Reading: “A Cold Clear Day: The Athletic Biography of Buddy Edelen”

Who was Buddy Edelen? Only one of the greatest American runners that most people have never heard of, but should have for a variety of reasons. That’s author Frank Murphy’s thesis.

Edelen’s story and personality are interesting and engaging enough that it’s tempting to say that this is a book that practically writes itself. But that would be shortchanging Murphy’s skill and creativity as a biographer. Edelen was emerging as a middle-to-long distance runner in the late fifties and early sixties, a time when American distance running was in the toilet in terms of development and competitive standing. So he set off for England, living like a monk in Essex, and training like a fiend under the long-distance direction of his coach, Fred Wilt. There, he charted a steady course toward American- and world-record-breaking times in the 10K and marathon, recognized and respected in Europe (and even loved in his temporarily adopted host country), yet totally unknown in The States.

In telling Edelen’s story, Murphy presents his subject as an immensely appealing man who combined intense focus with geniality and modesty. You can’t help but like — and root for — the guy. Expertly researched, the book doesn’t just present a coherent picture of how Edelen fit into the marathoning scene during this time period, but also presents some real gems, such as this passage. In it, we learn how one clever race promoter got around the AAU’s (Amateur Athletic Union) requirement that in order to retain “amateur” status (and thus eligibility to compete in the Olympics), an athlete must not accept remuneration of any kind (even for assistance with travel and accommodations for participating in races)  in an athletic competition:

“After the greeting, Billy [promoter Billy Morton] got to the point. “Buddy, me lad,” he said, “are ya a betting man?” Buddy said that he was, so Billy explained the way things were.

“Buddy,” he said, “I can’t pay you anything for this race because you’re an amateur. But seein’ as how you’re a betting man,” and he paused for effect before pointing to Buddy’s suitcase on the floor. “I bet you a hundred quid you can’t jump over that suitcase.”

As the meaning of Billy’s wager struck home, Buddy quickly hopped over the suitcase. Morton exclaimed loudly at such a thing, “My God, Tommy, look at that, Buddy just took me for 100 quid!” but being a man of his word, he paid and left. Buddy was 100 quid richer, but he was still an amateur.

Edelen also charmed his host country and managed to get away with behavior that would have labeled others lacking in his personal qualities as “ugly American.” One example is his greeting of Queen Elizabeth before the start of the 1962 Polytechnic Harriers Marathon: “Hi, Queen!”

As in another of his running-related histories, The Silence of Great Distance, Murphy takes considerable creative license when writing about his subject. In this case, he creates pages of speculative internal dialog during Edelen’s bid for a spot on the US men’s Olympic marathon team during a dreadfully hot and humid marathon in Yonkers, NY. This device — peppering non-fiction biography with what is most certainly a fictional stream of consciousness passage — will either work for readers or it won’t. For me, it worked. Murphy either has tremendous insight into and empathy for long distance runners, or he’s run a few awful, long races himself, because the mental crazy quilt that he constructs of what Edelen might have been thinking during that run is spot on: the jokes we tell ourselves, the pep talks, the moments of despair, the internal siren song to stop, the pure intake and recording of all sensory input…it’s all there.

I have no idea if this book would appeal to a non-runner. Probably not. But for students of the sport, it’s a wonderful read.

More about Edelen on Wikipedia.

Interview with Stephanie Herbst-Lucke

I stumbled across this fairly recent interview with former collegiate elite (and masters comeback) Stephanie Herbst-Lucke by Scott Douglas. In it she provides some interesting perspectives on running in one’s twenties vs. forties.

Herbst-Lucke was a central figure in The Silence of Great Distance, Frank Murphy’s excellent history of the development of women’s distance running in the US in the pre- and post-Title IX era. The book provides a biographical survey of key runners and NCAA teams during that era, placing them into a coherent timeline of how the sport was shaped by Title IX, feminism and the earlier rise in stature of male US distance runners on the world stage. The book also provides a nuanced, compelling treatment of the unique psychological and social pressures experienced by those early female competitors and how they impacted — or, in some cases, ended — their competitive careers.

