Wilderness Running Company

Archive for February, 2010

« Older Entries

Long Term Test: Vasque Celerator (Momenta)

Friday, February 26th, 2010

The bulk of my miles in 2009 were done in La Sportiva Fireblades. The shoes that I used second-most were probably the Vasque Celerators pictured here. The Celerator — and the women’s version, called Momenta — were “the other” shoe in the Vasque performance lineup last year. I’m referring, of course, to the long shadow cast by the shoe’s slightly older sibling, the award-winning Aether Tech. After its 2008 launch, the AT quickly won over many trail runners as the very epitome of a willing, versatile shoe. A true all-rounder. The Celerator/Momenta is in essentially the same mold.

Fraternal Twins
(Full Aether Tech review here.)

In my recent review of the La Sportiva Raptor, I expressed surprise at how much difference in trail manners there can be between two shoes that appear, at first glance, to be almost exactly alike. With the Aether Tech and the Celerator, the reason for surprise cuts the other way: the two shoes look dissimilar yet behave almost identically.

In fact, the only differences between the two shoes are, by and large, cosmetic. Essentially, the Celerator is the Aether Tech for runners who prefer traditional laces (at a lower price point). Click here to see what I mean. See many differences there? Same last, same sole. The only differences are in the upper: the Celerator is a bit more airy; the AT has the Boa system. The end.

This is not to say the difference between the Boa system and traditional laces is insignificant. I personally like the way the Boa system applies an even, uniform hug to my foot. Some people still prefer traditional laces. Different strokes and all that. But the main point remains the same: the Celerator performs almost exactly like the Aether Tech.

My Opinion

These are a “baby bear” shoe for many runners: juuust right. The Arc Tempo last is a true medium fit, neither snug nor spacious. The Aether Tech sole offers middle-of-the-road cushion and protection, neither very firm nor spongy. They are light enough for race day and tough enough for everyday. When I run in them, I rarely think about them at all, which is a pretty high compliment.

We Barely Knew You

For better or worse, the lifespan of the Celerator/Momenta turned out to be only slightly greater than that of the mayfly. As so often happens, the younger sibling seems to have suffered in comparison with the flashier older sibling and hasn’t gained widespread adoption in the market. With the launch of the Transistor, the Celerator is likely to fade even further into the background. So it came as little surprise when I learned that this is the last season the Celerator/Momenta will be produced.

This puts WRC in a bit of an awkward position. On the one hand, we really like the shoe and still have quite a few of them in stock (especially the men’s Celerator). On the other hand, we fully understand the reluctance on the part of most runners to start up a relationship with a shoe when they know it will only be for the short term.

One way we attempt to be different from the GGGs (Giant Gear Generalists) is to always be mindful of this sort of thing — to always take into account the best interest of real trail runners, rather than just throw a bunch of SKUs out there and let the chips fall where they may. As a trail runner, I understand the frustration when a good shoe comes and goes this quickly. There’s no point in sugar-coating it.

So we’ve decided the best way to resolve the dilemma is to offer our remaining inventory at a low price. By lowering the bar this way, we hope the shoe is viable (1) as an introduction to the world of trail-specific shoes for beginner trail runners, and (2) as a secondary (or tertiary) shoe for the trail runner who, for whatever reason, likes to own more than one shoe at a time.

Specifications

Vasque #s 7586, 7587 & 7588
Width: Medium
Actual Weight: 362 grams / 12.8 ounces (men’s size 10.0)
Upper: Synthetic nubuck, TPU weld, Airmesh nylon
Midsole: EVA w/ high rebound heel and forefoot inserts
Outsole: Vasque Aether
Footbed: Dual Density EVA

Celerator Store Page (Men’s) >>
Momenta Store Page (Women’s) >>

***

Tags: , ,
Posted in Gear Reviews | No Comments »

New Arrival: Vasque Transistor FS

Thursday, February 25th, 2010

The past few weeks have been all about La Sportiva around here. That’s about to change, starting now: we just received our first shipment of Vasque’s brand-spanking new Transistor FS.

As usual, until I have a chance to spend some time with the shoe, our product description on the store page is Vasque copy. In the meantime, if you haven’t already seen iRunFar’s thorough overview of the shoe — complete with a shoe giveaway for product testing purposes! — check it out. As you’ll learn there, the design of the Transistor is really unlike anything else out there.

