Delight

Everybody calm down!

2011-05-03T09:34:00.000-04:00

Democracy is alive and well in Canada. Despite what much of what my Facebook and Twitter feed seems to have to say, Canada has not gone off the deep end, we are not entering the dark ages, and our country has not become USA Part Deux.

What's that you say? "John, you just wrote a big long post about why you voted NDP. Surely, you must be devastated at the Conservative majority government!" The answer is: no, not really. Yes, there are some things I'm concerned about, which I will get to, but the main thing I think people need to get is that there are no real extremes in Canadian politics. Harper is really just a boring economist from Calgary. He's a bit creepy, for sure. But he's no devil. To be fair, all of the leaders are kind of creepy. Even Elizabeth May. She creeps me out, man. Good for her for winning a seat finally.

The other thing that needs to be remembered is that just because you don't agree with someone, does not make them wrong or evil. Democracy has not been crushed because there a bunch of people in Ontario who are more concerned about their mortgage payments than about how long a drug dealer has to stay in prison, or whether a poor aboriginal girl can get an abortion. Stephen Heighton was right when he called these people "gutless," but the point of democracy is that those people have a right to make that choice. A little ironic for a leftist crowd to be decrying their choice, I'd say.

Sure, there is plenty wrong with our system, and I bet a lot of those people would be happy to have another set of voting options. The Liberal party used to be that option, but they've screwed the pooch fairly royally since Jean Chrétien left. I know how they can fix it though. Two words: Justin Trudeau. I don't know much about the guy. I've heard he's a douche. I don't know. I'll get to know him in the next four years, as he's my MP. What the Liberals need to do is choose him as their leader, which they can do with confidence now. They have at least four years to the next election, and they are down to the third party in the House. Plenty of room for JT to learn the ropes. Like it or not, politics is about likability, and he is a cutie. The so-called soccer moms will love this guy. The other advantage of having a Trudeau at the helm, other than the history factor, is that the Liberals tend to do well with a francophone Quebecer as their leader. Yes, there are plenty who despise the Trudeau name, but for sure it will be enough to bring back this province, which is key for the Liberals to come back.

The NDP are the official opposition and they are plenty green. Lots of new faces are ok though. Politicians have to get their start somewhere, and, but for the unfortunate Vegas-vacationing lady, this would probably be seen as a really good thing for Jack's crew. I voted for them this time (though it didn't matter because Trudeau won in my riding), but I will be watching to see if they can show in opposition the chops to maintain or move up to government status. I doubt that will happen, but hey, until I wrote my last blog, no one thought the NDP would finish second. I'm pretty sure most of Quebec read my blog and made their decision based on that...right? Right!

There are some good things about these election results. The first is stability. No more elections until 2015. The second is that the NDP will be the official opposition, which means that family and social issues will get plenty of airing. The Conservatives can pretty much do as they please, but they will have to deal with the NDP's bleating over it. Here's hoping the bleating is effective and not annoying. Another good thing: Elizabeth May got elected. I know I said she was creepy, but hey, good for her. Again, not much power to make laws, but at least she will be a voice with a platform now, instead of being on the outside looking in. One hopes that the other parties take a cue from the Greens and make the environment more of a priority. Yeah, right.

Ok, trying to stay positive, another good thing is the the Bloc are gone. Don't get me wrong, Gilles is dreamy, but he was getting old. Actually, I am quite pleased about this. Quebec has decided, it seems, that they want to participate in Canada, rather than try to break it apart. Of course there will still be idiots who will never be happy unless they get their own country. They will now be on the outside looking in. I hope the NDP will stand up for the right things in Quebec, and keep Quebecers happy on that front. By the right things, I mean, I hope that the MPs of constituencies in this province do what they can for their constituents, just like any MPs in any other province would. I don't believe Quebec needs or deserves any special treatment, but they deserve representation in Parliament. And now they have it.

Fourth good thing, and this one will surprise you. I'm quite involved in amateur sport and it's always nice when government steps up and supports health and active lifestyles. Well, based on this article from Andrew Maloney at TNFNorth, a track and field website, the Conservatives seem to at least have an Arts and Culture strategy now, which includes sport. It didn't exist before. The tax credit they created will be increased (but only when, if ever, the budget is balanced). Not sure how this will play out, but at least it is something. Ok, I'm really grasping at straws for good things now...

Bad things: I guess there are a lot of them. But do people honestly think Harper will re-open the abortion debate? He'll get killed on that. Canadians don't want to talk about that anymore. It's old news. As for gay marriage, again, Canadians are on-board, mostly. Harper is a politician, and even with a majority, he won't rock the boat. The social issues are safe.

My big concern, as I have said elsewhere, is with the Conservative Party's treatment of the Criminal Code, specifically mandatory minimums and time-served rules. If I learned anything from the reading I did in law school (cue cries of liberal bias in law school, blah blah blah), it's that crime is not caused by evil people. It is caused by putting people in bad circumstances. I suppose that sounds like an "it's society's fault" defence of all serial killers and rapists. It's not. What does need to be looked at though, in the often knee-jerk discussion of "crime and punishment" is that the majority of crimes are related to either substance abuse or mental illness. Yes, there are people out there who are just evil. They are the exception, not the rule. Most people break the law because they can't help it: they steal or assault someone to get drugs or money for drugs or because they are high on drugs. These are not excuses. If you do the crime, you should do the time, BUT. It is completely foolish to then release these people back into the world thinking that a few months, or even a few years, in jail is going to prevent them from committing the crime again. What will keep Canadians safe is a remodel of the justice system that takes these issues into account. Drug courts (and I recognize that the link is to the Government of Canada--notice that the backgrounder was published in 2005, however) and mental health courts are the way to go. There needs to be collaboration between the Federal and Provincial governments on these initiatives. It's a complicated process, but it needs to be. Building bigger prisons and extending the stays of small-time criminals just makes small-time criminals into career criminals.

So anyway, if you are going to worry about something, worry about that, rather than whether or not the CBC will continue to be able to air marginal programming. I say that with the utmost respect for all the arts and culture we get from the public broadcaster. I'm mostly just kidding, really. But here's the thing with arts and culture: artists won't be kept down. Writers will write, and painters will paint. The internet will allow their projects to be disseminated across Canada and across the world. I'm not worried for the artists for a second. I'm worried for drug addicts and poor people though.

That's my little recap. NDP: I'm watching, you better do good. Liberals: start the education of Justin Trudeau. I'll check back in four years.

I voted early

2011-04-26T10:15:00.000-04:00

I voted yesterday. We had a viewing of our condo so we had to get out for a bit, so we figured we’d just get it done. In my case, I knew who I was voting for, and, in any case, it’s not likely to make a large difference under the current electoral system. I voted for the NDP candidate in my riding of Papineau. The likely winner will be Justin Trudeau, running for the Liberal party. He was actually at the polling station when we were there. That’s cool, but this time, you did not have my vote Justin.

Some people feel that your voting preferences are private and should remain so. I’m not sure if that is out of some misguided sense of propriety (or maybe asking the question leads to family feuding!), or if it is out of concern for protecting the democratic process: secret ballot and all that. Either way, I don’t have a problem if people know who I vote for. Of course, going public with your choice is kind of a backhanded way of asking people who they voted for, because if they get all riled up, you know they do not agree with your choice, but if they don’t have much to say, it might be because they voted for that person/party, too.

In any case, I hope no one is too mortified that I voted for the NDP. I know some people think Jack and Olivia are creepy, but let’s be honest: that mustache is just like my dad’s, so don’t you go dissing it! Seriously though, I thought that I could make a contribution to the electoral discussion by explaining why I did vote the way I did. There is at least one good reason not to vote NDP, especially in my riding, which is that they won’t win, so my vote probably won’t “count” anyway. I could go on a rant about the way the system works, but I’ll leave that for another time. This is probably true: Trudeau is a big favourite. I will not mind if he is my MP. That said, with at least one poll over the weekend showing that the NDP could form the official opposition with 100 seats (38 more than the Liberals were projected for), and with that a chance to form a coalition government with what would be a Liberal party both embarrassed and chastened by the voters. This is pretty shocking news, and it’s not clear that it will last. But still, the possibility that the NDP could be a player, for real, is another good reason to vote for them if, like many, you agree with their stance, but don’t traditionally mark the box for them because they are not in the running.

The question to ask at election time is what is government’s purpose, in Canada? I would summarize the role of the federal government in one word: service. First though, I’d like to dispell a myth: it’s not the economy, stupid. While there may be a connection between government policy and the performance of the Canadian economy, there are other factors that weigh far more heavily, and over which citizens have varying degrees of control. The first example is the American economy. In many cases, we are linked, and what’s good for the elephant is good for the mouse. In some cases, our government’s policies have protected us from American influence. The best example of that is the banking industry, which, since it is much more regulated here, prevented the housing crash we saw in the US. Of course, all the political parties in Canada are on the same page on that issue, so it doesn’t really matter who you vote for: our banks will stay regulated. Interest rates and the like are determined by public servants, not elected members. Yes, tax rates influence spending which influences the economy, however whether people spend or save their extra money depends on more than how much extra they have. How “the market” responds to government policy is equally complicated. There is no direct relationship between a government decision and market trends. The market is influenced in combination with other factors that both determine and are determined by government policy.

All this is not to say that the economy is not important. What it is to say is that the economy, like most other issues, is complex and government’s influence on it is not the be all and end all, nor is it the government’s primary purpose. So we should, when voting, downplay the importance of the economy in our selection. You might say, well, this is a clear example of an NDP voter who is oblivious about the economy. If anyone could control the economy, or even just knew how the economy worked, they would be filthy rich. Some are. They probably don’t vote: they buy campaigns or live on a tropical island. Most Canadians are not. Check out “Fooled by Randomness” by Nassim Nicholas Taleb. All that you think you know, you don’t.

The Canadian government is a multi-billion dollar organization. There is no disputing that. They are playing with our money, so they should do it right. That’s true. But there is a difference between the government claiming fiscal responsibility for the economy as a whole, and claiming to have managed the treasury well. As far as I’m concerned, managing taxpayer dollars well means spending it on services for the tax payers. That’s it. I don’t mind a deficit budget because what that deficit is buying me is better services, in theory. In any case, the NDP budget projects a surplus, but there have been questions about that recently. I admit I’m looking at the budget and I’m wondering about a few costs, but what I like about it is that it is focused on real people and services for them.

It’s true that the Liberals and Conservatives both have nice things to say as well. The reality is that election promises rarely survive the harsh glare of the light of power. They often burn like a fly under a magnifying glass. But at least the NDP is starting from the right perspective. The Conservatives have done some pretty bad things to the Criminal Code with respect to sentencing. They’ve done some other things, too (the list is long), that, for a party that considers itself to be small-government focused, and with a strong moral compass, seem just incomprehensible. I know there are people out there focused on some moral issues that feel like the Conservatives carry their flag. I guess the question you want to ask is are the Conservatives really helping people? I think the answer is no. As for the Liberals, yeah, they are ok. They will do what they always do. Life will go on. We will lack doctors and nurses in Canada, we will continue to have health care but service will be poor. Right now seperatists seem to be waning. The Liberals will probably antagonize them. How do these things help the country? They don’t. They just perpetuate the same old same old. They will probably try to rob the treasury again.

What it comes down to is that I don’t trust the other parties. I don’t trust that they are not career politicians. Sure, Jack is a career politician, too. But his career has been spent fighting for the little guy. What does he have to gain, once in power? What is the NDP’s dark secret that they will spring on us once elected? There isn’t one. He is not beholden to corporate interests. This is important because corporate interests are not interested in regular people. Some say the NDP is a union front. Perhaps. But what are the unions after? Protecting working class jobs. I guess it’s just a value judgement on my part, but working class jobs seem more important to me and more in need of protection than corporate board room jobs. Of course the two are connected. But as a person, as a human being, who do I identify with? Who do I trust with my (at this point meager) tax dollars? Who would I want to have a drink with? Who do I think will do a better job of running the country? Jack Layton and the NDP.

The best thing about this election is that everyone gets a vote: just like opinions and assholes! Feel free to disagree or shit on my blog post. I thought of this as I waited in the polling station that had no armed guards, and welcomed men and women of all religions, races and cultures. Canada: it's all right.

ps when this gets posted to Facebook, you'll have to click back to http://www.delightinallthings.blogspot.com/ to see the links (to the poll, the book, the NDP platform, Shit Harper did and the Sponsorship Scandal).

One door closes and another one opens...

2011-02-25T12:26:00.000-05:00

Or so they say.

I failed the Quebec Bar exam, twice, which is actually not all that uncommon, but no less annoying. In order to write it again, I'll have to take the full prep course (4 months) and the regular course (4 more months) which is both expensive and time consuming. I could also write the Ontario bar, which is pretty hard to fail, from what I'm told, and try to article through LSUC. I'm pretty turned off a law career right now, to be honest. I'm motivated in other areas of my life, and I've got enough income to keep on doing what I'm doing. It's a pretty big disappointment, but as I may have intimated in an earlier post, there was only a pretty narrow sliver of the law that I was interested in pursuing. So we'll see.

I may write a longer post later about exactly the kind of torture the Quebec Bar program is, but it would feel like sour grapes. It's pretty ridiculously bad, and widely acknowledged as such, but hey, while lots of people fail, lots of people do pass, too, so some of the fault (really most of it) must be on me. I'm not sure I even want to go look at my exam, for 1) I don't want to go back there and 2) the chances of it changing are slim to none.

The way I feel now, though, can best be described by paraphrasing John Lennon. Enjoy.

Law is a concept,
By which we can measure,
Our pain,
I'll say it again,
Law is a concept,
By which we can measure,
Our pain,
I don't believe in Westlaw,
I don't believe in canlii,
I don't believe in the code,
I don't believe in procedure,
I don't believe in Hypothecs,
I don't believe in Jutras,
I don't believe in Kasirer,
I don't believe in Beverley,
I don't believe in Hart,
I don't believe in Fuller,
I don't believe in Beaudoin,
I don't believe in Wilson-Lafleur,
I don't believe in Healey,
I don't believe in Greenspan,
I don't believe in the barreau,
I just believe in me,
Mimi and me,
And that's reality.
The dream is over,
What can I say?
The dream is over,
Yesterday,
I was dreamweaver,
But now I'm reborn,
I was the walrus,
But now I'm John,
And so dear friends,
You just have to carry on,
The dream is over.

For those who can't see the embed, here is the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Wv3ic6OOXns

You may ask yourself, well, how did I get here?

2011-01-20T09:28:00.000-05:00

I was bored.

If I think about it honestly, I must admit to myself that I applied to law school because I was bored with teaching, and I was looking for something to fill my days. I suppose I should also admit that I had been spurned by a woman (who was probably just out for social climbing anyway) and maybe that pushed me towards wanting to try a more "glamourous" career. I also tell the story of how I got a ticket for not having a fare card on the AMT to Blainville, where I was going to talk to a grade school class about running. I was honestly mistaken, and I went to court and pleaded so with the judge and I won. I had also gone through a divorce (not the same woman, haha), and it was remarkably easy from a legal point of view (because we had no possessions or children to divide, I'm sure). I went home for a high school reunion, and everyone was a lawyer. So all signs were pointing to the law. But in retrospect, it wasn't a very informed decision; it was much more of a whim, and the base of it was I was bored.

After four years of living in the legal world, I have to say that it was worth it. Even if I don't pass this exam, it will have been worth it. McGill is, even if I can't say the best (because who knows how they measure those things), at the very least one of the best law schools in Canada, and perhaps the world. It is also the cheapest, thanks to Quebec resident tuition. So while going to law school on a whim might be a foolish and perhaps even financially disastrous idea elsewhere, in my situation it was not so bad.

It was worth it because one of my "goals" going into law school was to learn more about how the world works. A friend of mine (one of the many SMC alum who became a lawyer...interestingly he recently gave up his post at a bay street firm after only 4 years I think...hmm...) described the law as the rules behind the world. Or something like that. And I think if you are living in the world, playing by the rules, or at least knowing them, is pretty important. On that goal, I have to say, mission accomplished.

But I am not sure I had too many other goals. Making money was never a goal, at least, not money for the sake of it. It's a pretty easy equation, really: you can make high-five, low-six figures, but you spend all your time in the office. I'm not someone who likes to spend time in the office. I never had my eye on a particular job, or particular area of law, until very recently. Anyone who does is naive and misinformed, anyway (or very very well-informed, I suppose). There's a pretty big disconnect between each of the steps required to become a lawyer. The LSAT is not really comparable to law school exams. Law school, and it's exams, are not really comparable to the vast majority of legal work. That's because law school is based on appeals cases, which are generally what makes the law. Most lawyers work either on contracts or on first-instance cases, which are all about facts. There aren't too many facts in law school. The jump to bar school is similar to the jump from law school to real cases. The disconnect in bar school, in my opinion, is that we are asked to solve problems in only one way. That's a big difference from the real world. Not a leap for anyone who has dealt with bureaucracy in Quebec (or anywhere, I suppose), but for the people who run l'école du barreau, there is only one way. It doesn't bother them that many lawyers in Quebec think they are out to lunch. One lawyer said to me, and I quote "le barreau c'est notre pire ennemi." Ouch. But there are enough stick-in-the-muds to keep up the joke.

As I said, I do think I have an idea of what I would like to do as a lawyer. It's pretty specific. I would be happy with a job as a criminal prosecutor, probably someone who specifies in cases involving section 672 and following of the Criminal Code. You can look that up. ;) Apparently the DPCP (Crown Prosecutor's office in Montreal) think I'm at least worth a look: I have an interview with them next week. So clearly I have been doing something right.

If I don't get that job (and it's a very competitive process, the bar exam is just one issue. I may not get it even if I pass), there are many other avenues. The part-time teachers at Concordia got a nice settlement and a raise, so teaching there is actually a reasonable financial possibility. There aren't too many well-paid distance running coaches in Canada, but with the time I would have as a teacher (one course=5 hrs a week, tops) I could definitely dedicate the time required to the athletes to bring them to the top level (the coach's renown and reward just follows the athlete's performance...but that's a whole other post). I am in the general provincial government employment pool, so if I wanted a boring desk job that pays reasonably well, I could probably get one there. I'd be disappointed at not being a criminal prosecutor, yes, but I would not be disappointed at not being a lawyer, generally. Because I never really set out to be one. Seems odd, but looking back, that's the case.

That's what happens when you don't set clear goals: if you don't know where you are going, how are you going to get there?

Was does it mean when you fail, big time?

2011-01-19T16:16:00.000-05:00

Anyone who knows me knows I don't like to lose. I'm a very competitive person. Probably too competitive. I do and say a lot of things just for the sake of competing. I do it because I like a challenge and I think it makes me better. I can see how that might rub people the wrong way, but that's how I am. While I don't like to lose, I'm not a sore loser. Heck, I'm a Toronto Maple Leafs fan, so I've had my share of inconsolable losses. I like to think I take losing in the true spirit of competition: I learn a lesson and keep it for next time.

So how do I react to getting absolutely destroyed by the Quebec bar exam? I have to say I'm quite angry about it. This may come across as sour grapes, or sore losing, but I am angry not because I feel like I've failed, but because I feel like the game is rigged. I suppose that's a pretty serious thing to say, especially without proof. I don't have proof, that's for sure. I don't think that someone looked at my name, found me on the "do not pass" list, and graded my exam accordingly. No, I think that the answers I gave most likely did not correspond to the objective answer key provided by the Barreau. So how is that rigged? Well, I think that my answers, technically wrong though they may be, do not indicate my inability to practice law. Going by my results, you would think I am immoral, a poor writer, and completely ignorant of the law. I can confidently state this is not the case. As a friend who went through the same thing told me, I am in very good company. That's why I'm mad: I don't like losing, and I have not been able to figure out how to win this particular game.

I am happy to take responsibility for my actions. If I did not study enough, I could acknowledge it. Maybe I did not study enough, I don't know. I worked as hard as I ever have at anything academic. My French is good enough to understand all the legal texts, and the exams are all available in English anyway. I now have three weeks to get back on the horse, start studying again, and try a second time to pass this exam. I've scheduled several hours a day, for the various examinable topics (business law, prior claims, criminal law, law of persons, civil responsibility, civil evidence and professional responsibility). I'm studying in 15min bursts, with a 2min scheduled break every quarter hour. My high school principle, the venerable Fr. Mohan, gave me this advice. He said that 15min of attention was all the brain can handle without a break. So instead of fighting it, fading away, taking longer breaks, staring off into unproductive space, I'm going with it. Two days in, it is working well.

I don't know if this will help me pass. I don't know if I want to pass. That may sound strange, given the tone of angst of this post, but it's true. Perhaps if I were to fail again, I would be released from this legal world. I do feel a bit bound by it. I will post on that thought tomorrow, however. For now, and for the next three weeks, I'll hunker down and do my best to play the game to win. I've decided to write out my thoughts as a way of clearing out my prefrontal cortex. No, really. Check it out.

New Blog about Montreal Museums

2010-12-30T22:02:00.001-05:00

Miriam and I are writing a blog together about Montreal Museums.

Check it out: http://montrealmuseums.blogspot.com

Cross country season in review

2010-11-28T16:37:00.003-05:00

We started the season with high hopes, and I think we achieved some good things. As a training group, we qualified six people to the provincial team for xc nationals. The university teams both had their best seasons ever, at both the provincial and national level.

The Concordia men were in a tough battle between the top four Quebec schools, and we ended up in 3rd place, just behind Laval, and just ahead of McGill. While it's nice to beat our cross-town rivals, we were really aiming much higher than that. We lost out on second place to Laval on a big finishing kick by their 5th man--an 800m runner who was basically a depth guy for them in cross. Our depth guys were a skiier and a marathoner, and with 200m to go, it showed. I'm not blaming our guys one bit, or taking anything away from Mathieu Raymond, who probably had the best cross season of his career at Laval. He was strong at CIS for them, too. What is frustrating is that we don't even have a chance to recruit depth guys like that for our cross country team, because we don't have a track program. But that's another post... Stephane Colle had a good race and was able to take home the silver medal. Team Captain Ryan Noel-Hodge was very aggressive and tried to break the pack and run away with the win, but this change in strategy proved unsuccessful, as he faded to third, only to be caught at the line and relegated to fourth by McGill's top runner.

The Concordia women were short-handed at the QSSF (RSEQ now, new name for the league, very important for branding, you know), with our lead runner, Dominique Roy, not quite ready to return to competition. The ladies battled, though, and Coralina Tse was able to come away with a 4th place finish and was the second-fastest rookie in the conference. Not too shabby. Gabrielle Thompson ran extremely well coming off injury and recorded a personal best in the 5k of 20:02. She is also a rookie. The ladies finished 4th out of 5 as a team.

At CIS, it was the men's turn to be short-handed, as Eliot MacKinnon was unavailable to race. As a result, the team score was not as it was hoped, but the Stingers still managed their best every CIS showing, on the strength of Colle's 23rd place finish. Both he and Noel-Hodge were up in all-Canadian (top 14) territory early, but it was probably too much for both of them, as they faded in the later half of the race. A lack of big-race experience is probably to blame there.

The women, on the other-hand, welcomed Roy back to the fold, and she responded by running a very smart race, moving up from the mid-50s to finish in 33rd place, two spots behind her teammate, the always exuberant rookie Coralina Tse. Cora and Dom were the second and third Quebec conference runners across the line at CIS. Cora's race mirrored that of the top men, as she started in the top 10, and gradually moved back in the pack. All this despite the pre-race plan to be patient. It won't be long, however, before Tse is in the top ten to stay. The team score improved dramatically, as Thompson was solid again, as were Elizabeth Mokrusa and team captain Kelly Hewitt. The Stingers managed to beat the host team from Sherbrooke, the first time that has happened in our program's short history. The women beat Laval in 2007. With all the women back next year, they have vowed to move much further up the table.

At the ASGI Canadian Cross Country Championships in Guelph, Steph, Ryan and Coralina from Concordia were joined by training partners Brenna Walsh, Alizee Brien, Sebastien Monette, and Steve McElligot. Stephane ran a PB of 31:55 on the snow-covered course to finish 26th. Ryan ran a much smarter race and while he may have been a bit further back than he would have hoped, he moved up in the pack instead of back, and at 42nd, he beat some guys that are no slouches, in his first year of senior xc competition. Coralina suffered from a cold, more than from the cold, and while she started well, she could not overcome her illness, and dropped to 64th in the junior women's race. Brenna Walsh ran the senior women's course 4min faster than when she last ran it in 2008.

The men's team from Fleur-de-lys (Stephane, Ryan and Steve, as well as myself, unfortunately for the squad) were 8th. Now, only 8 teams scored in the senior men's division, but there were over 30 different clubs represented, so I think it says something that we managed a full squad. This is something we are going to be focusing on in the future, as this is, next to track nationals, the most important race on the domestic calendar.

All in all, a good fall season. Next up, some rest, some strength building, some volume, and some indoor track work. We are hoping to put together a really great training group here in Montreal, drawing from a couple different clubs. The athletes have asked that the coaches get together and plan some common workouts, as they are frustrated (and with good reason) with having three or four small (or individual) groups on the track, when everyone is really trying to get to the same place. We can be stronger together. I am behind them 100%, and I'm looking forward to an exciting 2011 for our group.

Why I hate AMERICAN football.

2010-09-20T13:54:00.004-04:00

Football is bad for you. It's bad for me. It's bad for everyone. It should be ignored and left to rot and die. It won't, but that's my opinion of it. I would be happy to hear from anyone why it is not so. But first, here are the reasons why I hate football.

Simply put, football is racist, sexist, and not a very entertaining game. Despite this it remains popular, mostly because there is a lot of money to be made on it, and so, there is a lot of money spent promoting it, which leads people to think it is interesting, important and cool, when in fact, it is not. Not only is this the case with American football, and American college football, but with the Canadian game as well. The only difference is that Canadian football matters even less, yet is afflicted with an inferiority complex (next to its American brothers) that leads the institution to be even more annoying. Finally, of course, is the arrogance of this American corruption of the British sport of rugby in taking the name of the most popular sport on the planet, that is football, known to North Americans as soccer, of course.

Football is racist. Think about it. A bunch of overweight black guys from mostly poor neighbourhoods get recruited by colleges to protect the lone, skinny white kid who is the star. They pay these kids with a piss-poor education, and the false hope of making the NFL. Let's say they do (if they don't, they are left to go back to their poor lives, with nothing to show for it but a useless degree and quite possibly a drug habit, or the effects of the drugs they were forced to use during their college careers). So now they are again in the position of protecting the white man, getting paid at least, but certainly pumped full of steroids.

Now, black people don't need me to fight their battles for them, but even I can see that the game of football is pure exploitation of the poor black population of the United States. All the points are scored by white guys: the QB and the kicker. Yeah, there are sometimes black quarterbacks, but how is it that this is an anomaly? Let's look at hockey. Not too many black dudes playing hockey, but at least the reasons there are clear: it's an expensive game and many black families are too poor to play it. Or, in Northern Europe and Western Canada, the heartland of hockey players, there just aren't as many black people in the population . But tons of black people play football. Why are most quarterbacks still white? It's because it is a position of privilege and the sport's racist culture is resistant to letting blacks play QB.

Football is sexist, too. I'm sure that I would not be the first to suggest that cheerleaders are pure and simple sex-objects. The whole thing is a painfully obvious mating ritual. And that's ok. Or at least it would be if everyone one involved weren't so oblivious to the whole thing. Get some self-awareness. Perhaps cheerleaders can be self-actualizing their sexuality. I doubt it. Let's compare to hockey again. Women actually play hockey. Well. I know there are women's football leagues, but they are few and far between, and certainly not as accepted by the football culture (or regular culture) as women's hockey is. Women's hockey has a ways to go, too, for sure, but it is miles ahead of football.

The game itself is ridiculous. I read recently that in a 3.5 to 4 hour game, there is only about 11 min of actual game-play. The rest is waiting, referees deciding, moving chains, etc. Actually I think the clock stops when the chains move, but anyway...what is going on for 3 hours? Nothing. Some would say strategy. I would say you are flattering your game. Even if it is strategy, again, what we have is a chubby white man mastermind, playing war with his mostly-black soldiers. If this is entertaining, I'm disappointed in our culture.

Even the notion that football builds character through discipline and team concept is far mislaid. The idea that the sum of parts can be more than the whole is not unique to football, and in fact, a superior individual (usually the quarterback) can overcome a mediocre team more often than not. Skill and talent wins games of any kind more than any other characteristic. The "team concept" in football is mostly myth.

All of these things are frustrating to me and make me hate football. But, taken alone, they would only be enough for me to ignore it, or snobbishly criticize it from afar. Unfortunately, football's reach is longer than that. Because of the elephant that is American football (from the NCAA to the NFL), our Canadian university sport system has been hideously disfigured. We could have a lovely system, where amateur sports of all kinds could flourish, and the long-term development of young athletes would be best served by going through the university system. Instead, because of the need to "compete" (and no one in amateur sport really understands this word: it's latin origin means to strive together--not against each other) with the Americans, we have eligibility limits, and a host of other restrictive rules that prevent Canadian student-athletes from achieving their full potential. There is no reason to limit participation to 5 years. Only because of football's self-importance (i.e. coaches would not be able to help themselves) do we have this rule. Sports with high academic averages feature student-athletes who are at school first, and at play second. But not football. Or less so.

Then there are the drugs. CIS Football has by far the highest incidence of positive drug testing. Only 5 other sports (out of 12 possible CIS sports) have any positive tests at all. What is wrong with football? Here are the stats:

Football 45

Ice Hockey 4

Basketball 4

Field Hockey 1

Soccer 1

Volleyball 1

By gender is is 54 to 2 for the men, by the way. One woman is field hockey (there is no men's field hockey). I don't know what the other would be.

The other problem is that football programs drain funding from athletics departments so that other sports can not thrive. Of course I come to this from the perspective of a university cross country coach, and perhaps we are known (as are all the individual sports) for being confrontational with the big sports of football, hockey and basketball, likely for reasons of jealousy. So if you want to discount my opinions on that count, go ahead. But it doesn't change the logic. I don't suggest that other sports are inherently more valuable than football. It's just that football costs way more. Look at the costs and look at the revenues. Some people will say (and this may be true in some places) that all the sponsorship dollars that come in are attributable mostly to football. So even if there are great costs, without the revenue that football brings in, the rest of the department would be in the red. I have yet to be shown the numbers. Probably because if football breaks even it is because of alumni donations and private contributions. Yes, they have strong alumni networks, but that comes from being propped up and supported 100% throughout the years. If individual sports got the full support football gets, alumni might be more inclined to give. Most cross country alum I talk to are only inclined to give because they know how poorly their sport is treated relative to the big three. They don't give out of a sense of loyalty to a school or a crest. Maybe runners are individualist like that, I don't know. In any case, I'd still like to see the numbers. And I would count among football revenues the beer money our team made a couple of weeks ago. Sure, without football, we would lose that, but we would also have the benefit of a chunk of a larger budget, wouldn't we? Maybe.

So this is why I am annoyed at football. It's racist, sexist, boring and it takes away from my sport (and plenty of other good sports, too). I would not suggest that the players themselves, especially in Canadian university football, are bad people. No, they are just being used by a corrupt system. The coaches are more likely complicit, especially when you hear some of the things some of them have to say about recruiting. University sport is sport for students, not the personal sporting fiefdom of the coaching staff. I say this generally, as again, when you speak to individuals, sometimes they are ok dudes. But it seems like they just don't know any better. Or they just want to play their game.

Playing a game is great. I like most forms of competition. That's why I can bear watching football twice a year: the Grey Cup and the Super Bowl. But I probably won't anymore. If I do, it will be for the reasons I always do: to hang out with friends and do something together. So I guess if that's why you watch football, (or any sport, really), hey, why not? But maybe you can find something better to do together than support the racist, sexist, destructive institution known as American football.

Yes this rant is elitist and condescending. I am ok with that. I am better than football, and football is beneath me. (unless some linemen read this and come to crush me, but they would only be proving my point...ow!) If you can make a logical, coherent argument as to why football is not any of these things I've suggested, please do. I bet you can't.

Stinger's First Race!

2010-09-18T18:11:00.003-04:00

Here are my thoughts and results from the race today. Also, who made THE CUT!

I think everyone ran well, everyone learned something, and everyone feels like they have more to give. That's exactly what we were looking for. Here are the results, with a few notes. Eventually the full results will be on www.mcgilltrack.com. Note that last year's women's course was cut short, so this year's version is a bit longer.

A few of us old men ran under the banner of Almost Retired. We managed to beat all the CEGEPs but one, and we beat UQTR out of the universities, so that's not bad. I take responsibility for us not being a bit higher, or at least not beating the CEGEP, as I was a good 20 spots back of where I should have been, based on my fitness before I got this cold...

Team Scores:
Men 3rd with 93 points. 23 points behind Laval (16 points back if you just count Q teams). Beatable.

Women 7th with 166 points. 4 points behind Sherbrooke. I suspect that if we swap in Dom, Kelly, Megan and Amanda, we can make up a good 80 points. So likely we are around the 94 point Laval team. McGill with 53 is impressive, but not unbeatable.

