Running with short legs?

2»

Replies

  • furmickc
    furmickc Posts: 43 Member
    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 :smile:

    I never thought of that. I'm 5 feet tall and have a long torso. I've recently got a Garmin that tracks frequency, and it's typically in the 190's, instead of the 180's "ideal". I wonder if that is due to my height. I'm on the quicker side, but not an elite by far.
  • jgnatca
    jgnatca Posts: 14,464 Member
    stealthq wrote: »
    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 :smile:

    +1
    5' 4" here and every year I get shorter (everyone else is getting taller). I run slow but it's fast for me. Find your pace and slowly work your way up.
  • carmkizzle
    carmkizzle Posts: 211 Member
    I'm 5'2 and can jog at 3.9-4.5. I think the lighter I become, the faster I'll be able to go. I'm more concerned about endurance, though,
  • CassidyScaglione
    CassidyScaglione Posts: 673 Member
    I don't know about running... but i have pretty short legs in proportion to my upper body, and let me tell you, getting into warrior pose is occasionally hilarious. Any yoga move that starts with "Now bring your right foot between your hands" actually. .. :/
  • ASKyle
    ASKyle Posts: 1,475 Member
    Keep at it, your speed will improve.

    I can walk briskly at 4mph, and can hold a jog at 5.5, and sprint at almost 9mph at 5'2".
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,294 Member
    I don't think short legs has much to do with running. at 5'6" I played football and ran track all the way to and during university, I was always one of the faster people with decent endurance. Having short legs means your strides are probably shorter, but your turnover is faster which compensates for a lot of it.
  • Sweet13_Princess
    Sweet13_Princess Posts: 1,207 Member
    It's nice to hear from people of similar stature. I've always thought long-legged people had it easier at runners and that short people were at a disadvantage. I think you busted that myth for me! Thanks for the research, too! It really puts things in perspective. I hope to get there one day.... I just started training for a 5k last month, which will be in April. My main goal is to NOT come in last! :-D

    Shannon
  • cgvet37
    cgvet37 Posts: 1,189 Member
    I ran into that when I was in the Military. I'm 5'8", but have short legs.
  • Penthesilea514
    Penthesilea514 Posts: 1,189 Member
    I feel this way sometimes, OP. I am really really slow jogger on treadmill (I started at 3.5 and have worked up a bit from there). I am 5'5 but I have short legs relative to my body (I have the same torso length as my 6'5 husband which is weird). I try not to think about my speed though- I am happy enough that I can "run" for miles when before I could barely even walk 1/2 a mile without feeling like dying. But I also have started to kind of resent treadmill running- I actually find I run faster and longer out on the road then in the gym where I feel l am just staring down the numbers on the screen.

    But congratulations on your progress, OP. Don't measure yourself against others, just yourself :)
  • aub6689
    aub6689 Posts: 351 Member
    I used to feel this way (5'2"), I don't run fast by any means, but I think you also get more efficient as you run more. I still choose distance over speed, but I run at a consistent 6.0-7.0 mph pace and it doesn't feel too fast. Just keep it up. Running gets easier with time, as you build strength and endurance you'll be able to go faster.
  • missblondi2u
    missblondi2u Posts: 851 Member
    I'm 5'2", and have just eased myself into running. I ran my first uninterrupted mile yesterday in 8:58, and finished 3 miles with a 10:20 pace. This would have been inconceivable to me even a few months ago.

    So don't worry, it gets easier.
  • scorpio516
    scorpio516 Posts: 955 Member
    peleroja wrote: »
    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.

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

    +1

    being shorter is better for distance running!

    Being tall is only good for sprinting and the field events of track and field. For example, tall high jumpers are usually more successful!
  • peaceout_aly
    peaceout_aly Posts: 2,018 Member
    I used to feel like this too! Before, I thought it was difficult to get up to 4.5 MPH and now I can go for 15 minutes at 7 or 8 MPH. I have a short inseam, I'm only 4' 11" so I feel your pain. It's all about the stride. Focus on taking big strides, it helps a lot and helps you not get exhausted early on.
  • LizzieEEllis
    LizzieEEllis Posts: 33 Member
    At 5', I love walking outside or on an indoor track, but hate the treadmill. Walking is a very meditative and relaxing experience. I prefer to space out, so the mental effort required to not fall off of a treadmill (though minimal) makes the experience irritating. It might not be so bad if I could rest my hand on the bar, but it is typically set at about shoulder height for me. I wonder if people with long legs feel constricted by the size of the running area. I also prefer to go whatever speed I please without thinking about it, so coming out of my stupor to fuss with the settings is a turn-off.
  • Joreanasaurous
    Joreanasaurous Posts: 1,384 Member
    Yeah... I am 4 foot 11 inches. I relate. A lot.
  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    litsy3 wrote: »
    Lots of top elite distance runners are quite short. Mo Farah is only 5'5.

