My 2016 Book…and the London Marathon

Back in 2016, I coauthored a short book (more a novella than a novel) with Phil Maffetone about a hypothetical “Million Dollar Marathon,” in which runners competed on a one-mile track, with the giant prize to anyone who could break 2 hours.

It’s fiction—I thought of it as near-future science fiction, since that is part of what I write—focused on a Tibetan refugee whose background gives him all the tools needed to make this quest possible.

Now, this weekend, the London Marathon—thanks to COVID-19—will be conducted under a protocol amazingly similar to that in our book. The best in the world, male and female will duel on ~20 laps of a 1.34-mile loop.  Not a track, but not all that different from Phil’s and my setup.

The goal in London is simply to win. The elusive 2-hour barrier (which someone will eventually break) isn’t on the radar this time.

But the World Records could easily fall. And the excitement may well parallel that in the book.

If you’ve not read it, it’s available on Kindle or in print from amazon.com, and won’t set you back by even half the price of a movie in the theaters (if one is available in your neighborhood).

Note: I make no profit off the sales on this. I did my part of this on contract. Phil gets the proceeds. But it was a lot of fun, and if you’ve not read it, now’s a good time.

Returning to Running After Smoke

Like all of us, I’ve been obsessively watching the air quality index, more or less willing it to improve…as if that’s possible. And like many of us, I’ve learned a lot about air quality levels we never before dreamed of. I used to think 175 was bad. Now I am a connoisseur of the difference between 530, and 430. I can feel it in my eyes, throat, lungs, and heart.

For 8 days, going on 9, I have done zero exercise, even though I have an N-95 mask that I bought back in January to combat smoke. I take out the trash (wearing the mask) when absolutely necessary. I occasionally collect my mail. And that is pretty much all I do. In 8 days climbing my stairs as few times as possible is my main form of exercise.

Hopefully, many of you were equally cautious.

Which raises the question: when this abates, as it eventually will (and may be doing as you read this) how fast can you return to normal training?

The answer should be reassuring. Soon. But take a few days to ramp up.

The basic rule of injury or illness layoffs is this. Three to five days off is nothing. You might feel sluggish the first day back, but take it easy and you’ll be back to normal the next day…or at worst the day after that. For longer layoffs, say a week to 10 days (which is what we’re talking about here), allow one day for full recovery for every day of layoff. If you’re flat on your back with flu, it might be longer (two days for every day off), and if you are cross-training extensively (hard to do in this kind of smoke unless you have a really good home gym…and great air filters) it might be less.

So my main advice is this. Figure you’re going to be sluggish at first. Don’t immediately jump into speed workouts. Start with a few cautious easy runs (once the air quality allows) to get your running legs back. Then segue into strides. Follow that with a little cautious tempo.

Physiologically, this layoff has been too short for you to lose much, especially because you weren’t actually hurt or ill. But it will probably take a few days to feel normal.

If you are doing the Stumptown virtual series (which starts next week) postpone the first race until the end of the week. You won’t be 100 percent at that point, but you probably won’t be a total slug, either. And remember, everyone is in the same boat.

Mentally, view this as a rest break. Unplanned, yes, but rest can be good. Bernard Lagat always took five full weeks off in the fall, after the Fifth Avenue Mile, at the end of September. That’s a lot more than 8-9 days. And by the Wannamaker Mile, indoors in February, he was so well recovered from his break (a total layoff) that for years, he was the King of the Boards.

In other words, don’t sweat it. In the big picture, this is a mere hiccup.

But don’t push it too hard, either. Let the recovery come to you, rather than you trying to force it.

It will come, and after nearly a week and a half of sitting indoors trying not to breathe orange air, simply getting outside and (eventually) seeing a patch of blue sky will be a reminder that what’s really important isn’t so much how fast we recover, but just that we can still (again) get out and do it.

When 6 Feet Apart Is and Isn’t Enough

One of the standard pieces of advice for people trying to prevent the spread of COVID-19 is that we need to either stay 6 feet apart or wear masks. But does anyone really believe the danger zone is that sharply defined? Especially because study after study has shown that exhaled droplets, especially small, can travel larger distances than once thought.

At the same time, we know that ventilation matters, because it markedly affects the number of virus particles you might inhale if you are unfortunate enough to be exposed.

A new paper in BMJ (formerly the British Medical Journal) has addressed that topic in unusual detail, producing a very thorough (and easily read) graphic detailing the relative risk in a wide range of situations.

The result is good news for outdoor enthusiasts (such as runners, cyclists, and hikers), mixed news for outdoor gatherings, and bad news for bars and restaurants.

Nothing surprising there, but the graphic is cool, and useful.

Here’s the link to the study, in case the image above isn’t readable on your device. The image is a few pages down.

What the Georgia summer-camp outbreak tells us about COVID-19 & Schools

Today’s COVID-19 news contained the depressing information that 260 of 597 attendees at a Georgia summer camp had tested positive to COVID-19. As super-spreader events to, that was a whopper. It also bodes poorly for opening schools in the fall. (Image credit: Taliroll / CC BY-SA, creative commons license.)

But with everything else in the news today, details were slim. And even the best news sources can mess things up. So I went to the CDC journal article on which it was based. You can find it here. These reports are a bit dry, but generally readable, and this one was no exception.

Her are the basic facts:

Continue reading What the Georgia summer-camp outbreak tells us about COVID-19 & Schools

Motivation and Humiliation

The Alberto Salazar/Mary Cain story is very much a moving target, as was revealed today in Sport’s Illustrated’s detailed feature.

