I ran on saturday - odd experience

mpatts

I ran an off road half marathon on saturday (dirt half in leighton buzzard). I don't really run anymore, to be honest have probably ran ten miles since may. I ran the first 10k in 40 mins, but then my legs stopped working. I couldn't even get out of breath! My pace dropped from sub 7's to sub 9's, finishing in 1.40 - and I can barely walk today (although I did CX race yesterday too). Is this just a cycling adaptation issue?

ai_1

You can hardly expect to go out and run a half marathon without problems having hardly run in 6 months.
Cycling may maintain your cardiovascular ability but running uses different muscles in different ways. There's some cross over but not enough that the two sports are anywhere near interchangeable. Runners often do reasonably well when they hop on a bike but cyclists rarely manage to run well without some run specific training.

mercia_man

Running a half marathon without training and completing it in a decent time shows you have good base fitness. But it's clear your pace judgement was wrong as you started really quickly, doing an elite level 10k, and then blew up. Cycling uses different muscles to running. Your cycling fitness alone would get you through a 5 or 10k but a half marathon is a different matter. You have to do running specific training to supplement your good cardiovascular fitness from cycling. I find that for any race over an hour, I really need to do some endurance running training to avoid feeling weak in the latter stages - no matter how much cycling I've been doing.

As for sore legs, I nearly always get them after a hard race, even on the road. After a tough fell race, it's normally four or five days of stiffness. The more running training I do, the less stiffness I suffer. But I never get sore legs after cycling.

manxshred

The last time I tried to run I felt great. I was running very quickly compared to my normal pace and everything felt easy.

I couldn't walk for about 3 days afterwards though.

craker

I've just signed up for my first half in a couple of years. Won't be running any 10Ks in 40 minutes of that I can assure you.

I am constantly reminded by a friend who has succumbed to middle aged inactivity (golf) that he's run only one 1/2 and that in a time faster than anything I've done. He did no training and ran it the day after playing rugby and going out for a skinful after the game. That was when he was a youngster...

ilovegrace

I used to run miles , competing on road and fell lots of miles per week
Became injured and now cycle , ran on Sat for the first time in ages not far , legs are like blocks of wood today.
regards
ILG

redjeepǃ

craker wrote:

I've just signed up for my first half in a couple of years. Won't be running any 10Ks in 40 minutes of that I can assure you.

I am constantly reminded by a friend who has succumbed to middle aged inactivity (golf) that he's run only one 1/2 and that in a time faster than anything I've done. He did no training and ran it the day after playing rugby and going out for a skinful after the game. That was when he was a youngster...

Don't worry about that. I find that the older I get, the faster I used to be.

madasahattersley

I've been running fairly consistently for 4 months now and I'd be delighted with a 40 minute 10k or a 1:40 half!

mxp27824

I don't understand. Had you lost your bike?

mpatts

So, to feedback on all of this:

1) You are absolutely right to say "what the heck were you expecting" - truth is I always expect too much. I will never learn. I almost certainly blew up, but I refuse to accept this and will look for something else to blame.
2) I should be pleased with that time, but I'm not. It's probably a sub 90 min half, given that it was off road with a lot of elevation
3) Next time, I'll just take my bike.

cougie

If you really ran the first 10k in 40 mins - off road = then bin cycling and keep to running - thats a fantastic time as part of a half marathon.

mpatts

cougie wrote:

If you really ran the first 10k in 40 mins - off road = then bin cycling and keep to running - thats a fantastic time as part of a half marathon.

First half is mostly on tow path, so although its off road it's the equivalent of on road (bar the first 400 metres or so, which is on grass).

I do think I'm a better runner than cyclist though, but I much prefer cycling!

IShaggy

mpatts wrote:

I do think I'm a better runner than cyclist though, but I much prefer cycling!

Same here. Always found running very easy - placing in few races - but struggled to make progress cycling. But cycling is my passion, so it's all I do now.

I'm tempted to take up running again one day, as I'm now 8kg lighter than when I used to run, and my capacity must have improved. But my legs hurt just thinking about it. I would have to build up really slowly to avoid injury.

peteco

I try and do a couple of runs a week to complement my cycling - nothing serious, 5-6 km each time.
My heart rate and breathing barely seem to rise, but it can hurt in a very different way to a decent bike ride.

Pete

Brommers76

40 mins for the first 10k is a bit quick esp if you only managed to run 1:40 - suggests you died a death. Somebody mentioned that 40min is elite level 10k but I think that is over egging it a bit.

I only ever did 1 half off a little run training and 1 year after valve replacement surgery. I did mainly cycling as rehab. Felt fine until mile 11 and then the pain in my quads was terrible and recovery needed days. The facts are that fitness is specific and I found that the more you train at one discipline the more muscle soreness and pains I got after doing another sport.

overlord2

40min 10k is club level running. You haven't run for a few months and you think you should be faster and better? Go on tell us really why you posted this unsurprising bit of info...?

ai_1

Overlord2 wrote:

40min 10k is club level running. You haven't run for a few months and you think you should be faster and better? Go on tell us really why you posted this unsurprising bit of info...?

It's definitely a nonsense thread topic. If you're running the first 10km of a half marathon at 4min/km pace you already know there's nothing "odd" about crashing thereafter having not trained for the event. Sounds like fishing for compliments or just making stuff up.

markhewitt1978

Ai_1 wrote:

You can hardly expect to go out and run a half marathon without problems having hardly run in 6 months.
Cycling may maintain your cardiovascular ability but running uses different muscles in different ways. There's some cross over but not enough that the two sports are anywhere near interchangeable. Runners often do reasonably well when they hop on a bike but cyclists rarely manage to run well without some run specific training.