Women 4.2k
13 Coralina Tse 15:41 (3:44/k) (6sec faster than last year)
19 Brenna Walsh 15:47 (3:45/k) (ran as Fleur-de-Lys)
33 Gabrielle Thompson 16:30 (3:55/k)
34 Elizabeth Mokrusa 16:33 (3:56/k) (46 sec faster than last year)
39 Megan Anderson 16:37 (3:57/k) (ran as unattached)
75 Lucianna Dykstra 18:06 (4:18/k)
THE CUT
104 Jade Ostiguy-Robillard 19:18 (4:35/k)
135 Sarah De Montigny 20:26 (4:52/k)
161 Rasna Mantha 21:23 (5:05/k)
183 Samentha Govindarajan 23:46 (5:39/k)

Men 6.3k
4 Ryan Noel-Hodge 19:44 (3:08/k) (16sec faster than last year, tempoed
two laps, past 15 guys on the last lap)
5 Steve McElligot 19:46 (3:08/k) Almost Retired
9 Stephane Colle 20:06 (3:11/k) (tempoed two laps, only one workout under his belt so far)
26 Sofiane Guend 21:04 (3:20/k) (20sec slower than last year)
30 Eliot McKinnon 21:12 (3:21/k)
37 James Coulton 21:24 (3:23/k) (52 sec faster than last year)
54 Ken Douglas 21:56 (3:28/k) Almost Retired
63 Jean Marc Laforest 22:19 (3:32/k) (1:13 faster than last year)
64 Glen Cowan 22:21 (3:32/k) Almost Retired
68 John Lofranco 22:26 (3:33/k) Almost (very likely) Retired
81 Vincent Morasse 22:59 (3:39/k) (2:11 faster than last year) Wow.
83 Peter Iacino 23:03 (3:40/k)
85 Didier Morelli 23:06 (3:40/k)
97 Clifford Reid 23:29 (3:43/k)
THE CUT
130 Colin Riendeau 24:54 (3:57/k) (15 sec faster than last year)
145 Dan Plouffe 25:19 (4:01/k) Concordia Alum
161 Charles-Smith Metellus 26:06 (4:08/k)
162 Jordon Choo 26:18 (4:10/k)
188 Francisco Checa 28:11 (4:28/k)

Stingers' XC fall preview: women

2010-08-27T10:12:00.002-04:00

For the women's preview, I've decided to go with the Olympic champion Canadian women's hockey team as a comparable, with a few local names thrown in from the Montreal Stars.

Dominque Roy: 4:30 1500, sub-18 5k, Dom is easily the fastest woman to lace them up for the Stingers. It is early in our history, but I'm going to throw down the H-bomb on this one: Haley Wickenheiser.

Liz Mokrusa: dropped about 30min off her marathon time (3:15), 17min on her half marathon time (1:27) and about 2 on her 5k (18:52) since last September. She will probably keep getting faster, too, as she just does all the work required, day-in, day-out. She reminds me of Montreal Stars' captain (and Stinger strength-training coach) Lisa-Marie Breton-Lebreux.

Coralina Tse: probably the top CEGEP recruit this year, Coralina ran 19:10 at provincials last year for St. Lambert. Speaking to her about her training (or how little of it she seemed to have one) leads me to believe she's got enormous potential. CEGEP star, big potential? Sounds like Tessa Bonhomme. (interesting side note: Tessa was the first ever first pick in the women's hockey draft. The first ever first pick in the men's draft was Garry Monahan, brother of Pat Monohan, my high school xc coach. It's true!)

Kelly Hewitt: team captain, was injured last winter, but has had a very good summer of training. Probably sub-20 this fall. She's more of a classic style runner, road racing pedigree. Her background in Communications makes me want to compare her to Cassie Campbell, now of the CBC, who was a pretty good hockey player back in the day, if you recall...

Gabrielle Thompson: a xc skiier, transfer from Ottawa, has great aerobic fitness, like Coralina, tons of potential. Hasn't run a true 5k yet, but ran 43:57 on the very hilly St. Bruno 10k course (which is incidentally right in her backyard!). Someone who might come out of nowhere and win it for the team: Marie-Philip Poulin.

There are a lot of names on the women's side, and a lot of women I've yet to meet. Here's a bit more about some of the names I do know:

Camilla Fitzgibbon, Chanel Savoie and Jennie Mae Roy are all returning members who could find their way into the top seven, depending on how their summers went. I see them as kind of a grind-line, and my lack of knowledge of women's hockey is going to show, but I think that Jayna Hefford, Cherie Piper and Gillian Aps are three players who embody this hard-working style.

Claire Gerin-Lajoie is a CEGEP recruit from Brebeuf who is future captain material. Fitness-wise she was mid 21min last fall, and could go sub-20 if she works really hard, but her biggest contribution to the team will be her enthusiasm. If energy on the ice can be compared to the energy we see from Claire, then maybe Gina Kingsbury is a good comparison.

Other names: Laura Gomez, a transfer from Montgomery College, Amanda Weightman, a transfer from Arkansas Pine-Bluff, Lucy Dykstra, from high school in Calgary, and Megan Anderson, from junior college in B.C., a former elite field hockey player, might all make a name for themselves as well. There are about 10 more names, but I think I will leave it at this. There's tons of depth on the women's side for the Stingers. I hope it turns into tons of medals!

Stingers' XC fall preview: men

2010-08-27T09:51:00.004-04:00

It's hard to write a preview for any sport, because let's face it, no one knows what's going to go down. It's especially harder to write one for your own team. So I'm going to try to lay out what I know, but with a twist: I'm going to try to match up our guys with members of the 2010 Stanley Cup Champion Chicago Blackhawks. Hopefully it will be a good omen and we can snatch a championship ourselves!

Stephane Colle: Canada Games silver medalist in the 5000m, has a pb under 14:30, had a bit of a rough year with injuries but managed to fight back and return to shape. Right now the most pure talent on the team so CBH comparison is to Marian Hossa.

Ryan Noel Hodge: Team Captain, QSSF rookie of the year, QSSF all-star, second fastest rookie at CIS last year, Concordia overall rookie of the year, 5k pb of 15:07 run at the national championships this summer. The kid is clutch and he is a perfect match for Chicago's "Captain Serious" Jonathan Toews.

Sofiane Guend: Coming off his best year, finally coming into his own. 10k PB 33:10. He's an American from Wisconsin, so we'll match him up with Blackhawk Pat Kane of Buffalo. Upstate New York...Wisconsin...same thing, right?

Didier Morelli: Triathlete with great wheels (27 for his last 200 of a set of 16), and decent endurance (1:20 half, cruising on a hilly San Fransisco course), is now focusing on running. Hoping a change of scenery will allow him to bust out, just like Patrick Sharp (yes, I'm comparing triathlon to playing for the Flyers).

Peter Iacino: a rookie with experience, Peter has been on the track scene in Montreal for a while. He was out with hernia surgery all winter, but has a 5k PB of 16:16, so you know he's got skill. Good match with skilled Hawk, Dave Bolland.

Lucas Corkum: Second-year runner who managed pretty well in his first year until CIS. The season was probably a little long, but he's put in a big summer of training and is a good bet to break out this fall. Hoping Kris Versteeg does the same (with the Leafs!).

James Coulton: rookie, and strong xc skiier. He was around Lucus in races last year while competing for Dawson College. He's a big dude, so we're going to call him Buff, after Dustin Byfuglien. If cross country had a net, we'd make him stand in front of it.

Jean Marc Laforest: another veteran who has had some shakey recent history, but he's back, and focused and ready to prove he's worth the big contract we signed him to...no wait, that last bit only applies to Brian Campbell!

Vincent Morasse: Vincent is a returning runner who took part in not one but TWO Spartan Races this summer. That's crawling through mud and jumping over fire pits for those who don't know. This of course tells you a lot about Vince's character. He's kind of the joker of the team, just like Adam Burish.

Clifford Reid: Cliff made big strides in the spring, but we're not sure what happened to him during the summer. He's got lots of potential, but like a young defenceman, there are going to be mistakes along the way. Brent Seabrooke knows what I'm talking about.

Colin Riendeau: Fitness guru is hoping his Cross-Fit training will translate into 10k success. Another "young defenceman" type, we're hoping he's more Duncan Keith than Brett Sopel.

We're still looking for a goalie. There are a few more names to throw out there, but I don't know much about them...yet. Look for one or more of Alex Garofalo, Charles-Smith Metellus, Marc-Andre Hould, Kyle L'esperence, Jordan Choo, and Matthew Haley to stick.

Running fast requires strong morals.

2010-08-21T10:45:00.006-04:00

I'll get to the running connection eventually. It's an interesting road...

I recently read two interesting pieces on free will. One from the New York Times and the other from a book by Michael Brooks called "13 things that don't make sense." One of the things that doesn't make sense, according to Brooks, is free will. The thing is, as Galen Strawson, author of the Times opinion, puts it, "current science gives us no more reason to think that determinism is false than that determinism is true." So are we really free to choose?

Strawson's analysis says no. Or at least, he connects the lack of free will to a lack of responsibility. He puts forth a "Basic Argument" as follows:

"(1) You do what you do — in the circumstances in which you find yourself—because of the way you then are.

(2) So if you’re going to be ultimately responsible for what you do, you’re going to have to be ultimately responsible for the way you are — at least in certain mental respects.

(3) But you can’t be ultimately responsible for the way you are in any respect at all.

(4) So you can’t be ultimately responsible for what you do."

Point three rests on the idea that whatever side of the nature or nurture debate you fall on, it's not your own free will that makes you the way you are. Every act we commit (or do not commit) is derivative.de novo from ourselves. This is kind of sad, or scary, depending on how you look at it. Whether it is derivative from our genes, or from the way our parents taught us to be, no act springs

The thing is, for all practical purposes ("practico-pratique, là," as my bar school teacher would say) it doesn't matter. Because unless you are super self-aware, and have an intimate and expert knowledge of genetics, our actions are pretty hard to specifically predict every time. So even if our path in life is already determined, at least it will still be a surprise.

But when you get right down to the nuclear core of everything, the quantum core, if you will, the randomness of the universe is what drives our actions, and being random, our universe is not determined. So maybe our actions are determined, but not by us. Are the random spinnings of sub-atomic particles enough to say that we have "free will"? I don't think so. Or is it? Brooks gets at this when he describes a process by which a subject's actions (physical actions, not moral actions) can be controlled by manipulating his brain chemistry with a magnetic field. What he further describes is slightly eerie: in monitoring brain activity, it has been discovered that the brain gears up to do its thing (whatever it is) before the person is consciously aware that he or she is going to do that thing. We are talking hundreds of milliseconds of difference here, which, depending on what industry you are in may or may not be a lot. I'd say for brain chemistry, that's a lot.

The real significance of this question is what it allows us to say about responsibility. It's a pretty easy out to suggest that our actions are determined, therefore we have no responsibility for them. Would such a defense ever stand-up in court? Not likely. The attempt to allow in the testimony of a Dr. Galen (State v. Sikora (1965) N.J. S.C.) to say that "unconscious influences" drove the accused's crime was not successful. Perhaps now that we have a deeper understanding of brain science, a better argument could be made than Galen's "inner tensions" but what would be the impact on society? Not good, I'd say.

The fact remains, regardless of whether our actions are determined or not, we are still responsible for them. Probably your attitude towards how much responsibility you have has already been shaped, but it can be shaped again, reshaped, and remade.

So to get to the running philosophy, let's say all your accumulated knowledge and tendencies are like training. All that training is going to determine how you are going to race. Of course, you can still influence the outcome of your race a little bit, but basically, the training gives you a range. The more aware you are, the more focused, the more confident, that is, the more responsible you are, the higher in the range you can be.

The moral of the story: Running fast requires strong moral fibre!

Racing in the street

2010-08-04T17:32:00.006-04:00

Tonight, tonight the strip's just right
I wanna blow 'em off in my first heat
Summer's here and the time is right
For racin' in the street

I came across a link to an opinion in the Globe and Mail today. It seems that this fellow has gained a following for being controversially tough on mediocrity. Apparently it started with a letter to the editor of People Magazine, criticizing their categorization of Katie Holmes' NYC marathon as "impressive." Katie took 5.5 hours to finish the thing. Howard Stern once said "A five hour marathon is not running--it's blocking traffic."

I agree with Mr. Gilfillan, the author of the opinion piece and the letter to People, and I agree with Howard Stern. Many others do not. They think such an opinion is elitist, disrespectful, and arrogant. But I think the point is being lost in all the self-righteous "Hey, a 2:30 half marathon is pretty good for me" business. Let's examine what is really being said here.

First of all, the main point of the opinion piece is not an attack on slow runners. It is a lament for a lack of fast runners. I can see how this might enjoin a "what, I'm not good enough for you?" reaction from those who might not make the cut of "fast" but let's face facts: the average finish time for a marathon in Canada has shot up since the incursion of the Running Room on the scene (or earlier), and the number of fast finishes (say, under 2:20) has plummeted. It would be easy to connect the two, and blame the slow people for the lack of fast people, but that would be wrong. Well, almost wrong.

Of course average times will go up: there are way more people, and the bulk of them are slower. There are reasons to hail this as a good thing. It means more people are exercising. It means more people are getting involved in running, specifically, which we runners like because we want everyone to think running is important (or at least to think we are not abnormal). This is cool. Or it would be cool if there had not been a corresponding drop in elite and sub-elite times. The total number of finishers has shot way up, but it's not like there are limited spots. If someone wanted to go and run a 2:18 marathon, someone could. John Stanton is not stopping you. At least not directly.

So how to make the connection between the two? First, it would be interesting to figure out what it takes to run a sub-2:20 marathon for men or the equivalent for women which might be around 2:45. I take these numbers because there were 9 men under 2:20 and 8 women under 2:45 at the Ottawa Marathon, which is perhaps Canada's premiere marathon. But that is up for debate (somewhere else, not here). To run that fast you have to train long and hard. It requires a lot of work, and sacrifice, and probably some level of pre-existing condition of being relatively healthy.

What does it take to run a sub-4 hour marathon? It's not that hard. All it really takes is being relatively young and healthy. I once advised a young woman (early 20s) on running a marathon. I sent her workouts by email, but she pretty much slacked off the entire summer, played soccer twice a week, partied, and didn't run. She was not sedentary, but she was not a trained runner by any means. I counseled her to not bother with the marathon because it would probably be a painful experience. She did it anyway, and managed to run 3:45. With no training.

Another example is that of the (now ex-) husband of another young woman (mid-20s) I was training. This woman was a sub-elite, former varsity runner. She could run 10k under 40min and was shooting for around a 3:00 marathon. She worked very hard at it, ate well, sacrificed lots (she was also a young mom at the same time). So a few weeks before the big race, her jack-ass of a husband (who was not supportive throughout, making the training even tougher) says, I'm gonna run, too, this marathon bit is a joke. He wandered in around 3:45, right off the couch, no training except a lot of climbing. He wasn't very nice about it, but he did it.

That fact that the absolute time of 3:45 is attainable by a reasonably healthy person with very little training severely diminishes its value to me. In absolute terms, it's not that impressive.

That said, I am not immune to the reward that can come from a slower marathon, and to the efforts required to run one. I coached a slightly overweight woman in her mid-50s whose goal was to qualify for the Boston marathon. At her age, what was required was a 3:59. It actually took her a couple years to do it, so by the time she ran her best marathon of 4:14, she was old enough that the time qualified her. And it was satisfying. And she worked for it.

It really depends who you are. I would say that this woman respected the distance, while those who ran 3:45 on a whim, maybe did not. That concept, of respecting the distance, is something that gets brought up by those lamenting the increase of slowness. But the two are not mutually exclusive. I would say this, though: why? Why do you need to run a marathon, when you could probably get the necessary health benefits, and enjoy your training just as much, by training for a 5k or 10k. That's another tangent I won't get on right now.

This idea of respect, however, connects the decline of elite road racing with the increase of mediocre participation. Attitude and respect. And money. It seems that the running "industry" of the 70s and early 80s was centered around different values. People drawn to the sport then were fighting against something, maybe. They were characters in a Bruce Springsteen song: facing a tough situation, but getting through it. That's not who runners are any more. They are characters in a Nickleback song: whining about how hard things are, but not doing anything about it. The business of running is selling the check-box of a marathon to a generation of runners who haven't really had it rough. They are sold the idea that to be a "runner" you need community, clothes, gear, and snacks. That's not what running is. It can be. But running, at least, the kind of running that elites identify with, is about athleticism, individualism and competition. The thing about elites is, they are cheap. Fast runners thinks he or she should get their shoes for free. They don't want to pay entry fees. So businesses, like the Running Room, and the companies that put on road races, do not cater to them. If the mainstream of running doesn't promote or support elites, is there any wonder we lack them?

But I believe we can have it both ways. The great thing about road races is that the best of the best run along side the recreational joggers. This is a good thing. It's not like Sidney Crosby ever really stops to play shinny with kids. Beer leaguers never get to play with real professionals. In a big road race, "garage league" runners can go head-to-head with the stars. But what I find unfortunate, is the lack of respect that some of the recreational runners seem to have for the elites. Racing is a sport. It's a game, a competition, there are scores. Faster running is a better score. That's really all there is to it. It boggles my mind when I hear slower runners trying to rationalize that somehow the "real" story is the back-of-the-packer who struggles through 4:30, but the dude who breaks 2:18 on his first marathon is not that interesting. You never hear recreational hockey players describing their exploits as being tougher or more impressive than a professional's. At least not in earnest.

The reason why elites get annoyed at the focus on mediocre runners (and partially why the slower runners don't care about the elites) is because each group thinks the other is having a totally different experience. To be fair: I'm generalizing about both sides. There are plenty of elites who respect what an age-group runner goes through, and there are Gallowalkers who are great fans of the best in the sport. But I have heard comments from both sides that show this disconnect. The beauty of the sport is that everyone suffers the same during the race. Even if you are walking for most of your 5:00 marathon, it ain't easy. And while the winners might seem effortless as they cross the line after "only" 2:15 of running at the peak of their aerobic capacity, trust me, they are hurting. But this isn't the message we hear in the media. We hear "run easy" and "a 10 minute mile is the same distance as a 6 minute mile."

I hope that the reaction to an article like Gilfillan's can be, not to cry foul, but to try to find that dirty, gritty hope inside that despite what you are, you can be better. Mediocrity is not really measured by final race time. I think it's fair to say that. The problem is that if people start to think that a mediocre race time is "ok" or "pretty good" then they are only short-changing themselves. If someone runs a 4:15 marathon, and they have thrashed themselves within an inch of their life, then kudos to them. But that's not what we see out there. We see walk breaks, medals just for finishing, and smiles across the finish line. To me, that's disappointing. I know that is not the best you can do. And that's why Gilfillan is saying: you can do better. Do better.

Is the world getting less uptight?

2010-07-31T17:45:00.002-04:00

So as I was warming up around Jarry Parc before my tempo run this morning, I noticed a couple bikes (actually a trike and a bike) leaning up against the tree where I usually do my warm-ups. I looked around the field for their owners. Sure enough, two small boys were conferencing near the cricket strip. No parents in sight. Just hanging out in the park. I did not know kids did that anymore, to be honest. Eventually two moms and a sister appeared, and the boys took to their bikes and tore off elsewhere in the park. So they were being monitored, good, but it wasn't like their parents were paranoid. Nice to see.

censuslessness

2010-07-24T10:19:00.003-04:00

Leah McLaren wrote an interesting article this week. No, really. I know, I'm surprised, too. Anyway, the point of her article is to flip Churchill's old saying about liberals, conservatives, hearts and brains on its head. She suggests that those under 30 are just naive and those over 30 are in denial, and she posits a "support your team" sports mentality to politics.

I find this interesting in light of the recent census debate. The same people who rail at Facebook for violating privacy concerns are now criticizing the government for cutting back on the long-form census for concerns of privacy. It seems to me that this is not an ideological issue at all, but a political one, in the sense that for a certain crowd, anything Harper does must be bad. But let's look at what would happen if the mandatory long-form census would be replaced by a similar, voluntary form.

The first possibility is that nothing would change. 20% Canadians get the long form. So that means instead of obliging that many Canadians to fill it out, StatsCan would need to find that many willing participants. I'm betting they could, especially considering the outcry, and the plan to distribute the voluntary form to 33% of the population. So if that's the case, what changes?

Well, certainly, the quality of the data changes. If people are self-selecting to fill out this form, that creates a whole new set of people, and all the data that is returned is only from that set. So anyone who is of the opinion that the long form census is invasive would not be represented. Is this so bad?

Objectively speaking, yes. But partisans might think twice before raining hate down on this decision. If more "liberal"-minded folks fill out the census, then they will be over-represented in all those important stats StatsCan is collecting. All those businesses that supposedly rely on the census data will now be pushed to provide services for what they perceive to be a more liberal Canada. Interesting...

Another use for the data is supposedly to find low-income areas and target services there, for example in-school breakfast programs. To suggest that a long-form census is required to figure this out is silly. You can determine needy kids in other ways. For example, check the real estate prices, or renters vs owners in the area. You can rely on the schools to determine who is in need. There will be gaps of course, but wouldn't it be better to have a gap where a school fails to identify a need because they just don't care, rather than a gap created by numbers, where an arbitrary household income determines the cut-off for help? I guess it is six of one, a half dozen of the other, as there will always be gaps and there will always be limited funds for such things.

My points are simple. 1) changing the long-form census to voluntary would not necessarily limit information for StatsCan, 2) it might benefit the political "team" that is criticizing the move, and 3) there are other ways to support the programs that this data, should it be lacking (which I doubt it would), informs.

Don't get me wrong. In terms of "teams" I am certainly not Team Stephen. If anything, I'm Team Jack (or Team Gilles, but only because of those eyes!). Like everyone else over 30, I might be a little bit in denial about that, but as far as the census goes, I'll treat it like an exhibition game, not the playoffs.

Risk management

2010-07-19T07:20:00.003-04:00

Last summer I read a book on risk management. (I can't find it right now...it's in a box.) The basic premise was that people don't have a clue how to manage risk. The example that's always given is cars vs airplanes. Some people have a fear of flying, and they manage what they perceive to be a risk by not taking an airplane, and driving everywhere instead. Of course, statistics show that driving is many many more times dangerous than flying.

A more subtle form of this problem is in the area public health. Many people find no time to exercise or eat properly, yet complain about getting sick or feeling tired all the time. Or they don't complain, but remain unhealthy, or choose to view their lack of health as "unfortunate" or in serious, extreme cases "a tragedy." Whatever the reason, whether it is fear, or laziness, it comes down to poor risk management.

Malcolm Gladwell's "Blink" is also an interesting book. It suggests that we can sometimes make better decisions if we don't think too long, and just trust our instincts. This is probably true for some things. But it seems to me that a better general rule is to think first. Michael R. LeGault wrote a book called "Think" as a response to Gladwell. There are some weaknesses in that book, as in Gladwell's, but the problem is not a question of Blink OR Think as a solution to all problems, it is a question of when to blink and when to think. Most poor risk management is simply a wrong answer to that question, and more often than not, a blink reaction is more wrong than a think reaction.

The best advice I have ever received from my dad (who was not necessarily one for advice) was "think slowly." If you think slowly, gather all the available information, then act, then you can avoid the risks you need to avoid, but you can also take the risks that are beneficial to take.

When to walk away...and when to run?

2010-07-10T16:25:00.003-04:00

I always tell my runners that all the lessons they learn in training and racing, they can apply to real life, too. So when we were faced with this difficult house-buying problem, I tried to rely on my running instincts to figure out what was best.

We saw a house we wanted to buy. We sold our condo to be able to buy it. But then lots of things kept going wrong. The seller was being picky about the move-in date, so we had to move that around a few times. Our buyers were also being picky as they had to move out of a rental and so we had to somehow accommodate that, plus the delay of part of their financing which was coming from overseas. They got antsy over little things, and threatened to back out twice. The night before the scheduled move, Miriam was up all night, sick. Then the next day, after I had moved a bunch of our stuff to Kris', where we were going to stay for a couple days to bridge the gap between when we moved out and when we were moving in, we get a call saying that the bank had refused financing to our buyers. Our buyers refused to even try another bank, and that threw our house purchase under the bus. Then we had to consider whether or not we wanted a mortgage, and whether or not we could even get one. Maybe if we were lucky, the seller would just give us more time.

So we tried to decide what to do. It seemed like the universe was pushing us away from this move. Or was it telling us to push forward, and that it would be worth it, but we'd have to work for it? This is where the running lesson comes in.

There is a point in every race where you have to decide if you are a hero or a wimp. It's harsh, but true. And every runner knows that feeling. It is your brain telling the rest of your body that something is wrong, and you should probably stop. You don't stop, usually, and it ends up being ok, usually. So we know we can override this deep-brain warning in order to achieve our goals. We practice pushing ourselves to that line in training, and gain the confidence we need to do it in performance.

There are certain situations where stopping is a better option: if you are injured. Sometimes we stop because the payoff is not enough: we know we won't win the race, or run a PB or get the placing we need to qualify. These aren't good excuses for a runner, but they make sense psychologically. Basically, we need to be motivated by the right things.

So to take it back to the house, are all of these roadblocks worth the payoff? Or is this a case of an injury that we really should take care of before jumping back in a race?

Hockey Fight in Canada

2010-07-10T16:16:00.004-04:00

Back in 2004, during the NHL lockout, I wrote a few articles for Maisonneuve Magazine's website. I thought I would re-post them here, since they are no longer available at their site, and since it is summer time, and we miss hockey. This one is about the hockey that was going on. Published around November, 2004.

My friend Cherine had never seen a live hockey game. To rectify this tragedy, she and I decided to head down to the Bell Centre last Friday. Since the NHL players are locked out, we didn’t go to see the Habs, but rather to see two teams from the Ligue Nord-Américaine de Hockey (LNAH): the Verdun Dragons and the Laval Chiefs. There was a distinctive non-pro feel to the night. The crowd was restless, there was a heavy police presence and when the first puck dropped, so too did the gloves. The fight seemed orchestrated—a way for the warriors on each team to say hello to the more than 7,000 fans in attendance. But when another fight began immediately after the next faceoff, it became apparent Cherine’s first live-hockey experience would be a night to remember.

Before seven seconds had ticked off the clock, five faceoffs had been attempted, and five players from each team had had their seats upgraded from players’ bench to penalty box. The game ended with fans throwing each other down the concrete steps of the Bell Centre’s lower bowl and attacking the Verdun players on their bench. This last move was a foolish one. One fan got whacked over the head by a stick-wielding Dragons' coach and then faced a flurry of fists from Clint Butler (who was subsequently ejected from play; the Dragons have since kicked him off the team for good). And yes, in between all of that, there was a game. The Dragons won 9-5.

After the initial boxing card—seven seconds of slugging drawn out over about ten minutes—the refs tried to put a lid on the fighting. They didn’t entirely succeed, but they managed to let the players play. In the end, the lax defence of both teams resulted in many pretty goals. There were still a few fights, but it seemed like the opening “faceoff” was part of the show; these enforcers were obviously excited to be offering their pugilistic patronage under the same roof (at least symbolically) as their heroes, John Kordic and John Ferguson.

Early on, Dragons' goalie Martin Villeneuve was hot, allowing his team to jump to a 4-0 lead on two goals by former Toronto Maple Leaf Daniel Marois. I was hoping Marois would get his hat trick, but the only foreign objects thrown onto the ice were a CD and a bottle of pop—the former in response to the bench-jumping, the latter (presumably) in response to the Chiefs’ lacklustre performance. The Dragons never relinquished the lead, though that didn’t stop most Chiefs fans, including one with the name “God” on the back of “His” Chiefs jersey, from yelling in their most profane patois. You’d have thought “God” would be offended by all the “Asti-de-câlisse-de-tabernac-de-trou-d’cul”s that were being hurlé’d from the stands. The best line came from the guy sitting behind us, who, after being chastised by another fan for yelling his way through the game, shouted, “C’est pas’d ma faute que t’es marrié!” (It’s not my fault that you’re married!). The chastiser and his wife left shortly thereafter, presumably at the wife’s behest.

With about five minutes left in the third period, the Laval goalie jumped into the fray, and started whaling with his blocker on an unidentified Dragon. This instigated the various fights in the stands. This is when Cherine and I learned why there were so many cops around. It took four or five of them to get the crazed fan away from the Dragons' bench and out of harm’s way.

This being her first game, Cherine was quite entertained, but I was compelled to keep insisting, “Hockey’s not really like that.” The fact that the Laval Chiefs wear the uniform of the Charleston Chiefs, of Slap Shot fame, didn’t help. Still, when you see a game with someone who hasn’t had hockey culture drilled into them since birth, it provides a unique opportunity for perspective. The similarities to Roman gladiator contests (or at least, pop-culture perceptions of them—Roman historians may beg to differ) are many: the coliseum, the armour, the drunk, revved-up crowd yelling for blood (“Du sang, asti! DU SANG!!!”). Having lived in Scotland for a time, Cherine wondered at the beginning of the game why the fans weren’t separated, as at European soccer matches. I explained that hockey fans were much more civilized.

In the absence of the NHL this winter, Canadians (and hockey fans in the United States) will have to make do with other hockey options, and so the LNAH will surely gain many fans in the coming months. In addition to fighting, new fans will see different types of regulation in practice, including no-touch icing, tag-up offsides, shootouts: it’s free-flowing hockey with very little clutching and grabbing (what little there is usually ends in a fight). When the NHL comes back—next year seems most likely—it will be up to the fans to decide if they want to see Koivu and Sundin try to beat the trap, and inevitably fail most of the time, or if they want to see James Desmarais deke out hapless defencemen with highlight-reel moves. Would fans rather see Tie Domi and Darren Langdon in a scrum in the corner or Steve Bossé squaring off at centre ice, helmet off, fists dancing?

As we walked through the Bell Centre’s parking lot, a chill in the air, trees aglow with Christmas lights, I heard a kid say to a couple of his friends, “Hockey’s not really like that.” Maybe hockey’s not really like that, but whatever that was, it sure was fun.

on not moving

2010-07-10T09:25:00.002-04:00

The best part about moving is when you get to open your boxes at the new place, discover all of your "things" again, and place them around the house.

The worst part about not moving is unpacking all the boxes you thought you were going to move and putting the "things" back where they used to be. It could be an opportunity to re-arrange, I suppose.

It's also a reminder about how worthless "things" are. I realized that I probably don't need to unpack most of my clothes. The dress pants and shirts I kept aside for the week of the move, plus the duffle bag of running clothes and a couple other things should keep me going until it gets cold. I'm down to two more books to read. Then I will have to unpack the books. Maybe that has the potential to be more Christmas-like. We're going to rearrange the living room again, so that might be nice. I am interested to see how much we actually unpack, and of that, how much we actually use.

I was leafing through a book yesterday that explained how people (maybe animals too, I didn't read that far) handle change. We handle it with our rational brain and our emotional brain. The rational brain understands it and deals with it. The emotional brain doesn't really like it and would rather things stay the same. This explains why moving is considered one of the most stressful things a person can do: uproot the safe, attachment-laden, home, and start over. So you would think it would be a relief to move, but not so. I think it was because we'd prepared ourselves emotionally, and then the rug got pulled out.

We'll probably end up moving next year, when things are more stable so we can back up any similar incidents involving third-parties and make sure we get what we want.

Thought of the day

2010-07-09T19:16:00.002-04:00

Email is weird. You know people who will reply to every email no matter what, even if it is just with a "thanks!" or a "Yes!" or an "I agree!"? Why do they do that?

I may be one of those people.

Old Reviews 2: Miracle Mile

2009-12-20T20:58:00.001-05:00

I reviewed this short story by Alex MacLeod for Canadian Running.

In Miracle Mile, a short story by Alexander MacLeod, two 1500m runners on different paths prepare to run in the national championship. The race, however, is entirely beside the point. The story opens with the gruesome Mike Tyson ear-biting incident, a chilling foreshadowing of what happens when a person “gives in to his rawest impulse” or goes “all the way over to the straight edge.” One runner, Michael Campbell, has been at the top, and understands the sacrifice required to get there, but is considering retirement. “You have to make choices,” he says: “you can’t run and be an astronaut.” His pre-race hotel roommate, Jamie Burns, is on the way up. He’s pushed those limits, done all the right things. Of course he wins the race, but at what cost?

This story, yet another beautifully-made edition from Frog Hollow Press, will ring true to any runner who has had a sniff at top-level competition. The hotel room scene is as true a painting as any. The warm-up around the sub-division as well. Even the names, Bourque, Graham, Marcotte, will evoke a certain era for those in the know. For a recreational runner, it might be completely foreign, but it might be instructive—not in the sense of a training manual (there’s none of that here), but as a way of understanding those tall, thin wisps who run 10ks close to your 5k time. I’ve heard some people say that it must be easier for the “fasties.” No chance. Most people run for all the right reasons: fun, fitness, feeling good—a balanced pastime. The “pure specialists” in Miracle Mile are motivated from a darker place, it would seem. The story flips from the pure realism of the hotel scene, and the race itself, to the fantastical train racing scene, and the final, warm-down episode that bookends the Tyson opener with grim believability.

Old reviews part 1.

2008-10-24T18:28:00.006-04:00

I thought I would post some old reviews, to maybe try to get me back into the poetry mindset. This is from Arc 57, Winter 2006, a review of The New Canon, an anthology edited by Carmine Starnino. I guess this is timely given the recent Cage Match between Carmine and Christian Bök. This is the unedited version (I think they took out the word "shit-wrecker" upon publication).

Middle-of-the-road-Margie Music
The New Canon: An Anthology of Canadian Poetry

Carmine Starnino is not one to shy from a literary fight. Fully aware, I’m sure, of his reputation for literary shit-wrecking, he’s set out to anticipate every axe of criticism that might be ground on his anthology. In his introduction to “The New Canon,” the editor plants so many hedges, he’s got his own fund. It is pointless to argue with the choices in an anthology, but since the editor has provided us with extended criteria, it is a useful exercise, I think, to hold the book up to its own standards.

With respect to his “crusading” title, he writes of “generational unprecedentedness” and “getting away from the known.” Yes, there are some new faces here, but Anne Simpson, John Barton, Karen Solie and Stephanie Bolster are hardly unheard of. Starnino invokes the meaning of “canon as ‘tenet’ or ‘rule’” and suggests that this anthology is “concrete evidence…of a new principle at work in our poetry.” I wonder if he intended that this new principle consist of blasé mediations on middle-age, characterised by a lack of stakes, and without any kind of tension? There is a lot of that in this book. If poems are songs, this is a collection full of adult-contemporary tunes, of middle-of-the-road-Margie music.