What I want to do here is address a small piece of it. In a prior post, I wrote:

“A friend … once told me that male coaches who started out with boys tend to mis-coach women….With guys, my friend says, it’s possible to motivate by humiliation. With women, she says (after admitting it’s a stereotype), that simply doesn’t work.”

Most people agreed, but I also got feedback suggesting that humiliation isn’t the optimum motivator for boys either.

Let me start by saying that I concur. What my friend (and I) were saying was simply that boys can be motivated in that manner.

I know, because it happened to me.

Continue reading Motivation and Humiliation

Mary Cain’s Bombshell

For the last month, I’ve been half-expecting another shoe to drop in the sad story of Alberto Salazar and the Nike Oregon Project (NOP)–sad, because, as I wrote previously, Alberto and I had been colleagues and there were many things I respected and admired about him.

But I never dreamed that the shoe was going to come in the manner or direction from which it did.

If you didn’t see it, Mary Cain, once the fastest young woman in America, in an opinion piece in the New York Times accused Alberto of fat-shaming her, trying to force her to lose weight via birth control pills, (illegal) diuretics, public weigh-ins, and other forms of emotional abuse.

It was a devastating article, followed up by confirmation on Twitter by Olympian and former NOP runner Amy Yoder Begley that the same had happened to her toward the end of her career.

You would be hard-pressed to find two more credible sources. Even before Amy’s confirmation, I believed Mary. If it had been sour grapes for not doing well after entering the program, she’d have done it years ago, rather than silently taking abuse for being a washout who couldn’t handle the pressure.

To me, this is far worse than the errors that led to Alberto’s doping ban. In those, he was basically playing the mad scientist, without thinking enough about the consequences and technicalities of the rules.  Here, he screwed up in a very different way.

When the news broke, I spent a lot of time going back over the books he and I wrote together. The publisher’s marketing department insisted that they all be written in Alberto’s first-person voice, even though the contract made me a more-equal contributor. That meant I spent a lot of time rewriting my own ideas as if they were Alberto’s, making it a little hard to sort them back out, today.

What I do know is that there were large parts I wrote in his voice, then submitted for his approval: “This is what you’re saying, unless you disagree.”

For example, he knew very little about master’s running, so I wrote that part. And most of the chapter on injuries was mine, largely because I’d written similar ones for books on bicycling and cross-country skiing.

A friend who is a former pro (not NOP) once told me that male coaches who started out with boys tend to mis-coach women.

That, I suspect describes Alberto. He came out of the male-track culture, then started coaching Galen Rupp and the altitude-house guys. Women, for the most part, came later.

With guys, my friend says, it’s possible to motivate by humiliation. With women, she says (after admitting it’s a stereotype), that simply doesn’t work. Most will just quit and go away, though there are others, who, like characters in a Shakespearean tragedy, will fall on their swords for a simple “good job”.

So, part of my take on this is that Alberto, however successful he’s been with some women, may not “get” women the way my friend describes.

Until the NYT article, I’d never heard of what felled Mary Cain, RED-S syndrome. When I Googled it, however, I discovered it was the same as female triad, which I’d long known: the nasty trio of eating disorder, loss of menstrual period, and stress fractures from lost bone density.

Mary says she lost her period for three years and had five stress fractures in five different bones.

In my books with Alberto, we warned about that, but now I now wonder how much the warning came from me, rather than him.

Alberto’s target weight for Mary was too light. Not because the charts said so, or because she looked too thin, but because she was losing periods.

For him to ask her to lose weight, and not monitor her periods (or advise her to do so) is…well, I find it hard to find the words.

In one of our books, “we” wrote that ideal weight for female runners is hard to determine. If you weigh too much, you’re slower than you could be, easily hurt, and subject to health problems. If you’re too light, you’re slower than you could be, easily hurt, and subject to different health problems.

Did he not remember that we wrote that? Or didn’t he really believe it?

But the core of Mary’s story is worse. She says she was engaged in cutting.

Nobody would lie about that; the stigma is immense. But when she worked up the nerve to tell Alberto and the group’s sport psychologist, she says, they were too tired, wanted to go to sleep, and blew her off.

I have trouble processing this.

Cutting is a red-flag warning of a serious problem.

When someone you care about tells you of something like that, everything else stops.

I have no training in how to react, specifically, to cutting, and was going to say I have no clue how to react. But I do: listen. Support their courage for talking about it. Make sure they’re not suicidal. Refer them to a trained helper, or assist in finding one. Stay up as late as needed, or at least until you’re about to keel over.

If Alberto didn’t know how to react, I get it. The sports psychology parts of our books were another portion that was mostly my doing.

But how could NOP’s sports psychologist not instantly have gone into “therapist” mode?

“Tell me more.” That’s all you have to say. It’ll open a floodgate.

Clemson, Ostarine, and the Olympics

I am a fan of college football. I went to one football school as an undergrad, another as a grad student, and taught at a third. And while the concussion problem has dampened my enthusiasm a bit, I still appreciate the sport’s athleticism, as well as the chess-game aspects of offense and defense. I even like the intricacies of the rules, in which it appears that someone not only anticipated anything that can possibly happen, but wrote a rule to cover it. As an official in another sport, I can tell you this is not always the case.

But I am very disheartened by what I’m going to call the Clemson doping scandal.

I’m calling it that because as far as I can tell, nobody else does. I can’t find a single news report that even uses the word doping, though I’ll admit I haven’t read everything.

That means the true scandal isn’t that three athletes on the same team (of only 18 or 19 who were even tested) came back positive for a substance called ostarine. The real scandal is that the sports media refuses to call it a scandal.

Continue reading Clemson, Ostarine, and the Olympics