The saga of a new bike

If you haven't talked to me in a while, you may not know that I have basically convinced myself that I am going to buy a new bike... yep. In my searching I've basically narrowed it down to a Cannondale CAAD 10:

Cannondale CAAD 10 w/ Ultegra... currently sorta my dream for January

or a Felt F5

Felt F5 with 105 components. Need to ride this baby.

Right now the CAAD 10 is winning by quite a bit. I road a CAAD 9 with tiagra components. FYI, as I understand it: components meaning the things that make your bike shift. This often includes brakes and sometimes the crank, but when people are taking about components they're usually talking about the shifters, derailleurs, and the cassette. I really loved that bike. I can't imagine it souped up with nicer components and set up to fit the way I ride.

I have yet to get on an F5, but I was put on a F95 and didn't love it. Didn't hate it.

Some other experiences I've had: rode a Trek madone 3.1. That was a fun one but also a little out of my price range and an old Felt ZW, which is their women's series. I didn't love that bike, but it was a very old model and not set up the best for the way I ride.

Recently, I rode some bikes that are waaaayyy out of my price range. If you really want to nerd out with me here, there are two big companies that produce components: Shimano and SRAM (I mean... there are others, like campagnolo and stuff, but for most purposes...). I went to the local bike store, Turin, that sponsors the team and asked if they had any road bike with a frame between 50-52 cm with SRAM shifting. My bike has Shimano shifting and I had never tried SRAM. I have the option of getting SRAM on a new bike but it is different in operation. Anyway, the manager found a Cervélo S2 (which is a $5000 bike...eek) for me to test ride.

The cervélo S2 with SRAM Red components. MSRP $5000. EEK! Honestly though, I felt every extra grand in this ride <3

After getting over the fact the bike was so expensive, here is my experience with SRAM vs. Shimano:

Let me explain the basics for any non-cyclists out there still reading: On Shimano, there are two configurations of shifters. The nicer shifters have two levers: a front and a back shifter on each handlebar. For the rear derailleur the front bar shifts to a larger chain ring make it easier, and the back bar shifts down to a smaller chain ring to make it harder. For the front derailleur, the front bar also shifts to a larger chain ring... but this actually makes it harder, and the back shifts to the smaller chain ring which makes it easier. Confused? Yeah. You get it once you ride a bit. On the cheaper versions on Shimano, there are little thumb levers (affectionately called "mouse ears") that serve the same purpose of the back bars.

OK so now that I've given a run-down of Shimano let's talk SRAM.
I was nervous about my test ride because they literally put me on one of the nicest bikes they could've put me on just to "figure out" SRAM shifting. I did a little online research so I didn't completely screw anything up. Here is how I can best explain it. SRAM looks a lot like Shimano. I've heard that SRAM has bigger hoods so someone with smaller hands might not like it as much. I didn't really encounter a problem with this (and then later I rode a Specialized with SRAM and didn't have an issue either). There are still the two levers, however only ONE (the back bar) is a shifter. The front bar, like Shimano, is the brake, but it is different because it is ONLY the brake and not the shifter. The way this one bar shifting works is that you push once slightly inwards (a single tap) if you want to shift down/into a smaller chain ring/to make it harder. You push once, but further inwards (a double tap) if you want to shift up/into a larger chain ring/to make it easier. Again, it is backwards for the front derailleur (so once slightly inwards aka a single tap still gets you into the smaller chain ring, but makes it easier; once further inwards aka a double tap still gets you into the bigger chain ring, but makes it harder...).

I got used to it pretty quickly and fell in to a very deep committed love with that S2, but you can't always get what you want, so I reluctantly returned it to Turin and cried a little as they hung it back on the wall. Well, not actually, but it really was one awesome bike and probably was my favorite test ride so far and that is saying a lot since it had shifters that I didn't really know how to use AND I later rode two even more exorbitantly expensive Specialized S-Works bikes (MSRP: $8100.... did you almost pee your pants? Because I almost did...). In the end, I actually think I could really get to like this whole SRAM thing and may get it when I get a new bike. :]

This is the Specialized S-Works Amira I rode. MSRP $8100. HA! Never in a million years. It was a good ride, but I couldn't honestly tell the difference between it and some of those bikes I mentioned before. I'm probably just too clueless, but SRAM red shifting was fun to experience again.