Of course, no anthology has yet to show any kind of consistency, so there are some raucous hits and sincere ballads here as well. It is disappointing, however, to read through the editor’s tirading introduction, where he promises that this anthology won’t be like the others, only to find that it is.

In the first part of his introduction, Starnino positions his poets in relation to previous (and concurrent) anthologies, noting who has held on and who has passed us by. He wants this book to “brake sharply on our tendency to put money on the same sure bets;” however, the “plain, the soft-spoken, the flatly prosy, the paraphrasingly simple, the accessibly Canadian” poetry that he describes as this sure-bet, “ruling aesthetic” is not absent from The New Canon. Diana Brebner’s “Port” is a fine example of flatly prosy (not to mention melodramatic and sentimental) “verse”:

Sometimes the tricks you learn as a child
are useful later on. When I was beaten
or raped I learned to move myself away
to a place without pain or degradation,

As serious as the theme may be, there is no poetry here. The closest “form” this comes to is that of a high school confessional.

Some of the poems are far too perfunctory, too simple. John Degen, do we really need another meditation on crows? Yes, they are tricksters, and child-like, we get it, but why should this matter to us? While Richard Green’s “At the College” is impressive for its terza rima, the content—the lament of a middle-aged professor whose students fall asleep in class—is irrelevant.

The best poems in this tome are ones that engage so-called “traditional” poetic themes of love and death, but with a smart, crisp formal element, and an imaginative metaphorical thrust.

Thank you, George Elliot Clarke, for “King Bee Blues,” a poem with some passion and playfulness: “You don’t have to trust/a single black word I say/but don’t be surprised/if I sting your flower today.” Bruce Taylor and Iain Higgins take up the topic of death by going backwards, to childhood. For Taylor, cars are “optimistic” and “people who drive them have fallen in love with the future.” There is hope in Higgins’ work: “Skinned & still bleeding, his brother half-blind from another fall, they wheeled their bent bikes to the door.” The most energetic poems here come through the eyes of a child, for whom love has not yet hardened under the glare of cynicism, and for whom death is far enough away that it retains its mystery; there is no middle-aged resignation here.

Steven Heighton’s poems, though he writes in the middle-aged mode as well, conflict the delight of youth against dour adulthood—and youth wins. “Constellations,” his tale of putting a child to bed, “wrenches” us out of “that evening adult world” of rented films and “day-end bottle[s] of beer.” “Black jack” is a great poem about risk. The other poets in this anthology take note: “Many tombs/are made of unplayed cards.” In “Machine Gunner” he channels David Jones, reaching back to a time when war seemed to be able to touch people in a more personal way. He steps over the sentimentality of modern responses to war (Anne Simpson’s “Seven Paintings by Brueghel” is a prime example in The New Canon), yet doesn’t dip into the over-simplified, cynical response of anti-war activists.

As I moved through the book, I enjoyed more and more of the poetry. The younger the poet, it seemed, the more lively the verse—a departure from those “sure bets.” George Murray’s poems seem to be girding themselves for some impending storm; Sue Sinclair’s “Red Pepper” is a twisted metaphor for a weary, if not broken, heart; Pino Coluccio writes in a sad, yet playful tone; Adam Sol’s “Wishing you better” untangles a complicated love; Joe Denham makes me care about the life of a prawn; Shane Neilson’s “Open head injury” is passionate, gruesome, and tender. There is something at stake for all of these poets—their poetry is a response to deeply personal, but also common, feelings: love, fear, hate, joy.

David O’Meara’s “Letter To Auden,” a seven-pager, puts a casual conversation with a dead poet into a clever structure so tight you rarely notice the rhyme—as it should be. He bemoans a century of decline of human culture, and wonders where we are headed.

But history, more than ever, is now a snazzy show
Put on for the tourists,
As if no one lives here anymore
And culture just exists
To sell, promote, consume, and generally entice
Travellers to our merchandise.
(And correct me here if there’s some doubt,
But wasn’t the Great Wall constructed
To keep the tourists out?)

It is a bit of grander thinking that most of the older poets here are too chicken (or weary?) to attempt.

This anthology, the editor declares, is “not about test-driving the reputations of fifty Canadian poets. It’s about what happens the next time we, as poets, sit down to write a poem. What conventions will we agree to respect and what will we allow ourselves to wincingly push past?”

It seems there is no agreement on this, and sometimes the poems get lost in the shuffle. As interesting and specific an image as bees in a Pepsi can might be (and it stuck in my mind), without a corresponding meaning to hang on, it begs the question: so what? It’s pretty, but it doesn’t mean much; however, when the poets combine linguistic originality with figurative thrust, and a cocktail of youthful exuberance, innocence and scepticism that combines to reveal a deep desire for their subject, then we have good poems to read.

Step 2: keep running

2008-09-11T19:40:00.002-04:00

So far the plan is working. After taking a couple days off to get ready for France, I ran nearly every day of the 15 days I was gone. I did 41miles the first week and 44 the next, including 4k of tempo in 15min. I'm basing the tempo off Endurance 5k, so 3:27+20sec per k was about right. My first week back in Montreal, despite classes and coaching, I managed 50miles. I got in some good runs at the cottage on the weekend, including a very solid 90min run that ended with 5k fast over some pretty hilly terrain. Fast being 20min (as opposed to the 23:30 for that stretch on the way out). My first tempo back in Montreal was 2 laps of summit, which I managed in 18min, split evenly. I was hoping to go further (2 laps+1k) but it was hot and I was not feeling as good as I'd hoped. This week, after the solid long run on Saturday, I did 3 laps in 26:50, the first one in 8:52, the second in 9min and the last in 8:58, and I felt much stronger. So already the increase in aerobic work is kicking in. I did a long run today as well. I have found that I feel good 2-3 days after a long run (90min, not 2h30), so since I will be racing 5k on Sunday this week, I thought I'd move the long run up. I have a massage with Eliza on Friday to work on my calves that have been tight (as usual).

With respect to the more philosophical plan, retirement, etc, I think that what happened was this: after the Boston marathon, there is no question that I needed a break. I had some fun with track races that summer, but my back was hurt, and I really should have just laid low. Once September and 1L rolled around, I was able to run a bit, but not really train. In the winter, because of some health problems, I didn't run at all for a period of 6 weeks. That was a big mistake. By the end of February, once I started up again, I started feeling much better. I decided that I would run for fitness rather than competition. I knew I needed to keep running in some respect, and I thought this would do it. I also wanted to dabble a bit in races, and I thought that I would be able to do ok with low volume and more quality than I was used to. I tried it for a good 3.5 months, but as we've seen, it did not work out, at least not on the competitive front. Certainly health-wise I was doing very well. I guess that what I DO want is to be able to run fast, and there is no question that for me, the best recipe for that is volume and aerobic capacity- and threshold-type workouts (as opposed to anaerobic workouts).

So am I un-retired? I guess I discovered what many people (especially Leslie) were saying was true: I was not ready for retirement. I don't know if my current plan and progression will get me to where I want to be competitively. I do feel much better about the training I am doing, and I think that I have room to add a bit more volume and another workout, later this fall. School is much more under control, and if things go as planned this fall, I will be able to enjoy it a little more, knowing that I've got some employment lined up.

I am racing 5k this weekend and I hope that I can bring the time under 17min. I'll base next week's tempo on my race performance, and hopefully that means I can do it a little faster. I hope that Adam, Adrian, Eoin and Stephen and I can start to get together soon as well, as it would really help to have a group. The fact that my day is already packed does not help, but I think we can swing a couple times a week. They are not up to doing workouts yet, but that's fine, as even when they start, they'll still be much faster than me, so I'll use this time to try to catch up as much as I can.

17:14

2008-08-14T18:04:00.002-04:00

I had been planning to run 5k Endurance since May, with the goal of running 16:40 of about 30-40mpw and faster workouts than I had been used to in the past. After the mile did not go well, I actually changed things up right away, but I certainly did not expect there to be any impact whatsoever on the 5k. I was hoping for closer to 17:00, but given the mile, 17:14 is good, and I think the best part is the splits: 3:26, 30,30,33,15. So I averaged 3:27, but that last K in 3:15 says to me I could have gone faster. Maybe I could give the lower-volume method a bit more of a try, but I honestly think that for me, I just need to run more.

With respect to what Davison said about my last post, I am not planning on just jogging. I wil make two adjustments to my training. One is that I'll try to have a higher total volume: 60mpw instead of 40. The other is that instead of doing all-out, lactic workouts every week (François Pap training), I'll build up with more tempos, and run more at 5k and 10k race pace. I will still add-in some of that short fast stuff, but maybe only once every 3 weeks (and certainly not until I've had several weeks of consistent volume).

I think that when I was training for the marathon and mountain running, I probably relied too much on volume and tempos, and not enough on anaerobic training. I ran some good 10k times then because the 10k is a mostly aerobic event, and you don't lose out too much by not having the fast stuff. In the last couple of months, I think that I did too much of it, and for me, I have to be careful because my body just does not react to that kind of training. Someone like Debardi seems to eat it up, and just get faster. I'll probably never run a 3:47 1500, but I think I can still run a low 15min 5k by training mostly aerobically. What will get me over the edge from high 15 to low 15 is most likely a safer, smarter integration of lactic training. But that is not going to come until next summer. I don't think my body can sustain it for long periods of time.

So, next up, I'm going to France for two weeks. Dave Sandomierski and Gary Story speak highly of the running there, so it should be good. I'm going to try to just get in 60-75min per day while I'm there.

As for retirement/non-retirement, I'll have to think about it more, and maybe I'll actually have time this year (2L) to share some of those thoughts here.

running my age

2008-08-05T17:07:00.002-04:00

It's been almost a year since the last post. I've done 1L, gotten completely out of shape, rounded into some kind of shape again, then stagnated. Last night I raced a mile on a dirt track, which I organized after having read The Perfect Mile, the story of Bannister and Landy and the four minute mile. I ran 5:10. Which may sound pretty fast, and it is if you don't run much, but of course next to Landy and Bannister (and don't forget Rich Ferguson, the Canadian who finished third in that famous Empire Games race), it is quite slow. It's also quite slow compared to what I could do, even at the peak of a mediocre career. I've run around 4:30 before, and 4:09 for 1500 (I was even 4:14 for 1500 last summer) so for whatever reason, what I'm doing now is just not working. Despite the fact that an analysis of my training seems to indicate the need for more fast workouts, having done some decent workouts this summer and having only a 5:10 to show for it is disappointing.

All of this is of course under the guise of "retirement" which basically means I can do what I want and not really have to answer to myself (or anyone) because, hey, I'm retired! Well, I think that I need to go back to what was working and making me very fit in the past, that is, a focus on volume, not on quality. If anything, I need a focus on volume before the quality can really do me any good anyway, so that is what I'll try.

My goal is to run my age for 10k by the end of 2009. That essentially means get back to almost PB shape. I turn 31 on Friday, which means I'll be 32 by the fall of 2009. So I should be able to run my age by then. I'll spend the fall trying to get in just about 60miles a week, with a tempo and a fartlek thrown in each week. In the winter, I'll do the bubble training (if that works out) with Concordia, and in the spring I'll start into a steady rotation of workouts. The spring plan is to rotate through mile, 5k, and 10k paced intervals, every two days, with a long run of 90min including 15-30min of tempo each weekend. That should provide enough quality. But before I do that, I'll want to be consistent at about 60miles over the fall and early winter (mostly to make sure I can get school done, and focus on coaching in the fall). Next summer I'll be working, hopefully, so I'll have a pretty strict schedule. That should be good, since clearly having my days to myself has not yielded any fruit!

Today I ran 65min easy with 10min of core. The goal is to do this well: keep the core going, and stretch, etc. Hopefully that will make up for the extra 10-20 miles a week I'm not running, and the fact that I'm old now...

New York City (Day 1)

2007-08-31T08:38:00.000-04:00

We pulled into Penn station on time, around noon. It was a short walk to our hotel from there: the Madison Hotel, at the corner of 27th. It was a good, clean place, no cockroaches or rats, and not as expensive as you would think for being nearly right at the heart of the centre of the universe ($120 a night!).

We checked in smoothly, and then headed out with the plan to sort of follow Holden Caulfield's day in NYC. It was a pretty rough guess, as we didn't really stay in any bad hotels, or end up in any snobby jazz bars, but we traced an outline. We walked along 34th street, through Macy's (just because it was there) to the New Yorker hotel, which is the closest thing there is to an "Edmont Hotel." It has a 50's-style diner on the first floor, so we had lunch there. I had meatloaf; Miriam had a burger.

After that, we walked up 5th avenue to Rockefeller Centre, but we didn't go up. It wasn't going to be a trip for acending tall buildings. We also had walked past the Empire State building, but we didn't feel like waiting in line to go up. We also couldn't go skating at Rockefeller Centre because, well, it was the middle of August! It would be cool to go back at Christmastime, and see the sidewalk chairity collectors and that stuff, too.

We walked (we almost always walked) up to Central Park, and saw the Carousel up close. I think that the thing everyone says about it is how fast it actually goes! I was impressed! We didn't ride it though. Then we went to the American Museum of Natural History, saw the dinosaurs, and the dioramas. Didn't see any "fuck yous" anywhere. On the way back we did see some ducks in Central Park, as well as a busker/folkie guitarist who had a quite a loyal following it seemed. Over by the fountain there were some guys doing flips and stuff. They built up one really big flip over four audience members. It was cool, but not worth however much money they probably made from it, collecting bills from people in pillowcases.

On the way out of the park, we checked out the Upper East Side appartments that Holden would have lived in (had he been a real person! Ha!). Pretty swank. Nice neighbourhood. Then we took the subway down to Ground Zero, just to see.

There wasn't actually much to see, except that there had been a fire burning all day in an adjascent building, so there were several fire trucks and police lines blocking off several blocks. Unfortunately, because the building was abandoned (as a result of 9/11), there was no water in the building, and two firefighters died.

After wandering through a mostly deserted Wall Street, we went through Battery Park, and waited for the Staten Island Ferry. The idea was to get a view of the skyline, and of the Statue of Liberty. The Ferry is free, so we just took it one way, got off, walked around and took it the other way. Lady Liberty was shorter than I figured, but the skyline was cool. It was just after sunset, so the view was nice.

We walked back up to Soho, and had a late dinner at Lombardi's Pizza, the oldest pizza place in North America. It was pretty good. Then we walked back up Broadway, through Union Square. We had a look at the Flatiron building on the way. We rolled back into the hotel around 1am. Batman Begins was on tv, which I thought was appropriate, since we were in "Gotham." So I watched that, while Miriam fell asleep.

All in all, a good day.

Boston

2007-08-23T13:16:00.000-04:00

I went on vacation for the first time in a long time last weekend. I mean a real vacation, not a trip for a race, or a weekend in Toronto. Miriam and I went to Boston and New York for 5 days. The purpose of the Boston stop was to see the Red Sox game at Fenway that had been rained out on marathon weekend. Miriam had already been to New York twice this summer, but she was willing to go back. It was worth it, I’d say.

In Boston we stayed with Chris Payton, a friend of mine from Waterloo Cross Country. Payton lives out in Newton/Waban, what one might call a tony suburb of Boston. His new house was an old 1920s home, with many rooms, and staircases, and even a secret closet. He and Kirsten have more rooms than they know what to do with. Or maybe they are planning a nice big Catholic family! Even Chris was a bit bewildered by the size of it, but the kitchen is really good, and as he said, they won’t have to move if they ever need more room!

Before we arrived out there, though, we walked the Freedom Trail in downtown Boston. Miriam had to drag her suitcase along with us, because of course, post-911, there are no lockers in public places any more. Being in America was a bit annoying for that. It’s almost a point of pride, it seems: we are so important that people might try to blow us up! New York was a different story, but more on that later.

Along the Freedom Trail, we learned about Paul Revere, James Otis (no one ever remembers him) and others. What stuck with me though was the origin of the word earmarked. In Boston Common, in the early days, the Puritans used to torture Quakers on the stock. They would nail their ears to the wood so that when they were released, they could be identified by their “ear-marks” in case they tried to spread Quakerism again. Evil Quakers! Yes, that’s pretty much all I got out of the Freedom Trail. Huzzah!

On the morning of the second day, Chris drove us downtown, and while he went to work for the morning, we went to the Aquarium. It was good fun. We saw the penguins, and the sharks, and some turtles. It was a solid tourist morning. The place was pretty empty when we got there, but by the time we were done, it was crawling with kids. The most memorable thing about the Aquarium: penguin shit. Everywhere. They were actually cleaning it when we got there, but they were like little, cute, swimming, shitting machines, those penguins.

We made our way to Fenway Park for the 1pm start. We settled into our bleacher seats, just as Freddy Canon was singing “Palisade Park”—but he was replacing the word Palisade with Fenway. Very clever. After the national anthems, I went down under the stands and got a Red Sox cap. I figured since everyone else in the city had one, I might as well get one, too, right?

Top of the first and there’s a fly ball to right field. J.D. Drew, the Sox’s rightfielder moves in for the catch…and drops it. The crowd lets him have it. A guy behind us is relentless: “You’re a bum! Go back to wherever you came from! You make me sick!” He actually said all of those things. In the bottom of the first, J.D. hits an RBI triple, the Red Sox score six, and go on to win the game 7-1.

We have dinner at a decent French restaurant, surrounded by people who look like they are about to get on a boat. Boston seems to have been invaded by a hoard of people who look like the two gay guys from Connecticut skit on SNL. We walked through downtown, back to Chris’ car, and went to bed, tired from a long day.

That's Miriam wearing the Sox cap, and behind her to the left (her right) is Payton collapsed on a stone map of the Boston area.

In the morning, we hopped the Amtrack for New York City. It was a pretty smooth ride, and getting in was scenic, at least through the Bronx and Queens, from which we got a very nice view of Manhattan. Then we went underground.

Retirement is good

2007-07-18T14:16:00.001-04:00

I suppose the blog will move away from running now. That's ok, I have plenty of other things to do. Mostly marking, but other, more interesting things, too. I have been running. I think I've run three or four times in the last week. I ran with the Concordia group on Monday night, and with a couple Borealites on Thursday morning (showed Marilyn the 1mile hill, to get her ready for Jung Frau), and with Leslie this morning at 6:45. So what does retirement mean? I guess it means I didn't run yesterday, I probably won't run on the weekend, and I'm not really too worried about it.

What have I been doing then, instead? Sunday I went to Leslie's friend Pat's house and recorded some songs. Results are here. I am reasonably happy with them. Probably if I'd been really picky, I could have done a few more takes and also, I'd like to redo one song in a different key. But it's just for fun, so whatever.

Also, I've been pushing the book. I was given 20 copies to sell by Frog Hollow, and I've sold about 30. I had to order more. Caryl has sold about a dozen through the website. I have a reading in Toronto on the 24th at the I.V. Lounge. Maybe I will be able to sell some more there. I've already exceeded reasonable expectations, so I suppose it is time to get unreasonable: selling out the series. I think there are probably only about 80 more to sell.

Qui d'autre de bon? Registration for McGill Law is in progress. Actually, all I've had to do is pick my language of instruction (English please!) and enter two dummy courses into the system. They pick the courses for me. I don't have a choice. I have been wasting a lot of time on the various McGill Law facebook pages though. Our class has its own group, already! Very exciting. I've already been asked by a 23-year-old to keep an eye on her during the Orientation week drinking. Because I'm "old and stuff" she said. Nice. 5 free drinks are included with the orientation fee. I wonder if I can handle 5 drinks. Maybe I'll give them to her. That wouldn't be very good eye-keeping, though, would it? I will drink Guiness very slowly and smile wryly from afar at all the "young" people. That is my plan. That should get me through September without dying, I think.

So, sort of a transitional post, I suppose. The 26-30th I'm in Canmore/Calgary for NACAC mountain running; August 10-12th in Toronto for Gab reunion; 16-20th in Boston/NY with Miriam; 24-28th in TO again for the reading and maybe to catch Jason in the Blue Planet Run. That should be cool.

Ok, back to marking. Only two and a half weeks left of that business!

A beautiful run

2007-07-11T12:29:00.001-04:00

I finished my competitve career with a good effort in Ottawa. I was pleased with the way the race unfolded: I got stronger as it went on, I moved up in the pack, and I passed one guy on the final stretch. I only ran 4:16, but this was the best race of the season for me, in terms of how it felt. I actually had a kick, for one thing. I answered all the questions, and I answered them correctly. When I was in doubt, I went faster, which is the way to go (thanks Terry G for that one!).

I also wanted to say that the whole experience of the "last" race was a good one. I met Freddy and Wes, and we warmed up on the trails, talking about Freddy's kids and the kid I met at the track last week. The three of us, though I only really know Freddy, and not that well, chatted like old friends, it seemed to me. During the race, they ran together for most of it, then with a lap to go, Freddy took off and Wes faded, and according to the results, I got him in the final stretch. I thought it was the other guy from OTTL that I had caught, though. Anyway, we warmed down by running to the bus terminal at Billings, discussing whether or not a chest strap on a backpack (they both often commute by running) was helpful to training. Through in a few surges--guys feeling like they hadn't raced hard enough maybe, though not I!--and then three sweaty guys on a bus. The cliché they say is "it's the people I'll miss"--well, I won't miss them because I'll still be around, coaching, running, but not really racing anymore. I think I've done all I can.

Haha, so maudlin...anyway, did I even have a career worth retiring from? That is to say, what will change? Well, here are my PBs:

800m 2:01.9 (1998)
1500m 4:09.1 (1998)
3000m 8:46 (2005)
5k 15:43 (2005)
10k 32:44 (2006) 32:36 xc (2004--probably a short course)
1/2 marathon 1:13:59 (2004)
Marathon 2:43:57 (2006)

Pretty middle-of-the-pack, but faster than most people in the world could run those distances. Probably only a couple thousand people have gone faster. I suppose that's not bad. I probably won't go faster again. Interesting thought, that.

No one believes me that I am "retiring" and maybe it's pointless to say so, but to be honest, I don't want to feel like I "have" to do it anymore. Maybe that is significant, that I feel like I have to. I'm looking forward to running, still, and running some trail races, but not having the day-in, day-out need for a run. It's a little weird, really, this running business. But I know it, and I have shared it with a lot of people. I'm not knocking it--that would be hypocritical au bas mot (did I use that right?)--just saying I'm out.

I think I've learned a few things throughout though, enough to write a book, maybe. ;)

Jay Cantin is a guy who has much faster PBs than I, and he made a little video that encapsulates the good stuff, I think.

So, on to law school...

final workouts

2007-07-09T19:19:00.000-04:00

So after my showdown with the kid, I was left feeling very sore. I had a massage on Wednesday, which seemed to help a bit, but I can never really tell until a few days later, because Eliza really gets in there. Some people think it is decadent of me to have a massage therapist come to my house. If you were laying on that table, you would not think it is decadent. It is painful! Also, another opinion is that it is not supposed to hurt. Well, I usually end up with pretty happy legs 3-4 days post-Eliza, so it does work for me, that's all I know!

I took Wednesday-Friday easy, partly because of the massage and because of the lack of warmdown on Tuesday, and also because I was just in a funk. I was not really that much into doing François' workout on Saturday, so much so that I forgot my watch at home. I biked to McGill (in case I couldn't get in--that way it would be easier to bike to Etienne), and jogged a mile easy while an intra-mural soccer game was going on. There was a McGill sprinter there doing 150s. He did 3 in the entire time I was there. He would do one, then put his pants on and lay in the endzone listening to his walkman for 10min. Oh, to be a sprinter!

My workout was 600 in 1:40, 45sec rest, then 300 in 48. I was supposed to do that 3x. I did it once, and I'm not sure how fast it was, but it felt like race pace for the 600 and then the 300 felt fast. I acheived my goal of feeling good after the workout (or at least better than I had felt going in). The mile cool down was nice. The bike home was nicer.

From Thursday night to Saturday at the workout, I just felt horrible. I'm not sure what it was. I had a serious bout of paranoia or insecurity or something, that was making me question everything. I just sort of kept telling myself that it was nothing, that it would pass. It did. So there's a lesson kids, haha, hold your feelings inside and they'll just go away! No, there's more to it than that. I think the workout helped, actually. I haven't really been eating well lately, nor have I been sleeping enough. Friday afternoon I had a 3 hour nap, which is evidence for sure that I need to sleep more (hence writing the blog at 7:30pm instead of 2am!).

So hopefully I'm on that for the next couple of days. I did a workout today: 3-4x400 in 66 with 3-4min rec. Stop when it gets to "cote 4" which is François for "pretty easy." I did the first one in 68 and it felt like garbage. I was not pleased. I was almost ready to call it at that. But then I did another and I managed 66, with about the same effort. I started and finished the quarters from the 1500 start. On the main straightaway I got a boost of energy, or at least I realised that I had more in me, and that helped. On the 3rd quarter I did 65, again making use of a good feeling. My plan had been to do 3x400 and then finish with a 300 to make a total of 1500 for the workout. So I let it rip, a bit, for the last one. I had been starting slow (splitting 17 high mostly) and reeling it in, but for this last one, I pushed from the start. I was through in 16ish, and then I just held it for a 48. Total, give or take a second, would be 4:08.

Not that that workout is at all indicative of anything, but I feel confident that once I get warmed up a bit, I can handle the pace. I just need to get into the groove. The first 400 was awful, so maybe when I warm up on Wednesday I'll do a few longer strides, full 100s maybe, to get down to a comfortable 16.

I was confident before that I would run a PB, but I did not have it that day. I am pretty sure I am in the same shape now, and so it's just a matter of finding the groove, being rested, and letting it happen.

A sign from a kid.

2007-07-09T18:50:00.000-04:00

Last Tuesday, I hauled out the wheels and managed 10x200 in 30.ish, with an easy walk across the soccer field for recovery. I had an interesting, perhaps defining moment...

During the second 200, this kid pulls up beside me on a bike. He's got a kid's racing helmet and fake racing number on his little dirt bike--he must be around 9 or 10 years old? Anyway, he's out in lane 4 and I'm in lane 1, just doing my 200, so I'm going as fast as I can, pretty much. He beats me to the line and then kind of peals off. Whatever, it was helpful: I had someone to aim at. After I do a couple more, he comes over to me on my walk across the field. He's not shy at all, this kid.

"Hé monsieur, veut-tu faire une course?"

I tell him, sure, but it's got to be 200m, that's it. I tell him we can even do a couple, if he wants. So he scoots over to the start line, and waits. I get there, finished my recovery, and ask him if he's ready to go. He nods, so I take off. The kid doesn't budge. Now, I don't want to interrupt my workout, but I don't want to have an unfair race, so I look over my shoulder and shout: "Come on!" He finally gets going, but he doesn't manage to catch me (I had a good head start, and he had me running scared, I'll give him that!). So as I'm leaned over, heaving after another 30.5, he wheels up to me.

"Y parrait que t'as gagné."

So matter-of-fact, les Québecois. I feel bad. I think of the scene in Without Limits where Prefontaine is running around Hayward Field with the little kids, and when one kid sprints ahead, Pre doesn't let him win. Of course, the girlfriend gets mad, says he should have let the kid win. Pre says: "You can never let a losing attitude creep in." So I think of that, and realise of course in my case it matters little, but then again, maybe I need as much help as I can get, and if crushing one 9-year-old's soul (really though, he was on a bike!) might get me a PB, maybe it would be worth it. The kid speaks again.

"Ça't tente-tu'd faire une course à vélo?"

A chance at redemption, perhaps. I had biked to the track, so I did have my bike there. I tell him, sure, but wait until I'm done running. So I polish off the rest of my 200s. He joins in for the last 50m of one. It helps. On my recovery he tells me, that in case I was wondering, he got the bike a couple of weeks ago, but the helmet and the racing number he got yesterday.

"C'est ben cool, ton bike." I tell him. He thanks me earnestly.

When I'm done, I walk over to the start finish where he's waiting. We're going to race one lap, 400m. I change out of my spikes and into my regular running shoes, and wheel myself over to the start/finish line. I let him say go. He says go and we're off.

I put my bike in the lowest gear so I'm spinning like crazy and not going anywhere. I'm in lane 1 again, and he's in lane 4 again. He puts on a little surge, but then coasts so that I catch up. I keep the gears low and just pedal steadily. He keeps looking back as if he knows I'm letting him win. I could change gears and take off any time I wanted. But he keeps surging and coasting, surging and coasting, all along the back straight and into the turn. I get the feeling he's toying with me, rather than the other way around. I wonder if I'd be better off hammering, giving him a race. Maybe he wants me to try harder.

We head into the final 100m and I change gears, pick it up a bit. So does he, staying just ahead. He doesn't coast. I am steady, working, but not going out of my way, yet. He pushes it again, and I catch up a bit. 20m to go, he's still in front. He starts to coast, I surge, then he surges one last time for the win.

Post-race, I shake his hand.

"Merci mon homme. Bonne course."

I walk my bike back to the fence. I realise that I know have to leave. So instead of doing my warmdown, I just hop on my bike and go home. It had to be done, though I felt it for three days. No warmdown after 10x200 in 30. Ouch. Good thing I had a massage on Wednesday.

one last kick at the can

2007-07-03T13:05:00.000-04:00

I'm not sure why I felt so flat and tired on Friday night, but I think regardless of excuses, it's probably better for me not to spend the money and time to go to Windsor to run nationals, when I can get a race more geared to my level in Ottawa the same week. If I had been able to run under 4:10 on Friday (as François predicted) I would have gone for it in Windsor, just for fun, and confident that with a couple more workouts and a taper I could drop to 4:00 range. I could probably run that fast this summer if I gave myself a few more weeks, but I don't have the desire to keep this up that much longer. 4:25 is just way too slow--slow enough that it is clear it was an anomaly, but still, slow enough to make me pause.

I did 5x500 on Tuesday in an average of 1:24 with only 2min rec in heat and wind (yes there were both). Here are the splits:
1:21 (32,33,16)
1:23 (32,36,15)
1:23 (33,35,15)
1:27 (33,37,17)
1:27 (34,37,16)

Compare that to 4x500 in 1:22 with 7min rec (and a whole lot more effort) and I think it shows a definite improvement. I fell apart a bit at the end, but it was mostly in the windy section.

I don't even know what the splits were for Friday night. Saturday I went swimming with my parents and then Sunday I did a really nice trail run on the mountain for about an hour. I didn't want to go (felt down about the race, was hanging out with Miriam which is more fun than going for a run when I don't feel like it), but I did and it was very good. I probably ran too fast, but I just needed to go and have a solid run, you know?

So, yeah, today some fast 200s (10-12 in 30-32), and then we'll see. I'll have to work on getting better sleep over the weekend and early next week. I think that getting to bed late, then up at 6 (if only briefly) made me kind of tired. I also felt that I wasn't quite recovered from the big workout on the weekend, or even the 500s, AND (excuses coming to an end soon...) I think I was sick, or at least on the verge of coming down with something. I started taking vitamins again, just to buffer a bit. Can I find anything else to blame? Oh, I did some new exercises in the weight room on Wednesday. Same program, new phase, but I probably should have stuck with the same stuff. I'll talk to Liz today about it.

I feel better today and most of my school work is taken care of, so I should be good to go. It seems like whenever I have a really BAD race, I follow it up with a pretty good one (Cross des couleurs followed by 10k PB for example), so I am upbeat and confident that there will be a 1500 PB this summer.

Two very fast workouts

2007-06-26T11:55:00.000-04:00

Ok, so I haven't posted in a week, but I haven't fallen off the wagon! I was just busy marking and didn't have time.

I did manage to get two pretty hefty workouts in. Last Wednesday, after taking three easy-ish days, post-nationals qualifying race, I went out to Lachine track for 4x800. The fact that I did a 3x10 (pretty heavy) weight workout first, and then biked 45min to get there may have affected the workout, but it was still not bad, all things considered. Here it is, with splits:

1st 800: 2:14 (31,33,34,35) it was very windy on the second and 4th 200s so I switched sides for the second one. I took about 3min rec between each one.
2nd 800: 2:20 (33,35,37,35) wind on the first and third 200s.
3rd 600: 1:44 (34,35,34)
4th 600: 1:42 (34,36,32) wind in the middle for these ones.

Not too bad, I think. I took Thursday v. easy and Friday off to travel to TO. Saturday, I met Darren at the Central Tech track for this beauty:

800: 2:15
400: 62
200: 28
400: 65 (starting to hurt)
600: 1:45 (felt it all the way to my fingers)

3min rec after the 800 and 4min rec after all the rest.

I'm pleased that I dropped that 28! I think it went really well. It felt like it was supposed to feel: lactic almost all the way for the last two intervals. I felt very tired on the second 400, but I still was pretty fast. The last 600 was a death march. I'm sure that my form was horrible, but I was just trying to get to the line at all costs. I did focus on keeping my head up at least.

Today I've got 5x500 in 1:23 (33sec 200s) with 90sec-2min rec. It should feel relatively easy, I think, but we'll see.

Friday I think I can run a PB. I was 4:14 in Sherbrooke and I felt strong, but not fast. If I can rest up enough by Friday, with these two workouts under my belt, getting the legs moving faster and working in some serious distress (what Roger Burrows calls the Emergency Response System), I think I am ready for it.

Liz is going to do my weight program for the next three weeks, and she's saying 3x/week. I guess I'll see what it looks like, but I'm excited about that, too. I really only have next week to do more workouts that will actually benefit my fitness, but sub-4 may not be out of the picture yet. We'll see what happens Friday night.

Mission: accomplished!

2007-06-18T00:04:00.000-04:00

Two races this week, and both went exactly according to plan.

Wednesday I ran 1500 at McGill. It was my first 1500 in about a year (I ran one last summer with Cardle and Nigel, just for fun, and I think I was about 4:15), so I started conservatively (68 first lap). I felt good, and I was right about where I wanted to be, ahead of the slow guys, but too far from the fast guys. One kid from CEGEP fell off the pack and I passed him on lap 2 (70). I actually broke the race up into 3x500m. The first 500 were easy, the second 500 push and the third, kick. So when I got to the third 500, I let it rip. I was 69 for the third lap. I finished with a 4:19 (51 for the last 300). Not bad. I had fun and I ran even.

