"The only way to be who you want to be is by being what you haven't yet been."
- Sally Edwards
"Only those who will risk going too far can possibly find out how far they can go."
- T.S. Eliot
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
Quotes and Mantras for Endurance Events
Having aspired to take my multi-sport athletic endeavors to the next level and train and complete a half Ironman (1.2 mile swim, 56 mile bike, and 13.1 mile run) in April, I feel the need now to search and collect mantras and quotes to call upon during hard hours of training and racing. I will need to stay continually motivated and will have to sacrifice a great deal. This list is just one of the ways I plan to keep my self on track. I plan to continually add to the list but here is what I've got so far:
"If one advances confidently in the direction of his dreams and endeavors to live the life which he has imagined, he will meet with success unexpected in common hours." -Henry David Thoreau
"The greater danger for most of us is not that our aim is too high and we miss it, but that it's too low and we reach it"
-Michelangelo-
And my never fail mantra: "It's only a process"
"If one advances confidently in the direction of his dreams and endeavors to live the life which he has imagined, he will meet with success unexpected in common hours." -Henry David Thoreau
"The greater danger for most of us is not that our aim is too high and we miss it, but that it's too low and we reach it"
-Michelangelo-
And my never fail mantra: "It's only a process"
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Billboards Battle Trees
The scenic rights along a stretch of Highway in Osceola Florida, just outside Disney World, are in the midst of a tug of war between billboard owners and local citizens. In the 1980's this stretch of highway apparently was such an eyesore that the citizens opted to tax themselves $29 million dollars to fund a highway beautification project. Now they have bike trails and 10 foot sidewalks on either side, lush landscaping that includes hundreds of trees, and well-lit bus stops, and information kiosks.
It would seem that such a project would have unanimous support, however Clear Channel and other billboard companies began complaining to the city that the new trees block the view of their billboards and threatened their business, which they argue, threatens the tourist industry, which is a major component of the local economy. Based on these claims, and the fact that their billboards were their first, they lobbied the state Legislature. The state sided with the billboard companies and in 2006 passed a law that guaranteed a 500 foot unobstructed view of the billboards.
Obviously citizens were enraged by this legislation because in their eyes it placed corporate interests over the public interest. But the real issue isn't about the trees; it's about who gets to control what the public views on a public highway. In the end the billboard companies and the citizen compromised and settled on an agreement that the trees be trimmed back to not obstruct the view instead of cutting them down entirely.
So who is right in this situation? The billboards were there first and they say they are essential for the tourist industry; but is it right to allow private industry to dictate what the public view on a public road? As much as it pains me to say, I think since the billboards were there first they should be allowed to remain and to be seen, but not at the cost of chopping down all the trees. Pruning ordinances are a good alternative as well as adequate pre-planning on the part of the city's beautification project. Granted billboards are important to tourism; however I would argue that I wouldn't want to see an ugly stretch of highway devoid of trees and littered with billboards. A compromise is best for both the citizens and the tourism industry in my opinion. I'm curious what anyone else thinks about this.
For the entire story, visit NPR
It would seem that such a project would have unanimous support, however Clear Channel and other billboard companies began complaining to the city that the new trees block the view of their billboards and threatened their business, which they argue, threatens the tourist industry, which is a major component of the local economy. Based on these claims, and the fact that their billboards were their first, they lobbied the state Legislature. The state sided with the billboard companies and in 2006 passed a law that guaranteed a 500 foot unobstructed view of the billboards.
Obviously citizens were enraged by this legislation because in their eyes it placed corporate interests over the public interest. But the real issue isn't about the trees; it's about who gets to control what the public views on a public highway. In the end the billboard companies and the citizen compromised and settled on an agreement that the trees be trimmed back to not obstruct the view instead of cutting them down entirely.
So who is right in this situation? The billboards were there first and they say they are essential for the tourist industry; but is it right to allow private industry to dictate what the public view on a public road? As much as it pains me to say, I think since the billboards were there first they should be allowed to remain and to be seen, but not at the cost of chopping down all the trees. Pruning ordinances are a good alternative as well as adequate pre-planning on the part of the city's beautification project. Granted billboards are important to tourism; however I would argue that I wouldn't want to see an ugly stretch of highway devoid of trees and littered with billboards. A compromise is best for both the citizens and the tourism industry in my opinion. I'm curious what anyone else thinks about this.
