Running in comparison to cycling.

[Michielveedeebee]

Everyone knows running gets you in shape quicker than cycling. Yet why is it that they say that running isn't good when you're a competitive cyclist? You use the same muscles groups, learn how to breathe good too(else your start hurting in the belly ). I figured it was because of the heavier forces on your joints but I asked my dad -sports doctor and orthopedist and as such reliable - and he claimed that wasn't the case. Any ideas on this ?

 

[Le breton]

Everyone knows running gets you in shape quicker than cycling. .............Any ideas on this ?

What does that mean, you get more quickly in shape for, say, cross-country skiing or roller skating, by running rather than cycling?

You would have to prove that, not obvious.

Running might get you quicker in shape for running than cycling would. Although I have never seen any proof of that, it would make sense.

I would certainly believe that cycling would get you more quickly in shape for cycling than running would.

As for myself, with NO training whatsoever on foot, I beat my personal record for running on foot a 4km stretch with 300m uphill at age 55, did better than 10-12 years before when I had been training for 1 or 2 month. I just happened to be in good shape when I did that test at age 55 and was consequently 1 or 2 kg lighter.

 

[Michielveedeebee]

What does that mean, you get more quickly in shape for, say, cross-country skiing or roller skating, by running rather than cycling?

You would have to prove that, not obvious.

Running might get you quicker in shape for running than cycling would. Although I have never seen any proof of that, it would make sense.

I would certainly believe that cycling would get you more quickly in shape for cycling than running would.

As for myself, with NO training whatsoever on foot, I beat my personal record for running on foot a 4km stretch with 300m uphill at age 55, did better than 10-12 years before when I had been training for 1 or 2 month. I just happened to be in good shape when I did that test at age 55 and was consequently 1 or 2 kg lighter.

No, what I meant was that your overall condition improves faster by running than by cycling this because of the higher heartrate. Yet everyone tells me that I shouldn't be running because it would harm my performance on a bike. I'm wondering why that is.

 

[titleshot]

I read an article somewhere a couple months ago that explains why running is not that helpful with cycling, dont really remember where, might have been velonews or something.

It had something to do with your muscles firing in different directions and its hard on your joints so you can get overuse injuries quicker.

I agree that running gets you fit faster, but it doesnt make you a good cyclist on its own.

Also I did triathlons for about 2 years and was a pretty good cyclist throughout that time. I dedicated the next year to just bike racing and I saw a night and day difference in leg strength and pedaling efficiency.

 

[Le breton]

No, what I meant was that your overall condition improves faster by running than by cycling this because of the higher heartrate. ..........

higher heartrate.

It's really up to you how high you want your heart to go on the bike. Running uphill as fast as you can, you might have a slightly higher heart rate than cycling uphill as fast as you can, maybe 5-10 bpm. due to energy expenditure in "stray" arm movements.
You might possibly argue that for equivalent training times in both exercises your cardiovascular system would be working slightly harder in running mode.

 

[oldborn]

Most triathletes agree that cycling has some benefits for running not vice-versa.
Some of them thinks that of the muscles triathletes developed from his cycling will not get any faster in running.

Running is good (if we are talking about cyclist) prep. period overall fitness method as well other sports. That does not mean that cyclist should runn fast during recovery periods between races, because thye do nat have a much time to experiment with that, some of them do easy, recovery jogging instead of 1h recovery ride beetwen some races, it is individualy.

Traithletes in other way are very, very fast on bike as on running, so if you train hard it will not hurt at all, let take a look of 2008. Kona winner Craig Alexander he did his 180km hell bike course for 4:37 h which is average speed of how many 41km/h? wright, and he still complete his marathon portion for 2:45. It will be interesting to see what will happened if he did first running portion instead cycling.

It is a matter the amount of strength/power you need to generate to go fast or climb big hills. Running, even at a very fast pace, doesn't require sustained quad power, and demands more from the aerobic capacity.

I could run 5 min/km on marathons and sub-4min/km on 5ks, but my quads would get toasted on the bike (in duathlon) way before my aerobic capacity was taxed when I started.

