Running with short legs?

Sweet13_Princess

I almost feel comical by asking this question, but does anyone think it's more challenging to run because you're a short person or have short legs? I'm 5'3" and I see treadmill workouts that tell me to run at 5mph and I laugh. I'm already at a jog at 3.5 and feel like I'm running at 4.0. I tried amping it up to 6mph for 30 second intervals and practically fell on my face.*LOL* Anyone else agree or do you all just think I'm crazy.

Shannon

mjwarbeck

I have relatively short legs - 31 inch inseam at 6'1. I just don't like running...never questioned if it was due to short legs

Sued0nim

I think I love you

Sweet13_Princess wrote: »

I almost feel comical by asking this question, but does anyone think it's more challenging to run because you're a short person or have short legs? I'm 5'3" and I see treadmill workouts that tell me to run at 5mph and I laugh. I'm already at a jog at 3.5 and feel like I'm running at 4.0. I tried amping it up to 6mph for 30 second intervals and practically fell on my face.*LOL* Anyone else agree or do you all just think I'm crazy.

Shannon

Thanks for the

kborden36

I'm 5'0 and feel the same way when running! I think I've gotten up to 4.4 on the treadmill

queenliz99

I know the feeling. Keep on going, I think running will get easier for you.

Sued0nim

by the way I would totally buy that speed is always relative to your stride length so think I would find running at 5mph much easier than you would because I'm 5'8 (with a 2'7 stride walking)

I would assume we employ similar amount of effort in moving one pace (although I'm probably heavier too) but I would cover more distance

Kullerva

5'4" here, but reasonably long-legged. (I hate my short torso, so there really is no winning on this one.) My recovery run pace is 5.7 mph and the fastest pace I can do a 5k is 6.3 mph. Speed comes with endurance. When I first started 4 mph felt like torture; now it's my ordinary walking pace. I've been running off and on for 15 years, though...

Azdak

As long as your legs reach the ground they are not "too short"

In general, the effort required for greater turnover due to a shorter stride is offset by the smaller mass and greater efficiency so that the oxygen cost remains similar at any given speed.

There was a recent study (sorry I didn't write down the reference and only scanned it) that suggested that differences in leg length might be more significant than previously thought, but I still think that holds true more for the extreme ends of the spectrum.

klkateri

I'm just short enough that most elliptical machines have much to wide a stance for me and I feel like I'm going to fall over... as for running, I always feel like that but never thought it could be my height.

coreyreichle

It's more challenging to run faster, but not to just run in and of itself.

5mph is still faster than about 95% of the American public. Keep that in mind.

Kanyon17

My friend is 5'1 and boy she runs fast.... more then me at 5'10! I'd agreed the person above; Speed comes with endurance

litsy3

Lots of top elite distance runners are quite short. Mo Farah is only 5'5.

majigurl

don't look at how fast you are going.. go for what works for you. I'm under 5 feet.. running can be fun, as long as you are only competing against yourself. Stop worrying about how fast you are going compared to someone else.

Gianfranco_R

Sweet13_Princess wrote: »

I almost feel comical by asking this question, but does anyone think it's more challenging to run because you're a short person or have short legs? I'm 5'3" and I see treadmill workouts that tell me to run at 5mph and I laugh. I'm already at a jog at 3.5 and feel like I'm running at 4.0. I tried amping it up to 6mph for 30 second intervals and practically fell on my face.*LOL* Anyone else agree or do you all just think I'm crazy.

Shannon

Well, not really, running speed = stride length X stride frequency, and tipically shorter people can compensate their short stride with a higher frequency. No worries, keep on working out and you will improve

enterdanger

I'm short legged. I'm slow. I don't necessarily think they are related. My 35 years of not exercising probably has more to do with it than my short legs. I wouldn't worry about speed. Just that you enjoy your run.

