Benefits of Running - same for cycling?
04-07-14, 10:44 AM
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: SW Fl.
Posts: 5,620
Bikes: Day6 Semi Recumbent "FIREBALL", 1981 Custom Touring Paramount, 1983 Road Paramount, 2013 Giant Propel Advanced SL3, 2018 Specialized Red Roubaix Expert mech., 2002 Magna 7sp hybrid, 1976 Bassett Racing 45sp Cruiser
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1069 Post(s)
Liked 788 Times
in
505 Posts
Here's my take on running, and I'm a bit of living proof.
MOST people who take to running get to run for about 20 years. If you start when you are 20, you'll stop by the time you're in your 40's. If you don't start till you are 50, and can run at that age, you'll get maybe 20 years, probably less.
As I said, that is my take, but I think it's pretty much true. On the other hand, my HS track coach is in his late 70's and still running marathons.
MOST people who take to running get to run for about 20 years. If you start when you are 20, you'll stop by the time you're in your 40's. If you don't start till you are 50, and can run at that age, you'll get maybe 20 years, probably less.
As I said, that is my take, but I think it's pretty much true. On the other hand, my HS track coach is in his late 70's and still running marathons.
I've started seriously running at age 61, running 5K pretty much every morning. Glad to hear I'm good 'til 81.
From what I've experienced and observed, I'm thinking a great many people run badly; they beat the crap out of themselves in the process or simply fail to get/keep themselves in running shape. That's going to lead to unintended consequences over the long run [pun intended].
From what I've experienced and observed, I'm thinking a great many people run badly; they beat the crap out of themselves in the process or simply fail to get/keep themselves in running shape. That's going to lead to unintended consequences over the long run [pun intended].
At 59.5, my first walking 5K was January 2010. With a base from bicycling I was able to improve my walking pace but was unable to jog or run due to knee issues. Here I am, 4 years-3 months later, and I still can not comfortably jog a complete half marathon but it's getting better. This Sunday's 70.3 will find me walking my 10:45mpm/12:00mpm pace and when feeling good my 9:00mpm/10:30mpm jog. I'm pretty sure many individuals without a base such as mine would be running for greater distances than I jog and possibly resulting in all sorts of injuries.
Proper training, form and nutrition will add years to the body's ability to exercise. To avoid complications, the brain must constantly be in touch with the feedback from the body and accurately process that information.
04-07-14, 10:47 AM
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: SW Fl.
Posts: 5,620
Bikes: Day6 Semi Recumbent "FIREBALL", 1981 Custom Touring Paramount, 1983 Road Paramount, 2013 Giant Propel Advanced SL3, 2018 Specialized Red Roubaix Expert mech., 2002 Magna 7sp hybrid, 1976 Bassett Racing 45sp Cruiser
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1069 Post(s)
Liked 788 Times
in
505 Posts
oops, double
04-07-14, 12:43 PM
#28
Full Member
Joints still Good
I am now racing age 72. Cycling goal is always 200 mi. per week with Strava PR's. I ran for about 40 years, mostly on trails (5 -15 mi. per week) but doing a half marathon once a year. Since a multi-level back fusion 1 1/2 years ago my Doc won't let me run any longer but there was no joint damage. Looks like genetics may be more important than how far you run. I will have to admit I had two cardiac ablations due to Atrial Fib issues which are probably due to heavy endurance training. I was happy I didn't have to give up cycling and look forward to 20 more years of it.
04-07-14, 05:59 PM
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2011
Location: People's Republic of California
Posts: 502
Bikes: Some
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 277 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
3 Posts
The majority of marathon participants today are run/walkers (Galloway system). This system in my mind does not tax the cardiovascular system as much due to frequent walk breaks and not getting into oxygen debt. It encourages a much slower speed than what one may think he's capable of doing. I hope my belief is correct because I'm thinking about doing marathons again using this system. I did them for about three years four years ago. Is it a bad idea to run them again?
