#@%*!!! Quasi-Monetarist Economics

I was going to single out a very specific "quasi-monetarist" economist active in the blogosphere, but in the interest of remaining civil while still getting my rage on, I'm going to opt out of it.

What I will say is this: "Quasi-monetarist" economics has to be the stupidest, most pathetic "theory" I've ever heard of. The reason it took so long to catch on is because it is a complete wasteland of irrelevant BS.

Its success is owing to the fact that, by definition, "quasi-monetarists" are always parsing things into "nominal expenditures" and "real expenditures." These economists are so good at throwing these terms around and asking seemingly innocent questions that they can easily befuddle an unsuspecting onlooker. The minute one economist tries to make a point, the "quasi-monetarist" will quickly interject a question: Are you talking about real income or nominal income? That's a valid question at times, but this is just a foot in the door. Next comes the wasteland.

The wasteland is the concept of a "nominal expenditure" versus a "real expenditure." Folks, this kind of crap only sounds interesting. In reality, it is not. It is made-up boloney. Mumbo-jumbo. B.S.

To understand why, simply think back to the last time you spent money. Was that a nominal expenditure for you, or a real one?

What? You mean you have no idea how in the hell you would ever manage to only spend money nominally? Welcome to the club. At the individual level, there is no such thing as a "nominal expenditure."

Now, keep in mind that the concept of inflation is a very important one. Inflation has a real impact on our daily lives, and we should think about it more regularly. That's why we already talk about inflation using existing terminology.

The whole idea of "nominal expenditures" is cheap smoke-and-mirrors crap. It's economics for people who are only interested in knowing how to use jargon to sound intelligent. Mark my words, one day "quasi-monetarism" will go the way of the dodo and its participants will be as embarrassed by what they said as they would be of a particularly bad high school yearbook photo.

There is no such thing as a nominal expenditure. People only spend the money that they have. Their behavior cannot be parsed into real vs. nominal. At the individual level, all behavior is real. Quasi-monetarism is a scourge.

A Pointer

I'd like to call your attention to this post over at The Big Picture. In typical Big Picture fashion, the post is comprehensive and well-documented. It is impossible for a "normal person" (average, every-day Joe) to really know how much of this is true, and how much is fringe extremism.

I guess you can only hear so many stories like this before they start to sink in. We know that the US government has done some slimy things in the past in the name of "protecting freedom." There are many well-documented cases that the US government has come clean on (always many decades after the fact, of course). This is what I call "Whore Culture," which is typically a label I apply to the behavior of society at large.

At any rate, it makes far more sense to my crazy brain to believe that the governments of the world pit us against each other than it does to assume that a bunch of bearded hermits over there (wherever there is on any given day) can blow us up, bankrupt our nation, and send us into a tailspin. No, in my weird world, only governments have that kind of power.

And only people have the power to stop them.

Off-Topic:
I am toying with the idea of updating my blog template. This one is nice, but boring, and can be difficult to read. I'll look into it a little more. Typically when I do this, I don't tend to find anything that I like better than this stiff template. I guess that's one reason why it's so popular.

But it feels too much like a textbook. If I had more money to spend, I'd pay the best web designer in the world to give me a make-over. Instead, I'm at the mercy of what I can do with HTML internet research, haha...

New Feature - Ryan Ruins Requests!

Ladies and gentlemen, I now present...

Ryan Ruins Requests (and Dedications)!!!

Ryan takes your requests... and promptly ruins them!

The rules are as follows:

1. Any genre is fair game.
2. Only request songs you anticipate will be ruined.
3. No Prince songs - I don't want to get sued.
4. I don't mind pushing myself to the edge of my ability, but we should steer clear of songs that involve so much virtuosity that it would be any fun to even try.
5. You may request a song for the next week, even if I played your request this week.
6. You may only request one song per week.
7. You may may your request in person, on the blog, on my Facebook page, or via email.
8. Dedications are acceptable. Be prepared to be quoted!
9. Uh, I think that's it.

