I'm a member of TCSD, the Triathlon Club of San Diego, which is one of the most amazing organizations of any type I've ever been a member of in my entire life, and that includes not only all other sport-related clubs, but also social service organizations and even churches. This club, with nearly 3000 members, provides an exceptionally high number of FREE club races, clinics, and seminars, and this is all done with an annual dues of only $60. To top it off, this large club has no paid staff: It is entirely run by volunteers.
TCSD is really all about beginners. Sure, we love our elites, and cheer them on to higher podium spots. And we love the bulk of our members, who race for the sheer joy of it. But we go a bit crazy for our beginners.
Here's an example: After each of our free electronically-timed club races, we have a short awards presentation. First come the top three women and men, and we all cheer. Then the volunteers are thanked, and we cheer a bit louder (because they bring the food). Then the Race Director asks: "Who just did their first-ever triathlon?" And when a few hands are shyly raised, the loudest cheering of the morning thunders out, generally shocking the poor newbies. I remember when this happened to me: It is one of my most treasured memories.
TCSD offers many clinics and seminars aimed squarely at beginners. Don't know what a triathlon is? Attend the "Tri-101" clinic. Want to learn more about club and sponsor resources? Attend the "Intro to Triathlon" clinic. Uncomfortable on a bike? Attend the "Biking Beginner's Clinic". Can't swim at all, or have issues with wetsuits or swimming in open water? Attend the "Beginners Open-Water Swim" clinic.
But if you have problems running, TCSD doesn't offer a beginner's running clinic. Sure, we have some truly excellent running clinics, but they're aimed primarily at building strength and speed, and don't emphasize identifying and resolving pain, discomfort, equipment or stride issues. I suspect this is simply because running is a more "natural" activity than either swimming or biking, and not many people really know all that much about starting from the beginning.
I'm thinking this situation should change, and despite my not being any kind of running expert or coach, I think I should be the one to start the change. I'd like to share my current vision with you, then I'll invite your comments to adjust what needs adjusting.
Here's my pitch:
Now that I'm recovering from my broken foot, I've been thinking about what I've learned about changing strides, changing equipment, and changing training, and how I have become able to run pain-free despite some major negative factors.
I'd like to put together a "Broken and (Re)Beginner Running Clinic" focused on getting people who have problems running at all to run comfortably. Neither speed nor long distance are goals for the participants: Running injury-free with comfort is the only goal.
My intended audience will be the weak, often-injured, awkward or uncoordinated, aged and obese, who either can't run at all, or for whom running is greatly limited due to discomfort. I will insist they not only sign a TCSD waiver (and be a member), but also get clearance from their MD if there is any question at all about their suitability for light running (especially those recovering from injuries).
My approach will employ 'talks', 'demos' and 'workouts', AKA "Hear it, See it, Do it", the intent being to employ all learning modalities.
The first priority will be to build basic physical self-awareness (balance, agility, proprioception, exertion, fatigue) along with basic leg and core strength. Each participant will become aware of the ranges of motion needed for running, the care and feeding of the muscles used to achieve that motion, and the nerve/reflex integration needed to make it all work together smoothly. At the start, no running will be done, and fast walking will be used to build motion awareness.
Next will come discussions about running gaits, with particular attention paid to the various foot strikes (heel, midsole, and forefoot), with demonstrations of all running styles, including run-walk-run. Each participant will get to try each stride for themselves at a jogging pace, to see how their body reacts. The physical demands of each stride type will also be discussed.
After this will come discussions of equipment, shoes and socks, and how they affect running. Particular attention will be paid to the idea of having different shoes for different kinds of activity (training, racing, trails, walking), how to shop for shoes, and how to research shoes.
The next phase will be all about practicing, with both self-monitoring and monitoring by each other. The goal will not be to build speed, but to build skill and comfort up to a sprint triathlon run distance of 5 km (3 miles).
By the end of the clinic, each participant should be able to run and train on their own, and also be ready to take full advantage of other TCSD running clinics.
I do not currently possess all the knowledge needed to do this alone. I will invite trainers, coaches, physical therapists, athletes, shoe retailers/reps and a Sports MD to review the curriculum, monitor the process, and give talks. My next step will be to recruit this support.
The other issue is time (duration and schedule). I believe each participant will need a minimum of 10 hours of contact time. Since many will be unable to attend all sessions, I'd like to plan to hold at least 12 sessions, with each session starting with a review of the prior session. To get all this in before the triathlon season is too far along, I'd like to schedule two sessions per week, perhaps one on a weekday, and one on the weekend. Perhaps 90-minute sessions at the start (more talk), with 60-minute sessions later on (more practice).
What do you think? What's missing? Who should I get to help?
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Friday, January 14, 2011
I'm Famous!
I was featured in a story on KPBS radio today!
Unfortunately, the report was barely 5 minutes long, so it won't qualify as my 15 minutes of fame. :-(
Update: 4:30 PM:
The story is part of the PM commute loop, so maybe it will add up to 15 minutes!
Unfortunately, the report was barely 5 minutes long, so it won't qualify as my 15 minutes of fame. :-(
Update: 4:30 PM:
The story is part of the PM commute loop, so maybe it will add up to 15 minutes!
Monday, January 3, 2011
The Adidas Chill M: My Ideal Shoe?
Those who read my shoe rant in this post or on RunBlogger know all about my frustration finding shoes that both fit my narrow flat foot and suit my forefoot stride. To summarize: What I'm looking for is a racing flat upper with a padded sole.
While visiting family back East over Christmas, I did some post-Holiday sale shopping at a nearby outlet mall which had an Adidas store filled with obsolete product for half-off. My eye was immediately drawn to the all-black upper and the light blue sole of the Adidas Chill M.
