Tuesday, February 07, 2006

RESPONSE TO COMMENTS

Well, if nothing else, my last post generated some well thought out comments. Rather than reply with a long comment, I thought I’d make this into its own post.

Andrew (and Bart), good arguments. They almost sound like they came right out of a textbook. To make my arguments more valid, I suppose I could have avoided the use of “dipshits” and explained the benefits of learning to listen to your body. For t-shirt guy, I could have listed the pros (less bulky) and cons (body wastes energy trying to stay warm, etc.) of a t-shirt in those conditions. But as Duncan said, that wouldn’t have been as “fun.”

Susan, like I said, I don’t care if you carry all those devices with you. I just hate seeing a HRM or GPS take the place of listening to your body – whether you’re running 5-minute pace, 10-minute pace or coming in last at 14:16 pace.

Eric, yes I criticize fellow runners, who probably don’t blog. In the blogging community I’m talking about generating discussions, asking questions, etc. A few days ago, Duncan questioned Mike’s build-up to his next marathon and Mike took the time to explain it so we could all learn. That’s half the stuff that makes blogs interesting and I’d like to see more of it.

As far as “good job” comments being “good for everyone,” I disagree. Not every run, every workout, every race, etc is worthy of a good job. Sometimes you need to be told “That sucked. What the hell happened? How are you going to fix it?” I’ll pick on Duncan, since he started this whole thing. I don’t know him personally, but I highly doubt he wanted people to stop by after his last 2:45 and say “good job.”

Massoman and Rob, I guess a lot of it comes down to why you read someone’s blog. Are you inspired or motivated by that person? Do you like their writing style? Do you have some sort of cyberspace connection? Are you hoping to learn from their training? Do you just want to be part of some community? Maybe it’s just because they have a cute profile photo. Who knows?

I tend to agree that it’s frustrating if you’re trying to communicate with someone and you don’t get a response. I recently left a comment on a blog wondering why the guy does nearly all of his training at his goal marathon pace. I never heard back. Anyway, if you like someone’s blog that shouldn’t cause you to stop reading and “move on to someone that deserves your time.”

Rob, I’m not an expert on anything either, especially running – but I like to discuss it. The Blogging community is interesting. As I said, we can all learn from one another. For example, I highly doubt I’d be running my current mileage if it weren’t for guys like Mike, Duncan, Eric, Andrew, etc. Reading how people you “know” actually feel during the process has helped tremendously.

Dallen and Eric probably hit the nail on the head; “a nice guy trying to be mean – who probably couldn’t keep it up if he wanted to.”

Yvonne, GERONIMO!!! Good advice though. In the end, that’s all we can be.

Bear, that’s for the support. I think the nerve had more to do with criticizing in-general, rather than criticizing gadget-wearing-weekend-warriors; taking the easy shots at people that I know nothing about, etc.

As for your other questions, that’s just the kind of criticism we don’t want around here. Just kidding – I couldn’t resist. Rather than interrupt the flow of this incredibly educational post regarding Blogging PC, I’ll answer your questions in another post.

5 comments:

  1. I want to ditto Bear's 'Quality vs Quantity' questions Chad. And it's not just about you specifically, just generally.

    I read blogs by very experienced runners (i.e. they've been at it for years) who can run a 1:25 half on 60 miles a week, and others who run the same time but on 100 miles a week. I've been struggling to get my head around that. Does this mean if 60 miler went ahead and upped her mileage (in a steady, sensible manner) to 100, she'd get faster? Or would 100 miler benefit from dropping back down to 60 or 70 and trying for more 'quality'.

    I know I'm going for a simplistic solution here, but if I'm being perfectly honest, I find it odd that anyone other than the world's elite would consider running anything in the 100+ range.

    Just say your marathon time dropped to 2:50 next time Chad. Would you then up your mileage even more to get below that 2:45 mark? So what I'm really asking is: where can you take your training once your already hitting top mileage?

    Looking forward to your responses, coz I'm clueless.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think that there is no "magic" solution that works for everyone yvonne. I personally think that I am my fastest when I run less mileage at a faster pace and introduce cross training. But I can't really diss Zekes method because he obviously is benefitting from it.

    I think you have to find what works for you, experiment with it all, then go back to what works!

    ReplyDelete
  3. ps. I run with a ton of "high mileage" runners who think that I would benefit from running 100+ miles per week because that's what they do and it works for them. I tried going high mileage for Boston last year and ended up injured. Now when they ask about my weekly mileage I just give them vague answers to avoid the argument :)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi Zeke, Great post. Not a textbook exactly but I consulted my notes. Odd hobby I know. I think the idea of getting good feedback and dialogue is great. You can't do better than Mike Salkowski's blog for that and we if did participate more in that manner we'd benefit as you (and Duncan) suggest.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Zeke, good stuff...I deserve to be picked on after throwing around satirical anvils with you! I know you aren't thin-skinned....I echo Andrew's comment about Mike S's blog. He's got facts, data, knowledge, do-as-i-do-mileage and most importantly --professionalism. But I guess this whole thing is like TV. You got the Disney Channel (#1 type), the Discovery Channel(#2 type), and those dark movies that 'no one' watches in their hotel room while on business (#3). We need some of all, and my point in the beginning was to at least admit that we turn it to HBO at 2am.

    ReplyDelete