Semereab Gebrekidan (bib #260), a 32-year-old from Oakland won the 2017 Oakland Marathon with a time of 2:35:54. Katherine Klymko won the female field with a finishing time or 03:09.02. Semereab has won a number of other running events, including the Treviso marathon in Italy last year.
Katherine Klymko (#344) of Berkeley won the womens field. She’s barely visible here, hidden behind the 2nd place finisher, Kelsey Gurganus (#276) of Indianapolis and the 5th place finisher, Jacqueline Sloves (#778) of Oakland.
Gabrielle Maudiere (#657) of Larkspur, pictured here with the 3:20 pace group, finished 3rd among women.
The East Bay Athletics Club men’s relay team (#9226) was first at mile 5, and finished 3rd overall with a time of 02:36:28.
The SFRC racing team (#9224) won the mixed relay with a finishing time of 02:24:13, good for a 5:30 pace.
The Excel men’s relay team (#9034) finished 1st for the men’s relay with a time of 02:26:51.
Mixed relay team Pimp my Stride (#9174) finished 3rd with a time of 02:54:24.
Perennial contender Ivan Medina (#417) of Hayward finished 2nd overall with a time of 02:39.03.
The Strawberry Canyon Track Club men’s relay team (#9219) finished 2nd with a final time of 02:31:44.
And as always, Dennis Lefbom (#686) ran with his Hawaiian shirt.
When our daughter was younger, I tried to quantify the "bumpiness" of her rides in strollers. We had two strollers, an older Bugaboo Bee (can't find a link to the older version) and a Thule Chariot Cougar (single, not double). We had the normal stroller attachment for the Chariot Cougar and the jogging attachment.
In addition to comparing the differences between strollers, I wanted to compare the "bumpiness" differences when walking and running.
Data collection was messy, as you'll see below, but hopefully the results are still interesting.
Measurements and Methods
I used an old iPhone 4S with an data logging app to measure its accelerometer output while the phone was placed in the bottom basket of the Bugaboo and in one of the front pockets of the Thule Chariot Cougar.
I used two different apps to record the data:
- Axelerom: For measurements of the Bugaboo and the Thule Chariot Cougar with stroller wheels
- xSensor: For measurements of the Thule Chariot Cougar with the jogging attachment
Both only recorded data when the phone screen was on, so I had to stop once and a while to make sure it was still recording. The Axelerom readings were taken at 5Hz and the xSensor at about 19-20Hz. The Axelerom readings were also somehow strangely rendered out of order in the data file. I had to resort the data by timestamp.
Upon analyzing the data, I realized that 5Hz wasn't fast enough to do anything other than measure acceleration. Even the xSensor measurements at 19Hz weren't that great. This was a bit of a problem, because I couldn't reliably measure the "jerk", or the rate of change of the acceleration. The jerk can have a large impact on the perceived quality of a ride. A good analogy is the difference between slowing down in a car at an intersection and abruptly letting off on the brake when the car comes to a stop rather than gently easing off of the brake pedal.
Coincidentally, I learned during research that 5Hz is roughly the resonant frequency of important parts of the body, and possibly the least comfortable vibration frequency to experience.
The measurements were taken on the sidewalks and streets in Oakland, California, mostly along the same ones for each stroller. I didn't take the exact same path or streets for each stroller though, so this is another potential source of variation.
The smoothest ride was with the Thule Chariot Cougar
The Thule Chariot Cougar looks like a SUV next to the Bugaboo Bee stroller. It's got two 20" wheels with pneumatic tires and a suspension on the back. The Bugaboo's wheels are suspended too, but are much, much smaller.
One can observe the difference in forces measured in the stroller on the graph: the pointier the curve, the smoother and less bumpy the ride.
The Thule Chariot Cougar with the stroller wheels (in green in the chart above) provided the smoothest ride, with a minimum measured acceleration of 0.399 Gs and a maximum acceleration of 2.231 Gs. The standard deviation was 0.108 Gs.
The Bugaboo Bee was the next smoothest, with a minimum measured acceleration of 0.087 Gs (nearly freefall, for a split-second at least!) and a maximum measured acceleration of 2.452 Gs. The standard deviation was 0.165 Gs.
As one may expect, the bumpiest ride was with the Thule Chariot Cougar with the jogging attachment, recorded while running. I regret that I did not perform measurements while just walking with the jogging attachment installed to have that as a point of comparison. The minimum measured acceleration was 0.089 Gs, the maximum measured acceleration was 2.382 Gs, and the standard deviation was 0.242 Gs.
What does this all mean?
It was really interesting to find that the maximum and minimum recorded accelerations for the Thule Chariot Cougar with jogging attachment, while jogging, was similar to that of the Bugaboo Bee. And the Bugaboo Bee is a pretty smooth rolling stroller. I found that to be pretty reassuring. Though the ride while jogging was definitely bumpier, the maximum acceleration magnitude was smaller than that of the Bugaboo.
