Any of you go running after years of cycling?!

Bambaata

Well i came from the dreaded "**** at 3 sports" and would have run a fair bit. I moved to bike only due to plantar fascia issues. Never gave it the focus to correct it properly and just went bike only for a while (will be 3 yrs ago soon!! Take it slow, make sure to roll out any knots and generally take care of yourself a bit more than you would on bike as it can take its toll on you. I didnt do enough maintenance and ran myself into trouble. And now ive cycled myself into trouble im now just swimming lol.

silverharp

im mostly cycling fit at the moment but go for 2 hour walks at the weekend, recently started doing some jogging during the walk , idea would be at least once a week turn my 10km walk into half walk and half jog and a shorter one half that during the week. the bike is staying in the shed for the next two weeks so hopefully a chance to build up the jogging over the xmas period. i also want to build up core fitness either using a body weight routine or toying with the idea of getting a squat rack, its possible to get lots of benefits from an hour a week.

Macy0161

Statler wrote: »

Some may disagree, but I wouldn't get too caught up in a couch to 5k program if you've a good level of cycling fitness, as seamus says above just start out slow and build it up gradually.

I more suggested it as an approach to help provide some structure around the gradual build up.

Harrybelafonte

Macy0161 wrote: »

I more suggested it as an approach to help provide some structure around the gradual build up.

Exactly, recommending to "start out slow and just build up" is too vague for someone who has never really run before.

What Username Guidelines

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

Exactly, recommending to "start out slow and just build up" is too vague for someone who has never really run before.

Personally, I would certainly have given up within minutes had it not been for the app. I've tried running before but completely ignorant to how fast, for how long, how often etc. The thought of running for more than 8 minutes seemed insane to me just last month and now, dare I say, I'm actually enjoying it

smacl

TooObvious wrote: »

Bang for buck it's hard to beat a fast (for you) 5km.

Been on the turbo the last couple of nights, and you can knock out some serious effort in a short time there too. Kettle bells also provide a decent fast workout without much of an outlay or setup. That said, I find anything outdoors, whether cycling, running or hiking provides way better head space. While I enjoy running, I find if I do it regularly for more than about a month I always picking some kind of strain that leaves unable to continue for a couple of weeks.

gearoidol

ive have come from the opposite side. running with about 7 years and started cycling about 3 months ago,due to achillies issues .

I have to say im loving the cycling. So little damage to the body compared to running . I used to run about 50 -60 miles a week and now about 35-40 and a few 2 hr cycles. Running batters the body ,you generally escape for a few years if you are lucky but a small thing can develop and quickly put you out.

I could still probably run 17:30 or so for 5k but for fitness you need to do mileage. A fast 5k is only about 300-400 calories if your fit where as a long 13-15 mile run on the weekend would be 1500 to 2000 cals .

I find with running if I push too hard without a proper rest week every month you can easily get caught in overtraining and quickly get run down which leads to head colds and crashing and burning for a few weeks.

Wildly Boaring

Did it this summer.

I'd always be ok(ish) for a 5k run.

Did a half marathon and a couple of the quest series (hardest category) by end of summer. Really like the quest ones

Have a brother who's a good runner. Gave me the same advice as above and it worked.

No more than 10% extra a week.

I started with two 3k runs a week and built up.
Once I got to a 7k and a 5k i went to 3 runs a week. One long two short.

The once I ignored my own plan I paid dearly and had to do bike only for a while.

Had a kid in October. Bike and runners in shed since. Gonna be a painful January!!!

I always tracked my runs with garmin but never worried about being quick on the long ones. Just hit and stick to a steady pace. Did try pushing on with 5k ones by the end.

I am deffo now ****e at 2 sports!!