If you look at the current version of this shoe, the unadorned simplicity shown above is no longer available.
This shoe has moderate heel-to-toe drop I would estimate to be about 4mm, which falls near the top of the range I want my ideal shoe to have.
When I picked up the shoe, two features were readily apparent: Light weight and a flexible sole.
The shoe is very light (246 g / 8.6 oz with factory insole and laces), which compares well with my Saucony Kilkenny XC3 racing flats (188 g / 6.6 oz), and is far better than my Asics Gel-Equation 3 (360 g / 12.6 oz) and Mizuno Wave Creation 10 (460 g / 16.2 oz with green Superfeet insole).
The sole is extremely flexible, surprisingly so. It is far more flexible than any other shoe I own, including my racing flats and even my Vibram Fivefingers Bikila! This shoe is almost as flexible as a pair of heavy socks.
The upper is made of CLIMACOOL fabric, which according to Adidas provides improved foot cooling. The upper is constructed using as little of this fabric as possible, much like racing flats. And like racing flats, the thin tongue can easily fold along its length, though this will be a problem only when socks are not worn.
Trying on the shoes revealed two more surprises: The sizing runs both narrow (again like racing flats) and a bit short. If you are between sizes, you'll want to go a half-size larger, otherwise go up a full size. To my narrow flat foot, this shoe felt like a perfect fit.
I did a few 5-stride sprints in the store, and the thick sole felt very stable, firm without being too hard. In particular, this sole had none of the "squishy" feel I felt with the Brooks Green Silence.
This afternoon I took the shoes for their first run, two miles over a wet paved trail with rolling hills. Traction was excellent, the shoes had no hot-spots (I wore bike socks), and the mid-sole provided the cushioning I need to prevent future stress fractures.
I think I may have found my 'ideal' training shoe! I'll update this post after I've resumed doing longer distances.
Update, 09Jan2011:
The more running I do in these shoes, the more I like them! Though I only have 10 miles on them (I'm still building back from my stress fracture), they have already proven themselves to be the most comfortable shoes I own.
Another characteristic of these shoes is their total lack of rigidity and structure: You can easily bend and twist them any way you like, all the way to the heel. They're even slightly more flexible than my racing flats! (This is due to the flats containing a thin plastic plate to protect against sharp things.)
With my very narrow and extremely flat feet, not to mention my over-pronation, weak ankles, slightly bowed legs, and history of PF, ITB and knee issues, I never thought I'd ever be able to run so comfortably in such a light shoe with so little structure. If I ever get to give a speech before the Academy (of Running Arts and Sciences), I'll give all the credit to forefoot running! That, and increasing my cadence above 90 (which may prove equally important).
For only a 2 ounce weight difference, I'm thinking of retiring my racing flats. We'll see how I feel about it when I start to prepare for a race.
Update, 25Jan2011:
I have a habit of naming my favorite pieces of gear. My prior bike, a Trek Madone, was my "Carbon Princess". My Garmin Forerunner 305 is my "Training Brain".
My Addidas Chill M shoes are now my "Running Slippers". They are literally the most comfortable footwear I own. I bought a second pair, just to be sure I'll never be without them. The minute anyone says the word 'shoe' near me, I immediately start to rave about my Running Slippers. I think I'll trademark that term and sell it to Addidas.
Seriously: I trust these shoes more and more with each mile I run. One particular advantage is seen when running up a steep hill: With all my other running shoes (including my racing flats), the tip of the toe of the shoe would contact the ground before the ball of the foot, due largely to the stiffness and springiness of the sole plate. This changes the timing of my stride, in that I'm not really sure when I'm making contact.
With the Addidas Chill M, I am able to lift my toe, which in this extraordinarily flexible shoe means I'm also lifting the toe of the shoe, meaning my forefoot hits the ground simultaneously, just as it does when running on level ground. This makes my uphill stride more predictable, more powerful, and much less subject to tripping or stumbling. Basically, I trust my stride more, and have less fear of making a misstep.
Another key change for me is running downhill: I used to go slow downhill due to a combination of impact sensitivity and foot discomfort. The impact sensitivity is due to my heel hitting the ground a bit harder, which causes pain at the site of my degenerated L5-S1 disc. The foot discomfort is due to my toes being jammed into the front of the shoe. I'm now have the confidence to crank up my cadence and increase my downhill speed. The increased cadence reduces my heel impact, and the great fit of the Addidas Chill M upper keeps my foot in place.
The fact that I'm still rebuilding from my stress fracture is most evident when I'm running on level ground. My legs want to go fast, but they don't yet have the conditioning to go fast for very long. So I back off a bit to flush my legs, only to find my cardio isn't up to it either. So I back off a bit more to recover, then speed up again to reach my cardio threshold. This means my speed on level ground varies between a 7 minute pace and a 10:30 pace.
In my prior shoes, it felt like the dynamics of the shoe affected how I ran at each speed, making transitions feel a bit awkward. With the Addidas Chill M, it feels like I'm using the same stride at all speeds. This could also be due simply to the lighter weight of the shoe (second only to my racing flats), and may also be due to my becoming more comfortable as a forefoot runner at all speeds. But I'm doing it in my Chill M's, and I like it!
I'm also thinking I like the 4mm heel-to-toe drop of the Addidas Chill M sole: When my heel does occasionally strike a bit too hard, the extra padding does a good job of cushioning the impact. It also makes the shoes very comfortable to walk around in, which was never the case with my racing flats.
I like my "Running Slippers"!
