do i weigh too much?

Sand Dunes wrote:

Sand Dunes wrote:

Reread my second post:

. . .healthy eating as eating clean. That is eat mostly unprocessed foods i.e. whole grains, legumes, fruits, vegetables, nuts and seeds. Keeping processed white sugar/flour to a minimum and use oils sparingly.

Also my first post on this thread:

No, whatever you do don't become OCD on your weight. I once did that and all that happened to me was I became fragile and injury plagued. Just focus on training and eating healthy.

thank you. i will try to take your advice. it's just hard sometimes, i always seem to be comparing myself to the skinny little freshman girls who weigh 90 pounds and effortlessly run the same times as me or faster even though they've only been training for a month.

yes, no, maybe? wrote:

I'm doing that, but what we are told, i.e. high carb/low fat is not good nutritional science. Because no matter how much we train or don't train, that energy ratio of fats to carbs is always going to be in favor of fat metabolism. But what we are supposed to believe is the opposite.

And then we get the weird stuff like the low carb nonsense and the paleo and ketogenic loonies.

Where is the really good dietary science? It's hidden away, because commone sense advice comes from people who aren't attention seeking whackos. Just sayin.

Read some science:

personwhoruns wrote:

Sand Dunes wrote:

Also my first post on this thread:

No, whatever you do don't become OCD on your weight. I once did that and all that happened to me was I became fragile and injury plagued. Just focus on training and eating healthy.

thank you. i will try to take your advice. it's just hard sometimes, i always seem to be comparing myself to the skinny little freshman girls who weigh 90 pounds and effortlessly run the same times as me or faster even though they've only been training for a month.

Who would you rather be:

Yuki Kawuachi who is a little pudgy for a elite marathoner.

Or

Dathan Ritzenhein who is a toothpick, but is constantly injured and pulling out of races?

I once bought a new car. Well, it wasn't new, but I just bought it, so it felt new. One door panel had been replaced, so my white car had a red door. It looked like a giant Tylenol.

As I pulled into my driveway, I saw a giant goat in the garage. I thought, "Good Grannies alive, what's that goat doing in here?" It was then that my wife stepped out of the front door and asked what was going on. I said, "There's a goat in the garage!" "A goat in the garage?" "Yeah, a goat in the garage."

Wouldn't you know it, our cat came out of the kitty door. He started going, "Meow, meow, meow!" All crazy like. Then the goat turned its attention to the cat food dish and started chowing down like a horse (well, more like a goat, really). "Meow!" Cat's still going crazy.

I thought about the situation, and decided then and there that if I ever want to PR in the marathon again, I've GOT to increase my mileage!

goat in garage guy wrote:

. . . decided then and there that if I ever want to PR in the marathon again, I've GOT to increase my mileage!

More isn't always better. But in general most people do need to run more mileage. But, there is a point of diminishing returns.

I've read plenty science bro. That abstract is typical of the misunderstanding. Loot at your average heart rate over 24 hours, it's mostly fat oxidation. So on a high carb/low fat diet, you are converting carbs into fat. That's not what I eat carbs for. I eat them to store them as glycogen.

Do you see where I'm going with this?

Sand Dunes wrote:

goat in garage guy wrote:

. . . decided then and there that if I ever want to PR in the marathon again, I've GOT to increase my mileage!

More isn't always better. But in general most people do need to run more mileage. But, there is a point of diminishing returns.

Uh, did you read the whole post?

Sand Dunes wrote:

goat in garage guy wrote:

. . . decided then and there that if I ever want to PR in the marathon again, I've GOT to increase my mileage!

More isn't always better. But in general, most people do need to run more mileage. But, there is a point of diminishing returns.

When is the point of diminishing returns for most runners?

Yikes! wrote:

Sand Dunes wrote:

More isn't always better. But in general, most people do need to run more mileage. But, there is a point of diminishing returns.

When is the point of diminishing returns for most runners?

Depends on the runner. Some thrive on 130+ miles a week (Bill Rodgers, Mark nenow etc). Others destroyed themselves by going that high (Alberto Salazar). Some thrive on a moderate amount of mileage think 80-100 miles per week (i.e. Jack Foster 2:11 marathon runner ran less than 80 miles per week, Steve Jones averaged 80 miles a week, John Walker 90 miles per week etc). Just experiment on yourself and see where your happy medium is.

Keep doing what you're doing.

to personwhoruns: You're totally fine. You already got all the advice you need here, and there's not much more to say. One thing that I'll add is that the freshman girls who are beating you might either i) be more talented, or ii) benefiting from pre-pubescence, such that their ability will fade in time. You need to have a long-term training mindset; you have to accept and then train into your adult body, rather than trying to maintain an impossible or unhealthy weight.

to yes, no, maybe: Just tell us what fats you think we should eat and then STFU (nobody will care anyway).

personwhoruns wrote:

Sand Dunes wrote:

Also my first post on this thread:

No, whatever you do don't become OCD on your weight. I once did that and all that happened to me was I became fragile and injury plagued. Just focus on training and eating healthy.

thank you. i will try to take your advice. it's just hard sometimes, i always seem to be comparing myself to the skinny little freshman girls who weigh 90 pounds and effortlessly run the same times as me or faster even though they've only been training for a month.

Yeah, that's not sustainable. You aren't supposed to keep the body of a 14-year-old, especially if you want your running career to last into adulthood and/or move up in distance. The 90-lb freshmen can fake it for now, but let's see a rematch 10 years down the road in a half-marathon.

Sand Dunes wrote:

Depends on the runner. Some thrive on 130+ miles a week (Bill Rodgers, Mark nenow etc). Others destroyed themselves by going that high (Alberto Salazar). Some thrive on a moderate amount of mileage think 80-100 miles per week (i.e. Jack Foster 2:11 marathon runner ran less than 80 miles per week, Steve Jones averaged 80 miles a week, John Walker 90 miles per week etc). Just experiment on yourself and see where your happy medium is.

Have you experimented with it? if so where was your breaking point? How long did it take you to find it?

I M no doctor, but I increased the amount of vegetables and fat in my diet. It seemed to help me, increasing my ability to recover from exercise more effectively. Good fats can be found in avocados, eggs, and nuts just to name a few foods. I eat quite a bit of meat, not sure if that is for you.

These are just options, don’t take them as holy writ. You might check with your doctor for food allergies and sensitivities, and take note of that yourself.

Your diet and weight are good. You should not run a 1/2 marathon until after college though. I don’t recommend any runs longer than 10 miles until college.

Predictor wrote:

Your diet and weight are good. You should not run a 1/2 marathon until after college though. I don’t recommend any runs longer than 10 miles until college.

Um, no.

To be a good runner, one must run. Without arbitrary mileage limits.