Now, if you also know me, you may know that I don't do anything without picking the heck out of Brad's brain because he is literally a walking triathlon encyclopedia (though he probably wouldn't admit to it). Brad was the one who told me about SRAM hoods being larger and attempted to explain how they shift to me, but it was one of those things I just had to do myself. He and I both went to the Specialized test ride thing where we rode incredibly snazzy and expensive bikes, and he also got himself on a cross bike with SRAM components to give them another try. In his most recent experience, he thought the SRAM hoods felt slightly more ergonomic than Shimano... but he still loves his Shimano (he has many bikes, but his two good ones have Ultegra and Dura-ace... if you're curious). He also told me this, which I think it interesting:

It is his understanding that Shimano components will more easily adapt to new gear, or as he put it SRAM is good if your bike is always going to be "your bike." SRAM apparently can be adjusted to really fit you and the wheels/cassette/whatever you're riding with, but for instance if you flat during a race and someone hands you a new wheel, you're going to have an easier time getting your shifting to work the way you want/need it to with Shimano than you would with SRAM. I believe this has something to do with how you set up your shifting. I'm too much of a novice to really understand how that all works... BUT it's still part of the information I am weighing on my decision to get the SRAM Rival or the Shimano Ultegra outfitted version of the CAAD 10 (you know.. if I get the CAAD 10... which I think I may).

Whoa. I have a lot to say. Don't I?

Well, I really need to go run right now, BUT in my next update on the saga of a new bike, I can talk about pricing and components and frames and what I've been finding in my search for a new bike. So far I've looked at Trek, Cannondale, Felt, Cervelo, Specialized, Giant, andddd briefly at Diamondback to get my brain wrapped around this huge undertaking. Lots to write about/notate/keep track of.

Until then, it's not like there isn't enough to read here....

Triathlon en France

Well, in 9 days I will be leaving for Nantes, France, where I will somehow attempt to keep up my training. My incredibly understanding mother ultimately realized that I need a road bike. This makes me approximately 85% less anxious about this undertaking. I'm not getting anything snazzy like the bikes I'm looking to buy when I get back to the States in January, but a super-entry level road bike (kind of like I have now) that will let me get in a few hundred miles. I'm pretty excited because I have heard Nantes is pretty temperate. I mean, sure, it gets cold, but not Chicago-cold. In other words, I may be able to bike through my entire stay.

Luckily, I found this store called Decathlon only 3.5 km away from where I'm staying!! YES. WIN. While I'm tempted to look at these road bikes with the critical eye I have developed from learning more and more about bikes, I am attempting to force myself to recognize that I will only use this for a few months. Regardless, I'm excited to have this store so close to me because I know I will spend entirely too much time developing a triathlon-related vocabulary. Haha So far I have learned that cadre = frame, fourche = fork, and a road bike is "vélo route" now... how to say "shifters." I have a feeling derailleur might be derailleur...

After conference championships (which is this weekend, on September 3) this blog will almost certainly completely focus on my experiences of attempting to continue tri in another country. AH!

A race, a PR, a recap

Finally my summer classes and internship are down. Now I have nothing to do but prepare for France and focus on tri. Get prepared for an influx of updates! It's about time.

I just raced the Sylvania olympic-distance triathlon in, you guessed it, Sylvania, OH.

