Right, that's my 2nd run complete and I'm happy to report that it felt a lot more comfortable. The first few "one minute runs" were over quicker than I expected and apart from a few twinges in my thighs I felt overall OK. Of course I still felt like a flat footed buffoon.... but I hope that will come with time and practise and as my ankles get stronger, etc.
The only downside to the run was my Garmins inconsistency! Practically every time I looked at it, it had auto-paused - which wasn't the case as we were continuously on the move; either walking or running. Then when we got back home and uploaded the run to GarminConnect it said that our moving time was nearly 10 minutes less than the overall time. Pfft! I know that it didn't take me 10 minutes to do my shoe lace up - and other than that momentary stop - we didn't stop moving at all!
Is it possible that my lovely bicycle specific Garmin is absolutely useless for running? Can they not cope with the slower walking and running pace? Yes, they are impractical as you have to hold them in your hand or pop it in a pocket, instead of having it neatly around your wrist but surely as it works using the same satellites it should give the same reading as a Garmin Forerunner.
Then to top it off... I really don't understand the statistics. After uploading the Garmin, it stated my best pace was 7;24min/mi. It took a lot of twitter peeps (and some controversy) to explain that it meant at that pace - if I could sustain it - I could run a mile in 7mins 24 seconds. My average moving pace was 11:54min/mi - but how could I trust the accuracy of that when it only had my moving time as 24mins instead of the 31mins we were out for.
Please don't tell me that if I continue running I'll need a different Garmin to run with?