Ugh...I run. Unfortunately. I hate it.

High school crosscountry. It sucks, but for some reason, I do it anyway.

-Mark

RickF wrote:I've been running for fitness off & on for the past 34 years (I'm 51). Typically I run every other morning, between 3 and 5 miles. Two summers ago I built up my distance and ran the San Diego Rock & Roll Marathon. I have also done some occasional mountain bike riding over the past 20 years. Then last summer I dusted off my old road bike and joined some friends for a few 30 mile Sunday rides. After bike riding I started feeling some soreness in my knees. Not what I would call pain but more like discomfort. My knees also started making grinding & popping noises. According to conventional wisdom cycling is lower impact and easier on the knees, right? So I backed off the cycling but kept up the running and my knees started feeling better. I might be some freak of nature that is better off running than cycling.

Being concerned that I my blow out a knee while carrying a 60 lb. pack, 10 miles deep into the backcountry, I decided to get checked out by an Orthopedist. After x-rays and MRI's the doc told me yesterday that there is some scaring but no real damage and that I should go ahead and "live my life". The doc also recommended some quad strengthening exercises. Good news for me, no surgery for now!

The conventional wisdom that cycling is easier on the knees than running is only partially true. There is less pounding than running but pressure is applied when the knee is more bent which puts stress on different parts of the knee (also true of the hip). Cycling is also typically a more prolonged activity. Cycling knee problems can also result from too low rpms and slight misalignments of the foot and knee.

foweyman wrote:The conventional wisdom that cycling is easier on the knees than running is only partially true. There is less pounding than running but pressure is applied when the knee is more bent which puts stress on different parts of the knee (also true of the hip). Cycling is also typically a more prolonged activity. Cycling knee problems can also result from too low rpms and slight misalignments of the foot and knee.

Foweyman,

Good points! The slight misalignment is one theory that was proposed by another friend. My old road bike has old fashioned serrated pedals, toe clips & straps. Wearing cleated shoes with this arrangement, my foot is confined and fixed against any realignment throughout the rotation of the crank arms. Applying 360 degree muscular effort in this confined misalignment could aggravate my knees.

My mountain bike is newer and has modern clip-type pedals that allow some rotation and pronation about the ball of my feet. I don't experience the soreness and irritation after riding my mountain bike.

This could be as simple as getting different pedals for my road bike.

I don't think its from pedaling too slow, I try to keep the rpm's up to avoid that anaerobic burn.

Its time to give the 'runner' thread a bump.

I was reading the comments and suggestions posted in response to 'training for Rainier and other PNW Peaks'. Many are of the opinion that running is not good for your knees, or that you shouldn't run longer than 30 minutes per session. Rugby legs may indeed be better than marathon legs.

Not only my knees, but my whole body starts feeling better and I really begin to enjoy running when I have time to run for longer than 30 minutes (the first 10 minutes are the hardest for me). I can usually find 3 or 4 times per week to run 40 to 60 minutes.

I typically have only limited windows of time availble for exercise/training. I get a much bigger return running from running than from cycling or playing Rugby for an hour. Running is so pure and simple. You don't need a bike, Rugby field, or any other arsenal of specialized equipment.

I realize that running is not for everyone, but I am sure glad that my 51 year old knees allow me to run as a primary form of exercise.

RickF wrote:Its time to give the 'runner' thread a bump.

I was reading the comments and suggestions posted in response to 'training for Rainier and other PNW Peaks'. Many are of the opinion that running is not good for your knees, or that you shouldn't run longer than 30 minutes per session. Rugby legs may indeed be better than marathon legs.

Not only my knees, but my whole body starts feeling better and I really begin to enjoy running when I have time to run for longer than 30 minutes (the first 10 minutes are the hardest for me). I can usually find 3 or 4 times per week to run 40 to 60 minutes.

I typically have only limited windows of time availble for exercise/training. I get a much bigger return running from running than from cycling or playing Rugby for an hour. Running is so pure and simple. You don't need a bike, Rugby field, or any other arsenal of specialized equipment.

I realize that running is not for everyone, but I am sure glad that my 51 year old knees allow me to run as a primary form of exercise.

Honestly I hate running. However, I am not of the opinion that running is bad for you. The problem is when running is your only method of conditioning and the idea that more running and longer distance makes your more "fit". Many of the problems caused by running could be eliminated by getting rid of "high tech" running shoes , correcting form, mixing up running modalities (do some sprints every once and awhile), do some plyometrics and get under the barbell. Do you want to avoid or get rid of your knee problems? Squat!

Greg

I'm wondering if I've experienced a "runner's high" already, but just didn't know what it was. I run 1,5 hour every Sunday, a bit longer as I approach a triathlon, and I feel good for the rest of the night after a run like that, except some aches that are natural after running for a long time. Is that what a runner's high is?

I used to think it was when I got really dizzy when I got off the treadmill, turns out it was wrong.

Read the book Spark: The Revolutionary New Science Behind Exercise and the Brain by John Ratey. It is a really good read explaining why you feel so good after you run, the beneficial effects of exercise on the brain besides what most of us already now.

Thrusthamster wrote:I'm wondering if I've experienced a "runner's high" already, but just didn't know what it was. I run 1,5 hour every Sunday, a bit longer as I approach a triathlon, and I feel good for the rest of the night after a run like that, except some aches that are natural after running for a long time. Is that what a runner's high is?