Today's episode of Ryan Ruins Requests is a send up of Katy Perry's "Teenage Dream."

Enjoy!

Totally Fried

I have several projects in the works for the short-term. It's an entirely manageable workload, but I think the process of thinking about all of them simultaneously as finally taken its toll on my brain. I don't mind saying it: I may have over-exerted my thoughts here. I'm on my second draft of an upcoming speech (details pending) and halfway through a new blog post about the psychology of running. On top of that I'm working and planning a weekend away.

It doesn't seem like much, but those of you who know me know I have a tendency to think hard about virtually everything. So I'm not surprised that I feel over-expended now.

Funny Story About That
At my recent appointment with my diabetes nurse/educator, I was trying to explain why I believe working out twice a day has a better impact on my blood glucose control than simply working out once a day. During my explanation, I said to her, "I work out pretty intensely--"

She interrupted me, saying, "You do a lot of things pretty intensely, don't you?"

So apparently I am not the only one who has noticed this. At any rate, I think it's a good sign. If people take notice of how involved you are with the things you do, and you do more than one thing, then it might mean you're on the right track.

At least, that's what I'm telling myself as my brain falters at the end of a long work week.

See you on the trails...

Caught in the Rain

Yesterday was my first experience of year being caught in a surprise rain storm while running. The storm blew in fiercely and suddenly. I was wearing my absolute lightest running clothes: compression shorts and a dry-fit sleeveless shirt. When the rain came down, this material proved to be ideal for wet weather conditions. The shirt was light enough that, even though it was soaked and saturated with rain water, it didn't pull down on my body as I ran.

The compression shorts, though, were the real winners here. I have mentioned them before as part of the tools. They certainly aren't necessary tools, but they provide some important advantages over other shorts you might choose.

First, as mentioned, they are impervious to rain. Even if they become fully saturated, they are skin-tight and therefore do not weigh you down as you run. Second, they are a bit longer than traditional running shorts, which means you can avoid the usual distance running cat-calls. This is not a huge factor for me, but it does come into play from time to time. Third, you can use them as a base-layer when it's cold outside. Fourth, chicks dig 'em! (Well... at least chicks who are into runners...)

Now, when it started to rain, I was about ten minutes into a forty-minute easy run. Especially on an easy day like yesterday, I could have easily made the choice to turn around and hurry home. Instead, I laughed, shrugged, and carried forward. This is kind of important if you plan on entering a road race of any kind.

Part of the fun of road racing is that you can't predict the weather eighteen weeks in advance. September 25th might be an incredibly hot day, or an incredibly cold one. It might be windy, or rainy, or snowy. We cannot know this for sure, beyond a few days in advance. By that time, you will have spent your registration money, booked a hotel, made plans, established a comprehensive blood-glucose-management strategy (or maybe that's just me...), and mentally committed to not merely running in the marathon, but trying your level best to run a great one....

You can't let a little rain get in your way. You have to be prepared to run in any conditions Mother Nature will throw at you - and she could throw some pretty terrible conditions at you. Prepare yourself for this eventuality by embracing all the weather conditions you face this summer. If it's rainy and windy, get out there anyway. If it snows, put a sweatshirt on and laugh. Humans have survived much worse conditions than 2-4 hours in bad weather. We are resilient. Our forefathers subjected themselves to all kinds of hell to provide for their families - and that means us!

Let's make our ancestors proud.

Responding to Alex Tabarrok

I'm going to re-post my comment to Alex Tabarrok's recently posted "mystery" regarding the fact that male per capita incomes have not been rising with GDP since the 1970s, whereas females' incomes have been...

The explanation that immediately came to mind is the increase in female labor participation rate since the 1970s. It didn’t take me long to confirm this at http://www.bls.gov. Male participation has steadily declined over the past 60 years, whereas female participation only started to decline as female Baby Boomers started retiring a few years ago. 