Thursday and Friday I ran v. easy for about 30min each day, with some light strides on Friday.

Christina also raced Wednesday night and ran a 4:47. She was going to race Saturday, too, and her goal was to qualify for the national championships with a top 5 spot. She is much higher ranked than I am in her event, and she had a reasonable chance going in. In fact, on Saturday night she ran another 4:47 to finish second.

I had looked at the start list ahead of time, and calculated that I was going to have to beat quite a few guys to get in myself. This is what the start list looked like on Friday:

1 5100 Poulin-Cadovius, James 85 Montreal Olympique 3:47.00
2 6400 Brett, Allan OttawaLions 3:51.23
3 5380 Lavoie, Olivier 88 Corsaire Chaparal 3:51.97
4 6403 Desormeaux, Kyle OttawaLions 3:52.49
5 6167 Michaud, Dominic 85 Cirrus 3:58.50
6 5931 Bouchard, Julien 84 Fleur de Lys 3:59.50
7 5938 DeBardi, Stephen 78 Fleur de Lys 4:02.00
8 5935 Colle, Stephane 88 Fleur de Lys 4:05.00
9 5932 Bouchard, Remi 87 Fleur de Lys 4:05.00
10 5266 Fauteux-Brault, Guillaume 87 Sherbrooke 4:06.00
11 5748 lapierre, Maxime 88 Universite Laval 4:12.00
12 5951 Lofranco, John 77 Fleur de Lys 4:15.00
13 6410 Lalonde, Patrick OttawaLions 4:15.00
14 5741 Perreault-Varin, Maxime 89 Trois-Rivieres 4:18.56
15 5644 Carriere, Yan 89 Vaudreuil-Dorion 4:30.00
16 6207 Novotny, Peter 89 Independant 4:35.00
17 6158 Demers, Benjamin 89 Cirrus 4:40.10

So for one thing I was worried about getting to race with the guys ahead of me, as they could very well have made two heats. On Saturday night, however, Things changed a bit. Lavoie didn't show (not sure if he was ever planning to, having got standard for Pan-Am juniors out west), and neither did Debardi. Julien was going to be pacing the steeple for his littlest brother, and Debardi didn't show up either. Menard was there, ready to race, but both he and James were not allowed to run because they didn't check in ahead of time. So at the line, the situation looked like this:

1 6400 Brett, Allan OttawaLions 3:51.23
2 6403 Desormeaux, Kyle OttawaLions 3:52.49
3 6167 Michaud, Dominic 85 Cirrus 3:58.50
4 5935 Colle, Stephane 88 Fleur de Lys 4:05.00
5 5932 Bouchard, Remi 87 Fleur de Lys 4:05.00
6 5266 Fauteux-Brault, Guillaume 87 Sherbrooke 4:06.00
7 5748 lapierre, Maxime 88 Universite Laval 4:12.00
8 5951 Lofranco, John 77 Fleur de Lys 4:15.00
9 6410 Lalonde, Patrick OttawaLions 4:15.00
10 5741 Perreault-Varin, Maxime 89 Trois-Rivieres 4:18.56
11 5644 Carriere, Yan 89 Vaudreuil-Dorion 4:30.00
12 6207 Novotny, Peter 89 Independant 4:35.00
13 6158 Demers, Benjamin 89 Cirrus 4:40.10

Ranked 8th, but 6th out of Quebecers (Brett and Desy, who drove down with us, were from Ontario and so couldn't qualify for nationals at this meet), all I had to do was beat one of those guys. I'll be honest, I don't really know who any of the guys whose names I haven't mentioned are (except Michaud and Novotny). So I had to beat a 4:06 guy and a 4:12 guy.

The race started out very quick, despite not having James and Menard to push the pace. Desy wanted to run 3:50, so he took it out hard. The first 200 was in 29-30 for the leaders and all those guys went with them. I was happy to be in about 12th spot and through 200 in 32 seconds. Before we got around to the first lap, (66) I had moved up on a couple of the runners and down the back stretch for the second time I was just behind a group which I think contained Lapierre and Fauteux.

I could see Desy and Brett well ahead, and Remi, Cole and Michaud were the chase pack. I thought about sitting on the young guys (ok, I know they are ALL at least 10 years younger than me--which is why I knew enough to not go out in 29!) but I felt good so I thought why not try to reel in the Fleur de Lys guys. I went around the kids and spent the next 500m looking up (good!) and chasing Cole and Bouchard #2. I didn't really gain any ground, but they pulled me through (second lap about 67).

With 500 to go, I was still just ahead of Lapierre (I think). I made a move and that was that. With 200 to go I knew I had him, and I could also see I wasn't catching anyone else, so I just gave'er and enjoyed the ride. I knew I'd make nationals because I was sitting 4th Quebecer, so that was a fun last 200. It's nice to run with a smile, sometimes.

Today I ran for 1h20, my longest in a while. I ran with Les to watch her workout. It was a bit round-about, as we went to Kent but weren't allowed on the track (we saw Neressa though, who was there watching Kouyabe play soccer in the African Games--the reason for the closure), so we jogged to McGill. She did a solid workout and I lounged on the track.

Not sure what is in store for this week, but François said something about shooting for 4:05, so if the coach says it can be done, well, it can be done. I'll extend my season two more weeks after OTFAs, and I think if I can do 4;05 at OTFAs, there's no reason why I can't use a tactical semi-final at nats to run sub-4. Tactical for them will be just right for me!

It feels a bit like those race car games where you hit a checkpoint so you are allowed to keep going. I just won myself two extra weeks of training! I know, the naysayers will claim this is just another sign I won't retire, but I think it is just perfect. I've never run nationals in track before, and I've never broken 4min. I can do both in one shot, and then head for the couch! Haha.

...and we're back up! This is like mountain running, geez...

2007-06-13T12:10:00.000-04:00

After a rough week last week, I seem to have gotten back into shape, quite miraculously. I ended up taking both Tuesday and Thursday (and Sunday!) off, or at least, that's what my log says. I may have forgotten to log a run. Wednesday I did 10x1min hard, 1min easy on the trails on the mountain. I didn't really want to go to the track, even though my thinking was to finish the workout I started on Friday (5x2x400 in 68), so I just opted for something probably fine from a physical point of view, but easier on me mentally.

This Friday I had a great workout after consulting with François, and determining that quality over quantity was what I needed. So I did 4x500 in 1:22,21,22,23, with lots of recovery. I took about 7min between intervals. The first one was the hardest. When I did the 1:23 (and it was 1:23 high) I figured better not to do another one in 1:25, since that would not be the quality I was looking for.

Saturday I was a very good boy and I did what I was told: 15min jog and another 10x1min on/1min off, this time on the trails in Durham, as part of the 5 peaks race. I added on for a total of 1h15. I took Sunday off because Miriam and I were at the cottage and it was too nice to venture out on the road, and Jan said there were lots of bugs. Normally I wouldn't have skipped out on it, but I had done the longer run on Saturday, and again, quality, not quantity.

Monday I did 6x200 with Christina. I let her lead, and gave her a two second head start. She was supposed to run 36 and I was doing 34s. She opened with a 31, pulling me to a 30 flat. Nice. So we settled down after that. I was 30,32,33,33,33,33. Afterwards we did 3x80m FAST. They felt really really good. Not a thing in my hip. I just felt strong and fast the entire way. All systems go!

Yesterday was an easy 30min. It felt good to go for a run, even if it was kinda short and it was supposedly hot outside. I am much better in the heat now. I'm not sure why. I wonder if it has to do with my diet. I used to have a horrible time in the heat, but then, that was when I was a vegetarian. I wonder if eating meat has helped somehow? I could ask Amy, she might know...

So, tonight is the first 1500. I am seeded at 4:18, which is a reasonable estimate, I think. There is a fast group (looks like John Carle is pacing James for a 3:47) with about 3-4 guys under 4min, but then there is a slower group, and they will probably start too fast, so I should have some people to run with for the first bit. It doesn't really matter to me in a 1500. I will run 34s and see where that gets me with 300 to go. I felt very fast on Monday, holding back on those 33s, so I think it will be ok. It will be interesting to see what the turnaround will be like for Saturday night.

back to basics? to the drawing board? to the future?

2007-06-04T13:31:00.000-04:00

Wow, tough week. After some really good workouts, my 3k did not go as I had hoped. And it wasn't even like I was a bit off what I was expecting. I was WAY off. I don't understand it, really. I ran 9:29, which is 43 secs off my PB and about 30 secs off what I figured I could do. Having run in the 8:45-9:00 range several times, I didn't think it would be that hard to get back there, especially given the good workouts I had. But, maybe my own instinct for shorter recoveries is a good one. Maybe 3-4min rest between intervals is too much--it doesn't simulate the race enough. In a race you don't get to recover. Or, maybe the workouts were designed for a 1500 and that tree will bear fruit next week. I suppose we will see.

Friday I tried to do a workout, but it just wasn't happening. The plan was 2x5x400 in 67-68 with 200m rec and 5min set rec. Pretty reasonable. I did the first one in 68 and I knew it was going to be ugly. The next two were 70 and 72 (37,35 with wind, but still). I did one more without my watch, just by effort. I honestly felt like I was about 50 years old (actually, that's not fair because I know some 50-year-olds who could probably knock that one back).

Reasons? Looking forward to shopping with hot new girlfriend? Sounds like a good excuse, but that's not really the reason. More likely: very little sleep last week, esp post-race, and Thursday night (which also included 3 pints and a drunken bike ride...oops!). So I took Saturday completely off. And when I say completely, I mean completely. I got out of bed to make us breakfast and to get the paper. It was a pleasant and necessary indulgence.

Regardless, I think I need to re-evaluate the goals. Probably 4:15-18 would be reasonable for next week, and if all continues to go well, I can still shoot for a PB of 4:08 in Ottawa. The chiro is working well, so that should help, too.

Sunday I did the Tour de L'ile: about 65k total, including the trip from my house to Parc Maisonneuve and back. It was a fun day, and I almost acheived my goal of taking it easy. I stayed with Katy and Yasmin and Mike for most of the first part. I satisfied my urge to go fast by falling back first to call Christina to see if she was home to lend me a jacket (she didn't answer) and then to call her mom to see if I could just stop by the house. Franca answered and got me Chrissy's Concordia jacket. So then I had to pedal pretty hard to catch the group. It was fun. I held back until the half-way stop. There I had to really keep it under wraps not to want to go out again too soon. We got our free cheese and milk (dumbest promotional idea ever: milk and cheese on a hot day!), and layed about on the grass. I was thinking in my head: all these people, they're leaving, they're getting ahead of me! But I held it back. Once we got going again, at about 30k or so Katy met up with some more Concordia people. I got a bit ahead of her and when I looked back I couldn't see her. She had said she wanted to find the next bathroom, so I didn't want to wait around too long in case she had stopped. So onward I went, fast, as I like to go. The last rest-stop is a forced one, and I got a Super Ice, and enjoyed that, asked who Wayne was (there were a lot of "I'm with Wayne" t-shirts). Turns out he was doing his 20th tour. Nice. I biked the last 8k pretty fast (for me). I figure it was about 30kph, except for the last bit through the Olympic stadium. It was good to finish with a bunch of little kids, just to put the point on it: IT'S NOT A RACE!

So yeah, I feel much more rested now and hopefully this week will help me get ready for the 1500 on the 13th. My motivation to do well is low, but my motivation to run is not flagging much. I did a nice easy run with Sarah Jane this morning and I'm giong to do the tempo with the kids tonight. Only a double because SJ was in town: she is big soup. I met her in the lobby of the Queen Elizabeth hotel. Meeting the personal trainer/nephew is very big soup. Haha.

Let's see what this week brings. Go Ducks.

Two more workouts: faster and faster!

2007-05-25T20:05:00.001-04:00

I suppose I shouldn't be surprised. The body really is good at doing what it is told. After two weeks and only four workouts, I'm running much faster than I thought I would. The rust is gone. I'm seriously thinking 8:45ish next week, especially if the chiro treatment works out. I had a pretty long evaluation with Dr. Neil today, and he seemed to think it was a fixable problem. He will treat me on Monday.

This week, I did two workouts. Wednesday, Debardi and I jogged over to McGill at around 3pm. The girls guarding the track wanted two bucks from us, but Debardi sweet-talked them and in exchange for letting us in for free, we did our workout shirtless. Fair trade, I think. ;)

Anyway, the workout was 2x(600-400-600-400) with 2min between each interval, 10min between each set. François gave us some goal times, but they were more for Julien than for us old guys, so we modified. Still, I was pleased to run 1:47-67-1:47-66 in the first set. It gave me enough confidence to go faster in the second set, and we managed to pull it off: 1:44-64-1:44-66. The last quarter was tough, and Debardi waited for me to pull me through the last 100. Still, it felt great. I am getting faster every day.

The second workout proved it, as I opened with a 1:40 600 on a hot Friday afternoon. The workout was 600-500-400-300-200-100, the first three at 1500 pace and the next three fast. 1:22, 64 (a little too fast, but felt great), 46, 30 and no time, but fast with the McGill group doing 200s in 27. Lots of recovery, but I'm really more concerned with getting the legs to turnover, so I don't mind.

I'm a little disappointed with how much attention François is paying to me. I know, odd, as I'm a coach, too, and we both know I can figure it out on my own, but I've asked him to help me with this 1500 thing. It is a common problem with Frank: he has too many athletes and tries to do too much. He is a great coach, and a great man, but sometimes his plate gets too full. He wanted me to do 15x200 at 1500 pace on Monday, but that's my tempo day, and I don't think he realised that I'm running a 3k on Wednesday, not 1500.

200s and lower back pain

2007-05-18T21:55:00.000-04:00

The second track/1500 workout of the summer/comeback is on. 12x200 with 200 break, in about 32. I had a couple 31s, early (and when I put the spikes on), and a 33 in there as well, near the end. It hurt, more than I think a 200m workout should, but it was considerably better than last week. I felt kind of broken-down-tractor-like for most of it (and yes, that is an improvement), but I just kept telling myself to make my legs turn over, because that's what I need most right now. That's what needs to catch up. The endurance is there. It's there.

My back was still pretty tight. I saw Julie on Tuesday and she figures it is a pinched nerve. She showed me the way it looks in her book and with the skeleton and all, and it seems like my hip is jammed up, keeping the nerve from sliding. There may also be some scar tissue. So I think I will go and see François' chiro. He's right near my house. I got chiro right after Boston, and it felt good for a week. I used to get it all the time, from Janet, when I was in Toronto. Some people are against it (physios and certain massage therapists--it's funny how people take sides on that), but I've had success in the past, so I think that is what I will do. It seems to make sense: something is stuck; it needs to get unstuck. The chiro can do that. The problem is how did it get that way? Julie couldn't figure it out. I think it is just from lots of mileage and from mountain running. I mean, leaning over, running uphill for an hour? Then training 80-100mpw, 2h+ runs...come on. It's an overuse injury, brought on by a weakness in my core, lower right back, glutes, too, probably (not firing as usual). So the chiro will re-set it, and since I'm planning to keep my volume down, I think I should be ok. I hope so because I feel like an old man. This is bordering on chronic pain and I AM NOT THAT OLD YET.

Also: sat in the tub with cold water and ice from the Ultramar. 8min. Not bad. I think that will help the legs. My right calf cramped up on the cool down, and my hams got real tight at the end. All related to the back, of course, but I think the ice will do good. It would do good anyway, so might as well.

And: I met Debardi's mom. François was telling me she is an incredible lady. Was all over the world in the 60s and 70s setting up medical facilities and stuff. Love those New Brunswickers! She's from Bat-hurst.

Next week: two workouts. Wednesday and Friday. Mondays tempos have been good. Did 5x5min with Debardi on the trails on the mountain this week. It felt pretty good. Everything feels real good except my back. I wonder how it'll be with rock climbing? It'll probably do me some good to hang upside down or something. We'll see!

1500 season

2007-05-11T22:57:00.000-04:00

I did my first track workout of the summer tonight. It was pretty short and pretty slow, but it was a good re-integration to that sort of thing. 4x400 in 69,72,71,72 with 200 recovery, then 4min, then 4x200 in 32,33,34,32, also with 200 recovery. The first 200 was actually 31.8, so it was nice to see that I still have some wheels. I subscribe to the Steve Boyd theory that the speed is there, and you just have to work on the endurance. That is, if you can run one 200 in 31, then you can run a 1500 that fast, if you work on your endurance. I will probably have to work on the speed end a bit, too, though. Ok, let’s be honest I have to work on it a lot. I think I can get down to doing 200s under 30 pretty soon. Not sure what that will mean for 1500 pace though.

First race is likely to be at McGill on May 30th, a 3000m. Should be a good transition from the marathon, and hopefully I can go much faster than my 9:24 of this winter. My goal for the summer is to run 1500 under 4min. 3:59.6, to be precise—Harold’s outdoor PB. I gotta get something faster than that guy! His 3000 is 8:33, which seems a stretch for the short time-frame I have before I open up, but we’ll see. You never know.

The thing is, this is going to be my last kick at the can, I think. Everyone seems to be in denial about it but me, though. Leslie doesn’t believe it. François just laughed. It’s going to be fun having a coach this summer, and hopefully getting some workouts in with Julien and Debardi, but I can’t see myself training the way I have for the last couple years anymore. Two marathons and two world championships in year and a half is a lot. I need to take a break, at least, from training. Realistically, with law school in the fall, I’ll just run a bit with Concordia, but not really train for anything. Next summer, I’ll see if I want to get back into it, but I don’t know if I want to invest that kind of time anymore.

I spoke with Jay about the running/identity thing. It’s tough to shake it. Part of my identity is that I am a runner. I still will be, I suppose, just not as fast. I will still coach the school and Boreal (until the fall at least). I have always said that coaching gives me just as much, or even more, satisfaction as running does: I’m just so blown away by what Chrissy’s been able to do in two years. Sofiane is going to be a monster in the fall. I am really happy when Laura tells me she feels strong before her marathon. I still have yet to see Claudine qualify for Boston, but man, when she does it is going to be awesome. Maybe this is living vicariously, and also, I know that my contribution to their success is much less than their own, but still seeing them succeed is really great. So I can still keep running as part of me, without having it take over, as Jay put it.

The thing is, after recovering from the marathon, I feel like I’m coming out of a bit of a fog. It may be that it is spring, but I feel like I have so much more energy now that I’m not running two hours a day (duh!). I kind of like having this much energy. It is nice to be able to go to bed late and not feel shattered the next day. It’s nice to be able to have a beer or eat crap once in a while.

The 1500 stuff is fun, and I think that since I’m so far ahead aerobically, I can make the transition, do workouts for 6-8 weeks, and maintain my base with very little mileage. This will let me get some biking and swimming in (for Ste. Agathe in August), and rest the legs a little. The plan is going to look something like this:

Monday: weights, then tempo with Concordia
Tuesday: easy run
Wednesday: weights, then track workout on my own, also a long bike ride in the evening to Boreal.
Thursday: off (long day at Concordia especially after a late night coaching)
Friday: track workout at Etienne-Desmarteau
Saturday: easy run and/or swim with Char and/or bike ride with Sean/Amélie
Sunday: long run (90min max! Haha, that’s not a long run at all!)

So, five or six days or running, no double runs (though some double workouts if you count the weights). It’s almost like normal exercise. Gasp! Ok, not really.

I’m very excited about the weights. I think Liz has put together a good program for me. I was happy to have exceeded her expectations in the rowing test this week. She figured I’d pull 2:30 for 500m, and I managed 1:53. It’s about mental toughness. When I saw I was averaging 1:55 for the first 20 seconds or so, I didn’t want to slow down. If I hadn’t had the average pace there, I might not have done it, but really, two minutes of rowing is not a lot. I have to try to get better every time though, so maybe I should have dogged it a bit! (Maybe I did! I think I can do better.)

I’m going to see Julie on Tuesday about my back. I am going to have to face the music. I probably should have gone a long time ago. Oh well. Hopefully between her and Liz, I’ll get things straightened out. The good news is that it seems to hurt less when I run fast. Not sure why that is.

Bring on the 1500. It’s going to be a fun summer.

Boston Marathon Literary Review

2007-04-18T00:33:00.000-04:00

So where do I start? Hopkinton, Mass, I guess. Actually, it started at about mile 24, Brookline, at 5:15am, the earliest I have risen in a long time. I got up, ate three eggs and the bagel I bought the previous day at Finaglebagel where they have a table-saw/conveyor belt contraption that cuts bagels—coolest thing ever! Seriously, the bagel cutter was the highlight of my trip.

Anyway, I ate, then I got on the T (no birthday party singing this time) and rode downtown. I followed the crowd. There was a guy with stakes. He was planning to build his own tent. It was raining. The system was very well-organised. There was a line of about twenty yellow school busses, which loaded up with an odd assortment of both stringy and pugdy folk wearing garbage bags, and then zoomed off, only to be replaced not five minutes later with another line of empty buses.

I got on the bus at around 6:45, I suppose, and in an hour we were in Hopkinton. On the way, we had to stop to pick up stranded passengers from another bus that broke down. I read my newly purchased “Runner’s Literary Companion,” a book I had heard about but was unable to find elsewhere. If the USA is good for anything, it is good for finding stuff. I read the excerpt from Once a Runner, not because it was really applicable (I had read the marathon stories the night before, in an effort to feel something special about the day. No dice), but because I like that story a lot, and it makes me want to run. Wanting to run would be a key ingredient on Monday.

So we rolled into Hopkinton, a town I have now mentioned three times, which is probably three times too many. Caroline, my ride down, said that she really liked the town, but to be honest, I hardly noticed it. Pierre, Caroline’s husband, has family nearby, and he seemed to share my nonplussedness. Anyway, the first thing I did there was take a dump. There wasn’t really a line, contrary to popular legend.

They had erected tents over the two sports fields that they used as athlete villages. Despite this, the ground under the tent was swamp-like at best, from a full day and night of driving rain. Yes, the weather was very bad in the days leading up to the marathon. I wandered to the lower village, after hearing announcements that the school and the upper village were full. I skwooshed into the tent, found an empty table, spread out my garbage bag and sat down. A few others joined me on my perch, which I gladly shared, but most runners had to sit on the ground (if they wanted to sit, which is sort of the ideal position to be in two hours before race time), and I’m not sure their garbage bags really helped much. It got really dark at one point, and there was some lightning. The wind blew the rain around, but mostly, I stayed dry and relaxed.

After some more reading, and some iPod listening (Yer Not the Ocean and World Container by the Tragically Hip were the last two songs I played before heading out), I threw on my disposable rain poncho and walked towards the start. On the way I stopped off at the toilet again (just to piss this time—the woods were being patrolled by siren-wielding sheriffs on 4x4s), and then over to my baggage bus. I was pleased to see my stuff would be on Bus #1. I would regret that later, though…I took off my pants and my jacket, changed into my racing shoes, and put my bag on the bus. Then I jogged (a cursory warm up) the .7miles to the start line.

Once I got there, I looked for people I might know: Jason Loutitt, Louis-Phillipe Garnier…I didn’t see anyone I knew. I had seen Michelle and/or Alison Gates (I saw them/her twice. Not sure which was which, or if it was the same one twice) in the village, but that’s it. No Marcio, no Louise, no Caroline.

I got to the start line at 9:45. Everything was timed pretty well. It was still raining a bit, but not hard. They introduced the elite men, then Sergeant Dan sang a hearty rendition of the Star Spangled Banner, and then away we went. A lot of Americans had their hands over their hearts during the national anthem. It is nice that people care so much, I think, but also maybe a little scary. Perhaps it was appropriate to be patriotic at this moment, not because the Boston Marathon is an American institution, and indeed a historic race (it is), but because of WHY it is so. The original race was 24.5 miles from Ashland, but before that, it was meant to go from Concord to Boston, to mimic Paul Revere’s famous ride (a sort of American homage to Philippides). That, I did not know before reading the first chapter of Michael Connelly’s “26 miles to Boston.”

Physically, I felt good. All of my aches and pains were gone. I hadn’t done any strides or anything, but the jog over had felt good. I really felt like for the first time in three months, I was ready for a good little run. The weather, the much ballyhooed weather, was improving, and regardless, was the best I’d seen in months anyway. No snow. Temp well above freezing, and the wind was intermittent at worst.

My plan was to try to run 2:37. Originally, François and I had thought breaking 2:30 was a reasonable goal, but after a few set-backs in training, and given some race results along the way, I figured this was a challenging, yet do-able goal. The big challenge in the Boston marathon is not to go out too hard. 2:37 averages out to 6min miles, but, given the nature of the course, anything up to 5:45 would have been ok for a first mile. Very relaxed, I ran 6:18. So, good, I thought. I avoided the first mistake. So I picked it up to about the pace I thought was right. Sure enough, I was through 3miles in 18:00 and did my first 5k in 18:38. A “Christina” 5k, I thought of it as, since that’s about what she runs them in.

The course is boring. I’m sorry to say that one small, quaint Massachusetts town looks just like another, and the roads between them are even more so. Still, I was feeling good, and I had a partner to run with. A guy in an orange singlet had moved with me after our first slow mile, and we had been gradually moving through the field together. We had an unspoken agreement, it seemed. He looked for me before he made a move, and I looked for him. We’d move up on a group and feel them out for a bit, then one of us would decide to move on. I would see most of these groups again.

Sometime around 10k, which I completed, again, on target, in 37:03, I saw Jason Loutitt. I hadn’t expected to see him so soon, or at all, and it made me worried that I was running too fast. But he said he hadn’t been running much lately, and that he wasn’t going to push it. He was in the middle of changing his shirt, and then he said he was going to drop back. I didn’t see him again. Around this time I also passed a guy named Laurent Jugant who runs for Vainqueurs. What is wrong with this guy? I passed him at about 22k in Toronto. He always goes out way too hard. He could probably run a decent race (any distance!) if he were patient, but he always goes out of his league. I know what you are thinking. I don’t ALWAYS do that…

Somewhere around here (again, it was all a blur. The towns were pretty dirty, and the spectators, though friendly, were not wall-to-wall, as advertised. I can see why, as it was a miserable day. I was fine running, but I wouldn’t have wanted to stand outside for any great length of time)…so, somewhere around 10k-15k, my gloves got too wet and sticky to deal with. I had my trust straw, but at the first water stop, I discovered that it had cracked. I pulled on it, but hardly got any juice. The second water stop was better, and I managed to make good use of it until about 10k, at which point I accidentally let it fall to the road with the empty cup. I would have to learn how to drink on the run on the run. I spilled a bit more than I would have wanted to, but it actually worked out ok. Still, at this point, the gloves, the nice white official Boston marathon gloves that I had been given at the start, were all wet. So I thought I would be nice, and give them to a kid who was standing there watching the race. I peeled them off, tucked them into a ball, and looked for a kid on the sidelines. I saw a little girl with her mom, so I angled over, looked her right in the eye, waved the gloves, and tossed them. She didn’t move and they bounced right off her face. I was shocked, not sure if I should laugh or feel bad. No time for either, as I was already by her. I yelled “You were supposed to catch them!” I hope she didn’t think she had to return them.

15k in 55:45, but I was starting to feel it. The orange-singlet guy had caught up to me after I broke away for a bit. I was feeling good, and I thought, well, I might as well keep on a good thing. What may have happened is that we may have hit a tailwind. I’m not sure. Anyway, at about 11 miles or 17k, I began to fall gradually off the pace. The orange guy was slowly reeling in the next group. So was I, but I was doing so much more slowly. I thought, if I can just catch the group, I’ll hang in with them and re-group. No such luck though, as they group itself came apart, and we all drifted into a kind of no-man’s land of strung-out, just off the pace runners, easy prey for the groups that were moving up from the back.

One of the first groups to do so housed a small, Japanese runner in green and white. I noticed him because he was so small. I would see him later as well. For now, he moved on, leaving me to my misery.

By the time we hit Wellesley College, I was sorely tempted to take one of the girls up on their “Kiss me for good luck” signs. I was in serious need of some luck. I settled for a bunch of hand slaps. It was way too early to be feeling any kind of trouble if I wanted to do well. My pace had dropped off by a minute (19:42, after my last 5k had been 18:42, and 18:24 and 18:38 before that). Trouble.

I went through halfway in just under 1:20. I thought, well, the worst I can do is toddle in in a 1:30 half…

My mouth was dry from gummi bears. I was doing my best to drink, even though I was depressed because I knew I was not going to run a good time, or crack the top 100 (which last year was just under 2:37, fyi, this year was 2:38:36, so not that much different, despite the weather). It would have been easy to not drink, but I knew I had to if I wanted to finish the thing. My fifth 5k was 20:37.

When we hit the hills, I actually started to feel better. Sometimes I think this only happens because I slow down. Probably true in this case. I was definitely running at sub-maximal effort, but I had long ago abandoned any thought of pushing through. It’s one thing to do it in the last 10k, but another to do it in the last 25. Again, the hills were nothing, really. I slowed down to 21:52 and then 22:47 from 25-35k. I thought I saw Sharlene Cobain at about 30k, but I may have been hallucinating. Sharlene, was that you?

In any case, the hills were not so bad. The third one was the worst, but my heart had been broken long before Boston College, so when the guy in the bathrobe stepped out in front of me, screamed, and flashed open his robe, I was not even mildly surprised to see that he was wearing black soccer shorts underneath. Nothing special was the theme for the day.

At the Boston marathon, you expect miracles. You expect something great to happen or some revelation or to cry or to laugh a great joy. At 23miles, I thought that it was about to happen to me. In my case, finishing the Boston marathon is no big deal. I know I can run that far, and I know that you can put even bigger hills than Newton in there and I’ll do it. It could have been raining much harder, and I would have finished. So you have to understand, performance is important. It’s not win or lose, but it is not simply how you play the game. It is somewhere in between. So when, at 23miles, I thought I saw the clock read 2:20:00, I had my moment. I did some quick math, and realised that all I had to do was run about 22min for the last 5k, and I’d have a PB. A PB is always a cause for celebration, a sign, no matter what else that you can say, today I ran the best race of my life. So I went for it. I started hammering. And to my surprise, I found that I had it in me. I hammered and passed a good dozen guys in the next mile. Funny how people were falling off the wagon. I mean, they were jumping off head first. I was well-rested from the 12miles of jogging I’d done in the meantime. Then I hit 24miles and saw the clock: 2:36:18. It was one of those good news/bad news moments. The good news: I didn’t just run a 16min mile. The bad news, I just ran a 6:18 mile, which means that I misread the clock at 23. Dear John: Shit. Signed, Heartbroken in Brookline.

Right about this time, I passed Payton and Kirsten on their way to Fenway. Kirsten got a good shot of me, and you can tell by the look on my face that I am right pissed. Not tired after having run 24miles, not hitting the wall, no, pissed. I tried to turn it into something good. I did. I picked it up a bit again, convincing myself for a moment that, hey, 2:51 is better than 2:53. Right? Right? I played this game with myself, mostly losing, until the last mile. Someone once said: Everyone’s got heart on the final straightaway, or something like that. In the marathon, maybe the last mile is that straightaway. Then again, there were a lot of people, as I said, who were clearly enjoying themselves even less than I was.

Case in point: just after crossing under the bridge at Commonwealth (a course adjustment they made last year), I noticed, not too far ahead, the green and white-clad Japanese guy. I gunned it again. I passed him, and several others, and kept cruising onto Boylston street. I was now in the final stretch. Please pass the heart. The streets were lined with screaming people, and some idiot in front of me was even playing to the crowd, encouraging them to scream louder. I was not in the mood. I passed him. I passed one of the elite women who had started 15min ahead of me. She was not having a good day, either. I caught sight of a guy wearing a “Snickers Marathon Bar” singlet. Snickers? Gross. You are the weakest link. Actually, he was Pepi Peterson. Not pleased, didn’t speak to me after the race. Sorry, dude.

So I finished. I crossed the line, a little more tired than when I had crossed it the night before with Chris and Kirsten on our walk downtown, but I crossed it. I was…underwhelmed. The lady who removed my timing chip seemed hard-done-by to tie my shoe back up. They gave me a bag of potato chips, a banana, an apple and a granola bar. I had to walk three or four blocks to get my bag. Luckily, I was able to get a massage and a chiropractic treatment (my back felt ok, and feels ok now) quickly. But the rest of the post-race experience was frustrating and boring. I could see it in the spectators who were looking for their family members who had run. It was impossible, or nearly impossible to pick someone out of the crowd, even with the lettered family meeting area signs. I waited around for Caroline (and Pierre and Laura as spectators), but at 3pm I decided it was futile. I took the T back to Chris and Kirsten’s and they were just getting in from the Sox game. Sunday’s game got rained out, but when we find out when the make-up game is, I’ll probably go back and visit again. They were really great hosts, by the way. It started and ended at Mile 24, Beacon and Kent.

A few positive notes: I beat Pepi. Yes, it is about beating people. It is a race. That is the purpose of racing, really. It’s not a time trial, it’s not the Boston Fun Run, it is a race. But I suppose everyone has their reasons (see Adidas marketing campaign—actually, really, what it is, is a big fat advertisement, but anyway…positive things).

I did not bonk. I believe that a combination of good training and smart racing (or at least smart racing making up for earlier foolish racing) saved me that ignominy. 2:51 after all is not that different from 2:44, in the fuel consumption scheme of things. So I feel I can be proud of that. It does seem that in general times were slower this year, but I don’t want to use the weather as an excuse or play the game of well, the leaders were 7min slow, so that means you can take 8 or 9min off your time, or it’s worth this or that. I ran what I ran. My fitness is likely a little faster than that, but exactly how much faster I could only say if I had gone out slower. I don’t think that I fell prey to the course at Boston, as I did go out slower than planed, and I did stick to my plan. I just over-estimated my fitness. A mistake nonetheless.

