Running: a gruelling slog

Last night's run home was a bit of a grind. You know the feeling, you've got a particular route to follow, but your legs feel like lead and, even though you're well inside your normal capacity you just feel like crap.

Possible causes:

• No breakfast
  I've found that eating much in the morning on days when I'm running to work makes for an uncomfortable time. Toast or crumpets aren't too bad, just a bit gassy. Muesli is an absolute no no, I feel really slow and awkward afterwards. So lately I've been running to work with no breakfast. It should encourage my body to burn fat anyway.
• Different, heavier shoes
  I decided I needed to try the (only comparable) alternative to Vivobarefoot trail freaks, and bought a pair of Merrell Trail Glove 3s. They're a dead loss on muddy ground, the grip is terrible. But I can't afford to replace them straight away, so I'm currently flipping between my trail freaks and my old Inov8 roclites, which need 'using up' so I can get some lower heeled x talon 200s. Compared to barefoot shoes, the Inov8s are like diving boots.
• Clothing
  I'd made bad clothing choices. I had a fairly thick long sleeved base layer on (one of my old Regatta winter ones) and a Paramo windproof, and I was sweating buckets. So I took off the windproof, and was still too hot. I'd planned in the morning for strong winds, and they didn't appear. One of the difficulties with running both to and from work, coupled with the UK's ludicrously variable climate.
• Mud
  Ground conditions last night were pretty ropey, everywhere has been saturated by the recent heavy rain and it's like running through porridge.
• The route
  I don't know what it is about this route - maybe it's the rate of climb, or the pace I take it, but even at my absolute fittest I get to the top of the second hill completely boggered.

So in the end, distance in the morning was 10km/250m, and the evening was 16km/600m. Pace in the evening was shocking - 8:54 per km, fully 2 minutes per km slower than my target training pace. I gave up on the usual bonus hill reps as I was starting to bonk, and went home to eat something.

Gearporn - running shoes again. Merrell trail glove 3

I've been running in Vivobarefoot shoes for several years. My initial feeling was that they wouldn't have enough grip for fell running, but I've done a few fell races in them without problems. For really gnarly ground I tend to use Inov8 roclites (once this pair die I'll get some other Inov8 shoe with less heel), but that mostly tends to be in winter when the ground is wet and sludgy.

Back in April I had to replace my last pair of Neo Trails, and they were no longer available. I ended up changing at that point to Trail Freaks, which opened a whole can of worms I've talked about elsewhere. So far I'm not mad keen on the trail freaks - they feel a bit too floppy and my feet slide around in them when wet. They're also none too durable, so when I trashed a pair I decided to replace them with Merrell Trail Glove 3s - the only other barefoot trail shoe other than 5Fingers or various sandals.

Size what?!

First of all, Merrell sizing is a load of cobblers (accidental pun) if you're in Europe. My size UK12/EU47 feet do not fit in a US12.5, nor would I expect them to - most manufacturers reckon an EU47 to be a US14. Not having had Merrells before, I didn't know this. That cost me a fiver as I had to send them back to Sportsshoes.com for replacements. Sportsshoes.com were as usual extremely helpful. Merrell weren't.

A grumble on twitter elicited 'our UK staff can help you' from Merrell. Merrell's UK staff completely failed to comprehend my problem and sent me their sizing chart, ridiculous UK/US equivalencies and all.

Nice and comfy

Overall, I like the trail glove. It's comfy, it fits well (once you have the right size) and my feet don't slide downhill inside the shoes on descents. But.

This is a trail shoe?!

I've had road running shoes with more grip than these things. I nearly did the splits in wet mud half a km from home the first time out in them. Really, WTF? The soles are, compared to the vivos, fairly clumpy, but the treads are ridiculously shallow. After running up through a field I checked the sole and was pleased to see they weren't clogged. No bloody wonder, when I look closer the tread is barely 2mm deep.

Overall

Overall, I do like the trail gloves. Probably not enough to buy another pair, and if they turn out to be consistently this slippy, they could end up being replacement casual shoes, since my old Neo Trails (worn out for fell use, now used for casual) look as if I've run over them with the lawnmower. The trail gloves are nice and comfortable though. If I did any road running, I'd probably use them for that. The grip really isn't up to trail use though, unless your idea of trail is nice graded footpaths around a reservoir, and you might as well use road shoes for that.

Oh, and Vivobarefoot customer service is light years ahead of Merrell.

Running - fixing the leggies

I've already mentioned that my ankle's been playing up due to the right size shoes. The cure for this is running shorter distances and waiting until it gets better. Since I'm fixing this longstanding issue though, I might as well sort a few things out.

My toes are quite squashed from years of ill fitting (and just conventional) shoes. My 4th toes have started to straighten already, so now I'm using foam toe separators to push the hammer little toes out a bit further where they can start to work. That's having an effect after just a week, and making my heel and ankle ache.

