asgaard

The (virtual) Great North Run

Sat, 19 Sep 20 14:35:58 +0000

I did the Virtual Great North Run last week, which is the first virtual race I've done, and I have to say that it was a pretty underwhelming experience.

The Great Run Company hyped it quite a lot by promising an app that would deliver some kind of 'experience', but it didn't work properly and it ended up being 'just' a long run.

The app they chose is called viRACE, which wasn't doesn't look like it was developed specifically for the Great Run company.

I used to work for a company that developed low budget apps, which it did by offshoring development (mostly). Every so often I'd get called into my boss's office, where he'd ask me to rescue the latest disastrous project and I'd be shown an app that, generally, would look abysmal. When I opened up viRACE, I had (unwelcome) flashbacks to working for this company. It just looks like an app that won't work properly. Beauty is skin deep, but software often looks exactly as well as it works because people who do a good job tend to make their work look at least presentable.

viRACE disappointed in every way. Standing on the (virtual) start line at 9:30, viRACE wasn't connecting so I had to forget the app and just run. Fortunately I have a Garmin watch so (unofficially) recording my run was not an issue, but viRACE was the official means of actually recording it. There was no instructions from the Great Run Company explaining what to do in the event that viRACE didn't work, so that was a pretty bad experience.

As it turned out, though, viRACE did connect, after about 1.5km. The first clue I had to this was that every so often my music (from my phone) would pause. I learnt at about the 10km mark that it was attempting to play audio, as it then informed me I'd run 5 miles. Well I was actually part way through the 7th, but never mind... This would happen every so often - sometimes it would manage to play a sound clip, other times my music would just pause.

Eventually I finished and stopped my Garmin and had a look at the app, which told me I still had a few km to go. I ended up running almost 23km in total so that I would officially finish.

Overall I found the experience extremely poor, and the Great Run Company haven't issued any statements or apologies about it or indicated that they will learn from it. Unfortunately, this is not surprising to me as the Great Run Company have previously disappointed. The last non-virtual Great Run event I took part in was the 2019 Birmingham Half Marathon, which they announced at the last minute was a mile short (though it was around 3-4km short according to my Garmin).

DIY metatarsal dome

Tue, 04 Aug 20 15:54:40 +0000

If you're here, you probably know what a metatarsal dome is and why you want one, but in case you're not clear, I'll give a summary.

What is a metatarsal dome?

A metatarsal dome is a dome shaped object that sits just behind the ball of your foot (under the heads of the metatarsal bones). The idea is that as the foot supports your body's weight, the dome supports your foot by spreading your metatarsal bones apart slightly around it, relieving pressure on the soft tissue around the metatarsals.

Metatarsal domes can be useful in managing certain types of pain in the forefoot, for example a Morton's neuroma. In the case of a neuroma, which is usually caused by nerve compression between the metatarsals, the dome helps by spreading the metatarsals and giving the nerve just a bit more space.

When I say 'dome', I am not referring to things often marketed as 'pads'. The terminology is inexact, but pads tend to be cushioned flat pads that are designed to be worn somehow underneath the ball of your foot. These do not support the metatarsals. Instead they just add a bit more cushioning, which may or may not be useful (or desirable, as they will cause your foot to point upwards slightly).

How to create your own metatarsal dome

I make my own metatarsal domes, and it's really easy.

Insoles with in-built metatarsal domes are an option, as are individual metatarsal domes, but I tend to dislike these because:

Insoles often come with other things like cushioning or arch support, which my shoe is already giving me
Insoles can make the shoe fit tighter, and tight shoes can aggravate neuromas
They often don't wear very well
Metatarsal domes seem to be a poorly defined thing. Some domes are huge, flat and wide and aren't really giving support in the right area. Others are too tiny to do anything.

Overall I find it easier to do it myself.

It's actually really easy. All you need is a shoe, ideally with a removable insole (which most if not all running shoes have), some podiatric felt and some tape (I use microporous tape because it's fairly easy to remove, but it's really not important).

The felt I use is this stuff, but you can use whatever you can find. This one is 7mm thick and has adhesive on one side.

What I do is I cut out a teardrop shape from the felt, and right in the middle of it, I add another little square (maybe 1cm square) of felt, so it's doubled up at that one point. It's not exact, the idea is just to create a dome shape, so that it's not all one height.

I stick the smaller one onto the bigger one using the adhesive on the felt, then I tape it underneath the insole.

You will need to play around with placement, which is why it helps to use tape rather than the adhesive on the felt, but basically you're aiming for the fleshy part slightly behind the ball of your foot.

The felt dome will flatten a bit under your weight when you wear it regularly, and the insole will mould itself slightly around it.

Summary and thoughts

I prefer to use tape instead of adhesive on the felt because it makes it easier to move around if needed.

I prefer to put it underneath the insole instead of on top because 1) you can tape it more easily (see previous point), 2) it protects from the mechanical friction and moisture from your foot, and 3) I suspect that the way the insole moulds itself around the felt helps create more of a 'dome' shape than having the felt above the insole.