I did run the Boston marathon. Apparently this impresses people. I’m happy that it does. It does mean that I have done something a lot of other people have done. A lot of other people have not done it, either, and really really want to do it. So, yes, finally, I do feel a little bit special.

Will I do a marathon again? I probably will, but not any time soon. Running a marathon is not hard, despite what some might tell you. Training properly for one, when one is a pretty fit and mildly successful runner with competitive ambitions, however, is quite difficult, time-consuming, and ultimately, life-draining. If this, or any other, marathon teaches a lesson about life, it is that if you make a plan, and carry out the plan, you’ll probably make your goal. There are no miracles. Just hard work. Steady, simple, straight ahead hard work. It can be applied to anything: to your job, to your love relationships, to your family. It should be applied to those things. Simple, get-out-the-door-and-do-it-everyday is what got me to the finish line, the same as Robert Cheruiyot, and the same as this guy: http://www.whatwouldjacobdo.com/. So there you go.

Final countdown...

2007-04-12T21:42:00.000-04:00

Well, I feel different this time. I'm not pondering law school, for one thing. I'm not sure if there is anything else, any other large and unreasonable life change that I'm using as a way to deflect focus from this marathon I'm supposed to run. Well, there is one thing, but I'm not going to mention it. I'll wait until after to see if it is still around on Tuesday... It's not the sense of ending that came last time. It's there, but I can hardly believe myself when I say that I'm going to retire after this. I mean, first of all, I don't know that I'm good enough to actually call it "retiring" and of course, I won't not run. I'll just not train as hard, which will become an excuse for not racing as well. Or maybe I will run a 1500 this summer for real. Or play hockey. Who knows? I'm trying to keep my eyes on the prize here, but sometimes I get distracted.

Hard to tell if I feel ready. My back is hit and miss. I feel like it is getting better. The last couple of weeks have been boring, running-wise. I think that is a good thing. It hit me tonight that I really would like to get out and go for a good long hard run. I guess I can hold off until Monday. I think that is a good thing, too. I'm finally starting to feel a little restless. It's just that when I do run, I don't feel all that great. Good thing I'll have a little while to warm up.

The weather may be an issue. Apparently there will be wind and rain. My thinking is: better wind and rain than wind and snow. I've been training in the worst possible weather all winter, so I am not at all worried about what it's going to be like. My main concern is what to wear. I mean, what if my new Puma top doesn't match my favourite shorts? ...Ok, no. That's not what I mean. I mean, ideally, I would wear shorts and singlet in 10 degree weather, but if it is raining, do I go with pants because it is cold? Or will they stick to me and annoy me? 2h30 is a long time! (Especially if it's 2h37 or something). Do I wear a long-sleeve under the singlet? To be honest, I think it is going to come down to singlet and shorts, as long as the temperature is above zero. I don't think another t-shirt will make a difference in the wind. I'll just have to bring all kinds of stuff I can get rid of. You would think after 111 years, they would make it easier at the start.

I'm also pissed off that the faster runners have to take the early bus. So I'll get out there at 8am or some shit, and the people who are going to run it in 4 hours anyway get to arrive at 9:30. Hopefully I can score a ride with Payton's club.

Anyway, I certainly have more long runs under my belt this time. I have a run of 2h50, which is hopefully more than I'll even run the thing in, so I am confident about getting it done. The question is how fast. Almost all of the quality I did was relative, that is to say, it was done in horrible conditions so I was reving the engine really high, but not getting much turnover. I guess turnover is not all that important for a marathon. I feel like I have a lot of endurance, and not much speed. That's probably how it should be. And I'm starting to feel restless. I'm eating a lot and not noticing it. Ok.

Ok.

I think I'm ready.

Fighting in hockey...sure, why not?

2007-04-04T21:43:00.000-04:00

An article in the Star (http://www.thestar.com/News/article/199587) suggests that most hockey fans support fighting. Not surprising. What was interesting were the other aspects of the poll:

"The poll also found that:

– Supporters of the Conservative party were nine percentage points more likely to support fighting than Liberals.

– Francophones were eight per cent more supportive of a fighting ban than anglophones.

– Younger people (aged 18 to 24) say they enjoy fighting 15 percentage points more than people aged over 55.

– Men are 15 per cent more likely than women to oppose a ban.

– Alberta is the province most opposed to a ban.

The Decima poll of 1,000 Canadians was conducted between March 30 and April 2, and has a 3.1 per cent margin of error."

Just putting it out there...

food

2007-03-31T21:00:00.000-04:00

I just went to the store and bought: two boxes of mussels, a dozen eggs, a cantalope and flax seed cookies. I bow to the cravings.

Taper time! Woohoo!

2007-03-28T21:53:00.000-04:00

Last week was a good week. It started with my longest run ever, time-wise: a leisurely 2h51min on the mountain, through the remains of the snow storm. It actually felt easier than the previous hard 20milers done in 2h20 on snow. Woke up in the middle of the night Sunday (post-run) with chest pains. Chest pains so bad they woke me up! Marcio, a guy I coach who also happens to be a heart surgeon, or something, says that it is most likely stomach acid, or muscle cramping, and NOT heart related. Still, chest pains, lower back trouble...you wouldn't know I'm actually not even 30 yet.

After easy runs on Monday and Tuesday, in which my legs hurt a bit but not too much, I tried for the 10k progression run on Wednesday. I managed to get down to 3:30/k on the last two Ks (nos. 7 and 8) but that was it. I ended up with about 8k total. Not bad anyway, but no top end speed. So Coach Frank and I decided that I should do some 800s in 2:30, which is not all that fast, but faster than anything else I've been doing, and 400s are pretty much useless for marathon prep. Anyway, that went down later...

Thursday I doubled up for the first time in a while. The evening run was cool: Cat brought her dog, Nicolai. He was chill. Unfortunately, Christina did not run with us. That would have been fun to see, haha. She did meet the dog, but declined his amourous advances. How she could resist his husky eyes? Anyway... Friday I just did an easy 30min, basically running up to the track to see Tafik run his 1500.

Tafik is this kid who trains with the Tuesday night Jog-o-max (worst team name ever) group. His teacher and her sister train there, too. I guess the school he's at is mostly populated by under-privileged kids, so he can't necessarily afford to join a club. He ran pretty well: 5:15. He started pretty quick (as did the field) but he was consistent. He came back and ran a solid 21min 5k on Sunday, too. So, Isabelle (his teacher) and I are going to try to get him to run with Fleur-de-Lys. The school will pay the club fees, probably.

Saturday was my last fast long run. I felt awesome. I ran to meet Christina at Gouin and Salk, but I was so fast (i.e. I was so early) that I had to keep going to her house. I made it there in under an hour! She stuck with me for about 3min. I was going about 6:20/k or maybe a little faster, as that ended up being my average time for the whole thing. I ended the run at Boutique Endurance, just because I knew I could get some food there. The usual sniping from Bert, of course. You can't go in the store without enduring "good natured" ribbing from guys who haven't run much lately. I can take it from Pierre, because if you make the Olympics, you've got impunity, but it's funny how everyone knows everything about everyone else, and they always tell you you are doing the wrong thing. Never an encouraging word. Whatever.

The long run was solid and I feel a lot more confident. I doubled up Sunday (because it was too nice not to) and Monday, all four shorter, very easy runs. Today I felt ok. I went up to Robillard to do the 800s. I only managed 4 of them, in 2:31,35,35,32. I just didn't really have it. I didn't want to do it. I acheived my goal of getting the legs moving. I don't know if it was enough to do anything for the VO2max, but at this stage, that's not really the purpose. As I told Caroline, everything we do now, before Boston, is just to make ourselves feel ready to race.

Making the playoffs

2007-03-17T13:37:00.000-04:00

I feel like the Leafs (and Habs, Canes, Iles, Rangers...). There is a pretty good chance I'm going to make the playoffs, but I'm not really doing anything dramatic to ensure that fact.

This week was a solid week, though, with a return to good workouts and good weather. In accordance with the plan, I decided not to worry about cranking out too much mileage, and just focus on one workout and one long run. The workout went really well. I went up to Summit on Thursday with Christina, and I ran four laps at a tempo pace, while she ran 3 laps easy. Neither of us were in much of a mood to run on the way out, but I felt much better after the workout. I think she was just happy to get it in. Anyway, I managed to average 8:35 for the loops, which is around 5:50/mile or 3:37/k, so now we are talking a bit. It felt harder than marathon pace (which is unfortunate when running at about that pace last fall felt much easier), but my legs were all there for the first time in weeks, and it was only my gut that was burning.

The other days I put in easy hours all around. I was going to do the long run today (2h45 easy), but with 30cm of snow, I figured I'd be better to wait until tomorrow, or even Monday for what would be my longest run ever, time-wise. Next week I will do the progression run workout, and a long run a bit faster (2h20 at 6:40/mile). So today will be a day off. I haven't had one in two weeks, so I hope to feel very rested tomorrow. This week was pretty tiring outside of running, as I had a guest and we were often up late, after which I would get up early anyway. I also pretty much flung myself from the healthy nutrition train, but I seem to be doing ok, so I'll just catch the next one, and keep on going. It's funny because I worry about that stuff (sleeping, eating well) when I've got nothing else to think about, but if I am really busy, it almost ceases to matter. Granted, I ran far less this week than I have in a while, so maybe that helps. The 80-100mile plateau is a more precarious perch.

So, no St. Patrick's Day festivities for me. Just going to play it low key and watch the Leafs beat the Habs, and hopefully edge closer to that playoff spot.

Putting it back together...

2007-03-11T23:56:00.000-04:00

Well, I followed up my slowest 3k in 10 years with my slowest half marathon ever. Nicely done, I know. I basically shut it down after 15k, when some dude named Nellio who I'd never heard of went by me. I did manage to drop Debardi, after he showed up at 17k and ran with me for a while. He couldn't handle the 4min Ks up the last hill. Haha, so at least I can feel good about burning him, despite the fact that he's run maybe three times in the last month.

It went down thusly: Algerian guy not registered and doing it as a workout took off from the gun and ran it in 67. Dave Jackson from Victoria, coming off a solid 3000m at CIS the night before, and Terry Gehl led the way, with a chase group of me, Kevin Dunbar, Jean-Nic Duval and Alan Moore. We were all about 3:40 for the first K. Jackson and Terry pulled away then. The four of us kept about 3:40-45 Ks until about 8k, at which point I dropped back. I felt ok, like I could still talk and stuff, but my legs were toast. Dunbar and I were chatting, and I was annoyed that I COULD talk to him, but I couldn't keep going because of the legs. At 8k Jean-Nic made a move, and Dunbar covered, and they dropped Alan. I kept pushing to try to keep them in sight until about 12k, then I was just pushing for pride until about 15k, at which point I decided to save it for a better day.

I did run 20miles on Wednesday, and it went very well in fact. The last two days I was easy, but not enough rest, clearly. I am not too worried, as I know that if I rest my legs, I should be able to go ok for the marathon. The question is will I be recovered enough on the whole. How much of a hole have I dug with my training? Do I have enough time to get out of it, and still do some decent work in the meantime? So the plan is to focus on long runs and one workout a week, and not worry at all about the other days. Hopefully that will let me recover. Three weeks of that, then two weeks of real tapering, with the High Park 8k as a test in four weeks. I am sure that physically, I have done enough to at the very least run faster than Toronto, but I am concerned that I may have done too much, and that I won't be able to use what I have done. I suppose this is the question of marathon training: how much, how long, how fast, how soon, how late?

We shall see. I'm sure that the beers Cantin bought me last night won't help, though some people would have you believe that drinking is an important component of training, and one that I clearly don't do enough of. I beg to differ. I did get out for a run at 9am today though, time change included, so I can't be THAT old! ;)

Provincial 3k champion (the hard/easy way)

2007-03-04T10:50:00.000-05:00

Ok, so the 3k wasn't that bad. I basically ran even splits (3:10, 3:06, 3:08) and let the others go out too fast (they were 33 on the first lap). I reeled in one guy at 1200 and another at 1500, earlier than I expected to. It felt just like a 3k should feel, only maybe without any kind of kick. I tried, but it was hurtin'. I just couldn't go any faster. I could keep going though, which is a good sign. That's what I'm training for: the ability to run for a long time, not necessarily a fast time. We'll see if Pete Quinn is right: he says if you are doing proper marathon training, your shorter race times may suffer. Well, they are suffering. Still, I beat the guys I needed to beat to win the senior men's race. Julien didn't run. I'm sure he would have beaten me, but hey, if you don't race, you can't win! I did get beat by several juniors, including Jean-Claude, who, let's be honest, is no junior--the guy's gotta be like 28!

So, next step: day off today, because HR was up at 60. I will do my long run tomorrow morning, and Eliza is coming at 1pm, so that is good timing. I will run the half marathon in Ile Bizzard next weekend. I think that will be a much better test. I predict 1:15 or so. I kind of hope to go a bit faster, but we'll see. I'll start conservative and see what I can do. Kristjan Hunter says he might run it, and maybe some others down for CIS will come out. Training has been inconsistent, but I have gotten some good volume in, and some good long runs. What's missing maybe are the workouts, but hopefully these next four weeks will be enough.

As I've said before, I think there is a limited window for me, for workouts. It doesn't take me that long to ramp-up to race shape, but if I push it too long, then I just burn out. So now is the time. I just have to remind myself that I don't need to do anything spectacular: I just have to run lots of miles, get the long run in, do tempos, and be smart. It'll take me a couple of weeks to get over a big mileage push, I've learned, so I have to respect the taper when it comes. Should be good.

Crisis mode (always a crisis)

2007-03-01T19:56:00.000-05:00

The last couple weeks have been really hard. First it was hard because I was running so much. Then it was hard because I wasn't running at all. Now it is hard because I can run, but I don't want to. Or at least, I'm able to run a bit, but I'm holding back on days my HR is high (like today: 66 in the am, way too high, even though I didn't feel sick), and it is frustrating.

I think what has happened is when I found out I got into law school, it sort of solidified my impending retirement (or cutting back on training or whatever), and it made it hard to keep focus on Boston, knowing that after that, I'd probably not be training for anything in particular for a while. I always do that: skip my focus to the next thing, before the current project is done. It makes it hard to get out there and do the stuff you have to do, but don't feel like doing when you know that in 2 months, you won't HAVE to do that stuff anymore. It is pretty easy to start to want to slack off now. Also, not running for 5 days gets you into that mood pretty quick.

I'm running the 3k at provincials Saturday. I'm excited because I know that I must have some fitness from all those miles. I ran a reasonable 5k in January and I'm way fitter now, even with the time off. So I hope to surprise the field. They are all pretty fast (Julien ran 8:43 in Boston, and the others are in the 8:50s), but I'm hoping that the long indoor season will have taken its toll. Also, they all have a tendency to go out too hard (try for 8:30 and run an ugly 8:45), so maybe I can catch some of them dying, the young guys especially. Julien will be hard to beat, since I gave him advice on how to race 3k (haha), but I think the young kids will be ripe.

That race is motivating me now, but of course the best thing I can do for it is to take it easy. Still, I will do a solid run tomorrow, and hopefully the race will go well. I have always run very hard at provincial indoors. For some reason it seems to get me to my limits. Maybe it is the 10pm start time. Sunday I will try for a 20miler, regardless. Perhaps that's foolish, but I'll see how I feel. The following weekend I'm racing a half marathon, which is more in line with the whole Boston thing. I would like to run well, but I wonder if I should worry more about training than racing. There are only 6 weeks until the marathon. A good half would boost the confidence though. I guess I will see how the week goes.

Prediction: 8:58 I think I can dip under 9min if I run it right.

Busted!

2007-02-22T10:28:00.000-05:00

Tuesday I ran 90min, despite feeling like shit. It was a bad idea. I pulled out of the workout on Wednesday. Day off. Day off today, too. I will continue with these famous days off until my morning HR is back to sub 50 (it's been 60 all week). I'm still coughing and I have a sore throat and a runny nose. At least I am not feverish anymore. And I did get into law school yesterday, which made things a little better. On Tuesday night, I actually had a dream that I was in law school. I guess my subconscious knew it was coming! Or I have been thinking about it a lot. Bring on the law! Bring on the rest!

getting closer to the edge...

2007-02-19T15:42:00.000-05:00

I am really pushing the envelope this week. After last Wednesday, I went 2h in the am, and then about 40 in the evening on Thursday. I did another long run, 2h17, with strides, on Friday. Saturday I ran 2h30, over to Ile Notre Dame, and ran with Boreal during their half marathon. Probably about 31k total. That was it man. I had yesterday off and I was feverish, and a sore throat for sure. Probably from the post-Char arriving poutine. Evil cheese! This morning I tried a "tempo" which was ridiculously slow, but I suppose the effort level was right. My legs actually felt fine on the warm up and warm down, and "only" running 90min was kind of a treat.

Seriously though, I think I am burning out my brain. I think there is something somewhere about marathon training and getting enough glucose to the brain. I am definitely low. I am constantly eating, but it's not really helping. I'm nervous, paranoid, tired, stressed...it can't be good. I was supposed to do 2h tomorrow, but I'm going to tone it down to 90min. I am supposed to do 5x2k on Wednesday, so I want to be ready for it. Gotta take my own advice and prioritize recovery.

Short post, but, as I said, the brain, she's low on juice...

Ups and downs...

2007-02-14T16:50:00.000-05:00

So to recap: Thursday was a good run, followed by a good massage. I decided to do my double Friday and save the off day for Saturday. My back was acting up from carrying things up and down Geoff's staircase, so I bailed on that, and basically spent Saturday doing nothing.

Sunday I "raced" 10k...I put that in quotation marks because it was for sure the worst "race" I have run in a while, at least in terms of meeting my expectations. I figured, based on my 5k from early January, and 4 solid weeks of training since then, that I'd be in 33-33:30 shape by now. The course is not that tough: a double out and back with the first k uphill (but very gradually) and the middle ks on a golf club road. The status of the golf club road is the key really. I had heard that it was in good shape, so I decided to just run the 10k, and try to run fast. It ended up that there was a thin layer of snow that was enough to slow the field down by quite a bit. The winner, Baghdad Rachem, was just under 32min. He's basically a 31min guy, so there's at least a minute slow down on the course. I ended up 35:43 (it pains me to even write that), which was WAY slower than I was hoping for. Given the conditions, I would have been happy with anything up to 34:59.

Probably I was tired from the 100mile week last week. I did cut back the week before the race, but I guess it wasn't enough. I was telling Eliza (while she was gleefully twisting her thumbs into my calf) that I have a well-developed sense of what is going on in my body. For example, I can wake up with a sore throat, but then go eat a meal, and then it will be better. I can feel myself going from sick to not sick. I think most people can feel this too, but most maybe don't take notice. I can sense almost to the minute when I've recovered from training or racing or whatever. I was pretty tired last week, pretty down emotionally, too. At about 7pm on Sunday, I felt it click. I was recovered. So it was about 9 hours too late for the race.

I decided that if I am going to be putting in this kind of volume, I need to match that volume in my workouts, as well. Now that I've had a cycle to get used to running 13-15 miles a day, I figure I can do that. This week, though, with the race, I only have one workout. I did that today: 5x1mile with 200m recovery. I was pretty pleased with this one. I averaged 5:17, and actually went 5:22, 5:17, 5:17, 5:19, 5:13. I negative split all of them, and on the last one I managed to stay at 39-40secs per lap the whole time (the others I had 41s and 42s laps). All this after a 15miler (1h56) on Monday and a double last night (12 and 5). So I am pleased. Two hour runs are to become the new normal.

I wonder, though, what is the point of the 5mile run. I added one last night (actually it was closer to 6miles), and I'll do one tomorrow as well, after a 2 hour run in the morning (not sure how far I'll get, with the snow, so I'm just going to run for time). It is 5% of my weekly total for a 100 mile week. If I were running 60 mile weeks, would I do a 3mile run? I don't think I would. I think it is useful in that I felt very good, and it gave me confidence that I was recovered, since I wasn't dragging my ass. As far as how useful it is aerobically, I don't know. But for now I will stick with the plan.

Here's a pic of me post-race:

And one of the very successful Concordia squad:

Flavio (support crew); Christina (1st woman in the 5k); Sofiane (3rd in the 5k). Second row: Dan (3rd in his age group in the 10k); Simon (first in his age group in the 10k, and 6th overall, one spot behind the coach); Antoine (PB in the 10k).

around and around and around...

2007-02-07T21:36:00.000-05:00

Good workout today: 4x1200 in 3:48 (15:50 5k pace, not bad) with 200 rec, then 3x200 fast at the end. I definitely feel like the workouts I've been doing lately are all right on in terms of pace. The long run on Friday was just right for depleting what juice I had left in my legs, and today I kept the pace the same, but the effort level kept creeping up and up and up. My legs were getting heavier and heavier. The 3x200 fast was a real kick in the ass. Neil had a look, and, as usual, my shoulders were way too tight. The last of the three was as fast as the second, but felt much more relaxed. Good signs all around.

Tuesday's run with Leslie was sub-par, but I think that was just because it was cold. Also could have been because of the near maximal effort on Monday. Wow that was cold...

Tomorrow will be a solid 90min, and then a massage from Eliza. I have a feeling I will get a call about law school when she is here, only because someone always comes by or calls when she is in my living room, giving me a massage, making me feel like a high roller because I'm getting a massage in my own house. Once the delivery guy from Puma came with my stuff, and she had to answer the door...so my free clothes and shoes were taken in by my massusse...very nice! Another time it was just Chris and Christina who knocked on my door during a run, but still.

I feel much better about the law school interview. I think I managed to stay on my toes and keep them moving with my answers. I think they were impressed with me to begin with, and I probably showed that I am as, I don't know, reliable?...as my file would indicate. Anyway, time will tell...

It doesn't feel like it has been eleven days since my last day off. I guess when Leslie has done 50 consecutive, 11 is not that great. But it is actually good for me, because I've always broken down at 9 or 10. I am in good shape now. I have one question that will need answering soon...I feel very strong doing all this mileage in mostly single runs. I've done only 7 doubles in 35 days of running. That percentage may go up in the next phase. I only feel really tired after a double. I recover very well from singles, and 90 to 105min runs are becoming the norm. No, not becoming, they are the norm. So should I do more doubles, or should I run longer singles? If my long runs are going to be 20-22miles, then 15-16miles would do for a medium long run, and 13 for a recovery run. I've got two 5milers scheduled for Saturday. I feel like there isn't really any point to doing them, other than to be rested for the 10k on Sunday. Actually, I think I will do them Friday anyway, and take the off day on Saturday, to help Geoff move. There we go then.

My face is so cold

2007-02-05T15:37:00.000-05:00

I'm glad the next couple days call for a reduction in volume because it is really friggin' cold out there. It was so cold I almost puked after my second interval this morning. I don't know if that was really because of the cold, but let's just say it was an unpleasant morning. I was meant to do 4 loops of Summit in 8min each (with a bit of a break in between each one), but I only did three and they were much slower than 8min. I guess that's ok though as 8min would have been BTW, and they were pretty much BTW.

The weekend was pretty much just easy running, as Ryan and his friend Adam were in town, so I wanted to not ditch them too much for running. I think it worked out ok. Saturday morning I ran up to Robillard, watched Amélie's race, and then ran home. She did well: 5:15. A little slower than I thought, but she was alone in the race with Arianne Raby, who went out in 37 for the first lap (despite claiming to want to run the thing in 5:10), and Amé got sucked along. She corrected her pace though, and held on, dropping to 44s for two laps, and finishing in 40. I'd say with a more even race, she could run under 5:10. Arianne ended up running 5:08 the hard way, I think. Gabrielle Simoneau ran well in the juvenille race (4:49). I think she could go much faster if she didn't just sit and kick. Most of her laps were in 39, then she just goes in the last 200. Try running faster! Geez...

Sunday I did a swim, then a run. It felt weird on the legs at first, but it was ok after that. This morning's run was hell (see above). Oh well. Easy tomorrow, workout Wednesday, massage on Thursday...woohoo.

I had my law interview today. It was a little disappointing, though I'm not sure what else I could have done. I gave them the answers as to why I wanted to go, why McGill, etc. When they met me they said they were "very impressed" with my file. Man, everyone is always "very impressed" with the file. Anyway, I kind of feel like I let them down after that. They reduced my big talk on why law to: it's interesting and it's a challenge. Then they got me in an argument about whether drug testing in sport is an invasion of privacy. It was just a test to see what I would do in an argument, I suppose, but I wasn't prepared, and I feel like my argument was scattered. They just slowly turned up the heat, poking here and there, to see if I was done. At one point, I did say, quite firmly, "no, that's not a contradiction" and explained why. C.H., you bastard, you should have been there, you would have liked it. I mentioned your hate for Dick. They kind of raised their eyebrows (seeing as how he is the chancellor of McGill, haha), but don't worry, I didn't mention you by name.

Who knows? It might have actually gone quite well. The guy after me was a middle eastern dude, all dressed up in a suit (I wore a nice shirt, but not a suit), and really nervous. He asked me how it was. I said it was easy. He asked me: "What did they ask?" "Just questions about yourself. Relax, man." People get really worked up about this stuff.

Also, I looked up some of the professors at McGill, mostly to see about the two dudes that interviewed me. I was interviewed by this guy: http://people.mcgill.ca/fabien.gelinas/ and this guy: http://people.mcgill.ca/robert.leckey/ Law professors have done a lot of stuff. So I guess it is ok if they managed to keep me on my toes in an argument. I am not used to losing arguments...law school could be fun!

good long run...

2007-02-02T20:25:00.000-05:00

Wow, what a great long run I had today. It was finally not -1000000 degrees, and the sidewalks were clear in most places, so I ran at a decent pace for the first 8miles (just under 8min miles) then picked up the last 10.1 to 6:40/mile. It was exactly what I was trying to do. The feeling at the end of the run was just right, too: my legs were just emptied out at about 1mile to go, so I had to run a bit on fumes, but keep the pace, which is the purpose of this kind of long run.

Even better was that this came off the heels of a track workout yesterday. Usually I'll put a day or two of just miles before the long run, but with Ryan coming up this weekend, and Amélie's race tomorrow, I wasn't going to have time on Saturday, so I went for it. Pleasantly surprised. The track workout was good, too: 6x1k in 3:08 with 200m rec. Faster than my 5k pace at Hanover, with not too much recovery (about 75-90secs), so I'm sure I'm not in 16:15 shape anymore! We'll see what happens next weekend. I'd like to go to Vancouver to try a half, but whatever, patience. The time will come.

If the weather is bad next Sunday, I'll do 5k and 10k at Ile Bizzard and try to run both at a decent pace, but not full out. If the weather conditions are good, I'll just do the 10k and see what I've got. It's not the best course, but I have run it enough to be able to read my result.

Big workouts for the kids this week, well Wednesday anyway. Monday was a bit of a recovery day for them, and they managed 5x1k at 5k pace with 200rec pretty well. Wednesday was 1200-800-400-400-800-1200, at 3k-2k-1k pace. Pretty fast for pretty long. The guys and Chrissy handled it all right. The other girls did 3x3-4x300, getting progessively faster, and it went well. I'm looking forward to seeing what Amé can do tomorrow. I think she's going to run well. 5:10ish, I'd say. Tough race because there is no one in that range for her to run with: a couple girls at sub5 who might go out hard and die, but no one to set a pace with. We'll just have to encourage her...

breakdown...and pick up!

2007-01-30T14:58:00.000-05:00

This week has been up and down. Friday I had to split my workout as I couldn't handle the treadmill. Saturday was a day off and Sunday I ran long: 18miles. It was supposed to be all easy, but I decided to pick up the last half. I was 1:15 out and 1:05 back. Solid. I felt fine afterwards, and hit the pool with Sid. I guess he thought I looked peaked though, as he cut it short. I was soooooo hungry on Monday. I ate everything in sight. I saw the grocery store girl again.

Monday's run was rough. I met Leslie, which was nice, for the first time in a while, and we did a bit of a rough tour of the mid-north of Montreal, stopping by her office and mine (Robillard). At about 6miles though, my right shin started to hurt. I was paranoid that it was a stress fracture. I cut off the last mile, and iced it up.

At practice I showed it to Maryse (with Chrissy and Amé looking on), and she determined that it was probably shin splints, and not at all a stress fracture. Still she said not to run on Tuesday. Well, you know how runners are...but I got up in the morning and I was feeling fine, so I did run on it, and lo and behold, no problems! In fact, I had a great run, hammering 3x10min around Parc Laurier. I'm not even coming close to the per mile paces I'm supposed to be hitting, but it is hard with the wind and snow and all. I am happy with effort-based work for now.

treadmill wars

2007-01-26T14:59:00.000-05:00

I hate the treadmill. It's boring and for some reason, it's hard for me to run on it. This morning was the last workout before an off-day, but Robillard was closed for a kid's meet, and it was too cold to go outside for this particular session (8x800 in 2:30). So I thought I would try the new treadmills at EV. I managed 50min, with about 10min total running time at 5min/mile pace--half the required load. I just couldn't bear it on the treadmill. I broke it up into 1min on/1min off (the off being at 8min miles). It's not that it is that cold outside, just too cold for a workout. I suppose it might be this cold on April 16th in Boston, but I doubt it. Anyway, I wanted to get a little turnover in.

Also, I am in love with the grocery store cashier. She has a nice ass that is nicely displayed when she turns around to run my debit card through her interac machine...if only that were a metaphor. Anyway, yeah, she changes her hair every week, it seems, and she wears arm socks with the fingers cut out of them to show off her painted nails. She's got a lip-ring, too, which isn't usually my style, but it suits her. She is also very cute when she says "tank you" in English. Mostly though, she speaks in montrealais, which is hot. This has nothing to do with training for Boston, but in a way, everything. After all, I have to eat, too...

Bostonward

2007-01-25T13:42:00.000-05:00

All right, so the marathon didn't kill me. I took a bit of downtime, ran provincial cross country championships, took more downtime, and started back up in early December. I thought I was ready to begin proper marathon training, and I had a pretty good week, but it was a case of too much, too soon, with a hard long run, weight training, LSAT exam, and a highly anticipated (if not ultimately fulfilling) date in the space of 48 hours. So I got sick and was out again for a couple of weeks.

The last two weeks of 2006 were solid. 56 and 61 mpw, and then on the final day of the year, a good 2 hour run, just under 16miles. No quality to speak of, other than a 10mile hilly road race on Dec 26th in Hamilton. It was quite fun, actually. I averaged 5:50 per mile, though more accurately I was running 5:45 and there was one mile that was about 6:15 because it was all uphill. I reeled people in from mile 3, and was not passed. I ended up behind the next pack by a bit though, behind Terry Gehl (rival from MTL) and Scott Stevens (who I coach). So, 2006 ended ok.

2007 started with a well-enjoyed day off, followed by 10 straight days of training. In there I ran a 16:15 indoor 5k at Dartmouth, a solid and accurate test of fitness. The mileage has crept up nicely (71,67,83 so far), but I'm not too concerned with weekly totals. For example, here are two progressions of weekly mileage:

1) 54,64,53,67,53,60,67,69,73
2) 72,64,55,48,72,57,67,71,69

The first looks a little more organised, with an up-down flow at first, then rising for the last four weeks. The second one is kind of hap-hazard. Actually, it is the same person's "weekly" mileage, just taken from a different starting point (Sunday vs Monday).

My point is just that weekly mileage totals only tell you the total volume. They don't say anything about intensity, nor about how the volume was distributed (in 6 days, 7 days, 5 days, doubles, no doubles). I'd rather worry about session volume, make sure there are adequate recovery days (which don't necessarily mean days not running), and let others add up the totals.

That said, there's something nice about a good, round, 100 mile week. I can appreciate that, for sure. But in terms of what it means, well, not much.

The two weeks after the 5k were consistent, with only the 12th completely off. I had a great long run on the 14th in TO with Mario, Sharlene, Ian Reid, and others. 17miles at 6:50 pace. The 20th I did two runs of 5miles each, one in Montreal and one in Derry, New Hampshire. The next day I raced 16 hilly, windy miles. Another good test. It actually didn't feel that long. Another 10? Sure. Here's what it looked like:

So, since then I've been kinda tired, but pushing through. Saturday is my next fully off day. I thought I would try to quickly recap the buildup to Boston so far. I will try to be as consistent with the posts as I am with the runs, but, well, one is obviously more lucrative than the other, if not in monetary terms, at least in terms of how much I care... I will try for a weekly update.

Marathon post

2006-10-16T12:24:00.000-04:00

Ok, so it was not that bad at all. Actually, it was a lot of fun. Probably I could have gone faster in the earlier going, but who knows how that would have changed the last part, so no point worrying about it. Full results are here.

It was fun because the race went all through Toronto and I got to think about all the good times I've had in the various places I passed. Here is how it went:

The first 5k (19:24) along Sheppard were pretty uneventful. The wind was in our face, and I was trying to be conservative. I guess there were about 20 people ahead of us, but by the turn at Downsview station, we had passed five or six. I couldn't believe the pace some of those idiots were going at. They must not have had a fun afternoon. Our group was an older guy named David Thompson (finished in 2:48) and a guy who was breathing pretty heavy (not sure his name, maybe Dave Stephens) and probably Roman Chapulty.

The second 5k (18:29) started out up Allen Road. I took some Gatorade at the turn, but I tried to do it without the straw, and I immediately understood why the straw is required. I will always bring a straw to every marathon I ever run (even if I only do one more). The area up there is pretty barren. I remembered going to a job interview near there in the summer between first and second year. I remember walking from Downsview station and thinking, "man, this is way too far to walk, I wish there was a bus!" The job was supposedly "sports marketing" but was really just calling people and selling magazine subscriptions. I wonder why they don't just say: this is a job selling magazine subscriptions? Anyway, I had to stop thinking about how far it was because I was only 5k in. This section was faster but with the same effort, because we weren't in the wind anymore.

