The Idiosyncrasy of Runners: Revisited

For those of you who read my previous post entitled "The Idiosyncrasy of Runners", check this out. These videos embody precisely what I was talking about. Such a breadth of motivation for runners; who can possibly judge their training, their race, their results? I'm glad I understand now. We are all different in our accomplishments, but we are united in that we accomplish. Go, run!

Call Me Sisyphus: Hill Training

Since my girlfriend Kim moved to Pittsburgh I've been spending a considerable amount of time in the old "Steel City", and this certainly has made training interesting. As my last post highlights, the topography is very hilly; hills+roller coaster=fun, hills+running/biking=cruel and unusual punishment. Trying to flatten out a course on mapmyrun.com (here's the best I could do) is a fruitless endeavor.  So far I feel like Sisyphus.

Who is Sisyphus?

Sisyphus, in Greek mythology (us runner-types love our Greeks), was a king punished by the gods for his deceitfulness by being forced to push a large boulder up a hill only to watch it roll back down to the bottom... again and again... forever. And that's the feeling I get on these undulating runs. With no flat terrain for respite, I'm always climbing up, or laboring back down to get my boulder. <--(better click that one gang, you're life will be changed forever...)

Anyway, with joy (regret) I've decided to (was forced to) embrace it. Like any good student of the sport, I've researched some articles on hill running and have began creating workouts for myself. "Hill running is good for you!" they tell me. And I say, "Yeah, whatever hot shot, just give me the workout... don't walk in here, on your two legs, with your water, actin' all lean and muscly and try to tell me you like hills... that's stupid, and you're stupid." *blink... blink* Ahem, sorry 'bout that...

THE WORKOUTS:
Hill running is a lot like interval training in that you really can't keep running uphill forever, like you really can't run at (faster than) race pace forever. So, you break up the hills with rests or recovery. Here are 5 basic hill sessions that I found most interesting:

*Always warm up first*

1) Sprint Hill Intervals
This workout requires a full range of motion from your stride. Find a pretty steep yet short hill (about 50m) and sprint up it at about maximum effort, lifting your knees and driving off your toes to the top. Walk back down it of recovery and wait for approximately 2 minutes. Try to go for 10-12 reps.

2) Long Hill Intervals
Same as above except lengthen the hill to about (200m-400m), reduce the steepness and your intensity. You'll probably want to increase your recovery as well. Do about 8x200m with 2 minutes rest at the bottom. This workout is excellent for your running muscles. It burns through the fast twitch fibers and requires help from your slow twitch muscle fibers (the ones that help with endurance) due to the length of the hill.

3) "Hard Hills" Active Recovery
Same as (2) above except do not walk down the hill and rest for recovery. Instead, create a course that allows you to "loop" back around to the hill and jog your recovery. I like this type of workout because it improves your resistance to fatigue like you would experience at the end of a race. Here's a 5k course I created in Pittsburgh, notice the loop and elevation changes:

These last two I have not tried:

4) Bounding Hills
On a short hill interval course like that in (1), lengthen your stride by elevating your knee and spring from one foot to the next up the hill (you know... bound). You can do this linearly (in a straight line up the hill) or "horizontally" (a side to side bounding motion up the hill). It is said this workout increases the strength and elasticity of your muscles, tendons and ligaments and therefore helps prevent injury and promote efficiency.

5) Downhill Hills
Stopping yourself while traveling downhill is a quadracep burner. You get very intense contractions of the quad when your foot hits the ground followed by relatively longer periods of relaxation. Simple enough: start at the top of a 50-100m hill, moderately steep, and run down it at about 80-85 percent effort. Walk back up for recovery and repeat. Build up to 6-8 reps. You actually get the same effect walking or running backwards up a steel hill.

So, try some of this out! It requires a considerable bit of "amping" yourself up, but finishing one of these bad-boys is euphoric. I'm talking mind numbing... like snot on your chin, eyes rolled back in your head, odd noises and odors emanating from your body, real mad cow disease sort of euphoric... like "Snuffles the floating dog" good!"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Citations:
(1)http://www.runnersworld.com/workouts/mastering-hill-workouts?page=single
(2)http://www.runnersworld.co.uk/general/everything-you-need-to-know-about-hill-training/159.html
(3)http://news.runtowin.com/2010/06/25/5-hill-workouts-video.html

Running in Pittsburgh

Yup... this is the flattest 5 miler I could find around Brentwood, PA. It's an out-and-back. Any deviation off the main road requires climbing gear. This city will kill me...

