Author Topic: warpspeed to the new scenario  (Read 11863176 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

LBSS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13398
  • plugging away...
  • Respect: +8185
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: warpspeed to the new scenario
« Reply #1485 on: February 15, 2026, 09:39:28 am »
0
humidity builds character. or so i tell myself.
Muscles are nonsensical they have nothing to do with this bullshit.

- Avishek

Joe

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2939
  • Goobernatorial
  • Respect: +1288
    • View Profile
Re: warpspeed to the new scenario
« Reply #1486 on: February 16, 2026, 09:00:13 am »
0
16-02-26

Run -- 8.07k, 50:00

Lift -- Chins, Chest Press

Joe

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2939
  • Goobernatorial
  • Respect: +1288
    • View Profile
Re: warpspeed to the new scenario
« Reply #1487 on: February 17, 2026, 04:14:53 am »
0
17-02-26

Run
- w/u
- 3 x (10' on / 2' off) [13.7kmh]
- c/d

Total 56 mins

Lift -- Back Extension, Leg Press, OL Calfs, a bit of beach muscle stuff

Notes

Bought a Li-Ning Red Hare 9 Pros. It's like if you took the Evo SL and added the best parts of a Hoka shoes (wide base, nice upper). A++ and half the price of equivalent shoes.

LBSS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13398
  • plugging away...
  • Respect: +8185
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: warpspeed to the new scenario
« Reply #1488 on: February 17, 2026, 09:10:30 am »
0
i just bought a pair of red hare 8 pros to replace my evo SL's. sirpoc endorsed, and i've seen a couple other threads where people say they fit the same as evo SL's in the same size (half a US size up from normal). looking forward to them!

if you were planning a trip to the states anytime soon i'd ask you to pick me up a few li-nings in singapore, i bet they're cheaper there  ::)

ETA: did you have a chance to try on any of the other li-nings? specifically, the feidian challengers? just a little worried about width, only reason i haven't pulled the trigger on a pair yet.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2026, 09:15:38 am by LBSS »
Muscles are nonsensical they have nothing to do with this bullshit.

- Avishek

Joe

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2939
  • Goobernatorial
  • Respect: +1288
    • View Profile
Re: warpspeed to the new scenario
« Reply #1489 on: February 18, 2026, 03:31:35 am »
+1
18-02-26

Run -- 5.3k, 31:30

Notes

Slept badly so just a short one.

i just bought a pair of red hare 8 pros to replace my evo SL's. sirpoc endorsed, and i've seen a couple other threads where people say they fit the same as evo SL's in the same size (half a US size up from normal). looking forward to them!

if you were planning a trip to the states anytime soon i'd ask you to pick me up a few li-nings in singapore, i bet they're cheaper there  ::)

ETA: did you have a chance to try on any of the other li-nings? specifically, the feidian challengers? just a little worried about width, only reason i haven't pulled the trigger on a pair yet.

Li-Nings are TTS for me (or same as I use for Clifton 8/9, Evo SL and Zoom Fly 6). I did try the Feidian 6 Challenger, yes! Volume-wise, width wasn't an issue, but the midsole felt narrow. Less narrow than, e.g., Puma Deviate Nitro (unwearable for me), but a touch narrower than Evo SLs. I'd say I'd be fine with them as an occasional race shoe but not as a regular training (hence skipping them).

LBSS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13398
  • plugging away...
  • Respect: +8185
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: warpspeed to the new scenario
« Reply #1490 on: February 18, 2026, 07:53:50 am »
0
got it, thanks!
Muscles are nonsensical they have nothing to do with this bullshit.

