Pacing, training, and the nature of fatigue

Hi,

These threads about lactic acid and all the insightful observations and
the illuminating explainations have been almost overhwelming!

The theoretical and more abstract issues interest me purely from
curiosity, but I also have an interest in the practical.

My endurance events (which results interest me) range from 3 hours to
20 hours. To do well I need both power and endurance. I could use more
of both, but I feel power is what is most lacking. I can go forever,
but as soon as the terrain gets steep, or the pace picks up, I get
dropped. Just no more sustainable power available. In terms of HR I
have a pretty good idea what my LT is, and I have a good idea of how
long I can manage various HR's above my LT before I have to back off.
But I have a very poor understanding of the nature of fatigue, and what
I need to do to wear myself out. What is fatigue? Why can someone not
just keep eating, and just go forever? When I go at a moderate pace
below LT I feel I never have to stop. For example my Birkebeiner (first
time) where poor conditions, poor technique, and ill-suited skis made
me use 7 hours. My effort level was low and as a result I was not
tired. Had there been any point in sprinting for 9,999th place, I'm
sure I would have done quite well. The same with cycling. I have often
done 250km+ rides (and on occasion 540km rides) where I felt just fine
afterwards, where I kept my HR below LT almost all the time. But
yesterday for example I went on a 90km bike ride with some friends. It
was a very hilly 90km with several 8-10% climbs. On the flats I have no
problems keeping up with these guys, but in the hills I get a real
workout. Up every hill I was well over LT, essentially at max HR. I ate
a big dinner 1.5 hours before the ride and had a banana and an apple
during the ride, but still after about 2.5 hours I was fried. For the
remaining 40 minutes I could not keep up, even on the flats. I was
tired. But what does that actually mean? Why was I not able to produce
enough power after over-extending myself earlier?

That was a training ride, so I chalked it up as a ride that at the
least gave me practice in suffering. But it made me think about pacing
during a race. I know I can perform at constant power below LT, but how
much (or rather how often) can I dig deeper for short periods before it
makes my ability to even sustain sub LT power levels? What is the
mechanism for this limitation? What is fatigue?

And it made me wonder about my training. Was this particular instance
related to my insufficeint power, or is my LT too low, or do I have
insufficient endurance. And what is endurance? If I had more power
would I have just been fatigued earlier from having expended more
energy sooner? If my LT was higher would I have avoided the problem by
getting more efficeint use of my resources to expend the same or
greater amount of energy? Or is this something entirely different, this
elusive endurance.

Someone please enlighten me!

Joseph

Very essential questions that will intrigue many to hear the absolute truth
about and solutions for.

longer winded than I planed, hope it's not all nonsence.

As far as I understand things, we can eat as much as we like, but during
more intense workouts, our bodies will hardly take any in. Are 70-100g
depending on body weight I think it was. If you drink as much as you should
in summer cycling rides/races, more solid should hardly be required. That
is, if all minerals and stuff are in the drink mix.

Our muscles' high-power fuel is glycogen (at least in Dutch). It recovers a
little during a workout, but cannot really keep up above a certain level, so
you get tired and are forced to switch to fat burning. In 2-hour MTB races,
I've had that happen at exactly 90 minutes, time after time. It was a very
unpleasant experience, to feel the powers fade like that. A rock concert
that is turned down to background noise in a matter of seconds. From one
moment to the other, I was forced to shift super-small gears to get up hill
that I was sprinting up earlier. On the bike, I seem to get through long
flat stretches fine on fat burning (up to ~300W), but going above that is
like killing a bit of yourself. Going slowly for some time will see me load
the batteries back up so I can do short sprints again, or crank up overall
speed for some time to fend of competitors.

If you can't keep up on longer hills, it's probably a basic power to weight
ratio "issue". Your engine needs to be a nice part of the hole, preferably a
bus engine on a scooter, not the other way around.
Now with cycling I'm pretty sure that bike setup plays a vital role in a
rider's "ability" to conquer hills. If you sit really far behind the bottom
bracket, you'll have trouble pedaling efficiently when gravity works at a
different angle. Seat forward, you'll be able to do the Lance-spin more
easily, use less muscle strength and smoothly pedal up with no dead spots in
the pedal cycle to fall back.
Many cyclists have their seats back for cruise the flats comfortable, and
struggle on long climbs. That's like forcing yourself to rollerski in V2
Alternate up the same hill, where a more climbing-specific technique would
be more appropriate.

Sounds like you had to dig deep on the hills, burn up all the fuel in your
muscles, and had to survive the last 40mins of that ride on fat burning
only.
Perhaps your buddies are just better at climbing hills, so they don't have
to burn up all their fuel riding the same pace. Or your bike makes you use
your mscles less efficiently on hills.
Or you just don't do those near-max half-hour efforts often enough, so your
cardio system is not really prepared for it, even if your power for a given
heartrate is quite good.
You may have a spike in your heartrate/lactate graph (I was tested to have
one 10bpm under LT) where you just trash your muscles and blood if you stay
there for too long (train by doing that heartrate more often).

Because you're saying that at lower intensity you could go on forever (I
can't even a casual bike ride of 10 hours kills me and makes me call my
momma), you probably just have endurance muscle fibers which are harder to
train for speed/power. You could still get somewhere by working on
intervals, maximum time trail efforts (bike and ski), all below 15mins.
Forcing heartrate above LT. Overall speed in longer races can go up
considerably from this.
I like doing such time trails, your competitor is the you that set the
record a week ago. You know you can do it, and demand from yourself to
better it. If you've taken care of yourself, you will better it. ~5km
rollerski bursts after intensive warmup, 5km of 10mi bike, one 5km MTB lap,
etc.
I like doing something I can time and repeat under similar circumstances, as
a self-motivator and test method. Bettering yourself on a desert stretch of
road can be more satisfying that winning regional race at times, at least
for me. And it got me fast and mentally strong, as the lactate pain is quite
torturous through at least the second half of it.

In general, look what you'd worst at, enjoy the least, and get started doing
exactly that, more often, for longer :-)

Hope any of this made any sense,

Good luck,

J

schreef in bericht
oups.com...
Hi,

These threads about lactic acid and all the insightful observations and
the illuminating explainations have been almost overhwelming!

The theoretical and more abstract issues interest me purely from
curiosity, but I also have an interest in the practical.

My endurance events (which results interest me) range from 3 hours to
20 hours. To do well I need both power and endurance. I could use more
of both, but I feel power is what is most lacking. I can go forever,
but as soon as the terrain gets steep, or the pace picks up, I get
dropped. Just no more sustainable power available. In terms of HR I
have a pretty good idea what my LT is, and I have a good idea of how
long I can manage various HR's above my LT before I have to back off.
But I have a very poor understanding of the nature of fatigue, and what
I need to do to wear myself out. What is fatigue? Why can someone not
just keep eating, and just go forever? When I go at a moderate pace
below LT I feel I never have to stop. For example my Birkebeiner (first
time) where poor conditions, poor technique, and ill-suited skis made
me use 7 hours. My effort level was low and as a result I was not
tired. Had there been any point in sprinting for 9,999th place, I'm
sure I would have done quite well. The same with cycling. I have often
done 250km+ rides (and on occasion 540km rides) where I felt just fine
afterwards, where I kept my HR below LT almost all the time. But
yesterday for example I went on a 90km bike ride with some friends. It
was a very hilly 90km with several 8-10% climbs. On the flats I have no
problems keeping up with these guys, but in the hills I get a real
workout. Up every hill I was well over LT, essentially at max HR. I ate
a big dinner 1.5 hours before the ride and had a banana and an apple
during the ride, but still after about 2.5 hours I was fried. For the
remaining 40 minutes I could not keep up, even on the flats. I was
tired. But what does that actually mean? Why was I not able to produce
enough power after over-extending myself earlier?

That was a training ride, so I chalked it up as a ride that at the
least gave me practice in suffering. But it made me think about pacing
during a race. I know I can perform at constant power below LT, but how
much (or rather how often) can I dig deeper for short periods before it
makes my ability to even sustain sub LT power levels? What is the
mechanism for this limitation? What is fatigue?

And it made me wonder about my training. Was this particular instance
related to my insufficeint power, or is my LT too low, or do I have
insufficient endurance. And what is endurance? If I had more power
would I have just been fatigued earlier from having expended more
energy sooner? If my LT was higher would I have avoided the problem by
getting more efficeint use of my resources to expend the same or
greater amount of energy? Or is this something entirely different, this
elusive endurance.

