Imagine if I suddenly assumed the role of an unreliable narrator. Alex from A Clockwork Orange immediately comes to mind. Like the entire time you were reading my blog, you thought to yourself, is she even sane or telling the truth? In reality, I think many people started reading my blog for that very reason: because no (sane) woman runs 16 miles a day while pregnant and refuses to gain more than 15 pounds? Do they!?
But then some women were like, hey, I can relate! And now some of you have gotten to know me. And some of you have even met me. And I'm not even weird. In fact, I'd like to think I'm reliable (I was honestly going to say as reliable as Holden Caulfield, but then I realized he is usually considered an unreliable narrator. Hmmm.)
Where on earth am I going with this?
I want to report my training, my running and my life accurately. So my dilemma is this: what do I report as my real PR from the half marathon on Sunday? The Garmin time or the official race time? Can we come to a consensus as a running community what people should use as their PR on their blogs? Is there already a consensus? CAN one use a Garmin time? Or is it just ANNOYING to do that?
Let me give you a bit more info about the race on Sunday: It was officially "danish certified" (DAF): measured by hand to be 21.1 (maybe even 21.0975, not sure about that)km. BUT even Peer who measured it also got 21.5 km on his Garmin after the race. As he described, everyone took long ways around at times and wide turns at curves, etc.
So what counts? Or does it not matter? Olga is thinking I should just shut up right now.
I have to say I'm leaning towards reporting the actual race time.
I also want to officially apologize to Sparta, who organized this race! You guys did everything right!