Sidewalk vs. Road

Quoted message said:

I have two options for running surfaces: sidewalks and streets.
Sidewalks are harder surfaces to run on, yet they have no slant. A
hard surface causes the body to absorb more shock. Roads are softer to
run on, though they are canted. Slanted surfaces can do a number on
the ITB,

And hips and almost anything else.

Quoted message said:

so are sidewalks the better surface?

yes

Quoted message said:

I have been working on
the POSE method of running, so I also think that I would be able to
absorb the extra shock of sidewalks. If I were to run heel to toe,
then I would think that the roads are actually the better route.

POSE is neither a silver bullet, nor a decisive factor in the equation in this
instance.

A moderate increase in impact can be addressed by changing footwear. There's
not much one can do to deal with running on a slanted surface.

Cheers,
--
Elflord

--
Elflord

"Elflord" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I have two options for running surfaces: sidewalks and streets.
Sidewalks are harder surfaces to run on, yet they have no slant. A
hard surface causes the body to absorb more shock. Roads are softer to
run on, though they are canted. Slanted surfaces can do a number on
the ITB,

And hips and almost anything else.

Quoted message said:

so are sidewalks the better surface?

yes

Seriously? Everyone "in the know" has told me not to run on sidewalks, but
I'd much rather do sidewalks than risk getting run over.

determined said:

"Elflord" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I have two options for running surfaces: sidewalks and streets.
Sidewalks are harder surfaces to run on, yet they have no slant. A
hard surface causes the body to absorb more shock. Roads are softer to
run on, though they are canted. Slanted surfaces can do a number on
the ITB,

And hips and almost anything else.

Quoted message said:

so are sidewalks the better surface?

yes

Seriously?

Yes

Quoted message said:

Everyone "in the know" has told me not to run on sidewalks,

Depends on what the alternatives are. I don't think it's very controversial to
say that a substantially cambered surface of any type is much worse than a hard
surface. This will cause all sorts of repetitive asymmetries (it's like having
one leg much longer than the other)

My personal view, which is perhaps somewhat controversial, is that surface
hardness doesn't make a whole lot of difference, as long as you're wearing shoes.
There is no hard evidence that I'm wrong.

Quoted message said:

but I'd much rather do sidewalks than risk getting run over.

Indeed. It's important to keep risks in perspective ! Playing in traffic really is
much more dangerous than running on sidewalks.

That happens to be my primary reason for choosing the sidewalks too, though I
was barely conscious of this until you mentioned it here -- I mean, I just
don't have the urge to spontaneously play in traffic.

Cheers,
--
Elflord

determined said:

"Elflord" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I have two options for running surfaces: sidewalks and streets.
Sidewalks are harder surfaces to run on, yet they have no slant. A
hard surface causes the body to absorb more shock. Roads are softer to
run on, though they are canted. Slanted surfaces can do a number on
the ITB,

And hips and almost anything else.

Quoted message said:

so are sidewalks the better surface?

yes

Seriously? Everyone "in the know" has told me not to run on sidewalks,

What??? I run on the sidewalks all the time. lol!

but

Quoted message said:

I'd much rather do sidewalks than risk getting run over.

Well, yeah. 😉

Paul said:

I have two options for running surfaces: sidewalks and streets.
Sidewalks are harder surfaces to run on, yet they have no slant. A
hard surface causes the body to absorb more shock. Roads are softer to
run on, though they are canted. Slanted surfaces can do a number on
the ITB, so are sidewalks the better surface? I have been working on
the POSE method of running, so I also think that I would be able to
absorb the extra shock of sidewalks. If I were to run heel to toe,
then I would think that the roads are actually the better route.

I go with the least slanted surface. Where I am, the sidewalks are also
slanted for drainage, at least the newer ones. (In ice storms, they have
you slide into traffic.) And the newer roads have fairly high crowns.

I was running some roads this winter when we had a bunch of snow, but
the plows leave a strip of snow in the "gutter" that's flat, so it
wasn't too bad. But this spring, my legs really let me know how unhappy
they were when I was having to run more roads to get to the trails after
the snow from roads was gone, but some trails were still too wet or
punchy snow. Fortunately, things are drying out so I can almost use my
regular access routes (just a couple snow drifts left). For me, it's
definitely the cant, although the grassy embankment was a little better
than the road.

Dot
barefoot on my very brown lawn this afternoon, in t-shirt

--
"The goal is training and adaptation, not destruction and injury."
- John Hardy
http://www.mountainrunning.coolrunning.com.au/misc/training.shtml

Taking the traffic out of the equation, does everyone still agree that
sidewalks are the way to go? Also, would barefoot running make any
difference in this predicament?

Paul said:

Taking the traffic out of the equation, does everyone still agree that
sidewalks are the way to go? Also, would barefoot running make any
difference in this predicament?

The one with the least slant would be best. Barefoot wouldn't help,
unless your longer leg is on the down-slant side - in which case, it
doesn't matter if barefoot or not.

Dot

--
"The goal is training and adaptation, not destruction and injury."
- John Hardy
http://www.mountainrunning.coolrunning.com.au/misc/training.shtml

Paul said:

Taking the traffic out of the equation, does everyone still agree that
sidewalks are the way to go? Also, would barefoot running make any
difference in this predicament?

If the sidewalk's flat and in good repair, and the road significantly
crowned, I'd say take the sidewalk.

IME, that slope will make a much bigger difference than that between a
99.6% hard surface (asphalt) and 99.9% (concrete). Or however the
hardness is measured, the point being that while dirt or grass will
yield significantly, pavement of either variety ain't moving more than
a fraction of a mm, leaving your shoes and legs to absorb near enough
100% of the shock.

I'd think you'd prefer the flatter, not the marginally softer, surface
barefoot too; but that's just an educated guess. Barefoot on
pavement's a little too hardcore for me.

I sometimes prefer roads to sidewalks because the latter are often
horribly uneven around here, a much bigger tripping hazard. As much
fun as getting hit by a car doesn't sound like, neither does a much
larger probability of taking a face plant on concrete and losing some
teeth hold much appeal. And most of the roads here are one way and
low traffic.

Paul said:

I have two options for running surfaces: sidewalks and streets.
Sidewalks are harder surfaces to run on, yet they have no slant.

My opinion, like many of the other responses, is to go for the most
level surface.

"Bucky" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Paul said:

I have two options for running surfaces: sidewalks and streets.
Sidewalks are harder surfaces to run on, yet they have no slant.

My opinion, like many of the other responses, is to go for the most
level surface.

Listening to this discussion of a sharp stick in the eye or a kick in
groin as running choices, makes me thrilled to be living in a rural area
with very few sidewalks. Since there are few sidewalks I can always run
on the side of the road which is flat dirt and softer and if off peak
hours, I can run up the middle of the road.

Regardless of where we live there are a different set of running
conditions to overcome. I joined a local land conservancy which bought a
160 acre parcel of land within the town and we are putting in trails.
When done we should about 4-5 miles of trails, some with a layer of
wood chips, to run on. If your restricted to running in the dark bring a
flashlight. 😉

I know we can all adapt but I don't think I would still be running today
if my default miles were on sidewalks or heavily trafficked roads.

-Doug

Doug Freese wrote:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

I can always run
on the side of the road which is flat dirt

<snip>

LOL

Man come on!!
Over here we have paved roads :-)

martin

Charlie Pendejo said:

I sometimes prefer roads to sidewalks because the latter are often
horribly uneven around here, a much bigger tripping hazard. As much
fun as getting hit by a car doesn't sound like, neither does a much
larger probability of taking a face plant on concrete and losing some
teeth hold much appeal. And most of the roads here are one way and
low traffic.

I run pavement all the time, yet to trip via that route. If you lose
half of your teeth, you could always join the ultra running community.

Cheers,
--
Elflord

Run every path. Otherwise you get locked in.

Run on a slant. On cobblestones. On sponges. Etc.

