Running to compliment cycling

Mac9

Does anyone do this?

Barring the obvious increased injury risks that running has compared to cycling, are there any other negative side effects to running in terms of increasing overall fitness for riding?

Over the next couple of months (until the end of April) I won't be able to do any training midweek until around eight at night. I'd rather not be doing too much riding in the dark so I'm considering running 3/4 nights per week and then riding of a weekend.

Running is undoubtedly great for cardiovascular fitness but will it help or hinder my cycling?

Any advice is greatly appreciated!

TakeTurns

Will help marginally, won't hinder unless you injure yourself. If I were you I'd find a hill locally and work on it or do short efforts on a quiet road somewhere.

Mac9

Cheers.

There are a number of steep streets within 10 miles of where I live but they're all only approx. 150m-400m long. I have to ride for an hour into West Lancs to find longer hills.

Will the shorter steeper streets be of much use in the long term for practicing climbing or are they simply too short to see any benefit?

JayKosta

There are major differences between 'running muscles' and 'cycling muscles' - you need to find an exercise routine that will work the leg 'cycling muscles'.
I would try running that includes lots of mild hills, or perhaps even 'step running'.

Why not an indoor bike trainer, or even an 'exercise upright cycling bike' ?

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA

BenderRodriguez

I would say that if the alternative to running is not doing anything, running will be vastly more beneficial to your cycling!

In my experience there is also a lot more crossover between aerobic sports than some would have you believe. For example, one of my best ever seasons of bike racing (20 minute '10s', 54 minute '25s' - on a standard road bike with tri-bars - top 6 placings in E/1/2 road races) came after a winter when my main training activity was running. I used to run for between 40 and 50 minutes as fast as I could, usually 3 times a week, plus a weekend club run.

Conversely, when I was younger I once entered a half marathon with some friends from a running club and went round in 1 hour 25, which was the faster than anyone from the club, much to their annoyance! This was done almost entirely on my usual diet of on the bike training, with just two runs for training.

Max Bridges

I found running fitness transferred well to cycling. Cycling fitness didn't transfer well to running. After cycling for 12 years without doing any other sport I found running very tough and my legs were in a terrible state after my first 30 min run.

I tend to lose weight running but put on weight cycling.

Alex_Simmons/RST

Well the runner reckoned the cyclist had nice legs.


Oh, you mean complement...


Well as said, some exercise is better than nothing, but don't expect it to improve your bike riding, more as an interim measure to prevent general fitness declining, for weight management etc. Be good if you could find some more cycling like exercise alternatives.

davep1

I've been running for a month now, but live near the South Downs so in 5 minutes I can be off the street and on some nice bouncy grass. I've got up to almost 40 minutes, but it is more about the time spent doing it than any mins/mile pace efforts at the moment. I just find it easier to get out and run in any weather than ride the bike; I would prefer to ride but when it is pissing it down and/or blowing a gale I can't get the motivation. It also seems to take less time to get ready; I can run in shorts, a long sleeved top and a t shirt whereas cycling seems to require at least 15 mins getting ready and sorting bits out for the bike.

I'll have more of an idea if it helps my cycling when I get back into longer rides. I haven't noticed any ill effects so far, apart from if I sit down after a run my knees seem to hurt for a bit, but it doesn't seem to have hindered my efforts on the bike when I can get out on it.

I read somewhere that climbing stairs two at a time was quite close to simulating the action of cycling.

ai_1

Max Bridges wrote:

I found running fitness transferred well to cycling. Cycling fitness didn't transfer well to running. After cycling for 12 years without doing any other sport I found running very tough and my legs were in a terrible state after my first 30 min run....

This, more or less, seems to be most people's observation.
When I started to do some running I found the cardiovascular ability I'd gained cycling was a huge advantage but i still had to slowly adapt my muscles, tendons, ligaments and joints to the very different demands of running. They compliment each other well from a cardiovascular point of view but aside from that it's debatable.