The third 5k (18:41) was more fun, or at least, the end of the second and beginning of the third. We passed through G. Ross Lord Park. It was cool, almost like a cross country race--I could have run on the grass, but I didn't want to slip and my hamstring was tweaking a bit. I pulled out the straw for the fuel at 9k and it was masterful. I should have named my straw. There was a long downhill just before 10k, and I broke the group on it--we had caught up to a guy in a Tom Longboat singlet and he sort of pushed the pace a bit through the park. None of them could run downhill very fast though. I just let it go--it was nothing like REAL downhill running, of course, so I guess that's why. But I relaxed and let them come back to me. I figured I'd rather have the company for a while longer, and they'd tired themselves out trying to catch back up. It was a race after all.

Turning onto Yonge to start the fourth 5k (18:46) heavy-breathing guy was gone and only one dude (Chupulty, I think) was left near me. I tried to let him do some work, especially since we were back in the wind, but he wasn't really willing, so I just cruised on alone. Now the course started to become familiar. I ran past Churchill street, where my uncle Joe had lived, and my uncle Frank as well. I saw Dave Fitzpatrick near the start line. That was great. He told me I looked really good, and I felt it. I was very relaxed at this point. Under the 401 and down to York Mills was a very fast K (3:30). Joe, Char and Sarah Jane were there at the corner, going crazy. That was fun. It was a good pick up for me.

Hogg's Hollow slowed things down a bit, but it was not really a problem. I hit the half in 1:19:20. The interesting thing was, that was the only time I really checked my total time. The rest of the race, I just kept checking my splits at every K, but it never got above 5k. I just broke the race down into smaller chunks and it worked really well. This fifth 5k was 19:21, as a result of the hills on this part. I didn't actually think of the Abbey girls going up Hogg's Hollow, but I guess I could have. Down toward Lawrence I thought of Derek Wagland and Buncic, who lived near there during high school. The second hill after Lawrence was fine. I got to Sporting Life and I thought again of Wagland, and Tony Shaunessy, who puked over the railing, down into the subway entrance, the last night of Grade 10, after we'd been drinking in Sherwood Park. Tony didn't feel good, so we decided that it would be a good idea to feed him pizza. It wasn't a good idea. Also, that night, I beat Marc and Ray in a footrace--they fell over the log at the fire. Marc insists, of course, that he beat me, but he didn't. Last night he tried to race me again, but I wisely refused. I take his insistence (and glee at the possibility that he likely would have beat me) as an admission of defeat in the 1992 Sherwood race.

I passed the theatre just north of Castlefield, and I remembered going to see a movie with Kevin Walsh in the summer after grade four or five. It was the first time I'd gone out with one of my friends or something. We saw some movie with Bette Midler and someone else. A comedy. I think we wanted to see Batteries Not Included, but it wasn't playing at the right time or something. Weird. At Yonge and Eglinton Joe, Char and SJ were there again. I gave Joe the six-shooters and high-fived Char and Sar. I'd walked home from there drunk many times in high school. Funny, THAT didn't seem far. I moved from 12th place to 11th here, passing the guy from Les Vainqueurs who always goes out too fast.

I hit Davisville station (my pediatrician's office across the street, and where I slammed the door to the car that signaled the beginning of the end with Laura and I) and more and more people were commenting on the straw. The straw is key. I am loving the straw. The 6th 5k (19:04) was tough, but it felt good because I passed another two guys. I worked through Forest Hill, remembering Paul Barry's first marathon, and how he didn't come to school for a week afterwards--Kilbarry road was an ominous reminder of that. Then, I ran down Spadina, across St. Clair, gave a nod to Churchill Park, aka Fantasy Island, home of many many high school workouts, including the post-season long run (we ran 10miles up there, around and around, in the snow), before hitting Casa Loma. My dad used to plow snow there, and I remember going to a magic show where the magician called me on stage and put my hand in a machine that he had used to chop carrots. It was sort of a saw-someone-in-half gig. Yeah, and flying down Walmer on the way to UofT for indoor workouts in the winter. I moved into 9th place (past a startled Steve Cochrane) at 30k.

30-35k, the 7th 5k (19:08) was miraculously still on pace. I took off my gloves, and traded them to Sarah Jane at Yonge street for Gummies. I timed the Gummies just right, starting to eat my first pack at 13k, cracking open the second at about 25k, and getting the third from SJ here. This part of the course was also reminiscent of high school, as we used to hammer down Rosedale Valley Road on our distance days. I was tempted to turn off and hammer up the hill behind Castlefrank, but I decided that I wanted to finish the marathon instead. I thought I could try and reel number 8 in at this point, but the wheels just wouldn't go. The still roughly on-pace 5k split here is largely due to my pushing to try to catch Alexander Makovec (from Vienna). My calf cramped up, only briefly, but enough to startle me into caution, and that was that.

The last stretch, 7.2k (31:01, for an average of 4:13/k) was frustrating because I felt great, other than the fact that I had to slow down to keep my legs from cramping up. I took Gatorade (straw=awesome) and I had to change my stride to get the cup, and that made my left hamstring tighten up. I kept moving though, focusing on bringing it back on-line. Not once did it occur to me that I would have to stop. I knew that I would make it, the question was just how fast. It didn't really hurt that much, but only because I couldn't really go fast enough to make it hurt--my legs would cramp up before that could happen. The same thing happened at the end of World Mountain Running Trophy, in Bursa, but only for 200m, not 7k!

The crew (Joe, Char, SJ) were there at King and University, and I managed to beat them back up to Museum. So I guess it was going ok. PQ's advice that the last K is extra long was probably good, as I was ready for it and it didn't seem like much of a problem. I've run around Queen's Park enough in my life to know how far it is. I saw McCabe, Sharlene and Darren on the way around, Tim (and I guess his mom and my mom, but I didn't see them) in the final stretch, and that was it. Per's first words to me were: "Man, you look too good."

Good enough, I think.

ending

2006-10-06T09:10:00.000-04:00

Ok, so I know I use this blog sporadically and probably unfairly (to the blog I mean...I only show up when I want something, when it suits my needs. Never a thought for the poor blog...), and rarely for mere personal reflection. I think now I would like to reflect...

Last spring, in the final weeks that Leslie was training for Boston, she mentioned having a sense of "things ending." I remember going for a morning run with her, and leaving her at the north shore where she wanted to "think about things" and I remember thinking, man, she's just going to jump in and swim to Mexico or something. Well, she didn't, and it seemed like after the race, things hadn't ended, and she was back to her usual chirpy, chipper self. So maybe it was the marathon training.

As the big day approaches for me, I am having the same feelings. Normally, I am pretty upbeat and positive, and I think of things ending as other things begining (thank you, Seneca), but when it comes to big races, that becomes a problem because I look past the race, to the next race, Christmas, a week off, a marathon in the just-distance-enough future, etc. It is hard to look past the marathon, though, and I think I may be being overly dramatic, but I just wonder what will be next. I've only done a month of "real" marathon training. I can't imagine three-four months (i.e. to prepare for Boston myself). I suppose it will all sort itself out when the time comes (and hopefully that time will be around 2:30!).

I fear a little that this law school idea is merely a product of marathon-craziness. Then again, everyone I talk to thinks it is a good idea. Funny though how everyone views it through their own lens. Almost every person I've spoken to has given their opinion couched in what THEY would do--but not if they were me, just if they were they, and were thinking about law school. Also interesting: people NOT in law school say: "you'll make a good lawyer." People in law school say: "you'll enjoy law school." I suppose one can only relate through one's own experiences. Still, it is funny. It seems also that the detractors (there are few) are only those who would be unable to make such a big decision themselves. Ok, so the more I think about it, the more I think it is not marathon-craziness.

I just wanted to set this down so I can look back, post-marathon, and get some perspective. Maybe for next time, or maybe to remind myself not do it again.

Thanks for listening, blog. I promise I will try to be a better friend, and return the favour some day.

email from Turkey #3

2006-09-22T14:30:00.000-04:00

Sorry for the delay. The internet was scarce in the places I've been
recently. I'm home now, and I just slept for 10 hours. Much better.

The race went well, I thought. Results are here:
http://www.wmrt2006.org/ (they have fixed the senior men's link). I
finished 122 out of 147 I think, so beating 25 people is better than
the 6 or so I beat last year. As a team we did well, I think,
considering our inexperience, and considering our most experienced guy
had a horrible race. Jason Loutitt finished 110th and he only went
past me at about 8k. He was 38th in Italy, I believe. Stefan Jacobson
had the best race, beating that American, Paul Low, and finishing
60th. Morgan was 93rd, Simon was 120th. We were 21st as a team, out of
26. I think though, that everyone is keen to continue as mountain
runners, and that will show in the next two to three years. For Morgan
and Stefan to do as well as they did with almost no uphill experience
is really great. If Jason can get himself back on track, he will be
an asset to the team, and I think Simon's prowess lies more in the
up-and-down. Anyway, since I'm in charge now (insert wicked
world-domination-type laughter) we are going to start moving up the
charts. If the 2009 up-down championships are held in Vail Colorado,
as expected, I think that would be a good year for Canada to break
through with a podium finish. If the American women managed to do it
(and their senior men got third) then so can we, because we have about
the same topography.

The women did reasonably well, finishing 14th out of 19. Katrina
Driver was 56th, Amy Golumbia 61st, Shannon Elmer 73rd and Michelle
Cormier 76th. Not a great day for our most experienced runners
(Michelle and Jason), but for reasons I won't get into. They will be
back, there is no question.

The best result was Shaun Stephens-Whale, who was 41st in the Junior
men's race. He was actually further up for a while, but he suffered a
cramp. It is not a good course to go out too hard on, but I think in
Shaun's case it had more to do with the food this week, as he has
alergies and the turkish delights, so to speak, weren't agreeing with
him. He is only going to get better, though.

The reason I say it was the endofanera is that because Jonathon
Wyatt of New Zealand lost the uphill race for the first time in 6
tries, I think, to Rolando Ortiz, a Colombian. Jono was attacked by
wild dogs on Friday, but he refused to use it as an excuse. It came
down to a great kick, apparently. Also, the Eritrean team beat Italy
in the senior men's race, the only team ever to do so. The streaks are
over. Ana Pitchrova was 7th in the senior women's race, and her Czech
team lost by two points to the Americans.

It was a great and exciting year for mountain running. We had 36
countries participating, and medalists from all five continents.
Mountain and trail running is the fastest growing sport in the world
right now, with more than 40million adherants (or addicts, if you
prefer). Danny Hughes, our president, was relentless in all his
speeches, pushing Otto Klappert of the IAAF to make the trophy race a
true IAAF championship. Otto is very supportive, but of course, in the
end it comes down to money. Still, the sport is growing.

The trip was great, though I got kind of sick at the end, probably
from running uphill all-out for 12k or something like that. I'll have
to go to the doctor to make sure it's not something worse than a sore
throat.

I spent Monday night in Paris, and took some cool photos. I'll post
lots of photos here:http://www.flickr.com/photos/47977673@N00/ in the
next few days. I think I took over 200!

Finally, I was really sad, shocked, I don't know what to say, really,
to hear about Emilie Mondor's passing on the weekend. I was on the
plane back from Paris and I saw someone reading La Presse, and I saw
that her photo was on the front page. I thought maybe she had run on
the weekend in the Montreal half or something like that. I asked the
flight attendant for a copy, and when I got it, it took me about three
reads to figure it out. It's pretty hard to believe. I suppose there
is no good way to find out that someone you know has died, but let me
tell you, being on a plane with a bunch of strangers is not ideal. I
was just looking around, wondering if any of these people knew her.
I'm sure some of them knew of her. When I got back to the office at
Concordia, I mentioned it to Sheila, and she had heard, so I was glad
at least that her life was being celebrated. It's just really sad. For
those of you who don't know, Emilie is one of Canada's best distance
runners.

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1157925009905&call_pageid=969907740050&col=970081602428

She was going to do the New York marathon, and I had emailed her about
it in the summer. I think we were both shooting for the same time
(2:30--me at Toronto) and I was hoping to better her time. I wrote to
her about the kind of shape I was in, thinking I might be able to run
around 15:30 for a 5k. She said "good to know that now the men in
quebec start running in the 15:30 and under. should be that way."
Indeed it should.

So, the endofanera in another, sad, way, too.

I'm home now. I hope to see you all soon.

John

Photo update

2006-09-22T14:28:00.000-04:00

http://www.flickr.com/photos/47977673@N00/

email from Turkey #2

2006-09-22T14:27:00.000-04:00

On 9/8/06, John Lofranco wrote:
> Ok, so we made it to an internet cafe in Bursa. The food is good. It's
> like at Banff--buffet styles. I ran part of the course yesterday and
> part today. It looks good. Nothing as steep as Sulphur mountain at
> all. Th efirst 4k is a long grind on a drit road that is quite
> reminiscent of the dusty dirt roads you see in newsreels (yes, Joe,
> newsreels, just like my hired car) of middle east bombings. There have
> been no bombs though. The second part is rocky trail covered in
> leaves--it kind of alternates between flat and up, and then moves into
> a forest trail. I saw an old man walking up with a bag in his hand and
> I thought, oh, how nice, an old Turkish man going up the mountain to
> pick berries. Then, when I was walking back down, looking for Shaun
> (the lost junior--I found him) I saw the old man from the front. He
> was wearing a Nike cap and had an ipod on.
>
> The gondola rides are steep. The air is very dry. Everyone is in good
> spirits, except Ceri and Stefan who have yet to arrive. Apparently
> they are lost in Istanbul. Hopefully they'll arrive soon!
>
> What else to say? Thanks for the messages. I am going to try to read
> them now. I probably won't respond though. I hope things are going
> well with the team. I'll be back soon. Probably one more email, maybe
> from Paris, after the race.
>
> Talk to you all soon!
>
> John

email from Turkey #1

2006-09-22T14:26:00.000-04:00

> On 9/6/06, John Lofranco wrote:
> > Hey Canada,
> >
> > So, by virtue of the tried and true Debardi method (thanks buddy!), my
> > flight to Paris was spent luxuriating in the extra-wide seats formerly
> > known as first class. Wow, it really makes a difference. And the hot
> > towels...great stuff. I actually slept 4-5 hours. Air France flight to
> > Istanbul was boring. I slept. The food was crappy.
> >
> > Once at the airport, I hired a car to take me to the Crown Plaza to
> > meet Jason, Michelle and Amy. All the Turkish car guys were much
> > impressed with out choice of hotel: "oh, Crown Plaza, is expensive,
> > yes." It is indeed a fine establishment. On the way here, my driver
> > rear-ended a lady and her daughter, causing their car to rear-end
> > another van. Much Turkish swearing ensued. Istanbul is apparently the
> > car crash capital of the world. How appropriate.
> >
> > So I recovered from that with a nice little hot tub session with Jason
> > and Amy, and then the four of us went out to dinner. What a dinner. It
> > was a little pricey, but our meals our paid for for the next few days,
> > so it was good to sit and eat. And eat. I ate two steaks--that was
> > after the cold mezzah (kind of like greek pikilias, a sample plate of
> > salads) and hot mezzah (a shrimp thing and a meat roll). Michelle ate
> > a fish. Like you know when you get a fish on your plate and it still
> > has eyes? Yeah, that kind of fish. Then the dessert was milk pudding
> > with ice cream.
> >
> > Don't worry, I won't be too heavy to get up the mountain. ;)
> >
> > We're getting the shuttle to Bursa in the morning. I suppose there
> > will be more in a few days.
> >
> > Have fun! Play safe.
> >
> > John
> >

Last entry from Banff

2006-09-01T13:41:00.000-04:00

I picked up my team uniform for Turkey this week. I'm starting to take it easy now, with a day off yesterday, and just a short run today. I'll probably run hard up Mount Royal on Sunday, and then do a 3k time trial on Tuesday.

That's my buddy, Martin. He's a...pine martin. They are like pole-cats or weasels, but obviously much friendlier. He hangs out on my balcony and in the trees behind the studio.

I've written more in the last two weeks than I thought I would, and I managed to prepare a few classes, and work on some stuff for the xc season, too. I also got to be in a play, which was quite the success. A group in the science-communications workshop needed actors for their final presentation. They presented work on HIV and AIDS, in a multi-media gallery presentation. Sameena Darr and I played a couple going to the show. We were imbedded in the audience, and when we started our lines, the other gallery patrons were not meant to know that we were actors. It was pretty cool because a lot of people thought we were having a domestic dispute. My character (John) is a bit ignorant of HIV and AIDS, so he spouts wrong-headed clichés, while Sameena's character (Mary--yes, original names, I know. The science people wrote it.) gets mad at him. In the end, she reveals that she brought him there to tell him that she is HIV positive. John's reaction is not positive. It was tough--especially since I haven't acted in 14 years--but I think we got it just right when it counted. Having a beer bottle to walk around with kind of helped me feel like an asshole. I don't know why, just holding it in my hand made me feel more agressive and arrogant, which was just right for the character.

I've met some interesting artists of all sorts--a really old lady from New York City who is still hanging on to her sexual-anti-church painting, despite way too much plastic surgery; an Irish conceptual artist who is exploring event horizons; a photographer from New England, living in Miami, with a show in Toronto; and a musician/poet from Montreal. It's been cool.

Here's the last poem I wrote, part of a series with titles from the Phonetic Alphabet (hence the title):

Zulu

It’s hard to find the heart of darkness on sand
dusted plains—it’s really more of a jungle thing.
There’s something about the grit that sticks
to the hair on your forearm that keeps things
superficial, and with so much squinting
into the sun, you can never really see inside.
That itinerant, exiled existence is not much
different from riding the express bus
to work, wondering at the hearts
of the other passengers: which are broken,
which are soaring? But there’s too much heat,
and the fumes ride up into your eyes
like grey tears scurrying home at dusk,
so there’s no time to give a thought to your own.

Photomania!

2006-08-30T11:25:00.000-04:00

Ok, so all my camera needed was new batteries. I was confused because it was turning on, just not all the way. So I fixed it up and took some photos. I've only added a few new ones, but they are a selection of about 60 I took yesterday.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/47977673@N00/

wildlife

2006-08-26T12:43:00.000-04:00

I haven't really seen that much wildlife. There was a very small elk on Mountain Ave the first time I ran up it. Today I saw a weasel on the porch of my studio. It looked kind of like an Aryan squirrel or something: Big boned, strong jaw, obviously works out. I've only seen one magpie--last time there were many.

There are no photos of these specimens because my camera is still broken. It caught, and it was ready to go, but by the time I walked out to take a photo of Sulphur mountain, it bailed on me again.

UPDATE: two mountain goats on Norquay last night, and a medium-sized elk on Sulphur today. Char, the camera is broken because the lens won't come all the way out. I'm not sure why. It works sometimes, but rarely. I'm hoping I can get it fixed in the day or two I am back in Montreal but I doubt I will have time. Oh well. Ya'll will just have to imagine the kebabs and tavuk gosu tatlisi.

Triple threat

2006-08-25T22:20:00.000-04:00

What a day for running. I almost ran three times, but luckily, when I got up from my chair, my legs made an executive decision, based on the two previous climbs today. I just feel like I am ready to fly, despite the hard runs I've been doing up these mountain. Here is what happened:

First, I have discovered breathing. How I got through 29 years without it, will forever remain a mystery... No, I mean breathing as a tool for mountain running. On his website, Jason talks about the breathing (breathing in unity with movement). It makes a huge difference in being able to keep going, and in pacing. Breathing every third step is very different from every second step. It's like gears in a car. I know if I want to make it up I have to keep it in "three-step" gear. If I go to "two-step" (apologies to my cowboy friends), it burns out, too fast. I did two-step on the easier slope on the road, but it didn't last long on Sulphur. Knocked 40secs of the ascent and it felt easier. More impressively (for me) I knocked 5min off the descent! The down is just not my thing, but the last two I've done (10min this morning and 25min this aft) have been unconscious.

I think that Daniels (or someone) talks about this 2-2, or 3-3, or 4-4 breathing, but as far as running flat goes, I don't think it applies in the same way. Well, I suppose you can go by that as a physiological clue, but I think cadence is much more important. I can run at many different speeds and still keep 3-3 on the flat. Yes, there is a point where I will be forced into 2-2 and even 1-1, and I guess it would be interesting to know that point. I just don't like theories of running that try to solve everything. I would file it under good to know.

In mountain running, though, the cadence does not vary as much. The cadence is still very important, but a 3-3 cadence is going to allow me to continue to run uphill for an hour, while a 2-2 is not. The faster I can do the 3-3, the better, but as soon as I hit 2-2, I am breathing too heavily to be able to maintain it. I did slip back into it a bit, on some very steep parts, in order to get through it, but I tried to relax back into 3-3 as soon as I was able. I suppose a real monster like Wyatt can keep 2-2. I wonder, or his is more controlled breathing just faster?

Anyway, that was a great discovery. I feel much more at one with the mountain now, which is going to be important for when the mountain kicks my ass (hopefully I will be able to kick back). That is also the reason I DIDN'T do three runs today. Breathing aside, 2:20 total of running is probably enough for one day.

The reason I almost DID do a triple (which I have actually done before) was because I finished Running with The Buffaloes this afternoon, before dinner. If you are taking my ENGL 212 class (Lecture I) this fall you will get to read this book. And there is no better time to read it than cross country season. I guess my reaction to things (good or bad--and this was good) is always to go for a run. Now I'm trying to decide if I should watch Without Limits or On the Edge tonight. I will probably be up all night if I do. I am up all night anyway (it's hard to sleep at altitude, I find) so what the heck...

results:

2006-08-23T14:55:00.000-04:00

Here is something I've written in the last couple of days. Some of you may find some familiar refrains (a run is a series of decisions, etc...)

Losing

A run is a series of decisions, questions
that must be answered on the run. Every
second spent in doubt is lost forever,
and that is why there is a constant threat:
that of having a lover and knowing
you could lose her—because one can
not exist without the other. Those lost
seconds bear you on like sideline jeers,
a company that is worse than loneliness.
The moments when you think you’ve lost
her: the sting of the click, the moan
of the dial tone, like one of her friends
giving you a look dirtier than your best
racing socks—they hurt most. The last third
of the race, when the leaders have slipped
away, out of sight over the last hill, left
you to thrash up it, wishing for that
aloneness, is the hardest question. The struggle
to open that coffee shop door, order a tea
you won’t drink because you know
what’s coming—your name too far down
on the results sheet to satisfy your heart—that
is the toughest time to get through. But when
you do, and you see the other runners are all
smiles, because they know you’ve all done something
no one else can do, you can at least be a little bit happy.
When she says she can’t take the risk,
it’s a credit to you because you can, and you do,
every time. It’s good practice, losing.

Photos!

2006-08-23T10:58:00.000-04:00

Ok, ok, so I have posted the photos elsewhere:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/47977673@N00/

Not sure if that link will work. Let me know.

Thanks Yvonne.

Banffing it up in Banff. Banff, the town with the name like the word "smock" that you just want to keep saying over and over...

2006-08-21T22:09:00.000-04:00

7:49pm Banff AB.

Banff is like Quebec West, I’m telling you. I was at the grocery store and the cashier started going off about the “asti’d vache” qui ne lui “calissait pas la paix, crisse de tabernac” because even though there were too many people working, she wasn’t allowed to go home. Then there was the shaggy kid with the wide-brimmed ball cap and the fake I.D. (his buddy’s Quebec license). Christine, the secretary at the registrar’s office is also from Montréal. You walk down the street and you are as likely to hear French as English. I even told the dinning room guy “Merci” out of habit. It was because I’d been talking to Marie, one of the opera singers (there is an opera singers’ convention) who is also from Montreal.

As far as the work goes, it is great. The environment is really conducive to writing. I’ll probably get the last of the sonnets drafted by tomorrow (a full 10 days ahead of schedule!), which means I’ll get on that play for sure. Also, the New Canon review is not going to take that long either—it’s just the reading, which doubles as “inspirational” reading anyway, that’ll take a few days.

Maybe I should explain about the reading. I usually need to read some poetry first, before I can actually write any myself. I think because I work in so many different head spaces (coaching, training, teaching, reviewing, poetry, fiction, non-fiction, plays) I need to really isolate each space. So for now I am in poetry mode, and to get there I need to be reading some. A preview of the review: I like Bruce Taylor, Noah Leznoff, Iain Higgins and George Elliot Clarke, so far. The rest of the first 20 or so poets I found to be, well, exactly what Carmine said he was trying to avoid: “the plain, the soft-spoken, the flatly prosy, the paraphrasingly simple, the accessibly Canadian.” I’m a little surprised because Carmine is usually quite rigorous, but then again, there is still his unexplained appreciation for Robyn Sarah…

Running-wise, I ran for over two hours yesterday afternoon, 36min of which were spent on the Sulphur Mountain trail. Today I ran up Mount Norquay, but it was all road, and not that steep. Still a solid 20min climb. I am still not really feeling the altitude like I did last time. I must be in better shape. Not sure what else to say: more of the same to come.

Still working on getting those photos up.

Welcome to Banff!

2006-08-20T14:22:00.000-04:00

10:34pm, Banff AB

So, here I am. The flight was uneventful. Actually, that’s not true. On the Montreal-Toronto flight, I got to see a new Doctor Who episode—missed the last ten minutes though. On Toronto-Calgary saw The Sentinel—secret service agent is having an affair with the First Lady. Also, I managed to bring liquid on board. So much for security. They let me bring an empty water bottle through, and then I filled it at the water fountain before I got on. I was well-hydrated for my arrival at altitude.

Met a nice French woman—Sandrine—from Toronto, who is camping here for a few days. She works for Sanofi-Pasteur, which is, though after several changes in ownership, descended from the lab of Louis Pasteur himself.

Upon arrival, I checked in and promptly went for a run up Tunnel Mountain. 6:38 to the trailhead; 12:00 to the top; 11:11 back down; 5:45 home. 35:34 total. Felt it pretty bad going up, but coming down was ok.

I put my socks on the balcony of my room and one of them got blown off!

The studio I’m in is called “The Hemingway” but not that Hemingway…it’s named after Peter Hemingway, an architect. It’s the same one that Ross was in. Also, Jaspreet is next door in number 2.

I took some photos of the studio, but for some reason the blog won't take them. I'll see if it works later.

Not bad. What is bad is the movie Flight 93, which I watched last night, back in the room. I guess they took the exact transcripts from phone calls. The script is awful. Still, I’ll bet they don’t show this movie in-flight.

Anyway, the plan is to go up the mountain again in the morning, and then get started on the writing. I am feeling like it will be productive. The room smells the same as when I was last here. It’s not necessarily a pleasant smell, like lavender or something, but more like pungent soap. Anyway, the smells seems to be initiating a Pavlovian response. It worked out well last time I was here…

Update: 12:09pm. Just posting this now. Second run up Tunnel Mountain was faster (good). Breakfast was awesome—eggs, little potatoes, pancakes (sorry no photos of the food yet). Going to have lunch now.

Alberta Beef and Flapjacks

2006-07-25T12:03:00.000-04:00

I went away to Alberta this weekend, for a wedding. Wedding food is often very good, but can also be very bad. But it wasn't just the reception meal that was of note on this trip. No, there were plenty of good eats out west.

Craig picked me up from the airport in Edmonton, and we drove north to Athabasca. We decided to stop for dinner in the dirtiest small-town bar we could find. In the perhaps ironically-named Legal, AB, we found Kilgour's, a local watering hole that welcomed customers with the words "keep your city...out of our country" above the door. This was the place. We walked in to the turned heads of a table full of good-ol' boys, perhaps past their prime, but all wearing cowboy hats regardless. The bartender was very friendly, and also wearing a cowboy hat and boots. He was even a bit bowlegged. I ordered the cheeseburger, and Craig had the steak sandwhich.

30mins later, we finally had our order. At first we thought it was because we were from out of town, but everyone's orders all came at once, so it was likely the cook really was just overworked. The burger was just fine, nothing out of the ordinary.

While we were there, some dude won $400 at the VLT! Of course, the two sad-looking old folks who had been at the machines all day didn't win a thing. They just kept feeding the 20s in to the machines. When they got their meal, they leaned their chairs up to the machine to reserve them, supposedly, and moved over to eat at the counter and play on the terminal there. Addicts. But the guy who won just walked in, sat down, put in a fiver, and bang, he was up to $400! He played a little more, but he cashed out well ahead.

When we got up to Athabasca, the menu was mostly pancakes (or maybe flapjacks, as you might call them if they are made on a barbecue or over a campfire) and sausages. We had a couple of those breakfast cookouts, and we did hit up the local family restaurant, The Green Spot, for less than enthralling open-faced hot turkey sandwhiches. The mushroom gravy was outstanding though. Usually gravy doesn't have much flavour, but this was good stuff. It made the dry fries bearable.

The wedding meal was very good. There is a reason Alberta is known for its beef. There were fine pasta salads, Yorkshire pudding, potatoes, corn and mixed vegetables. The dessert was some kind of maple cake that was rich and sweet, in a very good way. The wedding cake itself was a simple chocolate cake (vanilla on the second layer, but I didn't have any of that). It didn't have the usual crazy-butter icing wedding cakes tend to have, but it was still good.

The other thing that happened on this trip was that I ran on Friday morning before breakfast. Usually I eat first and ask questions (the kind you ask on a 10-mile run) later, but because we were meeting up with others for pancakes, I decided to get the run out of the way first thing. I only did 30mins anyway, but still, I felt a little empty inside. I like a good meal.

back at the table

2006-07-18T21:50:00.000-04:00

Ok, so I missed a few days there. Not to say I didn't eat, but, well, let's just say there were more sausages over the weekend than I normally would like to eat. Also, there was the "forgetting to eat dinner" incident on Monday, which was unfortunately followed by the "play soccer/rugby for two hours with French dudes" incident. I had a very late tuna melt (on a bagel!) last night, but my poor planning (going right from Robillard to Esprit de Corps but not packing a meal) caused me to miss the workout in the morning with Leslie and Sean. I did run though, and I did do the workout this evening.

Which brings me to: pan fried chicken breast with peanuts, peanut butter and vanilla soy milk as a sauce; wild rice that made the water in which it was boiling turn black, and a spinach salad with tomatos, onions, red peppers and avocados. Now I feel like I'm back on the horse.

In response to Leslie's gross-out greens experience, I'd say that 1) yes, bright coloured urine might mean it is not getting absorbed, which could mean that she's just got plenty of good nutrients anyway and 2) you think it tastes bad, but you got the berry flavour! It's really not as bad as all that. I mix it with the protein which gives it a kind of milk-shaky kind of flavour, which is nice. I don't sip it either, I just down it.

I really think the important thing is the green-ness of it, not so much the vitamins. I don't know the scientific basis for it, but I try to have greens at every meal: the Greens+ at breakfast (or in the morning), and spinach (usually) or broccoli at lunch and dinner.

I bought a new organic yogurt today. I mistook it for Activa, the kind I usually get. We'll see what it's like...tomorrow.

post-race meal

2006-07-16T22:44:00.000-04:00

After my 4:15 (which was as predicted, though not quite as fast as hoped), I had a chicken and bacon sub at Subway, two cookies and an iced tea. Actually, before that, walking home from the track, I had a Blizzard from Dairy Queen. I ate lots more crazy stuff this weekend, but I suppose that will have to wait for another post.

Here are the official race results, to compare with the seed times:

1 Soucy, Philippe 88 Dynamique de Lav 3:59.9h
2 Menard-Kilrane, Francois 82 Cirrus 4:00.7h
3 Cloutier, Sylvain 85 Rouge et Or 4:04.0h
4 De Bardi, Stephen 78 Montreal Olympiq 4:07.8h
5 Fyfe, Iain 88 McGill Olympic C 4:09.5h
6 Sharp, Nigel 88 Independant 4:10.2h
7 Cardle, Peter 70 Montreal Olympiq 4:14.0h
8 Beaudette, Kenny 90 Sherbrooke 4:14.6h
9 Lofranco, John 77 Montreal Olympiq 4:15.4h
10 Rivard-Bernard, Simon 90 Montreal Olympiq 4:16.2h
11 Pelletier, Mathieu 85 Vaudreuil-Dorion 4:22.0h
12 Nepveu-Goulet, Julien 88 Montreal Olympiq 4:25.3h
13 Belgherdi, Mustapha 59 Vainqueur 4:35.8h
14 Lariviere, Roger 52 Vainqueur 5:03.0h
15 El Moustir, Younes 92 Montreal Olympiq 5:10.5h

Pre-race meal

2006-07-14T16:31:00.000-04:00

Ok, so here is something interesting. I'm racing tonight, 1500m, at the McGill track. So what do I eat? Well, unfortunately for journalistic enquiry, not much different from any other day. In fact, seeing as how I usually run within an hour or two of most of my meals (well, not quite, but every day and sometimes twice a day), you could plop a race in there and not have it make a bit of difference. That is as it should be, I think. This morning I had the two eggs, side-by-each with a pair of bagel slices, and of course the greens/protein/X combo. For lunch I had two salami and mustard sandwiches with spinach salad (tomatoes, cheese, red peppers). I've been drinking water all day, seemingly to no avail, but I guess it is better than nothing. Now, with an evening race, here is where it gets a little different. After a solid 90min nap, I woke up at 4pm, and mixed a banana-granola bar-raspberry yogurt-peanut butter-soy milk shake. That should be enough to hold me until race time. The 1500 is a pretty intense race, compared to what I'm used to, at least in terms of speed. I think mountain racing is kind of like 1500m pain for over an hour. Luckily, tonight's race will only be about 4min long. For those keeping score here is the start list:

Épreuve 10 Hommes 1500 Mètres Course Ouvert
===============================
Nom Année Équipe Seed
===============================
1 4017 De Bardi, Stephen 78 Montreal Olympiq 3:57.00
2 3780 Menard-Kilrane, Francois 82 Cirrus 4:00.15
3 4360 Soucy, Philippe 88 Dynamique de Lav 4:03.00
4 3835 Cloutier, Sylvain 85 Rouge et Or 4:05.00
5 4044 Rivard-Bernard, Simon 90 Montreal Olympiq 4:14.00
6 4033 Lofranco, John 77 Montreal Olympiq 4:15.00
7 3401 Cardle, Peter 70 Montreal Olympiq 4:15.00
8 4723 Pelletier, Mathieu 85 Vaudreuil-Dorion 4:25.00
9 4713 Nepveu-Goulet, Julien 88 Montreal Olympiq 4:25.00
10 4710 Belgherdi, Mustapha 59 Vainqueur 4:34.00
11 4780 El Moustir, Younes 92 Montreal Olympiq 4:55.00
12 3418 Lariviere, Roger 52 Vainqueur 5:00.00

I like to see how close I can come to my seedtime. I find it annoying when people give a seed time that is obviously not within their range of ability. In this case, it doesn't matter too much, as there will only be one heat (or maybe two, of 7 and 5, but I doubt it), but when there are several heats and to go in the faster heat means a shot at a faster time (and maybe qualification for something) lying about seed times can make a difference. I like to play the game of who ran closest to their seed time. Extra points for running faster than your seed time.