This was kind of just a fun exercise, but there are a couple of conclusions I came to:
- The Thule Chariot Cougar is a very smooth-riding stroller.
- Running with the Cougar's jogging attachment is sorta bumpy, but probably not way worse than the Bugaboo Bee.
We started out at the Hetch Hetchy Campground, in Yosemite National Park, and spent the evening there before making a short backpacking trip up to Laurel Lake and back. It’s only a 5 or 10 minute walk to the O’Shaughnessy Dam from the campground, so we headed over there before it got dark to check it out. We had taken care of reservations a while back. Our lodging: our tents, hammocks, or just sleeping bags.
The reservoir appeared to be pretty full, which is good drought news! Looking at the dam, I couldn’t help but wonder what the valley must have looked like before the dam was built.. and what our water situation in the Bay Area would be like without it. We read about the construction of the dam, John Muir’s opposition, and the interesting Pelton turbines used for power generation.
We returned to the campsite, had dinner, and spent some time together under the stars before going to bed. The milky way was easily visible, as well as multiple planets – I think Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn were out.
The view from the tent:
It was a warm night and a warm morning. Lots of neat driftwood in the Hetch Hetchy reservoir.
The metal signs were nice to look at, but I don’t think very accurate. Perhaps the trails have changed over the years. The below sign indicated that Laurel Lake was 7.6 miles away, but by my measurements, we only backpacked 6.9 miles. We did not go to Beehive meadows.
There was quite a variety of scenes in those 6.9 miles though. Mossy pines:
White flowers. I tried to study the wildflower sign before I left, but sadly did not remember any of them.
Waist-high ferns in a previously fire-damaged area that was coming back to life. The abundance of sunlight due to the lack of trees made for a verdant scene.
After making it to the lake, we all jumped in to cool off and refresh ourselves.
It was a nice site, with very few traces of humans who had been here previously.
We weren’t far off from the solstice, so we were treated to a lot of daylight.
Christian tried fly fishing, without much luck, unfortunately.
Laurel Lake was still by 11pm.
I managed to sleep pretty well, so I didn’t catch the lake at dawn. But the water was pretty glassy at around 8am.
We had a leisurely breakfast and then made our way back towards the reservoir.
Just before a stream crossing: this butterfly was still alive, but not doing so well.
Another photo of the previously fire-damaged area.
We managed to see a bear on our way back, near the dam. I didn’t take photos of it because I was shooting with a prime lens and my other lens was tucked away in my backpack.
We started and ended the hike at the dam, which was at about 2950 feet elevation. According to the GPS, we maxed out at around 6600 feet near Laurel Lake.
(This is a work in progress. I’ll continue to update it as I can, as I proceed with my search.)
After going a few years without training with a heart rate monitor with GPS, I’ve decided that it’s time to look into getting a new one.
I still own a Garmin Forerunner 310XT that I hope to never use again because it’s been fairly terrible. I used my Forerunner primarily for running, but did some cycling with it as well. It was probably an 80%/20% split. I originally chose the 310XT because of its long battery life, and of course, for its heart rate and GPS features. I had previously run with an old Polar, maybe a S625X? It worked pretty well, but I was intrigued by the idea of using GPS to track my workouts.
In theory, based on the features, the 310XT was a cool product, but in practice, it was burdened by awfully buggy firmware that made it unusable most of the time. I’ve had such a profoundly bad experience with that watch, that I’d rather not buy another Garmin device again.
What am I looking for?
I’m looking for most or all of these features, not necessarily in any particular order:
- Logging for post run/ride analysis
- Easy data transfer from device to a PC or phone for analysis
- Strava integration
- Reliable performance
- Non-creepy data storage. I’d like to not have to rely on a company’s website to look at my information, and I’d like to choose whether that information is private or not.
- Good heart rate measurement
- Good GPS
- A decent display for monitoring heart rate, total distance, current speed, and so on
- Battery life: 8 hours would be great, so that I could use it on longer bike rides.
- Waterproof, because I sweat a lot. I don’t really swim, but riding and running in rain happens not too infrequently.
So, what’s out there now?
I bought the 310XT in early 2012, and the Polar many years before that. Things have changed a lot, and there are new players in the game.
My iPhone has GPS built in, and if I want heart rate data, I can get a “dumber” device that measures my heart rate and have it sync with my phone. I usually don’t run with my phone, though, and on longer bike rides, I’m concerned about battery life. So I’d prefer to look for something different.
Fitbit has a wide range of devices available now. On the higher-end is the Charge HR and the Surge. The Charge HR is their “Active Fitness” device, and the Surge is their “Performance fitness” device. The Charge HR will track steps and heart rate, but has no GPS. The new Blaze just came out too. It has a heart rate monitor, but does not have an embedded GPS. One nice thing about the Fitbit devices is that they can measure heart rate without the chest strap – a sensor is part of the wrist band.