The seasonally unadjusted numbers also give a clue: males far more often engage in seasonal labor, which tends to be trades. This means that, in general, men are more inclined to work in trades and other such work that does not require a college education. Great Moderation notwithstanding, these jobs are less sensitive to the “perpetual” increase in GDP we’ve been experiencing since the advent of fiat money. 

That is, women – if they choose to work – tend to choose service industries, business, health care, etc. If they aren’t well-educated and the best they can hope for is Wal-Mart, they will be far more sensitive to what Mises called “the disutility of labor” than men will be. This is a legacy of traditional gender roles, I guess, but not necessarily in a bad way.

Special bonus content! I'll include screen shots from my BLS data queries:

Speed Training Twice Per Week

This week is our first experience of the season engaging in two different kinds of speed workouts in the same week. Previously, we have done two tempo runs, or one fartlek run; but we have not yet done one tempo run and one fartlek run. In the future, we'll be adding a track workout to the mix, too (and I will discuss the ins-and-outs of track workouts when we get a little closer to the date).

The difference between how to approach these workouts may not be immediately intuitive, particularly if you have less running experience. That's why today I'd like to briefly discuss how to approach multiple speed training workouts in the same week.

Tuesday: Tempo Run Day
I mentioned before that tempo runs are an opportunity to work on your speed, your pace, your endurance, and your mental grit. This week, because you have a fartlek workout coming up on Thursday, I'd like you to focus on the speed, endurance, and mental grit components of this workout.

Again, the idea with a tempo run is to push yourself up to the point of being slightly physically uncomfortable with the pace you're making, and hold yourself there for the duration of the run. As you continue to train, that point of discomfort should gradually become a faster and faster pace, wherever it is.

So, during a tempo run, you should not really be thinking about comparative pacing. You should not be worrying about whether or not you can finish the run at your current pace. You should simply push yourself into discomfort and hold. To that end, you might even consider leaving your watch home during your tempo run, or at least resisting the urge to look at it. You shouldn't get caught up on what pace you're running and whether it is "fast" or "slow." What you should focus on is the way your body is reacting to what you're doing.

Learn to read your body's signals, then get comfortable with an uncomfortable pace.

Thursday: Fartlek Day
In contrast to the tempo run, this week's fartlek workout should be more pace-centric. Specifically, you need to learn to identify the difference between a faster pace and a slower pace.

In the beginning phases of your development as a runner (or if you're just rusty), you will likely only have two speeds: "go" and "go slow." But marathons are long and involve a wide spectrum of pacing needs and strategies. Especially for competitive runners, it becomes necessary to "attack" (or "defend!") at some race stages, and recover during others. Part of the goal of fartlek training is to get used to the idea of multiple attacks and multiple recoveries in a single outing.

More to the point, you should be able to vary your speed at will without it costing you the whole race. Going faster during some segments of your run shouldn't kill the rest of it.

Therefore, while your tempo run is a good opportunity to see how long to you can continue at a fast pace, and how fast that pace can be, your fartlek run is a good opportunity to find out at what pace you begin to use up your anaerobic fuel sources, and to try to keep that from happening.

In a Word
This week, Tuesday is "go fast" day, and Thursday is "pace well" day. Let's do it!

Form, Form, Form

I don't want to beat a dead horse, but today I'd like to talk about running form. But before I do, I need to reiterate a couple of important things so that no one gets the wrong message. Keep the following in mind at all times:

• Running with bad form is risky and will result in injury, I can assure you.
• Running faster is easier on your body because it subjects your bones and joints to fewer impacts.
• Running faster is a lot more fun.

I'd like to ask you to keep these things in mind so that you understand that what I'm talking about isn't about winning a gold medal or setting a world record. It's about running safely, it's about treating your body right, and it's about getting the most out of your daily exercise. If you could run with better form, you'd be better off. You'd be healthier and happier, even if you didn't shave a second off of your time. Don't just ignore this; it's really important.