I used to think it was when I got really dizzy when I got off the treadmill, turns out it was wrong.

I got my "runner's high" after about a 20 minute workout the other night

5 rounds for time
400 meter row
15 Overhead Squats 45#

It was supposed to be a run and the weight was supposed to be 95# but it still kicked my butt.

Do intense workouts and you can get that runner's high nearly every workout. If you aren't getting the "high" afterwords then your workout wasn't intense enough.

Greg

MikeTX wrote:

RickF wrote:you shouldn't run longer than 30 minutes per session.

Did someone actually say this? I said I have quit running for longer than 30 minutes. But that's for me. I do think people have to listen to their bodies. If your knees say stop, I would not recommend to keep going. You're fortunate to have good knees. Not everybody does.

I agree with MikeTX and I apologize if I the reference to running for 30 minutes was taken as a negative inference to MikeTX's post on the other training thread. I intentionally avoiding posting on the other thread because many climbing and mountaineering enthusiasts are down on running. I posted here in the running thread to stimulate discussion amongst people who generally view running as a valuable conditioning activity.

I know people who increased the distance and intensity of their runs without listening to their bodies. Ultimately these people injured their knees.

MikeTX's edited and used the quote of me quoting another post somewhat out of context. Just to make my opinion clear, here is what I posted:
RickF wrote:
Its time to give the 'runner' thread a bump.

I was reading the comments and suggestions posted in response to 'training for Rainier and other PNW Peaks'. Many are of the opinion that running is not good for your knees, or that you shouldn't run longer than 30 minutes per session. Rugby legs may indeed be better than marathon legs.

Not only my knees, but my whole body starts feeling better and I really begin to enjoy running when I have time to run for longer than 30 minutes (the first 10 minutes are the hardest for me). I can usually find 3 or 4 times per week to run 40 to 60 minutes.

I typically have only limited windows of time availble for exercise/training. I get a much bigger return running from running than from cycling or playing Rugby for an hour. Running is so pure and simple. You don't need a bike, Rugby field, or any other arsenal of specialized equipment.

I realize that running is not for everyone, but I am sure glad that my 51 year old knees allow me to run as a primary form of exercise.

MikeTX wrote:I agree that running is indeed an excellent conditioning exercise and I wish I could do more, because I actually enjoy it so much. And I would recommend it to anyone who has healthy knees. You can't beat it for cheap, efficient exercise, especially if you're trying to lose weight.

What are "healthy" knees. Do you have a diagnosed knee problem or do you just get sore when you run? When I first started climbing my knees were always killing me on the way down from the first climb to the last climb of the season. I spent my offseason focusing my weight training on the legs and doing a lot stretching. The next year I had no problems. In recent years my conditioning was less than optimal and when I would climb I started having knee problems again. Last year I did a conditioning program that did a lot of squats (below parallel) among other things. I have no problem with my knees on the downhill. In general if you have problems with your knees, strengthening the muscles surrounding them will solve the problem.

Greg

I think the speed of running would also have something to do with knee pain. The architecture of the body subtly shifts as you run faster. I've turned to running of late for training time considerations. I find I get that amped "whacked" totally exercised feeling from an hour of running that takes me about 4 - 5 hours on the bike. But I run slow. Feel everything moving around inside my body. Kind of strange. You'd think everything would kind of settle down in the first 20 minutes or so. Last night, for example, lunch decided to go wild around 45 minutes into it. For climbing training, I actually prefer Bikram Yoga. It has the water discipline, the breathing, the stretching. The only thing that it lacks is endurance.

John Duffield wrote:I think the speed of running would also have something to do with knee pain. The architecture of the body subtly shifts as you run faster.

Form probably has a lot to do it with it also. A lot of people run (jog) where the heel strikes the ground first. Bad...very bad.... I was guilty of this.

Run in your barefeet and your form will probably change dramatically. This is the anatomically correct way to run...on the balls of your feet.

If you want to improve your running technique check out the Pose method of running.

Greg

I agree that running is one of the most time-efficient exercises available but form is critical. When i started running two years ago I studied the forward lean and the mid-foot strike. My goal was to develop good form to prevent the injuries that come with the jarring impact of heel strike. The best analogy I found was to hold chest and shoulders as if you were taking a deep breath, lean forward from the ankles such that you cannot stop in only one or two paces, and visualize your foot as a paw when it hits the ground: on the ball (pad) and push off. If the horizon bounces when I run, I know my form has broken down.

Many of the sources I read said it takes some time for your calves to adjust. I haven't run in 6 weeks due to an injured hip (from pushing the weights too hard) and am just starting to rebuild my base. I'm feeling it in my calves, ITB and plantar fascia. Don't forget to keep up with the stretching!

MikeTX wrote:I've been a heel-toe runner for the past 20 years. I recall being told this was the best form for long distance running. I think a high school friend who ran cross-country told me this. So, that's the way I've always run.

Now I keep reading that running on your toes or balls of your feet is better. Anway, I ran four miles on Sunday...on the balls of my feet (no heel strike). It felt very awkward and my calves are sore as hell. But my knees feel better than they normally do after I run. So, maybe there's something to the "run on your toes" idea.

I began doing that myself, but had to stop because of an injury I got from suddenly beginning to run a different way. Anyway, experienced runners I've talked to say that it takes years for you to feel comfortable with running like that if you've always used heel strikes before. But the muscles adjust pretty fast, don't continue if you start feeling it in your tendons though.