CHA CHA CHA CHIA.

Chia seeds. Once only thought of as a way to grow hair for your chia pet, or in this case 'chia Obama' has turned into the new superfood of the last 2 years.

Most of us were told about the wonders of chia through every vibram owners bible, 'Born To Run.' You know the the book I mean? The one I have that love/hate relationship with because it's a great story that focuses on Scott Jurek who was just about invisible outside the ultra running world. The hate part is all the half truths you read that has every reader who never even had a hang nail buying vibrams and jumping on the shin splint band wagon, among other things. Now don't expect to run like Tarahumara after chugging chia all night because after all the secret might be in something else they do, for example, before those long distance runs, they consume large quantities of corn beer which is very high in carbohydrates. Funny how no one jumped on that idea, maybe because we know it would leave us dehydrated or puking three miles into a marathon. Maybe certain things work for certain people because they were raised for generations doing it.

As for chia seeds, I have no problems with this little member of the sage family. One thing that is never mentioned is that chia seeds can have a wild effect on your stomach resulting in frequent port-o potty stops during your next race if you're not careful. Only take less than a teaspoon per consumption.

Health Benefits:

Chia seeds have been used by native Americas and the now famous Tarahumara Mexicans as an endurance food. Today we know chia is the highest source of Omega -3 fatty acids, next to the flax seed. Chia seeds are also more versatile than flax seeds as you can mix them in all sorts of food and drinks and chia (unlike flax) doesn't go bad. In water chia expands and becomes gelatinous. As I said it relieves constipation, lubricates dryness, treats insomnia, and improves mental focus.

I like to add chia seeds to lemon water and add a teaspoon of xylitol, also known as birch sugar. It's refreshing in the summer and makes me think of a healthy version of bubble tea.

10 facts you should know about barefoot running and Vibrams

“People who don’t wear shoes when they run have an astonishingly different strike,” said Daniel E. Lieberman, professor of human evolutionary biology at Harvard University and co-author of a paper appearing in the journalNature. “By landing on the middle or front of the foot, barefoot runners have almost no impact collision, much less than most shod runners generate when they heel-strike.

Yes, Professor. I understand your point and the point of every 'barefoot' runner that has made many marvelous claims since they read 'Born To Run'. But I've been saying all along that I'm not buying into it. Here are a few reasons.

1. The Lance Armstrong of ultra running and seven time winner of the Western States 100 Scott Jurek, who went to Copper Canyon in Mexico may not have won that race against the Tarahumara as depicted in Born To Run, but did you know that he went back the next year and kicked some Tarahumara butt, wearing Brooks Cascadia running shoes?

2. The Tarahumara do not run barefoot, they wear inch thick rubber sandals.

3. Christopher Mcdougall himself said he only runs barefoot for short distances and only when he needs to correct his form (as if he can't do that in running shoes.)

4. Runners love a quick fix. Hey, we run because we don't want to be still we want to keep moving. But this won't make you any faster, it won't cure all your running injuries and....

5. Changing your running form while going barefoot or minimalist can lead to shin splints, fractures, Morton's neroma, and metatarsal problems. I still have a lingering injury from changing to light weight trainers while trying to improve my form.

6.There's more to the Tarahumara than minimalist shoes and barefoot running. They are known as "the people who run fast." Running fast is not something you accomplish be running barefoot, it's genetic.

7.Kenyans also run barefoot at a young age. They run to school getting in at least 10 miles a day. When they are old enough and if they are lucky they get running shoes. If barefoot running was faster for them, why don't they run marathons barefoot?

8.The name of Vibram five fingers bikila shoes come from Abebe Bikila who was the Olympic Marathon Winner in 1960 and 1964. In 1960 he ran barefoot as he trained, and as he ran his whole life. He won in 2:15:16. When he ran in 1964 he set a new world record of 2:12:11... wearing Pumas.

9.If we were meant to run barefoot then why is it every culture on this planet has decided to cover their feet. Society on a whole has decided that walking and running with shoes of some kind is much more beneficial to them then being barefoot.