Women’s Transistor Store Page >>

Men’s Transistor Store Page >>

***

Posted in News | No Comments »

Book Review: Racing Weight

Wednesday, February 24th, 2010

The Hook

As a statistical matter, it turns out endurance athletes worry about their weight as much as the general population, despite being, on average, considerably slimmer. But beneath the quantitative similarity lurks a significant qualitative difference: athletes think about weight primarily in terms of athletic performance rather than simply “looking good” or staving off obesity. So, while many of the core principles of weight management are the same for athletes and non-athletes alike, there are many meaningful differences at the margins.

The Text

Racing Weight is organized almost exactly in one-thirds of about 90 pages each. It is a clean, intuitive structure. Fitzgerald’s writing is also clean and direct; pretty much exactly what you want from this type of book.

The first third of the book sets contextual groundwork by detailing the relevance of weight management to peak athletic performance and providing several tools for tracking progress and managing seasonal challenges.

The second third of the book is, logically, the core, and is comprised of Fitzgerald’s five-step plan for weight management:
- Improve diet quality.
- Balance your energy sources.
- Time your nutrition.
- Manage your appetite.
- Train right.

The final third has a variety of aids (sample one-day nutrition diaries of elite athletes, recipes, etc.) which help bring to life the various concepts discussed earlier in the book.

Does It Work As a Book?

As a reference, I love it. Most of the principles here are familiar, so while the book is novel in some respects, it is anything but gimmicky. Instead, it is (1) a coherent road map (finally!) to the various tips and insights you’ve probably come across over recent years in piecemeal fashion through a variety of outlets, and (2) a toolkit for actually implementing these principles without quitting your job or hiring a private chef. Fitzgerald walks the line very well of providing the scientific basis for his advice without getting bogged down in hair-splitting academic debate. Also, the paperback format and pricing ($13-$18) is a utilitarian’s dream.

Put another way, Racing Weight represents another example of the tools and science enjoyed by pros “trickling down” to the passionate non-pro. And I’m a huge fan of that.

Does It Work As a Practical Matter?

The value of any training aid depends heavily on the buy-in of the athlete using the aid. But I would say Racing Weight makes the implementation of a basic weight management strategy as feasible as is reasonable to expect from any book. There’s also plenty here for the athlete who wants to go well beyond basic weight management into territory where few wish to go.

For me personally, the book has already been well worth the purchase. For example, I’ve known for a long time I tend to not consume nearly enough calories early in the day. However, I wasn’t sure precisely what the dimensions of this tendency were — either the size of my typical deficit or its exact drawbacks. From a table in the chapter on nutrition timing, I learned it is best to consume fully 1/3 of my daily calories by around 10 AM. The text of the same chapter spells out why this is so. Having the logic of this one principle spelled out in detail then boiled down to a single metric is something I can really work with.

While this example probably strikes you as a silly thing to spark a mini-epiphany — and, in a way, it is — I bet there are other nuggets in Racing Weight that will be of particular benefit to you in a way that’s similar to the way this one worked for me.

Of course, true implementation of a weight management strategy — like any other element of training — is a long term proposition. So, over the coming weeks and months, I will make additional posts sharing my experience with that.

Other Resources

Publisher’s Page
Companion Website
Purchase (Amazon)

***

Tags: ,
Posted in News | 2 Comments »

One Thing

Monday, February 22nd, 2010

Pre-run at Cove Wash Trailhead, 45 minutes before sunset. It’s good to be back at it.

***

Tags:
Posted in News | No Comments »

In Case You Missed It

Friday, February 19th, 2010

Time to reach into the semi-regular Friday grab bag.

1. Still more evidence that trail runners are simply better people. Turi, a Reno-based runner, won a pair of Fireblades in our Twitter raffle. He replied with a nice note, a couple of mentions on his blog, and this:

It’s a wallet featuring the WRC logo, made entirely of duct tape. It — duct tape — isn’t just for your feet, after all. I love it! Thanks Turi! (I’m pretty sure Turi makes this kind of thing regularly, as a hobby/small business, so if you’d like something similar of your own, drop him a line.)

2. Slimmer Doesn’t Always Mean Fitter. The thesis of the Times article — that “everyone has a point at which further weight loss actually makes their performance worse” — does not actually contradict anything Matt Fitzgerald writes in Racing Weight, despite the subtle suggestion in the article that it does. For many of us, it is probably pretty safe to answer the question: “what is your ideal racing weight?” with:  “lighter than I usually race.” Still, it’s a good idea to remember that weight management is a means not an end, more (loss) is not always better, and that listening, really listening, to your body is ultimately better than listening to the scale.

