Just completed W4R2. Was not as light-footed and elfen-like (!) as I felt during the first run of week 4. Couldn't speed up at the end of the last 5 minutes like last time, but it was very windy and against me. On the other hand I completely underestimated my half way point and had to wander around a bit at the end to complete the podcast - which means I'm getting faster and covering more distance.😊 I wish Laura would tell us when we were half way, but otherwise I'm very happy to have her accompany me.
But really I think I probably shouldn't have run. I was out late last night, too much food and drink. And in order to counteract the effects I walked home (9 km) at midnight. Meant I ended up doing 20 km yesterday (all walking - wasn't a running day). And not in the best shoes. Consequently my legs felt very stiff this morning, I was tired and my toes are sore. I probably hadn't given myself enough rest, thereby increasing the risk of injury.
So where is the line between reasons and excuses for not doing something? My husband draws the line differently from me. I'm not a risk taker, but he probably thinks I am. For instance:
I run in the dark on my own (a woman alone in the park at 6 am)
Yesterday I walked 9 km on my own, partly through parks at midnight. There weren't many people around. I mostly kept to main roads, but there were 2 points where I was feeling nervous myself. I walked VERY fast there!
I'd be mad to do it in London. But Munich is extremely safe, I have never felt threatened in 30 years. And I was at Leeds university when the Yorksire Ripper was on the rampage, now that was threatening! And if I didn't do these things in the dark I wouldn't do them at all. Is the danger a reason or an excuse? If I hadn't run today would my fear of injury have been a valid reason or just a pathetic excuse for being a couch potato? Sometimes I find it very difficult to distinguish.