Herbst-Lucke apparently started showing up at local road races a few years back, where she was occasionally recognized by knowledgeable (and shocked) fellow racers. Despite not having focused on the marathon in her earlier running life, she was among the entrants in Boston earlier this year for the women’s Olympic marathon trials, in which she finished in a respectable 59th place.

Sammy Wanjiru interview

Nice interview with the young Olympic phenom from Kenya. Also, this piece in the Times, which I can’t see the point of — a race recap four months after the race? Must be a slow news day…

Life, and a little running

Not much posting of late as I’m playing host to my sister and niece as they tour some NYC area colleges for said niece to attend in about a year and half. It seems like just yesterday that my sister was visiting me while five months pregnant with Annie. Gads, how did I get so old so quickly?

I skipped the Barnard walkthrough yesterday in favor of a 12 miler, some shopping and a few hours of work. But today I went in with them to tour NYU. I went to NYU for my grad degree in the mid-nineties and it was interesting to see how differently they market to teenagers vs. adults. Teens (and parents) get an emphasis on safety, social/club opportunities, studying overseas and the ubiquity of free food. Graduate school prospects (at least in my dept.) were sold on professional networking, potential for good incomes and more professional networking. Snacks were never mentioned.

The rest of the day was spent at a display of gothic fashion at the Fashion Institute of Technology (which was a great show, actually; I have a new appreciation for haute couture). Then a trip to TKTS to get them tickets to a show and then a stop at one of my all-time favorite places in the world (after the Swiss Alps), the Oyster Bar in Grand Central, where we ate very expensive oysters and I had the rare martini.

Tomorrow I’ll tag along on a tour of Sarah Lawrence, which is just down the road from us. Then the academic vetting is behind us and we can go have some more fun. Fortunately, my sister and niece share my morbid genes, so we have not one but two graveyard visits on the agenda (the Hartsdale Canine Cemetery AND Woodlawn!), as well as some more typical touristy stuff, like Ellis Island, the Brooklyn Bridge, et al.

Since this is a running blog, here’s the relevant running portion of this post: I ran around 48 miles last week, including two easy runs of nine miles (8:45ish pace) and a delightful 11 miler on Sunday that started slow and ended at an 8:00 pace). Not exactly hard running, true, but enough to feel like an effort. I expect I’ll have around the same mileage this week. My legs feel good and I’m looking forward to gearing up for the next training cycle as well as doing some winter racing.

In other notes, I’m always reading a running-related book. On Ewen‘s recommendation, I picked up an out of print copy of “Guide to Running” by Grete Waitz and Gloria Averbuch. This book is utterly charming. It’s a combination of memoir, training guide, cultural criticism and “lifestyle” guide (which has the effect of making me wish I lived in Norway, at least circa 1980). There are even recipes for making Norwegian snacks (although you’ll need to find gjestost).

English is not Waitz’s native language, obviously, but that’s part of what makes her writing voice so appealing. She is also remarkably frank when talking about what it was like to be thrown into world-stage competition as a teenager, the pressure to medal “for country,” and her discomfort with fame. As an added treat, you can pick up lots of great little Norwegian sayings (“It’s so secret; it’s no secret” and “Hurry slowly”). Maybe it’s having a distant Norwegian heritage that makes me slightly biased, but this is a great little read.

2008 NY Marathon: the view from the curb*

What’s more exciting: running a marathon or watching one? You can’t do both at the same time. But you should do at least one or the other once in your life. I’ve done the former four times, and now, the latter once. Here, I provide my awestruck impressions of watching the fastest people in the world running within 10 feet of me yesterday morning.

First of all, it was a total pain in the ass to get to the Bronx yesterday. I did it the wrong way, taking a train to Fordham and then walking about a half mile along Fordham Rd to the 4 line. That took forever to arrive and then I discovered that it doesn’t stop at 138th St, where I wanted to be. So I had to get off at 149th, walk into the bowels of the subway system to catch the local 5 train and endure another 15 minute wait in a rat- and cockroach-infested dungeon. I found myself wondering if it was all worth it.

