The Running Thread Vol 2
Discussion
ajap1979 said:
Does anyone understand Strava Best Estimated Efforts? Mine are all massively out of kilter with the times I do on a regular basis. For instance my Best Estimated Effort for a half marathon is roughly 10 minutes longer than I would normally run it on a fairly easy day, and I'll do that at least four times a month. Just doesn't make much sense.
Yes, I'm not sure I understand them at all. For me they're coming up as the actual times that I've run, with no estimation at all (e.g. for gradient, stopping etc). For example, today I recorded my "best estimated 1/2 mile effort" during some 1k intervals. The Strava support page says that even if you stop just before the increment, it'll estimate your time, but that's not true for me, because I ran my fastest 10k in a race that was 9.95km long, but Strava has my estimated best effort as a lot slower than that (nearly 2 minutes!), during my first ever 10k months beforehand. The only way to acknowledge that fast 10k was to enter it manually with a link to the official timing page. RobM77 said:
ajap1979 said:
Does anyone understand Strava Best Estimated Efforts? Mine are all massively out of kilter with the times I do on a regular basis. For instance my Best Estimated Effort for a half marathon is roughly 10 minutes longer than I would normally run it on a fairly easy day, and I'll do that at least four times a month. Just doesn't make much sense.
Yes, I'm not sure I understand them at all. For me they're coming up as the actual times that I've run, with no estimation at all (e.g. for gradient, stopping etc). For example, today I recorded my "best estimated 1/2 mile effort" during some 1k intervals. The Strava support page says that even if you stop just before the increment, it'll estimate your time, but that's not true for me, because I ran my fastest 10k in a race that was 9.95km long, but Strava has my estimated best effort as a lot slower than that (nearly 2 minutes!), during my first ever 10k months beforehand. The only way to acknowledge that fast 10k was to enter it manually with a link to the official timing page. I did a 5km effort the other day pacing for 17mins and got the 2nd best estimated effort 16.55 which would have been right enough!
Don't understand the half marathon though Ajap...as it would for sure pick up if you ran 21.1km unless your stopping your watch for whatever reason as it then adds that time your stopped for!
thebraketester said:
Got fitted for some trainers today. Brooks Ghost 12.
First impressions are good. No more shin/side calf pain, just need to get the lace tension correct as I think I am wearing them a bit tight.
I'd be interested how you get on. In March I ordered a pair direct from Brooks so I could compare with the Glycerin. The Brooks were faster than the Glycerin, and less floaty, but gave me really bad plantar fasciitis. I went back and forth to confirm it was them, and yep, it was, so they got sent back in the end and I'm now on my second pair of Glycerins.First impressions are good. No more shin/side calf pain, just need to get the lace tension correct as I think I am wearing them a bit tight.
Braveheart300 said:
RobM77 said:
ajap1979 said:
Does anyone understand Strava Best Estimated Efforts? Mine are all massively out of kilter with the times I do on a regular basis. For instance my Best Estimated Effort for a half marathon is roughly 10 minutes longer than I would normally run it on a fairly easy day, and I'll do that at least four times a month. Just doesn't make much sense.
Yes, I'm not sure I understand them at all. For me they're coming up as the actual times that I've run, with no estimation at all (e.g. for gradient, stopping etc). For example, today I recorded my "best estimated 1/2 mile effort" during some 1k intervals. The Strava support page says that even if you stop just before the increment, it'll estimate your time, but that's not true for me, because I ran my fastest 10k in a race that was 9.95km long, but Strava has my estimated best effort as a lot slower than that (nearly 2 minutes!), during my first ever 10k months beforehand. The only way to acknowledge that fast 10k was to enter it manually with a link to the official timing page. I did a 5km effort the other day pacing for 17mins and got the 2nd best estimated effort 16.55 which would have been right enough!
Don't understand the half marathon though Ajap...as it would for sure pick up if you ran 21.1km unless your stopping your watch for whatever reason as it then adds that time your stopped for!
RobM77 said:
thebraketester said:
Got fitted for some trainers today. Brooks Ghost 12.