Someone please enlighten me!

Joseph

Joseph asked
Why was I not able to produce enough power after over-extending myself
earlier?

Same thing happens to everybody I know who pushes it very far over their
"lactate threshold" early in their performance. When training with other
moving people around, I find it's easy to get too far over my limit too
early without noticing it -- seems to happen in these unconscious(?)
competitive situations (like yesterday evening in Central Park).

What the biochemistry is, I can think of three explanations that have
nothing to do with food or fuel -- anyway all three have the same practical
implication.

Based on this and some other questions you've asked, I suggest you read this
book: The Triathlete's Training Bible, by Joe Friel. To make it applicable
to cross-country skiing, substitute Classic striding for run, Skating for
bike, and Poling for swim.

For bicycling specifics, somebody asked a very similar question to yours on
news:rec.bicycles.rides last year, and received lots of interesting
answers -- check the archives.

Ken

Ken Roberts wrote:
Joseph asked
Why was I not able to produce enough power after over-extending myself
earlier?

What the biochemistry is, I can think of three explanations that have
nothing to do with food or fuel -- anyway all three have the same practical
implication.


No teasing like that! What are these 3?


Based on this and some other questions you've asked, I suggest you read this
book: The Triathlete's Training Bible, by Joe Friel. To make it applicable
to cross-country skiing, substitute Classic striding for run, Skating for
bike, and Poling for swim.

Will do. Amazon is my friend.

For bicycling specifics, somebody asked a very similar question to yours on
news:rec.bicycles.rides last year, and received lots of interesting
answers -- check the archives.

Any key words you recall I can use to search? I'm not having any luck.

Joseph

Jan Gerrit Klok wrote:
Very essential questions that will intrigue many to hear the absolute truth
about and solutions for.

longer winded than I planed, hope it's not all nonsence.

As far as I understand things, we can eat as much as we like, but during
more intense workouts, our bodies will hardly take any in. Are 70-100g
depending on body weight I think it was. If you drink as much as you should
in summer cycling rides/races, more solid should hardly be required. That
is, if all minerals and stuff are in the drink mix.

I've read various things about absorption rates, etc, but they all seem
rather simplistic. As a large person (as you are), I have presumably a
large blood volume, large organs, etc. Shouldn't this affect absorbtion
rates? Wouldn't this "scale"?


Our muscles' high-power fuel is glycogen (at least in Dutch). It recovers a
little during a workout, but cannot really keep up above a certain level, so
you get tired and are forced to switch to fat burning. In 2-hour MTB races,
I've had that happen at exactly 90 minutes, time after time. It was a very
unpleasant experience, to feel the powers fade like that. A rock concert
that is turned down to background noise in a matter of seconds. From one
moment to the other, I was forced to shift super-small gears to get up hill
that I was sprinting up earlier. On the bike, I seem to get through long
flat stretches fine on fat burning (up to ~300W), but going above that is
like killing a bit of yourself. Going slowly for some time will see me load
the batteries back up so I can do short sprints again, or crank up overall
speed for some time to fend of competitors.

The part that is confusing me is that the point at which this happens
is very difficult to determine. I know for example that I can hold LT
HR + 10 beats for say 2 minutes, LT + 15 beats for 1 minute, etc. These
things are almost as clockwork. But when this fat-buring only fatigue
sets in, it always comes as a surprise. How to estimate when it will
set in?


If you can't keep up on longer hills, it's probably a basic power to weight
ratio "issue". Your engine needs to be a nice part of the hole, preferably a
bus engine on a scooter, not the other way around.
Now with cycling I'm pretty sure that bike setup plays a vital role in a
rider's "ability" to conquer hills. If you sit really far behind the bottom
bracket, you'll have trouble pedaling efficiently when gravity works at a
different angle. Seat forward, you'll be able to do the Lance-spin more
easily, use less muscle strength and smoothly pedal up with no dead spots in
the pedal cycle to fall back.
Many cyclists have their seats back for cruise the flats comfortable, and
struggle on long climbs. That's like forcing yourself to rollerski in V2
Alternate up the same hill, where a more climbing-specific technique would
be more appropriate.