While visiting family back East over Christmas, I did some post-Holiday sale shopping at a nearby outlet mall which had an Adidas store filled with obsolete product for half-off. My eye was immediately drawn to the all-black upper and the light blue sole of the Adidas Chill M.
 |
| The upper is as about minimalist as you can get. |
If you look at the current version of this shoe, the unadorned simplicity shown above is no longer available.
 |
| The heel logo doesn't use reflective paint. |
 |
| The super-flexible (and colorful) sole. |
The shoe is very light (246 g / 8.6 oz with factory insole and laces), which compares well with my Saucony Kilkenny XC3 racing flats (188 g / 6.6 oz), and is far better than my Asics Gel-Equation 3 (360 g / 12.6 oz) and Mizuno Wave Creation 10 (460 g / 16.2 oz with green Superfeet insole).
The sole is extremely flexible, surprisingly so. It is far more flexible than any other shoe I own, including my racing flats and even my Vibram Fivefingers Bikila! This shoe is almost as flexible as a pair of heavy socks.
The upper is made of CLIMACOOL fabric, which according to Adidas provides improved foot cooling. The upper is constructed using as little of this fabric as possible, much like racing flats. And like racing flats, the thin tongue can easily fold along its length, though this will be a problem only when socks are not worn.
Trying on the shoes revealed two more surprises: The sizing runs both narrow (again like racing flats) and a bit short. If you are between sizes, you'll want to go a half-size larger, otherwise go up a full size. To my narrow flat foot, this shoe felt like a perfect fit.
I did a few 5-stride sprints in the store, and the thick sole felt very stable, firm without being too hard. In particular, this sole had none of the "squishy" feel I felt with the Brooks Green Silence.
This afternoon I took the shoes for their first run, two miles over a wet paved trail with rolling hills. Traction was excellent, the shoes had no hot-spots (I wore bike socks), and the mid-sole provided the cushioning I need to prevent future stress fractures.
I think I may have found my 'ideal' training shoe! I'll update this post after I've resumed doing longer distances.
Update, 09Jan2011:
The more running I do in these shoes, the more I like them! Though I only have 10 miles on them (I'm still building back from my stress fracture), they have already proven themselves to be the most comfortable shoes I own.
Another characteristic of these shoes is their total lack of rigidity and structure: You can easily bend and twist them any way you like, all the way to the heel. They're even slightly more flexible than my racing flats! (This is due to the flats containing a thin plastic plate to protect against sharp things.)
With my very narrow and extremely flat feet, not to mention my over-pronation, weak ankles, slightly bowed legs, and history of PF, ITB and knee issues, I never thought I'd ever be able to run so comfortably in such a light shoe with so little structure. If I ever get to give a speech before the Academy (of Running Arts and Sciences), I'll give all the credit to forefoot running! That, and increasing my cadence above 90 (which may prove equally important).
For only a 2 ounce weight difference, I'm thinking of retiring my racing flats. We'll see how I feel about it when I start to prepare for a race.
Update, 25Jan2011:
I have a habit of naming my favorite pieces of gear. My prior bike, a Trek Madone, was my "Carbon Princess". My Garmin Forerunner 305 is my "Training Brain".
My Addidas Chill M shoes are now my "Running Slippers". They are literally the most comfortable footwear I own. I bought a second pair, just to be sure I'll never be without them. The minute anyone says the word 'shoe' near me, I immediately start to rave about my Running Slippers. I think I'll trademark that term and sell it to Addidas.
Seriously: I trust these shoes more and more with each mile I run. One particular advantage is seen when running up a steep hill: With all my other running shoes (including my racing flats), the tip of the toe of the shoe would contact the ground before the ball of the foot, due largely to the stiffness and springiness of the sole plate. This changes the timing of my stride, in that I'm not really sure when I'm making contact.
With the Addidas Chill M, I am able to lift my toe, which in this extraordinarily flexible shoe means I'm also lifting the toe of the shoe, meaning my forefoot hits the ground simultaneously, just as it does when running on level ground. This makes my uphill stride more predictable, more powerful, and much less subject to tripping or stumbling. Basically, I trust my stride more, and have less fear of making a misstep.
Another key change for me is running downhill: I used to go slow downhill due to a combination of impact sensitivity and foot discomfort. The impact sensitivity is due to my heel hitting the ground a bit harder, which causes pain at the site of my degenerated L5-S1 disc. The foot discomfort is due to my toes being jammed into the front of the shoe. I'm now have the confidence to crank up my cadence and increase my downhill speed. The increased cadence reduces my heel impact, and the great fit of the Addidas Chill M upper keeps my foot in place.
The fact that I'm still rebuilding from my stress fracture is most evident when I'm running on level ground. My legs want to go fast, but they don't yet have the conditioning to go fast for very long. So I back off a bit to flush my legs, only to find my cardio isn't up to it either. So I back off a bit more to recover, then speed up again to reach my cardio threshold. This means my speed on level ground varies between a 7 minute pace and a 10:30 pace.
In my prior shoes, it felt like the dynamics of the shoe affected how I ran at each speed, making transitions feel a bit awkward. With the Addidas Chill M, it feels like I'm using the same stride at all speeds. This could also be due simply to the lighter weight of the shoe (second only to my racing flats), and may also be due to my becoming more comfortable as a forefoot runner at all speeds. But I'm doing it in my Chill M's, and I like it!
I'm also thinking I like the 4mm heel-to-toe drop of the Addidas Chill M sole: When my heel does occasionally strike a bit too hard, the extra padding does a good job of cushioning the impact. It also makes the shoes very comfortable to walk around in, which was never the case with my racing flats.
I like my "Running Slippers"!