First impressions are good. No more shin/side calf pain, just need to get the lace tension correct as I think I am wearing them a bit tight.
I'd be interested how you get on. In March I ordered a pair direct from Brooks so I could compare with the Glycerin. The Brooks were faster than the Glycerin, and less floaty, but gave me really bad plantar fasciitis. I went back and forth to confirm it was them, and yep, it was, so they got sent back in the end and I'm now on my second pair of Glycerins.First impressions are good. No more shin/side calf pain, just need to get the lace tension correct as I think I am wearing them a bit tight.
Candellara said:
ASICS NOVABLAST!! - FIRST RUN
A gentle (4.42 pace) run of 12km
First impressions. Soft, very soft. Softer than Nike ZF3's but not as snappy so not bad for an everyday training shoe on slower runs.
The upper feels really good quality and very breathable. You certainly feel the airflow around the toe box.
If you've wide feet - there's a ton of room around the toes - probably too much for me (although i've fairly wide feet). ZF3's feel much more snug and tighter fitting. You really need to lock the Novablasts down really tight to stop your foot moving around in the shoe although as your distance goes up and your feet swell - they become more snug.
They are going to feel quite unstable for some as the stack height is quite high and the foam very soft and you do really notice this on uneven pavements.
Overall, they're ok. I won't rave about them as some reviews because i think the ZF3 is a better shoe for me personally but i need to get some different shoes into a rotation. I'm eagerly awaiting my new Pegasus 37's due mid July
Are they worth £120? They're well made, perfect if you've wide feet and want a really cushioned landing through the mid and forefoot. For me, the price point is too close to the ZF3's and i'd rather be wearing those at just £20 a pair more (if you can get the damned things as Nike never seem to have any stock these days!!!
Any further thoughts on the Novablasts?A gentle (4.42 pace) run of 12km
First impressions. Soft, very soft. Softer than Nike ZF3's but not as snappy so not bad for an everyday training shoe on slower runs.
The upper feels really good quality and very breathable. You certainly feel the airflow around the toe box.
If you've wide feet - there's a ton of room around the toes - probably too much for me (although i've fairly wide feet). ZF3's feel much more snug and tighter fitting. You really need to lock the Novablasts down really tight to stop your foot moving around in the shoe although as your distance goes up and your feet swell - they become more snug.
They are going to feel quite unstable for some as the stack height is quite high and the foam very soft and you do really notice this on uneven pavements.
Overall, they're ok. I won't rave about them as some reviews because i think the ZF3 is a better shoe for me personally but i need to get some different shoes into a rotation. I'm eagerly awaiting my new Pegasus 37's due mid July
Are they worth £120? They're well made, perfect if you've wide feet and want a really cushioned landing through the mid and forefoot. For me, the price point is too close to the ZF3's and i'd rather be wearing those at just £20 a pair more (if you can get the damned things as Nike never seem to have any stock these days!!!
ajap1979 said:
RobM77 said:
thebraketester said:
Got fitted for some trainers today. Brooks Ghost 12.
First impressions are good. No more shin/side calf pain, just need to get the lace tension correct as I think I am wearing them a bit tight.
I'd be interested how you get on. In March I ordered a pair direct from Brooks so I could compare with the Glycerin. The Brooks were faster than the Glycerin, and less floaty, but gave me really bad plantar fasciitis. I went back and forth to confirm it was them, and yep, it was, so they got sent back in the end and I'm now on my second pair of Glycerins.First impressions are good. No more shin/side calf pain, just need to get the lace tension correct as I think I am wearing them a bit tight.
RobM77 said:
thebraketester said:
Got fitted for some trainers today. Brooks Ghost 12.
First impressions are good. No more shin/side calf pain, just need to get the lace tension correct as I think I am wearing them a bit tight.
I'd be interested how you get on. In March I ordered a pair direct from Brooks so I could compare with the Glycerin. The Brooks were faster than the Glycerin, and less floaty, but gave me really bad plantar fasciitis. I went back and forth to confirm it was them, and yep, it was, so they got sent back in the end and I'm now on my second pair of Glycerins.First impressions are good. No more shin/side calf pain, just need to get the lace tension correct as I think I am wearing them a bit tight.
smn159 said:
ajap1979 said:
RobM77 said:
thebraketester said:
Got fitted for some trainers today. Brooks Ghost 12.