The last couple of winters I maintained a fair amount of cycling through the bad weather. This year I decided my priority was running since I plan to do some duathlons/triathlons this year and cycling is my strongest discipline at the moment. So I would concentrate primarily on running in the evenings for the same reasons others have mentioned. There's less gear needed in winter, you can get out the door much quicker, the dark is less of a hindrance/danger, cold is less of a problem as you've less windchill.

What's actually happened is I nearly abandoned cycling altogether because the weather's been so horrendous and I've been enjoying the running. I got back on the bike properly a week ago and I've lost some ability alright but it's all in the legs and should come back quick enough. Cardiovascular fitness seems to have been maintained very well.

So in conclusion:
Running can be a good way to keep your heart and lungs in good shape. It'll keep you from putting on weight if you're off the bike. Also I've found it great for all-round good health. It'll make you notice any core strength, flexibility or posture issues which should benefit you in general and can be neglected on the bike.

Recommendations:
Start gradually with very short distances at first. If you're young you might get away with several km from the start but for older riders like myself (38) getting into running you should spend a few weeks just getting up to 5km.
Run don't shuffle! If that means you run a few hundred meters then walk for a couple of minutes to loosen up and get your breath back before running again, that's fine.
I think minimalist shoes work great but be careful with your technique and ensure you really take your time building distance.

BenderRodriguez

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

some exercise is better than nothing, but don't expect it to improve your bike riding, more as an interim measure to prevent general fitness declining, for weight management etc.

I would bet good money that if someone significantly increased their aerobic capacity (or 'general fitness') through running they would also see at least some improvement in their cycling performance, especially if they also did at least some time on the bike as well so as to keep their 'cycling legs'.

Similarly, I would bet that someone who had developed their aerobic capacity through running would be able to reach a given level of performance on a bike with fewer hours of specific on-the-bike training than if they had never bothered with the running first.

Of course, riding a bike would be the best option to improve cycling performance, but sometimes this isn't a practical option, and sitting on a turbo isn't for everyone.

The biggest issue with running is that many cyclists never run a yard for most of the year and so risk injury if they start clocking up lots of running miles as part of their pre-season training. Personally, I don't think that it is healthy that cyclists are often 'one trick ponies' who end up with sore legs for a week if they have to run after a bus!

Alex_Simmons/RST

BenderRodriguez wrote:

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

some exercise is better than nothing, but don't expect it to improve your bike riding, more as an interim measure to prevent general fitness declining, for weight management etc.

I would bet good money that if someone significantly increased their aerobic capacity (or 'general fitness') through running they would also see at least some improvement in their cycling performance, especially if they also did at least some time on the bike as well so as to keep their 'cycling legs'.

Similarly, I would bet that someone who had developed their aerobic capacity through running would be able to reach a given level of performance on a bike with fewer hours of specific on-the-bike training than if they had never bothered with the running first.

Of course, riding a bike would be the best option to improve cycling performance, but sometimes this isn't a practical option, and sitting on a turbo isn't for everyone.

The biggest issue with running is that many cyclists never run a yard for most of the year and so risk injury if they start clocking up lots of running miles as part of their pre-season training. Personally, I don't think that it is healthy that cyclists are often 'one trick ponies' who end up with sore legs for a week if they have to run after a bus!

The latter point is the issue in this case.

The time required, for a trained cyclist who doesn't typically run, to build up the capacity to train in such a manner that their aerobic capacities are pushed that far, is highly unlikely to occur in the time frame mentioned by the OP, or if the training required was attempted in such a short time frame it would carry a high risk of injury.

IOW, to attain that level, you'd need to train for somewhat longer, and in that case well you may as well take up duathlon/triathlon, or become a runner.

Hence if cycling is the main game, I'd do the running for general fitness, weight management and maybe to see if I can enjoy another form of exercise. Where possible make it enjoyable. There are places one can run that are not overly suitable for bikes, so good chance to discover new things.