The Idiosyncrasy of Runners

“At paces that might stun and dismay the religious jogger, the runners easily kept up all manner of chatter and horseplay. When they occasionally blew by a huffing fatty or an aging road runner, they automatically toned down the banter to avoid overwhelming, to preclude the appearance of show boating (not that they slowed in the slightest). They in fact respected these distant cousins of the spirit, who, among all people, had some modicum of insight into their own days and ways. But the runners resembled them only in the sense that a puma resembles a pussy cat. It is the difference between stretching lazily on the carpet and prowling the jungle for fresh red meat.” 

― Once a Runner by John L. Parker Jr.

I am by no stretch of the imagination an excellent runner. The fastest 5k I've ever run is a 21:30, net downhill (Knoxville Covenant Health 5k). Also, a 45:38 10k (Rodes City Run, Louisville), 1:41:32 half (KY Derby Festival Mini-marathon). Still, it wasn't until recently that I understood the sentiment expressed in the above passage (it's from a book called Once A Runner by John L. Parker Jr. Excellent book for runners, a must read!) As I bombed past people on the greenway, nasty thoughts would creep in my head: "You're not gonna lose the weight talking on your cellphone while you 'run', lady!" or "Don't break a sweat there man, wouldn't want to get your $50 running shirt smelly!" or "(Insert comment here about any one of these dudes)"

Seriously, if you don't click "these dudes" you suck, you NEED to watch that video...

But, that's not the right attitude at all. Running serves the human spirit in so many ways that it isn't possible for any person to completely understand the motivation, the plight, the goals of another. The benefits are completely idiosyncratic, and defined by no one other than the runner (unless, well, you're Galen Rupp or Mo Farah or something... then everyone wants you to win). The unity comes in that we are runners and that when we cross the line we accomplish. What? Doesn't matter... it's specific to the individual. But, we accomplish together. For the longest time I integrated my competitive "team sports" mentality into running and felt like I had to beat everyone, and by beating them I was somehow better. You either win, or lose... that's it. But anyone who has ever watched THE LAST spent marathoner break into tears after crossing the finish line knows that there is so much more. That person won today, and in our mutual accomplishments we are equal, regardless of talent or skill. (Kimberly, you must be so proud)

However, at the same time this doesn't mean I shouldn't try to be a puma. Said another way, since we don't gauge ourselves against one another we must strive to continually better ourselves! That's precisely where I struggled. I'm training hard to better myself and it was easy to scoff at others who weren't working so hard, but that's not in their "goal set", that's not why they run! While beating the guy next to me served as a great personal training tool, thinking less of others who didn't work hard didn't make me more of a runner, or a better person. I'm not saying you shouldn't strive to win. I just failed to understand that when you're 'dropping his ass' (I've said that before) in the last 100 meters, he's PRing, and when he crosses that line he will be just as happy as you. It never occurred to him that your kick suggests he kindly eat your dust and report to his car shortly after the race, receiving no celebratory Mac-Donalds on the way home for LOSING! LOSER... NO! That's not what it's about.

Perhaps that is why I find triathlons so endearing. There is an additional layer of unity in that you HAVE to train. The best runner who has never mounted a bike will die in the middle of the tri before they get to the run and surely be disappointed. Lance Armstrong, having never donned a speedo, would surely drown (or, take on a lot of water before finishing). You must respect the sport, and your limits, and train to overcome them. Walking a 5k is excellent for some, but you simply cannot walk an open water swim... you must become a puma. I find great camaraderie in the lifestyle, the accomplishments, and the training with my fellow triathletes.

So, I digress. I used to think I couldn't call myself a runner because I wasn't fast enough. Part of that idea probably comes from the fact that I live with an ex-division 1 runner. But, now I truly believe that anyone who runs for any reason, as idiosyncratic as it may be, can call themselves a runner. But seriously, get the f*** off your cellphone while you exercise, the world can wait for 1 hour! :)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Note: I recently learned that Lance Armstrong did triathlons BEFORE cycling, but I'm leaving my error in the text because that's a friggen hilarious mistake! I coulda picked ANYONE! :)

A change of pace...

Perhaps it was wishful thinking... or even asinine... to believe that I could keep up with a blog that rides on the frontier of economic research across a variety of subjects. To think that I could be that guy that bridges the gap between interesting economics and people who don't care about economics (Levitt already did that). Or, to blog with any regularity at all. (Boy, was that paragraph an abuse of sentence structure... piss off Language Arts, I like PE!)

