For me, this was a really big confidence booster. The tester I had was actually really giddy with my results - you could tell he thought I had potential.
I just need to shed a few pounds :).
I have to laugh, because I know it's true.
When you grow up eating Hostess cinnamon rolls with each bite slathered with butter... well, you better know that you're not going to be the leanest/lightest out there :).
At a weight of 109.6 (keep in mind that I'm 5'0" inches, people), my stats are:
Body fat percent: 15.3-15.8%
VO2 max: 64
First we discussed Vo2 max. Apparently just seeing this number, he'd put me on the national team for the U of MN. Really? Top 10 on the D1 U of MN team? Keep in mind that I was a high school all-state runner for Marshall (small town), 4 time NCAA qualifier for Gustavus (D3), but never All-American, never really that outstanding... never would have considered myself a national runner for a competitive D1 program. [Although, I must note that the U of MN did take note of me and I think school would have been free between a hefty academic scholarship and a small running scholarship - so maybe they saw something there I didn't].
Then we moved to the last page (after a lot of VCO, RR, BTPS, BR, etc metrics). My weight. Here he was brutally honest: "um, well, you're much higher than I would have pegged you for someone with your marathon times".
"And I don't know how to say this, this isn't something you can control" -- but he nicely told me that my breasts were larger than other top marathoners/U of MN top athletes he's tested. And they're all fat, so perhaps they're playing into my total percentage. I'm pretty sure I blushed. I have never been called "busty" before... although I have noticed I'm bigger this year than in previous years... guess I'm living up to the name, "Busty Gustie"???
I'm being 100%, brutally honest - no holds bar here, people :).
But this guy was obviously excited. Not about my breasts. Hahahaha. About my results despite my weight and my chest. I guess it's hard to tell a woman athlete that they need to lose weight in order to be faster... but that's the case with me. To have a Vo2 max of 64 at a heavier weight than ideal is notable. I'm still looking up information on it, but I guess if my body fat was more in the "normal" range for a competitive female marathoner (10-13%), my Vo2 max would be:
@102.5 lbs (10% fat) = 68.4
@103.5 lbs (11.5% fat) = 67.8
@104.5 lbs (13% fat)= 67.1
@105.5 (14% fat) =66.5
@106.5 (weight before NYC, approx)= 65.8
@109.6 (weight day of test) = 64
Those numbers aren't going to get me to the Olympics, obviously. BUT, they do tell me that I have a strong set of lungs - and that my current PR of 2:44 probably isn't my maximum potential (Even at a Vo2 max of 64 Daniels would say something around 2:35 would be possible - really?!?! Maybe I'm reading this wrong.). So, that gives me a lot of hope/optimisim that there's a lot of ground left to be covered and potential to be unleashed :).
Oh - one more interesting to note: I am a predominate carb-burner. Even when I'm walking or running easy, I am burning almost all carbs. The tester said this might be an opportunity for me - to try to teach my body to burn fat on my long runs (since there are only so many carbs you can store/take in during a marathon). So, this will be something I research and try to play with in the coming months. At a RER of .7, you're burning fat. 1.0 is where you're burning 100% carbs. At my walking rate, I averaged .96. When I switched to my easy running pace, I dipped to about .9, but then quickly moved to 1.0 when incline and pace increased. Interesting!
Second interesting fact: I use less energy running at 7:30s than I do walking!
After CIM, I continued to have questions about my talent and wondered if I hadn't reached my potential with my 2:44s. I actually told Nate that my next blog post would be all about how I needed to overcome the fact I didn't have the pedigree (I am not a multiple time All American, my parents are as non-athletic as they come), etc. But this shows me that I probably have more potential than I give myself credit for (after all, Nate reminds me, you did qualify for the 2012 Trials on your first try, after just 9 months of training with Jerry). Obviously, it will still take a TON of work, a lot of mileage, a lot of hard track and tempo work, and ALL the little things, but these "numbers" (they are only numbers!) would say I have the talent and potential to be a 2 time qualifier. Weird, but awesome at the same time.
Edited to add:
So now there's no reason not to chase that 2:43 with everything I have :) Let's get after it!