I hope that is the case for me. My best is 4:09.1, run indoors at McGill in January of 1999. It has been a while. We will see. I hope the strength from mountain running, and the turnover intervals I did earlier this week, and the rest I've had over the last couple of days will lead to good things. We'll see.

Oh, and of course, the food. As I said, with race time at 19h20, it's tough to eat dinner before hand. It's fine for me to eat and then go for an easy run, but eating too close to an intense effort like a 1500m could lead to disastrous circumstances. So I'll go with Eload and X at around 5:30. At 6pm, Cardle (seeded at 4:15, though he's probably closer to 4:05) will arrive and we'll walk over to the track. A quick check-in, an easy jog, some stretching, some drills, strides, and then the gun goes off.

Cardle and I, as you can tell from the ages of the competitors, are relatively old men. Debardi is old, too, but he's in great shape. Menard is not considered to be old just yet. Phillip Soucy and Simon Rivard-Bernard are the two high school kids we are keying off. Cardle trains with Soucy, and Simon trains with Debardi and is in my club. Kids tend to go out too hard and die, so even if they are fitter than we are, there is still a good chance that we could eat them up (see I'm keeping on message) in the final few hundred meters.

I'll leave it at that for now. I will post the results later.

how many more days of food can I stand?

2006-07-13T22:50:00.000-04:00

Well, surely I will keep eating. But will I keep reporting? I suppose that is the $64,000 question. What can you buy for $64,000 anyway? A pretty nice car. I could buy food for approximately 13 years. Wow. 13 years worth of Crispy Rice and Ginger Zinger granola cereal with Soy Nice soy milk. Greens+ and protein with vitamin tonic. Lovely combination. Raspberry Activa yogurt and a Val Nature granola bar. Banana bread from Claudine (Priceless). Tabouli, lentil salad, cheese and bread courtesy of the fine people at SCIREQ, who have hired me as their office nutritional consultant. Ok, that's not true, I just had lunch with Leslie at her office. Nice people though. They played along. Pat filed his report: "it was pretty good." Solid. Dave (I think it was Dave) needs to eat more salad. Apparently his wife is a wicked cook. What else? Lemonade and a maple cookie with Dave (not the same Dave), then a smoothie and a cookie at Café Vienne, en attendant mon ami Jean-Yves. For dinner: steak with fried onions and green peppers, rice, and a spinach salad (with tomatoes, red peppers and Gruyere cheese, oil and vinegar dressing). And a maple cookie for dessert. Pas pire. I could do that (or similar) for 13 years with $64,000. Or I could go on an all-inclusive vacation to Cuba every year for 64 years. But then what would I eat???

two, two, two days in one!

2006-07-12T23:35:00.000-04:00

Ok, so I got a little behind.
So much eating, so little time.
Let's go back to Tuesday
morning and work our way
to today. I had a bowl of cereal,
I believe, to start: material
evidence that I like my carbs
in the am, too. It takes its barbs,
that fuel does. For lunch I had
the best sandwhich ever. Scads
of salami, tomatoes, cheese,
spinach, red peppers, and mustard (please!).
A snack of yogurt and off I went,
to do a track workout: time well spent
chasing the clock 200m at a time.
When it was all done, I set out to climb
the hill up Cote-des-Neiges to see
my friend Kris who had nothing for me
except cold chicken and blueberry
strudel (2). Lemonade and Bruny's
special protein mix were for me to dig
into (guess who's the guinea pig
when Xistence makes a new product?).
Not the most complete or thought out
nutritional day, I admit, but look out
tomorrow, because I went shopping!
No longer will you see this cat hopping
around like a starving poet in his low,
dry garret. I bought steak and potatoes
(ok no spuds, but I had to make it rhyme)
and enough fruit and veg to fill my fridge for a time.
Wednesday I ate cereal again in the morning,
which may make it seem like my meal times are boring,
but I really like cereal. After my run
I finished the last of my greens, one
scoop was all that was left, so I mixed
it with Bruny's special formula from X.
At lunch I had the same sandwich as before,
it's the kind of thing I never bore
of. Dinner was a little haphazard and sketch,
I had a peach and some yogurt before I left
to go coaching the folks in Club Boreal,
but at the station I picked up a Burger Royal
and ate it on the train to Pierrefonds and the hill
where they train and mutter they'd like to kill
their poor coach who watches while they take a beating:
the kid is just sitting there laughing and eating!
No, they find I'm nice, I think, or Claudine
wouldn't have baked some banana bread-thing
special for me. I ate a bit of that, and a granola
bar, and an orange given to me by an old fella
who's name I don't know, but who does what I
tell him: "hey, you, run up that hill, I don't care if you die!"
I jest! I'm kidding! It's only a joke. I would never
endanger the lives of my charges. If ever
it came to a dangerous situation, I'd take
the utmost precaution: I'd offer them cake.
Oh, and I can't forget: I also had grapes.

Five days of food

2006-07-11T00:23:00.000-04:00

Since I had a workout this morning, my first meal was the protein heavy 2 eggs (once over) with the ever-popular bagel. I am out of Greens+ and RecupX (I'm jonesin'!), so recovery drink was Eload. Lunch was a big ol' bowl of pasta, with some cheese and a very nice eggplant and tomato sauce. Lovely, just lovely. Banana, finished the yogurt, strawberries and another bagel for dinner. I was on the run for dinner, picking up my ticket for the Wilco show, then running up to Robillard to coach. I also had a lactose-free orange-mango sorbet while I was waiting around for Jon, the guy I went to the show with. He's going to review the show at his blog later today. Look for it! When I got home I had a bowl of cereal. Not really a great nutrition day, but I didn't go to bed hungry, so that's a good thing.

Craig notes that he wouldn't bother blogging about his food unless it was really weird. In fact, it was Craig who pointed me to the Kobyashi links earlier, so yes, Craig is a food man, but reserved in his blogging to topics other people might be interested in. Still, the process of writing down what I've been eating has made me realise that a) I need more variety (i.e. more weird food, maybe) and b) I don't eat as much as I thought I did. A purpose for everything, and every thing with it's purpose, right? Isn't that what they say?

food four

2006-07-09T22:52:00.000-04:00

Opened with cereal and the dregs of the iced tea from yesterday. 14 mile run then lemonade, and then greens+, and shortly thereafter a banana. Funny how I am not as hungry after 14miles as I was after merely 8 on Tuesday. Leslie made the valid point (on our run, in real life, not in a comment box or forum or even email!) that food eating contests are typical of first world excess. I am no less impressed with Kobyashi, but I do realise that it is a bit extreme. Then again, so is going for a 14mile run on Sunday morning. How is 53 hotdogs in 12min any less a waste of resources than 26 miles in 2:16? Which luxuries are excessive and which are not? By definiton, a luxury IS an excess, I think, so...

For lunch it was the versitile bagel, yet again, times two, with a tuna salad consisting of tuna (duh!), tomato, and a couple of garnishes. Then I went to Carmine's to watch the match. There I ate a few chips, but not really that many, ate a couple slices of cold pizza, and drank cranberry and orange juices. After tasting victory on behalf of my Italian heritage, I met Katia for sushi. I don't really know what things were called, but we had salmon, eel, octopus, shrimp and avocado in various rolls. I understand why Kobyashi can eat so much sushi: it is satisfying, but not filling. It fills you so that you are not hungry, but it doesn't fill you up like pasta or pizza.

I also ate some strawberries. Sorry no photos this time.

Day 3 of food

2006-07-08T12:03:00.000-04:00

I had a bagel with peanut butter and jam for breakfast. For those begging for pictures, this is what a bagel looks like when it is sliced and has peanut butter on it. You'll have to imagine the jam.

Post tempo run I had Eload and Recup X, and then I made some Green Iced tea. And a banana.

Next, for lunch, a light lunch because it is so hot, a bagel (that staple food) and some hummus. There was a peach after that, and yogurt as I watched Le Gaz de Paris Golden League (they have track and field on TV now, apparently).

For dinner, two chicken/veggie burgers (just because they are easier to cook than real chicken or real burgers) on bagels (of course) with tomato and some condiments. For dessert, some snacking on some mixed nuts and raisins.

Ok, lest anyone think that these volumes of food are in any way impressive--they're not. I am like a four-hour marathoner to this man: Takeru Kobayashi. He is the Paula Radcliffe of eating. Nothing can stop him. Nothing. Woe to the fool who challenges him. Seriously.

Food #2

2006-07-07T23:24:00.000-04:00

This, dear reader, as you will see, was another typical day of food consumption. Pre-morning run I ate a bowl of cereal, and vitamin juice (that's pronounced Vita-min, you know, the British way). Post-run I had Greens+, mixed with recovery drink. For lunch I had the rest of the pasta I made last night (I always make enough for leftovers). I had a bowl of yogurt at some point, with some cereal in it. Clearly there are not enough fruits and veg going on around here. I went out and bought some, and a mango/lemonade drink. I had a Skor Blizzard with Dave and Kristina, and then we went to Pacini and we all had the same thing: linguine with capicolo and mushrooms, with a caesar salad. Lovely. At the kickboxing/esprit de corps party/picnic later, I ate some carrots, grapes, a chocolate crepe, chips, and some tuna salad. Mangia, mangia, as they say.

Food log #1

2006-07-06T23:31:00.000-04:00

Ok, so, yes, the sister is right. If I don't update the blog, then people won't read it. As for the code, well, I realise it was very rudimentary, but I was still hoping that someone would get that if you anagram the answer, you can come up with "Masonry's bear shit"--an interesting phrase to say the least.

So, in order to generate interest, I am going to sell out to the blogosphere and start posting intensely personal and intimate details about my life. To be specific: what I ate today.

I'll start with dinner, because it was such a massive festival of carbohydrates that it was in fact the meal that incited this whole idea. I got home from my second run of the day and proceeded to ingest:

500ml of recovery drink (Xistence+Eload+water)
250ml of chocolate soy milk
a toasted bagel with peanut butter
a plate of whole wheat pasta with two kinds of cheese. Since this is a post for intensely personal and intimate details, I will reveal that I did use salsa as pasta sauce. I would not normally do this, but there was simply no time for ridiculous luxuries such as leaving the house to get the food I wanted. I simply ate what I had.

Ok, then I did leave the house. I went to the store and bought a drumstick ice cream cone.

After going to a poetry reading (I won't bore you with the intensely personal and intimate events that took place there, but you can download them if you like), we went to Schwartz's Deli, where I had a medium smoked meat sandwich and a black cherry cola. I also ate some of Anita's fries.

I had vegetables earlier in the day, fear not. A quick run-down: Breakfast--two eggs and toasted bagel. Lunch--tuna melt (on a toasted bagel! Wow, do I like bagels) and a salad (lettuce, tomatoes, onions, green peppers, cheese blocks). I also had a Greens+ in there, and a bowl of yogurt and cereal.

Tune in again soon for more food! I like to eat!

The DaVinci Code Revealed!

2006-06-08T13:00:00.000-04:00

Everyone else is doing it, so I figured, why shouldn’t I?

I read it and watched it and I enjoyed both. I love a good conspiracy theory, of course. Right away, I thought: Princess Diana gets killed in a car crash, and Elton John sings a song about an English ROSE. Hmm… A terrorist cell was poised to strike Ottawa, and this weekend, the Bilderberg Group is meeting there. Hmm… My brother just became a mason, but he won’t tell me where the Holy Grail is. Hmm… Actually, just by posting this, I’ll probably be drawn into a world of long-kept secrets and international intrigue. One can only hope.

It is easy to make quick connections and wonder about dark backroom meetings and secret societies, but the reality of the Da Vinci Code (other than that it is a poorly to fairly written book—it could have used a good edit) is that is it an old story. I’m surprised by the reaction of those who have yet to read it: “Don’t tell me!” they shriek, and recoil, as if I’m going to force some bit of information on them that will ruin their lives. APPLE, ok, the answer is APPLE. It’s pretty easy—in fact I got most of the riddles. But the riddles aren’t the thing. The story, as mentioned in the book, is everywhere. A very self-aware story-teller Dan Brown is—“Harrison Ford in Tweed” indeed. (If only. Tom Hanks was a poor choice for a role that required a little more chemistry.) Indiana Jones, King Arthur, Disney, Star Wars, Da Vinci Code—it’s all the same stuff. A long-lost, or hidden heir; a return to the “rightful place”—what exactly is there to give away in the Da Vinci Code? Oh, right: APPLE (clever product placement, I must say).

The reason people like it so much, other than the compelling story-telling technique of switching from scene to scene, from cliff-hanger to cliff-hanger, is not just that the story is familiar, but that it leaves us with the sense that there is meaning to our lives. The end of the book, if I may discuss it openly, where Langdon kneels in front of the spot where he thinks the tomb of Mary Magdalene might be, is not about finding the Grail; it is about believing in something. Here is a guy who, while he may be interested in the sacred feminine, doesn’t show any real tendency to religion, at least not the zealous type some of the other characters show. Yet, through his search, he comes to believe.

I don’t believe that Dan Brown is necessarily yet another in the list (Da Vinci, Newton, Disney) of artists and thinkers who have pushed this particular story into the public sphere, or that this is part of some plot to take down the Church. I do believe that the message here is that it is good to believe in something, whatever it is. Belief will take you further than cynicism, for sure, but healthy scepticism is a big part of constructing belief—and belief must be constructed, not just handed down and accepted.

The story of the Grail encourages people to look, to be aware. Big-name, organised, institutional religion is very much against awareness and investigation. The Vatican’s reiteration this week of their position on sexuality is proof of that: the Church, from the top anyway, looks backwards, not forwards. The new Pope is no less an ass in this regard than the last one. It is great to find Jesus, or Mary, or Allah or whatever god you like, but in order to find them, you’ve got to look. I believe it was Aerosmith’s Steven Tyler who sang: “life’s a journey, not a destination.” If the search goes well, you will find what you are looking for.

And a little excitement never hurt anyone. I really think university English instructors are under-represented in the world of adventure and intrigue. It’s always archaeologists or historians. I’m telling you: writing is the real key to the code.

Happy searching!

The Champ

2006-05-09T14:23:00.000-04:00

Someone who is causing much delight on the street these days is the neighbour. Rebecca Murray, the owner of the yappy (but lovable) dog-next-door, became the Canadian savate kickboxing champ on Sunday, by thoroughly kicking the ass of one bitter but determined Anne-Laure Bouvier in three rounds of blood-spilling, contact-losing, flat-on-her-ass knocking action. The discipline known as “assaut” requires technical skill—you score points for accurate hits—less than brute force. Knowing that her opponent was jittery, insecure and ready to be easily knocked off her game, Rebecca risked two warnings for “too much power” and attacked hard and early.

The first round was close, and a few choice shots by Ms. Bouvier (hardly a name for a fighter, not like the Newfie-bred Murray) saw the Kroovy flow from Rebecca’s glass proboscis, but only because the neighbour’s nose had started to bleed before the fight. Thankfully, the judges weren’t adverse to a little mess, and between rounds, she got herself cleaned up.

In the second round, the decisive blow was struck: a boot to the gut and Bouvier was floored. Shortly thereafter, a face-shot from our hero took out the gnarled foe’s contact lense. Murray took full advantage and pummeled the little one-eyed bitch.

Sensing her shot at the title was about to miss the mark, Bouvier came out hard in the third round. Murray fought defensively, wary of a third warning for power. In the end, a majority decision handed the crown to the petite couples therapist, who after the match pronounced that all she wanted was some poutine and beer. With her nutrition regimen consisting of mostly coffee and cigarettes, it looks as though she plans to add some carbs to the mix in her run-up to the world championships in Paris. Hopefully she will be able to remain in her under 56kg weight class.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you the Canadian champ, Rebecca Murray of Montréal!

Toronto karma cookie

2006-04-28T12:09:00.000-04:00

This is a story about karma and a cookie. I’m not sure which way the karma goes, if this was a reward for something, or making up for something bad, or if I'm next up for a spontaneous act of kindness, but something good happened, a small thing, and it was delightful. So here it is:

Toronto has a reputation outside of itself of being stuffy, uptight, money-hungry, career-oriented, and maybe even rude—rude for Canada, not New York rude. Let’s not get crazy. Starbucks has a reputation of being also maybe a bit on the uptight side, despite the marketing to make their cafés seem laid back and such, there are people who think of Starbucks as evil. Maybe the same people who don’t like Toronto. I am somewhat ambivalent towards Starbucks as I don’t drink coffee. I like Toronto, though, because I grew up there and it will always be home. I’ve always thought that was kind of a cliché, but it is true. As much as I have no plans to leave Montréal, ever, when I go to Toronto, I’m going home.

So I came home this week, and my first stop after disembarking from the train at Union Station was to meet my brother for lunch. He said he would meet me at Starbucks at Yonge and Adelaide. Never mind that I went to the wrong one—there was a very obvious Starbucks at Yonge and King, just a block away, and the one he was at was hidden away inside some other building—it was good that I did. I got a free cookie.

I was a bit unsure about which one I was supposed to meet him at, and I was half and hour early, so I thought I’d buy a cookie to get some change to call him and let him know I was there. I ordered the cookie and it got put in a bag on the counter. Then, as she was ringing up a sandwich and a San Pellegrino for a woman all Toronto-ed up in her power suit, she casually picked up my cookie, handed it to me and said: “There you go.”

“But I haven’t paid for it,” I protested.

“That’s ok,” she said. “Go ahead.” I thanked her and retreated to the patio to eat my cookie. I didn’t manage to get change, so I sat there waiting for Joe, thinking about why she would have done that. Maybe the $1.35 isn’t worth it—what is the profit margin on a white chocolate macadamia nut cookie?

Later, Joe said, “Was she cute? Did you get her number?” Oh. Well, she wasn’t that cute. I never notice those things. Subtle does not work with me.

There was a guy standing on the street corner wishing the customers a very subtle good day, holding a dirty, empty coffee cup out for tangible evidence of how good a day it might turn out to be. I thought I caught him giving me a knowing look. Then another down and out looking dude showed up on a scooter. He sort of shot me a glance, too. I had had a late night and early morning, I hadn’t shaved in a few days, I was carrying two dusty knapsacks, and wearing a pretty cheap (but actually quite useful) green rain jacket. Maybe they thought I was one of them? Maybe the Starbucks girl had thought I was destitute. But I had pulled out a twenty in order to pay.

I suppose there is no reason to go on thinking about why. People can just be nice, for no reason. I’ve done it. I certainly didn’t enjoy the cookie any less for being confused about its provenance. So, there in the heart of stuffy Toronto, in a stuffy Starbucks no less, a spontaneous act of cookie-kindness (the best kind) took place. Perhaps it was the city welcoming me home, a workaholic parent making up for lost time by buying favours. Maybe that’s an unfair assessment. After all, I’m all grown up, and I can see the city now for what it is, not just what it is to me. The way around all that anti-Toronto propaganda is to come here, and enjoy the city for what it is: still Toronto the Good, if Toronto the Busy. But not too busy to share a cookie.

A goal for Afghansitan

2006-04-11T13:48:00.000-04:00

Ok, so clearly people reading this are not into the conspiracy thing. That’s fine. Go on living your lives as if everything you believe is actually true…

Seriously though, there was an interesting article in the New York Times this weekend about the “chattering classes”—essentially a group of critics who have a voice “amplified” by the media. In the article, a blogger, Markos Moulitsas claims that “Absolutely everything and everyone in politics is driven by media today.” Presumably he means “the media,” a distinction I made clear to my ESL class this week, but anyway, his point is that it’s all about looking good.

I disagree. There is a great deal of posturing and massaging of media relations in politics, but in the end, it has to be about implementing your agenda. For example, the Conservative government may have made more middle of the road promises in the election, and they may have succumbed to the idea of a “debate” on Afghanistan—but that doesn’t mean they care what people think.

During this so-called debate, Jack Layton threw back a bunch of questions the Defence Minister had himself asked of the Liberals last session:

“"What are the goals and objectives of the mission and how do they meet our foreign-policy objectives? What is the mandate, what is the defined concept of operations, what is the effective command and control structure, what are the rules of engagement?" Mr. Layton asked, quoting Mr. O'Connor.”

In response, O’Connor called Layton and his party “anti-war.” Those questions don’t seem anti-war to me, they seem like questions that should be answered before a military mission is sent off. O’Connor’s supposed answers—

"Events in Bali, Madrid and London have all showed how vulnerable we are to terrorism," he said. "Must we wait for terrorists to appear in Vancouver, Montreal or here in Ottawa before we recognize the very real threat that they present to our security?”

—don’t make sense. The tired refrain of a potential terrorist attack in Canada doesn’t cut it. I don’t mean to sound naïve—and that is what the powers that be in Western governments (Canada, U.S.A., Britain) are playing on: the fear we could be next—but is there any real possibility of attacks taking place here? London is an important world city. Madrid was in the midst of an election being fought on whether or not Spain should stay in the war. Bali seems so out of the way as to be banal, but I’m sure there must be some connection. Anyway, what is our place in the hierarchy of the world? Pretty darned low. So, then, is the likelihood of a terrorist attack on us.

Of course, if we do choose to get involved, our stock on the potential terrorist target could rise. Michael Ignatieff makes a good point that he has been to Afghanistan pre- and post-Taliban. Apparently life there is better now. There are good things to be fought for over there. But if that is the case, the Defence Minister needs to say so. He needs to relate the goals of the mission to our foreign policy objectives. If achieving better treatment of women in the 3rd world is part of our foreign policy, then say so, and say that’s why we are in Afghanistan. But don’t say it’s because if we don’t go there, terrorists might attack Vancouver.

I certainly don’t expect to hear from the Defence Minister that we are in Afghanistan because the Conservatives and their friends are sympathetic to the American military-industrial complex and can stand to make some money out of it. That’s too much honesty for even the chattering classes to ask for. But a little direction would be good. A little justification, not self-righteous chest pounding, and fear-mongering, should be the product of this debate.

9/11 Conspiracy Theory--yes, but what are you going to do about it?

2006-04-06T14:24:00.000-04:00

People always ask, “where were you when it happened?” On September 11, 2001, the so-called Kennedy Assassination of our day, I was in Fredericton, New Brunswick. Sorry, that’s all I got. I don’t remember the exact moment right off the top of my head. I was probably at home, goofing off on the computer, and someone probably called me to tell me something about airplanes and skyscrapers and terrorists. It was probably my dad who called.

I have to admit my first thoughts upon “seeing the towers fall,” as they say of that moment that has so defined world politics since, was that it sure looked like a controlled demolition. I also remember thinking that the cell phone calls from airline passengers were suspicious seeing as how you couldn’t make a clear cell phone call from an airplane back in 2001. All the people on TV that day and shortly after (I remember watching CNN in an East Side Mario’s restaurant in Halifax after running my first university cross-country meet in two years—no, the meet wasn’t cancelled.) said they thought they saw a helicopter around the Pentagon, and thought they heard an explosion, like a missile. I put all this together and I thought, yeah, sounds like a government-planned “terrorist event” designed to consolidate a neo-conservative agenda.

In the days that followed, the media’s focus shifted, and I, like most others, were convinced that an evil little man named Osama had masterminded all of this. So, what is more likely? My story above—a government conspiracy—or that it was all the doing of one man, organised from a hospital bed in the far reaches of the world, as a bit of revenge for the big, bad American culture blitz in oil country?

Dylan Avery, in his movie Loose Change, proposes that it is more likely an inside job. In fact, I didn’t really think all of those things on September 11th, or even on the 12th or 13th. They all come from his film, a very credible and believable documentary that zeros in on certain claims the U.S. government has made, and tries to expose them as false. He does a good job. I’m convinced.

But then again, I’m a conspiracy buff, and I wanted to be convinced. A better test would a sceptic, someone who normally scoffs at such things. If you have been scoffing up to now, that person is you. Watch the movie. See what you think. This is not a Michael Moore-esque rant. This is no personality attached, looking for the truth, investigative reporting at it's best. Avery's blog chronicles the fallout from the film. Researchers have been killed. Seriously.

A friend of mine, upon my telling her about this theory, refused to believe that the American government would do such a horrible thing. People aren’t really that bad, she said. Here’s the thing. Someone did it. Someone had those planes (either filled with people or military drones, it doesn’t matter) flown into the two biggest buildings in the biggest city in the world. Why is it so much more believable that Osama could be so evil, but Dick Cheney could not? Let me suggest a reason: it is easier to think Osama did it because Osama is a brown man.

Clearly the status of Arabs in North American media has deteriorated since 9/11, but even before then, a systemic racism existed in the U.S.A. (and Canada, let’s not kid ourselves). I’m not going to trot out any stats to prove this racism. If you don’t believe it, you are naïve. If you are not white, you know it. If you are white, ask any friend who isn’t. Ask ten of them and see how many say, no, man, I get treated just like you, the colour of my skin don’t mean shit, yo! Ok, tongue-in-cheek there, but also, case-in-point.

It is the easiest sell the American government ever had to make. “The butler did it” is so Victorian. Welcome to the 21st century: the brown man did it, in the air, with a plane.

Collected mementoes in the Toronto Star

2006-03-27T23:19:00.000-05:00

Just a short post to provide a link to my Toronto Star article on objects left-over from previous relationships.

I suppose there is some irony here. Several ironies, in fact. First, see my previous post on Leah McLaren. The article is, dare I say it, McLaren-esque.

Also ironic, the day that the article is published, Katia (my ex-wife) and I both get letters from Revenue Canada auditing our marital status. Yes, you can have your marital status audited. There is a form to fill out and you have to provide proof of where you lived. I am considering photocopying the Star article and sending it in as "supporting material." Katia just wrote a letter to some guy with whom she bought a canoe (talk about objects left over...). That letter may also be included in the audit package.

The third irony, or maybe it is just a coincidence, or an amusing anecdote, is that this weekend, I met a guy who had also dated one of the women mentioned in the article. A clue: he is not the sweater guy. Perhaps another article is in order: something about dating other dudes' exes (see REM songs).

As an aside, and in anticipation of the trope police coming after me for improper use of irony (the opposite of what is expected), I offer the second definition of the word from Oxford: "the quality of an occurrence being so unexpected or ill-timed that it appears to be deliberately perverse." One would not expect me to write a McLaren-esque article. The second is clearly perverse. The third is, as I've said, maybe just an amusing anecdote. Perhaps it is not unexpected, but only if one is cynical about the dating scene in Montréal, which I am not, at least not for the moment. Not in springtime anyway. Talk about delight!

Leah McLaren Strikes Back!

2006-02-28T10:58:00.000-05:00

The Globe columnist-turned-novelist defamed the so-called blogosphere on the weekend in her Saturday allotment. She intimated that bloggers are bitter, bad writers without editors to clean them up or publishers to keep them locked up. Funny, because I often wonder about her editors…Actually, she has a point. For the most part, blogging is done to hear the sound of one’s own keyboard clicking away, seemingly indicating productivity. (I realise the terrible irony of what I have just written, but let’s just skip that step for the moment.)

I wonder if she was pissed because she found so many people don’t really like her, or at least her writing (and probably aren’t smart enough to distinguish between the two). Hey, I can sympathize with these people—the first blog I did was an effort to chronicle just how bad McLaren’s Saturday columns were. Yes, very immature, I know. To be fair to the bloggers/ haters, though, writing does often betray a good chuck of the writer’s actual personality. The problem with Leah McLaren is not that she is annoying—or, I guess to be more accurate, and somewhat charitable, the writing persona she has created for a very specific demographic (single, hipster, Toronto girls who take themselves way too seriously) is annoying—the problem is that she didn’t write very well either.

But these things take time. Her article on Special K Pilates balls was actually kind of funny—mostly because it was true, but also because it seemed like McLaren finally got that it was funny. She lost a bit of her obliviousness, or perhaps gained a little bit of tongue-in-cheek (maybe she finally got some).

A couple weekends ago, I was very surprised to read her column and find it tightly written, funny, and almost self-aware. I only noticed after I had read it that it was an excerpt from her novel. That explained the solid editing, but it also provided a reason for her recent transformation: in writing this novel about a woman in her 30s searching for man to have a baby with, she must have realised the folly of her situation, and a little bit the impetus behind why these women act this way.

Why are so many young, professional women obsessed with their image and social status (not to say that there aren’t as many men who are, but for the moment, let’s focus on the ladies)? It is a deep, instinctual drive to find a mate. That, friends, is the driving force behind why we do anything, really. So it is important for Leah McLaren (and her audience) to have the right pumps, and a mini-cooper, and a farm because all of these things put them in the category of “successful woman” that has been created, rightly or wrongly, by our society (blame it on the media, whatever, it is all built by humans and we all have the same drives). And what else does a “successful woman” have? Babies of course. So all these things make them attractive to guys. Guys, of course, well, we play our own games, but to the same effect. Bigger, stronger, flashier. Treat ‘em mean, keep ‘em keen. Whatever works.

Leah McLaren, I believe, in writing her novel, as achieved self-awareness. I can’t say whether or not that will help her writing. There seems to be a bit of an edge to it that was lacking before the novel. Maybe it is the confidence of having the novel come out that has got her going. I can’t get inside her head. It’s just what I see from over here.

In any case, the reason, now, that Leah McLaren has chosen to rise above the bloggers may be that she has that self-awareness they don’t have. I’m trying to make this blog as self-aware as possible. It’s a hard thing to do because there are always forces driving us the power of which we don’t understand. But knowing that is at least a step in the right direction.

Still, there is an irony to her aloofness—and I’m not the one she cares about, I’m certain of that. Only recently was she engaged in a massive bitch-fest with another writer, Ryan Bigge. The deal is that a few years ago, McLaren panned Bigge’s book. This month, Bigge panned her book. Boohoo: if you can’t take the heat, get out of the way of all the authors talking. Maybe her recent column is another slag at Bigge, or a shot at all the bloggers who agree with him. Maybe she isn’t so self-aware after all, just cranking up the bitch-mill. At least now she’s somewhat entertaining to read, kind of like watching a hockey fight—you enjoy it with guilty pleasure—whereas before it was like passing a jack-knifed tractor-trailer on the 401—you're disgusted, but you can't look away.

Olympic Break!

2006-02-10T17:01:00.000-05:00

I'm going to take a little break from this blog during the Olympics. I have been "recruited" by Maisonneuve to help out this crazy old guy who is doing blogging for them during the Games. He's not so much up on the technology, and I'm the resident sports guy, so, yeah, I'll be on that train every day for the next 16.

He's already got two posts. Check 'em out: On the Rings' Edge.

Go Team Canada! Go Heather Moyse!

So, what happens if you’re a Danish Muslim cartoonist?

2006-02-07T11:32:00.000-05:00

I’m honestly quite surprised and confused at all the firebombs and protests in response the printing of cartoons of the prophet Mohammed in a Danish newspaper. What disturbs me most is not the cartoons themselves (I’ve heard some pretty good Jesus jokes—there’s nothing mutually exclusive between religious belief and a sense of humour), or even that they have sparked controversy, but the direction of the reaction.

It’s pretty clear that there are some countries, some of them located in the Middle East, that aren’t big on freedom of the press. State-controlled media and propaganda is nothing new in countries run by religious leaders (one might even put our southern neighbours in that category). So it is understandable that they might be shocked that a newspaper could be so controversial with its opinions. The irony is that the cartoons were drawn to accompany an article about free speech.

What confuses me is the demand by protesters from these countries that the Danish (and European) governments take responsibility for what has occurred. Can you imagine if Stephen Harper had to make a formal apology on behalf of the Toronto Star? It just seems unfathomable. Burning the embassies of European countries is a frightening response because it shows that those doing the burning can’t seem to understand that the opinions of one editorial cartoonist (with the approval of the paper’s editors and publishers) does not necessarily stand for those of an entire nation (or continent)!

Of course, one wouldn’t expect people who are extreme in their beliefs to be able to differentiate between the actions of one individual and the collective attitude of a nation. This is how wars start: when a group of people all get painted with the same brush. While it is important to respect the beliefs of others, and in this case the newspaper should be quite conciliatory towards its offended Muslim readers (a newspaper can only be responsible to its readers—the assumption is that all of a sudden the paper is being read by all those angry, fire-bombing protesters), the governments that have now been forced to be involved must be strong in their support for freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

I guess it is too much to ask for a calm, rational, sit-down conversation, but someone needs to say to whoever is in charge in the countries where these protests are taking place that in Europe, at least, it is not required that all people hold the same beliefs. Those Middle Eastern governments (Lebanon, Syria, Afghanistan, Iran, Somalia, India, Indonesia, Israel and New Zealand—more on that in a minute) need to tell their people to calm the fuck down. Newspapers enjoy an autonomy necessary to preserve the freedom of the press, but governments must be responsible for the actions of their people, especially when it comes to destroying embassies on their soil.

I suppose the argument could be made that the cartoons constituted a similar tearing down of a symbol of a people, but have we not yet gone beyond all that “eye for an eye” stuff? I guess not.