LivingtheLeanDream

5ft 2" here and my slowest running pace is 5 mph /My average walking pace is 4.25 mph ...I guess everyone's different regardless of the length of legs...

NovaDuck

I'm also 5'3", however I don't find that matters much for my speed but my overall fitness definitely does. While my stride is not as long as some, my stride frequency is definitely more.

I'm fairly slow I guess, 12 min mile, but it has improved from almost 14 mins, so it's definitely not my legs!

enterdanger wrote: »

I'm short legged. I'm slow. I don't necessarily think they are related. My 35 years of not exercising probably has more to do with it than my short legs. I wouldn't worry about speed. Just that you enjoy your run.

Also, definitely that!

girlinahat

I have been aiming for a cadence of three steps per second (right left right) and am jogging at about 4.7mph. Speed will come with endurance and increasing stride length, but the cadence can remain the same.

RoxieDawn

5'4" and very short legs and longer torso and I do run fast. I do not have issues with being slow at all as I have run all my life and was on track team in college as a sprinter and did hurdles..

Sweet13_Princess

Wow! Thanks for all of the feedback. Based on what some of you have said, I wonder if shorter people burn more calories then? I mean, if we're having to take more strides to make up for shorter legs, wouldn't the calorie burn be higher? This really makes me curious, but also makes me laugh a little at myself.*LOL*

Shannon

LivingtheLeanDream

sorry to burst your bubble but the shorter we are the less calories we burn unfortunately....same goes for the lighter we are the less we burn.

Gianfranco_R

Sweet13_Princess wrote: »

Wow! Thanks for all of the feedback. Based on what some of you have said, I wonder if shorter people burn more calories then? I mean, if we're having to take more strides to make up for shorter legs, wouldn't the calorie burn be higher? This really makes me curious, but also makes me laugh a little at myself.*LOL*

Shannon

only weight and distance matter.
Here is the formula:
http://www.runnersworld.com/weight-loss/how-many-calories-are-you-really-burning

Meganthedogmom

Hmm I'm 5'3" as well, but I jog at 5mph without much strain. Maybe I have a shorter torso, though.

peleroja

I posted this on another thread yesterday so my apologies for the copy/paste, but:

Honestly, your height doesn't matter that much. Desiree Linden, one of the top female long-distance runners in North America, is only 5'2" and she just qualified for the US Olympic marathon team again. I don't know much about the science of it but I do believe the smaller/lighter factor helps offset a possibly shorter stride as you suggested.

Some other short runners:
Tsegaye Kebede (M), Ethiopia, 158cm (5’2’’), 50kg, 02:04:38 (broke the Chicago Marathon record in 2012)
Rosa Mota (F), Portugal, 157cm (5’2″), 45kg, distinguished as the Greatest Female Marathon Runner of All Time on the 30th Anniversary Gala of the Association of International Marathons and Distance Races (AIMS) on 09 Nov 2012 (former European, World and Olympic Champion (won 14 of 21 marathons started including Olympic Games, World Champs, London, Boston, Chicago and Rotterdam))
Tegla Loroupe (F), Kenya, 4’11”, 40kg, 02:20:43 at the 1999 Berlin Marathon to break the women’s marathon world record
Samuel Wanjiru (M), Kenya, 163cm (5’4’’), 52kg, 02:06:32 (2008 Beijing Olympics marathon winner and Olympic record)

I think for sprint-type events it might be different, but not so much for distance.

I couldn't find much from legit sources on it, but here's one hypothesis from a blog:

Running speed (per minute) = stride length x number of strides per minute. To increase your speed therefore, you can either increase your stride length, or increase your cadence. It would seem that studies have shown a convergence towards a cadence of 90-95 (measured on one leg) or 180-190 steps per minute for elite runners. If we assume then, that this factor remains relatively constant, the other factor to consider is the stride length.