    Isn't Stevie Kremer something like 5'2 or something like that, Emelie Forsberg is similarly pretty short.

  • litsy3
    litsy3 Posts: 783 Member
    litsy3 wrote: »
    Lots of top elite distance runners are quite short. Mo Farah is only 5'5.

    Isn't Stevie Kremer something like 5'2 or something like that, Emelie Forsberg is similarly pretty short.

    Yeah, Mo was just the first that sprang to my mind because he's a man, so that really is noticeably short. As a woman runner I'm used to practically all my team-mates being my height (5'4) or smaller.
  • 20yearsyounger
    20yearsyounger Posts: 1,630 Member
    scorpio516 wrote: »
    peleroja wrote: »
    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.

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

    +1

    being shorter is better for distance running!

    Being tall is only good for sprinting and the field events of track and field. For example, tall high jumpers are usually more successful!

    Not sure about that. I went to school with a guy that won a bronze medal in the 100m Olympics and he was my height. He always used to beat taller people. It's about turnover as well not just height.

    As for the treadmill, I always feel like I might fall off as well if I go to fast. At least on an elliptical I know that balance is part of it.
  • blues4miles
    blues4miles Posts: 1,481 Member
    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?

    This has been what I've been using lately and yes it seems to be accurate. It's a lot lower/more conservative than a lot of other online calculators/MFP and even my HRM give me. Prior experience seems to indicate the other sources were overestimating, and this seems to be more accurate based on what I would expect to lose.

    To the OP - don't worry, you'll get faster the more you train. Also get outside! Dreadmills don't let you use your natural gait and force you to a constant pace. I'm always really slow when I start out, 15 minute-miles, no joke, and I am a little taller than you at 5'4". Speed comes with time/endurance/training.
  • kaylasaurus
    kaylasaurus Posts: 45 Member
    I used to feel like this too! Before, I thought it was difficult to get up to 4.5 MPH and now I can go for 15 minutes at 7 or 8 MPH. I have a short inseam, I'm only 4' 11" so I feel your pain. It's all about the stride. Focus on taking big strides, it helps a lot and helps you not get exhausted early on.

    This may work for you, but I would not recommend over-striding. Your foot should be landing below your hip. I developed a lot of hip problems when I was trying to overcompensate for my short legs this way ( I am 5'1 with a 28in inseam)
  • catnap1996
    catnap1996 Posts: 5 Member
    Contrary to popular belief, being short makes you more suited to running . Look at the elite runners. Paula Radcliffe is an anomaly at 5'9". Also , height has nothing to do with burning calories
  • Gisel2015
    Gisel2015 Posts: 4,186 Member
    klkateri wrote: »
    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.

    I have the same problem with the elliptical that is why I am now prefer the ARC. I can control the stance much better and get a good workout. I don't run, I never did because I don't like it and now my knees will not allow it, but I am a fast walker for my short legs and my stride is small. I am only 4' 11", so I can't expect much.
  • 20yearsyounger
    20yearsyounger Posts: 1,630 Member
    catnap1996 wrote: »
    Contrary to popular belief, being short makes you more suited to running . Look at the elite runners. Paula Radcliffe is an anomaly at 5'9". Also , height has nothing to do with burning calories

    Not directly but indirectly if you are focused on the optimum weight for your height.
  • callsitlikeiseeit
    callsitlikeiseeit Posts: 8,626 Member
    im 5'1 and on my best day can do a 12 min mile.

    but i also dont really consider myself a runner LOLOL
  • coreyreichle
    coreyreichle Posts: 1,031 Member
    catnap1996 wrote: »
    Contrary to popular belief, being short makes you more suited to running . Look at the elite runners. Paula Radcliffe is an anomaly at 5'9". Also , height has nothing to do with burning calories

    The elite regional runners here top out 5'11"...