bed, because the KQ guys like Ian are out training while I am lying in bed thinking I need the sleep to perform at work.

Anyway, offline Ian shared some of what he is up to outside of tri...even more respect given that in 50-54 he's often competing with semi retired or retired full time KQ competition.
Quote Reply
Re: Chicked by Colleen: IMAZ 2nd *male* 50-54 race report [sneeuwaap] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Congrats Ian, great to hear you had a great race and a Kona slot, wow!


Rodney
TrainingPeaks | Altra Running | RAD Roller
http://www.goinglong.ca
Quote Reply
Re: Chicked by Colleen: IMAZ 2nd *male* 50-54 race report [Borden] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Borden wrote:
sneeuwaap wrote:

Again, for 50+ guys, it wasn’t the Dimond. They’re sold out anyway; don’t even bother. :-)


How is it that you managed to mention your Dimond and not post a picture at the same time?

Congrats, man.

I'll have to take some better ones...the Dimond guys got a few at the booth before bike check-in.


Quote Reply
Re: Chicked by Colleen: IMAZ 2nd *male* 50-54 race report [sneeuwaap] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Great report, great result. congrats.

We have a lot in common (go class of '80!), didn't get a chance to meet you at Cal Int'l (couldn't stay for awards). Or challenge, (I did the tri.)

Used to live in Redwood city, then Los Gatos, now Sacto.

Known Tim for years - he's a stud. Say Hi to him for me.

Enjoy Kona (I've never been).
keith

I saw this on a white board in a window box at my daughters middle school...
List of what life owes you:
1. __________
2. __________
3. __________
Quote Reply
Re: Chicked by Colleen: IMAZ 2nd *male* 50-54 race report [sneeuwaap] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
We were probably right be each other at the finish. I finished in 10:15:xx (can't remember) so may have seen you in the last mile.....pearl izumi octane suit caked with salt.

Anyways congrats on a great race and good run execution!
Quote Reply
Re: Chicked by Colleen: IMAZ 2nd *male* 50-54 race report [zachboring] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
zachboring wrote:
We were probably right be each other at the finish. I finished in 10:15:xx (can't remember) so may have seen you in the last mile.....pearl izumi octane suit caked with salt.

Anyways congrats on a great race and good run execution!

Thanks, Zach - same to you. I think you went by me early in the last mile. I was wearing an unzipped white FusionSports top and green compression sleeves. Not my best look, but I'm not sure I have a best look.

Best of luck on the TRSDraft!
Quote Reply
Re: Chicked by Colleen: IMAZ 2nd *male* 50-54 race report [manofthewoods] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
manofthewoods wrote:
Great report, great result. congrats.

We have a lot in common (go class of '80!), didn't get a chance to meet you at Cal Int'l (couldn't stay for awards). Or challenge, (I did the tri.)

Used to live in Redwood city, then Los Gatos, now Sacto.

Known Tim for years - he's a stud. Say Hi to him for me.

Enjoy Kona (I've never been).
keith

Keith, will do. Is your last name Hansen? If so, we never actually meet because you're so fast in the water that I don't stand a chance!

Ian
Quote Reply
Re: Chicked by Colleen: IMAZ 2nd *male* 50-54 race report [sneeuwaap] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
yes,

You must be a PI. or an internet sluth :-)

Thanks for the compliment re: Swim (adult onset, worked hard on it, so much that my run has taken a hit - not the smartest tradeoff)

I saw this on a white board in a window box at my daughters middle school...
List of what life owes you:
1. __________
2. __________
3. __________
Quote Reply
Re: Chicked by Colleen: IMAZ 2nd *male* 50-54 race report [manofthewoods] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
manofthewoods wrote:
yes,

You must be a PI. or an internet sluth :-)

Thanks for the compliment re: Swim (adult onset, worked hard on it, so much that my run has taken a hit - not the smartest tradeoff)

Tim pointed you out to me before Rancho Cordova - he said "there's your competition." :-)

I'm sure you're like me with Norcal races: "quick check of the field - no Sheeper, no Pete Kain, no John Murphy, no Jason Campbell, no Kyle Welch - maybe I've got a chance..."
Quote Reply
Re: Chicked by Colleen: IMAZ 2nd *male* 50-54 race report [sneeuwaap] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
sneeuwaap wrote:
manofthewoods wrote:
yes,

You must be a PI. or an internet sluth :-)

Thanks for the compliment re: Swim (adult onset, worked hard on it, so much that my run has taken a hit - not the smartest tradeoff)


Tim pointed you out to me before Rancho Cordova - he said "there's your competition." :-)

I'm sure you're like me with Norcal races: "quick check of the field - no Sheeper, no Pete Kain, no John Murphy, no Jason Campbell, no Kyle Welch - maybe I've got a chance..."

competition is something I'm rarely called (here in NorCal), I'm used to being called: "idiot", "dirtball", "hoser" (from my Canadian friends), "bonehead", "loser", etc.

I'd didn't see Tim at Challenge - you did the AquaBike - correct?

I saw this on a white board in a window box at my daughters middle school...
List of what life owes you:
1. __________
2. __________
3. __________
Quote Reply
Re: Chicked by Colleen: IMAZ 2nd *male* 50-54 race report [manofthewoods] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
manofthewoods wrote:

competition is something I'm rarely called (here in NorCal), I'm used to being called: "idiot", "dirtball", "hoser" (from my Canadian friends), "bonehead", "loser", etc.

I'd didn't see Tim at Challenge - you did the AquaBike - correct?

LOL! Tim was there spectating, and rode the course after everyone was out of the water. I was actually entered in the half but was sick as a dog (almost didn't make the drive up), so I called it a day after one loop of the run. The organizers just switched me to AquaBike when I turned in my chip, but without the award since I wasn't originally entered. Fair enough.
Quote Reply
Re: Chicked by Colleen: IMAZ 2nd *male* 50-54 race report [sneeuwaap] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Great race. This was very interesting to me as we had near identical bike and run splits and were very, very close on NP. Do you mind sharing your weight? Curious as to the differences between your set-up/Dimond and my admittedly much less aero set-up.
Quote Reply

Prev Next