3. Ever wonder what is the most efficient method to carry water and stuff while running? You’re not alone. Pretty interesting read, although I’d agree with Bryon (comment one) that this research effort represents more of a starting point than the final word on the topic. I’d also suggest personal preference should (and will) probably remain the deciding factor for most runners in figuring out which way they want to carry their necessaries. And I desperately hope this isn’t the first step on a path that ends with computer-modeled trail running.

4. Best Reason to Visit Expedia. Before I die, I want to spend one month, just one, running (and riding) my way from Girona to San Sebastian.

5. Photo I love (via Run Junkie):

May your weekend be filled with endorphins and vistas of wild places!

***

Posted in News | 3 Comments »

Why We Offer La Sportiva

Thursday, February 18th, 2010

I subscribe to the belief, well-drawn by Malcolm Gladwell in Outliers, that culture counts huge, and that wild success often occurs when a unique historical pathway intersects with a large investment of time spent honing the skills unique to a particular field.

So it should come as no surprise that my enthusiasm for La Sportiva starts with the company backstory. It is a family-run business, based in the Dolomite region of northern Italy, which got its start in the late 1920s making wooden clogs and leather boots for lumberjacks, farmers, and soldiers. The company has been making shoes and boots for mountain use ever since. That means they have spent not years but generations refining designs that work well in the mountains, and eliminating those that don’t.

Over their 80+ years in business, La Sportiva has evolved right alongside various mountain sports, and is now recognized as the source for some of the best performing, most refined footwear for specialized wilderness applications like Mountaineering, Climbing, and, of course, Mountain Running.

Today, La Sportiva is as “core” as trail running gets. Besides making great shoes, they put their marketing resources where it counts, right at the grassroots, by sponsoring a large roster of runners and scads of great events nationwide. But the crown jewel in Sportiva’s sponsorship crown has to be the Mountain Cup series. Ten events in the spirit of European mountain, or “sky,” racing. It’s a welcome departure from ultra-centric race series and proof positive that, by itself, mileage is a very crude measure of what counts as legitimate wilderness running.

For all the details of the linkage between Sportiva and trail running culture, visit their separate, dedicated mountain running website. If it isn’t already in your regular rotation, it should be; if there’s another gear-maker who has a better website dedicated completely to trail running, I’m not aware of it.

So, in long form, that’s why we are proud to offer La Sportiva mountain running shoes. But since pictures are often more potent than words, you might also consider this clip of a sky race in the Dolomite mountains — La Sportiva’s home.  When I lace up any of my Sporties, I can’t help but feel a sliver of… satisfaction? pride? confidence? …that I am about to enjoy the product of a long evolutionary process that took place primarily among these narrow valleys and craggy ridgelines.

***

Tags: ,
Posted in News | 1 Comment »

One Thing

Monday, February 15th, 2010

Just a week in, the back rehab is going well enough that I’ve cautiously resumed activity. I was feeling pretty great about that on Saturday. So was Joia, aka the post-run golden retriever wet wipe. Yes, it’s a major ewww, but it’s also pretty funny. And I have a very hard time withholding anything from her that literally makes the tail wag the dog.

***

Tags:
Posted in News | 2 Comments »

La Sportiva Raptor Review

Thursday, February 11th, 2010

La Sportiva Raptor

I’ll admit it: this one surprised me.

When I was first introduced to the Raptor last summer at Outdoor Retailer, I immediately thought of it as Wildcat’s Evil Twin. The similarity between the two shoes was obvious. It seemed like the Raptor looked a bit meaner than the Wildcat and, as I became familiar with the details of the Raptor’s design, I expected it to act a bit meaner than the Wildcat. Still, they look so much alike and have so much common DNA I wondered how different they could really be. You might say I expected the differences between the Raptor and the Wildcat to be more than cosmetic, but not much more. That isn’t really how it turned out.

The Same Platform
(Full Wildcat review here.)

The Raptor is built on the same last, called the Tempo, as the Wildcat. La Sportiva accurately calls out the fit of this last as medium/wide. As a point of comparison, both shoes are considerably more spacious, especially in the heel and midfoot areas, than Sporties built on their Racing last (i.e. Skylite, Crosslite, and Fireblade). So both the Raptor and Wildcat are better choices for runners who have wider feet and/or like to provide for more in-run foot swelling.