I was aghast to find out quite how much suppleness I've lost over the years. I tend not to do much in the way of leg stretching, as it's caused me problems in the past. While I've been doing the Vivobarefoot ankle and tendon exercises though, I've discovered that the suppleness I had in my teens and early twenties when I did martial arts has long since departed. I can no longer kneel with my bum on my heels and the top of my feet flat against the floor - my thigh muscles won't allow it.

So I'm doing lots of stretching. Which makes for aching legs. But in the long run my legs and feet will work properly, as nature intended them to. I hope.

Practicality of trousers

I think I just worked out why people of Oetzi's time wore leggings, suspenders and loincloths instead of trousers.

Try dropping into full squat in ordinary trousers.

You may want to have a needle and thread handy....

Running - painfully doing it right.

I've been running minimal a few years now, and until this year I've always used Vivo neo trails. Finally this year I wasn't able to get any old stock, and bought some Trail Freaks. Now, I always used to wear size 46 neo trails, and they seemed to be a good if slightly snug fit. The Trail Freaks didn't work for me in a size 46, in spite of supposedly being the same sizing. REALLY didn't work. Lots of blisters. Vivobarefoot kindly helped me out a little here, and I started running in 47s. One of the first runs I did was a 35km with far too much on the flat. Shortly afterwards my ankle & shin started to ache, lots.

I cut back on the mileage for a few weeks, and went to see the physio this week. It seems that running in the right size shoes has inflamed my ankle. For years (about thirty years in fact) undersize shoes have been cramping my toes under, so I've been putting my weight too far to the outside of that foot. Now I'm wearing wider shoes, my toes are uncurling and the weight is going on to the ball of my foot. The tendons controlling that part aren't used to lots of exercise, hence the inflammation. So it's no big deal, it just means building up the distance again, once my ankle stops hurting.

After four years of barefoot/minimal running and walking, I'm still finding problems with my feet caused by thirty years of ill fitting shoes.

Beekeeping - swarmy bees

This year is the first time (apart from the beginners course) I've felt like I'm really learning something about practical keeping. Being an antisocial sort, I've never really engaged much with my local association (although I do keep up my membership), so I've tended to learn from books and online information. Keepers have a saying, "bees don't read books", and it's very true, they don't behave anything like the way the books suggest.

This year, I found out why.

Approaches to teaching beekeeping vary from place to place. I learned at my local association, and after the course was given a swarm. My beekeeping mentor is extremely knowledgeable, and always willing to help, but I really, really hate feeling like I'm imposing on people, so I tend to make my own mistakes and do my own research.

The key here is 'swarm'.

Some associations train new keepers, then encourage them to buy bees from a supplier, like Thornes or Paynes. That way, you get even tempered bees that are cooperative and not too swarm-prone. Others, like ours, provide new keepers with a captured swarm.

Bees from a swarm will be prone to swarming.

Therein lies the problem. Much of the information in books and online has been written by longstanding, experienced keepers with established apiaries and calm, well bred bees. They give the impression that bees behave predictably because theirs do. You have to read a lot deeper to find the 'oh ffs what are they doing NOW' information.

If this sounds familiar, http://www.dave-cushman.net/ is a URL you need to know. The BBKA facebook group is also useful, because it has a real mix of inexperienced and experienced keepers: the former pleading for help and advice, and almost invariably getting it (although, being a forum type environment a certain amount of bad tempered trollery and impatience is inevitable from time to time).

In any case, the main thing I've learned this year is: if you are keeping bees from swarms, and you are having trouble controlling swarming behaviour, you shouldn't be surprised. Don't believe what the basic books tell you, experiment with swarm control techniques and learn from your experiments. Most importantly, make a conscious decision: would you rather risk losing a swarm, or losing a colony? The answer depends on your circumstances; if you keep in a suburban area where swarms are disruptive you may prefer to risk losing colonies rather than filling your neighbours gardens with swarms. Some keepers will be aghast at that, but for some of us that choice can be the difference between carrying on, or hanging up the veil.

Demaree pt 4 - tricksy little buggers

I checked the hives on friday. No queen or brood in one, little pollen, loads of honey. With no brood to care for, the bees are just laying in stores. The other one was more complex.

I'd carried a single frame of sealed brood over from the top box when I did the v-swarm. Inevitably there were a few eggs round the side - whoever heard of a frame with _nothing_ but sealed brood? I'd removed the queen cells after 5 days - top box and bottom. This time there were queen cells on this old frame, and on the newly drawn comb on the neighbouring frame. They _really_ want rid of this queen. So, I removed the queen cells in case they'd just 'not quite got it out of their system' and left it until today - tuesday.

Again, the queenless/virgin colony has nothing but honey, so I put a frame of brood from the other colony in with them to see what they make of it.

The newly v-swarmed colony? SEALED queen cells, and lots of them.

Balls to it - they really want rid of this queen, and they're about to swarm, so lets give them what they want. The queen goes in a plastic box, one unsealed queen cell is left intact, and we'll let them requeen.