10. And finally my moment of validation. In regard to the the quote above and similar claims in "Born To Run." Here are a pair of Vibrams that are worn in very suspicious areas:

Remember it's not the shoe that makes you a great runner or gives you great form it's you.

Just ask Paula Radcliffe, she doesn't have the greatest running form, never grew up running barefoot and has to wear orthotics (which make your shoes a few ounces heavier) yet she's still holds the world record in the womens marathon. Something to think about.

Fartleks, Shalane, and the 5K

Thud,thud,thud,thud,thud,thud,thud,thud,thud,thud,thud,thud,thud,thud,thud,

What is this sound? I keep asking myself while I'm running fartleks with my local group in north Brooklyn. This is the sound of a slow heavy runner, a clydesdale right? That's what they call them in those running magazines I read. Who's doing that?

Surely it's not the runner ahead of me with the perfect stride, gripping the ground with her Lunaglides and pushing away effortlessly. Certainly it can't be the guy closest to me because he's not all that close. Then I realize it's me! I have some how morphed into this clydesdale, like something out of a horror movie. Suddenly these fartleks are beginning to stink.

So how did this happen, how have I become so damn slow? Last year around this time I was getting faster. I finished a rather hilly 5K in 22 minutes (5 minutes faster than the previous year) and my pace for the 4 mile was even better still. Yet here I am with my lingering injuries from before the summer. My piriformis is so tight they had to give it a name (piriformis syndrome) and then there's my partially inflamed foot that hates any kind of speed work.

Well what's a runner to do, I've tried just about everything so now I'm back to running.. slowly, even when I try to pick it up it's still slow ( for me anyway.)

Next week I will return to the 5K I ran last year in 22 minutes and run as well as I can. Let's hope this won't be too crushing for my ego. Until then I will gallop thru the streets of Brooklyn with the speed of one of those horse drawn carriages in Central Park.

And for anyone who thinks a 5K is no big deal because maybe like thousands of other people you run marathons, consider this. Most pro runners consider the 800 meter to be the most challenging. Why? Because unlike marathons and ultra marathons you are giving 100% speed a 100% of the time, and by the time you're finished you want to die, that is if you're doing them right. ;) Here's Shalane Flanagan talking about the 5K.

The Boston Marathon qualifying rant

 On one of my long runs in central park I noticed a girl running in the opposite direction, and though she was not what I would call fat, but she wasn't what I would call exactly fit either and I'm sure no one was mistaking her for a runner in her street clothes.

So why is that annoying? She was doing what I like to call the Boston brag. That's when you wear the famous blue Boston Marathon jacket that brags about your running prowess, maybe you're even sub elite fast. I don't know about you but I know zero men wearing that Boston jacket that don't at least look like they're fast runners. But I've seen one too many female runners qualifying for Boston that don't look all that fit. "But Mark Boston has qualifying times and chubby or not she qualified"

Qualifying times, just what do they mean anyway? The qualifying times are harder for the New York Marathon but no one seems to care about those qualifying times, and who's wearing that jacket? But Boston seems to be the holy grail for runners, a right of passage, as if qualifying for the Boston marathon and wearing that blue jacket makes you a 'real' runner. What's worse is that once runners get a taste of that Boston cred. They want to keep on proving it and showing others year after year "yeah I got into Boston" And my answer to that is, congrats, and so what? Now you're going to show me your medal?

Now don't get me wrong Boston is a fun marathon to do but there are 100's of other fun marathons to do as well and unless you actually live in Boston I see no reason to want to do it year after year considering travel and expenses and so on, why not do something completely different? Oh wait I know, your ego.

Now I'll admit I never officially qualified for Boston but that didn't stop me from running it any way. Every year Boston expects hundreds of people to bandit the race and in 2008 I was one of those bandits "oh no not a bandit, that’s so wrong you must qualify.." let me cut you off before you start screaming at your computer. The head of the BAA ran his first Boston Marathon as a bandit. And like I said they are well equipped for it anyway I only ran the last half to pace my friend Cara and had probably the most fun I had at any race, mainly because there was no pressure and that only happens when you bandit races, so much fun.

