Garmin Dead II

13th Feb 2014, 10km.
14th Feb 2014, 10km.
15th Feb 2014, 10km run in afternoon, followef by a 40min swim, 1.6km run back home. Unfortunately, my Garmin 305 dead after lap swim. Suspect due to the worn out of side buttons. I don't blame its IPX water resistance.
16th Feb 2014, 9.5km run in 45min with PRPR (Pasir Ris Park Runner, formerly know as Elias CSC running club). I wore Garmin Swim to clock to timming, unfortunately, the band was broken and the watch dropped, then after I pushed button to save the workout, it stopped woking and shown "please wait" ....This unit I purchased in Aug 2012, only 1.5 years and I did no more than 1 swim per week, the band should not be so fragile since it marked as a professional lap swim watch. A cheap Timex Ironman watch (~USD30) could stand more the two years lap swimming!
In two consecutive days both my Garmin dead. From tomorrow, I will be training without watch until my 310XT shipped to Singapore (I ordered from Amazon 1 week ago, only cost USD159). Should I trust Garmin.

Running Diary 0038: Revolutionary sport watch, wearable market killer, Polar V800

8 Jan 2014, 23C, sunny.
12.4km in 1:36. The easy pace was not so easy. I felt sluggish so after 8km I accelerated ~1km, at the pace below 5min/km. It was like Fartlek. And I think there was be no stress since no repeating. Just to relax the stress came from monotonous movement.
During lunch one colleague showed me a news of Polar's new sports watch V800. Later I checked DC Rainmaker's blog for the comprehensive preview. It is a revolutionary sports watch with its breaking new feature. First it is the first wearable smart watch that independent of a smart, unlike Magellan Echo, Pebble, Gaxy Gear etc. It has it's own GPS, computer and can work without the presence of a smart phone. Second, it is first GPS sports watch not only recorded Swim Bike Run, but also integrated with activity tracker, infringing another wearable market just developed by Nike Fuelband and FitBit. Third, it armed with Bluetooth Smart (less power drain during communicating with sensors and smart phones) and has a astonishing extended battery life of 50hrs, which is only come with two other brands' flagship products: Garmin Fenix and Suunto Ambit. I'm also interested in the Smart Coaching function by analyzing recorded HR data. It is more useful that Garmin FR620's Vo2max analysis. For endurance sports, fatigue and recovery analysis are more key indices. Polar is more professional that Garmin in this field. And in his review, Rainmaker marked V800's GPS signal receiving as "awesome". It was a leap-attack to Garmin.
Polar was aggressive and ambitious, it combined all key points of a sports watch the customer desired, unlike other manufacturer who want to separate in several product line. I'm love to see it.
The only thing I regretted with this piece was it's display. It was still a cheap TFT display used in a outdated smart phone, with a glaring glass that make it unreadable under sun. I will not recommend to use colored display or touch screen that introduced by Garmin 620/220. Any serious runner/ triathlete knows it's useless.  I only recommend to use E-ink technology used in E-books like Kindle. High quality display without glare and power saving.
Looking forward more manufacturer listening to the customer and introduce more device like Google Glass, Polar V800 to the market.

Combining Auto Multi-sport with Auto Lap setting: A good way to record Triathlon and other multi-discipline sports with Garmin Forerunner 305

Before I began to play triathlon, I only use Garmin Forerunner 305 recording single workout like running and cycling. Garmin did provide the function for multi-discipline sports recording, with its Multi-sport feature (p28 user manual). As the manual tells, there are two way to record multi-sport workout. One is manual and another is auto ( p29 user manual ). In both features you can set as many sports legs as possible. Transition time will be recorded if you select "INCLUDE TRANSITION" in Auto Multi-sport feature. It will not be displayed in "HISTORY" part of the watch, but in Garmin Training Center. Like illustrated below(fig1 is manual Multi-sport, fig2 is Auto Multi-sport), manual transition will not be displayed. Please note that the only place you could view transition time is in GARMIN TRAINING CENTER, only when you record in AUTO MULTI-SPORT feature with " INCLUDE TRANSITION " option.

fig1. Manual record

fig2. Auto record

Unfortunately, GARMIN CONNECT does not support multi-sport workout display, so you might find the Duathlon I participate yesterday was divided into 3 workouts: 10k run, 36.6k bike and 5k run. Nor did other sites like RUNNING AHEAD, DAILY MILE, ENDOMONDO, and RUN KEEPER.

From any aspects, Auto Multi-sports is the first choice for tri-s over manual. And further more, lt could be integrated with Auto Lap feature of Forerunner 305, so not only each leg, but also each lap or split will be displayed. Here goes the settings:

1. Set Auto Lap in each sport:

1.1 Running

Main manual-->Settings-->Running-->Use This Sport

Main manual-->Training-->Training Options-->Auto Lap-->(Then do as you want, lap by distance, position)

1.2 Biking

Main manual-->Settings-->Biking-->Use This Sport

Main manual-->Training-->Training Options-->Auto Lap-->(Then do as you want, lap by distance, position)

1.3 Other

Main manual-->Settings-->Other-->Use This Sport

Main manual-->Training-->Training Options-->Auto Lap-->(Then do as you want, lap by distance, position)

2. Enable Auto Multi-sport:

Main manual--> Training--> Auto Multisport-->Set legs, include transition
3. Start Auto Multi-sport:

Main manual--> Training--> Auto Multisport-->Start Auto Multisport

4.End Auto Multi-sport:

Main manual--> Training--> Stop Auto Multisport

You might also press LAP button for 3sec to end the workout.

