Some time ago, I decided that my weight goal would be 199 lbs. Why 199? Well, it's just a number, really, one that doesn't start with a 2, 3 or 4. I don't think I've weighed under 200 since probably 6th or 7th grade. I would've been about 11-13 years old. There's just something nice about that number.
I don't think there's anything wrong with that goal, but I wonder if it's the RIGHT goal.
Along the way on this journey, I've set lots of goals. Eventually, I've made most of them so far. I set them monthly, for particular events, for specific dates on the calendar. Now, every so often, the though of hitting the ultimate goal flashes through my mind as I've lost 70% of the weight I set out to lose.
Complicating this question is the diet and exercise component. Lately, I've been feeling a bit lethargic, particularly after longer runs. As I get closer to the Philly race in September, even the short runs get fairly long, at 5 miles, 2x per week. I've attributed this to lack of carbs and have begun to reintroduce them into my diet. At this point, I'll gladly trade slower weight loss for more energy.
I hope to be at 250 by Philly, 14 lbs in 2 months. Definitely doable. Initially, I had hoped to lose 100 in 2007, after 100 in 06. I'm a bit behind there and the pounds will only get tougher to lose. Ultimately, I'm shooting for a marathon weight of 220 or better for next spring. Plenty of time to get there.
I'm not sure that 199 is the right number. I have no idea what excess skin will contribute and if I'm willing to have it surgically removed. Every pound I lose will make running easier and the miles faster, so maybe 180 is the right number. I just don't know.
There is much to figure out between now and then and many decisions to be made. Ultimately, it can't derail what I've already done, but I really need to figure it all out sooner, rather than later.
With that said, I'd rather be where I am than where I was.