Slow jogging vs. brisk walking

Options
2»

Replies

  • aliakynes
    aliakynes Posts: 352 Member
    Options
    Jogging burns more calories than walking, even if you're slow. So there is plenty of reasons to go for the jog, especially if you enjoy it and want to pursue running.

    I had to learn in hilly terrain also so I started off running slower than MFP considers a jog. But do your best and keep it up, speed comes with time, and I definitely run faster now than I did in my beginning days.

    P.S. Posting again for those who missed it ... http://www.runnersworld.com/weight-loss/how-many-calories-are-you-really-burning?page=single
  • dacspace
    dacspace Posts: 108 Member
    Options
    Running slow burns more calories than walking under 5 mph. Most people don't come close to walking that fast.

    http://www.runnersworld.com/weight-loss/how-many-calories-are-you-really-burning?page=single

    As a slow runner myself I want to say thank you for sharing this article. It makes a lot of sense!
  • BerryH
    BerryH Posts: 4,698 Member
    Options
    it's ALL uphill baby
    To be fair, it's 50% downhill, unless you're now very, VERY high up a mountain and and a very, VERY long way from home! :happy:

    You burn more calories through slow-running at the same speed as you can fast-walk because the energy it takes to propel yourself off the ground. You can probably tell by how much more sweaty and out of breath you get running!

    You might actually be running faster than you do on the treadmill - I hate them so much it's far more of an effort to keep up the pace.

    Do you have a smartphone? There are tons of free maps that use GPS to tell you how fast you';re going.

    If you love running, keep running. If you prefer walking, walk more. If you like a bit of both, mix it up. If your goal is to run a certain distance or complete a race, work up from one to the other.

    If you want to get faster, do some interval sessions - run faster for a minute and jog or walk to recover. I was going to add do hills, but you've got that covered! Bet you'd conquer any race on the flat!
  • meshashesha2012
    meshashesha2012 Posts: 8,326 Member
    Options
    much of this will also depend on your gait. if it's harder for you to walk a pace and easier to run it, then you're more than likely using more energy trying to force your body to walk it .

    at least this is what i've noticed on the treadmill. for me the walk/run barrier is around 5.0/5.1. anything under i can walk but the closer to 5.1 im walking the more elevated my heart rate when walking. once i give in to start running at that speed, my heart rate drops 20-30 BPM
  • brianages
    brianages Posts: 49
    Options
    If your knees hurt walking is best. If you can run then run like the wind because it is great stuff when you get into it. I just started the running about 6 months ago and now I run at least two 5K's per week. It feels great and seems to help the whole body thing. The bicycle has improved my running when I started doing one 30 mile ride per week.

    As always: Live like someone left the gate open!
  • 7elizamae
    7elizamae Posts: 758 Member
    Options
    Do whichever one your enjoy most. Then you'll stick with it!
  • kelseyhere
    kelseyhere Posts: 1,123 Member
    Options
    It sounds like your question is about how to log your activity, if you log using the speed you will have the most accurate results. Personally I feel like it's better to underestimate calorie burns when not using some sort of device, so if it estimates you burned 200 cals for example after 25 minutes of walking, I might adjust that to 175 cals. I used to try and force myself to run a lot but just found myself slogging through it. I much more enjoy the brisk walking, but I mix in lunges, jumps and always do hills to make sure it's challenging. You can also try walking up the hills, then jogging down.
  • PaytraB
    PaytraB Posts: 2,360 Member
    Options
    Honestly 4.5 is a brisk walk.

    If you're not much of a runner why do it at all? Why not just walk briskly?

    Not true. If you are running, you're running. Keep trying and, slowly, you'll get speedier. MFP has just made groupings and as we progress, we fall between the groupings sometimes.

    When I first started running, I was slower than MFP's 5MPH, too. I logged my running time under MFP's "walking" criteria and used the "running" criteria as a goal to reach. It was a milestone when I could move up to "real" running. It felt like a big accomplishment to be able to post a "running" day on MFP. LOL!
  • aliakynes
    aliakynes Posts: 352 Member
    Options
    Honestly 4.5 is a brisk walk.

    If you're not much of a runner why do it at all? Why not just walk briskly?

    Not true. If you are running, you're running. Keep trying and, slowly, you'll get speedier. MFP has just made groupings and as we progress, we fall between the groupings sometimes.

    When I first started running, I was slower than MFP's 5MPH, too. I logged my running time under MFP's "walking" criteria and used the "running" criteria as a goal to reach. It was a milestone when I could move up to "real" running. It felt like a big accomplishment to be able to post a "running" day on MFP. LOL!

    Also, the average marathon runner typically clocks in at 4.5 miles per hour. Tell them it's a brisk walk! :laugh:

Categories