Remember, we work out to get the most out of life. You cannot make the most of your time on this planet if you're constantly nursing injuries and grimacing through your workouts. Running is supposed to make you smile! With great running form, it's possible.

But Is It Really About Form?

In my opinion, the difference between a 45-minute 10K runner and a 35-minute 10K runner is almost entirely a function of technique. I say this for a couple of reasons. 

First, no one has ever "trained their way" out of a 45-minute 10K. For the most part, people who run 35-minute 10Ks (or better) have always run 35-minute 10Ks (or better); people who run 45-minute 10Ks (or worse) have always run 45-minute 10Ks (or worse). At this point, many would chime in to say that some people are just "naturally gifted runners" and can run faster than everyone else. I have many friends (L, I'm looking at you) who insist that some people just can't run faster than about 45 minutes for a 10K. This brings me to the second reason I think the problem is their lack of technique.

Have you ever seen a 45-minute 10K runner with really fantastic running form? I haven't. I have seen thousands of slow runners, but I've never met a single slow runner with good technique. Why do you suppose that is? 

Remember John Stanton from The Running Room? This guy has been a slow runner right from the beginning. He is the king of the Perpetual Beginners. Here's a picture of what he looks like when he runs:

Just look at him with his elbows poked out and his chest puffed up. Notice his little baby-sized, short, stunted stride. In John Stanton's world, everyone runs like this, and everyone needs a pair of stability shoes. (Of course, here at Stationary Waves, our readers are intelligent, and they know that there is no scientific basis for the belief that motion control shoes prevent injury.) But you don't need stability shoes, and all John Stanton wants to do is profit off of the ignorance of those who buy into the Idea of the Perpetual Beginner.

Compare Stanton's kludgey running form to that of marathon great Khalid Khannouchi:

Picture updated April 29, 2013

Folks, this is what a real runner looks like. Notice the incredibly long stride, the shoulders pushed back to draw speed from the motion of the arms, the slight forward-tilting posture of a man charging forward. It is everything the Running Room will advise you not to do. 

It is no surprise at all that Running Room groups continue to churn out hundreds of new 45-minute 10K runners every year. But if you want to learn how to run, you shouldn't be asking people who run 10Ks in 45 minutes, anyway.

So It Really Does Come Down to Form

Improving your technique will save you. But enough prose, let's get to work. How do you move from the 45-minute category to the 35-minute category? It takes a little enlightened practice. First you need to know what to do, then you need to know how to train yourself to do it. So here are a few guidelines.

Tip #1: Long Strides

Forget what you've read about short strides lessening impact. You don't need to lessen impact if you already have good form. Part of good running technique is taking long strides. I used to practice this by running on sidewalks and trying to keep to about 2 strides per 3 sections of sidewalk. You can try this out yourself on your next run.

Another option is to pace off about 50 meters and do "long stride" drills, in which you bound from foot to foot like the creature from the movie Predator. Don't over-do it, though. Once or twice before your run will do just fine, if you make it a daily habit.

Tip #2: Butt-Kicks

Good runners kick their feet out so far behind them that they occasionally get lower back pain and even kick themselves in the buttocks. Seriously. This, too, is a trainable motion. Now that you've paced off 50 meters for your Long Strides, do a couple of Butt-Kicks. Literally, jog 50 meters while kicking yourself in the buttocks with your heels every time you take a step forward. 

Tip #3: Arms = Speed

One of the best things I ever learned came from my high school rival, Eric G. (Where is that guy now??) He told me that the legs always move as fast as the arms. It's true! Give it a try - during your next run, suddenly start pump your arms like madman. Notice that your legs automatically match the pace set by your arms. You can use this to your advantage when sprinting or at the end of a race. In the meantime, remember to hold your shoulders back slightly (this is actually a mark of good standing posture as well). Keep your elbows low, but allow your arms to make a full, natural motion. Make sure that your elbows don't poke out to the sides like John Stanton's; they should instead move completely parallel with your body. Any energy spent moving your arms across the front of your chest is energy wasted and lost, and it just slows you down.