So, this blog is no longer that blog ^^referenced up there^^. Nobody reads blogs unless they are both frequently updated and interesting. I flirt with the line of being neither of those, so this blog will now be very different! By that I mean it will now be completely self serving, but wasn't it always? NO! Not completely...

For a blog that is updated frequently and interesting, see: Keeping Up with Kimberly.

I will still write about economics and triathlons... after all, that's what I do. BUT, I will not research interesting topics just because I think they're interesting to my 5 readers, my girlfriend, and that random guy from Ouagadougou (Note: they weren't interested). No, I will research interesting topics and write about them because I'm interested in them... and not care if anyone reads about them. That's right, "anyone", if you read or don't read this blog, I don't care!

If you happen to be reading this, please note that this potentially sophisticated blog has been reduced to "Justin's Diary"... and not the cool Justin. This Justin-->

So, if you find me interesting, you're in luck! Preview of potential topics:

Economics 

Triathlons

Fantastic! Alright! Here we go!

If you can't find a cause to give to in New Orleans, open up map, see "French Quarter".

Abstract: It is accepted that charitable donations are partially crowded out by government grants. That is, people view grants as imperfect substitutes for their own giving. At least, that’s the “demand side” of the story.  I take a look at Andreoni and Payne (2003)[1] and discuss their findings for the “supply side”, i.e. nonprofits. They suggest the strategic response of non-profit firms is to reduce fund-raising efforts after receiving a grant. This has important implications for the time-old “big government giving/small government, private donations” debate and says, essentially, you’re both right/wrong! (I’m drinking coffee, and currently my glass is half full…everyone’s right)

I have just returned from the Southern Economics Association’s annual conference, this year in New Orleans, and am bursting at the seams with interesting stories (about a 50/50 split between Bourbon Street and the Conference).

New Orleans is in itself an economic phenomenon; a cesspool of behavioral anomalies, a sandbox for the study of market competition and consumer/firm interaction, and yes, a kiddie-pool-full-of-ky-jelly of altruism and charitable giving.   For example, my friend managed to donate a dollar to a man raising money for a deaf persons’ music club (there may actually be these clubs and I am very happy for the deaf community if they enjoy such opportunities). The interesting part of this transaction is not the irony of the organization, but that he gave to a “cause” simply because he was asked and would have never sought out a deaf persons’ music group to donate to it. I gave a dollar to a man who told me to eat pine needles to gain more testosterone… but I’m a connoisseur of sorts. The other interesting point is that since I saw my friend donate, I didn't feel the need to. His giving “crowded out” my giving.

My reduced giving as result of my friends giving parallels what goes on with government grants.[2] The demand side response to an organization that receives “my tax dollars”, or in many cases any other source of money, is to reduce my giving to them. However, you can easily imagine that if the man had received a grant to fund his organization he would likely not be on the street on a Saturday night asking for $1.50 donations from a stumbling, scruffy bearded hippy and a v-neck sweater touting mamma’s boy (both economists). So, our private giving would be reduced, not because we saw the grant as a substitute, but because he never asked us!

Androni and Payne (2003) explore the nonprofit response empirically. They find that for arts organizations (like a music group or museum) an additional $1000 in government grants would reduce fundraising expenditures by $265 dollars. Additionally, the same size grant would only reduce social service organizations fundraising expenditures by $54 (and negative responses for others). They conclude that grants do decrease fundraising expenditures, which in turn decrease private giving. Not surprisingly, effect is larger for organizations who receive many of their current revenues from private donations already and smaller for those who have to fight harder for private funds.

So, maybe the argument for non-profit government grants should not be over whether or not to give them, but which organizations to give them to.

Lastly, there is a reason why a “hand grenade” is a weapon and not a drink…

---

[1] Andreoni, James and A. Abigail Payne. “Do Government Grants to Private Charities Crowd out Giving or Fund-Raising?” American Economic Review, June 2003, 93(3), pp. 792-812.

[2] The crowding out is incomplete. By incomplete, I mean that the reduction in giving does not equal the amount in grants, so there is net gain... good news.

An Economic Case for the Running of the 2012 NYC Marathon: Refilling Bloomberg's Washed Out Coffers

This entry is for my girlfriend, Kimberly Huber (she has a blog, and a bucket list, and food recipes… it’s awesome, see it here). She will run her first marathon on Saturday in Indianapolis, Indiana at the Monumental Marathon. In the spirit of her excruciating training I will punish her further by forcing her to read an econ blog about marathons. Good luck, Kim (with both)!

Don't forget to click on the links for a more, um, indulgent experience...

Abstract: Part 1: The guy who ran the first marathon surely hated it too… but he died at the end.