The felt tends to come in 7mm or 5mm thickness. As it's doubled up, I have a 14mm tall dome digging into my foot, which sounds quite big. In reality, it gets squashed down pretty quickly so it's not really that big, however, if you have small feet you might prefer the 5mm.

Strava

Tue, 19 May 20 18:12:02 +0000

I was disappointed by Strava's recent announcement that it is moving previously free features to the paid subscription service.

The announcement can be found here.

I pay for Strava because I quite like it. I guess that by most standards I'm a pretty serious runner. I usually run daily, about 60k per week. So I use Strava a lot. But do I find Strava useful? No, not really - from a training and performance perspective, Garmin Connect has better metrics. But Strava has a community and a social aspect, and that's what I like.

That's what Strava is - a social app based around fitness rather than a fitness app first, in the same way that Instagram isn't really a photography app.

So I'm disappointed Strava is putting social features behind a paywall and deterring free users, because by reducing the value of the app for free users it's also reducing the value of the network for paying users like myself.

I also think that it's important to note that it is an obvious step in the wrong direction for Strava to focus on reducing the value of their free service rather than increasing the value of their paid service.

I'll be blunt and say that, even though I'm a subscriber, I do not think their paid features are worth the money. They are missing opportunities to provide useful functionality for serious athletes. There are so many things I'd like Strava to tell me:

Estimates for realistic best performance over common distances (5k, 10k, half + full marathon, etc) based on my current shape.
Training plans, probably automated, based on my current shape and goals
Summaries aggregated by week/month showing how much time I'm spending in each heart rate and pace zone.
'Weather adjusted' pace; in the same way that Grade Adjusted Pace adjusts my pace for changes in elevation, I'd like to try to compare my performance when the weather suddenly heats up.
Automatic elevation correction - there is already a button to do this per activity, but only on the website! (well, OK, this one shouldn't be a premium feature). Without this, for me at least, the Grade Adjusted Pace feature is pretty useless.
Better understanding of my exertion levels and over-training risks, e.g. my interval sessions always end up being treated as an easy workout because they don't last long and my heart rate drops back to normal very fast between reps (and, including warm up and cool down, my average heart rate for an interval session can be quite low, so Strava's relative exertion metric scores quite low). But, even over the short periods, my speed, cadence and stride length is unusually high, which is obviously putting serious strain on my muscles and should be treated as a hard workout.
Better querying in general - e.g. show me my 10 fastest kilometres, my longest run, my highest heart rates recorded, etc. Strava stores so much data, but provides scant methods to explore it.

Overall I think Strava is focusing on entirely the wrong approach. They should be keeping the social features to appeal to a wide base of athletes and make the overall platform free for everyone, but enticing the more serious athletes to pay.

Altra Instinct 3.5 thoughts/review

Sun, 16 Jul 17 11:21:54 +0000

I have something called a Morton's Neuroma, which is an enlarged/irritated nerve between my third and fourth metatarsals. It's gradually improving but it's a frustratingly slow process which involved me taking almost 3 months off running.

I usually wear Asics Nimbus, which is a heavy shoe with a 10mm heel. I've had the odd foray into other shoes but I come back to the Nimbus because it fits well in the width, which is 100% important with a neuroma. Most running shoes are very narrow and that's not tolerable for me.

Recently, prompted by the neuroma, I have been making a push to adapt my running form to a more natural style. High cadence (~180 steps per minute), with a mid-foot strike and my feet mostly under my centre of gravity - the latter two driven by the cadence. I'm not convinced the reduced impact force matters to me much, but the fact my centre of gravity always stays over my feet probably does, because it means there's less chance for my supporting foot/leg to do something wrong or become unstable.

Altra caught my eye because they have taken the unprecedented step of designing shoes to be roughly the same shape as human feet. Apparently this is a novel concept in the running footwear industry. Their shoes are fairly wide, the toeboxes are square-ish in contrast to most shoes which are designed for people whose feet have a line of symmetry through their third toe. They are also zero drop, i.e. there is no heel.

So, I bought a pair of the Instinct 3.5s from Northern Runner, whom I'm not getting any commission from but I'm going to advertise anyway because not many places in the UK stock Altra shoes and choice is important.

In the Instinct 3.5 it's recommended to buy a half size up over your usual trainers. This is what I did (11 UK in the Instinct 3.5 vs 10.5 UK in the Nimbus 18), and I agree - the 11 is the right size for me.

The first thing you notice is that the toebox is seriously wide. The second thing you notice is that the mid-foot is actually a bit tight, but I re-laced them (see image) such that the laces don't cross the shoe for the first three holes, which opened up the mid-foot nicely. Overall, with this alternative lacing, the fit is perfect.

So, how do they actually feel?

