From cycling to running

Bradders87

So after standing on the sidelines cheering the runners along the marathon yesterday, I've decided that I'm going to bite the bullet and run it next year.

The only problem is that I've never really been much of a runner. I'm making a huge assumption that my level of cycling fitness has put my CV system somewhere near where it needs to be and it'll predominantly be a case of developing the muscles required over the next year.

Thoughts/comments/experience?!

simonaspinall

I'm in a similar situation to yourself - I am a cyclist 90% of the time but have also recently started running again after a a couple of years off. The biggest shock is the impact, even if you have a half-decent running gait, especially if you live in a hilly area.

My best advice is to do a thorough warm-up then do a good quality mile run, then stretch. Do that for a couple of weeks so that start to build up the little muscles and not overload the stress on your legs and then start going that bit further.

Runinng a marathon is all about maintaining a good running gait at a good pace, like maintaining good pedalling technique and cadence. It's best to start of on short distances at high quality and build from there.

Also, i would start on a treadmill - Much easier to get the pace right and have a better quality running gait and then transfer to the road once your at a reasonable standard.

Aim for some local running events such as fun runs, or a half-marathon between now and then so you get used to the pre-run routine.

Percy Vera

Personally I wouldn't bother with a treadmill.

The biggest mistake cyclists make when they start off running is they run too far as they are fit from cycling.

Start off by running an easy 15/20mins 3/4 times a week. Lots of static stretching afterwards. Do this for about a month.

Then increase 1 run to 30mins, after a few weeks all your runs to 30mins.

After this you should have some sort of running legs. Find a marathon programme in a magazine and follow it.

Try running on grass or soft surfaces rather then pavement/road.

Doughnutface

I've gone from a running background to more cyling now and I think there are a few important differences although if you have the CV fitness on a bike you'll be able to run fine with the right training.

The main differences are the impact and the inability to rest whilst running unless you start walking (which is rubbish. Dont do it!). The single most important thing in running is getting the right trainers. They come in 2 main types which are road and xc/trail. If you're going to run on road only use road trainers. They can be used off road but you'll slip around more because of the tread but its really important not to use xc trainers on road because they're too stiff and you'll get injured. Get a pair from a proper running shop that do gait analysis and you'll be absolutely fine.

If you're going to do the London Marathon its a bit tricky to get entry unless you do it for a charity. They normally have a minimum sponsorship target of £2000 but its for a good cause and worth it. Its also a good marathon to do because its flat, normally quite cool, and you get loads of support.

For training the best thing to do its start running gradually and find a training program for the time you want to get in the marthon. There's loads online, and loads of good info about training. Have fun

jibberjim

Percy Vera wrote:

Personally I wouldn't bother with a treadmill.

I wouldn't for sure - your gait on a treadmill is different to running on the road - it's like saying pedal on a recumbant to start with and then translate to a regular bike

Percy Vera wrote:

Start off by running an easy 15/20mins 3/4 times a week. Lots of static stretching afterwards. Do this for about a month.

I agree with the first part - I don't agree with the stretching, and the "about a month" should be judged of in context of the progress made with leg pain etc. etc.

Percy Vera

jibberjim wrote:

I agree with the first part - I don't agree with the stretching, and the "about a month" should be judged of in context of the progress made with leg pain etc. etc.

What would you do? Dynamic stretching or none at all?

I find streching my quads, hamstrings and calfs helps me.

jibberjim

Percy Vera wrote:

What would you do? Dynamic stretching or none at all?

Dynamic perhaps as a warm up, but not particularly necessary if you're warming up by runnign anyway and not going straight into high intensity work.

But it depends on the situation - if you learn of injuries/tightness etc. then you can look to maybe introduce them (although massage might be better than stretching IMO) but as a new runner, I wouldn't include it - there's lots of evidence that stretching makes you run less efficiently and there's little evidence that static stretching does anything to reduce injury - indeed it may be the opposite (the research is completely inconclusive and appears to be a subject bound up with a lot of entrenched opinions).

holmeboy

Just ran the Scottish KIlomathon 26.2k in 2' 11'' 32s. Down for the Edinburgh Marathon on 22nd May.
My advice, start running easy distance and pace and pick it up as you feel. I run twice a week just nowwhilst cycling the rest of the time. The cycling is suffering because of the longer training runs so havent cycled more than 23 miles at one go since Feb. I'm in the Fred W as well so I'll need to fit in a long cycle sometime?
Hey Ho!

