I discovered this sweet little site called “Athlinks” thanks to The Complete Running Network. From the site’s FAQ:

What is Athlinks?

Athlinks is the most comprehensive database of endurance race results and events anywhere in the world. We currently provide coverage in the U.S. and parts of Canada and Mexico for six different race categories: Running (over 3 K), Swimming (open water and/or over 500 M), Cycling, Mountain Biking, Triathlon/Multi Sport, and Adventure Racing.

So in a nutshell, they collect and database every set of race results they can get their hands on. Nifty idea. I always wished that the MarathonGuide.com race database expanded out to cover more races than the site’s namesake, but it looked like Athlinks.com is trying to pick up the slack.

I decided to give Athlinks a test drive. It is a free service, after all. I registered myself in the site, and then searched on my name. Several blocks of race results popped up, and I quickly filtered out people who weren’t me based on their age and hometown. I ended up finding 13 different race results that were indeed my own, and I selected them as such to assign the results to my account. The valid race results ranged all the way back to 1998, and contained both big and po-dunk races, both memorable and forgotten races:

The very cool thing is that the entire race results (all competitors) are databased and accessible, not just your own placing. It was fun to look through full results of races I had completed years ago, and remember various rivals, friends, and stories from each endeavor. It was also an enjoyable waste of time to search on old teammates and running buddies, and seeing what sort of races they have been up to since I lost contact with them.

The downshot to the site is that I’ve ran way more than 13 road races since 1998! My race total over that time span is more like 30. But shooting near 50% isn’t too bad all things considered, and I expect they will continue to add more results, epecially since they give you the option to tell them about missing races. Through grassroots methods like this, the database will grow and become even more robust.

So check it out when you need a good excuse to procrastinate!

Raceday is almost upon us, so time for some maps and pre-race analysis. After looking at the online map for the 10K course, I was not encouraged about the pain-factor of this race. From the email I got from Striders:

“It will be an epic 10K run, we hope you like it.”

Yeah, I bet! The 5K was pretty epic, and even fun, in kind of a sick, twisted sort of way.

Making my own maps did nothing to help these sentiments. One of the benefits of using a GIS-based approach for mapping is that you can overlay multiple layers, which allows for direct visual comparison between two data themes. In this case I overlaid the Striders 5K course from two weeks ago with the 10K course. Doing this allows us to see where the 10K goes relative to the 5K, and also lets us assess how much worse the 10K will be!

Of course, a course map for these particular races would be virtually meaningless without an elevation layer! Overlaying a digital elevation model (DEM) accomodates planimetric visualization of all the climbs and descents…all without a profile graph. This is one reason why I tend to bash Google Map mashups, which we are seeing with increasing frequency as “official” race course maps. Yes, Google Maps and Google Earth are quick and handy, they display roads and aerial photography quite well, and they accomodate some custom data. But even for simple maps they are lacking in several major areas: 1) No elevation layers; 2) Poor cartography; 3) Commercial-use limitations and map ownership limitations. They are referred to as “Google Map hacks” for a reason. I’ll discuss points 2 and 3 in other posts, for today I’m only interested in elevation.

The GIS map posted below is very simple: it only shows the 5K route (red dash), the 10K route (solid yellow), 10K mile and tenth-mile markers, and a shaded elevation map. I did not have time to do any real cartography (ie roads, labeling, etc.), so just a “down and dirty” map for today. I left out aerial photography to focus the eye on the true point of the map: showing elevation, which grades from green (low elevation) to red (high elevation). See the legend for details, but the elevation colors change in 25-ft increments. Click on the map image to download a full .pdf file.

We can see immediately that the 10K course reaches a higher elevation (>5100 ft) than the 5K course from two weeks ago. Yikes! We’ve got a heck of a climb between Mile 2.2 and 3.1, but from there on we’ll have a very fast downhill (aside from a wimpy little climb just after Mile 5.0).

My take on this race is similar to that of the 5K: the race can be lost in the first half, and won in the second half. A relatively conservative start will ensure success and plenty of leg pop for making a mad surge on the downhill section. But if you go into debt in the first half, you may be out of gas by the time the course becomes favorable for speed.

Even though one can glean everything they need to know from the elevation map itself, I’ve sketched up a very quick and dirty profile and stats for those of you who must have one. Note that the 5K profile is overlaid on the 10K profile for direct comparison (another handy feature of custom mapping vs. a web service or Google Map). I calculated roughly 680 ft of total gain and drop for the 10K. This is just slightly more than twice that of the 5K. Gradients are very similar to those that we experienced in the 5K (unfortunately), although some parts will definitely be less brutal on the knees. I didn’t have the time or desire to actually calculate gradients and post them on the profile like last time, but I think the graphic itself says it all (click on image to enlarge profile).

