My All-Sports Calendar With Links to Personal Sports Logs

I became confused regarding which sport I practiced on which day. Reading through scribblings in spiral notebooks, & looking at seven different personal sports logs (running, swimming, weightlifting, basketball, soccer, baseball, tennis) and then integrating them mentally, have been inadequate methods. I needed a better record of which sport I practiced on which day in order to better plan my practices. 

So I produced:

May 2014 Sports Calendar for David Virgil Hobbs

In the future I will post links to such monthly calendars here. 

This calendar should be useful for anyone following along.

The CSS & the HTML in this calendar are notable for the result produced, which allows for highly-controlled sophisticated record-keeping involving a minimal amount of work & technological sophistication.

Sports Participation Rates Estimates

Given the amount of time and energy I've been putting into sports, I felt I needed a clear idea regarding what percent of the various age/gender groups in the US population, have a serious interest in the various sports. I wanted to know, what percent of the age/gender group had an interest in at least one of seven sports I've recently been participating in.

I realized, that I had to process the stats which give how many people participate in a sport, to account for the fact that the total of this stat for all the sports, is 4.1 times larger than the population of active-athletes. This because many people participate in more than one sport. The 4.1 figure indicates that on average the physically active participate in 4 different sports. I wanted to process out, if the participant figures for seven different sports add up to 165 million, then what percent of the population is involved in at least one of those sports?

The number of persons at the gym had begun to seem small to me, the people at the gym, had begun to seem suspiciously un-typical. I was wondering: am I being deceived by all the media hoopla about sports?; could it be, that the actual truth, is that there is a small minority of individuals who each engage in lots of sports, thereby making it seem as if sports is more popular than it actually is?; could it be, that most of the people involved in sports are children and that the normal adult ignores sports?

I started out building a table that (as of now) gives the Participation rates in absolute and percent terms, for seven different sports, for several different age/gender groups. This required combining incomplete information available from the National Sporting Goods Association (the leading source of such info), with Census Data and the art of math:

Sports Participation & Fandom Rates for Various age/gender Groups

The next problem, was figuring out what percent of the 'active' persons, are what I would call 'seriously' active in their sport, active enough to take an interest in literature and coaching in the sport.

In the 2013 PAC Overview Report, I noted on page 8, the  '2012 level of activity':

Active to a Healthy Level and Beyond (151+ times/yr) High Calorie Activity: 32.9%.

Active (51~150 times) High Calorie Activity: 11.2%.

Casual (1~50 times) High Calorie Activity 9.3%.

Low to Medium calorie activities: 18.6%.

None 28.0%.

According to the NSGA's definition, someone is active in a sport if he participates in it more than once a year. Based on these above PAC stats, I concluded that 80% of those who the NSGA rates as active in a sport, have a serious interest in the sport.

The next problem, was, how can I estimate the participation rate for an age-group, if the only stats available are the participation rate in the population at large?

In the 2013 PAC Overview Report , I noted on page 7, the  'Inactivity Levels (by age-group)'. On this basis I estimated that:

Given that ps = the percent of the age 6+ population involved in sports, the percent that is involved in sports age 6-17 would be 1.12(ps); the percent age 18-54 involved in sports would be 1.02(ps), the percent age 55-64 involved in sports would be 0.9(ps), and the percent age 65+ involved in exercise/sports would be 0.85(ps).

I decided to apply these statistical adjustments to each sport on a uniform basis, in determining my estimate for the percent of an age/gender group involved in a given sport. So for example, given that the (extrapolated from NSGA data) reported rate of participation for males 6 years old and older in running was 15%, I estimated that the participation rate for males age 6-17 was 1.12(15%)= 16.8% (this aside from the separate issue of 80% of the active being 'seriously active'.

Combining the adjustment for seriousness of activity, the adjustment for age-groups, and the info I had for percent of population 6+ active in a sport, I came up with estimates for what percent of a gender/age-group is seriously active in a sport:

My Estimates (actual data lacking) of Percent of Persons with Serious Participatory Interest in Certain Sports, and in one of a Group of Sports, for Age/Gender Groups, 2012

The final problem of the evening, was: so I know how many people are involved in running, how many are involved in swimming, how many in weightlifting, how many in basketball, how many in soccer, how many in tennis. From this information, how can I estimate, how many are involved in at least one of the seven sports?

I had the following info: the total of the NSGA participation figures (age 7+) for the 7 sports came to 165 million; the total of the participation stats for all the 45 or so sports tabulated by the NSGA came to (age 7+) 823 million; the total of active persons (age 6+) according to the PAC was 199 million; 823/199 = 4.1; a sports participant by definition participates in at least one sport. I came up with the following formula and math:

165.3/823=0.20.

4.1-1.0=3.1.

0.20 x 3.1 = 0.62.

1+0.62 = 1.62.

Hence I concluded that the total of the various number of participants figures for the 7 sports I was focusing on, should be divided by 1.6, to get an estimate of how many different individual persons participated in at least one of the 7 sports (because some participate in more than one sport).