As for fitness cross over, I found my cycling fitness gave my running a decent boost, in particular when I was playing (association) football in my younger days. I was fittest for football when I did more bike and less running training. Perhaps because I could get more aerobic volume in on the bike, and still did enough running to satisfy the specificity demand.

ai_1

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

....The time required, for a trained cyclist who doesn't typically run, to build up the capacity to train in such a manner that their aerobic capacities are pushed that far, is highly unlikely to occur in the time frame mentioned by the OP, or if the training required was attempted in such a short time frame it would carry a high risk of injury.

IOW, to attain that level, you'd need to train for somewhat longer, and in that case well you may as well take up duathlon/triathlon, or become a runner.

Hence if cycling is the main game, I'd do the running for general fitness, weight management and maybe to see if I can enjoy another form of exercise. Where possible make it enjoyable. There are places one can run that are not overly suitable for bikes, so good chance to discover new things.

As for fitness cross over, I found my cycling fitness gave my running a decent boost, in particular when I was playing (association) football in my younger days. I was fittest for football when I did more bike and less running training. Perhaps because I could get more aerobic volume in on the bike, and still did enough running to satisfy the specificity demand.

I think you've got that about spot on.
You can't just jump into running for short periods, say over winter, and expect to do a large volume of training without major risk of injury if you haven't maintained your running ability for the rest of the year.

BenderRodriguez

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

The time required, for a trained cyclist who doesn't typically run, to build up the capacity to train in such a manner that their aerobic capacities are pushed that far, is highly unlikely to occur in the time frame mentioned by the OP, or if the training required was attempted in such a short time frame it would carry a high risk of injury.

IOW, to attain that level, you'd need to train for somewhat longer, and in that case well you may as well take up duathlon/triathlon, or become a runner.

Hence if cycling is the main game, I'd do the running for general fitness, weight management and maybe to see if I can enjoy another form of exercise. Where possible make it enjoyable. There are places one can run that are not overly suitable for bikes, so good chance to discover new things.

On the other hand, if someone is running just for the enjoyment and to maintain fitness they will be already spending enough time running in order to get a real aerobic boost from doing it, as long as they go hard enough! In my experience, there is absolutely no need to do 50 miles a week. Just treat one's running sessions as an alternative to the sort of short, hard efforts many do on a turbo. Running for just 20 or 30 minutes on the ragged edge, or doing 5 minute intervals, gives a really intense aerobic work-out which is vastly less mind-numbing than sitting on a turbo.

OK, some may not be up to running even for 20 or 30 minutes, but in my view if this were me I would actually focus on developing such an ability, as I would argue that for most of us having good all-round fitness that is adaptable to many situations is more important than doing nothing but riding a bike simply in order to do a 23.20 '10' rather than a 23.30!

BenderRodriguez

Ai_1 wrote:

You can't just jump into running for short periods, say over winter, and expect to do a large volume of training without major risk of injury if you haven't maintained your running ability for the rest of the year.

But the beauty of running is that you don't need to do a 'large volume' of training if your aim is simply to give your aerobic system a good work-out. Twenty to thirty minutes is probably as much as you would ever need if you treat these sessions as being akin to sitting on a turbo.

I would say that doing a long, steady run can be a joy in itself though, if your legs are up to it. Much like getting out on the bike for a few hours!

markhewitt1978

I've been trying it from time to time, as I have an hours lunch with nothing else to do - I've looked at cycling at lunchtimes but there's nowhere to keep a bike here. But unlike cycling I find running a real chore, I don't enjoy it at all, with cycling I can be on my 80th mile, completely shattered, gasping my last, but I'm still having fun. Running within 1/4 of a mile I'm completely done wowing never to do it again

ai_1

BenderRodriguez wrote:

Ai_1 wrote:

You can't just jump into running for short periods, say over winter, and expect to do a large volume of training without major risk of injury if you haven't maintained your running ability for the rest of the year.