I did last year this kind of duathlon 10km running-40km cycling-5km running, what i was discovered that i will never do it again for sure, in simple words my aerobic capacity and treshold power on bike portion where i almost die, was less then on 1st running portion, on second 5km portion i was really toasted, lack of aerobic endurance and treshold again, i guess.

Running uses more of muscles, cycling really demands a lot from mainly the quads, and this will generally be the limiting factor for accomplished runners who switch to bike - all those runner calves and hams aren't a big factor on the bike.

Of course, if you have both the quad power and aerobic capacity, you'll be super strong on the bike.

In short running will not hurt your cycling if you runn sometimes occasionally, neither will improve your cycling much either.

 

[L'arriviste]

Everyone knows running gets you in shape quicker than cycling. Yet why is it that they say that running isn't good when you're a competitive cyclist? You use the same muscles groups, learn how to breathe good too(else your start hurting in the belly ). I figured it was because of the heavier forces on your joints but I asked my dad -sports doctor and orthopedist and as such reliable - and he claimed that wasn't the case. Any ideas on this ?

I run whereas I don't ride anymore (that may change in 2011). I like running because it requires no prior planning and it costs nothing except the occasional renewal of footwear.

I can see how it could be detrimental to competitive cyclists because it probably does put a bit of stress on the joints and I think it lacks the extraordinary variations in effort offered and indeed required by cycling.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Most triathletes agree that cycling has some benefits for running not vice-versa.
Some of them thinks that of the muscles triathletes developed from his cycling will not get any faster in running.

Running is good (if we are talking about cyclist) prep. period overall fitness method as well other sports. That does not mean that cyclist should runn fast during recovery periods between races, because thye do nat have a much time to experiment with that, some of them do easy, recovery jogging instead of 1h recovery ride beetwen some races, it is individualy.

Traithletes in other way are very, very fast on bike as on running, so if you train hard it will not hurt at all, let take a look of 2008. Kona winner Craig Alexander he did his 180km hell bike course for 4:37 h which is average speed of how many 41km/h? wright, and he still complete his marathon portion for 2:45. It will be interesting to see what will happened if he did first running portion instead cycling.

It is a matter the amount of strength/power you need to generate to go fast or climb big hills. Running, even at a very fast pace, doesn't require sustained quad power, and demands more from the aerobic capacity.

I could run 5 min/km on marathons and sub-4min/km on 5ks, but my quads would get toasted on the bike (in duathlon) way before my aerobic capacity was taxed when I started.

I did last year this kind of duathlon 10km running-40km cycling-5km running, what i was discovered that i will never do it again for sure, in simple words my aerobic capacity and treshold power on bike portion where i almost die, was less then on 1st running portion, on second 5km portion i was really toasted, lack of aerobic endurance and treshold again, i guess.

Running uses more of muscles, cycling really demands a lot from mainly the quads, and this will generally be the limiting factor for accomplished runners who switch to bike - all those runner calves and hams aren't a big factor on the bike.

Of course, if you have both the quad power and aerobic capacity, you'll be super strong on the bike.

In short running will not hurt your cycling if you runn sometimes occasionally, neither will improve your cycling much either.

Not necessarily true. I know people who have competed in cross country running events just for fun and done quite well in them. They are cyclists and cycling is their only form of exercise. The day after they did cross country race they were super sore from it because of not being use to having the impact on the legs because running is high impact where as cycling is not. Running does have an effect on cycling if you don't run at all.

 

[Toobab]

Like they said..

I used to be a bike racer and now I'm an even more ineffective but much happier veteran club runner.
A very good example of how different the two activities are is when you get on and off the bike in a duathlon and try to run. It's like a witch has cast a spell and changed you into elastic bands and straws.
I don't think running actively works against cycling, and I'm sure in my own case that cycling helps prevent running injuries.

 

[Michielveedeebee]

thx for the replies, my joints are allright my knees can take a whole of a lot it's the elbows that might cause me problems because of a 'kraakbeenmuis' (no idea what it's called in English but it means you've got a loose redundant part of cartilage)
So running isn't good because of the lack of quaduse? That seems not possible as you use your quads for leg extension ? and you use your calves to 'jump' whilst running. but what's wrong with stronger calves?

 

[oldborn]

Not necessarily true. I know people who have competed in cross country running events just for fun and done quite well in them. They are cyclists and cycling is their only form of exercise. The day after they did cross country race they were super sore from it because of not being use to having the impact on the legs because running is high impact where as cycling is not. Running does have an effect on cycling if you don't run at all.

Well yes, i agree with you at some point, but they are not used to that wright? They are cyclist, i am sure that they choose easy 1h jogging instead, they would not suffered that much.
Even Cadel Evans would suffered after 8km cross country race, following with some hard race day after, or not?. It should not be competitive kind of running, unless you are triathlete specialist.
Triathletes are more used to that changes. Someone mention feeling you have after cycling portion on traithlon, your legs hurt like hell and remind us how those two sports are different. There is one techique to overcome that, at first few hundreds meters running, concentration should be on frequency of your step, just to let blood circulate again. Traithletes who are more used for such a movement change are very good at both disciplines.

On ours local group riding there is quite often some cycling pros and triathlon pros., well all i have to say that those cyclist specialist are little better on long hills, on flat to medium short hills, it is hard to tell who is who, both are monsters.

 

[oldborn]

thx for the replies, my joints are allright my knees can take a whole of a lot it's the elbows that might cause me problems because of a 'kraakbeenmuis' (no idea what it's called in English but it means you've got a loose redundant part of cartilage)
So running isn't good because of the lack of quaduse? That seems not possible as you use your quads for leg extension ? and you use your calves to 'jump' whilst running. but what's wrong with stronger calves?

Well i am pretty much sure that Fergie is somewhere around and he is the man for muscles and physiology aspect of this thread.

 

[forty four]

i dont know about running using more muscle than cycling. runners and cyclists are skinny but runners look terrible no skeletal muscle at all. there legs are also much skinnier than your average cyclist with minimal definition. so thats a false claim cycling develops more overall muscle. triathletes of course are different in this regard.

 

[Michielveedeebee]

i dont know about running using more muscle than cycling. runners and cyclists are skinny but runners look terrible no skeletal muscle at all. there legs are also much skinnier than your average cyclist with minimal definition. so thats a false claim cycling develops more overall muscle. triathletes of course are different in this regard.

Well actually you do. you use the deltoid, latissimus dorsi, trapezius, pectoralis major, the full rotator cuff etc... and that are definitly not the only ones My shoulders grow pretty big if I run often

 

[JayKosta]

There are differences in the muscles that are used in running compared with cycling.
If you want to be good at cycling, then train the cycling muscles.

In running, muscles have to be used just to keep the body upright.
When cycling, muscles are used to a higher % for direct forward propulsion.
The bicycle itself takes care of supporting the rider, so larger and heavier 'cycling muscles' are more useful than 'heavy muscles' would be for runners.

Running (or jogging) might be better for general overall conditioning and weight control.

Cross-country skiing is also great for general conditioning because it uses both upper and lower body muscles.

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA

 

[kiwirider]

Yet why is it that they say that running isn't good when you're a competitive cyclist?

The only sensible answer that I've ever found is old school tradition - in much the same way as if you read Lemond's history he comments on the inconsistency of being told by team management after he started racing in Europe that icecream was bad for him, whilst they were offering him cheese as a part of his meal ...

All of these arguments about how bad running is for cyclists ignore the fact that there is a considerable body of top flight professional cyclists who as a matter of course are required to incorporate quite extensive running programmes into their training. I am of course talking about cyclocross racers. These are people who race on the road during the summer, put in major road mileage and still maintain a good running programme (which incorporates a combination of endurance - for those mud races where heaps of running is needed - and power - for the stairs).

Sure, they're not as fast on the road as dedicated roadies - but then how well do you think that some of the GT whippets like the Schlecks or Contador would do against Nys and Stybar on their terrain???