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Bike Tool Kit Containers
Back in early October I did one of the Moment Cycle Sport shop rides on a rainy morning. After the ride I expected my bike to be a mess, and I was not surprised my jersey had a mud stripe on the back, but I didn't expect my tool pouch to be thoroughly soaked along with everything inside it. I looked around for a better tool pouch, but the ones I found were pretty much all alike. So I put my tools in a Zip-loc bag and shoved them back into my old pouch.
After I installed my Oasis One-Twelve hydration system there was no longer room for a tool pouch under my seat, so I had to find an alternative, preferably something waterproof. Since I was no longer using the bottle cages on my frame, the obvious approach would be to find a tool container that would fit into a bottle cage. After lots of searching, I found the following products on the market:
I next found that not all 24 oz bike bottles make good tool bottles. First, you need at least 1" of bottle available between the indented ring and the cap, else the top won't stay straight when pushed into the bottom. Scratch another bottle. And the bottle must not taper too much near the cap, else there will be a gap around the top after it is shoved into the bottom. One more bottle dies.
After destroying three bottles (and perfecting my bottle-slicing technique), I found some Bontrager bottles that had all the needed features. Well, I did have some other bottles that also looked like good possibilities, but no way was I going to cut up one of my TCSD bottles!
My old tool pouch contained the following items, all of which fit nicely into my modified bottle:
As you can see, there nothing about it that shouts "Steal me!", which may be another advantage.
Since the whole search for a replacement tool container started after a rainy ride, I modified my other Bontrager bottle to hold a $5 plastic poncho. That'll keep the mud stripe off my jersey!
After I installed my Oasis One-Twelve hydration system there was no longer room for a tool pouch under my seat, so I had to find an alternative, preferably something waterproof. Since I was no longer using the bottle cages on my frame, the obvious approach would be to find a tool container that would fit into a bottle cage. After lots of searching, I found the following products on the market:
- The Cage Rocket Storage Pod, which is carried locally by REI, initially looked like an ideal solution, but it had two main problems: First, it has a large base that keeps it from fitting into all bottle cages. Second, the shape of the opening made it difficult to completely fill the interior. A minor additional concern is that REI didn't carry the waterproof version.
- The Trek Waterbottle Softshell Pack isn't waterproof, and is soft enough that I was concerned it could pop out of a bottle cage.
- The Bike Rider Tool Bottle is a screw-top bottle which seems to be available only in Australia.
- The BBB Tool Can for Bike Tools is another screw-top bottle.
- Use a 10 oz peanut butter jar. This is the "free" version of the above screw-top bottles. Unfortunately, I only get peanut butter in 40 oz jars, so this would cost me extra. So I suppose technically it would belong in the list above.
- Modify a 24 oz bike bottle.
- Cut away the indented ring.
- Fill the bottom with tools.
- Shove the top into the bottom.
I next found that not all 24 oz bike bottles make good tool bottles. First, you need at least 1" of bottle available between the indented ring and the cap, else the top won't stay straight when pushed into the bottom. Scratch another bottle. And the bottle must not taper too much near the cap, else there will be a gap around the top after it is shoved into the bottom. One more bottle dies.
After destroying three bottles (and perfecting my bottle-slicing technique), I found some Bontrager bottles that had all the needed features. Well, I did have some other bottles that also looked like good possibilities, but no way was I going to cut up one of my TCSD bottles!
My old tool pouch contained the following items, all of which fit nicely into my modified bottle:
- 3 tire levers (2 aren't enough when my hands are numb)
- 1 CO2 chuck
- 2 CO2 cartridges
- 1 tube
- 1 patch kit
- 1 set of Allen wrenches
- 1 small rag (wrapped around the CO2 chuck)
As you can see, there nothing about it that shouts "Steal me!", which may be another advantage.
Since the whole search for a replacement tool container started after a rainy ride, I modified my other Bontrager bottle to hold a $5 plastic poncho. That'll keep the mud stripe off my jersey!
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Review: Oasis One-Twelve Hydration System
There are lots of "spendy" products out there for triathletes who have money burning a hole in their pockets and/or who may lack the time to shop around. There are $300 sunglasses that are indistinguishable from still high-end $60 models. Bike helmets that cost ten times more than an "ordinary" helmet with the exact same certifications. An expensive carbon bike accessory that saves weight equivalent to a sip of water, and is so delicate it will easily break if you rack your bike wrong.
You will find nothing but glowing reviews for these high-priced products. Which is as it should be: If you ignore cost, nearly all of these products truly are among the best available. Unfortunately, most top reviewers are either wealthy, work for a bike shop, or are reviewing a product sample, so they tend to discount the purchase cost in their reviews.
It takes extra effort to determine that some lower-cost products give up nothing significant (perhaps a tiny bit of style or weight), yet save 50% or even 80% of the cost. A common thread in many of my posts, particularly this one, is that I consistently advocate a value-based ("frugal") approach to triathlon, including not only equipment, but also things like training costs, supplements, and race fees.
For example, the $60 TCSD annual membership fee is easily the very best value in all of triathlon. The return on investment is so stunning, so overwhelming, that all other purchases are rip-offs in comparison.
Then there are those rare, unique, specialized products for which there literally is no competition. My personal example is my TitanFlex Al-Ti bike, the only product of its kind available that permitted me to continue in triathlon despite my bad back, and what's doubly amazing is that the TitanFlex is competitively priced.
Between the stratospherically-priced luxuries, the almost-free stuff, and the one-of-a-kind items, is a sea of products that offer varying levels of value compared to their competitors. Some of these products battle it out on the national stage, using marketing money to sponsor athletes and buy advertising in magazines and online. Other products eke out a meager existence with minimal marketing, selling one at a time here and there, relatively unknown and thus easily overlooked.
Among the minor players is the occasional gem of a product that deserves much wider recognition. The Oasis One-Twelve Hydration System is one such product.