- Avishek

Joe

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2939
  • Goobernatorial
  • Respect: +1288
    • View Profile
Re: warpspeed to the new scenario
« Reply #1491 on: February 19, 2026, 05:09:57 am »
0
19-02-26

Run
- w/u
- 4 x (6' on / 2' off) [13.8 x 2, 13.9, 14.0 km/h reps]
- c/d

56 min total, about 10.6k

Notes

Solid. Enjoying holiday but SGP+CNY is just an overload of oily foods and meats so I'm missing my light vegetable and whole grain diet a bit

Joe

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2939
  • Goobernatorial
  • Respect: +1288
    • View Profile
Re: warpspeed to the new scenario
« Reply #1492 on: February 19, 2026, 10:22:32 pm »
0
20-02-26

Run -- 6.69k, 45:37

Notes

After several days of heavy tropical rain, finally a dry (but still cloudy, muggy) morning, so got outside again. Ran through the Botanic Gardens, very beautiful and rather hilly so pace was pretty much a crawl between that and the weather. Fly tonight and back early AM, so providing I'm not too stiff from being crammed into economy seats for 13 hours, should be good to hit up My 8 x 3' tmrw.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2026, 10:24:27 pm by Joe »

Joe

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2939
  • Goobernatorial
  • Respect: +1288
    • View Profile
Re: warpspeed to the new scenario
« Reply #1493 on: February 21, 2026, 12:11:02 pm »
+1
21-02-26

Run
- w/u
- 8 x (3' on / 1' off) [about 4:20 average pace, I think]
- c/d

Total - 11.1k, 1:02:22

Notes

Watch was out of battery so I used phone GPS + an interval timer app. Pace eyeballs from intervals.icu, cba to to work it out precisely. Happy to get it in given jet lag and flight-induced tiredness+stiffness.

Joe

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2939
  • Goobernatorial
  • Respect: +1288
    • View Profile
Re: warpspeed to the new scenario
« Reply #1494 on: Today at 08:57:01 am »
+1
22-02-26

Run - 9.39k, 59:12 [outside]
Lift - Pulldown, chest press, machine OHP, flyes, cable row
Cardio - 29:03 [elliptical, ski erg, jog home]

Notes

During c/d of yesterday's run + a bit of today's run I had a bit of what I call the 'rattly bone man' feeling while running, so called an audible and finished up in the gym. Took a page from LBSS's book and sandwiched lifting in the middle. Think the way I lift -- all drop sets, no rest other than time taken to change load on machine or find the next machine and get set up -- makes the back-half cardio feel pretty hard since I build up a ton of lactic acid. For instance, HR took a good while to drop to the 120s even at what I know is an easy effort on the elliptical. No idea what the impact of this is in terms of training load or effect, but noting it anyway.

Tried the ski erg for the first time. It felt (surprisingly) very fun. Sadly it's about as unspecific to running as it's possible for cardio to be, but I definitely prefer it to any other non-running indoor cardio modality.

ETA: 344 load, 6:30 time on feet, 61k. Fully back in the swing of things. Target avg load for last 3 weeks was 332, and I hit 321 (1 and 3 slightly high, 2 a down week for travel). This coming week should look basically the same as this past week with a slightly different SubT split, will go for 3x9 4x6:30, 8x3
« Last Edit: Today at 09:01:59 am by Joe »

LBSS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13398
  • plugging away...
  • Respect: +8185
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: warpspeed to the new scenario
« Reply #1495 on: Today at 02:10:12 pm »
0
interesting about the load. i ran almost 40km more than you did this past week and almost 2h more time on feet, but intervals.icu only gives my load as 329. pretty much all of the difference in volume is low intensity but still, with so much more volume it's still surprising that i'd be registering a lower training load.
Muscles are nonsensical they have nothing to do with this bullshit.

- Avishek

Joe

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2939
  • Goobernatorial
  • Respect: +1288
    • View Profile
Re: warpspeed to the new scenario
« Reply #1496 on: Today at 03:43:13 pm »
0
interesting about the load. i ran almost 40km more than you did this past week and almost 2h more time on feet, but intervals.icu only gives my load as 329. pretty much all of the difference in volume is low intensity but still, with so much more volume it's still surprising that i'd be registering a lower training load.

This surprises me! I would have expected yours to be much higher since I get the impression that your easy runs are done at a higher % of your top-end pace. My guess is that the difference comes from how we've set up load calculations on intervals.icu.

Following Sirpoc's guidance, I have it set up as pictured:



If I use HR instead of Pace first in 'training load priority', my load drops pretty substantially (an easy run goes from ~0.7 load/min to <0.5 load/min, SubT sessions drop by a bunch too).