I'll provide some more running form tips in subsequent blog posts.

A Fascinating Tidbit of Science

Afternoon reading for the scientifically inclined: Lubos Motl translates an interview with Czech geophysicist Ivanka Charvatova. Agree or disagree with the climate science angle (and really, how could you disagree), the whole concept of solar barycentric motion is a fascinating and brilliant contribution to human knowledge.

A must-read.

Sidenote: I have no idea what label to attach to this post, but I do occasionally blog about science topics. 

Week 2 Recap

Where I Am, Day 14:

• Weight: 151.3lbs.
• Estimated Body Fat: 16.9%
• Estimated Bone Mass: 7.9%
• Estimated Water Mass: 60.7%
• Average of All Blood Glucose Readings (Last 7 Days): 10.5 mmol/L

There were some challenges this week, and I think that shows in my statistics. Working out consistently was really difficult for me, thanks to my having a slightly more erratic work schedule. I find that if I don't get home before 5pm, it is extremely difficult to start my workout. Typically, this is because my blood sugar is high from stress on those particular days.

More significantly, though, I think the Humalog I've been keeping in my refrigerator is starting to spoil a bit. I couldn't really say what the temperature is inside my refrigerator. I keep the Humalog on the door to avoid its spoiling, but we are definitely not talking about a controlled environment.

Also, despite what my electronic scale is reporting, I believe my body fat has reduced significantly over the last two weeks. I barely have anything to pinch around my abdomen. This would probably be a good thing for most people, but it makes my insulin injections difficult. Either I inject past the fat tissue (i.e. directly into the muscle), which hampers absorption, or the insulin will leak out.

Speaking of which, I injected for lunch today and held the needle in my abdomen for well over ten seconds, but when I withdrew the needle, insulin came spurting out. That's frustrating, because at that point I didn't know whether the leak consisted of "extra insulin" that had dripped out of the needle, or my bolus dose just didn't find its way in. I just tested 30 minutes ago, revealing that I did indeed lose my dose. That sucks. I'm going to eat a snack and take a correction as soon as I finish this blog post. 

But all's well that ends well. I finished the week with a 71-minute long run; over eleven miles of running. This is an achievement for me because it represents the furthest distance and the longest batch of cardiovascular training I've undertaken since my 2009 diabetes diagnosis. It was a pretty even keel, too; I tested before the run at 5.4 mmol/L and finished at 5.1 mmol/L. Basically no change in blood glucose. Amazing. 

What's In Store for Next Week

Some big changes coming up, starting tomorrow. First of all, we'll be bumping up the duration of our "basic run" to 50 minutes. Second, we'll be doing both a tempo run and a fartlek workout. Third, we'll be working out a bit more than usual during the morning. For all of these reasons, you'll notice the long run is still only 70 minutes long. I didn't want to increase absolutely every factor. 

To that end, you'll want to make sure you don't increase the resistance or number of sets/repetitions during your strength training this week. Save these increases for a week that involves a bit more manageable an increase (perhaps Week 4, 5, or 6). 

How Do You Know It's Time to Run Further?

Today's scheduled long run is a 60-70 minute excursion. Last week's long run was, of course, a 60-minute run. Today, I'm giving you the option of running for an hour again, or increasing the length of your long run. But how will you know you're ready for an increase? There are a few ways.

First, and most obviously, if you are extremely tired today, now is no time to increase your long run. I would not recommend taking a rest day, however, since tomorrow is our scheduled rest day. You'll benefit both physically and psychologically by pushing through to the end of the week. That being said, there's certainly no need to increase the distance of your long run if you're pooched.