Bicycle Hydration System Overview:
My involvement with "bicycle hydration systems" (a fancy name for anything on a bike that holds fluids that isn't a generic bike bottle) started when I got my Profile Design Airstryke clip-on aero bars, and saw how perfectly the Profile Design Aerodrink bottle fit between them. For most of my rides I would use it alone, without additional bike bottles.
For longer rides, many riders add bike bottles behind the seat. A large number of rear bottle mount systems exist, including the Beaker Concepts HydroTail, the Xlab Carbon Wing, and several systems by Profile Design. Rear-mounted bottles offer not only additional volume, but also provide improved aerodynamics when used instead of traditional frame-mounted water bottles. Many riders also find rear-mounted bottles are easier to access while pedaling.
After my back went out last year, I was no longer able to use a regular bike bottle: My weak back made it difficult to ride one-handed while holding a bike bottle, and also made it difficult to twist to the side to drink from one. On longer rides, I would use the time spent at stop lights to transfer water from my bike bottles to my Aerodrink bottle. This would clearly be impractical for non-stop rides and races, so I started looking into hydration systems that would allow me to drink from a tube, hands-free.
The simplest hydration system, and also the least expensive with the largest volume, is the popular hydration backpack, of which several bike-specific versions are available from a wide variety of manufacturers. While I find such systems ideal for use when riding upright, I haven't found a way to comfortably wear one while hammering in the aero position. There are front-mounted hydration packs designed for precisely this situation, but I doubt they'd be comfortable when riding upright, and they could block some ventilation on hot rides. Plus, I wouldn't want to take the time to put on a hydration pack during a triathlon transition.
Alternatives to hands-free bar-mounted and backpack hydration systems include frame-mounted and rear-mounted (behind the seat) systems which have tubing that runs from the reservoir to the bars. The best-known player in the frame-mounted hydration system market is the Inviscid Design Speedfil system. A less well-known rear-mounted system is the NeverReach Pro. The best prices I found for the smallest sizes of either system were around $100, including any required mounting kits and accessories.
While the Speedfil works great on regular "triangle" bike frames, it was not compatible with my monocoque TitanFlex. I also didn't like the idea of having to suck water up almost three feet vertically: It's like sucking on a milkshake, but getting only water for the effort.
The NeverReach has its own problems, the greatest being that it is not compatible with my ISM Adamo Road saddle. Another problem is that no local retailers carry it, so I couldn't check out the build quality. There were some unfavorable comments online concerning the mount, and I was unable to tell if it was due to the design or if the user either installed it or used it incorrectly.
The Oasis One-Twelve:
I made the rounds of my local bike shops to see if they knew of any systems I had missed. When I described my problem to Rachel at Moment Cycle Sport, she pointed to a system on a shelf behind the counter. It was the Oasis One-Twelve. And it was love at first sight.
The Oasis One-Twelve is the brain child of inventor and Ironman triathlete Dean Sprague, a prominent figure on the San Diego triathlon scene. The Oasis One-Twelve is named after the 112 mile bike leg of an Ironman triathlon.
I think it should be called the Oasis Sixty, since the system holds 60 ounces of fluid. The fluid is held in a pair of 30 ounce lightweight bike bottles that will fit in any rear-mounted bottle rack. The best part? The system costs under $40, less than half the price of any competitor's system.
The Oasis One-Twelve has a downside: It does not include the rear-mounted bottle rack, where the other systems mentioned above do include the mount. I looked at the rear-mounted racks previously mentioned, and they all cost well over $50, which would make the Oasis One-Twelve more expensive than the other systems. But once again Moment had a winning alternative: The $22 Tacx T6202 seat clamp. Combined with some spare bottle holders I had at home, it would work perfectly.
System Overview:
The Oasis One-Twelve system consists of the previously mentioned pair of 30 ounce water bottles, each of which has been modified with the addition of a 90 degree angled fitting at the bottom. The system also includes lots of tubing, an upper tubing stiffener, bite valve, and a generous length of Velcro strap material.
Surprising for such an inexpensive system, also included is a tubing cleaning tool. The separate Camelbak cleaning kit, for example, costs $10.
Installation:
Installing the Oasis system was simplicity itself: Put the bottles in the rack, route the tubing, cut it to length, then cut the long Velcro strap to the number and lengths needed and apply. There are no screws or clips, so the system may be removed just as quickly and easily as it was installed.
I didn't cut the tubing until after I knew I had the length right: I initially installed it with the extra tubing in a loop, then took a quick (dry) test ride to ensure I could position the bite valve where I wanted it before making the final cut. If you make a mistake and cut the tubing too short, a union is included to rejoin the tubing. If you do it twice, replacement tubing is available for a small fee.
The above installation description assumes the rear rack is already in place, and is able to handle a load of 60 ounces of water. The Tacx seat clamp is made of fiber-reinforced plastic, and when mounted per the Tacx instructions it sags and bounces under the weight of the filled bottles.
The Tacx instructions have the clamp extending horizontally from the rear of the seat, placing the tall bottles far behind the seat, with them extending well above the seat, which makes getting a leg over a bit more difficult. Simply flipping the clamp over makes it extend down instead of back, which not only eliminates sag and bounce, it also places the tops of the tall bottles at a much more reasonable height.
The adjustment to the mount created some slack in the tubing, so rather than cut it again, I'm riding with a small loop. Just in case I decide to change the mount someday.
Once everything was in place, I added a tie-wrap around the neck of the bottles and through the bottle cages to ensure the bottles would not bounce out even on the roughest road, or while on my rather bouncy car rack. The installation instructions suggest using some of the provided Velcro strap for this, but the circumference of my TitanFlex frame used up too much. It would never be a problem on bikes with a conventional frame geometry.
