Running Faster but Gait's A Disaster

In other words, I'm limping

In my April 14 post, I wrote about the way my blood pressure medicine was negatively affecting my running performance. A change in dosage made such a difference that I'm now running about 2 minutes per mile faster than my pace prior to March. 

While that's great, my lower back is not on board with it. Running harder seems to have triggered an old disc issue and on most runs my stride starts slightly unbalanced. This is likely due to nerve aggravation. This irritation has gone on for a few weeks and my aggravated nerves are beginning to aggravate me.
 

The problem minimizes after about 8 minutes into the run but it doesn't completely disappear and my antalgic gait appears to be costing me 30 to 45 seconds on my first mile. I really want that time back. I'm applying heat and ice to my lower back and have been doing active leg swings on the advice of Runsketeer TPP. It's helping, but recovery has been slow. 

In terms of performance, I looked at my running history on Garmin Connect and the data revealed a sharp drop-off in my pace that started in June 2017. 

This coincided with two interesting data points:

• My stride length shortened 8.5% compared to the prior six months. 
• My average cadence/SPM fell 8.6% over the same period.

I usually prefer downhill, but not in this case

Something caused this and I wanted to know what it was. Looking at my medical history at that time, I saw two things that happened around June 2017 that could explain it. 

• My doctor put me on blood pressure medication. 
• My ophthalmologist put me on a carbonic anhydrase inhibitor to address an eye pressure condition. 

I suspected that these drugs were negatively affecting my running, but I didn't know to what extent. Now that my BP medication is at the correct dosage and I'm no longer on that eye medication, my cadence and speed have returned to May 2017 levels. As great as that is, my stride length has not dramatically improved. I attribute that to my current back issue, so I still have a problem to solve.

I'm going to keep heating, icing and dynamic stretching and hopefully the nerve issues in my lower back will recede. If that happens, I think I may be able to improve my average pace by at least 30 seconds per mile. Will I ever get back to running well enough to credibly compete again? Well, that's the subject for another post.

It's not fair that I have to try harder to run better

Apparently you also need to put in more effort 

Today's run (street): 4.1 miles
Yesterday's run (street): 3.2 miles

Considering how much I run, I'm not really that good at it. People tell me that I need to run more intervals, do more hill, core and strength training, run longer distances and run more frequently. I'll concede that those things could help, but they all require more time and/or the acceptance of more discomfort. I'm not a physiologist, but I've always understood that if you do something a lot, you get better at it. If I'm putting in a dozen or more running miles a week, shouldn't I see continuous improvement?

My running experience since late summer has been positive. I reduced my intake of sugar and simple carbs and that led to some weight loss. Running with less weight would usually yield direct improvement, but it wasn't until my friend KWL surprised me with a Garmin 35 watch that I started to see gains. That's because I was paying closer attention to my running data, especially heart rate. Using percent of HR max as a guide to pacing myself on runs helped me improve my average pace by almost two minutes a mile.

While I did see a measurable improvement from that, I've still been averaging 30-40 seconds a mile slower than my average pace from a few years ago. I know some of that is due to getting older, but it hasn't been that long since my overall performance began to noticeably drop. Of all the helpful suggestions people have made to me, the point about running frequency probably hits closest to home.

This morning seemed like a perfect running day and I expected to run as well as I did on Friday when I exactly matched my current pace. But today felt much harder. When in doubt, I always look at the data. My average heart rate for my last two runs were exactly the same. Rate of effort was the same -- 76% of max with the last six minutes pushing closer to 85%. Today's run also matched yesterday's for average cadence. The only variable was stride length, with Friday's being a foot longer than today's.

So if effort was the same, why was my stride so short? I did feel fatigued throughout run and that surprised me because I'd had a good night's sleep. There's really nothing that can explain why I did worse today (by 50 seconds per mile) except that every stride carried me 175 feet less every minute than yesterday.