First impressions are good. No more shin/side calf pain, just need to get the lace tension correct as I think I am wearing them a bit tight.
I'd be interested how you get on. In March I ordered a pair direct from Brooks so I could compare with the Glycerin. The Brooks were faster than the Glycerin, and less floaty, but gave me really bad plantar fasciitis. I went back and forth to confirm it was them, and yep, it was, so they got sent back in the end and I'm now on my second pair of Glycerins.First impressions are good. No more shin/side calf pain, just need to get the lace tension correct as I think I am wearing them a bit tight.
RobM77 said:
I normally run in 10mm drop shoes and am a mid/forefoot striker, but yes, I did wonder if 12mm was just too much drop for me. I was doing easy runs in them, so there's a chance I was furtehr back on my feet when striking the ground, so experiencing the drop more prominently.
I'd say if you were doing 10m/miles or got very fatigued on a long run and ended up drifting toward a heel strike, you might end up noticing, but at your general paces you'll have a pretty high footlift, so the only feeling may be one of tipping forward a bit more as the heel taps the ground slightly earlier.2mm either way is OK for drop I think. 4mm and you should notice, 6mm+ and doing significant mileage and your calves would notice sharpish.
For what it's worth, I now run in a reasonable drop shoe, but I wear zero drop shoes day to day - Vivobarefoot shoes to work and Merrells for pottering about. The theory is this subtly stretches out my calves instead of living permanently on a slight heel like more work shoes. Not sure it's working to be honest, but I do love the feeling of barefoot shoes for mooching around.
ajap1979 said:
How many miles are people getting out of Zoom Flys? I’ve now put 300 on my ZF FlyKnits, but starting to feel like they’ve lost a bit of performance recently.
400 miles and they totally go off. I start getting pins and needles in my toes when they reach about 600km so know when it's time to order a new pair :-)Candellara said:
ajap1979 said:
Any further thoughts on the Novablasts?
Can't get on with them at all. Very wide and can't manage to get my feet locked down into them. Don't like them I was very close to buying the Saucony Endorphin Shifts, but the weight put me off, plus it's the Pros that I'm really interested in
Anyone know when Nike are looking to launch the Tempos?
MattS5 said:
lufbramatt said:
Strava has just told me I have done 400 miles on my Asics GT2000s so am thinking about replacing them. I've worn Asics shoes for years as they seem to fit me well. but I fancy trying something different as the Asics seem quite firm and often I feel like my feet and ankles have taken a battering the day after a longer run.
Just need a general purpose running shoe, to suit runs up to half marathon distance, for road and mild trail use (think gravel paths rather than muddy off road stuff), similar fit to Asics. I mildly over pronate so some stability features would be good. Any suggestions? The current GT2000-8 gets good reviews but it seems the tech has moved on somewhat in other brands.
I used to be a GT1000 man, but moved up to the Kayanos (21, 22, 23, 24, and now 25 or 26 version) and find them a great all rounder, especailly soaking my longer weekend runs, which are generally anything between 13 and 18 miles.Just need a general purpose running shoe, to suit runs up to half marathon distance, for road and mild trail use (think gravel paths rather than muddy off road stuff), similar fit to Asics. I mildly over pronate so some stability features would be good. Any suggestions? The current GT2000-8 gets good reviews but it seems the tech has moved on somewhat in other brands.
I also over pronate.
Had a bit of a breakthrough run on Tuesday. I started running again on March 23rd this year (lockdown day!) after a 7 month break due to a hamstring injury, so was avoiding running to concentrate on cycling events. When they all got cancelled I figured I had nothing to lose by trying to run again and have been alternating running and cycling days, roughly 15 miles running a week. Aim for the end of the year was a sub 40 min 10k. Managed a 38:35! super happy considering last September I had pretty much given up on running after a few false starts and recurring injuries. Shame there's no races on!
Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff