Running, thoughts on Galloway, Guinness

Running over the weekend went very well. I did two 3 mile runs, with no discomfort (apart from my calves, which are just plain out of shape now). The only interesting thing I saw was a policeman who had pulled over an old lady for presumably speeding.. (I'm familiar with the stretch and know my time will come, given that I speed through there twice a day).

The problem with that was that it's right in front of a known large abandoned property. I sometimes cut through there for my runs, but recently some "No Trespassing" and "Posted" signs had gone up. With the law right there, I figured I shouldn't risk it, even though the odds of him leaving his vehicle were low.

The Galloway thing seems to be working for me. I spent some time on his page and poking around various forums on the Interwebs, and my main problem with his plan is my own mental hangup.

I had always told myself, "If I run a marathon, I'm going to run the whole thing". Now, I read about his plans, and I'd be walking in it. That's purely a mental block on my part. There's no shame in walking part of a marathon, and who's to say I'd be able to run one myself? It's not just the marathon, it's races in general. I'm sure I could go through a 5K doing 100% running with little or no ill effects, but what about a 10K? According to him, that would be a no-no.

But, maybe I'll continue with his plan. I'm going to start including my walk time in my mileage calculation and see what my pace really is. I'll keep track of total distance covered, and see where I am.


And, without further ado, here's today's Alcohol Tuesday entry. It's beer, but I'll try to include a couple of tidbits for you non-beer drinkers. (And maybe I'll grab some wine for next week.. )

Today's entry is Guinness, the 250th anniversary edition.

First interesting tidbit for non beer drinkers: in 1759, the man, Arthur Guinness, signed a lease for the brewery. The interesting part? He signed it for 9,000 years. Not only that, the annual fee is £45. That's a man with some vision.



The above pic shows two glasses, one a good pour, the other, well, not so much.

The astute Guinness drinker will now say.. "What? You're not drinking it from the bottle?"

Indeed not. This was the first thing that I noticed was different in the 250th anniversary edition. There is no rocket widget in the bottle.

Second tidbit for non Guinness drinkers.. The bottles and cans typically have a 'widget' inside of them (a rocket widget for the bottles, a ball for the cans). This is so that when you drink from the bottle, you get a consistency similar to a draft pulled for you at a bar.

The beer itself had more carbonation than the standard Guinness. I'm not sure, but maybe the nitrogen aspect of the carbonation was removed (also explaining why the widget disappeared).

Compared to a standard Guinness, this was a little more malty. Also, disappointingly, the somewhat smoky flavor that exists in regular Guinness was not really present in the anniversary edition.

Change the carbonation, add the malt, and remove the smoke, and you've got yourself a stout which is OK, but not great.

The anniversary edition will run you about 10 bucks for a 6 pack of bottles.

My take on it is this. I'm glad I tried it, but I'll go back to the regular Guinness. (The 250th edition will only be around 6 months or so, anyway)

Ah, if only I was as knowledgeable about something more useful than alcohol. Oh well. :)

Keep on rockin!