[ot]R*nning



suzyj

suzyj

New Member
Mar 22, 2004
704
0
0
Okay, so I'm being a complete twit posting about r*nning in aus.bicycle. I should post in aus.r*nning, but I thought that I might get better (or at least more understanding) advice here.

Last Friday, I figured I'd go for a r*n. Nothing particularly hard - just a quick 3.5km. I strapped some j*ggers on, put on my HR monitor, and set off. Less than 2km later, my heart rate has hit 180, and I'm struggling. I managed to do the whole distance without walking, but blimey, I felt like garbage afterwards.

The next morning, I was walking like a marionette. My quads weren't properly connected to my brain. A good thorough massage and some stretching let me at least walk down to the shops, but I wimped out and got a taxi home. Sunday was less bad, but my quads were still shot.

So what's the deal? I thought I was reasonably fit. I do about 150km/week, and have a whole pile of really long distance rides under my belt, but my legs turn to complete mush in just 20 minutes of r*nning.

Oh, and I won't mention that my thighs rub together, and it _hurts_.

Are these things that will sort themselves given a few more similar r*ns, or am I doing something totally wrong?

Cheers,

Suzy
 
suzyj wrote:
> Are these things that will sort themselves given a few more similar
> r*ns, or am I doing something totally wrong?
>

A couple of ideas:
- when running my HRM sometimes takes 10-15 mins to settle down giving
false readings up around 180 so if it goes like that it's worth just
manually checking your pulse (if there's no pulse you probably should
stop running ;) )

- it sounds like this is your first run in a while. Just because you've
been riding a lot doesn't mean you are run fit. There are some nutcases
(Gags/Tam, must be an army thing) who decide out of the blue to run 25km
(Tam would probably do 125km), but most of us need run training to run.
Regardless of how much riding I've been doing, if I haven't been running
a 4km run out of the blue definitely hurts.

- having said that, if 180 was an accurate reading, and given how
stuffed it left you it could be, I'd be getting myself checked out. I'm
sure MikeyOz has a strong opinion on this one.

DaveB
 
DaveB wrote:
>
> suzyj wrote:
> > Are these things that will sort themselves given a few more similar
> > r*ns, or am I doing something totally wrong?
> >
>
> A couple of ideas:
> - when running my HRM sometimes takes 10-15 mins to settle down giving
> false readings up around 180 so if it goes like that it's worth just
> manually checking your pulse (if there's no pulse you probably should
> stop running ;) )
>
> - it sounds like this is your first run in a while. Just because you've
> been riding a lot doesn't mean you are run fit. There are some nutcases
> (Gags/Tam, must be an army thing) who decide out of the blue to run 25km
> (Tam would probably do 125km), but most of us need run training to run.
> Regardless of how much riding I've been doing, if I haven't been running
> a 4km run out of the blue definitely hurts.
>
> - having said that, if 180 was an accurate reading, and given how
> stuffed it left you it could be, I'd be getting myself checked out. I'm
> sure MikeyOz has a strong opinion on this one.
>
> DaveB

DaveB has got it pretty much spot on, but has missed one bit of
explaining...

It's not running out of the blue that hurts, it's running. Even when you
run slow enough that it doesn't hurt, it still does significantly more
damage than cycling for the same amount of time, and it takes you longer
to recover from it. Even if you smashed yourself on the bike, you
wouldn't end up with as much ache. Running stresses your bones. This is
a good thing in moderation, because it encourages your body to
strengthen your bones. But it can hurt.

Try run/walking. Pick something around 65-75% of your max HR and keep
it there for a bit. I prefer encouraging beginners to run/walk rather
than jog, because it takes a while to develop an understanding of what
pace you can hold, and so they either smash out too hard and can't
finish (or finish in agony) or go too easy and then often develop sloppy
form.

If it's quads that are hurting... (unless you ran somewhere hilly?_
Often, painful quads indicate someone landing with their feet out in
front, which is not efficient as you're pretty much applying the
brakes. Rather you should aim to run with your hips and chest forward,
feet landing comfortably under your body and driving to push you
forward. If you're doing this right, your bum should be what hurts at
the end of the run. Practise by doing small forward-backward leg swings
while keeping your hips dead level and facing forward (hold onto a
post/wall if you need to).

Tam

(Oh and DaveB, stop spreading rumours - I've never run more than
100.608km in one hit, thank you. I'm saving that until September.)
 
suzyj said:
So what's the deal? I thought I was reasonably fit. I do about 150km/week, and have a whole pile of really long distance rides under my belt, but my legs turn to complete mush in just 20 minutes of r*nning.

