Register | Login
Attackpoint AR - performance and training tools for adventure athletes

Training Log Archive: iansmith

In the 7 days ending May 24, 2010:

activity # timemileskm+mload
  ARDF2 2:37:45 12.01(13:08) 19.33(8:10) 41315.5
  Running4 1:50:30 12.99(8:31) 20.9(5:17)16.4
  Biking1 40:00 8.7(13.0/h) 14.0(21.0/h)20.0
  Orienteering1 37:40 3.29(11:26) 5.3(7:06)46.8
  Total4 5:45:55 36.99(9:21) 59.53(5:49) 41398.7

» now

Monday May 24, 2010 #

10 PM

Running 50:03 [1] 9.9 km (5:03 / km)
shoes: 201002 Asics T918N

I went on a comfortable recovery run this evening, after the temperature had fallen to 20 C. Even in the comparatively cool night, conditions were muggy and humid, with a dew point of 17 C. I ran sleeveless in running shorts and perspired significantly, especially near the end when I increased the intensity. I had planned on a shorter 8k run, but I added distance without realizing how far it was. I was surprised at how many people (perhaps 30 on my loop) were out walking along the river so late.

Sunday May 23, 2010 #


Day 1: 2 meter Results
Day 2: 80 meter Results

CSU, Vadim's training group and Lori's mom all fared well at the ARDF Champs. That the focus of our training was on the 80m band is evident - the quality of our races was much higher on Sunday. Les was very disappointed with his 2m race, and fairly satisfied with an excellent 80m race, in which he finished six minutes behind his German nemesis, Matthias. Lori had one rough control on the 2m band, but otherwise ran well. Despite knee discomfort and an unfortunate trail excursion, she had a strong 80m race; many people afterward were commenting on how fast she was moving when they saw her. Ruth had a rough start on the 2m band, but after finding the first control, she finished well. Her 80m race was strong, and she finished over an hour ahead of her competition. I had a very disappointing 2m race, with 9 cycles of error (45 minutes) relative to the optimal, and 6 cycles of error (30 minutes) relative to the expected. However, my 80m race was excellent, with only one real error at the first control.

To be competitive at the World Championships in September, we must get faster and improve our proficiency on both bands (particularly 2m). I am sure that the top 80m runners in the world are much faster than I am, so I will devote myself amidst my marathon training to speedwork and endurance. Technically, I must improve my ability to determine the correct ordering of controls and everything with the 2m receiver. Given that we have only had a handful of training sessions on the 2m band, our performance was not unremarkable. But we must do better.
10 AM

ARDF 53:41 [5] 7.63 km (7:02 / km) +41m 6:51 / km
shoes: 201004 Inov8 X-Talon 212

The 80m course from the 2010 US ARDF Championships at the Miami University Natural Areas map near Cincinnati, Ohio. I had a decisive performance: the second and third fastest times were George Neal (M50, 63 minutes) and Brian Ackerly (M21, 68 minutes). I had an excellent race; I lost one cycle on the first control when I took a bad bearing, but otherwise was without error. With an absolutely perfect run and considerable luck, I think 43 minutes was possible, but I am satisfied.

My splits, with parentheses denoting a perfect run finding all controls on cycle in the order I took:
Control 2: 11:29 (7:00)
Control 1: 5:23 (4:00)
Control 5: 12:27 (9:00)
Control 4: 9:10 (9:00)
Control 3: 9:09 (9:00)
Go + Finish: 5:51 (5:00)
Total: 53:29 (43:00)

The 80m frequency is more straightforward than 2m because there are no reflections - the receiver accurately indicates the direction and approximate range of the control. Raw speed is then more important than radio aptitude.

The courses were shorter than is typical because sections of the original courses were inaccessible due to land access rights. All the classes were given an extra control (except M21, which already has all five), so M40, M50, and F21 also had to visit all five controls. Because the courses were short, mistakes would be more costly, and I believed that I could push harder without risking exhaustion.

At the start, I ran hard to the eastern edge of the 750 meter exclusion zone around the start, and was apparently feeling good enough to run 3:30/km for the first few minutes. Control 2 turned out to be near where I guessed the closest control would be, so I set off towards it. On the first five-minute cycle, I ascertained that the correct order to visit the first three controls was 2, 1, and 5, with 3 and 4 more distant and near the finish. My bearing to 2 was poor, and I ended up about five hundred meters too far to the south. I doubled back and found it at minute 11, on cycle - a five minute error. I had a good idea where 1 was, and found it 90 seconds off cycle after taking a good bearing and some hard running.

I was about 300 meters from control 5 as its second cycle ended, and I slowed to a walk to try to find it off cycle on the last known bearing. I traveled about 250 meters without finding it, and settled at a trail junction to wait for it to come back on cycle. Les and Jens, an M40 from Boston and a German M21, arrived at the junction after me, also waiting; when the signal came on very nearby, I pushed very hard into and out of 5 and successfully left Les and Jens behind me. I then ran hard to the projected vicinity of 4, hoping to find it at control 5 + 4 minutes.

As 4's cycle ended, I had a good bearing and tried find it off cycle. I passed over a spur, through a reentrant and onto a second spur without seeing anything, so I scanned about until the cycle came on again. It was frustratingly close - within 100m of my position - and hidden in the reentrant I had passed through. After struggling up the steep, muddy sides of the reentrant, I set off at a hard pace towards 3 to try to get it at control 4 + 4 minutes. That was too ambitious, and I found it without difficulty at control 4 + 9 minutes.