There are various advantages to making estimates: you have something to work with when data is nonexistent or unavailable; you learn how to make estimates in situations where data is nonexistent or unavailable; you have something to work with if you feel like checking the veracity of some statistic.

47 second eigth-of-a-mile run, April 22, using long paces style on outdoors track

For the first time since returning to long-distance running in November '08, I ran eigth-of-a-mile (220 yard) distances, taking approx 5 minute breaks between quarter-miles. Like yesterday I ran on the outdoors track at Leary Field, the 'J. Lee Gould' track.

I left the footwear as it was the previous run; last time I gave myself footwear advice was after the March 25 run (http://davidvirgil.blogspot.com/2009/03/74-minute-5-mile-run-march-25-using.html).

Results foot-comfort wise:

Left foot/leg: No complaints with regards to track at Leary Field; some slight pain in balls of feet and toes on sidewalk.

Right foot/leg: No complaints with regards to track at Leary Field; some slight pain in balls of feet and toes on sidewalk.

Seems I got used to the softer outdoors track, so when I returned to the sidewalk, there was some pain in the balls of the feet and the toes.

Makes me feel as if I doubt whether I will ever be able to run faster than say ten minute miles on the road/side-walks without experiencing pain. The feet seem to hit the ground faster at higher speeds.

Wednesday April 22:

I ran half a lap, 220 yard segments on the Leary Field track. I stopped for usually approx five minutes after each 220 yd run. I used style B/E, emphasis on long paces.

Time after 5th mile: 90:02 (four 1/8 mile runs + 1/2 mile run + 1 mile walk + 1 mile run + 1 mile walk): The breaks were the usual format: time at end of run or walk segment rounded up to next minute, plus five minutes, equals start of next segment.

I used the following chant (chanted in my mind not with my mouth/tongue) during the 1/8th mile runs:

'Long are our strides as we streamline the sky
Great is our distance per unit of time

(NEW) Doing...just an eighth of a mile
in that long-paced style

Lord of Roads of Magnificence am I
Lord of Roads of Painlessness am I'

The three stanzas were chanted in various orders.

I stretched before starting the run; had coffee, cod liver oil, c-boost drink.
Times recorded today April 22, using style B/E, long paces, running 220 yard segments; times recorded yesterday April 21 using style A/D, quick short paces, running 440 yard segments (totals show mile-times unless noted):

1st, run: 0:47+0:51+0:55+0:58=3:31 for 1/2 mile+ 1/2 mile run at leisurely pace; 2:27+3:22+4:01+3:16=13:06,

2nd, walked: walked at leisurely pace; 3:41+3:45+3:41+3:45=14:52,

3rd,run: 19:15 (leisurely pace); 3:58(ST)+3:56(FL)+3:52(HB)+3:55(HB)=15:41,

4th, walked: 19:47 (leisurely pace); 3:41+3:41+3:51+3:43=14:56,

5th, run: 19:43 (lesiurely pace); 3:00(QS,ST)+3:15(FL,ST)+3:03(QS,HB)+4:01=13:19

The 0:47 time on the first 220 yd segment was a big relief for me, like avoiding hell on judgement day, despite being thoroughly worthy of being damned.

Because, if I am unable to run the 1/8th mile in 45 seconds, I do not stand much chance of being able to run the mile in 8x45=360 seconds = 6 minutes.

But if I can run the mile in six minutes, I can be at the basic aerobic type fitness level I need to be at in order to be a big-shot athlete. It's common knowledge that my weakness is this kind of endurance, and that aside from this weakness I am a super-star.

I realize that modern conditioning for sports increasingly emphasizes anaerobic endurance, the repeated wind-sprints type of thing; such anaerobic endurance drills require an aerobic fitness foundation.

The speed during the 0:47 run was 56% faster than my fastest quarter-mile of 147 seconds yesterday.

The world record eigth-of-a-mile speed is 12% faster than the world record quarter-mile speed (http://www.trackandfieldnews.com/tfn/records/records.jsp?listId=1 ).

My 56% speed improvement running eigth-of-a-mile distances (compared to quarter-mile speed) the first time running the eigth-of-a-mile (220 yard) distances shows how: at the present time, my weakness lies in slowing down from a speed which is approximately equal to my target speed of 45 seconds per 1/8th of a mile, after having run about an 1/8th of a mile; repeatedly running 220 yard segments is what will get me used to running at the speed I need to run at in order to run a mile in six minutes.

The rain interrupted the workout after four 1/8th mile runs. After this I felt tired; I decided to for the remainder of the day, add just 0.5 miles jogged + 1 mile walked + 1 mile jogged + 1 mile walked + 1 mile jogged, at a leisurely pace, bringing the total miles done on a wet rainy day to five.

I felt sick of pressure, trying hard to score a fast time. I think the new stuff, running half-miles, quarter-miles, 1/8th miles, tired me out and got me sick of pressure.

The running and walking at a leisurely pace was such that the time if the first 0.5 miles had also been run at a leisurely pace, for all 5 miles, would have been 96:13.