I'm hoping that tomorrow I'll bounce back and open my stride enough to get back to current pacing. I know that some of my friend's suggestions for improvement would yield a quicker cadence which is the other lever I can pull to improve. But increasing cadence is tough and I still maintain that I should be getting faster because practice alone should be enough to make perfect.

The lost workout

Onion volcanoes and warm sake -
Emerging Sister-In-Law (L), Mrs. Emerging Runner (R)

Today's workout (elliptical): 45 minutes

In the almost-seven years that I've been running, I've prided myself on my meticulous process to record workout metrics. I can look back on Garmin Connect to see the detail about every run and elliptical session that I've done since early 2010. If I want to go back further than that, I can look at MapMyRun stats, or see my earliest running data on the Nike+ site. I also have years of Daily Mile records that capture different information like shoe mileage.

In addition to all this, I can look at the Emerging Runner archives for measured mileage on every run. All this data recording takes time, and over the last year my record keeping has gone from meticulous to casual. I stopped recording my runs in Daily Mile last July and most of the time I don't even wear my Garmin when I'm on the elliptical. It's because of this that I cannot remember whether I did a workout on Friday.

I've been on vacation this week, but my time off has been more busy than relaxing. On top of that, I needed to go into my office on Wednesday. That made this vacation more like a couple of long weekends. Friday afternoon my brother and his family came to stay for a few days and my dad and his wife came out on Saturday afternoon. Later we went out to a local hibachi place and had a great time, but I don't recommend the lukewarm sake administered via a squeeze bottle.

With all that going on, I didn't have the opportunity to do a workout on Saturday, because our guest room is also our fitness room. It's also my office. Maybe we should take page from the local elementary school and call it the multi-purpose room.

So I may have done an elliptical session on Friday morning. I know I did a workout this afternoon. My pain from the herniated disc has been manageable, although it does give me a small zap if I move my leg in a certain way. I've been applying heat and that seems to help. It's no worse after today's elliptical session than it was before I started.

My biggest concern is that I'm returning to a week of commuting. That means three hours a day sitting in a driving position. I'm convinced that driving has been a factor in this disc compression. My standing desk (or as they put it, "stand up desk adaptation") gets installed on Monday. I'm hoping that will help me counteract all that drive time. I'll know more about the problem on Friday after my MRI.

The history of my running speed

Directional declines

Today's run (street): 3.6 miles

I decided to do some data mining on Garmin Connect to compare my historical averages with my current performance. In order to keep the information consistent, I only used data captured from one source, my Garmin 210 that I bought in 2010. I know I've lost a lot of speed over the past year and my interest was in seeing whether my recent history is an aberration, or if it merely reflects a long term decline.

Charting the trends reveals a changing relationship between race speed and overall speed. My average pace has followed a linear decline, but my race paces have dropped measurably since 2012. Up to 2012, I generally paced 7.5% better in races compared to my overall average. After 2012, that gap has closed and is now almost equal to my training run times.

As I often say when working with business data, these findings are only directional. The Garmin data, acquired by GPS, has a variable margin of error. I tried to correct for that as much as I could, but the numbers do have some skew. I only selected runs I'd tagged as "street running" to filter out slower trail paces and faster track paces. It's also important to note that the 2014 data is only through May 25, not a full year.

In terms of these findings, I'm not happy to see declines, but at least the drop-off has not been as sharp as I'd suspected. I did today's run as a tempo, taking it easy through the majority of the distance and picking up the pace more at the end. The last mile was a minute faster than the prior few, and I finished feeling great. I wish I could tap into that speed more often, but based on my recent race performances, it's a little more complicated than just trying a little harder.

I swear I didn't run through my neighbor's houses

I love data visualization

Today's run (street): 4.2 miles

The sky is as white as paper and the temperature is dropping. We're supposed to get two inches of ice and snow by late afternoon. Nothing so far, but I can tell it's coming. For that reason, I made sure I got outside early to get in a few recovery miles before conditions got worse.

