[SFmike]

SFmike on June 5, 2022 at 1:10 pm · in reply to: Who Likes Their Watch? #68019

Thanks, @laptoka. It’s good to know I’m not losing my mind!

[SFmike]

SFmike on June 4, 2022 at 10:04 pm · in reply to: Who Likes Their Watch? #68001

I realize this thread has been thoroughly beaten to death, but thought I’d add a quick note about GPS tracking options. I think (emphasis on “think”) Garmin defaults the tracking to “GPS Normal”. Other options are things like “GLONASS” or “UltraTrac”. In an effort to increase battery life I tried the “UltraTrac” (less-frequent location sampling) option today on a training hike. While it seemed to be better on my battery (started with full charge and it ended at 77%), the data it recorded was terrible. The route was a steep 2 miles, followed by a 2 mile rolling traverse, then a 2 mile steep downhill = 6 miles total. However, in “UltraTrac” mode, the data said 9.8 miles and the resulting map in Garmin and TrainingPeaks was a mess…lines jumping all over and zig-zagging. That said, the elevation gain was correct (the same as estimates from other sources online). More research is required here, but in the meantime I won’t be using “UltraTrac” and would suggest that anyone who does use it should also double-check their route mileage on something as simple as Google Maps. I’m sure DC Rainmaker has articles on this subject but I haven’t had a chance to look yet.

Has anyone else run into this? FWIW, I’ve been using Garmin watches for 6 years and always left them in “GPS Normal” mode.

Happy training!

[SFmike]

SFmike on May 22, 2022 at 7:40 pm · in reply to: Who Likes Their Watch? #67498

Victor,

I’ve been running a Fenix 5sPlus for a few years and still like it. Battery life seems to depend a bit on how your GPS settings are configured (eg. how often it pings the satellite). Generally, mine will use about 10%/hour when tracking but that might be due to the battery’s age, and I think I can get better performance if I adjust the settings. In regular watch mode it still lasts over a week. Syncing to TrainingPeaks is easy (via the Garmin app on my iPhone – the data has to xfer via bluetooth from the watch to your smartphone, then via cellular/wifi from your smartphone to the interwebs, then it’ll hit TrainingPeaks…at least that’s how it works on my setup anyway).

The upshot with this model is that it’s a bit smaller than other models and is more proportional on my skinny wrists. Most other GPS watches look ridiculous on me.

Happy hunting,
Mike

[SFmike]

SFmike on May 13, 2022 at 11:16 am · in reply to: May 2022 Introductions / Goals / Geographies #67113

Great thread.

Howdy. I’m Mike from San Francisco. Been climbing/backpacking/mountaineering off and on since I was a teenager but restarted a somewhat structured training plan when TFTNA was originally published (2015?). I found that book after a Shasta climb in 2014 where (I’m not embarrassed to say) I completely bonked to the point of hallucinating on the descent. There were two ultra runners in my group who basically tap-danced up to the top and back down – I was immediately interested in how they trained and I immediately learned that I’d done everything wrong. So here I am…still learning.

My mountain fitness goals are pretty tame (I think):
1. General mountain fitness – I want to be strong enough, durable enough, and aerobic enough to be able to slog up Shasta at any given time (and not bonk
;^) ). I don’t know what that translates to in a TrainingPeaks CTL measurement, but my gut says it’s somewhere around CTL=60, and I’d like to just maintain that in perpetuity.
2. General health and durability (there’s that word again). I’m a tall, skinny 46 year-old, who’s always been skinny. So, strength training has become more of a focus for me (nutrition, too).
3. Climbing goals – As in #1 above, I’d like to be able to go up Shasta without hesitation whenever my younger climber friends offer a last-minute spot with them. I’ve had to turn them down too many times in past years because I wasn’t maintaining sufficient fitness on an ongoing basis. A larger goal would be to visit Orizaba or maybe Chimoborazo later this year.

I’m looking forward to learning more from UA and the peeps in this forum. And, for anyone in the area who likes to check-off PCT sections…hit me up if you’re game for doing sections in northern california.

Cheers!
Mike

[SFmike]

SFmike on April 25, 2018 at 5:26 pm · in reply to: Timeline for training after ACL reconstruction #9541

This is a great thread – many thanks to all who contributed. For my part, I’m in PT for a patellar fracture that happened in December. Surprisingly, my range of motion is improving quickly. However, the struggle has been the atrophy in my quadraceps (medial side) above the injured knee. I lost a noticeable amount of muscle mass in that area and am not progressing as quickly as I’d like, but am happy to be out of the Robocop knee brace and walking up stairs (not down, unfortunately). If anyone has questions about patellar fractures, feel free to send me a note.