Second, I have scheduled more steadfast long-run (and basic run) increases over the course of the program. This is not to be rigid, but rather to emphasize that we have undertaken to run a marathon here. You have to get more than just your feet wet. At a certain point, you have to fearlessly dive-in. Don't be scared.

I remember the first sixteen-mile run I ever went on. This was my first experience with distances in the double-digits of miles. I didn't really know what to expect. It was a warm Sunday morning, and I set off from my parents' house. It was four miles to the mouth of a beautiful canyon, and then another four to the beautiful Bridal Veil Falls.

 

I didn't spend much time being scared, though, nor did I worry that I wouldn't finish. As I said, I didn't know what to expect. It's not in my nature to fear the unknown. I took it with an open mind. If you're not sure how to approach a long run, keep in mind that it will not necessarily be more difficult than a short run. Difficulty is more a function of speed and terrain than it is of distance. With good pace control and a comfortable gait, every distance is manageable, even distances greater than fifty kilometers!

If you're still a little worried, keep in mind that those of us who struggle with type 1 diabetes aren't sure whether we can finish marathon distances without going into insulin shock or diabetic ketoacidosis. It takes some experiementation. But if we never try, we never find out. There is no reason to be afraid. Failure, in this case, is not a bad thing. Simply undertaking a big run is a step over and above what the average person ever decides to do.

Third, you have to understand your own body. You have to know in the middle of your run whether your muscles, joints, and bones are ready for an extra ten minutes. Chances are, they'll be fine. There is a chance, though, that they're just not ready for it yet. Don't feel bad, and don't worry too much about it. Undertake a more modest distance and then try again next week. We're still only on Week #2 -- there is plenty of time to get to 26.2 miles yet.

Today, you'll be well-served to eat a lot of carbohydrates. If you're diabetic, make sure they are carbs with a low glycemic index to minimize the impact on your daily blood glucose levels. If you're not diabetic, go for the gold: pasta!

Making a Splash

It wouldn't be fair to suggest that I started it. Jeffrey Tucker started it.

First, he praised Taco Bell. Then, some poor, lowly Facebooker had his lunch handed to him by the aforementioned Tucker article, which skewers some libertarians' tendency to hate anything that isn't pure anarcho-capitalism. Jonathan Catalan joined in with his take on the issue. I happen to have both the Mises Institute's blog and Catalan's blog on my Google Reader feed, so I commented in both places.

Today, Danny Sanchez writes:

The angrier-than-thou "moral scrupulosity" among some libertarians that Jeffrey Tucker talks about in his excellent recent post seems to be part of something a bit broader. As a commenter on Jonathan Catalan's blog post seconding Jeffrey's sentiments said, there can be a tendency for libertarians to be "willful grumps".

That uncited commenter was yours truly. The great quote being circulated now seems to be this one from Tucker:

Murray Rothbard used the phrase "do you hate the state?" to ferret out real from mild libertarians. As a correlative question, we might ask "do you love commerce?" to ferret out real defenders of real markets as versus those who just enjoy standing in moral judgement over the whole world as it really exists.

Even that one is a bit too much of a false choice for me.

I neither hate the state nor love commerce. I love freedom and prefer it to virtually everything else. This isn't a Rothbardian position or a Misesian position or a Randian position or anything of the sort. I suppose it's most like Alexis de Tocqueville's perspective. "The gradual development of the concept of equality is a Providential fact." 

I don't think every idea any smart person had has to align with my own personal ideological consistency in order for me to recognize it as a good idea. Sometimes I think libertarians forget that most people don't take everything Mises, Rothbard, and Hoppe say hook, line, and sinker. Nor should they. "Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible." (Frank Zappa).

Libertarianism isn't a "done deal," nor is it a complete, consistent, fully resolved doctrine capable of accounting for every fact of human economic and political life. We're not "finished." We have to keep thinking. We have to keep bringing in new ideas and correcting old, incorrect ones. If that means I take more ideas from Rand than Rothbard, mix in a little Milton Friedman, add a few of Reagan's aphorisms, and (gasp!) don't hate the state, then so be it. 