MOST of your running is on flat, semi-hard surfaces.

Variety is Good.

Tomasso.

Doug Freese said:

makes me thrilled to be living in a rural area
with very few sidewalks. Since there are few sidewalks I can always run
on the side of the road which is flat dirt and softer and if off peak
hours, I can run up the middle of the road.

I'm out in the country, so city runners should take this with a grain
(shaker?) of salt. An item to consider is the angle of the sun. When
it's low in the sky, a runner can be lost in the glare. For morning
runs, I run on the side opposite the sun and run back on the same side I
ran out on.

Otherwise, running towards the middle, or (carefully) alternate
running on either side works for me.

Donovan said:

I run pavement all the time, yet to trip via that route.

Not the sidewalks in my neighborhood, you don't. Do you? Nah, you
don't, or I'd've seen you by now. Plus you're probably hypervigilant
from all that espresso.

It's an empirically proven fact for me: I can and will trip on
occasion, and even if I don't hit the ground, can and do mildly strain
leg or arm muscles in the split-second process of regaining my
balance.

Tomasso said:

Run every path. Otherwise you get locked in.

Run on a slant. On cobblestones. On sponges. Etc.

Variety is Good.

I agree philosophically - and I'd add, run in different types of
shoes, at different paces, etc. - but it's also a matter of degree.
Running a significant distance on a significantly slanted road makes
my legs and hips significantly unhappy. I wouldn't want to run in one
normal shoe and one 2" high platform shoe either.

I'd rather get my "unevenness" from trails, which are both softer and
much more irregular.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Elflord said:

Depends on what the alternatives are. I don't think it's very controversial to
say that a substantially cambered surface of any type is much worse than a hard
surface. This will cause all sorts of repetitive asymmetries (it's like having
one leg much longer than the other)

It seems to me that there are an awful lot of variables in
there. My experience has been that not too many roads have
*substantial* camber, and I've been running on very modestly
crowned rural roads for quite a few years without it causing
problems (as far as I can tell). However, when I've
travelled I've had to run on concrete and wow, did that ever
hurt. A lot.
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis - [email hidden]

Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community

Paul said:

Taking the traffic out of the equation, does everyone still agree that
sidewalks are the way to go? Also, would barefoot running make any
difference in this predicament?

What else are you going to do? If you can't safely run on ashphalt
surfaces, and you can't get yourself to some trails, then the sidewalk is
your only other option. Know though that concrete is unforgiving and
watch out for the slopes for driveways. Very bad for you. You might think
about time of day in order to get onto the roads. However even that may
not assist. Our early morning Sunday runs are punctuated by the sounds of
our local good Christians honking and waving their fists at us as we
impede their progress to salvation.

"Charlie Pendejo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
| I sometimes prefer roads to sidewalks because the latter are often
| horribly uneven around here, a much bigger tripping hazard. As much
| fun as getting hit by a car doesn't sound like, neither does a much
| larger probability of taking a face plant on concrete and losing some
| teeth hold much appeal. And most of the roads here are one way and
| low traffic.

Our local towns have the same sidewalk issues as you do.
In addition you have to deal with walkers.
Overall you end up running slower on sidewalks.

Charlie Pendejo said:

If the sidewalk's flat and in good repair, and the road significantly
crowned, I'd say take the sidewalk.

Except for right-ankle pronators in the UK, Japan etc, and left-ankle
pronators elsewhere :-)

I find it much easier to run on roads in the UK than in France / USA,
because my worst-pronating ankle (right) is relieved by the camber in the
UK, but agravated in "drive on the right" counties (supposing I run facing
the traffic of course).

Quoted message said:

I sometimes prefer roads to sidewalks because the latter are often
horribly uneven around here, a much bigger tripping hazard.

Sidewalks also involve stepping off and back on when you have to cross
side-streets, pass chuckleheads wandering aimlessely (and 3 abreast,
spread out over the whole sidewalk), cars parked on the sidewalk by their
dickwit drivers etc. Not good for allow the switch to autopilot to enjoy
the ride.