Brad, Kendyl and I drove out to Ohio on Saturday, stuffing our faces with entirely too many Matt's fig bars. Matt's, excitingly enough, is one of the newest sponsors of NU Tri, thanks to yours truly. We (slash I) really could not be more excited. We all use fig bars as pre-race nutrition especially for our carbo-loading and now we get them at a delicious discount. om nom nom nom

I had set myself up for a pretty disappointing race. My running and biking had been very slow in the past few weeks since I'd finished Evergreen back in July. After being hit by a car a week before the race (oh yeah, I was hit by a car. It was at a stop sign and I'm totally fine, but FYI it happened), I wasn't even sure if I would race, but my coach told me to stay signed up and only quit if I absolutely felt awful. So I listened and was feeling fine so I raced.

A few weeks back, Kendyl (who is a fantastic swimmer) helped me out with my swimming technique. Since then, I had really been focusing a lot on practicing my swim stroke. The water in Olander lake was very warm. Honestly, in comparison to the air temperature, it felt like taking a bath. I was lucky enough this time, to stay with my wave for a good portion of the swim and then as soon as they dropped me, the next one caught me and I hung on to them. In the end, I was out of the water in 35 min! That's a full 6 minutes off my time from Evergreen. We had a looonnnggg run to transition so in the end it was a 37 min swim time which is still 4 min off my swim time. When I got out of the water to see my watch said 35 min, I was newly inspired to actually give this race a shot. I had a pretty average 1:34 transition and then headed out to the bike.

The bike course was flat and WINDY... oh and rainy. My new burst of adrenaline was quickly depleted when I struggled to push 17 mph on the bike. This is MY leg. If I can't perform on the bike, my race is kind of a disaster. So for the first 10 miles, I alternated between being depressed that I couldn't keep pace and yelling at myself to keep pace. It didn't go all that well. Then on a nice right turn on to a bumpy road I lost my pack of shot bloks, my only race nutrition, only having eaten 2 of them thus far. I panicked a little that I would get side cramps from lack of electrolytes, but decided there was nothing I could do about it. I chugged my water and continued on my depressing bike leg in the wind and rain. But soon enough we came to the turn around and with 14 miles to go, the wind was at my back so I cranked it up to 20 mph and told myself I could hold it and make up for the bad first half. Thankfully, I did hold about 19.5-20.5 for those last 14 miles. I didn't quite make up for the bad first 10 miles, but I yanked my average speed up to 18.6 and was off the bike in 80 min. It wasn't as good as my 76 min finish last time or as fast as my 20 mph average goal pace, but it wasn't the worst either.

The run was the one thing I wanted to push in this race. It was a flat course. It was gently raining. It was mild if not cold weather and my goal was to break 9 min/mile pace. I took the first mile easy which ended up being about a 9:30. I had found a running buddy who was chatting me up and I realized I couldn't let him drag me down. I pushed a little harder on the second mile and he stayed with me. Still, I finished that mile a little too far over the 18 min mark. On mile 3 I finally started kicking it into a higher gear. I saw a guy loping along from Ohio State and thought "time to snag another place for NU" so I barely pulled past him and then dropped him (unfortunately, along with my running buddy). Soon enough, my running buddy caught up to me and managed to keep pace. Another guy joined us and I was happy he started to talk to him and not me, but also happy to hear this conversation taking place to get my mind off the pain. Soon enough, I began to feel a pain in my chest - something I'd been experiencing lately on runs if I took it out a little too hard. I tried to push through it, but the pain began to escalate so I knew that the best thing to do would be just walk my heart rate back down to zone 1. My chatting runner friends dropped me while I waited a few seconds for recovery. Soon enough I was back to normal trying to bridge the gap I'd created. In a few minutes I found my running buddy walking a bit. I asked if he was okay and he assured me he was fine and quickly attempted to meet my pace. We cruised over the mile 4 marker and I thought "2 to go, let's pick it up." I knew I was hitting pace there and it hurt. My thighs were dying but 2.2 miles was nothing - 20 min max. as we rounded the corner to find the 5 mile mark, I continued to speed up a bit. At a half mile to go, my running buddy completely dropped me. I was disappointed to see how much energy reserve he had as I cruised along, probably now holding a very painful 8:30 pace. Finally seeing the finish line, I picked it up to probably around an 8 min pace, crossing at 2:56:56. Again, breaking 3 hours and a little bit better than last time. In the end, I only kept 9:05 pace and was a bit disappointed, but it was still 19 sec/mile better than my pace at Evergreen.