Bambaata

As a guide to check you're not running too hard try to ruin at a pace that would allow you to have a conversation with someone, not talking long winded sentences but a pace that would allow short sentences with short breaks. It might help you moderate the intensity to help you run for longer

Buzwaldo

I took up cycling 7 years ago (aged 45 - typical mamil stuff) and joined club, few sportives, one Alps trip, one day on Ventoux, not competitive, just leisure. Got fairly hooked on it, enthusiastic but not devoted/obsessed, peaked around 5/6K km per year.
I had tried a small bit of running before, but knees were a bit dodgy. Last few years did a bit of running again, and hey presto, knees stood up to it ok, thanks to muscle development from cycling. Not too much, but got up to doing a few 10ks etc. but cycling was still the main thing.
My OH does a bit of running (late starter also) and worked up to doing DCM in 2016 & 2017. While I had no intention of doing the marathon, the support and buzz on the day in Dublin seemed brilliant when I was supporting her, much better than any cycling event I did including Mallorca 312 which I did (225 version) this Spring. So having done a HM last year I signed up and did DCM this year.
Obviously cycling took a back seat during that training, and I've only done a few moderate spins since. It's going to take a while to get back to where I was cycling-wise.
It did take a while to get going at the running, but I didn't go at it too hard initially, maybe running less than once a week while still cycling. It's when building up the volume of running, or doing hard efforts that injuries seem to occur. Got a good bit of useful info from the athletics forum here on Boards. Initially I kinda had the one pace for most of my runs, but learned that you need to make yourself run slowly (not as easy as it sounds) to build mileage and prevent injury. They then say to build some volume first, then add some speedier sessions / intervals. Not a good idea to try to build volume and speed at the same time.
Most training for the Marathon here were doing 5-6 days per week, but I just did three (occasionally four) and maybe one cycle as well, and was reasonably happy with my time.
I got some niggles, but nothing more than when starting cycling, and luckily no issues with achilles / calf muscle apart from mild calf tightness at times. I do believe that Achilles injuries need to be treated with respect and caution, knowing some folk who did have trouble, including one full tendon rupture, and one partial. It seems 40-50 somethings can commonly rupture them.
I still prefer the freedom and mile-munching of cycling, plus the sociability of a club spin (can't keep up now though), but time-wise running is great. You can go for a decent run from 30 mins upwards, whereas cycling needs a good bit more to be worthwhile.
Looking forward to striking a better balance of both going forward.

Arequipa

Thanks for the replies...
I like the idea of the slow build up with running & adding 10% per week...
I planned on doing the park runs but havnt got around to it yet...
My ancle/ achilles is defo on the mend now after Saturday's run in the rain! The right ankle is definitely a bit slower to loosen up than the left...
It gets me a bit down sometimes getting older and more injury prone...🀣🀣

Statler

Good luck with whatever approach you take, just remember to mind that Achilles... You want to avoid this at all costs! (needs volume): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsvcqS6tCLs

fat bloke

It's hard to argue with running in terms of time-efficient exercising.

Until you go running....:)

I like the idea of it, but any time I've tried it - niggles and twinges and darts of pain are the order of the day and more than anything else (apart from the fact I find it interminably boring) I'm terrified that a resultant knee or hip or ankle injury would keep me from the bike.

Thinkingaboutit

After a multiple fracture injuries some years ago, I run a bit on the grass in the park (there's elements of arthritis since that accident which I don't want to inflame and which makes itself known), but nothing like as often as I should.

El CabaIIo

As a few have said earlier in the thread, start out slow with running, the main goal should be build up volume at first so no point going out hammering a short run, blowing for air only to broke up for a week after it.

Second tip is to run alot on grass or soft surfaces, that goes for newbies and experienced runners, it'll massively lower your chance of injury and will develop all your stability muscles in your ankles and hips as well as your running musculature. Even the all the top pros do this with some going as far as using underwater treadmills.

Glutes and hips- strengthen your glutes and work on hip mobility. Cyclists will have overdeveloped quads and ttight hip flexors from the position on the bike. You'll need to develop your posterior muscles to rebalance the muscles.

Shoes- avoid shops who sell using a pronation test in store, 95% of them have no idea what they are talking about(only what they are trained to think-they are are a sales person and not a physio or biomechanist) and will reccomend €190 Asics Kayanos which are the most expensive shoe in store. Pronation is a normal part of the gait cycle, Overpronation is misalignment and is usually a result of imbalances in the hips, not the ankle(you will never see these stores look at your hips-cause and effect). Comfort should be the number 1 trait you look for in a shoe.

Technique- Do form drills rather than just focus on foot landing. Running is a full body sport, you're head is connected to your big toe, drills will help to synchronise all your muscles and teach your coordination. Footstrike isn't everything, overstriding is the big killer and you can do that whether you are trying to land on your forefoot or heel so don't reach out when running, stride length comes from the forces been directed back. Think like cycling, you're back wheel is where the power is coming from, the front wheel is passively moving forward because of that(you are not driving the front wheel.