Here's a shot of the final installation, along with the Aerodrink bottle (click on the image for more detail):
The package near the rear hub is instrumentation I'll discuss in a future post.
One side-effect of the installation is that I could no longer use my under-seat tool bag. Some folks are able to mount their tool bag vertically against the seatpost, but mine wouldn't fit due to the tubing from the bottles. My solution was to build a bike bottle tool box, which will be the topic of an upcoming blog post.
Test Ride:
On my first ride with the filled system, I had trouble getting water from the bottle to my mouth. After checking that I had not pinched the tubing by making any of the Velcro straps too tight, a quick email to Dean revealed I had missed a note in the manual: The bottle cap valves need to be opened slightly to prevent a vacuum from developing. With that done, drinking from the system was effortless on subsequent rides.
The bite valve works very well. I found it has an interesting feature: Bite too hard, and you get no water. I have chewed through several Camelbak valves, and I look forward to getting longer life from the Oasis One-Twelve bite valve.
The sheath around the upper portion of the tubing is flexible enough to allow the bite valve to easily be positioned as needed, and is stiff enough to prevent the tube from whipping in the wind and hitting me in the face while in aero. I much prefer it to the plastic straw in my Aerodrink bottle, which cuts into the roof of my mouth if I hit a bump while drinking.
Conclusion:
The Oasis One-Twelve system falls into the "Insanely Great" category of my triathlon equipment purchases. I found absolutely no design or manufacturing flaws in the system. It is made from top-quality materials, and best of all, it costs less than all other equivalent products.
If you are looking for a hydration system, be sure to check out the Oasis One-Twelve before buying anything else.
You will find nothing but glowing reviews for these high-priced products. Which is as it should be: If you ignore cost, nearly all of these products truly are among the best available. Unfortunately, most top reviewers are either wealthy, work for a bike shop, or are reviewing a product sample, so they tend to discount the purchase cost in their reviews.
It takes extra effort to determine that some lower-cost products give up nothing significant (perhaps a tiny bit of style or weight), yet save 50% or even 80% of the cost. A common thread in many of my posts, particularly this one, is that I consistently advocate a value-based ("frugal") approach to triathlon, including not only equipment, but also things like training costs, supplements, and race fees.
For example, the $60 TCSD annual membership fee is easily the very best value in all of triathlon. The return on investment is so stunning, so overwhelming, that all other purchases are rip-offs in comparison.
Then there are those rare, unique, specialized products for which there literally is no competition. My personal example is my TitanFlex Al-Ti bike, the only product of its kind available that permitted me to continue in triathlon despite my bad back, and what's doubly amazing is that the TitanFlex is competitively priced.
Between the stratospherically-priced luxuries, the almost-free stuff, and the one-of-a-kind items, is a sea of products that offer varying levels of value compared to their competitors. Some of these products battle it out on the national stage, using marketing money to sponsor athletes and buy advertising in magazines and online. Other products eke out a meager existence with minimal marketing, selling one at a time here and there, relatively unknown and thus easily overlooked.
Among the minor players is the occasional gem of a product that deserves much wider recognition. The Oasis One-Twelve Hydration System is one such product.
Bicycle Hydration System Overview:
My involvement with "bicycle hydration systems" (a fancy name for anything on a bike that holds fluids that isn't a generic bike bottle) started when I got my Profile Design Airstryke clip-on aero bars, and saw how perfectly the Profile Design Aerodrink bottle fit between them. For most of my rides I would use it alone, without additional bike bottles.
For longer rides, many riders add bike bottles behind the seat. A large number of rear bottle mount systems exist, including the Beaker Concepts HydroTail, the Xlab Carbon Wing, and several systems by Profile Design. Rear-mounted bottles offer not only additional volume, but also provide improved aerodynamics when used instead of traditional frame-mounted water bottles. Many riders also find rear-mounted bottles are easier to access while pedaling.
After my back went out last year, I was no longer able to use a regular bike bottle: My weak back made it difficult to ride one-handed while holding a bike bottle, and also made it difficult to twist to the side to drink from one. On longer rides, I would use the time spent at stop lights to transfer water from my bike bottles to my Aerodrink bottle. This would clearly be impractical for non-stop rides and races, so I started looking into hydration systems that would allow me to drink from a tube, hands-free.
The simplest hydration system, and also the least expensive with the largest volume, is the popular hydration backpack, of which several bike-specific versions are available from a wide variety of manufacturers. While I find such systems ideal for use when riding upright, I haven't found a way to comfortably wear one while hammering in the aero position. There are front-mounted hydration packs designed for precisely this situation, but I doubt they'd be comfortable when riding upright, and they could block some ventilation on hot rides. Plus, I wouldn't want to take the time to put on a hydration pack during a triathlon transition.
Alternatives to hands-free bar-mounted and backpack hydration systems include frame-mounted and rear-mounted (behind the seat) systems which have tubing that runs from the reservoir to the bars. The best-known player in the frame-mounted hydration system market is the Inviscid Design Speedfil system. A less well-known rear-mounted system is the NeverReach Pro. The best prices I found for the smallest sizes of either system were around $100, including any required mounting kits and accessories.
While the Speedfil works great on regular "triangle" bike frames, it was not compatible with my monocoque TitanFlex. I also didn't like the idea of having to suck water up almost three feet vertically: It's like sucking on a milkshake, but getting only water for the effort.
The NeverReach has its own problems, the greatest being that it is not compatible with my ISM Adamo Road saddle. Another problem is that no local retailers carry it, so I couldn't check out the build quality. There were some unfavorable comments online concerning the mount, and I was unable to tell if it was due to the design or if the user either installed it or used it incorrectly.