It was an interesting race and next I'll be met with rolling hills on the bike course of Muncie, IN for conference championships. I took 17th in the collegiate women's group. Kendyl took 14th. Brad took 7th and had the best bike leg in the collegiate men's group by 7 secs!

The dish on running lit

I am a little more than halfway through Once a Runner by John L. Parker. You may now, of course, commence your judgments as they may be. I have been told/heard that the two running books TO READ are this and Born to Run by Christopher McDougall. I am no authority on Born to Run as I have not yet read it and I will post a review on it once I've finished (probably by Friday, considering I started reading on yesterday). So far it's an easy read with a some flowery passages complete with big words thrown in here and there. Follows this great college runner and the whole destructive path of achievement that runners (aka cross-country, track, track-ers) put themselves on. I am not unfamiliar with it. Though I happily call myself a "recreational runner" I would say I have had enough friendships/relationships with these cross-country, track, track-ers to be familiar with the lifestyle. Similarly, I'd say with triathlon I have grown to be a little more serious about the sport than your average "recreational runner."

Conveniently, Amazon.com  has compiled lists of both the "most popular running literature" and the "best running literature" just in case you're hungry for more, but this is what I am going to give you.

But for my next bite out of running "literature," I would like to bring up the topic of Runner's World magazine. Forgive me for saying this, but Runner's World seems to be a bit of a running joke among runners. A loving running joke, but a running one, nonetheless (pun conveniently intended). I had my first year-long subscription to Runner's World this year. Up until this past fall, RW was something I picked up in airports for plane rides - which were, indeed, rather common. As I got more knowledgeable and serious about running, I became acutely aware of how little I was actually getting from my hour+ long reading sessions of the magazine. Slowly I began to read less and less until now I'm not even sure I've looked at my past few issues.

"There are three things that make you a worse runner: a car, a girlfriend, and a subscription to Runner's World." By a show of hands, who has heard that one before?

Depending on who you are, you may or may not know I have a little bit of background in journalism and when I'm not being an over-enthusiastic triathlete, I work on marketing and public relations for theater. Journalism is one of my secret loves that I use to salt-and-pepper all the other things I do with my life (thus the blog...sort of). My take on RW (and that of many runner's) is that they're so focused on catering to the "recreational runner" who is trying to motivate themselves into their first race that they sort of lose sight of what more competitive runner's are looking for in literature about, well, them.

What are they doing right?
Well, personally, I think they're doing a lot right. The recipes for efficient, healthy and delicious nutrition for athletes are a big win. Their feature stories on elite and pro athletes in addition to inspiring stories about runners? Into it. Plus, there are great articles on fun/scenic runs and interesting races.

But then comes the training plans... pages and pages on how to run 5Ks, recommendations on how to do a core workout, and total catering to new runners. Sure, the newbies are important too and probably the key demographic they're aiming to hit (and the larger demographic...) but what happens when the newbies become more serious? They lose them. They've already lost the more elite runners who think their magazine is a joke.


My question is what does an addition spread or two of hard-hitting running news add to their print cost and how much would that add to their demographic?
I mean, I'm sure these big shmancy professional editors have worked this out, but I wonder if there is a viable market for a more hard-hitting running publication. What about adding current stories about elite runners? What about the further development in research and debates about foot strike? What is gained from not catering to more elite runners?

I'm not saying I'm any elite runner or that I really know entirely what I'm talking about, but what I do know is that a lot of material is left out of RW (or as I have a bad habit of calling it: Runner's) and among very serious runners... it isn't taken seriously. I lament this fact and thus decided to muse on the topic for entire too long. :]