Here's a few form drills- https://running.competitor.com/essential-drills-for-speed-and-efficiency_58730. You'll find videos on youtube. You can also do strides once or twice a week for form and speed. Strides are short pickups where you run at 90% of max speed for 80m(keep the focus on relaxation and control). You can do 4-6 reps of these with 2-3 minutes recovery in between once or twice a week.

Foam roll- work out the tightness and fatigue in your muscles.

Avoid reading runnersworld- just don't!

Don't expect anyone to do all this but that's some stuff that will help you get better used to running and lower your injury risk.

xxyyzz

I'm a relatively fit mountainbiker but I took up running recently. The first night I started with great intentions of starting slowly, warm up, walk run for 20 mins and warm down. 5 mins in I thought f*ck this, it's easy and ran 5km straight. 2 visits to the physio and lots of pain later I am starting back into it SLOWLY. As mentioned, cardio fitness is your enemy when starting out.

smacl

El CabaIIo wrote: »

Second tip is to run alot on grass or soft surfaces, that goes for newbies and experienced runners, it'll massively lower your chance of injury and will develop all your stability muscles in your ankles and hips as well as your running musculature.

I started doing this on the recommendation of friend who is a keen hill runner, found it made a huge difference, and now would only run on grass and unpaved surfaces.

The Noble Nudge

Trail/Hill running is the only way to go....
Try a duathlon and then progress to adventure racing...

rollingscone

Arequipa wrote: »

Hi!

How are you all doing today?
I have been cycling for about 10 years...commuting to work, sportive, trips to Alps, tours etc etc..
I have tried a few times to get back to running... ie going for a jog for 20 - 40 mins, particularly during the Winter months...
I have gone for a few runs over the last few weekends, slowly building up distance and time.. on Saturday I went for a 30 minute run around my local park..
I have been sore since Saturday... particularly my heel-- ankle---achilles..

I am not looking for any physio or medical advice..

I just wanted to know if any of you found running really tough after lots of cycling?
Are there any ways to prep your body for the impact, use of different muscles etc?

Thanks a mil!

A

My reaction to this thread's thesis

Arequipa

thanks for the fab advice El Caballo!
I went to the physio today and she worked on both of my ankles for 30 mins..

She advised no running for 3/4 days and to stay off road/paved surfaces if possible!
Good timing with Christmas approaching!

A

magicbastarder

bit of a random aside, but be wary of parkruns:

https://twitter.com/ElaineEdwardsIT/status/1076924254816489474

mossym

Did I see you say you were running on sand? There's a lot of your problem. Running for years, I'd still build sand work up slowly, it's way harder on the legs, especially the Achilles/calves than hard surface running. Most definitely not the surface to start on. Your legs muscles end up compensating for the moving surface. And despite what lots of the cylists would like to think it doesn't matter if you do hundreds of kms a week, you still use a limited number of leg muscles cycling and are not run fit.

Stay off sand, build up slowly. Don't run 2 days in a row for now.

Beasty

Strugglin' to walk, let alone run! Low impact is definitely better over the long term, if you are likely to suffer from arthritis (and my spine was riddled with it in my 30s). My foot specialist, back specialist and pain specialist recommend I keep cycling (but not falling off:pac:) because it's low impact. Reckon I would already have had a few vertebrae fused if I'd been running over the past decade (When I've been at my most active in terms of cycling)

dahat

Beasty wrote: »

Strugglin' to walk, let alone run! Low impact is definitely better over the long term, if you are likely to suffer from arthritis (and my spine was riddled with it in my 30s). My foot specialist, back specialist and pain specialist recommend I keep cycling (but not falling off:pac:) because it's low impact. Reckon I would already have had a few vertebrae fused if I'd been running over the past decade (When I've been at my most active in terms of cycling)

+1
I have suffered with Psoriatic Arthritis for over 17 years and while I manage to run for 3 years in my late 20's it was so tough on the body all round. I have since stopped and not ran more than a few years since!!!

I started cycling under the same set of circumstances and have found my ability to withstand a fair amount of TSS is massively improved. I have had no tine off the bike due to arthritis but like Beasty the trick is not falling off!!!

triggermortis

I haven't ran since my military service ended in 1991, and wouldn't even run for a bus these days. If I jog more than a few steps I get back pain, so I just don't do it. Never liked running anyway.