Since the total elevation gain/loss is pretty much twice that of the Striders 5K, I think simply plugging your Striders 5K time into a standard race calculator, such as RunWorks or Sasha’s, and not worrying about calibrating for elevation, will get you pretty close. Based on my 5K time from two weeks ago, my projected 10K time would be 34:27. So that will be my 2nd-tier goal time to beat. If I’ve experienced fitness gains over the last two weeks, and/or just bust off a great race, my 1st-tier goal is sub-34:00. I predict that the winner (assuming the same cast of runners as last time) will be somewhere between 33:40 and 33:55.

In honor of Worldwind v.1.4 being released last week, here’s a teaser for the upcoming Ogden Striders Series 10K race. The 10K race course is shown in yellow; click for bigger picture. More GIS fun to come in a few days…

Product: Timex IRONMAN Bodylink System
Price: $275.00
Rating: Very Good 8.3/10.0
Pros: Accurate; stable GPS; good battery life; intuitive and easy to use; great watch features; good value
Cons: Data-logger & PC upload functionality not included; GPS external from watch; HR monitor unstable at times
Overall: This device is effective because it is easy and it works. GPS initialization is fast and reliable; GPS connection and accuracy is very stable. It’s best for runners who want to hit the road quickly and view results immediately. Analysis and mapping junkies may want to defer to a GPS unit that automatically comes with computer linkage - but otherwise, when it comes to reliability, value and simplicity, the Timex Bodylink is hard to beat.

Read the full review at The Final Sprint!

MotionLingo’s Adeo has garnered much attention this year as an innovative GPS-based fitness trainer that not only tracks your speed and distance, but also accommodates full integration with any mp3 player.

I have run with many other GPS products, but the Adeo is the first to provide workout feedback via audio messages rather than a visual watch interface. This sounded like a great idea to me right off the bat and I enjoyed putting putting the Adeo to the test…

Read the full article at The Final Sprint!

The MarathonGIS.com map of the week features the new route for the Wasatch Back Relay. The WBR is an exciting 178-mile, 36-leg relay race that traverses the interior of the Wasatch Mountain Range in northern Utah from Logan down to Park City, and is the cornerstone of the Ragnar Relay Series. The 12-person or 6-person teams run continuously through the night, and typical finish times are in the 20 to 24-hr range. Marathon GIS has been a sponsor of the Wasatch Back Relay since 2006, and designs and updates all of their course maps, profiles, leg books, and 3D animations.

2007 will be the 4th year of this young race. The WBR had 22 teams its first year (2004), close to 100 teams the second year, nearly 200 teams last year, and is anticipating registration of well over 200 teams for 2007. Another way to put it: the race is growing! This means that the race volume has grown to big for its britches (ie the course capacity) in some places. Consequently, the WBR route must be changed to accomodate the growth and also improve the race.

Doing any sort of manual editing within a geographic information system (GIS) requires a bit of labor, but the quantity and depth of this labor can be reduced by setting up a good data structure and workflow. Completely revamping half of the race took a solid two workdays of labor, which is a paltry amount compared to the initial mapping and setup time. Since a solid basemap framework and workflow had already been established, updates were streamlined and efficient, accomodating fast turnover time.

Click here to view flash maps of the course changes.

All of the WBR course changes are constrained to the first half of the race. The most obvious changes are the start of the race, and then the legs preceding the second major exchange of the race (Exch 12). Rather than starting at Hardware Ranch and chundering down Blacksmith Fork Canyon, the race now begins in Logan, which offers a much bigger and more accessible venue. Although beautiful, Blacksmith Fork was getting a bit crowded, plus teams hurrying to the start line tended to drive too fast up the canyon, putting runners on the road at risk.

Legs 1 and 2 are brand new, but then 3-10 will be fairly familiar to long-time WBR participants. Exchange spacing has been altered in order to put Exch 6 in Liberty, meaning that Van 1 does Avon Pass, but the actual course orientation is pretty much the same, barring a few minor details. The same goes for Legs 7-10: it’s a very similar route circumnavigating Ogden Valley as did the previous course, but there are a few different turns, and some exchanges are in slightly different locations. Since Exch 6 is now in Liberty, Van 2 no longer needs to travel to Cache Valley, but instead can meet Van 1 in Liberty, a big perk for those coming from the Wasatch Front or from the SLC Airport.

Legs 11-13 are the second major course change. Rather than running the behemoth summit up New Trappers Loop…there is now a behemoth summitt up Snow Basin Rd! Yes, it will be a long nasty climb, but will offer amazing views, reduced traffic hazards, and a sweet Exch 12 spot at Snow Basin. The race outgrew the old Exch 12 in Huntsville, and Snow Basin will provide ample parking and space for a major exchange.

By the middle of Leg 13, the route rejoins the old course for the most part. There are a few different turns, and in general the route favors more rural roads than before, but the general layout is the same. From Leg 18 onward, the course is exactly the same as it was in 2006, without exception.

