In an earlier post about the significance of pain in running, I wrote that I needed more data points. Well, last weekend, I got a new data point--painfully. After I fell on a patch of ice in mile 3 of a 20-mile run, I decided to continue and try to finish the run. The upper left leg, which took the brunt of the contact with the ice, didn't feel completely normal, but, after a few hundred meters, it felt good enough to go on--so I thought. After mile 11, I took a 1/4 mile walking break for a Gu and water. When I started up again, that upper left leg felt stiff and somewhat painful. This time, even after a while, it still didn't feel quite right. So, I decided to cut the run short (at 13 miles) and head home.
I could hardly walk the rest of the day.
My lesson learned, besides to walk around and not across ice (!), is that the significance of pain depends on the context. When Scott Jurek torn his ligaments at mile 44 of the 2001 Western States 100, he calculated that he could continue the race--which he won--without lasting damage. But, that was during a race. In my case, I was finishing up week 12 of a 16-week training cycle for the upcoming Shamrock Marathon. In hindsight, I should have headed home right after my fall on the ice. I should have told myself that to be ready for the race is more important than to finish that week's long run. Had I not continued the run after my fall, perhaps I would be further along in my recovery, which, at one week after, is back to normal walking but not quite to running. Withdrawal symptoms getting worse ...
No comments:
Post a Comment