tuesday
1x100m (time?)
hip sqt 2:5 60, 2:5 80
wednesday
4x200 75%
thurs-fri
sore hip - SI joint
saturday
6x100m (17, 17, 17, 16, 16, 17)
sunday
rev hyper 1:20 bw, 2:10 12.5
hip sqt 2:3 60, 2:2 80, 1:5 90
rev hyp 1:20 bw
tuesday - return to work
thursday
back ext 2:10 bw, 1:10 10
rev hyp 1:20 bw, 3:10 12.5
hip sqt 2:5 60, 2:5 80
saturday
treadmill 3x300 (9, 12, 9)
back ext 1:10 bw
sunday
1x60m grad (8s)
1x100 (60-7.6s, 100-12.1s)
1x60m (7.6s)
1x100 (60-7.5s, 100-12.0)
I had a race on tuesday that supposed to be electronic timing. it had been raining that afternoon, but I felt like I executed the run really well. there were a couple of other guys ing the race who are quite quick (around 11.5s) and I didn’t finish too far behind them. I was keen to know my time, and there was an announcement that the results would be on the website by the following evening. despite this I had to wait for nearly a week before they were available. when I eventually downloaded the results I was disappointed to see my time was 12.5. I then spent the next couple of days brooding because I have been training really hard and wasn’t getting any faster. heck, I had run 12.76s in qld when I was at death’s door with tonsillitis!
after a while it occurred to me that the times listed were all to one decimal place, so they must have been hand timed, but I was pretty sure there hadn’t been anyone timing the races. when I thought about it some more I remembered that I had to write down an approximate time that I thought I would run when I signed in (to assist with organising heats) and 12.5 had been the time that I nominated (I always nominate a slow time so I can be sure to beat it). I remembered the nominated time of another athlete from that meet, so I went back and had a look. lo and behold, his time was identical to his nominated time, as well! in fact, the more I looked the more I found things that didn’t add up. for instance, the guy who ran last place in the slowest heat of the night was way back behind the next slowest, yet his time was listed as being only .1s slower.
so it seems to me that the timing system has failed (possibly due to the weather?) and they have used the nominated times to guestimate the approximate results. no wonder it took so lo come out.
I wanted to test this out for myself, though. so this morning I headed to the track with a set of blocks and my timer. my suspicions were confirmed when I timed myself as running very close to 12 flat, rather than 12.5+. this means that I am actually reasonably close to personal best form. in fact, I may well have run a pb at the untimed meet.
looks like I have 2 more chances this season to nail in a good time…