For the entire story, visit NPR
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Women in Politics
Right now there is a heated debate in our nation about the place of women in the political world sparked by the vice president selection for the Republican ticket. Like Mr. Tuesday Pants (), I don't think women are incapable of serving in politics or that they should not serve because of some antiquated gender related issue. What I do strongly believe is that women should be held to equal standing as men in politics, but this is where I see problems emerging in two ways.
The general public response to Sarah Palin's vice president bid, at least from the female population that even remotely follows politics, is either "You go girl" or "How could she?" The "You go girl" camp are women who feel empowered that a woman is in the running for vice president and probably believe, as they should, that a women can do any job a man can. I'm not contesting this fact at all. I'm certain women have just as much intelligence and skills to run a nation as a man, I'm just not sure I want that. Again I'm aligned with Mr. Tuesday Pants, so refer to his post on Women in Politics for details on this. The "how could she?" camp pipes up this question because Sarah Palin has a 4 month old child with down syndrome and a 17 year old expecting a child of her own, and, I'm speculating here, this camp believes Sarah Palin should be more concerned with her own family right now than with running a country. "You go girl"s would say that no one has the right to tell a women how the manage her family. I pose this question though: would they feel any different about this issue if it were Obama with and a mental disabled infant? I certain hope not, but we can never know.
So do we hold Palin to a different standard because she is a woman and we criticize her decision to run despite her family situation because we think a mother should care for her family first or do we make this judgment of her simply because the we believe the needs of her family take precedent over national affairs for her as an individual? The Republican party would ask you to not consider her gender when assessing her motives and priorities. But here's the kicker as I see it.
Why did McCain choose Sarah Palin? Was it because of her political record, her experience, or other a combination of other factors related to professional career as a politician. Well these factors may have influenced McCain, but I firmly believe that he chose Palin because she is a woman, he needs to win over Clinton supporters and he thinks people will vote based on the chromosomes of his running mate and not her political history. But voting for McCain simply because there is a woman on his ticket would mean you are giving special consideration to Palin because she is a woman, but yet when considering other elements of her political career and personal situation we are expected to look the other way and not treat her any differently than we would a male candidate. You can't have it both ways. There seems to be a double standard emerging but I'm not sure many people see it. This is my take on the matter. I'm open to hear what yours is.
The general public response to Sarah Palin's vice president bid, at least from the female population that even remotely follows politics, is either "You go girl" or "How could she?" The "You go girl" camp are women who feel empowered that a woman is in the running for vice president and probably believe, as they should, that a women can do any job a man can. I'm not contesting this fact at all. I'm certain women have just as much intelligence and skills to run a nation as a man, I'm just not sure I want that. Again I'm aligned with Mr. Tuesday Pants, so refer to his post on Women in Politics for details on this. The "how could she?" camp pipes up this question because Sarah Palin has a 4 month old child with down syndrome and a 17 year old expecting a child of her own, and, I'm speculating here, this camp believes Sarah Palin should be more concerned with her own family right now than with running a country. "You go girl"s would say that no one has the right to tell a women how the manage her family. I pose this question though: would they feel any different about this issue if it were Obama with and a mental disabled infant? I certain hope not, but we can never know.
So do we hold Palin to a different standard because she is a woman and we criticize her decision to run despite her family situation because we think a mother should care for her family first or do we make this judgment of her simply because the we believe the needs of her family take precedent over national affairs for her as an individual? The Republican party would ask you to not consider her gender when assessing her motives and priorities. But here's the kicker as I see it.
Why did McCain choose Sarah Palin? Was it because of her political record, her experience, or other a combination of other factors related to professional career as a politician. Well these factors may have influenced McCain, but I firmly believe that he chose Palin because she is a woman, he needs to win over Clinton supporters and he thinks people will vote based on the chromosomes of his running mate and not her political history. But voting for McCain simply because there is a woman on his ticket would mean you are giving special consideration to Palin because she is a woman, but yet when considering other elements of her political career and personal situation we are expected to look the other way and not treat her any differently than we would a male candidate. You can't have it both ways. There seems to be a double standard emerging but I'm not sure many people see it. This is my take on the matter. I'm open to hear what yours is.