But this perspective of mine is only inconsistent to people who have their own thing going on. That's okay, too. It's possible for many different consistent logical systems to exist simultaneously. We're all consistent, so we all believe our logical systems are true. 

But truth takes a level of scientific evaluation that spans centuries. It's a job that's never really finished.

Specialization of Trade vs. Compartmentalization of Knowledge

It seems to me that one of the greatest challenges we face in the modern world is the competing priorities of breadth versus depth of knowledge.

Our daily lives and micro- and macro-economic systems have become increasingly specialized for centuries. This specialization of trade has been an economic boon, and is a natural and welcome economic fact. As technology becomes progressively more highly developed, the number of people who possess the knowledge to maintain and improve upon that technology becomes smaller. This was as true of ancient people making fishing nets as it is of software developers and nuclear engineers today.

So it should go without saying that if we want society to continue to progress, we can expect ever-more-pervasive specialization of trade. All is well in the world, and aprioristic praxeological reasoning triumphs again, right?

One problem: We can all regale captive audiences with stories from our own personal work experience involving more-senior staff knowing less about actual practical work than more-junior staff, and the inefficiencies that result. The fact of the matter is (and this is pretty logical), the less management understands what's happening at the ground floor, the more inefficiently the firm operates.

Yet management, too, is a specialization of trade. It involves a very specific and very real skill set; Not every great programmer, for example, will turn out to be a great manager of teams of programmers. This is certainly why large organizations hire managers directly out of business school, rather than promoting from, say, the IT department. Thus, we end up with exactly what we see today: armies of young MBAs hired directly into upper level positions simply by virtue of the fact that they have a self-described "management skill set," presumably acquired via their MBA programs.

This is a real question though: Are all these MBAs actually earning their keep? Do we need these folks, or would we be better off cultivating junior staff and grooming them for management?

To me, the answer comes from how much you think a manager needs to know about ground-level operations. Do we need average Joes who are management specialists - much like average Joes who are accounting specialists - or do we need geniuses who are capable of very in-depth knowledge across the full spectrum of company operations?

In my view, we need the geniuses. This ensures a meritocratic workplace that rewards the very best employees and places corporate decision making in their hands. It also prevents silly shortcuts like MBAs. No one should be allowed to make million-dollar decisions just because they went to business school. Decision making power should come from demonstrated knowledge and expertise, that is, if we're interested in good decisions and positive outcomes.

In many ways, the current economic dip is emblematic of the problems associated with relying on MBAs for company expertise. So what's ahead for us? More of the same, or a return to meritocracy?

Workout Schedule Disruptions

Working Out and Life (Not Working Out Is Life)
As important as it is to me to stay healthy and fit, as fun as it is for me to run and work out and feel great, life inevitably throws you curve-balls along the way. Unless you are a professional athlete, you will never be in a situation where working out is life's foremost priority. Among the things that are more important than working out (and I mean this objectively speaking, so if you disagree, you may want to think long and hard about your priorities and your philosophy) are: providing and caring for your family, maintaining a strong sense of ethics and values, and accepting your responsibilities with open arms.

All that is to say, as I mentioned in an earlier article, that life can and will demand flexibility in your workout schedule. A certain amount of flexibility is both expected and desired. We are not robots. I like to believe that my recommended training schedule accommodates itself well to necessary, ad hoc changes due to what we can call "unexpected life shocks."

You can easily overcome these unexpected life shocks if you know how. Today, I'll attempt to explain how to adjust your workout schedule on the fly. I warn you, though, it is a bit of an art, and therefore requires some practice.