This may sound drastic, foolhardy even. But where I am I prefer not to have swarms. In fact, I'd rather lose colonies than have my position made sensitive by more swarms in neighbouring gardens. So removing the queen should nip the swarm in the bud, and also give them a chance to requeen. If I end up having to beg a queen/frame of brood/swarm from someone....well, it's been a bumper year for swarms, so there's a good chance there will be one available if I need it.

Might yet get some honey this year.

Maybe.

Beekeeping - Demaree pt3 - a lesson learned

A few weeks ago I tried a Demaree/vertical swarm for the first time.

Week 1: friday, checked for and removed queen cells from both top and bottom brood boxes

Week 2: Wednesday, lots of queen cells: play;open; and sealed. In both boxes. Removed them all.

Week 2: Friday, more queen cells in the top, probably empty or not viable, and no sign of eggs or queen in the bottom. Stupidly, I assumed that the sealed queen cells, apparent absence of the queen and lack of eggs meant that she had swarmed once the queen cells were sealed.

Week 3: Friday  the weather was dreadful - high winds, heavy rain, very cold, general nastiness. After inspecting the other colony, which was extremely resentful of being disturbed, I decided that the vertical swarm colony didn't need checking. After all, it wasn't queen-right. Right? Wrong.

Week 4: Wednesday, an email from my partner: "Your garden is FULL of flying bees!" (I forgot to mention - this colony was hived in the prime spot and had built up well. There were lots of bees in there). What the hell had gone wrong? What had I missed?

Week 4: Friday, inspect the hive and find lots of sealed queen cells (plus some other unsealed brood). The queen had seemingly still been there, stopped laying ready to swarm then, when prevented from swarming, started laying again. The workers, still in swarm mode, turned several of these eggs into queen cells, and swarmed as soon as they were sealed.

I subsequently removed /all/ the queen cells bar one. That has now been torn down and the bees are in better temper. I'm now waiting, blue pen optimistically at the ready.

Beekeeping: Mysterious queen cells - mystery and solution

Last week I did a demaree on another hive. I put a single frame of mostly sealed brood, along with the queen, in a brood box of mostly foundation, put an excluder on it, then an empty super, then a crown board, then the main brood box, followed by a super.

4 days later I opened them up to deal with the inevitable queen cells and blow me if there aren't (as well as half a dozen queen cells in the upper brood) two sealed queen cells in the top super! When I removed them they were occupied with part developed queens. Her majesty hasn't had access to the super since March, so how the hell did those get there?

It's been bothering me ever since, and I've just remembered what happened.......

When I put the whole thing back together, I was (for whatever reason, can't quite remember) one super frame short (probably due to a mix of castellated and railed supers). So I put one in that had been kicking around the shed. It had been in a 'bottom super' of a brood and a half over the winter, and must have had some eggs in it. The bees have spotted the eggs, and raised 2 queen cells from them.

So know I know - bee eggs taken out of the hive, left for two months then put back are still viable.

Beekeeping: First attempt at Demaree part 2

I'd describe this as a qualified success. Last week I checked the hive and there were many many queen cells in the top half. This shouldn't be possible - there were no eggs, so all the grubs must have been > 5 days old. Which means my suspicion is probably correct - 90% of my swarm control problems over the years have probably been down to inadequately destroying queen cells. When destroying a queen cell you need to take the egg out of the comb and destroy it, not just wreck the wax structure.

Oh well, we live and learn.

This colony now has no queen cells in the top, 2 queen cells in the bottom (one possibly damaged, possibly not fatally), no eggs /anywhere/ and no queen. Oh, and they're properly pissed off :-/

Closed it up, will check again in 7 days.


However, it has been a lot easier to deal with and a lot closer to successful than previous years artificial swarms. I will persevere with the Demaree technique and see where it gets me.

Running and nutrition

I've been meaning to write a 'what I know about running and nutrition' for a while, since it's caused me a lot of problems. What follows is my understanding of what I've been able to find out, and I'm not an expert. Please let me know if there are mistakes. I've tried to provide a short summary, so there is necessarily some oversimplification.

The Fuel
The fuel your muscle cells burn is called ATP - adenosine triphosphate. It's derived from glucose in the blood. That glucose can be derived from a number of different sources:

• Fat 
• Protein
• Carbohydrate.

Your body has a natural store of carbohydrate - glycogen. It occurs in muscle tissue and your liver, about 2kg in total. When you aren't exercising, your body just ticks over on blood glucose, constantly topped up from glycogen.

Up to marathon distance
When you are exercising, things are a little different. You have enough glycogen to keep you running for about 25-35km (assuming you're pretty fit - this figure can vary, and you can increase it a little by long term training, and increase it a lot [in the short term] by planned carb depletion/loading. Search 'carb loading' if you don't already know about it).

Beyond marathon distance
Some people run far more than 35-40km without problems though (me included). That's possible because your body only burns glycogen when it has to. If your heart rate is above 60-70% of maximum you have no choice but to run on glycogen. If it's below that (but still raised above resting levels), your body will switch to burning fat. So the trick to long and particularly ultra distance is simply to slow down to the point where your body will burn fat.