Here’s the right way to get there from Westchester: Take the train to 125th St, walk two blocks, then hop on the 6 line north for one stop to 138th St and 3rd Ave in the Bronx.

I arrived at about 10:30 and milled around for 20 minutes, carefully setting up my camera to take poor quality pictures. I planted myself on 138th, just east of 3rd Ave (and just after the 20 mile mark), before a water table, thinking perhaps they’d slow a bit at that spot.

This little area was not the “dead zone” in terms of spectators I’d expected. There was a crowd on 3rd Ave and a band, and a few pockets of people to the west. But it wasn’t like the scene on 125th St in Harlem, where I went and hung out after I’d seen all the elites go by.

Here I will admit that I suck as a photographer. I may have learned never to experiment with new shoes or fueling strategies for the marathon, but I threw caution to the wind yesterday and experimented with the camera that I don’t know how to use properly. I tried the “burst” mode, which I thought would take a series of full sized shots of each runner in motion. Instead, I got a series of postage stamp sized shots. All of my runners are tiny.

So, I’m not going to embarrass myself further by uploading tiny photos. Especially when there’s a perfectly good series right here. Since I have no intention of running this race in the near future, I’ll go watch again next year and I’ll learn to use my camera properly by then.

The elite women

The excitement builds in the minutes before the first runners arrive. Someone barked “Ten minutes!” into a bullhorn at 10:50. Then, at 10:55, a new update: “Radcliffe first, Petrova second, Goucher third.” A few minutes later, we saw and heard the helicopter, followed by the roar of police motorcycles. They came around the corner and there was so much noise and activity that the two runners (Radcliffe and Petrova) were lost in the mayhem around them. The motorcycles and camera truck passed and suddenly it seemed very quiet.

The two women passed by me and I was struck by the fact that I could actually hear them breathing. Radcliffe, although only 5’8″, seems much larger in person. And she runs like a fucking machine. Petrova was hanging off her shoulder, looking like a little bobbing tugboat, but a tenacious one. One look at Paula and you knew she was going to win. Goucher came through about 15 seconds later, also looking larger than life, and wearing a facial expression that was, paradoxically, both relaxed and determined.

Incidentally, Petrova, 40, broke Priscilla Welch’s 1987 masters world record for the marathon yesterday by over a minute, with a finishing time of 2:25:43. I don’t think this was mentioned once in the televised coverage, which was too bad.

Tune came through shortly thereafter, followed by Wami (who is one of the most light-on-her-feet runners I’ve ever seen, and tiny). I was expecting Catherine “The Great” Ndereba next, but instead saw Jeptoo. Then a few others: Simon, McGregor and Morgunova. Then a big pause and the last few women who I would recognize came through: Lewy-Boulet, Scotswoman Hayley Haining (who is built like a tank; I wonder if that’s what I look like under my 24% body fat) and 19-year-old newcomer Ilsa Paulson, who is a tiny little wisp of a woman. I was disappointed to not see Kim Smith of New Zealand; it appears she dropped out just after the 30K mark.

The elite men

With the second-tier elite women straggling in one by one, the excitement began to build anew: In a few minutes, the elite men would start coming through. Once again, you could tell when the moment was near, with the arrival of a helicopter and phalanx of cops on bikes.

I was rooting for the Brazilian, Gomes Dos Santos, to win — and here he was in the lead! Goumri was right on his heels and looking very strong. Next up: Bouramdane, Tergat, Rono, Kirui, Macharia. And, finally, some Americas: Abdi, Rohatinsky, Lemkuhle. After that, I stopped recognizing people, with one exception: I saw James Carney, who looked awful. He was jogging along, looking slightly bewildered. He turned and asked another runner, who was passing, a question, and I thought, “He’s about to drop out.” When I got home and watched the coverage, I could see what happened: He went nuts and led the pack from the start, running like a rocket straight into a head wind for the first half mile or so.