But the beauty of running is that you don't need to do a 'large volume' of training if your aim is simply to give your aerobic system a good work-out. Twenty to thirty minutes is probably as much as you would ever need if you treat these sessions as being akin to sitting on a turbo.

I would say that doing a long, steady run can be a joy in itself though, if your legs are up to it. Much like getting out on the bike for a few hours!

Even 20 or 30 minutes is too much to start off with if you don't normally run but I take your point.
I've been increasing my range since the start of the year and can now run 15km fairly comfortably at what I consider a reasonably respectable pace. Now that I'm running these longer distances it's started feeling more similar to cycling in that you settle in for a cruise and, as you said, it can be quite enjoyable.
I'm aiming to do a half marathon in 6 weeks and perhaps a half Ironman at the end of the summer so for me it's another major discipline in addition to the cycling I've been doing for a few years.
If cycling is something you do for fun and to keep in good shape, I'd highly recommend adding some running to your repertoire. If you cycle competitively and cycling performance is your sole interest then there are probably better ways to pursue that than running.

mpatts

I have weekly runs in my training plan, as I enjoy it as much as anything else.

It's difficult to say scientifically if it is a help or a hindance, but my 2p's:

1) My coach worries about injury - I don't though, and I think a lot of the running related injuries are form (and trainer) related. I don't expect to get injured.
2) I think running is very, very helpful for pacing and avoiding the urge to give up. I'm paraphrasing someone else here, but you don't run against anyone else, or the clock, you run against the little voice in your head telling you to give up
3) I do believe you get a good CV hit in, say, 30 mins running compared to cycling
4) Running is useless for zone training (I find), but my zone training on the bike has really helped my running
5) Running made me lose weight initially, which is good on the bike.

As for the 'how much is too much' debate, I trusted my legs, lungs, and feet and just ran as far as I felt good. Sometimes I'd walk home. in Dec 2012 (my first runs) I was running 3k, which was taking about 25 mins. I'm now a sub 19 min 5ker, sub 39 10ker, and sub 90 halfer. I did almost die when I ran a marathon though.......

Anyway, as with most things, if you enjoy it do it. I tend to find that runners who do it for any other reason than enjoyment a) struggle to keep it up and b) often get injured.

andyrr

To the O.P. I'm not sure if you have considered using a turbo in the evenings ? I think there are many people in your position that have late or early turbo sessions as their main on-bike training during the week.
If you are determined and focused enough then turbo sessions are great - around the 45 - 60 mins mark means they can be short enough to not take up excessive time but do good things for your fitness. If you have the bike sat on the turbo (I even have my race shoes clipped into the pedals waiting for me) then all you need is a drink, pair of shorts, old t-shirt and away you go.
During winter I've never gone out bike training in the evening although I am able to commute by bike so I'll do 100 - 150 miles per week that way. I also started running and for me it was as much about not having the facility at the weekend to be able to disappear out of the house for 3, 4+ hours thus running fits in with family life much more easily.
With 1 hour total I can go from grabbing my kit and then be back in the house showered, having done a good session whereas a bike ride involves more faffing around, time pulling the various bits of kit together then wanting to clean the crap from the bike and at least 90 minutes seems a sensible minimum to make it worthwhile. I am fortunate in having good bike-training roads right on my doorstep but if that weren't the case then for pretty much everyone they can hit the road (pavement) and the session starts right there, no getting out of clogged up urban areas before any meaningful training can start.

ai_1

andyrr wrote:

To the O.P. I'm not sure if you have considered using a turbo in the evenings ? I think there are many people in your position that have late or early turbo sessions as their main on-bike training during the week...../quote]
I have a decent turbo trainer that I used a couple of times a week early this winter but as the winter continued and the weather stayed consistently bad I got sick of the turbo trainer and found the idea of a run much more palitable. Despite the weather I'd much prefer to head out for a run in the wind and rain than sit on the turbo trainer in front of the TV. Having said that if you can learn to enjoy or tolerate your turbo it will probably help your cycle performance more.

jamieprang

Strange. I was wondering the same question but in reverse. I'm more a runner than a cyclist. I enjoy both but my main focus I think for now will be running. I have my first ultra marathon planned for August and hopefully more in the future.