Running for weight loss
Obviously a lot of people seek to run to lose weight. Very often it doesn't work, they gain weight instead, become disillusioned and give up. What is usually happening is they're exercising too hard - gaining muscle (which is heavier than fat) and not burning body fat. If you want to burn fat, slow down. Walking or a very slow jog will do you more favours than running. The fitter you get, the higher that fat burning threshold gets, and the more energetic you can be whilst still burning fat.

Getting it wrong: hypoglycaemia or 'The Wall'
If you run hard past the point where you run low on glycogen, a number of things happen (symptoms vary a bit from person to person, but the general gist is the same):

1) Tiredness and slowing down
2) Irritability/depression: you may get frustrated or upset/anxious/weepy
3) Clumsiness & disorientation
4) Sudden severe sweating: cold sweats and shivering
5) 'Bonking': suddenly your legs just won't do what you tell them any more.

3 can be risky because you can fall and hurt yourself or get lost, and 4 onwards can be properly dangerous. In off road situations you are at risk of hypothermia. If you got lost because of  #3, and become hypothermic, you are in very serious trouble. Runners have died in that situation.

At this point, without a carbohydrate intake after a while your body will start to produce glycogen again, by glyconeogenesis. This involves burning protein (usually muscle tissue). This is probably not good news, it takes a lot of training to gain that muscle, you don't want to lose it. You sometimes get a flavour of acetone in your mouth when this is happening.

Fixing the problem
In this situation, just eating some sugary carbohydrates will fix the problem in the short term. Your blood sugar will rise, and your body will start to burn fat (it needs a little carb to 'power' the fat burning process).

Working out how long it takes food to actually do some good is a bit tricky. Sweet liquids take about 15 minutes to be absorbed. Solids generally take more like 2 to 4 hours, but soluble sugars dissolved in the stomach acid are probably absorbed as quickly as liquids. Certainly it feels like that, but as Bernd Heinrich found, just the taste of food can make your body tolerate lower blood sugar levels - sort of a 'sugar overdraft' as it knows there's food coming. (Attempting to diddle that by eating something that doesn't supply energy is pointless, and could be harmful).


Eating to maximise energy
There are two things to look at here: what to eat before running, and what to eat during running. There's a ton of advice out there on the former point, and it's mostly about your normal routine diet anyway.

The second, what to eat during running, can be tricky. I've tried eating sugary stuff during a run, and it disagrees with me (seems to bring on hypoglycaemia sooner, and makes me burp lots). Starchy food works better, but makes me a bit bloated and slows me down (cold jacket potatoes aren't very palatable, but are a very easily portable source of starch). It's only necessary if you're out quite a long time - I'd never bother if I was planning on being out less than about 3 or 4 hours. Very often even then I'll carry food, but not eat it.

The 'Nakd' cereal bars are the best thing I've tried so far. They're mostly date, so they're not intensely sweet. They seem to work really well for me. YMMV.

I've done better by training to improve my ability to burn fat, which is the next thing. Long fell races involve a much higher energy expenditure than road races (ascent is the main difference, but rough ground and with navigation to do concentration is a factor too), so some eating is necessary for most of us. I find gels unsatisfying, and the sticky goopiness is a nuisance (not to mention the wasteful packaging).

Bernd Heinrich's book 'Why We Run' is a good source for understanding the fat burning process, but by running slow when hungry/low on glycogen (such as training runs before breakfast) you can increase the ability of muscle mitochondria to burn fat. That will increase your range, particularly for distances over the 25-35km point. It's also a handy tip for getting rid of unwanted body fat - low intensity exercise when hungry will burn body fat, and also increase your body's propensity to burn body fat as a matter of course.

Training to maximise energy
Regular training will increase your glycogen storage capacity. Note that muscle can only use local glycogen - there's no point working out your upper body as a glycogen store for running, your leg muscles can't access that glycogen.


Glycaemic Index
The GI of a food reflects it's impact on your blood sugar levels. High GI foods hit your bloodstream fast, but can cause insulin spikes, whereas low GI foods provide slower release energy. It's not as simple as 'low GI before running, high GI during' though, as I've noted before if I eat very sweet food during a run it tends to bring on a sugar crash earlier.

Water & salt
During the winter I rarely carry water if out for less than 2 hours. As well as staying hydrated, you need to consume water if consuming food, and that's also the case for almost all energy gels. How much depends on individual and circumstances - in cooler weather I'll use fairly little - 1.5l will do me for 6 hours. In hot weather I can get through 4l in the same time and still need more.

If you get dehydrated, the initial symptoms are very similar to bonking. Later on after running you're likely to get stomach cramps and severe sweats/dizziness (especially if you eat too much when dehydrated). Dehydration can be fatal, you need to guard against it.

Unless it's extremely hot, you need to consume half a litre or so an hour during running (I tend to just drink when I feel like it rather than some kind of artificial regime). Salt tablets are not necessary for most people unless you're doing ultra distances, and even then probably only for really long runs in hot weather.

Conclusion
All you can do really is experiment to find what foods suit you. It helps if you understand a bit about how your body handles food and running though. As Richard Askwith points out in "Feet in the clouds" everyone has a different food to get them through the tough stuff. For him it was bananas mashed up with lucozade.