The recovery stories are great to read…thanks for sharing them!

[SFmike]

SFmike on January 22, 2018 at 10:17 am · in reply to: Fractured Patella #7729

Hi, all.

I’m reigniting this post/question one last time in case anyone has input. The original questions (above) still remain. UPDATE: I had the surgery and am supposed to start physical therapy soon. If any of you are located in San Francisco and have a recommendation for phys therapists, please let me know. So far, this part has been the hardest as I’m relying on a combo of Yelp reviews (a poor gauge for quality/specificity) and the odd referral from non-climbing friends so far.

Cheers!
Mike

[SFmike]

SFmike on November 15, 2017 at 10:22 am · in reply to: Should TSB determine training load? #6689

Scott J.,

Thanks for your additional notes. After reading (and re-reading) your (and Scott Sempel’s) comments, I adjusted my annual training plan and it seems reasonable to me given my preference for gradualness these days. Under the adjusted plan:

1. ATL is definitely above TSB.

2. The resulting CTL ramp rate appears to be approx 3 per week on a three-week cycle (2 build, 1 “rest”).

3. Projected weekly TSB level -5 to -15 (rest week versus build weeks). Oddly enough, I checked my data from the trip to Cham and two particularly big days registered >500 TSS each. The resulting TSB showed -56 for the week (-99 on that specific day) and yes, I was knackered for several days afterward. This is where I want to improve long-term…my ability to recover day-to-day, hence overall capacity for multi-day climbs.

4. I don’t know myself well enough, yet. The day before climb #1, my TSB was +13. Two days later on climb #2, TSB was -6. Two days after that on climb #3, TSB was -46. So, the data suggests I was terribly under-recovered going into climb #3, even though I felt okay at the start but was delirious by the end. The tank was drained.

I have a lot of capacity-building to do and that’s ok(!).

Many thanks!
Mike

[SFmike]

SFmike on November 11, 2017 at 10:09 pm · in reply to: Should TSB determine training load? #6633

Thanks, Scott.

I appreciate your insight. You definitely read between the lines: I’ve been intentionally conservative due to stress-fracturing my foot in April yet healing just in time for a trip to Cham. I don’t want to wear “the boot of shame” ever again and have been very careful with training loads since then. I only came back into climbing 2 years ago, after a decade+ layoff so I’m aware my body is still getting accustomed to workloads and it will take time.

I’ve allowed TSB to be slightly negative for the last week and it “feels” alright, so I think I’ll hold in the 0 to -5 range for a month and see what happens (only incrementally adding TSS when my gut says it’s okay). Also, thanks for the links to additional info.

Cheers,
Mike

[SFmike]

SFmike on October 21, 2017 at 11:30 am · in reply to: testing in the Bay Area #6460

Hi, dmedvedev.

I also live in SF Bay Area. Another option is the “Human Performance Center” at UC San Francisco. The facility is located in the Mission Bay part of town (south of SOMA). Here’s a link to their site:
http://hpc.ucsf.edu/performance-evaluations

Full disclosure…I haven’t tried them yet, nor do I know if they meet the Scott/Steve standards. You’ll want to perform your due diligence before going there.

Good luck,
Mike

[SFmike]

SFmike on July 25, 2017 at 4:14 pm · in reply to: Is elevation gain per week an important metric? #5719

Matt – I’m a city-dweller with a similar situation (apartment building is 3 stories and office building is 5 stories). I settled on doing my daily Z1 sessions on a treadmill at my office. I set the treadmill at max incline (15% grade), turn on my heart rate monitor and adjust the speed to keep my heart rate a few bpm under my aerobic threshold (AeT). As fitness improves, I increase the speed 0.1 mph. As for tracking elevation gain, it’s simple enough: (0.15 * 5280 * # of miles) = elevation gain. So, a session at 15% grade that covers 2.00 miles would be: (0.15 * 5280 * 2.00) = 1,584 feet of elevation gain. I won’t embarrass myself by admitting the pace I currently go at, but it appears to be working. I’m able to accumulate 5, light Z1 sessions during the week and still feel ready for a long(ish) Z1 on the weekend. The rub, here, is that 15% on a treadmill isn’t very steep and those box-steps will prove useful when motoring up a talus slope while wearing a pack.

Play around with it. Occasionally, I’ll wear a pack and toss a couple of jugs of water in it…sometimes more. Consistently gaining elevation in my Z1 workouts has helped a lot.

Treadmills, Stairmasters and box-steps suck but they’re the only options I’ve got (for daily use).

Good luck!

Mike