I started cycling mainly because I fancy trying a Triathlon. But also for enjoyment. But I wondered to myself, will the cycling training for the Triathlon help much in a way towards my running?

I know that any training is good training. Some better than none and all that. But is what I do on the bike significant enough to accredit it towards any success (and by success I mean actually finishing the Ultra marathon) I have in the race later this year? I wouldn't like to feel pleased with myself come august and bleat on about all the miles I've ran in preparation without giving the nod also to the hours spent in the saddle.

ai_1

jamieprang wrote:

Strange. I was wondering the same question but in reverse. I'm more a runner than a cyclist. I enjoy both but my main focus I think for now will be running. I have my first ultra marathon planned for August and hopefully more in the future.

I started cycling mainly because I fancy trying a Triathlon. But also for enjoyment. But I wondered to myself, will the cycling training for the Triathlon help much in a way towards my running?

I know that any training is good training. Some better than none and all that. But is what I do on the bike significant enough to accredit it towards any success (and by success I mean actually finishing the Ultra marathon) I have in the race later this year? I wouldn't like to feel pleased with myself come august and bleat on about all the miles I've ran in preparation without giving the nod also to the hours spent in the saddle.

Unfortunately, cycling doesn't seem to do much for your running except for adding to your aerobic fitness, at least not that I can detect.

The secret rider

I think running is important for effective cycling I also think that effective leg workouts all help

The development of fast twich and slow twich muscles from the gym work is brilliant for me and I have found that this has helped me displace lactic more effectively.

Being a previous runner not serious 10k's max .... I have found the quads need work as does the lactic displacement side of things I find running tends to strengthen my calfs and also off road help with able strength

The cycling I found was mostly quad work.

Now being about a week or two into my new and first cannondale the animals i Ride with are super fast and they all run / cycle alternate.

I think the running is also great for increasing lung capacity and also by utilising HIT training alongside slower 70/80% resting heart rate runs can also help with heart rate stabilisation and active recovery time.

In summary the fitness translates well from running to biking my quads need a lot of work and this will come quicker and can be more focused in the gym but I will try to alternate run / cycle

Finally I rode 30k off road Friday and ran 5k today I found my quads were super stiff and my back ached for the first 10 mins assume this is just muscle stiffness due to new excersise s ( biking)

Hope my experiences help

jamieprang

I figured that really there has to be some benefit. I agree that I cant train for a run by only cycling and I cant train for cycling by running. But I feel that there has to be some slight benefits of training for both disciplines. Maybe a slight edge here and a slight edge there. But I'm never going to be challenging on the top scale anyway, and the pro riders wont be sh!tting themselves anytime soon either so its all somewhat irrelevant. It was more curiosity that anything else.

markhewitt1978

Ai_1 wrote:

Unfortunately, cycling doesn't seem to do much for your running except for adding to your aerobic fitness, at least not that I can detect.

That seems to be the consensus that I've read on cycling forums, that cycling does very little for your running and I believe it as I can jump on a bike and ride for 5 hours no problem, but ask me to run for 5 minutes?]

However I've also heard the same isn't true in reverse, that runners can take to cycling quickly.

ai_1

markhewitt1978 wrote:

Ai_1 wrote:

Unfortunately, cycling doesn't seem to do much for your running except for adding to your aerobic fitness, at least not that I can detect.

That seems to be the consensus that I've read on cycling forums, that cycling does very little for your running and I believe it as I can jump on a bike and ride for 5 hours no problem, but ask me to run for 5 minutes?]