Some familiar faces

Just a few: Takashi Ogawa, a friendly age group rival of Jonathan’s, was powering his way through to a 2:50 finish. He looked good when I saw him. A few minutes behind him, I spotted Zola Budd. She is no longer the barefooted rail that she was during her cross-country and track days. Perhaps 20 pounds heavier, she still managed to break three hours in her first marathon yesterday. Finally, after I switched positions to go watch the throngs in Harlem, I saw fellow running blogger Pigtails Flying (who I have not met, but who sent me a picture so I could look for her). She also ran a huge PR yesterday (42 minutes!), breaking 3:55. Go Pigtails!

*In honor of Paula Radcliffe, maybe I should say “kerb.”

The problem of losing fitness

And I’m not talking about running fitness. I’m talking, of course, about drinking fitness.

Since I’ve been watching the calories to keep from becoming even more manatee-like during these weeks of post-race recovery, I had not a drop of alcohol all week. Until last night. I thought I was being restrained: two sets of a beer and a vodka shot (a trashy favorite of mine; Yuengling and Svedka, if you must know). I thought I’d be fine.

Woke up at 4:30 with a raging headache. I managed to get back to sleep until about 8:00, but felt like warmed over Alpo. I was surprised — I’m a complete lightweight after a mere week!

Since I had a 10 mile run scheduled for this morning, I forced myself out the door at 10:30 and, lo, it was good. I managed an 8:29 pace at 80% max heart rate. Over a somewhat hilly course, no less.

I still have a headache, but I feel much better than I did a few hours ago. Honestly, if you can get your head out of the toilet and your ass out on the road, a good run does wonders for a hangover.

I’m planning to go out and watch the NYC marathon from the sidelines tomorrow. I’ve never actually “spectated” a marathon before, so I’m curious. It’s also probably the best assemblage of elite women in the race’s history. How can I sit at home and miss seeing them fly by live? I’m going to hang out in the Bronx near the Willis Avenue Bridge: Mile 20, aka “The Wall”. Since this is the point in the race where a runner’s fate over the remaining miles becomes most evident, I’m hoping it will offer a dramatic vantage point, both for watching the elite men and women as well as the “Joe the Runners” who will follow them. If I get some good snaps, I’ll post them here.

Easing back into running

I ran every day this week except for Tuesday. I just couldn’t help myself. The weather is wonderfully cool (or even cold) in the morning and the leaves were so colorful this year; they burst into color over the last weekend and now they’re all falling, which is very dramatic on windy days.

I did a wonderful 10 miler this morning. The weather was gorgeous and perfect: sunny with temps around 52 and windy. I ran an average 8:40 pace at 78% heart rate and enjoyed myself immensely. I was truly sorry when the run was over. But it tired me out enough to nap for two hours on the couch after getting through the first few essays in the newish David Sedaris book When You Are Engulfed in Flames.

When I looked at my mileage this week, I could hardly believe it: I ran 39 miles. I hadn’t expected to get back up so quickly, but my legs have felt great and I wasn’t really paying attention to the cumulative mileage as the week wore on. I’ll probably keep it under 55 for the next couple of weeks, then start gradually working the mileage base back up into the 100+mpw range in preparation for starting up training again sometime around mid-January.

It’s nice to have such a long spell between races. The next one isn’t until very late May (that’s assuming we go through with our plans to run Newport, OR next year). I’m not going to do so much hard running during the base period again. Probably just one or two moderate-pace runs a week and the rest very easy. And I’ll probably do some racing for fun and training too, as there are some good ones coming up in the next few months: the Nyack Hospital 10K, the Hot Chocolate 15K, the Manhattan Half Marathon and the Boston Buildup series in CT.

Speaking of running 100+ miles a week, former champion Ingrid Kristiansen and 2008 gold medalist Constantina Tomescu-Dita had some training advice for Paula Radcliffe, who will be 38 when the 2012 Olympics roll around. Paula does not agree. I do, though, at least for myself. I’ll be cutting down on the mileage to average around 75 per week during training. I won’t, however, be having a baby.

Anyway, as for the next week, I have no plan. I will probably run almost every day again, once per day, with quicker running days determined by how I feel.

An elite is an elite is an elite

(With apologies to Gertrude Stein.)