Oh, and I won't mention that my thighs rub together, and it _hurts_.
Click to expand...

Different muscles being used and your body is going "NOOOOOOOOO, Suzy you are cruel and must stop this madness now" is my guess but if you are concerned talk to your doctor.

As for the rubbing get yourself some Fauldings Barrier Cream and apply liberally.
 
Tam wrote:

> It's not running out of the blue that hurts, it's running. Even when
> you run slow enough that it doesn't hurt, it still does significantly
> more damage than cycling for the same amount of time, and it
> takes you longer to recover from it.

Ahh - this makes considerable sense - on the bike, I can idle along at 110-120bpm, taking it easy. When I was running, even going really slowly I was still in the 160s.

> I prefer encouraging beginners to run/walk rather than jog

Okay, this is where I show what a complete idiot I am. I thought r*nning and j*gging were the same thing... Is there a difference?

> If it's quads that are hurting... (unless you ran somewhere
> hilly?_ Often, painful quads indicate someone landing with their
> feet out in front

It's moderately hilly around work, but nothing that requires gearing under a 39/19 or so... Having said that though, I was sort of throwing my legs out a bit on the way back to slow myself down. I guess it's just a matter of relaxing into it a bit more.

I haven't tried to r*n in probably 15 years, so I guess it's no wonder it hurts.

Ta muchly for the good advice.

Regards,

Suzy
 
Tamyka Bell wrote:
> Try run/walking. Pick something around 65-75% of your max HR and keep
> it there for a bit. I prefer encouraging beginners to run/walk rather
> than jog, because it takes a while to develop an understanding of what

Good point, I do that on all my long runs (this thread should just about
have FD tearing his hair out by now) and it has become such second
nature I forgot to mention it. Nothing better for beginners (and
hopeless runners like myself) to get the km's up while keeping the
damage down.

DaveB
 
suzyj wrote:
> Okay, so I'm being a complete twit posting about r*nning in aus.bicycle.
> I should post in aus.r*nning, but I thought that I might get better (or
> at least more understanding) advice here.
>
> Last Friday, I figured I'd go for a r*n. Nothing particularly hard -
> just a quick 3.5km. I strapped some j*ggers on, put on my HR monitor,
> and set off. Less than 2km later, my heart rate has hit 180, and I'm
> struggling. I managed to do the whole distance without walking, but
> blimey, I felt like garbage afterwards.
>
> The next morning, I was walking like a marionette. My quads weren't
> properly connected to my brain. A good thorough massage and some
> stretching let me at least walk down to the shops, but I wimped out and
> got a taxi home. Sunday was less bad, but my quads were still shot.
>
> So what's the deal? I thought I was reasonably fit. I do about
> 150km/week, and have a whole pile of really long distance rides under
> my belt, but my legs turn to complete mush in just 20 minutes of
> r*nning.

Delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS). You're using muscles you're not
used to, in ways they're not used to. Too much, too early.

> Oh, and I won't mention that my thighs rub together, and it _hurts_.

I used to chafe when playing sports that involved running. A pair of
cycling shorts, sans chamois, works wonders.

>
> Are these things that will sort themselves given a few more similar
> r*ns, or am I doing something totally wrong?

Yes, you're running. Don't.
 
Bleve wrote:

> Delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS). You're using muscles you're not
> used to, in ways they're not used to. Too much, too early.

Here's a handy link :

http://sportsmedicine.about.com/cs/injuries/a/doms.htm

The above mentions NSAIDs to treat the pain, but Ed Bourke found that
NSAIDs made recovery take longer.

In addition to the treatments suggested there, there's a theory that a
small amount of protein (the magic 4:1 ratio of carbs to protein) can
reduce its impact. Ed Bourke was a big believer in it. Chris
Carmichael moderatly so. See here :

http://www.active.com/story.cfm?story_id=6938

and my receipe :

http://www.aboc.com.au/perl/tips.pl?p=c4p
 
SuzieB wrote:
>
> suzyj Wrote:
> >
> > So what's the deal? I thought I was reasonably fit. I do about
> > 150km/week, and have a whole pile of really long distance rides under
> > my belt, but my legs turn to complete mush in just 20 minutes of
> > r*nning.
> >
> > Oh, and I won't mention that my thighs rub together, and it _hurts_.
> >
>
> Different muscles being used and your body is going "NOOOOOOOOO, Suzy
> you are cruel and must stop this madness now" is my guess but if you
> are concerned talk to your doctor.
>
> As for the rubbing get yourself some Fauldings Barrier Cream and apply
> liberally.
>
> --
> SuzieB

Or use BodyGlide (http://www.ultrafit-endurance.com/ is a good online
shop!)
Or use SportShield, my new best friend at http://www.seemerun.com.au/ it
smells better

Tam
 
suzyj wrote:
>
> Tam wrote:
>
<snip>
> > I prefer encouraging beginners to run/walk rather than jog
>
> Okay, this is where I show what a complete idiot I am. I thought
> r*nning and j*gging were the same thing... Is there a difference?