However I've also heard the same isn't true in reverse, that runners can take to cycling quickly.

Yep. If you're a cyclist and decide to start running you'll have the advantage of good aerobic fitness but you're pretty much starting from scratch with regards leg adaptation for running. With running core strength is also important and if your technique is poor it can be pretty hard on your body. It might be different for young riders who still have some of the inherent core strength, muscle tone and suppleness of youth but I think most riders in their 30s or beyond are surprised that running is a lot tougher than they remember. I was.

I think cycling is technically much easier than running and doesn't require the same full-body toughness. It's nearly all in the legs. Anyone can sit in the saddle and spin the pedals and if you're suffering you can just slow down a bit. If you're finding it tough running you may find you have to switch to a walk to recover. It's easier to be competent on the bike than competent as a runner but incredibly tough to be elite at either.

The very reasons that running is tough for cyclists are probably the same reasons that I think it's a good idea. Cycling gives you great aerobic fitness but doesn't necessarily give you a well balanced physique. If you cycle for fun and fitness rather than purely for competitive success then I think there's a big benefit in doing both.

davep1

Follow up here from my experience of last two weeks.

Ran on Mon 17th, furthest distance yet (only started running again mid Jan) 5km, cross country. Wasn't easy but enjoyed it.
Commuted Wed & Fri that week on the bike, about an hour each way but nothing remarkable.
100km bike ride Sun 23rd (remember the wind?!) started ok, after 2 hours was knackered and quads had that dull pain from pushing too hard. Then it was time to turn for home into the wind...
Tue 25th another 5 km run, although I walked the last km, nothing in the tank at the start and went down hill from there! Convinced myself it was too soon since the bike ride and too long since the last run (8 days)
Wed 26th commute to work and back on the bike. Felt awesome considering the effort running had been the day before, and really able to motor home.

markhewitt1978

Been trying a bit of running last week, mostly walking really but with running intervals. Has it helped my cycling? I don't think so, but, I lost 3lb as opposed to the previous week where I put on 1lb so it helps me lose weight, which helps my cycling, so I'm going to keep going with that

moscowflyer

I run regularly, 4-5 times a week but nowadays I limit myself to no more than 10k as my calfs can no longer stand the punishment from half marathon training. I enjoy the running and it definitely helps fitness wise, despite having ridden a lot less this past few months I can still maintain a good average over flattish routes, but the one thing running does is affect my climbing. I just can't climb as well when I'm running as the quads just don't like it, granted I'm also doing weights 2-3 times a week as well which won't help but if I have an extended absence from running, I start to climb better.

I certainly wouldn't run to 'help' my cycling, but I like mixing things up and hope to maybe start doing duathlons later this year as well as opposed to spending 99% of my time on the bike as I did last year.

Cumulonimbus

Looks like i am the opposite to everyone else here as i find cycling helps running more than the other way round. In fact i set a 5k PB last year the day after cycling 40 miles. Not sure why cycling helps more, suspects are cycling having a higher cadence and maybe my breathing on the bike is better too.

ai_1

Cumulonimbus wrote:

Looks like i am the opposite to everyone else here as i find cycling helps running more than the other way round. In fact i set a 5k PB last year the day after cycling 40 miles. Not sure why cycling helps more, suspects are cycling having a higher cadence and maybe my breathing on the bike is better too.

My typical cadence is almost identical both running and cycling! When I'm cruising I run consistently at 93spm +/-2spm. On the bike I usually settle around 90-95rpm although it does vary more than running. I don't think there's a link really, most likely just coincidence.
I do think I breath better on the bike. When running I tend to subconciously sync my breathing with my strides which isn't always ideal. Does everyone do this or is it just me?

mercia_man

Yeah I sync my breathing with my strides when running. I find it helps me to get into a good steady rhythm. At least this applies when I'm road running. Fell racing is a different matter. Nothing I have ever done is so hard on my lungs.