|
Jun 2008
2:14pm, 23 Jun 2008
718 posts
|
Finders
Sorry.....resume thread as usual. I'm on 'rest' due to throat infection and going loopy........threwwwywywywywy
|
|
Jun 2008
2:30pm, 23 Jun 2008
117 posts
|
biker
Runnersleep - no one should be unhappy with a 1.39 half. (unless they were supposed to win it LOL)
Finders, have a cream cake, relax. It's supposed to be fun.
|
|
Jun 2008
2:40pm, 23 Jun 2008
36,416 posts
|
Hanneke
1.76, 60.5 kilo's and loosing muscle mass in my upper body while getting incerasingly more well defined leg and bum muscles... something right? Something wrong?
|
|
Jun 2008
2:41pm, 23 Jun 2008
36,417 posts
|
Hanneke
I think I have to get used to looking like a runner rather than a horserider... all the strength in my upper body has gone, don't think I will ever be able to control a hunter or eventer right now! Let alone play polo!
|
|
Jun 2008
3:01pm, 23 Jun 2008
713 posts
|
DrBob
sounds great to me Han!
As for a 1.39 half, depends what you're after Biker. I'd be disgusted with myself if I ran that time, someone whose PB is 1.40 something would be delighted.
Finders, you were probably already loopy!  Keep up the good work, you're doing great.
|
|
Jun 2008
3:15pm, 23 Jun 2008
3,640 posts
|
Velociraptor
I don't think I'd like to lose my solid upper arms and shoulders, which suggests that when I say that for me running is about performance rather than aesthetics I'm telling a big podgy porking lie. At my age, the skin's not going to shrink (my abdomen is proof of that) so I'd just end up with bingo-wings anyway.
I also don't want to lose the fat from my face - weight loss isn't always kind to veteran runners in that regard, and I suspect it *is* the weight loss rather than the mileage and sun exposure that does most of the damage.
Anyway, weighing day for me today. Substantial increase, back up to just over 8 stone, but a lot of that will be artefact due to a very light training week (as in, barely 15 miles on feet and no climbing), a weekend of wall-to-wall cakes and home-made bread, and the phases of the moon.
|
|
Jun 2008
3:16pm, 23 Jun 2008
36,419 posts
|
Hanneke
As for a 1.39 half... God knows! It may well lie within my capabilities, if I start doing some speedwork
|
|
Jun 2008
3:21pm, 23 Jun 2008
19,471 posts
|
Gobi
LOL DrB
I saw 1.39 and just assumed it was ok as a split in a 100km race but would be gutted to run it unless pacing someone.
I have lost size this year from my chest, back arms etc, good for running bad for vanity.
|
|
Jun 2008
3:29pm, 23 Jun 2008
3,644 posts
|
Velociraptor
I've run several 1.39.something halves, and one that was comfortably under 1.39, and I'd only be very slightly disappointed if I was told that was as fast as I'd ever run over that distance.
|
|
Jun 2008
3:32pm, 23 Jun 2008
19,473 posts
|
Gobi
a bit like weight loss, we are all different :~)
|