04-07-14, 06:22 PM
#30
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: SW Fl.
Posts: 5,620
Bikes: Day6 Semi Recumbent "FIREBALL", 1981 Custom Touring Paramount, 1983 Road Paramount, 2013 Giant Propel Advanced SL3, 2018 Specialized Red Roubaix Expert mech., 2002 Magna 7sp hybrid, 1976 Bassett Racing 45sp Cruiser
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1069 Post(s)
Liked 788 Times
in
505 Posts
The majority of marathon participants today are run/walkers (Galloway system). This system in my mind does not tax the cardiovascular system as much due to frequent walk breaks and not getting into oxygen debt. It encourages a much slower speed than what one may think he's capable of doing. I hope my belief is correct because I'm thinking about doing marathons again using this system. I did them for about three years four years ago. Is it a bad idea to run them again?
Run Walk Pace Chart
04-08-14, 01:36 AM
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 352
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Dare I say it...."Moderation in all things." Except love and rocky road ice cream. And desire for N+l. Fitness for general health makes fairly low demands. Fitness gained in order to work on more fitness to be gained which then enables us to reach higher levels of fitness making possible yet more fitness in preparation for further fitness, etc. requires more.
04-08-14, 06:30 AM
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 5,774
Bikes: 2022 Salsa Beargrease Carbon Deore 11, 2020 Salsa Warbird GRX 600, 2020 Canyon Ultimate CF SLX disc 9.0 Di2, 2020 Catrike Eola, 2016 Masi cxgr, 2011, Felt F3 Ltd, 2010 Trek 2.1, 2009 KHS Flite 220
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4409 Post(s)
Liked 3,037 Times
in
1,883 Posts
An interesting analysis
Will Running Too Much Kill You? | Runner's World
Will Running Too Much Kill You? | Runner's World
04-08-14, 06:47 AM
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 7,085
Bikes: Cervelo Prodigy
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 478 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 87 Times
in
67 Posts
As soon as you get one scientific study, you get another that builds upon the earlier ones. You need to follow their "thread". There's some vetting by the journals and sometimes it becomes political. Some journals are prestigious and some are less. Hear what one scientist (Nobel) says:
Open Access science[edit]
In December 2013, Schekman called for academic journal publishing reform and open access science publication by announcing that his lab at the University of California, Berkeley would no longer submit to the prestigious closed-access journals Nature, Cell and Science, citing their self-serving and deleterious effects on science.[24] He has criticized these journals for artificially restricting the number of publications accepted to drive up demand.[24] In addition, Schekman says the journals accept papers that will be cited often, increasing the prestige of the journal, rather than those which demonstrate important results.[24] Schekman has said the prestige and difficulty of publishing in these journals sometimes cause scientists to cut corners or pursue trends, rather than conduct research on important questions. Schekman is the current editor of eLife, an open access journal and competitor to Nature, Cell, and Science.[24] Papers are accepted into eLife based on review by working scientists.[24] Access to accepted papers is free.[24]
Open Access science[edit]
In December 2013, Schekman called for academic journal publishing reform and open access science publication by announcing that his lab at the University of California, Berkeley would no longer submit to the prestigious closed-access journals Nature, Cell and Science, citing their self-serving and deleterious effects on science.[24] He has criticized these journals for artificially restricting the number of publications accepted to drive up demand.[24] In addition, Schekman says the journals accept papers that will be cited often, increasing the prestige of the journal, rather than those which demonstrate important results.[24] Schekman has said the prestige and difficulty of publishing in these journals sometimes cause scientists to cut corners or pursue trends, rather than conduct research on important questions. Schekman is the current editor of eLife, an open access journal and competitor to Nature, Cell, and Science.[24] Papers are accepted into eLife based on review by working scientists.[24] Access to accepted papers is free.[24]
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
ScottBGKY
Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg)
16
08-14-10 08:14 AM