In summary, I recommend the following :

• regular slow hungry runs to improve fat burning ability
• using a heart rate monitor to understand what your body is doing at different levels of work
• trying different foods to see what suits you when running.

Links
http://www.medbio.info/horn/time%203-4/homeostasis1.htm
runnersconnect.net/running-training-articles/cience-of-bonking-and-glycogen-depletion
www.livestrong.com/article/415921-what-happens-when-your-body-runs-out-of-glycogen-during-a-long-workout
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Why-We-Run-Natural-History/dp/0060958707/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1419335206&sr=8-1&keywords=why+we+run

CRO Challenge/Ingleborough marathon 2015

Back again for the CRO challenge, in much nicer weather this time. The CRO challenge is a great event: dramatic scenery, friendly marshals and lots of tough climbing. It's not an event for the glory hound, no 'to the second' timing or cheering crowds, just sheep and bemused ramblers. For me that makes it just about the perfect event.

At the start in Clapham most folk were looking bundled up against the cold (except one lad in a vest bearing more than a passing resemblance to a whippet - he wasn't going to stay cold once he got moving), and I was wondering if I'd underdone it (thin base layer, thin softshell, gloves, hat, buff, summer weight running shorts) but once we got going I was toasty (and lots of people were shedding layers once we cleared the tunnels).

I made good time up Long Lane, sat slightly behind two women with two dogs. As the route split and the 13 mile route went right, I caught up with the dog owner and we had a pleasant natter as we climbed the steep bits. The other woman disappeared ahead like a rocket and I never saw her again.

The run up from Clapham. Picture courtesy of CRO.

The Ingleborough plateau was windy, but not as grim as it can be. A quick scoot across to the checkpoint, and a much quicker run back with the wind behind me and that was the big hill done. Dropping down towards Humphrey Bottom I was informed by a couple of walkers that I was off my head ("yep, you're quite right").

That steep descent is difficult - not runnable, 3 points of contact in a lot of places, slippery and hard on the thighs. The duck boards and track across Humphrey Bottom are easy going though, and I made good time, shovelling down a quick bit of food (must have been around 1h 30 or so). Then onto the mostly unmarked route round Fell Close. Much of this was familiar from last year, and there were strategically placed marshalls and a few flags so route finding was straightforward. I passed a fair few walkers between here and Colt Park.

The run down from Colt Park to Borrins is mostly pretty flat and a good opportunity to make up time. My plan had been to keep the cumulative pace on the GPS below 7:30 per km. It'd got as high as 7:49 on the climb up Ingleborough, but that was expected, the trick was to bring it down again, and by this time it was hovering around the 6:50 mark. Knowing the amount of climbing still to do, that was fine by me, I'd soon lose the extra gained.

I was a bit tired at Borrins and not thinking quite straight. Some indecision about the right way (past the farm, over the stile and turn left, don't fanny about with the paths through the farm itself) was corrected by the two gents who'd been just behind me since Humphrey Bottom, and the descent to the valley bottom (under the railway and over the river) was more chance to pick up pace. No steam train this year sadly - last year as I ran down the track towards the railway crossing I was delighted to see a Class A4 on the Settle and Carlisle no more than 50 yards away.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/staticarchive/bb850a70a8202a3369037057bb24dd90f1010c05.jpg


Climbing up to the road, then again up to the Ribble way, I headed off left towards High Birkwith. The Pennine Way from High Birkwith to Horton rises fairly sharply then drops again. I followed the track from High Birkwith until it started to veer off left then joined the grassy track, along with a man and woman who looked like heading off the wrong way.

The track down to Horton is foul - fist sized rocks to turn your ankles, smaller ones to bruise your soles. I was glad of the heavier shoes - the barefoot shoes were a liability here last year.

I paused for a chat with the marshalls at Horton (I'd encountered someone heading up the Pennine Way track intent on doing the 3 peaks without a map. I'd directed him to Brackenbottom, a much less roundabout route up PYG, and very very strongly recommended he go to the PYG cafe and buy a map), refilled a water bottle, then off we go up Sulber Nick into the strong headwind. Quite a few walkers heading down at this point, probably having completed the 3 Peaks.

The run along the top of Moughton was easier than I remembered. I spotted a hare running along the field edge as I cleared one of the stiles. With no one in sight in front of or behind me, it was like being out on a solo run and I relished the isolation. I was starting to tire though.

The paths around Thwaite are hard work when you're flagging - narrow, winding, undulating walled paths with rocky surfaces. Last year I reached Thwaite in pretty poor order and had to stop to shovel down some chocolate. This year I was tired, but still functioning pretty well and pressed straight on to the checkpoint, eating on the run. Up more walled tracks to Austwick, another checkpoint and the road climb up through the village ("run a bit, walk a lot, run a bit, walk a lot".