The Raptor and Wildcat also have the same basic midsole specs, in terms of both thickness and density. Neither of these are low, flat shoes. Rather, they are built to absorb plenty of shock, especially in the heel. This level of shock absorption can come in handy for some of us all the time (heel strikers), and for pretty much all of us some of the time (during descents, especially long, steep ones).

TPU Heel Stabilizer

The final similarities worth noting are relatively minor: both the Raptor and Wildcat have a TPU heel stabilizer cup and a debris guard between the laces and tongue.

Things Get Interesting

The Raptor differs from the Wildcat in three significant ways.

Upper (f/ TPU Lace Cage)

1.  Instead of a very airy (and somewhat delicate) mesh upper, the upper of the Raptor is made of a more rugged mesh with synthetic leather overlays along the sides of the shoe. These changes add significant protection and durability while sacrificing a bit of breathability. The overlays also provide a solid anchor for the TPU lace cage.

2.  The Wildcat has a 2.4mm EVA cushion in its footbed, which is one of the main sources of the shoe’s relatively plush ride. In designing the Raptor, La Sportiva dropped this element. The result is a significantly firmer, and slightly lower, ride. (Click here to view a cross-section of the Wildcat midsole, including the layer of EVA cushion.)

Outsole

3.  The outsole of the Raptor is made of Frixon XF, whereas the Wildcat — and the rest of Sportiva’s mountain running lineup — features Frixion AT. What does that mean? If you are familiar with any of Sportiva’s other trail running shoes, you already know that an outsole made of Frixon AT equals a very sticky shoe, befitting the company’s cross-disciplinary expertise in climbing shoes. Well, the XF compound is even stickier. It is the same compound Sportiva uses in their approach shoes, and is just one category short of what they use in their flat-out climbing shoes. In other words, the Raptor outsole is seriously sticky.

Trail Manners

In many respects, the Raptor actually behaves a lot like shoes in the “tank” category: its chassis offers a very firm, stable ride, while its upper offers enough protection for even the nastiest trail conditions. The medium-wide fit provides plenty of room for swelling, which the TPU lace cage balances out by enabling a very snug fit all the way around the mid-foot.

This profile is (obviously) very different from the Wildcat, which is more of a plush, lightweight cruiser that really shines on fireroads and other lower-leverage terrain. Where the Wildcat is one of the more pavement-friendly trail shoes around, you won’t really appreciate the Raptor’s virtues until you put it through the ringer. The hairier the trail, the happier these shoes are.

And then there’s this: unlike most tanks, the Raptor is a very, very light shoe, weighing nearly the same as the Wildcat, which is roughly the same as the racy Fireblade and only slightly more than the even racier Crosslite. Interesting twist.

My Opinion

Under most conditions, I personally prefer “less shoe” to “more shoe.” As in, relatively flat and relatively firm. But sometimes I want a bit more heel cushion for long, hard descents. And sometimes, when the outing is likely to include a serious dose of bushwacking, I like a bit more protective upper. On those occasions, the Raptor is quickly becoming my shoe of choice: it’s everything I want from a burly shoe, but significantly lighter and more nimble than what I usually expect from such a rugged shoe.

The Raptor has the same roomy foot environment as the Wildcat, but the lace cage allows me to all-but-eliminate any squirreliness that might come from quick, twisty steps over very technical stuff. Adding considerably to the confidence-inspiring feeling of the Raptor is the XF outsole compound. The Raptor is easily the stickiest trail running shoe I’ve ever laced up — an absolute joy on any trail surface where grip is at a premium. If you’re like me, you’ll find yourself wondering if it’s possible to literally climb walls in them.

My go-to “test lab” includes a semi-long, extremely technical descent on slickrock. In the Raptor, I find myself throwing caution to the wind and taking dicey sections faster than I’ve ever dared before. I just point ‘em downwards and hang on tight!

Wear Note

This was not a long term test (only about 50 miles) so I cannot say anything definitive about the Raptor’s durability, which has been one of the few criticisms I’ve heard of the Wildcat with any consistency. (This should really not be terribly surprising, since the Wildcat design is optimized for relatively low-leverage terrain.)

There is little doubt in my mind that the upper of the Raptor will withstand serious abuse. Less clear, in my mind, is how the midsole will hold up.