This week’s running kerfuffle involved the Nike Women’s Marathon, in which Arien O’Connell, who describes herself as a “pretty good runner,” ran a 2:55 race and blew away the “elite” field by about 10 minutes. But since O’Connell didn’t register as an elite (and go with those who did 20 minutes before everyone else), her winning chip time was initially not acknowledged.

News articles began appearing, which led to reader outrage, which then led to complaints to Nike. Within a day or two, Nike reversed its decision, declaring O’Connell “a” winner (but not “the” winner). They also decided to do away with their elite start going forward.

Given how screwy their race was set up to be, I think they made the right decision under the circumstances. It seems unlikely that had O’Connell been running with the pack of 3:06+ “elites” one or more of them could have risen to the occasion and matched her time. But because she started 20 minutes behind them, we’ll never know.

The fatal flaw in Nike’s race design was their failure to properly define who qualifies as an “elite.” Registrants were left to their own devices to self-identify. Most knowledgable female marathon runners know that “elite” runners are fast. They are very fast. Not just the top 3% of runners, but more like the top 0.3% of runners. A 3:06 time might be considered “local elite,” but, again, Nike gave no guidance, so I can’t blame the slower runners who entered as elites any more than I can blame the faster ones who didn’t.

Also worth noting is the trend toward using chip/”net” time (rather than gun time) to determine order of finish. NYRR just started doing this. I think this is a good thing, because it measures and acknowledges performance in absolute rather than subjective terms. Although NYRR takes a hybrid approach in that the first place male and female winners are those who cross the finish line first. All other place finishers are determined by chip time:

In all NYRR scored races, each participant’s official time, the net time, is recorded from when a participant crosses the start mats to when he or she crosses the finish mats. This official time is used to establish the order of finish and to determine award winners. However, the first male and female runner to cross the finish line will always be the winner of the race.

Here’s something that illustrates what happens when there is no set standard. The table below shows the average finishing time for the non-elites vs. elites, based on the race result leaderboards. The first average time shown includes the top 19 runners in each category. The second average time in the non-elite column removes O’Connell’s time (since it could potentially skew the results considerably).

Non-Elites Elites
2:55:11 3:06:18
3:06:18 3:08:59
3:08:59 3:12:35
3:12:00 3:13:07
3:12:25 3:13:44
3:13:07 3:13:48
3:13:44 3:14:34
3:13:48 3:22:00
3:14:33 3:22:24
3:14:34 3:23:29
3:15:23 3:23:52
3:16:50 3:25:22
3:17:30 3:25:38
3:18:13 3:26:06
3:18:14 3:27:27
3:18:35 3:30:49
3:19:10 3:33:52
3:19:57 3:57:56
3:20:38 4:23:09
3:14:10 Average for all runners 3:25:32 Average for all runners
3:15:13 O’Connell removed

Even with O’Connell removed, the average time for the elites is still over 10 minutes slower than for the non-elites. So, in actuality, the non-elite racers were much more competitive than the elite racers were. The numbers do not lie.

Having a separate start for elites makes sense in many cases. Its purpose is to allow faster women runners the chance to compete against each other fairly, meaning they run only against other women without the opportunity to draft off of (or otherwise receive a pacing advantage as a result of running with) male runners. It also gives them the chance to shine in their own right rather than getting lost in a mass of slower male racers. But given that this is an all women’s race*, those are non-issues. In the all women’s races I’ve run thus far, there’s been no separate elite category for prizes, and the elites know who they are (and the non-elites know who they aren’t!) and line up accordingly.

But what do you think? Did Nike make the right decision?

*To further complicate things, the women’s marathon allowed about 350 men to race it this year. So the fastest runner in the race was, not surprisingly, a man. What on Earth is Nike trying to do with this race?

Once a runner, always a runner

68-year-old former cross country champ kicks some criminal ass in the streets of Devon.

Chasing Bolt

Great series on Usain Bolt from blogumentarian Matt Taylor, the brains behind Chasing Tradition, Chasing Kimbia and Chasing Glory.