Leaving the road above Austwick I felt like the finish was close, even though there was a lot of climbing still to do. The marshall at the top popped up like a jack in the box just as I was wondering where he was, took a couple of pictures and cheered me on a bit. The marshalls on the CRO are always particularly friendly and encouraging (whilst competently and discreetly checking for hypothermia/exhaustion).

3km to go. Picture courtesy of CRO

Which left the final grind up under Norber, then down into the village. I managed to dredge up some energy for the climb and went pretty quick, then battled with the headwind until the sharp drop through the tunnels. The first tunnel comes as a shock as it goes pitch black on you, even as you're struggling with rough ground underfoot. It takes a while for your eyes to adjust, so by the time they do you're out the other side, assuming you haven't fallen on your face.

Running at a good pace through the village to the finish, I was startled by the blare of a car horn. It turned out to be the lad I'd met on the previous years run who'd run dressed as a Roman soldier (he'd finished a bit in front of me, having lost a lot of time to a 5 mile detour!) cheering me on. This year he'd done the half marathon twice instead of the full once. I saw him shortly after in the CRO HQ, and he very kindly gave me a T shirt from the event he'd been doing last year (Yorkshire Warrior). Being a Yorkshireman born and bred it was much appreciated :-)

Final time was 5:11, 34 minutes faster than last year. Better weather helped, knowing the route a little better, not being on high dose antibiotics and being better equipped too. The main thing though was knowing that I could comfortably average sub 7:30min/km for that distance/ascent, having done 48km/1000m in 6 hours a couple of weeks ago. The final average pace was 7:10.

Food: 4 'nakd' bars, first after 1 1/2 hours, then every hour after that.
Water: started with 2 650ml bottles, refilled one at Horton.
Clothing: gloves went on and off all day long. Soft shell zip was up and down for cooling/warmth. Buff stayed round my wrist most of the way. No other changes, I stuck to the base layer & soft shell all day.

Kit:

The weather was looking changeable, and although there's not a lot of remote exposed running on the route I err'd on the side of caution. I tend not to draw that much of a distinction between events and normal runs, so I'm always equipped to walk myself out. Self sufficiency is a big part of running for me, so I hate to think that I'm relying on the race organisers to help me if I can't finish.

Some of the shopping from the last year came in handy for cutting back weight and bulk, so I was carrying the following:

• Montane Fireball - didn't use
• Montane ultra vest - didn't use
• minimal first aid kit
• 5 nakd bars - 1 left at the end
• 2 chocolate bars - didn't use
• compass
• OL2 lamfold map, route marked up and protected with sticky backed plastic
• powerstretch gloves
• buff
• cheap waterproof trousers in a drysack - didn't use
• SOL survival bag
• Raidlight pouch for food
• whistle
• phone
• tissues & van keys in a drysack
• 2 650ml water bottles

all rammed in my Montane batpack. I could probably have left a few things out (the waterproof trousers are an emergency item, I would never run in them, and since the worst case would be walking back the quickest route, or lying in the survival bag until someone picked me up, they're unlikely to be useful), but generally it was a pretty good 'self sufficient' pack.

Clothes on the run:

• ventus softshell
• summer shorts
• base layer (thin Rab one)
• base layer socks and summer walking socks
• roclite 295s

Those last were a last minute decision. The new Trail Freaks have given me a blister on the top of my foot (manufacturing defect I think), and the baregrips are too narrow and give me blisters. The roclites are my winter running/all year round walking shoes. Harder soles and better studs were needed for the climb up Ingleborough and the Pennine Way path into Horton, and the rocky paths around Thwaite. Shame about the baregrips, they'd have been ideal if they fit me. It's not like I can go up a size to get the width, they don't make them in a 13.

Once again thanks to the organisers and marshalls for what is probably my favourite event of the year. Thanks to everyone who sponsored me too - the CRO team work hard for the benefit of outdoor folk, it's good to be able to give something back.

Beekeeping - a first attempt at the Demaree method

I have a colony that has built up very well this spring, and last week they had started to construct queen cells. I've had limited success in the past with conventional artificial swarming, so I thought I'd try Demaree. So, on friday, I put a new brood box down in it's place, moved the queen with a frame of brood (mixed, some sealed, some unsealed) into it, along with some drawn comb and some foundation, put a (plastic) excluder on top, then an empty super, and finally the other brood box.

On wednesday, I checked and there were two queen cells in the bottom, which I removed after checking her majesty was still present, and upwards of a dozen emergency cells in the top, which I also removed.

Today, 7 days after the start of the Demaree, I found 2 more queen cells on the frame that was carried across and a hoard of queen cells in the top, mostly empty but some with older larva or jelly in. The bottom ones - well, maybe they're just really determined to swarm, or maybe they intended those to be queen cells from the start, or maybe I didn't destroy them thoroughly enough. The top ones though - there shouldn't have been any larva less than 5 days old in the top box. I checked very carefully, and there's no sign of any eggs in the top box. I was /very/ thorough about destroying the queen cells in the top.

It's as if they're trying to raise older larva as queens, and making cells with jelly but no eggs. I wondered if the queen had squeezed through (most of the paint has worn off her body), but there are no visible eggs, and she was in the bottom box when I checked.