A Boston Bandit in 2008

Well that's my Boston marathon and I'm fine if I never do it again even if I do qualify. Question is do I even want to qualify? The answer.. Of course, I want to qualify and then some but only because it'll mean I'm getting faster but I tend to run multiple marathons and sometimes back to back and that’s probably the worst way to try and qualify for Boston.. Unless you're a girl.

Oh no you didn’t! Oh yes I did, Most men I know that qualify for Boston are running about 60 to over 100 miles a week and not just running but training hard and being obsessed with the process, not only because they have to but because they want to PR. Here's a shameful fact. To qualify for Boston, Men 50 to 54 has to have posted a time of 3:35 or better. That time is five minutes faster than the time required for women 18-34. Well if that still seems OK to for you think about this. To make Boston, a 54-year old man has to run faster than the nation’s youngest and fastest women.

Now I'm not sure but I think if I suggested to a female athlete in her early 20's that she's not as fit as a 54 yr old man I might get a punch in the head. But when I mentioned this on facebook it stirred a vicious debate with women fighting for the 3:40 even some that could crush a 3:40 marathon thought it was OK because "women are just slower" What happened to the women’s right movement? I thought women wanted to be equal and didn't want to be treated as the lesser sex? I'm from generation X and we grew up being taught women and men were equal, so when I see this kind stuff it makes me nuts, and to make matters worse there's no proof women are slower!


Cara qualified by running a 3:30 marathon for Steamtown in 2007, she had no training plan, in fact she hardly even trained.

Before Katherine Switzer ran her first Boston Marathon as K. Switzer, why? Because women were didn't run marathons, in fact it was believed that if a woman ran more than 6 miles her uterus would fall out, (wha, wha, waaaat?) maybe you want to read that again because in the 60's it wasn't just here say, it was fact, or at least they thought so.

Now I've heard the stories about women aren't as efficient runners as men because of their hips and so on. But I'll tell you about the fastest runners I know. Both men and women are far from chubby and they train like animals. The goal is always a PR not getting into to Boston by a few seconds. I know a 46 yr old female runner who ran a 3:10 in New York last November her fastest marathon yet. I know a long time runner but first time marathoner, a 25 yr old female who ran a 3:06 she was 2 minutes off her goal of 3:04. These are runners to be admired, not because they are some how born fast, but because they train like most fast runners I know, hard. They know how to train they have their goals and will do anything to get there many I know even hire online coaches. Anyone running a 3:40 marathon in there 20's are just not training hard enough, period.

Here's an article from the Wall Street Journal that backs up what I'm saying

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703673604575550133914934718.html

Honestly who cares if you ran Boston? If you had a jacket from Berlin or London I'd be more impressed. Prove how fast you are by running fast, nine out of ten times you're going to be asked how fast you did your marathon in anyway. Why worry about Boston?

It seems that Boston are raising their qualifying times for 2013 but not just for women for everyone. My guess is everyone will just get faster if they really want to run this race. But it still won't change the fact that BAA thinks a 54 yr old man is more of an athlete than the fastest women more than 1/2 his age.

http://www.baa.org/Races/Boston-Marathon/Participant-Information/Qualifying.aspx

Cara may never know her true potential as a runner because she doesn't like speed work and she's not concerned with a PR, she just wants to have fun. And that's just fine with me.

another NYRR rant?

History is repeating itself. When Fred Lebow bragged about how much money NYRR was making in his book (enough to buy that fancy brownstone they wk out of) the city decided they needed to pay up. With membership increases, races selling out and significant price increases (at the height of the recession no less) NYRR is making more money than ever and the city once again wants their cut.

If they had club revenues of $39. Million in 2008 think about how much more they are making now since price increase for races membership running classes and everything NYRR jumped up in January 2009. For those who don't know all races besides the NY Marathon and the NY half were $11.

The sad fact is that many runners I speak to are fine with this for what ever reason, this means you should expect prices to go up in a big way next year.

This post is a response to the link below from the NY Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/10/sports/10running.html?_r=1&emc=eta1