My skiing and cycling slowly up hills is no mystery for me. Besides
being heavy at 100-105kg I have at least 8-10kg fat. Given that I am of
the same level of fitness as other hobbyists, it is no surprise that my
power/weight ratio isn't ideal. I like to flatter myself that my skiing
technique isn't as bad as my experience would indicate, as long as I am
strong enough to maintain a decent pace. If I get tired all bets are
off! on a bike I think I do fine. A riding buddy once jokingly
suggested he bring 20kg of weights next time to even the score. He and
I have the same measured power output, and he is regarded as a good
climber. Maybe I'll take him up on it, to see how my technique stacks
up!

Sounds like you had to dig deep on the hills, burn up all the fuel in your
muscles, and had to survive the last 40mins of that ride on fat burning
only.
Perhaps your buddies are just better at climbing hills, so they don't have
to burn up all their fuel riding the same pace. Or your bike makes you use
your mscles less efficiently on hills.

I like to think it is the fact that they are 20-25kg less than me. So
basically I expended way more energy than they did because I had more
work to do, and I ran out of gas. but is it really that simple? Were I
to have eaten more earlier in the ride would I have avoided bonking?

Or you just don't do those near-max half-hour efforts often enough, so your
cardio system is not really prepared for it, even if your power for a given
heartrate is quite good.

This would just account for getting dropped up a steep hill, but not
for bonking later, right? Or do you think this would effect total
efficiency?

You may have a spike in your heartrate/lactate graph (I was tested to have
one 10bpm under LT) where you just trash your muscles and blood if you stay
there for too long (train by doing that heartrate more often).

That is interesting. Can someone expalain why that may happen for some
people?


Because you're saying that at lower intensity you could go on forever (I
can't even a casual bike ride of 10 hours kills me and makes me call my
momma), you probably just have endurance muscle fibers which are harder to
train for speed/power. You could still get somewhere by working on
intervals, maximum time trail efforts (bike and ski), all below 15mins.
Forcing heartrate above LT. Overall speed in longer races can go up
considerably from this.

This is what I did all winter up and down the short steep hills around
here. Skating seemed to build more strength, but classic got my HR
higher. No LSD on skis, always hard (6-10 hours weekly). Once a week
during the latter half of the season I did one race per week too, which
really got the HR going. On a bike I do this 2x weekly. Once in a
training ride with a club, and once in a short road race (I always get
dropped on some hill, but I sure push it.) The rest is LSD (6 hours
LSD, 3 hard weekly).

I like doing such time trails, your competitor is the you that set the
record a week ago. You know you can do it, and demand from yourself to
better it. If you've taken care of yourself, you will better it. ~5km
rollerski bursts after intensive warmup, 5km of 10mi bike, one 5km MTB lap,
etc.
I like doing something I can time and repeat under similar circumstances, as
a self-motivator and test method. Bettering yourself on a desert stretch of
road can be more satisfying that winning regional race at times, at least
for me. And it got me fast and mentally strong, as the lactate pain is quite
torturous through at least the second half of it.

I do this quite often. Every week I did a 10km classic loop and a 10km
skate 2 days later. On a bike I do it once per week. In general on a
bike my best times come from a HR 5 beats above measured LT. On skis
the terrain was always much to varied to pay any attention to HR. I
just went as hard as I could.

In general, look what you'd worst at, enjoy the least, and get started doing
exactly that, more often, for longer :-)

getting dropped? ;-)

Hope any of this made any sense,

Good luck,

Thanks!

Joseph



schreef in bericht
oups.com...
Hi,

These threads about lactic acid and all the insightful observations and
the illuminating explainations have been almost overhwelming!

The theoretical and more abstract issues interest me purely from
curiosity, but I also have an interest in the practical.