In some countries, it's all the same. Here, a jog is a casual, laid
back, easy pace. A run is a thing of beauty, or alternatively something
which makes you sweaty and smelly and panting... Basically, if you take
walking pace and running pace... I'd say jogging is halfway, where it'd
still take you the same amount of time to go the distance as if you were
alternating walking and running.

> > If it's quads that are hurting... (unless you ran somewhere
> > hilly?_ Often, painful quads indicate someone landing with their
> > feet out in front
>
> It's moderately hilly around work, but nothing that requires gearing
> under a 39/19 or so... Having said that though, I was sort of throwing
> my legs out a bit on the way back to slow myself down. I guess it's
> just a matter of relaxing into it a bit more.

Running down hills always makes the quads hurt, until you get used to
it. Then you run faster down the hills and your quads hurt. Learn to
lean forward and go with it, and then slow yourself down for a bit, and
then pick up. I.e. rather than "riding the brakes" the whole way down
the hill, alternate them on/off.

> I haven't tried to r*n in probably 15 years, so I guess it's no wonder
> it hurts.

Damn straight! Start easier!

Tam
 
thats freaky weird, Ive been away for the last few weeks, work related unfortunately, so have not been reading much on the forums, then the day I am back at work in melbourne, my name got mentioned on a running thread as well in aus.bicycle.... the world truely is an amazing place :)

when I noticed I had problems with my heart is was not so much the fact my heart rate when up so high, it was the fact it went up so high, at such a slow pace, so it only got to 160, however it SHOULD have been about 90 or 100 and with the speed it got to 160, that combined with, the tiredness, dull headache and fluttering sensation in my chest, I knew something was wrong, there was also a lack of sleep as well before leading up to my episode.

elevated heart rate during exercise is basically your body telling you, hey listen, im having a hard time and as Tam pointed out and from my experience running takes a much harder toll on your body then cycling, even at a slow pace, its all the stress so basically your heart is just trying to get blood to all the required areas which are saying I need more blood, because of countless reasons, diet, sleep, muscle fatigue/damage, fitness levels, hormones, stress, caffeine, sugar..... oh and sporting teams letting you down!

I'm putting together a bit of a blurb about my training since my Atrial Fribulation, going to post it later on, some similar points you might find interesting... I've been keeping notes on my training! just generally how I feel.
 
Suzyj,

New runners tend to fall into a trap of trying to run too hard, it
takes a while for the body to adjust, run as slowly as you can at
first, use your lube of choice on the bits that are rubbing. I use
vaseline, some people worry about staining and use others as previously
suggested.

At an early stage, definitely run no more than every second day.

PiledHigher
 
PiledHigher wrote:
> Suzyj,
>
> New runners tend to fall into a trap of trying to run too hard, it
> takes a while for the body to adjust, run as slowly as you can at
> first, use your lube of choice on the bits that are rubbing. I use
> vaseline, some people worry about staining and use others as previously
> suggested.
>
> At an early stage, definitely run no more than every second day.
>
> PiledHigher
>

Amen to that. I tried getting started running a few times over a 10 year
layoff, but kept getting injured. Then I got a HRM and as soon as I hit
150bpm started walking till I was back down to 130bpm. For the first
month I couldn't run more than 250m without having to walk (which wasn't
that big a problem seeing I couldn't run more than 1km at that stage).
Month by month that improved, but the most important thing for me is I
went through my first two years of triathlons and year round training
without a single injury. I put the majority of that down to taking it
easy on my body.

DaveB
 

> Amen to that. I tried getting started running a few times over a 10 year
> layoff, but kept getting injured. Then I got a HRM and as soon as I hit
> 150bpm started walking till I was back down to 130bpm. For the first
> month I couldn't run more than 250m without having to walk (which wasn't
> that big a problem seeing I couldn't run more than 1km at that stage).
> Month by month that improved, but the most important thing for me is I
> went through my first two years of triathlons and year round training
> without a single injury. I put the majority of that down to taking it
> easy on my body.
>
> DaveB

There are two parts to long term injury free, like cycling, a large
part of your running should be at lower heart rate, with the harder
stuff both specific and measured to your goals and ability. This lower
intensity stuff is where efficency and smoothness are built.