I had no intention of running as hard as yesterday and had to throttle my speed a couple of times. A recovery run is supposed to be done well under anaerobic threshold to help flush lactic acid from leg muscles. I used my heart rate monitor to guide my pace, averaging 75% of HR max throughout the run. It was a nice relaxing workout, although my (gloved) hands got surprisingly cold.

No actual yards or living rooms were entered

I've written a lot about the variability of GPS as a measurement tool and today's margin of error was particularly egregious. Not only did the Garmin show me starting the run three blocks from my actual beginning point, the accuracy was laughably bad throughout the entire route. The Garmin route map (see above) makes it look like I ran through many people's yards and houses.

Distribution of pace times through the year

Reflecting back on 2013's racing season, I charted my race paces to see if there were any obvious patterns. The data doesn't show any trends that would explain my performance, as times were all over the map. I'm hoping that next year will yield faster times and more consistency. At least I finished the season in a good place.

Data visualization drives a decision

Downward slope

I downloaded my Garmin after yesterday's race to get a breakdown of my run. I'm a big fan of data visualization. When I looked at the cadence chart the data showed exactly where my base training had come up short. At 3.2 miles (almost the exact distance of my daily training runs) my average cadence had dropped from 89 to 85 SPM.

The shortcomings of my running routine could not have been clearer. I wasn't putting in enough distance in my daily training. I've always prided myself on the fact that I usually run six days out of seven. While the frequency is high, the distance is middling. It's a healthy routine, but not one that produces great race performances.

I'll admit that it's hard to break a running routine that's been a way of life for five years. Clearly a change is due. I'll continue to aim for longer runs on weekends, and try to increase my weekday distances. I'll aim for the same 18-20 miles a week, but will only run three days instead of four. If I could get closer to a 5 mile average run, my performance might proportionately improve.

Fitbits don't work across the room

Ouch

Today's run (treadmill): 3.2 miles

About halfway through this morning's treadmill run, I spotted my Fitbit sitting on the guestroom bed. I'm really into capturing my activity through that device, so I was a little nonplussed by the situation. While I was still capturing metrics like time and heart rate on my Garmin, all those steps would be lost to my daily and weekly totals. I considered stopping the treadmill to retrieve the device but decided that it wasn't worth the disruption.

Years ago, when my first Garmin failed during a run, I felt frustrated and asked myself, "If the run didn't record, did it really happen?" I know it sounds silly, but I once felt that way. A documented run is a tangible entity. Something that happened. Something to look back upon. A run performed independent of a watch or device doesn't become part of recorded history. I'll admit that on the rare times when I've gone out "watchless" on a run, I later Gmap'd my route so I could at least capture my distance.

Even without a device, running data on the treadmill is always available via the display. I don't fully trust the accuracy, but at least it provides ballpark metrics. I maintained a challenging pace through the workout and that took my mind off forgetting my Fitbit. So it looks like I'll need to wait a little longer to get my next Fitbit badge. Further, today's totals won't approach my daily goals. But I got a good run in today, despite the lack of evidence.

Good data can make you thin

BodyMedia, FitBit, Withings

Tuesday and Wednesday's workouts (treadmill): 50 minutes (total)

Yesterday was a busy day for me and I didn't get a chance to post. During the first part of the day, I attended a session on the future of journalism that was put on by the MIT Media Lab. I've been representing my company at MIT for over a decade and I always find it interesting to hear views on the direction of media from students and faculty. The theme that repeated throughout the dozen or so talks centered on the way data and data visualization is shaping news reporting.

On the same theme, I just read an article in the November issue of Men's Journal called, "Living By the Numbers" that examines how targeted data can directly contribute to personal fitness. The writer used tools like BodyMedia, FitBit and the Withings Body Scale to capture and track calories and performance metrics.

For some reason I expected the article to present a negative view of these devices, but  it actually supported their use. The writer started off at 195 lbs with a BMI of 25.7 and ended up losing over twenty pounds by the end. He didn't specify the time period for when that happened, but my own experience tells me that your weight can come down quickly once you've committed to a program.

