
Memories of racing NYCM in November 2011 are still vivid. It was a "do-or-die" race: run as fast as possible for as long as possible, was my strategy. After clocking 1:25 for at half-point, my quads were shot at 18-mile from running up and down on a hilly course. Limping to the finish line in Central Park my last 8 miles were slow and agonizing, ultimately giving me 3:01:35 finish time. My tank was empty. Gave it all. Played to win and lost: went for the "gold" and ended up forth, giving up a strong chance for silver or bronze.
STWM on October 20 this year was a "play-it-safe" race with my rational voice controlling my excitement and telling me to slow down at the beginning of the race. Keeping a reasonable pace I was on target with 1:30 at half-point, only to find myself losing precious time in the unexpected curvy and hilly last 4 miles ultimately finishing with 3:01:36 in pretty good form. Had this disappointing feeling that there was still some untapped energy in a tank. My run should have been more aggressive. Played cautious defense to maintain a one-goal hockey lead only to lose a goal in the last minute of the third to an opponent not afraid to take their chances.
My attempts at breaking 3-hour mark were unsuccessful in both races, resulting in a bitter/sweet memories and a sense of dissatisfaction from missing a goal. Comparing both races with their quite contrasting running strategies, I couldn't help but ponder a question: which "dissatisfaction" was more "satisfying"? Was a risky running strategy in New York more satisfying than much safer approach in Toronto?
Searching my soul in the last few days I had to admit that my running philosophy was strongly influenced by Steve Prefontaine who said: "To give anything than your best is to sacrifice the gift"
Run Strong ... and give your best!
RPB