So what's the current consensus on cross-training?

neeb

Generally these days the advice you hear most often is that to become faster/fitter on the bike you should do nearly all of your training on the bike. But let's say that I substitute one or two of my cycling sessions each week for running. What sort of impact will that have on my cycling?

Reason I ask is that having never really done any running, but being bike fit, I've recently had a go at it. I've found that I can go pretty much straight into running 5k in a not too embarrassing time (well, for a cyclist..), but my legs really suffer every time I do it. Basically, the extended recovery period from running interferes with the cycling. Obviously this is because I haven't done any running before.

I'm interested in how much better I could get at running with a little training, but then seem to run up against a potential Catch 22 - in order to do enough running to improve at it and recover more easily, would I have to do so much that it began to impinge seriously on the amount of time I could spend cycling? And if so, how severe an effect would that have on my cycling fitness (both short term and long term)?

Or is there a sweet spot (quantity / frequency of running per week) that would allow me to develop significantly as a runner without losing any cycling fitness? (I guess that would involve some sort of net balance, with the slightly decreased time spent training on the bike compensated for by some cross-training effect).

imposter2.0

As usual, it depends on your targets. If you only ride for a bit of fun, then do whatever you like, whenever you like. If you are racing or have performance-related cycling goals, then time spent on the bike is going to be more beneficial than time spent running.

AK_jnr

I need to run once a week minimum to stop too many aches and pains the days after.
I can run 18 min 5k's straight out the box without running for weeks/months so its definitely transferable for me. I did come from football though.

I just get bored of doing the same thing for too long. I find doing Parkruns mid summer gets my motivation back up for cycling for the rest of the year.

zoomer42

The slippery slope. Next comes 'a bit of swimming' and then all of a sudden your bombing down the road with a pair of bright green compression socks on and your helmet on back to front. Be careful.

neeb

No danger of catching triathitis, I can only do a poor breaststroke..

I'm not racing at the moment but I do have performance-related cycling goals (hill climbs in the autumn etc). But I'm not so focused on them that I'm looking for every slight gain whatever the cost. I know some people at work who are quite keen runners and have been out with them a couple of times. They set a fairly brisk pace and I can just about keep up, although what's interesting is that when I'm running it feels as if it is cardiovascular fitness that is holding me back, and yet when I go out cycling with the same people (as I have done once or twice) I can/could drop them without even trying. So I guess there is a large element of discipline-specific mechanical/metabolic efficiency involved, I must be having to burn more oxygen to run at the same pace as them and visa versa when it comes to cycling. I wonder to what extent these adaptations are independent or if becoming more efficient at running makes you less efficient at cycling.

IanRCarter

neeb wrote:

No danger of catching triathitis, I can only do a poor breaststroke..

I'm not racing at the moment but I do have performance-related cycling goals (hill climbs in the autumn etc). But I'm not so focused on them that I'm looking for every slight gain whatever the cost. I know some people at work who are quite keen runners and have been out with them a couple of times. They set a fairly brisk pace and I can just about keep up, although what's interesting is that when I'm running it feels as if it is cardiovascular fitness that is holding me back, and yet when I go out cycling with the same people (as I have done once or twice) I can/could drop them without even trying. So I guess there is a large element of discipline-specific mechanical/metabolic efficiency involved, I must be having to burn more oxygen to run at the same pace as them and visa versa when it comes to cycling. I wonder to what extent these adaptations are independent or if becoming more efficient at running makes you less efficient at cycling.

Do you 'train' or just 'go out and ride'? If it's the latter, you could cut down your time on the bike but follow a structured plan to make the most of the time whilst giving yourself time to run. I don't think either discipline will benefit the other though, except for CV fitness (and possibly weight loss, but you could be losing muscle not fat) but as you already know, CV fitness only makes up a small part of cycling performance.

Clearly you want to do some running, you're not racing, so go for it. You could enter a duathlon to give yourself a target for both running and cycling.

neeb

wilo13 wrote:

The recovery time from the first few runs was torture, but I found I could still ride on the following days as cycling is non weight bearing.

Yup, I'm beginning to realise that too. There was one day I could hardly walk in the morning but I was still able to jump on the bike and do a fast 35 miles after work in the evening. But then that makes me think it might be a good idea to get used to doing some running, what with it being a more natural activity, good for bone density etc.

I occasionally do hill walking (I'm in Scotland), and it's interesting that cycling fitness seems to transfer a little better to that than to running. But then I used to do a lot of it until about 10 years ago, so it might just be a muscle memory thing. In which case, again, it might be good to develop a muscle memory for running so that even if I don't continue with it I could return to it if I wanted.

neeb

IanRCarter wrote:

You could enter a duathlon to give yourself a target for both running and cycling.

That's not a bad idea actually.

cazhadfield

Purely anecdotal....but i've noticed recently that there are a few people in my cycling club who are also quite keen runners, they also, without exception, happen to be amongst the very best/strongest cyclists in the club.