Tom Butcher

The worst bit of running is the injury rate - from little niggles, stiffness that stops you walking down stairs in the morning, shin splints to proper several months off type injury.

A lot of that can be put down to training mistakes - too much too soon, not listening to your body and so on - but whilst everyone reads the same advice 90% of people ignore it so like most of us you will probably suffer too.

I'd go with Percy's advice - start with small amounts - if you have never run maybe even less than he suggests - two miles a couple of times a week for a few weeks might be as much as some people can manage without building up injury problems. Personally I have found some stretching beneficial and massage can work wonders if you get a tight calves or somesuch. When I say stretching I mean a general stretch after a run just to stop the muscles getting too short - not as a warm up which I believe can be implicated in injury and not a full on stretching programme which I can imagine might possibly make your joints a little too mobile if you approached it wrong.

derbygrimpeur

Not sure how much you know about the London Marathon but "I've decided that I'm going to bite the bullet and run it next year." - the only ways to guarantee you'll be running next year are to raise £1500+ for charity, or run sub 1:15 in a half marathon or sub 3:00 in a full marathon before September. You've got a small chance of getting in via the general ballot.

Just get out and run. Likes others have said, the impact will hurt your legs first so don't go mad in the first two weeks. But once your running a few days a week, you can chuck an extra mile or two onto your longest run each week. If you've got a heart rate monitor you can wear whilst running, do so. It is the best way to make sure you don't run too hard. Most people make this mistake and will end up taking longer to recover. Most of your running should be at an easy pace (i.e. less than 75% MHR). In fact, initially, I would suggest ALL of your running should be easy, until your legs are used to the impact.

Regular massage helps too. The lady that does my massage has much more fun :shock: if I've been in full running training (70+ miles a week) compared to when I've purely been cycling for the same duration.

rickyrider

As others have said - definitely take it easy to start with. I've given up running since it caused me too many niggling injuries. It's a savage sport to be honest, however well fitted your shoes or well stretched you are!

But to be honest, compared to cycling, it's also incredibly boring!

rake

the worst blow is after spending 7-8 months building up mileage over cold dark nights 5 times a week and recieve your notice that unfortunately your entry hasnt been sucessfull.
in the open draw i think you have a 1 in 5 chance of getting in.
Then to rub salt into my wound my sister got in first try, just luck i told myself. She then decided to have another go with a few mates and try and improve, second sucessfull entry in a row. i have since given up trying.

Anders29

I ran the Paris marathon a few weeks back and thought it was really good. You don't have to apply through the ballet so you know you're in and the earlier you book it, the cheaper it is. Def recommended! Plus this year's medal looked a lot better than the London one, and that's what its all about really!

derbygrimpeur

rake > just run quicker and get a good for age or championship start :P

Pross

I think you are guaranteed entry after 5 unsuccessful applications. I was due to get the guaranteed entry but the year it was due I was unable to enter the various reasons so was back to square one and gave up. I did 'enjoy' the Bristol half the two years I did it even though I've never been much of a runner and I was seriously unfit when I ran them.

jibberjim

Pross wrote:

I think you are guaranteed entry after 5 unsuccessful applications.

That's been discontinued.

rick_chasey

OK guys - which is harder - The Flanders sportief or the marathon?

bigmat

Rick Chasey wrote:

OK guys - which is harder - The Flanders sportief or the marathon?

Haven't rideen Flanders, but I've done a few big sportives Fred Whitton, Etape, plenty of other imperial centuries). I would say that in terms of exhaustion levels, I felt the same at the end of the marathon as I would after a hilly (but not mega hilly) sportive ridden at a reasonably fast but comfortable pace. I was significantly more knackered after the Fred Whitton, and some other lesser known sportives where I've been on the rivet.