The Oasis One-Twelve:
I made the rounds of my local bike shops to see if they knew of any systems I had missed. When I described my problem to Rachel at Moment Cycle Sport, she pointed to a system on a shelf behind the counter. It was the Oasis One-Twelve. And it was love at first sight.
The Oasis One-Twelve is the brain child of inventor and Ironman triathlete Dean Sprague, a prominent figure on the San Diego triathlon scene. The Oasis One-Twelve is named after the 112 mile bike leg of an Ironman triathlon.
I think it should be called the Oasis Sixty, since the system holds 60 ounces of fluid. The fluid is held in a pair of 30 ounce lightweight bike bottles that will fit in any rear-mounted bottle rack. The best part? The system costs under $40, less than half the price of any competitor's system.
The Oasis One-Twelve has a downside: It does not include the rear-mounted bottle rack, where the other systems mentioned above do include the mount. I looked at the rear-mounted racks previously mentioned, and they all cost well over $50, which would make the Oasis One-Twelve more expensive than the other systems. But once again Moment had a winning alternative: The $22 Tacx T6202 seat clamp. Combined with some spare bottle holders I had at home, it would work perfectly.
System Overview:
The Oasis One-Twelve system consists of the previously mentioned pair of 30 ounce water bottles, each of which has been modified with the addition of a 90 degree angled fitting at the bottom. The system also includes lots of tubing, an upper tubing stiffener, bite valve, and a generous length of Velcro strap material.
Surprising for such an inexpensive system, also included is a tubing cleaning tool. The separate Camelbak cleaning kit, for example, costs $10.
Installation:
Installing the Oasis system was simplicity itself: Put the bottles in the rack, route the tubing, cut it to length, then cut the long Velcro strap to the number and lengths needed and apply. There are no screws or clips, so the system may be removed just as quickly and easily as it was installed.
I didn't cut the tubing until after I knew I had the length right: I initially installed it with the extra tubing in a loop, then took a quick (dry) test ride to ensure I could position the bite valve where I wanted it before making the final cut. If you make a mistake and cut the tubing too short, a union is included to rejoin the tubing. If you do it twice, replacement tubing is available for a small fee.
The above installation description assumes the rear rack is already in place, and is able to handle a load of 60 ounces of water. The Tacx seat clamp is made of fiber-reinforced plastic, and when mounted per the Tacx instructions it sags and bounces under the weight of the filled bottles.
The Tacx instructions have the clamp extending horizontally from the rear of the seat, placing the tall bottles far behind the seat, with them extending well above the seat, which makes getting a leg over a bit more difficult. Simply flipping the clamp over makes it extend down instead of back, which not only eliminates sag and bounce, it also places the tops of the tall bottles at a much more reasonable height.
The adjustment to the mount created some slack in the tubing, so rather than cut it again, I'm riding with a small loop. Just in case I decide to change the mount someday.
Once everything was in place, I added a tie-wrap around the neck of the bottles and through the bottle cages to ensure the bottles would not bounce out even on the roughest road, or while on my rather bouncy car rack. The installation instructions suggest using some of the provided Velcro strap for this, but the circumference of my TitanFlex frame used up too much. It would never be a problem on bikes with a conventional frame geometry.
Here's a shot of the final installation, along with the Aerodrink bottle (click on the image for more detail):
The package near the rear hub is instrumentation I'll discuss in a future post.One side-effect of the installation is that I could no longer use my under-seat tool bag. Some folks are able to mount their tool bag vertically against the seatpost, but mine wouldn't fit due to the tubing from the bottles. My solution was to build a bike bottle tool box, which will be the topic of an upcoming blog post.
Test Ride:
On my first ride with the filled system, I had trouble getting water from the bottle to my mouth. After checking that I had not pinched the tubing by making any of the Velcro straps too tight, a quick email to Dean revealed I had missed a note in the manual: The bottle cap valves need to be opened slightly to prevent a vacuum from developing. With that done, drinking from the system was effortless on subsequent rides.
The bite valve works very well. I found it has an interesting feature: Bite too hard, and you get no water. I have chewed through several Camelbak valves, and I look forward to getting longer life from the Oasis One-Twelve bite valve.
The sheath around the upper portion of the tubing is flexible enough to allow the bite valve to easily be positioned as needed, and is stiff enough to prevent the tube from whipping in the wind and hitting me in the face while in aero. I much prefer it to the plastic straw in my Aerodrink bottle, which cuts into the roof of my mouth if I hit a bump while drinking.
Conclusion:
The Oasis One-Twelve system falls into the "Insanely Great" category of my triathlon equipment purchases. I found absolutely no design or manufacturing flaws in the system. It is made from top-quality materials, and best of all, it costs less than all other equivalent products.
If you are looking for a hydration system, be sure to check out the Oasis One-Twelve before buying anything else.
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
My Broken Foot: The Movie!
Have you seen the recent "cheap" Geico commercials? Well, they're designed to imitate Xtranormal's product.
I decided to have a go at making my own movie, and needing a subject, I selected some material from my prior post. The result may be viewed here.
Enjoy!
I decided to have a go at making my own movie, and needing a subject, I selected some material from my prior post. The result may be viewed here.
Enjoy!
Monday, November 29, 2010
"They're RACING flats dammit, not TRAINING flats!"
I recently started an email dialog with RunBlogger's Peter Larson, and found a kindred spirit concerning some of the more technical issues of running. Here's a slightly edited version of what I sent him:
Hi Pete,
It's been 4 weeks since I broke a 2nd metatarsal running on hard surfaces in my racing flats. I got my flats in early September in preparation for my first-ever Olympic-distance triathlon (1.5K swim, 40K bike, 10K run). The shoes (Saucony Kilkenny) gave me the Winged Feet of Mercury, immediately slicing 30 seconds per mile from my 4 mile training runs, taking me to a 9:00 PR pace for the distance (with rolling hills).