Generally, a less dense midsole like that of the Raptor/Wildcat will break down noticeably more quickly than shoes with very dense midsoles (e.g. Fireblades). Less dense midsoles feel “cushy” out of the box, but lose that feeling with the lost “dead space” that comes from repeated impact. This phenomenon is especially noticeable with most road shoes.

So it might seem the loss of “that cushy feeling” should occur with the Raptor at about the same rate as it does to the Wildcat. However, remember that the Raptor does not have a 2.4mm EVA footbed, as the Wildcat does. It’s entirely possible that the breakdown of this particular feature represents a significant part of what Wildcat owners experience when they notice a loss of cushion as the miles accumulate. For that reason, I suspect that the Raptor midsole will retain, over time, more of its cushion (or lack thereof) than the Wildcat. But it’s too soon for me to say for certain.

Manufacturer’s Specifications

Price: $110
User: Unisex
Claimed Weight: 12.28 oz/ 348 g
Last: Tempo 2
Fit: Medium/Wide
Upper: AirMesh/ Synthetic Leather/ TPU Lacing Harness/ TPU Transkinetic Heel Stabilizer
Lining: Mesh (back half and tongue only)
Midsole: MeMlex/ Nylon Molded Flex Transfer shank
Midsole Height (MM): Heel: 28 mm Toe: 16mm Delta: 12mm
SOLE: FriXion®XF/ Impact Brake System™ X-Axis™

***

Raptor Store Page (Unisex) >>

***

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Gear Reviews | No Comments »

Trail-Specific Shoes, Part 2

Tuesday, February 9th, 2010

In part one of this topic, we looked at the main factors beginner trail runners should consider when deciding whether to opt for trail-specific shoes. This post, also intended to help beginners navigate the world of trail running footwear, outlines from the ground up the main design differences between road and trail running shoes.

(Although beginner trail runners should be aware of the ongoing debate regarding barefoot running, a discussion of that topic is beyond the scope of this post.)

Context

Let’s first briefly revisit the obvious but important point that wilderness trail surfaces aren’t like typical paved or concrete running surfaces. Road running is done on surfaces that provide a consistent, predictable landing pad, while high-leverage trails do not. High-leverage trails are often covered in moisture or loose dirt, or littered with stationary obstacles like roots and rocks. The vertical slope and horizontal tilt typical of high-leverage trails pose additional challenges.

What does this mean for shoe design?

For starters, it means the organizing design principle for trail shoes is fundamentally different from that of road shoes. The “problem” road shoes are designed to solve is at the intersection of repeated hard-surface impact and the individual runner’s biomechanics. Given the nearly identical impact of each foot strike, the primary risk of injury to a road runner is obviously that of repetitive stress.

The approach taken by road shoe designers is to provide considerable cushioning, which is often supplemented with features intended to manage the idiosyncratic running action of different types of runners. Over time, road shoes have evolved into the categories motion-control, stability, and neutral, which are fairly well-defined and understood by most experienced runners.

By contrast, trail running shoes are designed primarily to respond to the trail itself and only secondarily to the runner’s profile and running style.This makes sense for a few reasons.

First, wilderness trails are almost always softer than pavement or concrete, which reduces the impact force of each footstrike. There’s simply less call for cushion.

Second, the biomechanics of the runner’s stride are largely thrown out of their normal repetitive consistency by the trail’s constantly changing nature (unless it’s a really boring trail). Running on some trails looks a lot less like what you see at the Boston Marathon and a lot more like what you see during a punt return at a football game.

Finally, traversing unpredictable wilderness trails at speed considerably increases the risk of injury from a single violent trauma like a sharp poke to your sole, a twisted knee or ankle, a stubbed toe, or a fall.

With this background established, we are now ready to explore the technical differences between road and trail running shoes.

Outsole

Having good traction makes all the difference when you come to a slippery, treacherous section of trail: good trail shoes allow you to confidently attack terrain you otherwise would have to tip-toe gingerly across. Since trail shoes need much better traction than road shoes, their outsoles typically are made from much stickier rubber compounds.

Most also have fairly substantial lugs designed to hook up in loose dirt conditions. However, a deep-lugged tread is not a universally desirable characteristic. Larger lugs sometimes translate into a higher, less stable ride. Also, for exceptionally smooth trails and those featuring a heavy dose of rock, a relatively bald outsole will provide more shoe/trail contact and, therefore, better traction. Beware, also, of lugs that are spaced close together, since mud will tend to get packed in the spaces between them, whereas wide-spaced lugs will be more likely to shed mud. For these reasons, I generally recommend selecting a tread design that provides as deep a lug as the terrain demands and no more.