That's what most people say. Running can prepare you for cycling but cycling cannot prepare you for running. I think because cycling is for the most part limited by CV fitness, but running requires something else, I don't know, core strength perhaps?

ai_1

markhewitt1978 wrote:

Ai_1 wrote:

You can hardly expect to go out and run a half marathon without problems having hardly run in 6 months.
Cycling may maintain your cardiovascular ability but running uses different muscles in different ways. There's some cross over but not enough that the two sports are anywhere near interchangeable. Runners often do reasonably well when they hop on a bike but cyclists rarely manage to run well without some run specific training.

That's what most people say. Running can prepare you for cycling but cycling cannot prepare you for running. I think because cycling is for the most part limited by CV fitness, but running requires something else, I don't know, core strength perhaps?

Yeah, cycling isolates your legs from the rest of your body pretty effectively, I think. Being good on the bike is largely down to good quads and good CV fitness. Technique matters but it's not nearly as critical as in many other sports including running. Running also depends on good CV fitness but it's more of a full body activity although the legs, of course, do most of the work. The posture and technique needs to be good and you have to maintain them. The impact loading is different to the cyclic loads on a bike and they fatigue you differently. Run pacing is trickier in my opinion. You have no gears or freewheel. You're always supporting your weight and if you're moving you can't rest. I enjoy both. Both can hurt and both can be very enjoyable but they are quite different in many ways.

cougie

Dont underestimate the physical impact on the legs of running. Cycling can't get you used to that. It takes a lot of running miles to get used to it.

mpatts

Overlord2 wrote:

40min 10k is club level running. You haven't run for a few months and you think you should be faster and better? Go on tell us really why you posted this unsurprising bit of info...?

The 'odd' bit is that my lungs worked but my legs didn't - this was the surprise.

Anyway, i won't be making the same mistake again!

ai_1

mpatts wrote:

Overlord2 wrote:

40min 10k is club level running. You haven't run for a few months and you think you should be faster and better? Go on tell us really why you posted this unsurprising bit of info...?

The 'odd' bit is that my lungs worked but my legs didn't - this was the surprise.

Anyway, i won't be making the same mistake again!

As per the earlier posts - this should not be a surprise.
The only surprise is that you're saying you're surprised. This is equivalent to a runner coming on here and telling us he's been doing plenty running but tried a cycling road race and was surprised when his legs weren't up to it. If you're capable of a 40 minute 10km you should have enough knowledge/experience to know that while CV fitness is fully transferable, muscle fitness is not. Why would you be surprised that cycling didn't leave your legs perfectly conditioned for running. As discussed above this is completely predictable. The only puzzling thing here is your post.

mpatts

Ai_1 wrote:

mpatts wrote:

Overlord2 wrote:

40min 10k is club level running. You haven't run for a few months and you think you should be faster and better? Go on tell us really why you posted this unsurprising bit of info...?

The 'odd' bit is that my lungs worked but my legs didn't - this was the surprise.

Anyway, i won't be making the same mistake again!

As per the earlier posts - this should not be a surprise.
The only surprise is that you're saying you're surprised. This is equivalent to a runner coming on here and telling us he's been doing plenty running but tried a cycling road race and was surprised when his legs weren't up to it. If you're capable of a 40 minute 10km you should have enough knowledge/experience to know that while CV fitness is fully transferable, muscle fitness is not. Why would you be surprised that cycling didn't leave your legs perfectly conditioned for running. As discussed above this is completely predictable. The only puzzling thing here is your post.

I can assure you I'm not showing off, if that is the implication - merely looking to gather sage advice, which I now have. I realise I shouldn't have been surprised, but I was.

bolingbroke

It does sound like a brag. Those are sub 6 minute miles, that's paramilitary requirement pace.

mpatts

bolingbroke wrote:

It does sound like a brag. Those are sub 6 minute miles, that's paramilitary requirement pace.

It's really not meant to!

bolingbroke

You should consider doing multisport if you can pull that off without training.

mpatts

bolingbroke wrote:

You should consider doing multisport if you can pull that off without training.

Really?

I can't swim (my technique is 'not drowning') so not keen on Tri, but had considered Duathalons. Might have a pop next year at the shorter running distances.

bolingbroke

Yeh Swimming is a whole other ball game. If you can run two sub twenty minute 5ks in a half distance duathlon you'll do pretty well in a lot of amateur UK races.

cougie

Check out parkrun - 5k races all over the country on Saturday mornings - you'll be near the top of the field with times like that.

markhewitt1978

Try doing Strava with your running and see how many CRs you can pick up.

tangled_metal

I know a few who do Park Runs and they sound a good idea. There were none near me when i started running so I never did it. of course I only managed to get out for 5 runs before I packed it in. The last run was a month after the penultimate run with an enforced break due to injury climbing. When I came back I did my best ever distance in the fastest time. in fact I did twice the distance that I did in my first run but in the same time. The last quarter of it was done with a limp because my knee went.

Now I ride a bike to work and back with a few family trips out at the weekend (and odd run out when I can get out on my own of a weekend, rare as hens teeth those trips). I am no longer a runner, my knees would hate me for it. I did used to do a lot of challenge walks. At 40 to 50 miles over hills in just under 9 hours to 16 hours, only walking certainly builds up endurance but that doesn't confer to running. It was when I was at me fittest in the challenge distances that I tried to take up running to gain even more speed but It amazed me how even walking fast over the fells doesn't lead to a head start with taking up running.

Basically running is an activity where the muscle group useage and just learning how to do it makes it unique. Not much transfers into it when starting out. i guess swimming is similar too. Get running and swimming sussed and you're a triathlete. Never for me but I was nearly tempted once by a quadrathon for charity near me. That adds kayaking to the usual tri activities. I was a kayaker back then and even had access to a WWR (whitewater racer) which would have been a fast craft to paddle in that leg.