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Hotter 'N Hell Hundred
The Hotter'N Hell had nearly 12,000 participants, 25,000 visitors, 3800 volunteers, who were greatly appreciated and 112 sponsors. This makes this HH100 a record year. I had real doubts about whether or not we were ready for the 100 miles. The week before we, Patrick, Jonathan and I set out for a 75 mile ride from our house to Patrick's mom's house. It was really hard to press on after about 70 miles. But whatever doubts I had about thie HH100 were squashed. I did great. Here are my overall stats:
Average mph: 18.11
Total time: 6:30:02
Rests: 3-adding up to 1:00:03
Pedal time: 5:37:59
Calories: 3685
What made this ride great were the volunteers. If you ever have a desire to cycle 102miles in heat that could range between 95 to 100+ degrees I strongly suggest the HH100. This is by far the best run, best stocked ride I've ever taken part in. The volunteers, all 3800 of them, were amazing. They MADE the race. Every stop, which on the 100 mile route were about every 10 miles were stocked with fruit, ice water, cold powerade, cookies, ice cold wet paper towels and more. Next year Patrick and I plan to do the Triple Heat: On Friday a 13 mile trail ride, Saturaday 102 mile road ride, and Sunday a half marathon trail run.
Over I just must say that my new love is cycling. It's addicting. I just love to go far and fast by just the power in my legs.
There will be many long rides head.
What ever your passion, press on with it and push your self.
www.hh100.org
Average mph: 18.11
Total time: 6:30:02
Rests: 3-adding up to 1:00:03
Pedal time: 5:37:59
Calories: 3685
What made this ride great were the volunteers. If you ever have a desire to cycle 102miles in heat that could range between 95 to 100+ degrees I strongly suggest the HH100. This is by far the best run, best stocked ride I've ever taken part in. The volunteers, all 3800 of them, were amazing. They MADE the race. Every stop, which on the 100 mile route were about every 10 miles were stocked with fruit, ice water, cold powerade, cookies, ice cold wet paper towels and more. Next year Patrick and I plan to do the Triple Heat: On Friday a 13 mile trail ride, Saturaday 102 mile road ride, and Sunday a half marathon trail run.
Over I just must say that my new love is cycling. It's addicting. I just love to go far and fast by just the power in my legs.
There will be many long rides head.
What ever your passion, press on with it and push your self.
www.hh100.org
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Small Texan Triathlon
The first big triathlon of the season was this last Sunday; the Small Texan Triathlon. This was an international distance triathlon: 800 meter swim, 45 K Bike, 10 K run. It went really well, peformance wise, but I wasn't thrilled with the bike or run course. The bike was on a very rough service road and there was so many hills, but I guess it was the Hill Country. The run was also on a service road with very little shade.
The bright side was my performance. I was able to run the whole distance which I wasn't expecting. It was really uplifting to be able to keep running beyond a half hour and I was thrilled that my hip didn't start hurting until mile 5. I pushed really hard the last 1.2 miles, by which time my hip started to ache pretty bad. I stretched really well afterward and all the pain was gone, it was amazing. I'm really surprised at how well stretching as worked for me.
My time was 3:13:33. Heres the Breakdown:
Swim- 15:29
T1- 2:26
Bike and T2-1:46:19; Avgerage 15.8 mph
Run - 1:09:18: Pace-11:11
I need to work on the transition times. My T1 time wouldn't have been as long had I not pinned the front and back of my shirt together when I pre-pinned my race number on. Silly mistake.
The bright side was my performance. I was able to run the whole distance which I wasn't expecting. It was really uplifting to be able to keep running beyond a half hour and I was thrilled that my hip didn't start hurting until mile 5. I pushed really hard the last 1.2 miles, by which time my hip started to ache pretty bad. I stretched really well afterward and all the pain was gone, it was amazing. I'm really surprised at how well stretching as worked for me.
My time was 3:13:33. Heres the Breakdown:
Swim- 15:29
T1- 2:26
Bike and T2-1:46:19; Avgerage 15.8 mph
Run - 1:09:18: Pace-11:11
I need to work on the transition times. My T1 time wouldn't have been as long had I not pinned the front and back of my shirt together when I pre-pinned my race number on. Silly mistake.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)