So far I've only taken them for a single short test run but I'm very pleased. I was worried the zero-drop would completely wreck me after a few hundred metres but I ended up going double the distance I initially intended to and they felt great. With a high cadence the mid-foot strike is both obvious and completely natural. With my ~~Nimbi~~ Nimbuses I always suspected that I was unintentionally excessively plantar-flexing my foot while running high-cadence to accommodate the heel, although I was never really sure. With the Altras I have no doubts; the strike is natural, and quieter.

It does not feel good to heel-strike in these shoes. My form is still such that when I am slowing down in uncertainty, for example approaching a road or a sharp corner, I'll revert to a lower cadence heel strike. It's pretty obvious when this happens in the Altras because it suddenly feels a lot less natural, which is in contrast to the ~~Nimbodes~~ Nimbuses where the huge wad of cushioning under the heel doesn't really alert you.

The next morning my calves were fine; I think that running high cadence in the ~~Nimbes~~ Nimbuses already prepared me.

I will update this post in a few weeks with any further thoughts, but my initial impressions are overwhelmingly positive.

Update 31st July: I've had a few weeks running exclusively in my Altras now and my thoughts are still much the same. I like them a lot. I suspect when I next run in some more traditional shoes they'll feel quite weird.

International buy nothing day

Fri, 25 Nov 16 22:18:40 +0000

Or so it was supposed to be, but in reality I bought a new pair of running shoes as Strava has been nagging me that I've run over 900km in my current pair (actually far more as I was using them for some time before signing up to Strava).

For the past few years I've worn Asics Nimbus, and I like them a lot, but the price inflation in the last 12-18 months has been insane. The last pair I bought were about £70, now they're retailing at a mere £150. That's far too expensive.

With a Black Friday offer that went down to £100, and with a 15% off voucher code, £85.

But I also ordered a pair of Saucony Triumphs which I hope will prove to be a cheaper alternative in future.
[...]

Bionic Boots

Tue, 25 Nov 14 22:47:38 +0000

Here's a video of some 'bionic boots', intended to let humans run at 25mph, about twice as fast as an elite marathon runner: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCnT-qWTE84

They're interesting from a technology point of view but a few things jump out at me.

If you look at elite runners' form you will virtually always see the front foot hitting the ground very, very close to the runner's centre of mass, while the back leg is extended at the hip. The runner's back will be straight, their hips will be pushed forwards, and they may have a slight forward lean through their entire body from the ankles upwards, but they will certainly not be bent at the waist. Those guys are distance runners but the classic 'shape' is also recognisable in sprinters:

It's even recognisable for Oscar Pistorius):

The runner in the bionic boots is totally different to the point that you don't even recognise it as running:

We only have the example of one person running in them, but the bio-mechanics that seem to be imposed by the bionic boots bear no resemblance to good running form, and, frankly, it looks bananas. At the point of impact both legs are flexed from the hip, even his back leg is flexed (which is bizarre), and he is bent forward from the waist. All you can really say is that his arm swing looks ok.

He is not in a good position to be absorbing the impact, however it may be that the boots themselves absorb it adequately and this isn't an issue.

Further to this, I'm curious what state it leaves his hip muscles in. He's obviously using a lot of hip flexion to lift up his legs, but with his back bent forward he's never getting any hip extension. That means the muscles at the front of his legs/hips are getting worked hard, but the muscles at the back probably aren't getting used at all. Hip flexors are powerful muscles. This is an imbalance you don't want.

Tight quads and hip flexors after running

Mon, 22 Sep 14 18:56:30 +0000

I hesitate to give out such advice because it seems that for any running ailment there are a million and one potential causes and the correct treatment varies based on which affects you. But this has genuinely helped me so, here we go.

I used to get very tight quads and hip flexors (especially in my right leg about 36 hours after running), and I'm pretty sure this was the cause of some medial knee pain. I've successfully alleviated this in three ways:

1. I'm more honest with myself about how slow an easy/comfortable run should be. i.e. I do most of my miles slower; we are talking 1:30-2:00/mile slower than my 'fast' pace.

2. Form: When I run, I push my hips forward, engage my abs, and keep my back straight. There's a lot of conflicting information on running form and most of it is very hard to feel while running. These here are things you can feel while you're running, and it should result in more glute and hamstring activation and easier landings.

3. Hamstrings and glutes. This is the big one! I've spent a few months training my hamstring and glute strength. Hamstrings and glutes are antagonists to the hip flexors and quads, so if the strength is imbalanced things don't work well, and, I think, the stronger muscle group ends up taking more of the workload than it should. Modern day life tends to weaken the hamstrings and glutes (with lots of sitting).

My routine looks something like this:

Daily or almost daily, AND pre-running as part of a warm up/activation

Glute bridges (3x10)
Glute kickbacks (3x8) (note: don't be confused by the word 'kick', it should be a slow, controlled movement)
Fire hydrants (3x8)
Hip hikes (2x20)

Every few days

Deadlifts. If you don't have access to a gym then it's worth getting a pair of dumbbells. A pair of 4kgs is fine for useful (distance) running strength - you will see diminishing returns as you increase weight. Deadlifts will make you sore, so be careful about timing them around running.