The real difference is how much a marathon messes you up. I'm usually back on the bike the next day, if not evening, after a century ride. After the marathon I couldn't walk properly for almost a week. Toenails still aren't totally back to normal after a year. I picked up all sorts of injuries during training requiring physio, massage and a month's rest before the marathon itself. I don't think any bike rides this side of a grand tour are as punishing on your body!

hells

I did the London Marathon yesterday. My work gets a set number of guarenteed entries per year and we need to raise £500 each for the works selected chairty. However they didn't bother to tell me I was successful in getting my place until February, which gave me two and abit months to train in. I had not run in over a year as I had been doing loads of cycling instead.

I did still manage to complete the marathon although I am now in complete agony, I cant move my legs atall and have lost 7 toe nails, I also ended up with several large blood blisters as well as normal blisters. It was one of the worst and best experiences of my life and I am immensley proud that I managed to finish.

In my experience cycling is great for CV work, when I dabbled in racing I got extremely high heart rates and breathing rates it made me feel tired and I sometimes got a sore tight chest, it dosnt really hurt your muscles and bones. Distance running however never made me feel tired or like my heart was pounding or I was struggling to get enough oxygen. It has been excruitatingly painful for my muscles and bones though. When I first started it hurt to just run one mile, especially the achillies, shins and knees. Now its my ankles and hips which are the worst but my knees and shins dont hurt at all. During the marathon it actually hurt more to try and walk rather than very slowly run. I have honestly never feklt so much pain in my whole life.

I probably will do another marathon in the future but for now I am going to stick to 10ks and half marathons until my feet toughen up and I improve my running style. You should definitly do the London Marathon, it was amazing, especially all the support from the crowds, words cannot express how I felt during the last two miles, or the euphoria while crossing the finish.

Headhuunter

derbygrimpeur wrote:

Not sure how much you know about the London Marathon but "I've decided that I'm going to bite the bullet and run it next year." - the only ways to guarantee you'll be running next year are to raise £1500+ for charity, or run sub 1:15 in a half marathon or sub 3:00 in a full marathon before September. You've got a small chance of getting in via the general ballot.

Just get out and run. Likes others have said, the impact will hurt your legs first so don't go mad in the first two weeks. But once your running a few days a week, you can chuck an extra mile or two onto your longest run each week. If you've got a heart rate monitor you can wear whilst running, do so. It is the best way to make sure you don't run too hard. Most people make this mistake and will end up taking longer to recover. Most of your running should be at an easy pace (i.e. less than 75% MHR). In fact, initially, I would suggest ALL of your running should be easy, until your legs are used to the impact.

Regular massage helps too. The lady that does my massage has much more fun :shock: if I've been in full running training (70+ miles a week) compared to when I've purely been cycling for the same duration.

That's what I thought! Bloody difficult to get a place in the London Marathon but there are quite a few other marathon events up and down the country, just enter one of those instead....

Cumulonimbus

Good thread as i was watching the Marathon yesterday and was thinking the same. Plan is to try and do a half marathon in the late Autumn, giving me a couple of months to start running again after cycling through much of the summer. Then over the winter do a lot of running rather than cycling, something like Reading half marathon in March followed by London marathon - if i cant get into that then try for a different Spring marathon.

Agree with the points about how it affects your joints. Cycling is largely CV while running is CV plus your body has to take the impact. I've found in the past that cycling fitness transfers across quite while but that your body cant take it. in particular, because i can run faster when ive done a lot of cycling my action changes to ball-heel rather than heel-ball and this can be more stressful on the legs.

Disagree with the treadmill idea. I find them really dull and have often narrowly avoided falling over when getting distracted and straying off the belt slightly :oops:

chipandpin

In my experience running and cycling are very different. Setting yourself a target of marathon in 12 months is very brave and will require a lot of training and, more importantly, discipline. Marathons are much harder than people think, and to be able to enjoy it, you need to be comfortably running 50 - 60 miles per week with rest days in between long runs (and for the London marathon, this will be through the winter). However, on the plus side, running is addictive and thats where discipline comes in - as much as you will want to run further each time you go out, DON'T increase your mileage too quickly - If you start out running 5 miles for example and feel comforatble at a 10 min/mile pace, try to run that 5 miles at 9 min/mile then 8 min/mile (or whatever your target pace will be) before extending the distance. This will help keep injuries to a minimum. Most of my running injuries came from upping my mileage too quickly and not allowing enough recovery time after long runs.