I verified the setting in yesterday's race, very convenient and effective. Please note that swimming could not be accurately recorded by Garmin GPS watches if wore in wrist, and Garmin Forerunner 305 is not water resistant. Please refer to DC Rainmaker's in depth review: Garmin Forerunner 305 in depth review by DC Rainmaker.

Simple Hydration handheld running bottle review

Attracted by its shape, I bought a Simple Hydration bottle via internet. The volume (13fl oz.) is desirable for a normal run ranging from 5k to 21k, as the adaption training made me rather a camel now. I don't want to carry a  fuel belt or hydration pack anymore. The design is such a minimalist way that could be easily hold by its shape. The price is not cheap, USD19.99.

The real bottle disappointed at first sight. The material and quality is not as good as Nathan fuel belt bottles (7 fl oz.) I used  before. (Left is Simple Hydration an right is Nathan in below pics)

The bottle material is much soft than Nathan. And I always wonder if it prone to be broken from the seam. Look at picture you will notice the difference of the clarity, smoothness of the material and roughness of the seam.

The feel of handheld is just OK and the natural hook shape really works and now I hold it for the weekly long run (21k+). I don't think it good idea to hook it on your belt or pants as it advertised.
The biggest problem during run is the mouth too tight so that I need to pull it out with teeth. While it never happened in Nathan before. Below picture you might notice how the mouth being bite badly by me after a 3 months use. And Nathan just as new even after 1years use. One more thing is that Simple Hydration's seal ring does not work well and tends to leak during run. I have no problem with it because I always carry plain water. Hope the manufacturer take note and improve in the future.

Lastly, Simple Hydration does not have scale while Nathan has. The scale help runner to realize how much water consumed in the run. Better to have
In summary, the design was good, the quality was poor (not as good as the handheld at the same price). If the manufacturer has change to the mainstream material, secure the cap and make the mouth easy to drink, I'll consider to buy a new one.

The making of my 1st Tarahumara huaraches

I'v been dedicated to barefoot running since this June, over a year after I practicing it. Though I have put more than 500km in my soles, and achieved >30km in a single run. To my surprise, my soles are getting tender and thiner other than tough and thicker. I read from some article that it might attribute to my good running form. Less abrasision have been put to my soles. I'm happy with that by cutting by tiny glass is always a concern. Recently I have been cut by a glass and it took me whole day to pick it out.

I decided to get some barefoot shoes. The shoes should be no other than protecting the sole. Because I'm a minimalist, a barefoot runner. To my knowledge, the only answer is Tarahumara huaraches. There are two site offer Tarahumara huaraches. One is Invisibleshoe, and other is Barefoot Ted's Lunasandals. The only materials are Vibram cherry sole and nylon (leather) cord. One can also order online for the soling sheet only. I'v tried to order the sheet but payment failed in Cobblersupplies web site. So I switched to Invisibleshoe, which is cheeper than Luna Sandals.

I got the the 4mm sole and nylon cord (USD30 inclusive of postage) 9 days after orfer by shipping with Borderlinx.

I got the scissors and leather punch from neibourhood store (S$8.4). Followed the instruction from Invisibleshoe: trace the foot-->cut out the tracing-->tranfer the pattern to the soles-->cut the sole-->punch the hole in soles-->lacing

I'v made a fashioned lacing and tried 10km run the next day. It was amazing that such simple shoes realy could run! I found red marks uner lacing after run. A barefoot veteran told me it was normal after 1st run. He said is true, I never found those mark later.

The weekend I run these huaraches in 14km race of Northeast Run 2011.  It works as normal running shoes or barefoot. The only problem was, how ever I changed the lacing method, my feet always slipped to the back of the soles after run. I though I did not cut the right position of the side holes. May I could improve in my next shoes. Anyway it did not affect my running. I decide to wear them for the next week's SCMS2011 full marathon.

Xterra Plazma Skin vs. Skins A400 compression long thights

Just ordered two compression long tights for my marathon training in the begining of this month. Xterra Plazma Skin from SGcompressionwear, and Skins A400 from Chain Reaction Cycles.

They all arrived 2 weeks later. The Skins I ordered is XS by online sizing chart, the feel is tight and perfectly fit. I ordered the smallest size (S) for Xterra because there is no sizing chart avalible, nor online information from Xterra official website. Fortunately, it also fitted me well, but not tight enough as Skins A400. They are generally same in size (so I guess Xterra is Asian size). Xterra sleeves are wider than Skins, and the material is thiner. That accounts for their difference in tightness. Both of them have 3D patterns. ButI found out only Skins was 3D cutting, Xterra's was just patterns. I was not supprise at the momnet because the Skins' price is 4x higher than Xterra. Xterra one was just a entry level comprehensive tights.

I'v tried Skin A400 in a 24k long run. It was tight and the support was amazing, especially in kness and ITB. The 3D cutting is great, every joint is free and muscle feel the support. I felt like to sprint when I was weraing it. I'v tried to control my pace but I still 10sec fast than before. And I could hold a steady running form & pace all along. I thought it not a bad idea to use it in stride improving training, beside hard run recovery. After run I did not feel the pain and soreness in the muscle, nor sweaty legs. Just great.

I'v tried Xterra Plazma Skin in a 8K cruise interval. It was so thin that I could not even feel its existance when I focused my run. It kept my leg cool all along the run. Despite the design, it still provide support to some extend. That is enought regarding its price.

Apendix: comparison table