An important point that the writer made was that interest in these tools diminishes over time. He likens it to the infatuation stage of new relationship that gives way to a more realistic viewpoint. In addition, the process of tracking certain things (like calorie intake) can become a real burden. The key point is that good data helps an athlete maintain awareness of diet and effort, and that can lead to improvement.

This may all seem self evident, but the way data is acquired and the way it's applied can make a big difference. In the end, it's not the gadget that puts us into better shape, it's the effort that we put into the process. However, good data seems to provide the type of feedback that will help keep us on track.

Pace perception, pace reality

I think I may have a distorted idea about what constitutes my "normal" running pace. In my mind I consider myself a 9:00 miler but in truth I'm not. Garmin Connect provides reporting tools that allow you to analyze your history and this helps me compare where I am today against previous periods. Sifting through the data and applying the appropriate filters allows me to see what paces I was doing last year on the treadmill, the road, the track and the trails. My overall pace, current or historical, means very little because it's a blend of those running types. Comparing or just reviewing anecdotal data, I see that my normal road pace is about 9:15. There is a margin of error because this data comes from my Garmin which has an over/under tolerance of about 3%, depending on its state of calibration. I often move the footpod from pair to pair depending on the type of running that I'm doing. When calibrate accuracy to .01 mile on my Adrenalines and then move the footpod to my New Balance trail shoes I'll get a different result. It's an inexact method but it's good for measuring trends over time.

Prior to last Sunday's race I had focused primarily on building up my running legs with less concern about pace. In the first two post-race runs this week I kept the speed dialed down in consideration of recovery. Today I decided to start faster and maintain a pace that was on the edge of discomfort. About halfway through I increased the speed a bit more and at the end I expected to see that I'd run the type of pace I do for road races (8:19-8:40). I was surprised to see the Garmin readout say I'd covered my distance at 9:00 per mile. It sure seemed faster than that. It's possible that the Garmin under-counted because of calibration variance and I was on the treadmill and not on the road. Next week we'll have our new treadmill that will provide a readout that I can compare to the Garmin's. It was nice to run my "normal" pace today, despite my delusions of grandeur.

Letting go of data obsession (a little)

As a coda to yesterday's post I managed to delete this week's run history from my Garmin before I had a chance to upload it to Garmin Connect. I'm disappointed by that but I'm also okay because running has finally become more about the experience than the measurement. A year ago I began to log my activities, first when walking and then when I switched over to running. The act of capturing the data, monitoring improvement and summarizing my monthly mileage became my primary motivation. When my Nike+ Sportband stopped uploading to the Nike+ website I practically panicked because I felt if the run wasn't captured it didn't count. Like it didn't even happen.

I switched from Nike+ to MapMyRun after that and I meticulously transferred information captured on Sportband to this website for a while, until the Nike+ technology failed altogether. Every month I would look at the summary and compare my miles per day/week/month against previous periods. I'd key in my cross training to capture elliptical miles from a paper log I kept next to the machine. I think my focus on the data rather than on the event began to switch when I started running trails more often. Mixing pace times from rugged, hilly runs with flat road runs made monthly pace averages less relevant. I'm still interested in the metrics of each run but I'm satisfied to know that I ran about 20 miles in a week, not that I ran 20.65.

Does this mean that I have transcended the beginner phase of running by focusing metaphorically on the game rather than on the score? Many experienced runners chuckle when I tell them how I capture run data with foot pods and GPS apps. They say they've been doing it so long that they know the distances they run and can pretty much assess their pace as they go. I'm not willing to give up my measurement tools quite yet but I'm willing to live with a few missing sessions on Garmin Connect.

Performance data

I upload my run data to the Nike+ website (top) which provides a personalized page that tracks my history. It keeps track of total number of runs, total distance and average pace. You can look at each run separately as well. You can also set and track goals, participate in discussions and challenge other Nike+ users. MapMyRun provides similar functionality but doesn't require the use of the Nike+ system. You can import your data from the Nike site to MapMyRun (directly above) and see much more detail about the run than Nike provides.