(Results) May 12, 2012
There isn't much good to say about this race. Let's summarize the negatives:
Bad performance: I ran 17:35, about three seconds per lap slower than I'd wanted to run. I didn't break 17:00, and I wasn't even close!
Bad tactics: I dropped back from the leaders' pace in the third lap and wasn't able to catch back up, and then fell increasingly far behind.
However, my most important race of the year (the 10k at Twilight Meet #2) was just one week after the 5k, so I had to find something positive to take away from it.
Not so bad performance: In the rarefied world of elite women's distance running, 17:35 is slow, but in the wider world, it's actually kind of fast. I can imagine a time not so far in the future where I will be thrilled to run 17:35. In fact, in view of the upcoming 10k, if I could just run 17:35 twice in a row without stopping, it wouldn't be bad at all!
No mental energy wasted: The leaders ended up basically running my 5k PR, which I ran on a cool night at a big meet with lots of company. For me to run the same time at this race in the sun and heat would have taken a supreme amount of mental toughness. Last year, I ran a 10k road race that required a supreme mental effort, and I didn't run well for the rest of the season. This year, I saved my mental energy for next week's 10k, which will hopefully have better conditions than the 5k.
Easy recovery: Another benefit of not running very fast is that it wasn't a very big strain on my body. Running a hard 5k and a hard 10k just one week apart is not advisable. Unfortunately, I didn't run well in the 5k, but fortunately, I won't have to recover from the 5k before taking on the 10k!
Spectators: My parents and Alan were all on hand to witness this race. My parents said that 12.5 times around sure was a lot. Well, I made it look pretty long.
Here is the race video.
Watch more video of 2012 New Balance Boston Twilight Meet #1 on flotrack.org
06/22/17 PHD comic: 'Technically'
1 day ago