three things thursday

Hi friends!  I'm done being cranky, I promise.  HURRAH BIG PR FOR ME!

1. Big big giant running news yesterday that is unlikely to ever have anything to do with me: changes to the registration and qualification process for the Boston Marathon.  For those of you that this directly affects, what do you think?  Being on the outside, I actually feel like this is a pretty fair way to change things, but I'd love to hear from everyone else.  The discussions I've seen in the past 12 hours have been fascinating.  I'm also a giant nerd and would love to see the numbers behind the decision.  As in, what percentage of the 2010 field would have been eliminated by the 2013 standards?  

For the record, a 3:20 marathon (my get-in-right-away qualifier) is faster average pace than the 5K I ran on Sunday.  Um.  Right.  YAY KATIE!  Also, I'd probably have to stop getting injured every other day.  But seriously, what do you guys think?  

Along those lines, I'll be in Boston this year, cheering my fool head off.  Side note: if you'll be there as well, join us for one of the many blogger meet-ups!

2. Blog shout-out time: Puppy pics, just for you :
and more ridiculous pictures of awesome here.  Be my friend, I'll send you terrifying emails after dark.  What?  

3. It's been really interesting how my perspective has changed as I've gotten a bit faster these past few months.  Before, when people would post their splits on dailymile or their blogs, anything faster than 9MM was, "Fast," anything with a 7 was, "Really Fast," and anything with a 6 was, "Have Fun Up There You Crazy Ridiculous People, I'll Be In The Back Drinking Wine."  But now that I'm consistently running in the 9s, 8s, and even 7s for some of my workouts, my perspective has completely changed.  I'm able to recognize the difference between running tempos at 7:50 and 7:10 - before, I would've considered it "the same," but now that I'm running my tempos at 7:50ish, I can see the gaping cavern between that and what a 7:10 average would look and feel like.  It's made me a lot more self-aware - before I was just a "10ish" person most runs - but I think it's also made me better able to understand and appreciate the strides that my friends and teammates are making in their own training, and how awesome those steps are, these steps that may seem kind of tiny on paper.  What do you think?  Has anything in your training ever shifted your own perspective?

So, to sum up today's 3TT test: 
1. What do you think of Boston?
2. Why don't you like puppies?
3. Faster = smarter?  (Just kidding, please don't punch me in the teeth).


  1. You are getting rather speedy! I like it!

    If my husband can get off work, I will be spectating Boston. But I am running National, you are too, right?

  2. I love puppies. Especially your puppies.

    I would also love to see the numbers behind the decision. I'm curious to see how much faster than the qualifying standards you will have to be to get in next year.

    Also I like that you are faster. That is all.

  3. The hard part of getting speedy is to realize that your old paces aren't the "norm" anymore. For the longest time I would overestimate how long runs would take me because I was so stuck in the old pace mode... So proud of you and your speedy ways!!!

  4. Your puppies are the cutest. Ever.

    I'll be in Boston, I want in on this blogger meet-up!

    And I think that getting faster definitely makes you more aware of improvement -- in part because those increments get smaller and smaller, but also because you know your body better/train smarter. Congrats on all your hard work!

  5. Puppies!

    Boston: eh. Its not like its any less of an accomplishment to run a 3:40 now that the BQ times have changed. A kickass time is a kickass time. Of course, now I have my mind set on a 3:20 but that is completely unrealted :)

  6. Two responses:
    I think it's good that the BAA did this. Knowing the history of the Boston Marathon-- the only reason they started using qualifying times was because the marathon was so popular. And then over the years they made them more and more strict, which in turn made the race more and more prestigious. So if the marathon is at a point where too many people are meeting the standards, then it's obviously time to tighten them. Running is becoming increasingly popular as a sport. Many more people are running marathons today than they were five, ten years ago. So the pool is larger. I think that tighter standards are in line with what the Boston Marathon has come to stand for. It doesn't affect me because I've decided to stop chasing after Boston and base my marathon goals on indicators in my training cycles.

    Second topic: I had always thought that the faster runners were just naturally that way. Many of them are. But when you see people who make dramatic improvements by training smart for years and years, then you begin to think that being "fast" is possible for anyone!

  7. Your lil puppy maks me want another one for my Cooper to play with! My brother has 3 goldens too!

    Your speed has improved drastically! 7's still see crazy to me--but I gues it depends on the distance--still fast!

  8. Love the puppies!

    I think Boston standards seem pretty fair, but the change doesn't really affect me since I don't think it's likely I will ever qualify. Like you, I would have to run the whole thing at or below my current 5k pace! Not likely. ;-)

  9. Honestly, I don't think the rolling admission will work! I think that Boston will fill just as quickly, but the result will be edging out everyone who just barely squeaked in under the time frame. I think that if they want to tighten the guidelines, they should just do it up so that only elite runners and super speedsters can do it, because the rolling admission might work out that way anyway (and just be a tease for people trying to register at the last wave).

  10. I'll play your game.

    1. Boston = for elites, should be geared to elites. I don't even think they should have charity opt-in unless you qualify.

    2. You'll be shocked to hear me say that...puppies and children are same in my head. Cuteness doesn't overcome the noise, poop, puke, etc. At least humans can eventually feed themselves.

    3. I totally know what you mean, after taking my average pace from 11mm to 10mm to 9mm over a couple years. I am still learning, though. And not nearly as fast as you!

  11. 1. I'm still in the back drinkin wine. No complaints from this peanut.
    2. I love all things cute.
    3. I have been at 11mm and 10mm for so long that a 7:41 shocked me. Now I'm just upset because that means I know what I can do and how much harder I can start pushing myself. I love the personal growth though.

  12. 1. I would LOVE to see how the stats would've changed for the ridiculous 2010 registration, too! Oh, numbers nerds. I think it was an appropriate update to old standards, and even though it makes it that much "harder" for me to get there - I like the challenge!
    2. Ah, puppeh is precious.
    3. My "fast" and "being smart about tempos" changes with the season - right now I'm happy with what ended up being a 7:35 tempo pace yesterday, but ultimately I miss my 7:10s that I was doing in DC before we left. Ah, such is life!

  13. totally agree with the change in perspective business. it's definitely all relative though--to the person, to how 'fit' you are at that juncture, etc. I never judge anyone for saying 'I was so fast/slow today!' because I get how we're all SO different.

  14. 1. I think the changes are for the better...even if it makes it harder for me to ever get in. It helps the race remain prestigious.

    2. Puppies rock. I want one (but can't have *sad face*).

    3. Agreed as well on the change in perspective point. I've felt it more in wasn't very long ago that I thought 10 miles was an absurdly long distance to run, but as my endurance has improved my perception on what is "far" to me has as well.

  15. I'm all about the puppy pics = hoorah!

    And congrats on getting speedier. You'll be at Boston in no time...

  16. I'm fine with BAA's decision, I think the masters women's running times needed to come down. Also, I'm still not sure 30 minutes is a good diff between men and women, when elite runners time diff is around 15-20 min diff.
    Of course more pup pictures!
    Yes, what you're running at track and in tempo def shifts your perception on what you want your race times to be! Congrats on all your hard work!

  17. Mixed feelings about the BAA decision. 1st - I agree with lowering the qualifying times. The sport is getting bigger so that makes sense.

    But I think the rolling registration will just create confusion and anxiety. I agree with the write up Amby Burfoot did for RW this week, saying they should let whoever register and if they want a field size of 30,000 they pick the fastest 30,000 runners that enter. Similar to the rolling registration but a tad simpler.

    Love puppies, is there anything better?!


Post a Comment