The other possibility is maybe I missed cells that weren't obviously queens at that point - the cell hadn't been extended although the jelly feeding has started. That doesn't seem that likely though.

I'd also spilled a lot of very wet nectar on wednesday when checking for queen cells - it splashed on the floor by the hives. Today there was a dead mouse in the middle of it.

Bees, they're a weird bunch. The lesson for me here is, when doing a Demaree don't assume it'll work - check the hive 2ce a week for the first two weeks.

A message to PE teachers

Dear PE teachers,

not all of the children you teach are the same. Some of them will be shy, or introvert, or both. These children do not need to be 'drawn out of themselves'. They know damn well what they are missing when they don't engage with team sports; they know it, and they want none of it. They're easy to spot: they're the ones who get picked for team sports last, and are often proud of that fact. You might find them difficult to understand, but you still have a responsibility to try. If you want to do something for them, teach them something they can do alone. Running is an easy one and the one I know, but there are others.

If you teach them to run - around a track, or cross country, teach them how to pace themselves; that running doesn't have to mean 'all out as fast as you can'. Teach them to maintain their body temperature; that sports doesn't have to mean shivering on a cold field in winter. Teach them to push harder because they want to; not because someone is shouting at them. And even though you may not believe it yourself, teach them that it's ok to put in only as much as they're comfortable with. Teach them that, because otherwise you'll lose them.

Maybe some of them will turn out to be great athletes. Maybe not. But at least some of them will live healthier and happier lives because of it, and won't look back on you for the rest of their lives with loathing and contempt. I was one of them, and school PE kindled in me a hatred of any kind of sport that lasted for twenty five years.


Yours,

A heavy smoker turned fitness nut, many times marathon runner, and passionate hater of team sports.

shoe crisis

Blast. With a tough marathon on saturday I have a shoe crisis:
vivo trail freaks - hard bit in the upper gives me a blister on the top of my foot
inov8 baregrips - too narrow footbox gives me a blister on the ball of my foot
vivo neo trail - 2 pairs, both look like they /might/ manage 42km, or they might disintegrate part way round
wave harriers - look like they might disintegrate after 5km.
Options -
a) aggressive surgery on the trail freaks
b) wear the neo trails and hope/carry duct tape
c) wear roclites and risk ankle turning from the additional height.

Probably option a, try a couple of hundred metres, and if all else fails c.

buggerosity - I like to think that being accustomed to minimal shoes means you can run in more or less anything (or nothing) but for best performance on a long run it's not quite true.

Gear Porn: Rab Ventus pullover

I've really spent a lot of cash on gear this winter. That's partly because I sold a load of clutter on ebay and ended up with cash (I have a rule - the proceeds of selling clutter is 'self indulgence money' unless I really need it for something urgently), and partly because I wanted to make my winter training more pleasant.

One thing I've been chasing for a while is a decent packable mid layer. The montane fireball is unbelievably warm and packable, but that's the problem. It's far too warm. The fireball is a 'depths of a snowy winter' or 'shagged my ankle and got to hop/catch the bus home' article. It's not a 'brr, turning a bit chilly, think I need a bit more insulation' thing.

I'd been using spare long sleeved baselayers for this for years, and then I was reading the kit list for the lakeland 100 (out of curiousity - really, it's not happening. No.) and found a requirement to carry a dedicated mid layer (specifically not a 2nd base layer). That set me researching the merits of different mid layers.

I tried a couple of fleeces, but the problem is they're completely non-windproof, and worst of all they're really bulky. I did end up with a couple of uber squishy comfy fleeces for general wear whilst experimenting though. Then by chance, browsing in Cotswold, I saw a Rab Boreas. They only had it in blue (not a favoured colour) and my parking meter was about to run out, so I hopped it and did some research on line.

I ended up with a Ventus (Boreas without the hood). And then another, a week later. Yes, I was impressed. It packs down titchy (into it's own pocket), maybe half the size of the fireball and while it's not /warm/, it's warm enough for running. Pretty much exactly what I was looking for.

It's basically a thin softshell. No waterproofing, but very windproof, and very breathable. Over-length sleeves with thumb holes provide just-enough hand warmth when you don't want to bother getting gloves/mitts out. The half length zip provides excellent venting for a range of temperatures. Not being waterproof, it can just go in the washing machine along with the rest of the stinky mud covered running gear, instead of buggering about with techwash and txdirect.

One or other of them has been out with me on pretty much every run since. Definitely a useful bit of gear.

New Years resolution runners.

It's the time of year that people start running as a new years resolution, to lose some weight and get fitter. For many, they'll do the wrong thing and end up gaining weight or just lose heart because it seems too hard. If you're one of the people getting started, here's a few things that might help:

• to start with (and I mean for at least a few months) run slowly, or even just walk. If you're working too hard, you're burning glycogen not fat. That will make you hungry, without losing any body fat. To learn more about how this works, read up about heart rate zones.
• if you don't have enough spare breath to talk, you're overdoing it: slow down.
• muscle weighs more than fat - if you gain weight but look and feel better, don't worry about what the scales say.
• try running on your toes/balls of your feet instead of landing on your heels - it puts less strain on your joints.
• Don't worry about going slow and not going far. It takes time to build up, and no one is going to think bad of you - you're out there running, just like the rest of us.