And New Zealand? The Dominion Post and The Press of Christchurch published the offending cartoons in the name of freedom of the press. That sparked protests from NZ’s Muslim population. Muslim leaders are urging calm. Well, good, I guess. I'm a little surprised, though. Will Canada be next? The National Post, quick to be extreme, has printed a bunch of anti-Semetic cartoons originally published in Arabic papers, just to prove a point. Is it ok to disseminate that sort of thing, just to prove a point?

Is it Islamophobic of me to say that these people are being sensitive? I mean, just because I don’t believe so strongly in Jesus as to go burn buildings in his name (do I believe in anything strongly enough to burn a building?), doesn’t mean others might not be. But who blinks first? When does tolerance betray your own beliefs? Can someone’s beliefs be just plain wrong?

When these sorts of religious fracas occur, I can only think: what would Jesus do? Seriously. What I mean is, all this violence is in the name of gods or prophets who supposedly preach love and peace; the killing is in the name of belief systems that are supposed to bring us to a better place, later, where we all get along, where there is no sadness, fighting, war. How can so many people be missing the point?

Peace and Love, man, Peace and Love.

Hockey Night at the Old Boys Club

2006-01-29T20:40:00.000-05:00

Hockey is pretty much the only thing I will watch on t.v., other than, sometimes, the news. Oh, and of course, elections. I have been known to watch hockey for 12 consecutive hours. Hey, it’s my Saturday, I’ll do what I want! Let’s just say it is something in which I take delight.

I certainly don’t watch hockey for intellectual stimulation—the way the Leafs have been playing, there is not much dumber out there to watch—but, being an intellectually-minded guy, I like to listen to the commentary between periods. I find Don Cherry entertaining (some do not—feel free to vent in the comments section), but I find the guys on the “Satellite Hot Stove” to be, for the most part, complete idiots. And Ron MacLean, sorry buddy, but you only make things worse.

By the second intermission of the Leaf game (Ottawa and Habs fans, I don’t want to hear your whining about how it is always a Leaf game. I’m not listening! Lalalalala!), if my vision hasn’t blurred from Aki-Berg-induced tears (poor guy, he’s done all right lately, until the injury), I am often enticed to blind rage by fools like John Davidson, Eric Duhatschek, and Jacques Demers. Sometimes, an intelligent commentator like Stephen Brunt makes an appearance, (and Pierre Lebrun seems ok, too), but this Saturday night, the aforementioned three just about made me lose my temper. I have a very well-placed temper.

The first thing that got to me (bear in mind, this is all relative—it’s only hockey, I realise, but let’s just work within the paradigm here) was Demers’ comment that Christobal Huet, the Habs back-up goalie, had not yet proven he was a “number one goalie.” Ok, Demers is not the first to utter this inanity. Would somebody please tell me what it takes to “prove yourself” as a number one goalie? Do you have to be involved in loan sharking? Be enough of a prima donna to refuse to leave the net after you’ve let in 5 goals in one period? Actually the answer is that you have to be overpaid, and you have to under perform.

Peter Budaj (who I have slagged before, but won’t anymore, lest his sister get to me!) is the “back-up” goalie in Colorado. Both his goals against average (2.73) and his save percentage (.901) are much better than that of the supposed number one, David Aebischer (3.17 and .894). Ok, you say, maybe Aebischer is not yet a proven number one, either. Well, how about Eddie Belfour (3.45, .887)? Those numbers are horrific compared to Toronto’s “back-up” Mikael Tellqvist (2.79, .906).

Tellqvist has played enough games that one might reasonable expect those stats to remain constant. How about the case in question: Jose Theodore (3.36, .885) vs. Christobal Huet (2.88, .915)? Huet has played in ten games for the Habs this year, and played half of the games in LA last year, with similar numbers. Why has he "yet to prove himself"?

The other topic on the “hotstove” was that of Scott Niedermayer’s knee injury. The big question was should he play in the Olympics and risk his career, or have surgery and save himself for his team, the Anaheim Mighty Ducks. To a man, the hotstovers agreed that he owed it to his club team, who are paying him millions of dollars, to make sure he was healthy for them.

Now, I know that hockey is a business, just like any other, and Scott Niedermayer is lucky enough to already have an Olympic gold medal, but if it were me, and I had the millions Scott probably has stashed away from being the best defenseman in the NHL, I would probably want to play in the Olympics. Then again, if he really loves playing hockey, the smart thing to do would be to have surgery and get healthy for next year. But he should do it because he loves playing, not because he “owes” anything to his team. He brings them revenue. He’s got to think of himself first—if he wants to play in the Olympics, he should. If he doesn’t want to risk his career, then he should get surgery.

Finally, it was Ron MacLean, in his segment with Cherry (I forget if it was Coach’s Corner, or post-game), defending the linesman for not preventing Aaron Downey’s broken face, that got me hot. Now, if you get in a fight with Zdeno Chara, you might end up in with a few broken faces, but Don Cherry’s point, that the linesman needs to tie up the fighters’ punching arms first, is still valid. I am not one of those who thinks Don Cherry is a great Canadian intellectual, but neither do I think he is a stupid man. He knows hockey pretty well. Part of the official’s job is to stop fights. Knowing what hand to tie up first is something he needs to know.

MacLean’s excusing the linesman for not doing that is lame. It is a circling of the wagons (MacLean is an official, too), and makes professional hockey (or maybe the entire sport of hockey) look like an old boys club, where one’s value is based on who one is, rather than how good they are at their job. The same is true of that infernal “hotstove.” Davidson and Demers are on there because they are “insiders,” not because they are intelligent hockey minds. Last week Murray Wilson, from the Habs radio broadcast was on. He is another guy who seems to have grown up on a cliché farm--he had absolutely nothing of substance to add to the discussion. At least Don Cherry, who is, at times, more than anyone, all about the code, is not afraid to say the unpopular thing.

Maybe I’ve just exerted too much mental energy over something meaningless. After all, I usually fall asleep half-way through the Vancouver game, which is usually much more exciting than the Leaf game (apparently last night I slept through a power outage. Who knew?). When I am awake, delighting in squinting at fuzzy black and white images of hockey players (and Leafs), I’d just like to not be annoyed by the talking heads. Maybe the problem with the talking heads is that they’ve got all the rest of their organs squished in there, and there is no room for the brain.

Canada elects Dead Fish Eyes with Lemony Smile (thanks to Russ and Katia for the colourful description of Stephen Harper)

2006-01-24T10:12:00.000-05:00

So, the election. This will be a very unedited post, as I've got to get on with things this morning, and you know, in the NEW CANADA, things are efficient. No more bureaucracy, etc. Down to business…

Seriously though, what gives? This guy is really the Prime Minister? Can’t Michaelle Jean do something about it?

I guess not. But really, I don’t think it is so bad. History moves forward, not back, and despite cries of Bush-North, Harper is really not that scary a man. An American poet, Joshua Beckman, was recently in town, and he noted that if Harper had to back peddle like mad for just suggesting that judges might be activist, then we are going to be ok. There are dangers, yes, but the make up of Parliament is such that if Harper tries to whip out any kind of agenda he’s got stashed up in the right-wing of his ass, the Liberals, Bloc and NDP will shut him down. The only problem is that the opposition may not be willing to send him back to Calgary any time soon. Another election is the last thing we need.

I think Harper will be reasonable for the first two years. His democratic reforms could be very good news for Canadians who think they are not represented by the government. Since the coffers are overflowing, his fiscal policies may not be too harsh. The area of concern (for pinkos like me, and maybe you) remains his lack of interest in social policy, and in some cases, his vested interest, which may be that of the idiot Rev. Ray De Souza.

I really think that in the long run, Canadians won’t stand for right-wing moralizing. An oft quoted credo: “If you aren’t a socialist when you are young, you have no heart. If you aren’t a conservative when you are older, you have no brain.” Indeed, as this applies to finances, I agree. But morals move forward. Even the looney-left, if it even existed in, say, the 1950s, wouldn’t have dared stump for pro-choice. Abortion wasn’t even mentioned then. Gay marriage? At that point, society wasn’t even ready to come to terms with people just being gay. So, even as our generation starts to get old (gasp!), and we become the conservatives of the 2020s, we won’t hold on to the morals of this Conservative crew.

It seems like, in the last century, the last three decades specifically, the world is moving right in terms of finance, but we are moving left on moral issues. The Conservatives did not win because more Canadians espouse their values. They won because the Liberals fucked up royally. Lucky for us, they didn’t fuck over the country, they just fucked over themselves. Politics are cyclical. We bounce back and forth to get the best of both worlds. A little discipline never hurt anyone. The country will be fine in the long run. We know this.

64% of those who voted voted for left-leaning, social-democratic candidates. Some of the 36% who voted for the Conservatives are probably more centre than right on social issues. Our system doesn’t reflect that in the government, but Stephen Harper seems to understand that. He seems ready to compromise. For the left to refuse to do so would be to commit the same sin of which we accuse our right-wing opponents: being dogmatic, unmoving, my-way-or-the-highway. How uncanadian that would be. With apologies to Jack, let’s hope this Parliament works. Together.

The right to bear flags (or flag bears?)

2006-01-23T13:58:00.000-05:00

Don Cherry is in trouble again, this time for being too patriotic. No, it’s not last-minute electioneering. Grapes reacted to certain Canadian winter Olympians asking to have their names taken from the list of potential flag bearers so they could focus on their events and avoid distraction. In his typical loud-mouthed fashion, he claimed those athletes don’t care about Canada, and pointed out that “in the U.S. they don’t have that problem.”

Speed skater Catorina Le May Doan expressed her disdain for Cherry, saying he doesn’t understand what it takes to be an Olympic athlete. Nancy Greene, a former Olympic skier, also chimed in, saying it is harder to win an Olympic gold medal than it is to be the NHL scoring leader.

While I appreciate the athlete’s need for focus, I think it is a bit harsh of everyone to attack Don Cherry’s enthusiastic patriotism. He means well, I think.

Amateur athletes often feel neglected because we are under-funded. I paid my way to New Zealand to represent Canada. I got $100 from my MNA, but that’s it in terms of the “public” support that we are supposed to be so thankful for. To be fair, I am far from being an Olympian, and I would gladly pay my own way again. I appreciate public support for elite amateur sport, I think it has a positive effect on the health of the nation, but I don’t feel entitled to it.

The support-related adversity we face is in some respects a motivating factor, but really, it comes down to being willing to sacrifice your life for the sport. That sacrifice is what separates the winners from the losers, not money. Money provides opportunity, but the best athletes will seize whatever opportunity they have and make the most of it.

In terms of an Olympic gold medal being harder than winning an NHL scoring title, as much as I respect the efforts of all the amateur athletes out there, I believe being the best professional hockey player in the world is just as tough being the best luge slider—maybe harder, but it is tough to judge. There is one scoring leader a year in the NHL, four each Olympiad. There are many more gold medals than that to win. Just because the NHLers are professionals doesn’t mean that they have an easier ride than under-funded amateurs. As AC/DC like to say: “It’s a long way to the top if you want to rock and roll.”

Millions of Canadians (never mind Americans and Europeans) dream of making it to the NHL (never mind winning the scoring race). Not too many dream of bobsled gold. Heather Moyse, the new brake-woman on Canada’s World Cup-winning team, has not worked all her life for this chance to win Olympic gold. She was recruited last summer at a retirement party for her university track coach. I was there. Before that she had never done bobsled. She has played soccer and rugby and run track. She is an immensely talented natural athlete, and a wonderful person. I hope she wins.

—as an aside, it is very interesting to read the comments of Canada’s driver, Helen Upperton, regarding the team’s recent success:

“I got to the bottom after the first run and I was actually kind of frustrated,” she said. “I’d had a couple of little hits on the way down and skidded a bit out of the first corner.

“Then I looked up at the clock and I was amazed. It was a new situation for me and I was so nervous going into that second run. The one thing that’s good is I know I can always count on a rocket-fast start.”

Yeah, because Heather is pushing. Does it say something about the sport that someone so inexperienced can have such an impact as to make her driver one of the best in the world?

Anyway, I hope they win. I think they will. Just sayin’, that’s all—

There is no doubt, though, that Ilya Kovalchuk (or Simon Gagné or whoever) will have put in just as much, likely much more work over their lives than Heather has to win her potential gold medal. It is hard to compare across sports, and probably it is best to say that all are equally tough, but to imply that professionals don’t work as hard as amateurs is just plain wrong.

In terms of carrying the flag, I guess Charmaine Crooks is right: every athlete is different. Don Cherry would jump at the chance. Becky Scott would not. I know that if I were competing in the Olympic Marathon (big if!), and it were the day after the opening ceremonies, I would have a tough decision to make. That said, Cherry made the very good point that Alex Bauman carried the flag in 1984 and won gold the next day. In 1988 Carolyn Waldo also won gold. In 2000 Carolyn Brunet won silver. At the winter Olympics, since 1984, Gaetan Boucher, Brian Orser, Sylvie Daigle, and Catorina Le May Doan (!) have all won medals after carrying the flag for Canada.

I think, ironically, some of those athletes who have asked to have their names removed are just looking for publicity. Either that, or they aren’t too confident in their abilities. I think the opening ceremonies are likely the most exciting part of the Games for many athletes. Olympians I have known have all said that those opening ceremonies are the best part of the whole experience. It is really all about the experience. There will always be some regret (world records and gold medals are rare, and even then, knowing elite athletes, there would still be a bit of “woulda coulda shoulda”), and I would rather regret .1 seconds than regret the cultural experience. World records can be broken, gold medal titles change hands, but the experience can never be taken away.

My pick for flag bearer would be Lascelles Brown, the newest Canadian citizen on the team. Or Heather Moyse because after less than a year in the sport she is going to single-handedly (or two-leggedly) bring Canada a gold medal in the women’s bobsled. Either way, I can’t wait to waste a lot of February mornings watching the Olympics on tv. Woohoo! ‘Lympics! 'Lympics!

What do newspaper editors look for when they go to the track in Oz? An endHORSEment of a different colour.

2006-01-19T14:40:00.000-05:00

So all the big papers have made their endorsements, and they’ve all endorsed the Conservatives. Talk about closing the barn door…Way to go out on a limb, guys. The Globe, the Post and La Presse have all decided to “endorse” Stephen Harper’s party, which means, I guess that they are encouraging their readers to vote for that party, or, perhaps it means they think that it wouldn’t be so bad, after all. At this point, it seems the editors will get their wish.

I thought I should endorse a party, too. I’m no Marcus Gee, but I will take a shot at this. I endorse…get ready for it…the NDP.

Blink. Blink.

Silence.

Ok, so no surprise there. Maybe a bit of a surprise considering what you might call my earlier endorsement of the Bloc, but strategic voting and endorsement of policy are two different things. If my MP weren’t the indomitable Gilles Duceppe, I would vote strategically for the Bloc. Gilles has a lock on Laurier-St. Marie, though, so I can afford to give my $1.75 to Jack’s crew.

The NDP gets a bad rap in Canadian politics. They are accused of wasting money, of being idealistic and, of late, being too big for their britches, taking the blame for bringing down the Liberal government. Most of this is untrue, yet normally sound-minded Canadians (for example my mother) fear an NDP surge in the polls.

Jack Layton offered an unprecedented deal to voters: vote for the NDP, just this once, he says. Try us out. The Liberals are in the shop for a while; take the orange and green for a spin (more on the colours later). This may seem foolish of the leftish leader, but I see the method to his grovelling. As the old cliché goes, a week is a lifetime in politics. By the next election, no one will remember this particular plea. Can you remember any particular slogans or promises (other than the ones that we are so often reminded have been broken) from the last election? Of course not, and that was 18 months ago. Imagine if the Conservatives get a majority. It will be four years!

Jack knows that if he can increase his seat count, the NDP will take a big step back towards respectability. That fear some Canadians have of an NDP powerhouse in Ottawa will be allayed if the party can make a large, strong contribution to the next Parliament, as they did in the most recent, truncated mandate.

Why would a strong NDP be good for Canada? Well, it comes down to your opinions on two questions. The first is that of the role of government. If you think government is meant to help people, and to maintain a certain standard of living, and that is should do so by being actively involved in people’s lives, congratulations, the NDP may just be for you (Thank you Paul Barry, grade 10 history, for the details behind this very simplified notion).

The second question is how smart do you think people are? Can Canadians think for themselves? I would say: no. This is perhaps more of a right-wing idea, at least in terms of law and order, but it is also the dirty little secret of the left: people are too stupid to use those Conservative tax cuts wisely. They’ll spend them on beer and popcorn, instead of saving up for health care user fees. An economy can’t run on beer and popcorn alone, so better to save people money by paying for the things they need, so they can spend what they have on the things they want.

The NDP would spend money on what people need: health care, the environment, and housing. The NDP thinks long term. Environmental policies, for example, may in fact hurt business’s profits this year, but they may allow those businesses to exist years from now, by forcing them to change.

The national child-care program, which Stephen Harper would replace with a paltry $1200 a year, could do wonders for the economy. As much as I think the best place to raise a child is in his or her own home, the economic reality is that parents (both parents) need to work to pay for the kid(s). If a national program can be created to allow parents to go back to work sooner, that would certainly help the old economic engine. $1200 a year doesn’t even pay for diapers.

The Liberals make a big deal of their debt-reduction, but really, the fear of debt is unfounded. Now, I’m no economist, but I get by in my little economy of one. I am in debt, but it isn’t hurting me. I could be spending an extra $400 a month on stuff, spurring the economy and so forth, but all in all, being in debt is not so bad, and considering my debt has paid for two degrees, which allows me to teach and write books, I would say it was a good investment.

The NDP supports these sorts of things. While they may not be strong enough yet to form the government, a seat near the front of the table (as opposed to the back of the barn) would help force the hand (if not in terms of parliamentary confidence, at least in the court of public opinion) of the Conservatives and/or Liberals. Harper’s recent comments about Liberal checks, while perhaps unorthodox, speak to this ideal situation: a balance of ideas in government is the best way to give Canadians what they want.

As Jack Layton likes to say, the NDP are a positive choice. It is a fancy campaign slogan, but it is true. I have no problem with those voting Conservative or Liberal because those parties’ values are the ones they themselves espouse –only those who vote for one to punish the other. In Quebec, as I’ve said, for the sake of balance, the Bloc is better. Yes, that is a protest vote, but, until recently, there hasn’t been much of a race here. That has changed, and so, too, perhaps, should my thoughts on the matter. (Il y a seulement les fous qui ne changent pas d’idées.)

There you go. Delight has endorsed the orange and green (more after the election on why those colours are a bad idea), matched up with the moustache, leaned left, as it were. Good luck on Monday! Everyone vote!

Ideology and party politics: inefficent and obsolete.

2006-01-16T09:37:00.000-05:00

The Conservatives have learned that the party that casts the widest net will catch the most voter-fish. Good for them, but is it good for Canada? I don’t mean: "Are the Conservatives good for Canada?" I mean: "Are a bunch of centrist parties, all touting the same thing, good for Canada?" Party politics, in an odd way, has become obsolete, while at the same time remaining a monolith on the Canadian democratic scene.

The problem with party politics is that voters are forced to choose from a slate of not necessarily compatible policies. Among ideologues there is a tendency to assume that if you believe in one policy, you’ll believe in a list of others under the same banner. But people are more complex than that.

I offer myself up as an example: though I may get slapped for this somewhere along the line by someone who takes partisanism and ideology too seriously, the issue of abortion is a good way to demonstrate my point. I believe that abortion should be a legal choice for a woman, and that if she should choose to have one, it should be paid for like any other medical practice under the Canada Health Act. If asked for my advice or opinion by a female friend on whether or not she should have one, I would, I am confident, always answer: no, don’t have an abortion.

So, somehow, I’m both pro-choice AND pro-life. For some reason, instead of eliciting support from both sides, this opinion usually leads both the right-wing religious crazies and the left-wing feminist crazies to condemn.

Thankfully, I have not had to deal with this particular situation in my own life. A friend once confided in me that if she ever got pregnant she would “kill that little parasite so fast.” Funny thing, she got pregnant not soon after, and had the kid. Let the choice be there, but educate people (men and women, who, hopefully, are making this decision as a couple, though the circumstances leading to such a choice often involve, I think, a lack of a prospective father) on the options available.

This is not meant to be a post about abortion. But you see how a seemingly black/white issue is far more complex. This is why governments fall: we sway back and forth between one package and another, tolerating cuts to social programs in order to benefit from tax cuts for a time, then paying more taxes and enjoying an active government for another. The problem is that instead of pursuing ideology in a coherent plan for the nation, governments focus their energies on staying in power, while the opposition, instead of providing useful criticism and balance, attack the government out of a need to get power for themselves.

How might we have a more effective government that wouldn’t be run based on power-plays and partisan slates? I have postulated a theory once before over at MediaScout that was perhaps a little more extreme, in that it precluded any current MP from seeking office. That theory resulted in holier-than-though invective from political science graduate students claiming that party politics were the basis of democracy. Here’s an idea: let graduate students run the country: they clearly know everything! Seriously though, a full-scale purging of the political ranks is neither likely, nor the best idea. But a nation-wide, grass-roots collective of independents, beholden together only by the promise that they would put the issues of their community first, could work.

This may sound like a de-centralization movement that might cause even Gilles Duceppe pause—if Canada can be divided, can Québec as well? It’s not. National parties are important and useful in setting federal policies that define us as a nation. Otherwise, what are we but a group of 308 town-ish sized blobs? A federal MP’s job is to make the country work as a whole. The candidates’ allegiances to their party first, however, and to their constituents—Canadians!—second is what is causing all the trouble.

I am happy with many of the policies my incumbent MP supports in Ottawa, with the exception of at least one, a pretty big one at that: he wants to take my riding out of Canada. I don’t like moving to begin with, and though Gilles Duceppe would have me emigrate from Canada with the advantage of not having to pack my bags, this is one resident of Laurier-Ste. Marie who does not give full-support to the man.

It is impossible to make everyone happy. Canadians want certain things from their MPs, but in the current system, you have to take the bad with the good. In the hotly-contested Toronto riding of Trinity-Spadina, Liberal Tony Ianno is in tough in the face of backlash against his party, and the hard-charging NDP first lady, Olivia Chow. But the issues go deeper than that, locally. Residents support Ianno because he is a member of their community, and they want HIM to be their representative in Ottawa. They might not trust the Liberals, but they trust Chow even less: her party has been putting up signs, without permission, in front of the houses of elderly immigrants who don’t speak English well enough to protest. While it might be advantageous to have the wife of a party leader as your MP, many locals are making the choice between Tony and Olivia, rather than between Liberals and NDP.

So it is already happening, to an extent. The problem is that, as good a guy as Tony Ianno might be, he has no choice on how he votes in Parliament. He can’t represent his constituents on an issue-by-issue basis (neither, for that matter, can Olivia Chow, or, the cannon-fodder Conservative candidate, Sam Goldstein). One solution to this problem would be to allow free votes on more bills. That wouldn’t change partisan pressures, and would bring up the complicated matter of confidence. Take out the parties, though, and all the votes become free. Add in Stephen Harper’s proposal of fixed election dates (there is something the Conservative Party and I agree on), and you’ve solved the problem of confidence. As it is now, committees work together on drafting proposals, and on drafting the laws later. An elected Senate adds to the democracy (though also, to be fair, to the bureaucracy of elections). Who gets to be Prime Minister? Let the Commons decide in a convention-style vote that requires the support of 50% of the House. It would only take a day or two. His or her role would be more like that of head of state, as opposed to head of government—and we could ditch the Governor General, too!

All this may sound far-fetched and simplistic, but such individualism is happening elsewhere in our culture. And what did Calvin’s dad say about Thoreau? “Simplify, simplify.”

Montréal Metro Riders More Polite Than Politicians (how hard can that be?)

2006-01-12T20:49:00.000-05:00

So, thirteen days in, has anyone kept to their New Year’s resolution? Diets, exercise, good will… all are available at a surplus in early January. Hold on to what you can find, though, because they will be collectors’ items in a few short weeks.

The change of the calendar by no means endows us with any more will-power or discipline than we had in months previous. Yet, there is something about a whole new year that can inspire people to take that step. One would hope that with so many good intentions out there, society might change for the better. A tall order, you say? A grandiose suggestion? Indeed. We’re all so hell-bent on self-improvement, so why does it seem people are getting more and more individualistic, hiding under their ear-pods, shuffling by becoming experts on sidewalk construction, grunting like pre-historic pre-teens? We need to make a species-wide New Year’s resolution—to resolve to be more polite.

Even in a city like Montréal, where everyone is mostly perfect, or pretends to be, there is always room for a civic upgrade. In general, I find this town to be pretty communal. People smile on the street, they say hi, or bonjour, hold doors open, and are generally agreeable. The one vice Montréalers seem to have is the impatient habit of not waiting for people to get off the metro before they crowd on. It is the oddest of phenomena in this supposedly-better-than-Toronto, European-minded city. Even in the grumpy Big Smoke, riders wait for their co-patrons to exit the subway car before moving in. Not so in Montréal! Until now.

For that has been the Montréaler’s resolution—to resolve to not push into metro cars before everyone else has got off. It seems that our collective will has decided that this is to be the year. And, so far, so good. It is as if some force has overcome us. My fellow commuters look as surprised as I do when, as the doors open, we stand aside and…wait. Those exiting the train peer curiously from the doors, elbows raised. Where is the crush? They put out a tentative foot: tap, tap, tap…what’s that? The platform! And then the rush from the rest as we, the embarkers, stand, amazed at our own adhesiveness in the face of those open doors.

Really. It’s weird. I’m glad to see it though. A better world, one metro stop at a time.

English Election Debates--Majorly Conservative

2006-01-10T10:17:00.000-05:00

Here’s a little summary of the four leaders’ performances last night in the English debate:

Overall, the format was good. The moderator, Steve “you want in on that” Pacon, followed the flow of the debate, let them go at it as much as he could. The lack of one-on-one debates was disappointing in some ways, but it also avoided having to watch Duceppe and Layton tell each other how much they like each other. I would like to see Martin and Duceppe go at it on national unity, though, because that was the most entertaining topic. I’d even be willing to host it in my living room. Best question was to Duceppe: if we shouldn’t revisit same-sex marriage, why do we need to revisit sovereignty? He answered well, too: because one is about assuring individual rights—a universal—and the other is a test of the collective will—changeable over time.

Gilles Duceppe: I take exception to Andrew Coyne’s post-debate comments on the CBC that Gilles doesn’t belong on the English debate. Gilles Duceppe may be a separatist, but he still represents Canadians as a leader of a party, and as an MP (my MP, in Laurier-Ste.Marie). He has the right to send his message to English-speaking Quebecers. Besides, his English is better than Harper’s French. I thought he got that message across well enough, though not as well as in the debate last June (the December debate was, to quote my friend Stephen, more of a “joint press conference”). He looked haggard, and it took him a while to get going. That said, once he did, he used his nothing-to-lose position to take shots at Martin and Harper, and was strong, I thought, in defending his nation’s right to sovereignty. He was confident, and, though he was careful not to make predictions, his “optimistic” assessment of his fortunes in Québec this time around is likely accurate. One CBC viewer commented that they would vote for Duceppe, were he running in Ontario—a comment I have heard before. I will reiterate: Gilles Duceppe would make the best Prime Minister of the four party leaders. Too bad about that separatism thing…
Best Line: (to Martin) “You are a living democratic deficit”
Most like: Tie Domi. Effective at what he does, but a one trick pony.

Jack Layton: A changed man, he was very calm this time around, sticking to his message. Many viewers, in their post-show comments, thought he sounded like a commercial. I agree, though I think someone watching the debates who does not follow politics as closely as some of us might find that at least informative, and perhaps even refreshing from the personal attacks the rest were firing off. Also, Layton and the NDP are the only party that have actually done all the things they’ve said they’ve done. I felt like Jack was the only one up there (other than Gilles) who was telling the truth. Sadly, I think, an election campaign is no time for the truth. The NDP leader did look strong when he turned to challenge Martin, and he was, in fact, best, when he was reacting, rather than just reciting his platform. He did avoid the question about swingers’ clubs, but really, what kind of question was that, anyway?
Best Line: calling Harper’s tax cuts “a shell game.”
Most like: Matt Stajan, last year. He’s up and coming, playing smart and safe. Last year he was Darcy Tucker on uppers, pretty much gnawing on Martin’s lapels every chance he got. This year was better, but he’s still not quite ready for the big time.

Paul Martin: He came out strong, took control, and tried to create an “intellectual debate.” Fat chance, Paul. Despite being the target most of the night, he managed to elevate himself, and push his vision for Canada. He was the only leader to look prime ministerial, and his closing statement offered much more to the casual viewer, saying all the right things. He mentioned working together, looking long-term, and, not in so many words, a welfare state. Martin tried very hard to differentiate himself from Harper. On the passion scale, he clearly did, but I don’t know if it will be enough. I thought he did well to tackle the sponsorship and other scandals: he said he reacted as he should have. Well, what else is he going to say, really? The policy announcement of taking away the notwithstanding clause was desperate for a couple reasons. First, because it only really appeals to the pundits and political junkies. Most Canadians probably don’t care. Second, because, as those pundits pointed out, he’s the only one who has really been in a position to use it (to save Churches from having to perform marriages they don’t want to). Despite my aversion to his corrupt party and to the arrogance of a big government, he did well.
Best Line: Didn’t really have one, so I’ll resurrect “Voyons donc!” from the French debate in December.
Most like: Mats Sundin, post-eye injury, post-lockout. He is still the natural leader, or at least, he wants to be. But does he still have it?

Stephen Harper: Like the rest of his campaign, slow and steady wins the debate for Harper. He was quite upfront about his position, admitting to not being outwardly passionate, and only started to do the “Harper bobble” towards the end, perhaps when all that smiling was making him tired. He made his case. The problem is, his case is pretty much the same as the Liberals’, and in some cases the NDP’s and the Bloc’s. The other parties made sure to point out that Harper and the Tories voted against many of the proposals they claim to want to implement. Doug Saunders wrote in Saturday’s Globe about conservatives trending towards the left, but found quiet reassurances to traditional right-wingers that once in power, it would be business as usual.
Two moments stuck me, one good, one bad. He made points against the NDP by saying how tax cuts to large employers (like the auto companies) would help workers; however, his child care benefit ($100 a month to every family with a child under six) is just ridiculous. The government’s job is to redistribute the wealth to those who need it, not just give it back to everyone. Westmount and Rosedale parents don’t need an extra hundred bucks a month. That’s a tip for the nanny. Sorry, he’s got to be more creative than that. Mostly, Harper is doing and saying the right things, but should we believe him?
Best Line: Didn’t really have one. The barb about the auto workers was good, but not exactly catchy. To his credit, he didn’t say anything stupid, either.
Most like: Eric Lindros, at the moment of signing. He is on the verge of getting what he has most wanted. Will he get the chance, and can he deliver? Or will Canadians be scared off by his party’s moral “concussions”?

What is a blog anyway?

2006-01-05T21:50:00.000-05:00

What is a blog? No, really. The response I got when I told people I was going to start a blog (do a blog? blog a blog?) was mostly, “oh, no, not another blog.” They fear, perhaps, embarrassment on my behalf for when I make public some intimate thought that I shouldn’t have expressed for the world to see. I am well aware of this, and I don’t plan for this to be a diary, or merely a compendium of musings on quotidian happenings. It may interest some to know that my sister has shaved her head, or that I’ve just bought a new guitar, but that is the stuff of conversation, not of blogification.

Now, the blogophiles among you might jump up at this point and say, “no, for the blog is the new conversation; the internet is the new water cooler, etc. etc.” While this may be true, there is one distinct difference between a regular conversation and one that takes place on the internet. When we are talking, face to face, the words are fluid. They exist, then evaporate, staying only in our memory, and are quickly covered by more words, and thoughts that go with them. We naturally filter the parts of the conversation into areas of our brain: throwaway jibes, off-colour comments, inside jokes. Sarcasm is easily detected and taken in context.

When we have a conversation on the internet, whether in a chat room, message board, forum, instant messenger, or blog, the words remain. They are solid, not fluid. Also, they are public. What might be meant for one or two people can be read by one or two hundred, or thousand people. The intentions of the speaker/writer (a significant difference) are easily misinterpreted, especially upon reinterpretation, the luxury of which we don’t have in regular conversation.

The difference is that between speaking and writing. The internet, with its instantaneity, has tricked us into thinking that writing is speaking. But it is not. As a writer, and more importantly, as a teacher of writing, the most important aspect of my work is revision. I tell my students that the difference between a good writer and a poor one is not necessarily natural ability, or education (though these obviously come into play), but patience, and the ability to revise. In essence, it is experience. A good writer is one who has experienced what he or she is trying to tell you, not only in terms of the story, but one who has experienced the work itself, several times over. I tell my students that the more they revise their work, the better their mark will be. It is a hands-on version of think before you speak.

Alan Ginsberg’s philosophy of first thought, best thought seems to have caught on with the bloggists. Not all of them, I’m sure, but among angst-ridden teenagers—the Live Journal set—and young people on some of the track and field message boards I frequent, for example, the idea of revision is completely lost.

What this amounts to is a lot of unfiltered thought. More professional blogs (like the Star’s hockey blog, or Maisonneuve.org’s columnists, or the Pun Gents, to take examples close to me) avoid this trap because they are heavily edited. They aren’t just thinking out loud. There are plenty of good blogs out there, and they all have this in common. I am trying to avoid this trap as well, by filtering myself. As I write this it is Thursday morning. It probably won’t see the light of blog until tomorrow afternoon. If nothing else, it gives me the time to spell check (don’t get me started on that—another post regarding r u l8 and lol and the like is coming, too) Perhaps this takes some of the edge off. Well, edgy is not really the goal. Thoughtful, insightful, even wise is the goal. That takes time. Time is something we have plenty of, though the instant online culture tries to make us believe that it is scarce. It’s not. Every minute we get sixty more seconds to fill with distance run, or whatever else. Think about it.