12345Michael543
05-18-08, 06:05 PM
Okay, I'm an overweight (working on it), out-of-shape (working on it), 45 year old man.
Lately, in addition to eating right, I've been trying to be more physically active. So among other things, on occasion I'll walk for 60-90 minutes along the NCR trail (in Baltimore County, MD). Usually it's 30-45 minutes at a decent pace, then sit and rest for a few minutes minutes, then back. Nice trail, weather's comfortable this time of year, and I enjoy it.
While walking the NCR trail, I see lots of people riding their bikes. And I got to thinking, "If walking the trail is nice, I bet riding it would be even better." So the other day, I stopped by a bike shop right on the trail (it's the one at Paper Mill Rd., for those of you who know the area), and rented a bike. (Yeah, yeah, in the long run it makes much more financial sense to buy a bike of my own. I know. But this once, I rented a bike.)
First time I've been on a bicycle since a fair number of years and a good many pounds ago.
Anyway, I found that I couldn't manage even 10 minutes of riding, before I had to stop and take a break, and I was forced to stop and rest every few minutes thereafter. I had the bike out for around an hour, and covered maybe 4 miles - which utterly exhausted me. Whereas, on foot, I could cover about as much ground in the same time, and not be completely exhausted as a result.
Now, I totally get that I'm just starting out, and if I keep at it I'll see improvement. And I also get that riding uses different muscles than does walking and all that. But is it unusual that I could go longer, and probably cover as much (if not more) distance on foot, than I could on a bicycle? Because it just seems sort of counter-intuitive to me. But if several of you assure me that it's not so strange for someone like me, just starting out, I'll take your word for it.
Lately, in addition to eating right, I've been trying to be more physically active. So among other things, on occasion I'll walk for 60-90 minutes along the NCR trail (in Baltimore County, MD). Usually it's 30-45 minutes at a decent pace, then sit and rest for a few minutes minutes, then back. Nice trail, weather's comfortable this time of year, and I enjoy it.
While walking the NCR trail, I see lots of people riding their bikes. And I got to thinking, "If walking the trail is nice, I bet riding it would be even better." So the other day, I stopped by a bike shop right on the trail (it's the one at Paper Mill Rd., for those of you who know the area), and rented a bike. (Yeah, yeah, in the long run it makes much more financial sense to buy a bike of my own. I know. But this once, I rented a bike.)
First time I've been on a bicycle since a fair number of years and a good many pounds ago.
Anyway, I found that I couldn't manage even 10 minutes of riding, before I had to stop and take a break, and I was forced to stop and rest every few minutes thereafter. I had the bike out for around an hour, and covered maybe 4 miles - which utterly exhausted me. Whereas, on foot, I could cover about as much ground in the same time, and not be completely exhausted as a result.
Now, I totally get that I'm just starting out, and if I keep at it I'll see improvement. And I also get that riding uses different muscles than does walking and all that. But is it unusual that I could go longer, and probably cover as much (if not more) distance on foot, than I could on a bicycle? Because it just seems sort of counter-intuitive to me. But if several of you assure me that it's not so strange for someone like me, just starting out, I'll take your word for it.