One can use any of their devices, or none at all with their app’s “MobileRun” Feature.
I’m not going to buy a Garmin, but I still am interested in knowing what their product offering looks like.
Their vivofit line includes 3 models of interest. The Vivosmart HR contains a heart rate monitor that measures from your wrist. It does not contain a GPS. The vivofit vivoactive does contain a GPS, but has no heart rate monitor. The vivofit vivovactive HR has both, and would probably be the device I’d consider if I were considering Garmin at all.
Garmin also offers a fenix series. Only the fenix 3 HR contains a heart rate monitor and a GPS receiver. All of the other fenix models (fenix 2, fenix 3, fenix 3 sapphire) have various levels of GPS functionality, but do not have a wrist-based heart rate monitor.
Suunto wasn’t ever high up on my list, but I wanted to see what they have to offer. Browsing their website, I found three models that may fit my criteria. The Traverse, the Ambit3 Vertical and the Ambit3 Peak.
Working on it..
Working on it..
Working on it..
This year’s 7th Oakland marathon took place on a cloudy morning. It started raining around noon, so most runners just escaped the rain.
A runner (9119) from the Olympic Club male relay team was the first runner through at mile 4, escorted by a few cyclists. They finished in 1st place for the male relay category, with a time of 2:21:44.
This runner (bib 9181) from the SFRC Racing team was the second runner through at mile 4, they finished 2nd in the mixed relay category with a time of 02:41:43.
Carrying the baton for Shabo TC, this runner (9186) helped his male relay team capture 3rd place in their category.
After the first batch of relay runners, we started to see the marathon runners, seen in the lime-colored bibs. This is Alex Battaglino (217) and Patrick Donnelly (924), both of El Cerrito, within footsteps at mile 4. Alex eventually won the race, and increased their separation from a couple of feet to 8 and a half minutes by the end of the race. Alex Battaglino won with a time of 02:34:51, and Patrick Donnelley finished 3rd with a time of 02:43:25.
Ivan Medina of Hayward is a perennial top finisher at the Oakland Marathon. This year, he finished in 2nd place, with a time of 02:41:25. He ran it quite a bit faster in 2015, having finished that race with a time of 02:30:07, which would have been good enough to win this year.
Here’s a runner from the Habitat for Humanity team, who ran in the mixed relay. They finished with a time of 4:16:37.
Christopher Jackson of Berkeley finished the marathon in 6th place, with a time of 02:55:17.
The #GUforit with the That’s Fine Track Club finished first in the mixed relay. Here’s one of their runners at mile 4.
Rob Nachtwey, of Berkeley, is another perennial contender who is easy to pick out because of his pink hat. He finished 2nd in 2014, and this year finished 4th, with a time of 02:50:55.
This is Patrick Madigan of San Francisco, who finished in 13th place with a time of 03:05:36.
Team Worse Chemistry (9048) from Berkeley finished with a time of 03:24:05, good for 6th place in the Mixed Relay.
Team Soil Joggers, from Oakland, finished 8th in the Male Relay with a time of 03:26:34.
Runner 462 is Spenser Talkington, who ran an amazing 03:05:13 at only 17 years of age! Congrats, Spenser! Fernando de Samaniego Steta of San Francisco (960) finished in 5th place with a time of 02:54:34.
The Strawberry Canyon Track Club Women of Berkeley finished 3rd in the female relay with a time of 02:59:21.
Rohit Mitter (478) from New York finished 18th, with a time of 03:12:12.
Joshua Lerner of San Francisco won the Masters category with a time of 02:49:50.
Eric Obeng (686) of San Francisco finished 11th place with a time of 03:04:13.
Alexander Kramer of Calpella (858) finished 19th with a time of 03:13:06. Nelson Osaky (448) finished 382nd with a time of 04:41:12, and it appears that Holly McIlvaine dropped out of the race or her timing chip didn’t register.
Joshua Bornstein (135) of the Tamalpa Running Club from San Rafael finished 7th with a time of 02:58:35. Erik Donohue finished 26th with a time of 03:18:16.
Andra Enoiu from Richmond finished 63rd overall, but 4th among women, with a time of 03:34:06. She won her age group.
This guy (9212) ran for team StephCurry4Prez. !
I think this is the same guy who ran with a hemp shoulder back back in 2011? Nice to see him running again.
I had an espresso there before they closed. It was a little hole in the wall at the entrance of a building in downtown Greenville on Main St.
I wonder why they closed – they had another location in a mall that they closed a number of months earlier.
According to GreenvilleOnline, they closed because of the weather and additional competition. It’s a bit of a sad end for a place that “helped create a true coffee culture in Greenville”, but former owner Shannon Hudgens leaves a glimmer of hope: “I may not come back as Coffee & Crema in the same form that people are used to, but it doesn’t mean that I’m dead either.”