Part 2: Bring on the skinny tourists! Marathons’ benefit to society doesn't stop at the finish line, it continues through the checkout line. Hosting mainstream competitions, such as a marathon, can provide a city with a decent short term economic stimulus.[1]Today, Mayor Michael Bloomberg (New York City) announced that the infamous ING NYCMarathon will commence on time this Sunday, bringing nearly 50,000 runners and their families into a storm-stricken downtown. Good idea or bad? 

Part 1: The Legend of a Legend: Pheidippides

In case you didn't know, the marathon commemorates a death march of a young boy named Pheidippides (Dippy from here on out)… so think about that when you’re complaining about your numb foot at mile 20![2] Dippy was a Greek messenger who, according to my favorite version of the legend, ran a total of 300 plus miles before collapsing to death. The Persians were at war with the Greeks in and around Athens, so Dippy ran 150 miles from Athensto Sparta to ask for help, then ran back another 150 miles to fight in the Battle of Marathon. He survived it, because, you know, ya’ can’t kill a man who just ran 150 miles very easily, and was immediately sent to Athens to tell of the good news. After the 26 mile jaunt, he burst into an assembly, yelled “We win!” and died.  The official distance of 26.2 miles began in 1921 to commemorate the 1908 marathon which was extended .2 miles to finish in front of the Royal Box in London[3].

Part 2: Marathons, not your average tourist attractions

Many states have tourism taxes designed at capturing a little extra revenue from those bedless, kitchenless, transportationless visitors who frequent their municipalities from the great unknown (see what this means for Texans here). For example, Hawaii, a state that thrives on tourism, established the Tourism Special Fund in 1998 which collects taxes from hotels, vacation rentals, and other transient accommodations. They use the fund to generate additional tourism through hosting mainstream events. In 2007 the Fund was roughly $70 million, 10% of which went to the marketing of sporting events like surfing championships, PGA golfing tournaments, the Ironman Triathlon World Championships, and the NFL Pro Bowl. If you’re reading this as an economist, you’re thinking cost/benefit analysis. Baumann, Matheson, and Muroi (2009, Journal of Sports Economics) study the return to Hawaii sports marketing by looking at the changes in arriving flights surrounding several large sporting events. They find that only 3 events cause a significant increase in tourism in Hawaii: the NFL Pro Bowl, the Ironman Triathlon, and the Honolulu marathon. Additionally, at an upper bound, the Honolulu Marathon generated the same amount of tourism as the Pro Bowl. Hawaii spends roughly two-thirds of its entire sports budget on the rights to the Pro Bowl, but provides no funds to the marathon.

What does this have to do with New York City? It is no mystery that the city has been on halt while Hurricane Sandy passed and that, with 32 deaths, morality and ethics enter the equation. But, Mayor Michael Bloomberg has said the race is a “go” based largely on local economic concerns, so let’s take a very “economically positive” look at this. The New York Marathon will attract nearly 50,000 runners and their families and friends. These runners had to qualify (or be randomly drawn) for this race and have known for a while that they were running, therefore it is highly likely that their hotel rooms are booked and bags are packed. New York City collects a 5.8% tax on hotels plus $2 per day so, assuming one hotel room per runner at an average cost of $250 for one night (conservative), that’s $825,000 in tax revenue from hotel accommodations alone. Although NYC charges no sales tax for shoes and clothing under $110, everything else has a 4.5% city sales tax with additional surcharge rates sprinkled in.[4] Linking this to the Hawaii case study, the Honolulu Marathon attracts only about 40% of the runners but still boasts a net increase in economic activity of $5.1 million (Honolulu Marathon, 2008). That is, after accounting for local economic displacement as a result of race congestion, closed roads, etc., consumer spending increases by $5.1 million. Similarly, NYC is extending little monetary cost to put on the marathon since most of it will be paid for by entry fees (about $250) and sponsorships (it’s televised on ESPN2), while forgoing nothing in the form of lost local economic activity. Storm congestion and road closures are already inhibiting regular economic activity. So, disregarding moral sentiment, giving the “green light” to the race is a no brainer. With regards to how it “should be”, I’ll act like a good economist and stay out of that debate…

Justin Roush

University of Tennessee Economics

---

[1] Baumann, Robert W., Victor A. Matheson and Chihiro Muroi. (2009). Bowling in Hawaii: Examining the Effectiveness of Sports-Based Tourism Strategies. Journal of Sports Economics.10(1).107-123.  

[2] It’s more of a tale…

[3] Shamelessly, Wikipedia.org.

[4] www.nyc.gov.