In addition running is less forgiving of poor biomechanics than
cycling, I attribute my injury free running to obsessive replacement of
shoes (~800ks per pair - they won't look worn but compared to a new
shoe there will be a world of difference), good biomechanics as
mentioned and using the right sort of shoes for your running style.

PiledHIgher
 
PiledHigher wrote:

> New runners tend to fall into a trap of trying to run too hard,
> it takes a while for the body to adjust, run as slowly as you
> can at first, use your lube of choice on the bits that are
> rubbing. I use vaseline, some people worry about staining
> and use others as previously suggested.

> At an early stage, definitely run no more than every second day.

Makes good sense. I went out again today at lunchtime and did much the same run, though this time I walked maybe 20% of it. Certainly didn't feel as bad - bit like doing intervals though - it can be a bit of a struggle to convince yourself to start up again.

Afterwards I feel worn, but not totally used up. I'll try to get three lunchtime runs a week in and see how it goes. If anything, I figure running during the time I'd normally be eating food has got to help the waistline :)

Cheers,

Suzy
 
suzyj wrote:
> Okay, so I'm being a complete twit posting about r*nning in aus.bicycle.
> I should post in aus.r*nning, but I thought that I might get better (or
> at least more understanding) advice here.
>
> Last Friday, I figured I'd go for a r*n. Nothing particularly hard -
> just a quick 3.5km. I strapped some j*ggers on, put on my HR monitor,
> and set off. Less than 2km later, my heart rate has hit 180, and I'm
> struggling. I managed to do the whole distance without walking, but
> blimey, I felt like garbage afterwards.
>
> The next morning, I was walking like a marionette. My quads weren't
> properly connected to my brain. A good thorough massage and some
> stretching let me at least walk down to the shops, but I wimped out and
> got a taxi home. Sunday was less bad, but my quads were still shot.
>
> So what's the deal? I thought I was reasonably fit. I do about
> 150km/week, and have a whole pile of really long distance rides under
> my belt, but my legs turn to complete mush in just 20 minutes of
> r*nning.
>
> Oh, and I won't mention that my thighs rub together, and it _hurts_.
>
> Are these things that will sort themselves given a few more similar
> r*ns, or am I doing something totally wrong?

Ob Note, haven't run in about three years. That said:

I first started using a HR monitor for running. I don't know about
today but back then just about every runner was over-training every time
they ran.

I'd been running just about daily for five years. A day wasn't a day
without a run. I'd gotten Sally Edward's book, can't remember the
title, and it had these different zones. I went out for a recovery run
and spent more time walking!

Ignoring the jeers of my comrades persistence paid off. In six months
I'd gone from the bottom third of the squadron to the top ten, so I'm a
fan of heart rate training. I wouldn't use one in a race but for
training they're good tools.

What I have learned is that heart rates vary with disciplines. The max
HR I've recorded on the mountain bike is 5 beats lower than the max HR
I've recorded running five years previously. That heart rate is ten
beats lower than the max HR I've recorded on a road bike. Might be
something to do with body position, I don't know.

My advice is to train in the zones; if that means walking then walk.
Persistence will get you there although I'd suggest that if you find you
need to get somewhere quickly a bicycle's a better bet (I know I know,
low predictable blow! Born out of guilt from not running for three
years probably (if Suzie sees this I'm dead.....))

--
Cheers | ~~ __@
Euan | ~~ _-\<,
Melbourne, Australia | ~ (*)/ (*)
 
On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 13:10:39 +1100, suzyj wrote:

> Last Friday, I figured I'd go for a r*n. Nothing particularly hard -
> just a quick 3.5km.

So you just got back then? That sounds like an appropriate speed...

> Are these things that will sort themselves given a few more similar
> r*ns, or am I doing something totally wrong?

Well yeah. You admitted to it in the first sentence!

Dave - who knows nothing about running other than I'm not that good at it

--
Dave Hughes | [email protected]
Striker, listen, and you listen close: flying a plane is no different
than riding a bicycle just a lot harder to put baseball cards in the
spokes.
 
Euan wrote:
<snip>
> Persistence will get you there although I'd suggest that if you find you
> need to get somewhere quickly a bicycle's a better bet (I know I know,
> low predictable blow! Born out of guilt from not running for three
> years probably (if Suzie sees this I'm dead.....))

Euan,

I looked at the time it took me to do my first MTB race and was
horrified to see I could've run the trails at about the same pace.
(Although it was enough incentive to make me train on my MTB). Running
was faster than persistence!

Tam
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back