My last prior 10K was nearly 25 years ago (I'm now 54). I stopped running when the pain in all my leg joints didn't go away for days after even mild training runs. I was a hard heel-striker then, with flat feet, skinny weak ankles, and slightly bowed legs. Getting into triathlon 2 years ago meant I needed to find a new way to run.
First I went with shoes that would keep the road as far from my legs as possible (Mizuno Wave Creation 10), which made a return to light running possible. But I was physically unable to go much faster than a fast jog. I added orthotics, which helped a little. Then I got knee pain (chondromalacia caused by ITB Syndrome), and I searched for a new stride. I read about POSE and Chi Running, adopted a mid-sole strike, and 3 months later my PRs started to improve, though they soon topped out again.
Then in August of 2009 I lost my L5-S1 disc: It simply degenerated away, leaving no padding and lots of pain behind. Since I had by then become addicted to each of the triathlon sports, I refused the offered spinal fusion surgery and endured months of physical therapy to learn how to live with a damaged back. And in February of this year I became a forefoot runner: Any significant heel contact would cause intense pain at the site of my degenerated disc, so I had no alternative, since I refused to give up running (and triathlon).
My initial web searches failed to uncover any useful forefoot running resources. I had to feel my way into forefoot running on my own. The first thing I noticed was that the towering heel of my Mizuno Wave Creation 10 was hitting the ground way too early, and was forcing me to run either on my tip-toes or in a slight squat in order to avoid a painful heel impact, each of which caused other problems.
I switched to a cheap pair of Asics that had a much softer and slightly lower heel. By mid-summer my PRs again started to improve. Since I wasn't placing as much weight on my midfoot, I removed the heavy orthotics, and saw another improvement in my PRs. At this point, I was much more comfortable running a mile than walking one!
When a friend suggested racing flats, I went to each of my local specialty running stores, tried everything, and when I finally tried the Kilkenny, it was love at first step. I got the shoes, trained well, did my race, beat my optimistic goal time, and kept on running in my racing flats. I searched the local shops for road shoes that would have a low heel compatible with a forefoot strike, but found nothing that fit my narrow flat foot.
In hindsight, a stress fracture was inevitable. Sure, it was not smart to run exclusively on hard surfaces in racing flats. But I also must share some blame with the shoe market, for not having a road trainer available that would fit my foot and running style, and also be stocked by local shops.
I somehow didn't find your blog until today, when I was again searching for road shoes. I've read a dozen of your general posts, and am working my way through your shoe reviews: We appear to generally think alike regarding technique and equipment, though we approached our beliefs from very different paths.
While I now consider myself to be a minimalist runner due to my forefoot stride, I also realize I'm a 'maximalist' runner: Maximally ignorant, that is. It took me way too long to learn the running vocabulary, which is the only way to get useful search results (when entering any area of specialization, first becoming 'buzz-word compliant' is mandatory). Where are the running glossaries?
I've reached the point where I'm willing to believe that my ideal road shoe, a padded racing flat, may simply not exist. And I'm wondering what I can do about that situation. So far, I've come up with five options:
1. Accept the situation: Do what's needed to adapt to the best fitting shoe available that has an acceptably low heel-to-toe (H2T) drop. But I'm concerned I'll have to adapt my stride to the point that I'll have problems switching back to my racing flats before races. And I refuse to give up my racing flats!
2. Find a shoe that's ideal in all respects OTHER than H2T drop, and have a cobbler slice away some foam to remove the excess heel height (a trivial task for any qualified cobbler). This would require a shoe with minimal heel structure, lacking things like wave plates and air/gel layers. The Brooks Green Silence may be a candidate, which I'll try out after my foot finishes healing.
3. Eliminate all hard-surface running, except for final race training and race day. Which means I keep running in my racing flats, but only on sand and turf. Not an easy thing to accomplish in my densely packed suburb, but not impossible (just impractical).
4. Add a thin Sof Sole gel cushion to the forefoot of my racing flats. I've already done this, just for insurance, but I doubt it is enough to prevent another stress fracture. And I haven't yet run in the modified shoe, so it may prove unworkable.
5. Create my own shoe.
As I've wailed and moaned about my shoe situation to friends, family, and members of the Triathlon Club of San Diego (TCSD, the Best Damn Club on the Planet, no lie), I found some kindred souls, one of whom is a mechanical engineer, and another who is a materials engineer with deep knowledge of polymers and foams. Me, I'm a software engineer with lots of simulation experience, and I also know my way around a sewing machine.
Unfortunately, we're all either lazy, time-crunched, or both, and would much rather work with an existing manufacturer than go off on our own. We simply want the shoes we want, and don't necessarily want to get into the shoe business.
Yes, I'm finally getting to the point:Some questions for you!
- What do you think of my options above? Did I miss any?
- Does my dream shoe already exist?
- What would you like to see in a new minimalist shoe suitable for forefoot road runners?
- Which manufacturers do you think would be most willing to work with motivated amateurs?
We've also discussed a shoe with a negative static H2T drop that would become zero when the forefoot sole is compressed. The shoe design would vary not only by foot size, but also by runner weight (possibly by swapping the insole). This would allow us to add sophistication to the forefoot without having to thicken or complicate the heel. It would be a shoe designed exclusively for forefoot hard-surface runners, though we might also be able to market it as a butt-lifting, leg-toning walking shoe!
Time for me to get back to reading your blog. Thanks!
-BobC
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)