Im not so sure stretching is particularly good for you BEFORE a run. I find that starting out slow and gradually building your speed up is more effective. A good stretch AFTER is important though - Also, a foam roller for your ITB is a worthwile investment (albeit very very painfull)!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9aJtO0VCqw

Oh, and why not enter a few other races over the next few months - If you can get a charity place for the Great North Run I would highly recommend it. Its a good tester aswell as its mostly up hill. Also, have a look at the 'hellrunner' series. These really are not for the faint hearted and are a really good test of endurance.

Last thing - don't skimp on your trainers - have them custom fitted and budget at least £100. I have always bought trainers from Sweatshop / He Runs She Runs as they offer a guarantee that if your not happy with your trainers, they will change them unconditionally. (not sure if thats just my local Sweatshop though)

Hope that helps - ENJOY !

Rooner

Thought I'd my bit to the mix. I'm primarily a distance runner (around 6min/mile, so although not super quick, not slow either), commuting cyclist and just started road cycling at weekend as well.

There's a lot of guff talked about starting running, and a lot of over analysis - we evolved to run, it shouldn't be too hard!

1 - Start off running at a comfortable pace, but don't be afraid to walk now and again of you get tired.
2 - keep at it, some days will be hard work, others easy, but you need to run regularly.
3 - One rest day a week is enough, but you can have easy days
4 - yes, trainers are important, but I've run in £20 shoes and £100 shoes, there is virtually no distance (BUT this is assuming you have a neutral gait and are not really overweight, if thats the case, yes get some fitted at a decent shop)
5 - dissassocation - thats maybe not the right word but I mean being able to take yourself mentally 'elsewhere', if you can't do this distance running then no amount of training will help. Yes, it can be boring (although not if you pick your routes and listen to music), it is often painful to some degree, so being able to mentally switch of is a benefit.
6 - be realistic but don't be a wuss, aim for a few miles to start and then pick the distance up as you feel able, there's nothing wrong with pushing yourself. And if you do feel you've overdone it, force yourself to run the next day as well, it'll loosen everything up.
7 - as you are aiming for a marathon, as a new runner, distance and time on your feet is the key, don't worry about a time for your first event, that'll come if you stick at it.

Pross

jibberjim wrote:

Pross wrote:

I think you are guaranteed entry after 5 unsuccessful applications.

That's been discontinued.

Really? It always seemed a good idea for people who were serious about getting an entry. I guess it is their way into pushing people into taking the charity route, I would certainly run it for charity but I don't like being pushed into making a minimum target (and would run for a small local charity that doesn't get places). Do the charities have to buy their spots in the first place? Looks like I'll have to get myself a sub 3 hour run in another marathon, based on my half marathon times that means I have to get the second 13.1 miles down to around 45 minutes

derbygrimpeur

yeah, the £100 thing for trainers is rubbish. I've never spent more than £80, most of the time I run in £50 trainers. It's not about cost, it's about fit & getting the correct support for you (gait analysis recommended).

I agree with most of what Rooner says, except number 5. Personally, I rarely listen to music and "like" to feel every little niggle and pain. It is feedback that the body gives that is important. I don't find running boring at all. Of course, that is a personal thing and many people do find running boring.

FWIW, I went from absolutely no activity (not even cycling) to a sub-3 marathon in 13 months. I mention this as chipandpin's point about 12 months being brave is scaremongering in my opinion. I'm now a 1:12 half-marathoner, with a 2:45 marathon PB off 6 weeks training after injury.

Anyone can run a marathon, it's not that difficult. The difficult bit is doing it in a respectable time and without making use of emergency services.

As with Rooner, there's a lot of "guff" spouted about running, I've always found it best to read some books. What works for one person may not work for another. As I said in a previous post, get out there and run. Build up the distance before thinking about speed (Rooner's number 7). The more you run, the quicker you'll get anyway.

If you don't get into London, Brighton has a great new marathon. Plus there's Paris in April too.

derbygrimpeur

Pross wrote:

jibberjim wrote:

Pross wrote:

I think you are guaranteed entry after 5 unsuccessful applications.

That's been discontinued.