I can remember how just a couple of months ago, 96 minutes on the outdoors sidewalks course would have been the result of maximum effort and a new personal record (http://davidvirgil.blogspot.com/2009/02/running-shoes-1-layer-gel-heel-to-toe.html).

Today the speed at a leisurely pace, 96 minutes for five miles, was 71% of the speed on the course when making a maximum effort (current personal best 68 minutes for the five miles) (68/96=0.71).

This tells me something significant. It tells me that when I feel tired, too tired to work out, I can still go out and do a workout at a leisurely pace that causes me no discomfort whatsoever, at a speed that is 71% of my maximum speed.

This implies that persons such as myself, are liable to skip a workout which we could easily perform at 71% of max effort, on the grounds that we are too tired to work out.

It would be nice at thus juncture to be able to snap a finger and have a humble underling, who has a Phd in statistics, and a Masters in exercise science, to promptly and obediently supply the info as to whether the smartest coaches and physicians think that a workout at 71% of maximum effort, is worth anything in terms of improvement in conditioning and health.

Off the bat, I would estimate that a workout at 71% of maximum effort accomplishes more for conditioning and health than idleness along the grounds that a weightlifter whose maximum for the bench press is 10 repetitions of 200 lbs, would consider 10 reps of 145 lbs to be a worthwhile activity, better than inactivity, so long as the 10 reps of 145 lbs did not result in the body being overworked due to too much weightlifting being done.

In the weightlifting world you often hear it said, especially with regards to weightlifting for the purpose of building up sprinting speed and jumping ability, that it is wise to lift at about 67% of maximum personal capacity and that lifting at a heavier than 67% level can be dangerous or counterproductive.

I think people underestimate the similarity between weightlifting and track. People under-estimated the contribution weightlifting can make to track performance.

The way people used to insist that to train for a mile one must run distances longer than a mile as opposed to distances shorter than a mile, was related to their failure to appreciate the role of simple muscular strength of the right type in the right places when it comes to running, which was related to a failure to see similarities between track and weightlifting (over-specialization of labor again?).

In general a long slow minimally-interrupted five mile run at 71% maximum effort, when one is used to almost daily long but faster minimally-interrupted five-mile runs at 95% or more of maximum effort, can be better than inactivity because the body gets used to the almost-daily 95% efforts on five mile runs, and suddenly switching to just half-mile runs with a break every half-mile, and quarter-mile runs with a break after every quarter-mile, and eighth-of-a-mile runs with a break after every eighth of a mile, hits the body the way withdrawal from an addictive drug hits the body; seems such withdrawal should be gradualized, especially since a five-mile run does not damage the body/mind via side-effects the way an addictive drug does.

I find the five-mile runs promote my general sense of mental and physical well-being. This in turn can result in an improvement in track performance. There is more to life than track performance, and certain types of exercise can improve life in these non-track areas. Improvements in areas of life outside of track, can result in improvement in track performance.

The footwear today was the same as the previous run. This footwear setup is described at http://davidvirgil.blogspot.com/2009/03/68-minute-5-mile-run-march-29-new.html .

'Twas a day-time run, and then a night-time run.

The black heavy sweatshirt, long-sleeved collar-less sportshirt made of t-shirt-type material, t-shirt, sleeveless t-shirt, shorts, & headband were a little too warm during the first four 1/8 mile runs.

The weather during the workout (2:33-2:57 PM) was: avg 55 degrees, 1 mph wind, avg 0.25 in/hr rain (http://www.wunderground.com/cgi-bin/wxStationGraphAll?day=22&year=2009&month=4&ID=KMAWESTO6&type=3&width=500&showsolarradiation=1&showtemp=1&showpressure=1&showwind=1&showwinddir=1&showrain=1 ).

The workout started at 2:33 PM; the fourth 1/8 mile run was completed at 2:57 PM. At this point I had to take a break because the rainfall level changed from tolerable (0.2 inches per hour) to intolerable (0.5 inches per hour). The evening portion of the workout lasted from 9:32 PM to 11:11 (109 minutes including breaks).

Advice to myself for the next run fotwear-wise: Same as that listed in the March 25 post (http://davidvirgil.blogspot.com/2009/03/74-minute-5-mile-run-march-25-using.html ); no need to do anything.

In accordance with the rotation entered into the blog-record March 15 (http://davidvirgil.blogspot.com/2009/03/76-minute-5-mile-long-length-paced-run.html ), run the next run, using style C/F, the syle that combines length of pace with quickness of paces, pausing five minutes after each quarter-mile to rest/take-notes.

Running Tactics Slash Strategy

Yesterday, I estimated that when I ran the 147 second quarter-mile, my fastest of the day, I ran the first 220 yds in 49 seconds (http://davidvirgil.blogspot.com/2009/04/25-minute-quarter-mile-run-april-21.html ).

Today I managed to run 220 yards in 47 seconds.

Just goes to show my competence in applied math.

Incidentally, Tom Wolf was on my high school soccer team; he later became an applied math big-shot...once I dreamt that everyone around was a monkey but he was a human...which means that, I am capable of thinking that he is less monkey-like than the people around here).

@2009 David Virgil Hobbs