The main thing to remember when discussing stride length whilst running is that it can be vastly different to your walking stride length. This is because walking stride length is limited to the length of your legs as you always need to have one foot on the ground, compared to when you run, where there will be a period of time when both feet are off the ground. In other words, running stride length is dependent on your ability to push yourself off the ground and forward.

So how does this relate to a runner’s height? Taller runners, due to their longer legs, tend to be able to push off harder compared to their shorter counterparts. Weight however, also has to be taken into account. A taller runner may push off with more force, but they may also be heavier and thus, may not travel as far forward compared to a shorter, lighter runner. Also, the more you weigh, the harder your body has to work to lift itself. Another point to consider is that taller runners need to lift themselves up higher, to get their longer stride in before landing on the ground again – this vertical motion detracts from forward motion. All of this goes some way to explaining how the previously mentioned examples of marathon runners could triumph despite being relatively short – it is clearly the height-weight ratio that is of more importance not just the height.

This is clearly just one theory / factor and there are surely a lot of other things at play here. It does give me confidence to know though, that height is by no means a limitation.

Bluepegasus

I'm 5'8 and I still run slow!

Meganthedogmom

Gianfranco_R wrote: »

Sweet13_Princess wrote: »

Wow! Thanks for all of the feedback. Based on what some of you have said, I wonder if shorter people burn more calories then? I mean, if we're having to take more strides to make up for shorter legs, wouldn't the calorie burn be higher? This really makes me curious, but also makes me laugh a little at myself.*LOL*

Shannon

only weight and distance matter.
Here is the formula:
http://www.runnersworld.com/weight-loss/how-many-calories-are-you-really-burning

Out of curiosity, who here has used this formula and been successful eating back those calories while still losing weight? Or maintaining. Depending on goal?

20yearsyounger

meganridenour wrote: »

Gianfranco_R wrote: »

Sweet13_Princess wrote: »

Wow! Thanks for all of the feedback. Based on what some of you have said, I wonder if shorter people burn more calories then? I mean, if we're having to take more strides to make up for shorter legs, wouldn't the calorie burn be higher? This really makes me curious, but also makes me laugh a little at myself.*LOL*

Shannon

only weight and distance matter.
Here is the formula:
http://www.runnersworld.com/weight-loss/how-many-calories-are-you-really-burning

Out of curiosity, who here has used this formula and been successful eating back those calories while still losing weight? Or maintaining. Depending on goal?

I can't remember the losing part but I maintain on the net numbers within the calculation. Eating back though also has a lot to do with how good a food estimating process you have

with regard to the short legs, I used a shortening stride to reduce the impact. This has helped me run further and ultimately faster with a higher turnover rate so I don't think being short really matters. In fact, I can out sprint many people taller than me, I just can't out jump them

FatMoojor

Last race I went on there was a short women, probably around 5'1" / 5'2" and she was flying along. I was doing around 6mph and she blew past me with ease.

wilsoncl6

Being short is not as much of a factor it seems as the weight your carrying. If you're running, it's the ability/strength you have to propel yourself forward and having to move your other leg forward before impact. I've run for speed over short distances (not sprint distances) against much shorter runners and they have left me in the dust. I would think, the lighter you are, the stronger your leg/hip/glute muscles, the faster you're able to move your legs and the faster you are able to propel yourself forward. A taller person may have a longer stride but that's balanced out by the extra weight that is being carried.

CindyFooWho

I took my dachshund for a walk Saturday. He's had cabin fever so he decided to run his walk, and I let him. I had to keep a good jog going to keep up with him. His legs are about 2 inches long. Now, granted, he has 4 of them, but still...

I'm just being funny, I'm not mocking. But it's a bit true. I am no expert, but am someone who is progressing in running ability. I began with just over 5 mph on a treadmill. I can now sustain just over 6 mph for 30 minutes and am improving, so I can tell you that your speed will improve with your ability. Just enjoy and keep it up.

stealthq

Work on endurance and you'll find that your feeling isn't so. You can get quite fast as a short person if you want to work on it