Really? It always seemed a good idea for people who were serious about getting an entry. I guess it is their way into pushing people into taking the charity route, I would certainly run it for charity but I don't like being pushed into making a minimum target (and would run for a small local charity that doesn't get places). Do the charities have to buy their spots in the first place? Looks like I'll have to get myself a sub 3 hour run in another marathon, based on my half marathon times that means I have to get the second 13.1 miles down to around 45 minutes

I think it's just because of the administration involved and the ever-increasing numbers of people on the list. It would have become impossible to even honour those 5-time rejectees.

Charities pay a variable amount for the places I think, depending on how many places they buy. There was a documentary on it last year, but I think it was circa £500-£1K per place.

Pross

:shock: I wonder how many of those raising money realise how little is actually going to their chosen charity? I thought it might be they paid £50 to £100 per place - no wonder they are happy to cut down on the number of ballot places available. It's a shame as the large 'industrial' charities are getting places at the expense of individual runners who raise money for their local charity

chipandpin

derbygrimpeur wrote:

yeah, the £100 thing for trainers is rubbish. I've never spent more than £80, most of the time I run in £50 trainers. It's not about cost, it's about fit & getting the correct support for you (gait analysis recommended).

I wasn't saying you must spend £100, i was saying BUDGET £100 as the pair of trainers should be bought based on fit not cost and running trainers run to about £100 at the top end.


.

derbygrimpeur wrote:

I mention this as chipandpin's point about 12 months being brave is scaremongering in my opinion.

Based upon 'derbygrimepeur's times (who runs in the top 1% of London Marathon runners)!!! he is clearly the expert here, so maybe its not brave at all to take up the challenge of a marathon without ever having run before.

Apologies to the OP for the 'guff' was merely offering my opinion. Maybe running is as simple as put one foot in front of the other and repeat!

derbygrimpeur

Pross wrote:

:shock: I wonder how many of those raising money realise how little is actually going to their chosen charity? I thought it might be they paid £50 to £100 per place - no wonder they are happy to cut down on the number of ballot places available. It's a shame as the large 'industrial' charities are getting places at the expense of individual runners who raise money for their local charity

yeah, basically the charities subsidise the rest of runners. I think entry is only about £30, which is extremely cheap for what you get (road closures etc.). This is kept low in part thanks to the charity money.

chipandpin > you said budget at least £100, which I took to mean that should be your minimum spend. Apols if this is not what you meant. I don't mean to belittle anyone's opinions, but things can get very confusing for newbies to running when it really should just be a simple case of running. Forget intervals, tempo, fartlek, threshold, run-walk etc. Just run

Running is simple. As is cycling. Both sports get over-complicated in my opinion. Going back to the 60s/70s, British runners were much better than nowadays mainly because they just ran lots (120mpw+). Runners World etc have popularised the concept of "improve in 4 weeks by running less". It's a load of guff (I love that phrase, not used often enough these days )

Bradders87

derbygrimpeur wrote:

FWIW, I went from absolutely no activity (not even cycling) to a sub-3 marathon in 13 months. I mention this as chipandpin's point about 12 months being brave is scaremongering in my opinion. I'm now a 1:12 half-marathoner, with a 2:45 marathon PB off 6 weeks training after injury.

That's very interesting. My initial thought was with a year to train I'd like to do it in under 3 hours. What was your training schedule like?

derbygrimpeur

bradders > I started running at the start of August 2006 because I wanted to do the London Marathon. I was running about 10-15 miles a week for first couple of months and ran my first Half Marathon in 1:51 in October 2006.

I built up to about 30 miles a week by March 2007 when I ran a 1:29 Half.I basically lost 3 stone in the first 6 months and figured the easiest way to get in was to run "Good for Age", which is sub-3 for senior men.

I then increased to a peak of 55 miles in the months leading up to my first marathon. I used the Runners World sub-3 hour 12 week marathon schedule and finished in a short 2:59.

I think a sub-3 marathon is achievable for any man under 40. If they want it bad enough and are prepared to train hard/lose weight (if required) then it's achievable. Many runners disagree with me on this, but they haven't tried it.

As a cyclist, you should have a great aerobic base, it's just how you then convert that to running. It's basically a case of getting your legs used to it.