Adjusting Your Workout Schedule: A Real-World Example
Today, while the rest of you are enjoying your evening easy run, I'll be hammering away at a fartlek workout. What happened yesterday was that I worked late, and then got stuck in traffic on the way home. As a result I didn't make it home in time to workout and eat without having to do one or the other too close to bedtime. There is a risk of overnight hypoglycemia in either case. Ironically, the other reason I had to adjust my workout today is because I had a hypoglycemic event last night that resulted in a morning blood glucose reading high to the point that exercise is contra-indicated. (Exercise raises blood glucose naturally and safely, but beyond 16mmol/L, exercise can induce diabetic ketoacidosis and cause serious bodily harm.)

What this means is that I missed last night's fartlek workout and today's morning strength training.

Looking ahead, I see that this evening's workout is a welcome recovery from yesterday's crusher - an easy run. Tomorrow's run is a basic 45-minute run, and we have a long run on Friday. My task is to minimize the amount of deviation from the prescribed workout "pattern" established by the schedule.

So, I have elected to engage in a fartlek workout this evening. Tomorrow, I will go on a 45-minute run at a slightly easier pace than I otherwise would have, because I will need some recovery time. However, I will not need as much recovery time as the rest of you, because I missed out on the back-to-back plyometrics/fartlek training that the rest of you had to do yesterday. This means that, by doing a fartlek workout today and taking a slightly easier basic run tomorrow, I will still be back on track for Friday's long run.

Adjusting Your Workout Schedule: Alternative to Real-World Example
Another option I could have chosen in this scenario would have been to sacrifice my rest day, having essentially replaced the equivalent of one full workout day (one evening, one morning) with a rest. This is a viable choice and appropriate for certain people in certain circumstances. I chose not to go this route due to the fact that my prescribed rest days occur only once every 14 days. Therefore, it's important to keep this on track because otherwise I may have to workout more than 14 days in a row before my next rest day. This, in my view, isn't safe.

Those of you engaged in the Level 1 schedule, however, do not have this problem, and could easily take the above approach. It is also slightly less of an issue for Level 2s than it is for Level 3s.

Adjusting Your Workout Schedule: The General Theory
As I mentioned above, what you want to try to do is minimize the extent to which a necessary change in the day's workout impacts the overall direction and pattern of your regimen. You'll want to take a look at a few important items:

• The previous 2-3 workouts
• The next 2-3 workouts
• How you feel and how much time you can commit over the next few days
• Planned rest days
• "Important" workout days
  

In regard to the first two items, try to prevent yourself from having to do two speed/tempo/fartlek workouts in a row. Two such workouts in a week is a significant undertaking. Two in a row will break your muscles down far too much. You'll risk injury and fatigue, and it will cost you more workout days in the long run.

As for how you feel, this does relate to previous and subsequent workouts, but it also relates to the reason you have to change your workout schedule. For example, if life's other commitments are driving the workout change, then your body likely feels fine and you can undertake to do more to make up ground. On the other hand, if an illness, injury, or late night is driving the change, then you should opt out of powering through a lot of difficult workouts to make up ground. Your body likely needs the rest.

Speaking of rest, one must never underestimate the importance of planned rest days. These are not "days off." These are important, deliberately established workouts. They are there for a reason. Your body needs them. You cannot skip them. If you choose to work out on a rest day (or do something physically exerting in a non-workout context), you must make that rest day up soon. Sometimes people have a hard time understanding that taking a rest day is a type of workout. Exercise involves constantly breaking your body down and rebuilding it. Rest days are when the major rebuilding and healing occurs.

Finally, with regard to "important" workout days, you should keep in mind that some workouts are more important than others. For marathon runners, the long run is arguably the most important day of the week. Speed work, on the other hand, is of less importance. For a 5K runner, the opposite is true. Therefore, if you find yourself in a situation where you have to choose between a long run and a speed workout, choose the option that better addresses your training goals.

Conclusion
It's no fun to have to miss a day, but it happens sometimes. With a little logic and some planning, you'll be able to adjust your workout effectively, no matter what life throws at you.