On Wednesday of last week (I think) I ran my promised 6 miles. As expected, it was a glorious run for the most part. I was running through farmers fields and hadn't taken my allergy meds for a while, so I had some snot issues, but other than that it was quite enjoyable. Using Jenni's new 5 star system, I would have to rank it as a 5 star run. Well maybe knock a quarter off the last two on the list. Let's say 4.5 star run.
I did it: one star
I made all my time intervals: one star
I made my set distance: one star
I made that distance in my set time: one star
It was fun/easy/good: one star
Then on Friday, I went for a walk around the Seawall in Vancouver, which is also about 6 miles. I was with someone who walks the seawall almost every day, so I was really no match for her. We were walking FAST and talking fast, and for the most part I was distracted from the burning sensations in my legs. About half way through the walk, I finally realize that my legs are getting really sore, which makes me surprised since I never get sore legs when I run unless I run really far. By the end of the walk, my legs feel like jello, and I am anticipating being VERY sore the next morning, something that also hasn't happened after running in a very long time. I wasn't as sore as I thought I would be, but still more sore than I feel like I should be from walking.
Before Friday, if I had to guess which was harder between running or walking 6 miles, I would have said running. Until I realized that I run all of the time, and I almost never walk, except the 1.3 kms to school. When I do walk, I walk pretty damn slowly. And apparently speed-walking and running use different muscles or at least use the same muscles differently. So, my conclusion is that walking is harder than running, especially when one does not walk very often.
Seven miles tomorrow in Surrey. It won't be as good as the 12 mile Tour de Surrey that I did when training for the half marathon back in January, but it will be fun nonetheless. I can't wait!
No comments:
Post a Comment