My endurance events (which results interest me) range from 3 hours to
20 hours. To do well I need both power and endurance. I could use more
of both, but I feel power is what is most lacking. I can go forever,
but as soon as the terrain gets steep, or the pace picks up, I get
dropped. Just no more sustainable power available. In terms of HR I
have a pretty good idea what my LT is, and I have a good idea of how
long I can manage various HR's above my LT before I have to back off.
But I have a very poor understanding of the nature of fatigue, and what
I need to do to wear myself out. What is fatigue? Why can someone not
just keep eating, and just go forever? When I go at a moderate pace
below LT I feel I never have to stop. For example my Birkebeiner (first
time) where poor conditions, poor technique, and ill-suited skis made
me use 7 hours. My effort level was low and as a result I was not
tired. Had there been any point in sprinting for 9,999th place, I'm
sure I would have done quite well. The same with cycling. I have often
done 250km+ rides (and on occasion 540km rides) where I felt just fine
afterwards, where I kept my HR below LT almost all the time. But
yesterday for example I went on a 90km bike ride with some friends. It
was a very hilly 90km with several 8-10% climbs. On the flats I have no
problems keeping up with these guys, but in the hills I get a real
workout. Up every hill I was well over LT, essentially at max HR. I ate
a big dinner 1.5 hours before the ride and had a banana and an apple
during the ride, but still after about 2.5 hours I was fried. For the
remaining 40 minutes I could not keep up, even on the flats. I was
tired. But what does that actually mean? Why was I not able to produce
enough power after over-extending myself earlier?

That was a training ride, so I chalked it up as a ride that at the
least gave me practice in suffering. But it made me think about pacing
during a race. I know I can perform at constant power below LT, but how
much (or rather how often) can I dig deeper for short periods before it
makes my ability to even sustain sub LT power levels? What is the
mechanism for this limitation? What is fatigue?

And it made me wonder about my training. Was this particular instance
related to my insufficeint power, or is my LT too low, or do I have
insufficient endurance. And what is endurance? If I had more power
would I have just been fatigued earlier from having expended more
energy sooner? If my LT was higher would I have avoided the problem by
getting more efficeint use of my resources to expend the same or
greater amount of energy? Or is this something entirely different, this
elusive endurance.

Someone please enlighten me!

Joseph

Jan Gerrit Klok wrote:

Our muscles' high-power fuel is glycogen (at least in Dutch). It recovers a
little during a workout, but cannot really keep up above a certain level, so
you get tired and are forced to switch to fat burning.

Someone (my sister's brother-in-law) who reads a lot of medical journals
told me that there is a percentage of the population (perhaps 20%) whose
digestive system converts carbohydrates into triglycerides instead of
glycogen. (We were discussing the results of my cholesterol test, where
I had low cholesterol but high triglycerides.) Are the triglycerides
available as fuel during exercise?

Lew Lasher
Cambridge, Massachusetts and Stowe, Vermont

schreef in bericht
ups.com...

I've read various things about absorption rates, etc, but they all seem
rather simplistic. As a large person (as you are), I have presumably a
large blood volume, large organs, etc. Shouldn't this affect absorbtion
rates? Wouldn't this "scale"?
I certainly hope it scales! But if you're 100kg, don't expect to absorb 2x
that of a 70kg athlete.
Also, it can be trained somewhat. Taking gels and banana's during hard
workouts.

The part that is confusing me is that the point at which this happens
is very difficult to determine. I know for example that I can hold LT
HR + 10 beats for say 2 minutes, LT + 15 beats for 1 minute, etc. These
things are almost as clockwork. But when this fat-buring only fatigue
sets in, it always comes as a surprise. How to estimate when it will
set in?
The amount of recovery enjoyed? With little recovery (flatlands MTB racing),
it was really short for me. The transition came smoother and later as the
racing was less brutal.
Belgian cyclo-cross pro's go for a mellow ride BEFORE breakfast once a week
or so, to train fat burning capacity. No other fuel in the body left, after
all.
Their races are short, but speeds is so important, that they want to be
burning fat from the starting line. The speed they generate is really out
there, even surprising to a mountainbike professional. There may be
something there... I suppose they may not bink as bad as others, as they are
more prepared for it.

I like to think it is the fact that they are 20-25kg less than me. So
basically I expended way more energy than they did because I had more
work to do, and I ran out of gas. but is it really that simple? Were I
to have eaten more earlier in the ride would I have avoided bonking?
If you're carrying more weight running a similarly sizes engine, especially
on hill you'll be closer to the red zone. So, you manage the same effort for
shorter than the other guy. The other guy has to ride faster on the same
hill to fatigue after the same amount of time on it.