Wildly Boaring

Wildly Boaring wrote: »

Had a kid in October. Bike and runners in shed since. Gonna be a painful January!!!

Ran 5k today. Full of Turkey, ham, beer and cheese.

Took it very handy......still bleugh...

xxyyzz

I only recently took up the running, never realised run cadence is a thing. Similar to cycling, a higher cadence is more efficient so something around 180 steps per minute is kind of the magic number depending on who you talk to. Apparently it also prevents overstriding thus reducing the impact on the joints (again depending on who you talk to). My physio recommended running with a metronome app and gradually increasing my cadence which is currently low at 160 by 5%.

El CabaIIo

xxyyzz wrote: »

I only recently took up the running, never realised run cadence is a thing. Similar to cycling, a higher cadence is more efficient so something around 180 steps per minute is kind of the magic number depending on who you talk to. Apparently it also prevents overstriding thus reducing the impact on the joints (again depending on who you talk to). My physio recommended running with a metronome app and gradually increasing my cadence which is currently low at 160 by 5%.

I know this cadence of 180 gets thrown around alot but most people don't know where it came from. Jack Daniels(a famous coach and physiologist, not the whiskey) came across this observation when watching elite marathoners running at a pace faster than 12mph were running at around 180spm(faster than most threadmills can go) and this was then correlated to a magical cadence.

Elite 800/1500m runners have a cadence of 200-220, try aand go out on a track and run 210spm for 800m and you'll see the flaw in this causation and effect. Most of the elite marathon runners who are running at these 180+ cadences are running faster for 26 miles than the average fit runner can run for 400m. World class 5k runners are averaging 15.5 seconds per 100m 50 times back to back when their all out 100m sprint is probably 12 seconds. They are almost sprinting for a 5k.

If normal walking cadence is 120
And sprinting cadence is 260
And 800m cadence is 220
And marathon cadence is 185
In elite athletes

What does that say? Speed dictates cadence. Running at 6mph(10min/mile) at a cadence of 180 would mean that your stride length would be .89m. The average human WALKING stride length is .80m. Running slowly at high cadence is not efficient, you are basically racewalking if you do which uses completely different muscles which are not efficient for running.

Stride rate is self-selecting. Are you tall with longer legs? You'll have a slower cadence. Are you a much slower runner? You'll have a slower cadence etc.

Now, you can try and improve cadence by 3-5spm but the magic 180 formula holds no substance as an ideal and efficient number, it was just something that was observed in elite athletes and got drawn out to everyone else.

py

Have started running recently in preparation for the marathon next year. Have slowly been building up my endurance as well as my knowledge with a few books that have been recommended to me. The above posts are great to see the pros/cons to different insights when it comes to running technique.

xxyyzz

El CabaIIo wrote: »

I know this cadence of 180 gets thrown around alot but most people don't know where it came from. Jack Daniels(a famous coach and physiologist, not the whiskey) came across this observation when watching elite marathoners running at a pace faster than 12mph were running at around 180spm(faster than most threadmills can go) and this was then correlated to a magical cadence.

Elite 800/1500m runners have a cadence of 200-220, try aand go out on a track and run 210spm for 800m and you'll see the flaw in this causation and effect. Most of the elite marathon runners who are running at these 180+ cadences are running faster for 26 miles than the average fit runner can run for 400m. World class 5k runners are averaging 15.5 seconds per 100m 50 times back to back when their all out 100m sprint is probably 12 seconds. They are almost sprinting for a 5k.

If normal walking cadence is 120
And sprinting cadence is 260
And 800m cadence is 220
And marathon cadence is 185
In elite athletes

What does that say? Speed dictates cadence. Running at 6mph(10min/mile) at a cadence of 180 would mean that your stride length would be .89m. The average human WALKING stride length is .80m. Running slowly at high cadence is not efficient, you are basically racewalking if you do which uses completely different muscles which are not efficient for running.

Stride rate is self-selecting. Are you tall with longer legs? You'll have a slower cadence. Are you a much slower runner? You'll have a slower cadence etc.

Now, you can try and improve cadence by 3-5spm but the magic 180 formula holds no substance as an ideal and efficient number, it was just something that was observed in elite athletes and got drawn out to everyone else.

Like I say, depends on who you talk to