From my own experience (soccer player turned cyclist, dabbled in duathlons for a few years and now race cyclocross and XC ski ... if the snow ever comes back!), I would say that the biggest issue is the time that the body needs to adapt to being "multi-purpose" - which is why a biker running for the first time in ages spends a few days afterwards limping! (Been there, done that, many a time - so easy to forget that a big VO2 doesn't make up for not having runners' calf muscles!) Once you're beyond that stage, the only issues are having enough time to ride and run; running is a harder activity - contrast how you feel after an hour run or an hour ride - so it does require somewhat longer recovery; and it opens you up to a different set of potential injuries (eg., twisted ankles if you trip). Oh and the only other thing is that most trainers and physios will tell you that the average cyclist has such abysmal proprioception from spending too long on bikes that they almost certainly will end up with skinned knees at some stage ...

In saying all this, to me the most important thing to remember is this:

We're all different and what works or doesn't work for one person doesn't necessarily apply to you. View everything you're told as a theory that you need to test against yourself and your own experience of how you work. Know your body and try things out - that way you'll get a good regime that works for you ...

 

[Michielveedeebee]

Thx @kiwirider for the great answer I'm glad you feel the same way about it as I do

 

[runninboy]

Thx @kiwirider for the great answer I'm glad you feel the same way about it as I do

Kiwi rider is correct.The most important thing is we are all different. People run differently. A sprinter runs different than a distance runner. His body is different his stride is different. they are both runners. You have many sub categories of runners, but yet as this is a cycling forum they all get a broad generalization which is basically wrong. Someone mentioned a 2:45 marathon as good. Runners would consider that glorified jogging. I realize it is in an Ironman but my point is you use your muscles differently running at a 6 and a half minute per mile pace(on my team that was called conversational pace and only used for recovery)versus running at a 4:40 minute per mile pace.
At the faster pace your weight is farther forward as you transition from stride to stride at a higher rate. At the lower pace you are basically stopping your momentum briefly on every stride. You are simply not carrying your momentum at a high enough rate to use the muscle the same way. Triathletes in general basically use a joggers stride and try to use a higher turnover when they wish to go faster rather than being more flexible and having better leg extension. Part of this is they ride their bikes without thinking about the muscle groups they want to utilize on the run. Spinning, using the hip flexors and then using the correct muscles on the run would make triathletes better runners. Basically a RUNNER uses their hamstrings more than their quads, a JOGGER lands heavily and tires his quads. The quads that are already tired from cycling.


My opinion as a pretty decent runner with years of experience and alot of cycling experience.

In a nutshell, because running is a weight supporting exercise your body has greater stresses put on it. Also in case no one here has noticed you cant coast when you are running. Unless you are riding a fixed gear chances are you spin a few revs and coast. Most times when you ride in a pack you do not pedal 100 percent of the time.

It is pretty common for peoples MAX heartrate to be 5 to 10 percent higher during running due to the greater number of muscles involved in running. However the pounding your body takes running should not be ignored. I know from my experience the difference between good pain & bad pain. When you run it is pretty common to get small tears in various muscles, how quickly your body repairs itself depends on how far you push yourself. Push yourself too hard and you will be in a constant state of injury. As you get older certain injuries become pretty common for running. Meniscus tears are very common, something you would rarely get on the bike because your knees do not have to support your entire body weight, let alone the impact that multiplies your weight on every foot strike. On the bike you weight is constant and supported between your ****, hands and feet .
My meniscus was shredded into 7 pieces recently and it had taken me quite a long time to heal and rehab and get close to where i was.
At a young age you should have no such problems though.

 

[Toobab]

I think it's more that running is not the ideal training for cycling rather than it's no good at all, it doesn't train the exact muscles in the exact way you need, and you can't (sanely) run for long enough to help with the equivalent endurance for road racing. Running will help, but not as much as actually riding the bike, it is good to keep running if you can't ride because of the weather / injury / just had enough of the bike, but if you can ride, running is a bit of a waste of training opportunity.
I don't see how it would make you a worse cyclist if you added a run as cross training which didn't disrupt any other part of your training, it might even add something which you wouldn't get from the equivalent ride, but if you replaced a 4 hour ride with a 15 mile run, you will see some difference, the recovery from a long run is roughly the same as a long ride, you'll burn roughly the same calories, but the training effect is just different, otherwise everyone would do it and be just as good in 1.5 hours running as with a 4 hour ride.