running intervals 40:00 [5]
shoes: Inov
Skatås hill intervals with the boys. They did 10, I did 8. 2 mins up, recovery run back down and start again...constant loop. Aim was to get to same point each time (i.e. consistency). My first two were a bit further, the rest were about the same, maybe 10 yards away from the 1st two. Worst was #5.
Snowing and windy, and a little slippery but not too bad.
Stretching 15:00 [0]
shoes: barefoot/socks
Ankles a little sore on the jog home, and legs a little tired, so stretched immediately when I got home. I will feel this workout tomorrow.
Even though, unfortunately (though I understand the sensitivities of weight discussions, having been around runners my whole life - including some with anorexia) the L&F group was cancelled, I will still keep to my 2,5 kg plan pre-TT (and cheer on Boris, and others if they want me to). But the discussion made me think quite a bit (but as I got to it late, and did not want to write a comment after the 'time to move on' was in place, I write here instead - as I speculate few if any will read this). Besides some thoughts about both sides of the issue (such as weight associated to speed, which I think is a valid argument - the less you have to carry around, the faster you can go, but of course, like most things, one variable, ex. weight, is not the full formula for speed; other variables such as form, muscle elasticity, fuel, etc. play roles as well, and sometimes this gets lost in the discussions). Anyway, I thought about what kind of metrics I really want to set goals for and some ideas include: BMI (muscle mass/body fat ratio), flexibility and springiness as the physical components, and more security and decisiveness in my route choice, and ability to control being focused as mental components. I am always fine when I have plan - it is when I get wishy-washy or distracted that my brain shuts off. And that simply requires more time with maps and in terrain.
It is a shame about the L&F, and the comments around it all - again, I understand the sensitivities and agree that the allocation of people without volunteering (perhaps particularly with weight specifications) can go against the intention of motivating others, but I think it also illustrates that we need to be cognizant that people are motivated in different ways. Attackpoint is meant to inspire and motivate, and I think the intention of the group was to do this - this was certainly the effect on me - a quasi-guilt but also being part of a group, and knowing someone would be checking up on me kind of motivation, which can be taken negatively or positively - I choose to take it positively. (Its a shame too because it was the first time in quite a while I could be part of something in the US o-community. I feel a bit outside the loop on this side of the pond - but that is also my own responsibility, I know.) There have been other types of measurements and ratings out there on attackpoint - the # of controls, hours per month, training hours in general, etc. as well as discussions about what constitutes effort levels. I think 10 years ago, if I would have been listed on L&F (which would probably have been likely, and at a larger amount), I probably would have reacted strongly as well, though might not have had the guts to speak out like Zan. Now, even though I am probably the lightest I have been since high-school (well, I was down to 61 kgs a few years ago here in Sweden, but generally), I would not be offended. This is due to quite a number of factors surely - not the least of which has been living in the company of so many good orienteerers for the past 7 years (I am still the 'largest' girl in our club, but I am fine with that). I have observed training habits, eating habits, exercise regimes even when pregnant, etc. and it is probably the most normal and at the same time disciplined group I have been a part of - and I hope I have learned something.