I put on what speed I have left - on a suboptimal route - to the go control, which was situated on the bank of a stream about 8 meters wide and 50 cm deep. The finish was on the opposite side up a chute - apparently the set up was to provide photographers with dramatic pictures of ARDFers fording the stream, but I thought it unnecessary. The water did not trouble me, since I was wet from fording several streams earlier, and crossing the stream did wash much of the mud off my legs. Nevertheless, crossing a rocky stream with sensitive electronic equipment solely for photo opportunities was unwise. I was the first finisher, so I enjoyed cookies and powerade while I waited for my competition to come in.

Running warm up/down 15:00 [1] 2.5 km (6:00 / km)
shoes: 201004 Inov8 X-Talon 212

Saturday May 22, 2010 #

10 AM

ARDF race 1:44:04 [5] 11.7 km (8:54 / km)
shoes: 201004 Inov8 X-Talon 212

The 2m course from the 2010 US ARDF Championships at the Hueston Woods map near Cincinnati, Ohio. I will upload my GPS track sometime later. I'm slightly satisfied with my result in that I found all five controls, pushed hard, and was the fastest American M21. Brian Ackerly, an Australian, beat me by twenty minutes, and I came in second.

My performance was unremarkable. My inexperience with the 2m band - this is my fourth or fifth time using the receiver, and the first in more than 9 months - was patently obvious. I took the controls slightly out of order (42315 instead of the correct 24315), and lost many cycles. Once I refamiliarized myself with the band and the technique, my performance improved.

Below are my splits and what I think someone of my fitness and ability could have optimally done:
Control 4: 25:11 (9:00)
Control 2: 22:45 (13:00)
Control 3: 29:35 (16:00)
Control 1: 14:46 (8:00)
Control 5: 7:35 (9:00)
F: 4:12

It should be noted that the "optimal" performance is very optimistic, particularly given the difficulties inherent to the 2m wavelength. I assumed I would find the controls on cycle for the optimal; run split to 5 was faster than optimal because I found 1 off cycle. Even in the incorrect order, the "optimal" run would have been just under 60 minutes.

So, I lost 3 cycles on control four, 2 on control two (bad route choice), 3 on control three, and 1 on control 1. It is reasonable to lose a cycle on controls 2, 3 and 4 because of the challenges and uncertainties in 2m, but even allowing for those, I made 30 minutes of errors. I will have to practice 2m more aggressively if I am to compete at the world championships.

Running 10:00 [1] 1.5 km (6:40 / km)
shoes: 201004 Inov8 X-Talon 212

Thursday May 20, 2010 #

6 PM

Biking (Commute) 40:00 [3] 14.0 km (21.0 kph)
shoes: Trek 7.1 FX

Biking to and from Bellevue Pond at the southeastern end of Middlesex Fells.

Running 35:27 [2] 7.0 km (5:04 / km)
shoes: 201004 Inov8 X-Talon 212

Distance is a guess; to get to the Park-O at the sheepfold, I decided to bike to Bellevue Pond, then run the ~ 3 km to the Sheepfold. I ran more aggressively than easy pace, but below threshold. My right calf was discomforted and tight at first, but it started to loosen up. I'm not really sure what the source of the injury is - it's been bothering me for over a week, but it's not severe enough to warrant logging as an injury. I can still race reasonably well on it, particularly when I get a good warmup.

Running on the trails through the Fells is gorgeous; I really should get out more often. Despite a temperature of 80 degrees in Somerville, conditions were pleasant in the woods. The time includes the trip to the sheepfold and the return after the Park-O. I didn't have a complete map, so I took the skyline trail for much of the way on the return (as I know its route).

Orienteering race 22:40 [5] 3.3 km (6:52 / km)
shoes: 201004 Inov8 X-Talon 212

The 6th Park-O of the season was at the Sheepfold. Brendan set an excellent course - the first ten controls were technical, with only one trail leg from 6 to 7. The route to Control 11 was a 600m trail run, but I think ending a course, particularly a sprint, with hard trail running is quite reasonable. The Fells also make it very difficult to set even a 3 km course without using trails. Starting a course with trivial legs is undesirable, of course.

Given my concerns with respect to my right calf, I was moving well. The plateau between the skyline and the reservoir was difficult; I lost time off trail going to controls 2 and 4. I had a bobble at control 9, where I hesitated (perhaps 15 seconds), but the rest of my run was clean. I narrowly edged Audun (22:50?) and was in turn beaten by Dancho (22:18) and Ross (21).

The crowd was respectable given how difficult it is to get to the Fells, with perhaps 16-18 runners. Two beginners and their mighty dog, who hiked the entire Appalachian Trail, tried the advanced course and completed the first 9 controls at walking pace.

Orienteering (Control pickup) 15:00 [1] 2.0 km (7:30 / km)
shoes: Trek 7.1 FX

I retrieved controls 2 and 3; this was largely trail running, though I got to try the route from 2 to 3 again. I did better during the race.

This outing was very successful - I invested about 3 hours, 15 minutes into the expedition (including showering), was active for about 2 hours, and socializing for most of the rest. A pleasant evening.

Tuesday May 18, 2010 #


In the vein of attackpoint's usual committee decision-making efforts, I pose the following question to the my community:

Ignoring the top level domain (.com, .info, .net etc), what domain should I obtain for my personal use?

I'm a big fan of acronyms of my name (e.g. iamsinht), and some options are:
- iamsinht (distinctive, but less convenient to those unfamiliar with hyperbolic trig functions)
- isthmian
- thiamins (non-sensical, but pronounceable)

A few other options:
- supafishi
- thesalvadoran
- htimsnai
- iamsmith
- Perhaps a word ending in -ian, e.g. 'tellurian'
- discipulus

« Earlier | Later »