Weight loss at last

Latest health bulletin on this ailing ex-athlete has a slightly more positive bent to it. Since Christmas I have lost 11lbs. Without going on a diet, I have cut out all the rubbish snacks, toast & jam in the morning and second helpings of dinner. I also didn't drink at all in January and since starting back am only doing so in moderation, concentrating on quality not quantity. Thus just quaffing fine Burgundy & Claret from France, Spanish Gran Reserva and Italian Barolo at meal times. Also generally leaving the calorie busting beer alone, although had a rather tasty 7º proof Belgian beer (just the one) in Holland last week and a fine pint of Timothy Taylor's with Andy Bradley in Derbyshire today.

I have also been running, no great distances but regular outings that create structure and routine which the body likes. Built up over January to regular 15-20 minute potters four times a week. This only gives 10 miles a week but is at least a start. In true Paul Barlowesque fashion my mileage has built up in tiny incremental increases but this appears to be working. In Holland last week (now that's what I call a sand dune) I managed a 41 minute easy run with Michelle after her 10km win and since then have had the confidence to do two 30 minute efforts. My injury woes have not disappeared - my Achilles is so bad that about an hour after each run, and for the rest of the day, I am limping despite a cold shower and ice, and I've still got abdominal pains and joint issues - but I see my priority right now to reduce my weight and therefore the pressure on my pins. Maybe then the eccentric exercises I do to ease the Achilles will start to work. I also have the small issue of a mob match on Blackheath's brute of a course this Saturday.
.
One of the great pleasures of being running fit and healthy is to be able to eat & drink without any worries; this is what I aspire to. As Haruki Murakami wrote in his book, What I talk about when I talk about Running:
.
"if you live in Boston, Samuel Adams draft beer and Dunkin' Donuts are essentials of life. I discovered to my delight that even these indulgences can be offset by persistent exercise."
.
Sounds good to me. I still have a long way to go having put on well in excess of two stone, but a start has been made and I'm confident that I can now complete another full mob match season on Saturday.

Olympic stadium

A hot potato if ever there was one; I guess it's time I put in my sixpence worth although most readers probably won't like it. Sadly, politics and money get in the way once again.

To go back to square one, the 2012 Olympics should not have been handed to London, they should have gone to Paris where most of the infrastructure was already in place and the total cost would have been within some sort of proportion. The UK Government now has a noose around its neck; it's committed to supplying a fully (i.e. over) funded Games whilst putting the population through severe austerity measures. All for the sake of three weeks sport. As could easily have been predicted when the budget figures were quoted at the time of bidding, the cost of staging this jamboree will be billions above estimate, money that could have been used around the country to fund grass roots sport. Everybody knew that would be the case but of course once the winner was announced it was too late to go back on it. Yes, there will be some regeneration in the East End of London, not before time, but this could have been done at a fraction of the cost of staging the Olympics. Why the excitement at staging the Games? I would far rather hop across to Paris than struggle to Stratford, that's if I could get a ticket. I find it incredible that the British Athletics Supporters Club, who travel all over the world to watch their beloved sport, are not getting any preferential treatment in terms of ticket allocation. How many true athletics (or cycling, swimming, boxing etc) fans will get to see their favoured events?

In a previous blog I've said what I think about the marathon not finishing inside the stadium. Appalling decision.

The bid team apparently promised that there would be an athletics legacy at the Olympic stadium. Well, they have reneged on most things so one more won't matter. Spurs or West Ham? All the top athletes, uk:athletics and other influential people have stated that there can be no argument about which bid to accept, it has to be West Ham's because the stadium must retain an athletics track. Thankfully, one or two of the more intelligent people on this planet - Brian Moore and John Bicourt for example (I know intelligence is all relative) - disagree; I'm on their side. Do the athletes think that they'll be able to turn up and train at the stadium any day of the week? If so they are away with the fairies. Athletics will be the poor relation to football. It will be a football stadium which allows athletics as a secondary sport on some occasions. From an athletics point of view the stadium will become a white elephant.

Why not take Spurs' money and build a brand new stadium solely for the use of athletics? It can become a centre of excellence and be used on a regular basis. Spurs propose to rebuild Crystal Palace. Sounds good but as someone who has travelled there on numerous occasions I think I speak for the majority when I say that it's in the wrong place! As with Wembley (another white elephant) and Twickenham, why do we insist on building these massive stadiums in built-up areas? In America most stadia are built right by major highways. My choice would be just outside the M25 corridor, maybe adjoining the M40. This would still be known as a London arena (important for the perception of foreigners); be a short drive from Heathrow and be easily accessible from all parts of the country via the motorway system. I rest my case.