The rubber compounds used in the outsoles of trail shoes are, as a rule, much denser than those of road shoes. This greatly improves durability and provides a protective barrier between your foot and sharp objects.

Midsole

The midsole of trail running shoes tends to be more protective yet less cushioned than road running shoes. This is primarily a function of the density of the materials used, but the midsoles of many trail shoes also incorporate a rock plate.

Many trail running shoes have a relatively thin midsole, which reflects the preference, nearly universal among trail runners, for a lower, more tactile feel of the trail surface. A thicker midsole adds height and reduces stability, which dampens trail-feel and makes twisted leg joints more likely. In addition to riding lower than comparable road shoes, trail shoes tend to be a bit wider than their road cousins for the same reason.

The combination of a low, confident ride and dense midsole materials means that a trail shoe will generally feel considerably stiffer and more stable than a comparable road shoe. For this reason, it is common for a trail running shoe that feels “in tune” on a technical trail to feel a bit stiff on pavement. It’s a bit like driving a Jeep.

Upper

The uppers of trail shoes also feature a variety of distinguishing elements. One of the most important is the stout toe bumper built into trail shoes. The violence of a stubbed toe mid-trail run is impressive. When it happens — and it will happen — you will be glad to have just a bit more protection where it counts. Most trail shoes also feature a gusseted tongue or “scree guard” to prevent debris from infiltrating the shoe.

Since water is a common element on many trails, the use of Gore Tex or other waterproof membrane is more prevalent in trail shoes than road shoes. However, most trail runners prefer to manage water not by trying to keep it out of the shoe, since that is often futile, but by opting for an airy, well-draining, quick-drying upper.

If you aren’t sure whether your trail conditions call for Gore Tex, consider the rule of thumb that a waterproof upper is better at managing snow and general slop than repeated crossings through shin-deep water.

Bottom Line

All the individual choices that go into the design of road and trail running shoes add up to a pretty significant difference in the way they each perform. In general terms, trail shoes tend to offer a ride that is noticeably lower, firmer, and more stable than road shoes. They also offer improved traction and protection…but not cushion.

Although trail shoes tend to be heavier than comparable road shoes, due primarily to the density of the materials used in their mid- and outsoles, there are plenty of models of hardcore trail shoes that are not particularly heavy or “hiker-y.” Although it is hard to generalize, the typical weight difference between a trail running shoe and a comparable road shoe is in the range of 1-2oz.

That said, when it comes to choosing a trail shoe, I would suggest that trying to link a given road shoe to its trail counterpart is a nearly pointless exercise, since the categories distinguishing trail shoes are considerably less clear-cut than for road shoes and relate to terrain as much as to the biomechanics of running. Like learning any new language, your fluency in trail will really improve as you are able to skip the step of translating in and out of road.

***

Tags: ,
Posted in News | 1 Comment »

One Thing

Monday, February 8th, 2010

This is my main gear closet on yet another 2010 morning in which I didn’t get into it.

I’ve beat around the bush several times over the past month that my year is off to a bad start. This post is either another in that series or the beginning of a new direction. Only time will tell.

The first circle on my 2010 calendar is was Red Hot Moab. Unfortunately, I’ve been sidelined pretty much completely since January 1, first by illness and now by injury. So Red Hot won’t be happening for me. (Since my current issues are back-related and do not respond favorably to travel, I won’t even be attending the event as a sponsor-spectator.)

As you might expect, I’ve gone back and forth several times on Kübler-Ross’s grief spectrum (denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance).  I’ve finally concluded that I need to genuinely retrench with respect to my health, instead of merely sucking down a few muscle relaxants and tapping my foot impatiently until I feel juuust good enough to resume thrashing myself. To that end, I have just begun a course of treatment that will throw the kitchen sink at my troubles: acupuncture, ART, chiropractic and PT, supplemented, of course, with “independent study.”

Truthfully, I’ve let a few chronic hot spots hang around as unwelcome guests for far too long with my tendency to treat flare-ups with the bare minimum of medication and rest, and not a thing else. If missing Red Hot 2010 turns out to be the price I had to pay to finally address this stuff, it will be well worth it.

***

Tags:
Posted in News | 4 Comments »

« Older Entries


© 2011 Wilderness Running Company. All Rights Reserved.