Click here for a tale of someone who's lost a load of weight and hugely improved his health in his first year of running.

Gear Porn: Paramo Velez Adventure Light for running

As per an earlier post, I've changed the gear I wear for night time winter running lately. Last night was the first really crappy night I'd run in it. Since there's not much useful information around on using the new generation of lightweight Paramo waterproofs for running, I thought I'd try and fill the gap a bit.

I like Paramo gear - it's not cheap, but their ethical credentials are good, their customer service is excellent, and it lasts just about forever. It's a bit generously sized for my skinny runner build, but you can't have everything.

Morning:
10km run into work starting just before dawn (8am). Wearing Ron Hill lycra shorts, very thin Rab base layer, paramo, rab aleutian gloves, sealskin waterproof socks & vivo running shoes. Temperature when I set out was about 5 deg centigrade, light breeze.

I was on the warm side of comfortable for most of the way with the vent zips open, mostly when climbing. A little sweaty, but only a little warmer than I'm used to.

Evening:
15km run home with 600m of ascent in 2 climbs. Same gear but Buffalo mitts instead of the gloves.

The weather last night got properly toss. Nominally 7 deg C, 70kph winds at 400m and heavy (horizontal) rain. To start with I was on the warm side, until I cleared the village and got out in the wind. By the time I hit the top of the moor at 410m I had all zips shut, it was blowing 40kph with light rain, and I was nice and comfortable.

It got worse.

By the time I'd dropped to the valley bottom and climbed the other side onto Windgate Nick, the rain was properly heavy, the wind was up to 60kph plus, and I was just about warm enough. I couldn't run on the top due to buffeting/head wind. I wouldn't have wanted to stay up there for more than 20 minutes or so without adding a layer, although I think just putting a buff on would have been enough for safety, if not comfort.

I was unsure about how the jacket was going to go - Paramo waterproofs tend to be on the toasty side so running in one was always going to be a 'try it and see'. I'd consider it a qualified success:

• Temperature control is fine using the vent zips handles temperatures up to 7 or 8 deg Centigrade with no wind. Any more than that, it's going to be much too warm. (handy hint - fasten up the neck press stud to keep your hood up when it's windy and raining, then you can open the zip to provide venting).
• Below that temperature, it can handle a very large range of conditions without needing to layer/delayer. Much more so than anything else I've tried.
• I found that the hood snugged neatly around my face with the drawcords. I've never managed to do that really well with any other jacket, and it makes wearing a hood much less irritating.
• That makes it ideal for changeable (grim) weather. Exactly what UK upland winter conditions throw at you.

It's impossible for me to stay dry in a waterproof when running. No 'breathable' waterproof fabric can handle the volume of moisture that I generate when exercising hard (and I don't think I'm unusual in that regard). I was noticably drier and more comfortable in the paramo than my old Montane Atomic DT. The wicking and the texture of the lining makes all the difference. As some others have said it doesn't keep all the rain out in driving wind & rain, but when running that's ok - you expect to be slightly moist.

Yes it's relatively heavy, and only really suitable for winter conditions. But because you can handle a much wider range of temperatures/conditions by careful venting, you don't need to carry as much gear. For what I was after (making longer evening training runs in bad winter weather more comfortable) it's exactly right. In the spring it'll go in the cupboard and I'll go back to softshell/windproof and a taped seam waterproof in the bag when I have to.

Note: for comparison, it's about as warm as a Montane Fireball.


Update 27/2/15: this was first written at the beginning of January. It's now the end of Feb, so the VAL has had  more use.

About the end of Jan the jacket started to wet out easily, so I washed it in techwash. It was fine for another 2 weeks, but then started to wet out a bit so I ran it through again and reproofed it with tx-direct. That made it good as new. I can live with reproofing a couple of times each winter, to be a lot more comfortable on the long slow night time runs that make up the bulk of my winter training.

Last week I decided to leave it at home - it was a little warmer, perhaps 7 deg and no wind to speak of. Instead I used a thin marmot softshell and a Fuera windproof. That turned out to be a mistake - the last hour of a 24km/600m run was cold and damp and nasty. This week, back to the VAL with a temperature of 5deg and wind of 20kph and I was toasty warm. The weather turned properly crap towards the end - sideways rain and no visibility to speak of. I was wearing a Rab Aeon base layer (very, very thin) under the VAL, and I'd have been happy to be a bit warmer in the last 30 minutes. Up to then I was fine. The visibility forced me to slow right off, and that's something that would have been a problem in a different coat as relayering would have been needed.

Still well impressed. I'd use a full weight Velez for walking (as I did last weekend, when it rained then snowed horizontally), but the lighter VAL is perfect for long slow runs in the cold, rain and wind.