Van 1 can now breathe a sigh of relief: they no longer have to run Avon Pass and Guardsman Pass (Ragnar)! In addition, the Snow Basin/Trappers pass south of Ogden Valley is now shared by Van 1 and Van 2, further equalizing the workload and the scenic views. Finally, capacity issues have been resolved, allowing this exciting young race to continue its growth and development.

Last night I had a little extra time, so I busted out the Strider Series 5K course map and profile in ArcGIS. For those unfamiliar with Geographic Information Systems (GIS), a GIS will marry together spatial (geographic) information with a database backend that contains attributes for the spatial data (and for linked tabular data). Every feature included in a GIS map will have an associated table, and both spatial and tabular data can be used together (or alone) for subsequent analysis. Most people are familiar with Google Earth, which could be considered a very lightweight GIS program (but that’s stretching it). True GIS software has almost no limitations on what you can extract from the data.

Anyway, ArcGIS 9.2 allows users to made cool little time-series animations of data. What I did for the Ogden 5k was trick the program into thinking that race distance was actually time series, so the YouTube movie below shows an animated course and profile. This is a new ArcGIS feature that I’m pretty excited about and hope to use for future race contract work.

As you can see, the Ogden course is quite hilly, mostly uphill for the first half and then downhill for the second half. But how hilly? GIS allows me to quantify the gradient of the course, by creating elevation points at a fixed spacing (0.1 miles), and then extracting spot elevations from a 10-meter DEM. Most profile web services, such as the one found at the USATF Running Routes page, use 100-meter DEM’s, which are more generalized and less accurate that the 10-meter DEM’s that I download. After I run the analysis, I then import the resultant table into Excel to calculate gain/loss/gradient, and create an elevation profile graph. I’m generally not happy with Excel graphics, so I tend to copy and paste the profile graph into Adobe Illustrator to doll it up. Illustrator can be difficult to use at first, but is the premium tool for graphic arts, as well as cartography. My Illustrator profile is below (click on thumbnail for full resolution).

In a nutshell, the Ogden 5K has 325 feet of cumulative gain and 325 feet of cumulative loss (it’s a loop). Uphill and downhill gradients range between 2%-10%! Yikes! According to my Noakes calculator, this course will be about 30 seconds slower than running on a track. Thus, for those of you hoping to run 16:00, plan on something more like 16:30. As for myself, I’m hoping to end up with 16:45 or so, based on this information. We’ll see how it goes!

Well, I have officially signed up for the entire Striders Series, which starts with a 5k on Feb 10. After over 5 months of base training I’m happy to throw down in a race again, although I’m not looking forward to the pain of a 5k. In my opinion, half marathons and full marathons are worlds easier than 5k’s, which I why I’ve only ran two 5k’s in the last three years!

I did a 2-mile time trial today to get some sort of idea of what I can race a 5k at. I was hoping to hold 5:00-miles comfortably, but I pretty much went into oxygen debt after one 5:00 mile; the second mile was in the 5:20’s. So I’m about as fast as I was in high school. Great. But I have to keep reminding myself that I missed most of 2006 and still need many months to refine both my speed and endurance. It will come. I can hope for sub-16:30 at Ogden, but it will take some work to get to sub-15:30, which is where I want to be by Draper Days.

The little 2-mile time trial was enough to get quite a burn in my lungs and remind myself what the 5k will bring: lots and lots of pain. I’ll need to buckle down and remember how to push myself and truly “race”. I didn’t really push it at all during the last half mile of the time trial, rather I just gave in to the protests of my muscles. Pushing through that pain is key to racing, and can make a 15-30 second difference in a 5k race. Hopefully this experience today jogged my muscle memory (pun intended).

Another factor to consider is that the Striders 5k course has a pretty big hill for the first half of the race. This will slow times considerably, even with the subsequent downhill. Going out hard will be suicide.

It’s nice that Striders made a quick little map and profile on the USATF site, but being a map nerd, I intend to make my own maps and profiles using higher resolution data for each race I do this year. I will post each map and profile on this blog to showcase what Marathon GIS does, so stay tuned. Once I have good elevation statistics, I will be able to calculate my proper pace for each race segment based on total elevation gained and lost. The general idea is that energy expenditure on uphills is about twice the energy savings on downhills of the same gradient (The Lore of Running, by Noakes). It’s a fun formula to play with, anyway, and makes for a good GIS application.

So despite the upcoming 5k being inevitably painful, I’m still looking forward to mixing it up with everyone. Who else is throwing their hat into the Striders Series?

This is the second and final installment in “Scaling the infamous Wall”. Make sure you also go back and read “Part I: Marathon preparation”.

The big day is finally here and its time to run the epic marathon! You have prepared and trained hard for last several months, weeks, and days, setting yourself up for success by training with a plan, tapering effectively, living healthily, carbo-loading, and calculating your true pace. You are ready…SO DON’T BLOW IT!!…

Read the full article at The Final Sprint!