Cycling vs Running - Which is "harder"?

[ric_stern/RST]

Most athletes I work with are triathletes. Where they have had lab tests (lactate threshold, VO2max cycling and treadmill) they have had higher heart rates for running in all cases.

it's possible/likely that the triathletes will have higher run figures.

I do work with the occasional cyclist. In the last two years there has been 2 out of the 7 cyclists I have worked with who have had a cycling max HR within a beat or two of their running max. The rest have been more than 5 beats down. They are all well trained and do little cross training. They are all older men (one woman), 35 plus.

I agree that it is possible to have cycling HR max the same as your running HR max, but I don't see it as the normal, even among pure cyclists.

in all honesty i don't think this counts as a large enough sample.

ric

 

[rarriola]

Here's one more reason for running being harder:

Even being a runner for such a long time, there would be no way for me to run the equivalent of biking in a short period.

For example, I have been riding for 6 weeks and did 80 miles this morning around 19 mph by myself (including stops). I figure this is like running 24 miles or so at 7 min pace.

There is no way that my body would hold up running something like that in such a short period of time.

 

[mitosis]

it's possible/likely that the triathletes will have higher run figures.



in all honesty i don't think this counts as a large enough sample.

ric

I'm not basing my opinion only on my experience. I read widely and consult other coaches.

Physiology texts won't mention it because they are too general. Some web sites confirm your view (and mine) that some pure cyclists will have a max heart rate near their running max. But again it is not the usual.

I'm not arguing with you for the sake of an argument, I'm interested in being a better coach. So quote me some studies to change my view.

 

[ric_stern/RST]

I'm not basing my opinion only on my experience. I read widely and consult other coaches.

Physiology texts won't mention it because they are too general. Some web sites confirm your view (and mine) that some pure cyclists will have a max heart rate near their running max. But again it is not the usual.

I'm not arguing with you for the sake of an argument, I'm interested in being a better coach. So quote me some studies to change my view.

see Astrand and Rodahl, Textbook of work physiology. pretty sure that has something in. if not, try searching on Pub-Med

ric

 

[xbgs351]

My cycling max heart rate has always been a couple of beats higher than my running max heart rate.

One of the hard parts about running is the way that the impact hurts your muscles. Riding down a hill is a lot easier than running down one.

It's about seven years since I stopped doing triathlons. I have continued to ride and am a little stronger on the bike than when I did Tri's. I do way 3 kg more now, but why has my 5km run race time gained by 6minutes?

 

[ganderctr]

I'll vote for running, even in my days of running, it was always harder.

Muscle recruitment is different. That's one thing. I've never been able to run more than a mile without dying but on the bike I can do a flat-out mile with little pain. I can also recover from a hard effort while still pedaling...no such luck in running.

 

[Meek One]

Otherwise distance runners would have more powerful builds, which they clearly don't. Ultra runners are pure endurance athletes, whereas most cyclists have to sprint at times, or at least opeate at a high % of their max heart rate.

Umm, most good-great cyclists got pretty wimpy builds too. Just because you do a short sprint every now on your bike doesn't give you a 200m track sprinters legs.

I find running harder. You can't COAST or change gears for that matter while running, maybe it'd be closer if you had a fixed gear.

Try running your wifes race once and you'll see she may be right.

And, yes, you can severely tax yourself on a bike, but in general I think running is tougher.

My 2 cents

 

[robkit]

i like to wind my runner friends up by suggesting that running is for endurance atheletes who cant afford a bike! just kidding though, i do have serious observations...

running seems harder because you cant even do it without being well up there in intensity - its almost like there is no level 1 or 2, which is possible in cycling. does that make runnning harder? - for a beginner maybe, but a trained cyclist and a trained runner performing at threshold are both performing at threshold - by definition it has to feel just as "hard".

how hard one can go has to depend on specific training. it boils down to developing the right muscle and training it to twitch in the right sequence. a highly trained runner and a highly trained cyclist can likely go just as hard.

running pounds the body in a way that cycing doesnt. does that make it harder from a workout perspective or just feel harder from an abuse perspective.