Pure coincidence maybe, and i often hear the argument that 'they'd be even better cyclists if they spent more time on the bike and less time running'.... but from what i can see the running certainly doesn't appear to be harming their cycling performance....

mercia_man

I was in a similar situation to the OP. I'd cycled for years, doing the odd sportive, weekend group rides and (hardest of all) many solo touring holidays with camping gear in the Alps and Pyrenees, and had a first go at running in my 50s. I found I was quite good at running and enjoyed it. I started entering races and training and by the time I reached the V55 category (I'm now a V60) I was occasionally winning my class in both road and fell races and finishing overall in the top third on road and top half on the fells where the fields are smaller and ability higher.

My cardiovascular fitness, pace judgement and hill climbing ability from cycling all helped with running. But muscle soreness after a hard run was an issue. The more training and races I did, the less stiffness I suffered. I can now do a 5k or 10k road race without serious DOMS. But there's no getting away from the fact that it is painful for me to walk for three or four days after a fell race or half marathon, no matter how much training I do. An easy spinning cycle ride is about the only exercise I can do after a tough race and I feel it is good therapy for loosening those sore legs.

The main downside of running compared with cycling is injuries. My list includes broken ankle, hallux limitus, plantar fasciitis, bruised underside of left patella from falling on a rock and twisted right knee from a failed overtaking bid through water.

I don't think running in itself harms my cycling ability. If anything, it improves my general fitness, strength and stamina and helps to keep my weight down. But it does eat into the time in which I can cycle. For example, I will stay resting at home, legs up on a stool, on a Saturday before a Sunday running race rather than going out for a ride with the lads.

I would suggest the OP tries running a couple of times a week - one steady longer session and one of speed intervals or hill reps - and enters a few races. I don't think this will harm his cycling speed but it will definitely improve his running speed and will speed up post-running recovery.

neeb

Thanks for that advice! Not sure I'm good enough to enter a race yet. Waiting to see how much faster I can get in the next few weeks if I keep at it once or twice a week. What sort of 5k time would I need as a 49 yo to be able to enter a 5k race and not totally embarrass myself?

Interesting you mention the injury risk. A major reason that I don't currently do road racing is the risk of crashes and significant injury, which feels on the wrong side of acceptable to me, especially in the UK when the roads seem to be wet half of the time.. Hence my ambition to get more into hill climbs and TTs (although at 63kg I'm not sure how competitive I'll ever be able to be at flat TTs). Entering a mass start running race initially seems much less daunting from an injury risk PoV, but I guess it's the chronic / medium term injuries that are the big risk..

mercia_man

Give running races a go! I'm sure you'll enjoy them. And don't worry that you won't be up to the general pace. Every road race has many people who are simply joggers and have entered just for fun. Running races have a generally supportive and inclusive atmosphere - and if you enter local club run races, they are considerably cheaper than a commercial sportive. And there's no tedious snobbery about who has got the latest carbon wheels or electronic group sets.

To give an example of typical pace in a 5k road race, here are some stats from the Phoenix Flyer, part of the Telford Sexarathon six race summer series in Shropshire which attracts some of the best runners in the West Midlands. It's the first running series I ever entered and I have done it most years.

The first V45 (45-50 age group) was Paul Ward, an international runner, who did it in 16:11 and was third overall. The last V45, an unattached runner, did it in 29:38. There were 329 finishers (men and women) and the last one home did it in 39:09. The runners who finished half way in the field did it in around 23:10-23:20. Most of the M45 times were 20 to 25 minutes. So if you can do a 5k in around 23 minutes, you will be in the middle of the field overall.

Yes injuries are a risk. But stick to 5 and 10k road and trail races, and don't overdo the training, and you should be fine. Obviously, the risk is higher for things like marathons and the associated lengthy training regime. Incidentally, at your light weight you would be well suited to fell running as long as you are willing to suffer!

neeb

Great, thanks for that! Sound like I could already finish about half way down which is encouraging.

Oddly enough despite being a fast hill walker and good up hills on the bike, whenever I'm running with other people and the route heads up hill I seem to suffer.. Must be some weird muscle I've yet to develop! (or maybe it's just that I'm on my limit already while they're putting in an extra push).

Monty Zoncolan

Interesting thread. I seem to have done the opposite from some, namely coming from running to cycling.

I would say that the cardiovascular benefit you will get from running should benefit you on a bike. I find it especially towards the end of quite a pacy ride (say 30 miles plus) where a bit of stamina/economy of effort comes into play - I notice this because people in my group are 'stronger' riders but some tend to flag a bit as the ride goes on. Having done runs of up to 20 miles training for a marathon I tend to be able to maintain the pace for a bit longer.

The other area is hills. This is where running and cycling are closest in effort and sensation for me. Hill running helps climbing on the bike and vice versa.

You can also fit a session into a shorter space of time. A steady run can be, say, 30 or 40 minutes. Most interval sessions would be less than that. A long run would be under two hours.

I also agree that the fatigue and soreness accumulates quicker with running. You need to manage how you train sensibly to avoid getting 'dead' legs and injuries.

So my entirely anecdotal sample of one would say go for it but have fun.

penski

Interesting thread. Hadn't come across duathalons before - is there a popular series/site to check these out? Google doesn't bring up much