This would just account for getting dropped up a steep hill, but not
for bonking later, right? Or do you think this would effect total
efficiency?
Well, increasing the power you generate at a give heart rate will also allow
you to drop heartrate at a given power (keeping up with buddies on a hill)

You may have a spike in your heartrate/lactate graph (I was tested to
have
one 10bpm under LT) where you just trash your muscles and blood if you
stay
there for too long (train by doing that heartrate more often).
That is interesting. Can someone expalain why that may happen for some
people?
My highly educated coach had the theory that I'd been exposed to LT+
heartrates too much. At LT, I had near zero lactate going on, and feeling
really comfortable, until fuel just ran out. I was a novice ahtlete, but
really was managing odd speeds down the straights in MTB races, in a time I
couldn't sprint up a hill in large gear, at all. All speed, no muscle
strength.
At LT my waste disposal was extraordinary, but neglected elsewhere. I also
had too weak a base (130-140rpm), so I got schedules to do endurance work
and intervals in those painful HR's, both low rpm and high rpm.

You may have the same, with your frequent all-out efforts, actually doing
too many of them.
Perhaps, if you can't have yourself tested for lactate levels, try some
15min intervals of LT-10/15 in otherwise just mellow training riders at fat
burning HR?
If you can find a heartrate where it really hurt (try building up really
slowly), than you might have such an odd peak. They're rare though. When I
trained in that zone to take away the peak, it was hell, although I could go
quite a bit faster. When I did (but shouldn't), the pain went.

Any key words you recall I can use to search? I'm not having any luck.

The subject of the thread on news:rec.bicycles.rides around August 2005 was
"Hill problems".

Joseph asked
Why was I not able to produce enough power
after over-extending myself earlier?

Here's some possible explanations:
(a) simple "old school" oxygen / lactic acid theory: After those intervals
of "over-extending", your muscles have an over-concentration of lactic acid
"poison". Once you do enough easy recovery spinning to bring the lactic
concentration down to a low level, your endurance and hill-climbing power
should be as good as when you started your exercise session.

(b) available fuel theory: After those intervals of "over-extending", your
muscles have an under-concentration of fuel. There are several kinds of
fuel, but the usual culprit is glycogen -- but only if you did enough work
already to deplete it (like at least more than an hour). In this situation,
if you ingest an energy drink, your "endurance" should be OK as long as you
keep your speed/power output within the rate your digestive and bloodstream
can deliver, plus the rate at which other stores can transported from other
sites in your body. (On this theory, the time duration that your
hill-climbing power could be sustained should steadily increase later in
your exercise session, provided that you utilize your muscles at a rate
slower than than your bloodstream can transport new fuel from other
sources.)

(c) depletion of supporting resources other than fuel or oxygen? Human
biochemistry is complicated. I'm not saying I know what these chemicals
could be, but there might be no quick way to ingest them or to produce or
transport them from ingested (as opposed to injected?) substances.

(d) special stress chemicals: The experience of intervals of
"over-extending" the power output of muscles might produce chemicals other
than lactic acid.
This opens up several more alternatives:
(1) These stress chemicals are caused by high lactic acid concentration;
versus these chemicals are often correlated with lactic acid, but their
causal pathways are independent.
(2) Some of these chemicals directly block higher power output in the
muscles; versus they only make you _feel_ like you cannot push your
muscles to higher output.
(3) These chemicals are an accurate warning signal of significant
probability of long-term damage to bodily structures; versus some of these
chemicals are just unfortunate misleading side-effects (? sort of like an
allergic reaction ?) of a biochemical system which evolved for competitive
survival + reproduction objectives that have little to with success in
modern athletic performances of 25-250 minutes.

My experience is that theories (a) and (b) fail to explain important things
that happen in my exercise sessions and endurance performance after I
"over-extend" in the first hour.

It would greatly surprise me if some form of theory (d) does not hold --
because otherwise it's very difficult to explain:
* development of improved endurance infrastructure and increased muscular
performance which can be observed a week later
* DOMS -- "delayed onset muscle soreness" -- significant specific muscle
pain two days after the exercise.

Ken

Ken Roberts wrote:
Any key words you recall I can use to search? I'm not having any luck.

The subject of the thread on news:rec.bicycles.rides around August 2005 was
"Hill problems".

Thanks. The power to weight issue is pretty obvious. Some of the
training and mental tips seem pretty good. Your posts about technique
were interesting. I think my technique is pretty good, and I have
convinced my friend to try a handicapped time trial where he has
ballast to match my weight. We have the same power. It will be
interesting to see the results of climbs. It will be strange for him to
have extra weight, but we have the same gearing and same power, so
theoretically it will be technique that makes any difference.

Joseph