Running Question
Tracieisfitastic
Posts: 104 Member
So, I'm training for a 5K that's happening on April 1st. I run on the treadmill 3x a week for 32 minutes which is 2.60 miles for me. I NEVER run outside. In January I signed up for a 5K run/walk that was scheduled for today ( February 25). I figured since I be killing it with no issues on the treadmill for 32 minutes I could do the same outside. I WAS WRONG. I noticed the difference almost immediately after taking off. The pavement kicked my butt. I could only run for 17 minutes straight before tiring out. I felt kind of let down. Should I start running outside more and how often?
0
Replies
-
I would get the Couch to 5K app and use that for your outdoor runs. You might be able to skip ahead a couple weeks, but check it out. That will give you a good program to follow
If possible, do all your runs outside. Obviously there are things to consider with that - you want to be safe, so running on a treadmill on weekdays may be better if you have to run when it's dark.
~Lyssa0 -
I'm a novice runner myself, but running on a treadmill is pretty different from running outside. It's great practice, but if you want to train to run outside, you really need to run outside as often as you can. I use the treadmill when it is pouring rain, but otherwise I get outside. In addition to getting better exercise--not just because you have to actually move your body mass forward, but also because of hills--you also get to see different scenery, people, and sometimes things you just wouldn't see otherwise. In just a few months of running I have seen incredible sunrises, rainbows, wildlife, ..., all kinds of things that I wouldn't have seen otherwise.9
-
You should set the incline on the treadmill to "1" or higher. Also, treadmills are usually off when it comes to pace.
Training on a treadmill is perfectly acceptable way to train for running outside. I don't like the c25k program, as I believe you should work up to running everyday with one rest day a week and add duration from there. Runs should be at conversation pace or more than likely "running like your grandpa" pace.2 -
I do both. I like treadmill running for pacing and pushing myself to train faster. I like outdoor running for scenery and something different.
Typically, my treadmill pace is faster than my outdoor pace. So when you head outside slow your pace a bit and you should be able to finish without tiring out.1 -
I usually run at 1.5 or 2.5.0
-
Running on a treadmill is nothing like running on the street. The treadmill is doing some of the work for you. If you are training for a race, you need to be running on the street.
One summer I thought I would avoid the heat and the need to get up super early by joining a gym and training on their treadmill. But at the end of the summer, when I finally started running on pavement again, I had to start over from scratch. It's just not the same.1 -
If you where training for a 5k treadmill race then a treadmill is fine. If you are training for an outside race then train outside.
If you really want to train hard, try trail running on hilly trails. If you could run 5k on hilly trails, a 5k road race will feel like an appetizer...:)4 -
I do 85% of my "cardio" training inside. I don't seem to have any problems translating it to running outside. Most definitely, I didn't feel like I was "starting from scratch" when I ran over 12 miles and 2000' of vert all on trail today. Get the proper training program, and there are no issues training on a treadmill.1
-
-
Run outside as often as you can.4
-
I too am a novice. I've tried the indoor machines. Not only do I get bored staring at a wall or a television but I find I don't get nearly as intense of a workout as I do outdoors. If possible make sure you work hills into your route and push the hardest on them.0
-
VioletRojo wrote: »Running on a treadmill is nothing like running on the street. The treadmill is doing some of the work for you. If you are training for a race, you need to be running on the street.
One summer I thought I would avoid the heat and the need to get up super early by joining a gym and training on their treadmill. But at the end of the summer, when I finally started running on pavement again, I had to start over from scratch. It's just not the same.
^^ This. With a treadmill, you're working to keep up with the belt, which is not the same thing as propelling your own body forward with your own legs. Also, unless you're using a running watch that is synced to some kind of measuring device on your shoe, you really don't know how fast or far you are running. Treadmills are not calibrated for speed / distance, so I wouldn't pay any attention to those numbers. (The other day a women on MFP celebrated running a half marathon in about an hour on an elliptical. Ummmm, no way.)3 -
I know people who train for marathons on the TM, but for most of us, it really helps to spend some time outdoors in real world conditions. Hills, wind, temperature, distractions, allergens, etc. are different outside. Depending on the weather where you live, I would aim for at least half your runs outdoors. At a minimum, do your longest runs outdoors. If you are regularly running non-stop for 32 minutes, start increasing the time on one of your runs. Adding 5 minutes a week will get you to 4 or 5 by the time of your race, which will make running hard for 3.2 feel easier than it is now. When you do run on the TM, increase the incline. It doesn't have to stay at any one number, but run 1/4 mile or more at 1, 1.5, 2, and 2.5 in whatever order you choose to imitate real life. I do most of my TM runs at 1 or higher since I live in a hilly area where there is rarely any flat road to run. If your races are usually flat, then just do most of the TM runs at 1 or 1.5.0
-
Thanks guys. I run on incline at 1.5 or 2.5. My mph is currently 4.9 but I will be increasing it to 5.1 on tomorrow.0
-
You also need to note that running on a treadmill doesn't have the same impact on your feet and joints that road running does. it's quite a shock to the system when the road doesn't 'soften' the impact and you're literally pounding the pavement'.2
-
I've been running off and on for 6 years or so (I started when I was 215 lbs and could barely huff and puff for 30 seconds before I had to walk) -- I do a lot of treadmill running in the winter since I live in a cold climate and running in cold air exacerbates my asthma. It's not a 100% match and the pacing is slightly different for me, but I'm never starting from scratch. I got back into running this fall/winter after a brief hiatus, and did all treadmill training in building up my endurance (three 3-4 mile runs during the week, 4-7 miles on either Sat or Sundays), and got outside 2 weeks ago for my first long run. 8 miles wasn't easy and I wasn't as fast as I was on the treadmill, but my goal wasn't speed -- all I had to do was keep running, and I did. There's no way I could have done that if my treadmill training hadn't helped a lot. 1
-
rugratz2015 wrote: »You also need to note that running on a treadmill doesn't have the same impact on your feet and joints that road running does. it's quite a shock to the system when the road doesn't 'soften' the impact and you're literally pounding the pavement'.
If one is running with adequate form then the surface doesn't matter. Treadmills don't inherently absorb shock loading.1 -
MeanderingMammal wrote: »rugratz2015 wrote: »You also need to note that running on a treadmill doesn't have the same impact on your feet and joints that road running does. it's quite a shock to the system when the road doesn't 'soften' the impact and you're literally pounding the pavement'.
If one is running with adequate form then the surface doesn't matter. Treadmills don't inherently absorb shock loading.
According to this article in the Houston Chronicle (http://livehealthy.chron.com/treadmill-shock-absorbent-8169.html):
"The ground reaction forces on a treadmill are significantly lower than on hard surfaces, according to the 2008 study 'A Kinematics and Kinetic Comparison of Overground and Treadmill Running,' published in 'Medicine and Science in Sports and Medicine.' Hard surfaces such as concrete and asphalt create jarring impacts on your joints with each step. Over time, this can lead to joint injury or pain. The treadmill provides a softer surface, cushioning each step to reduce joint impact."1 -
MeanderingMammal wrote: »rugratz2015 wrote: »You also need to note that running on a treadmill doesn't have the same impact on your feet and joints that road running does. it's quite a shock to the system when the road doesn't 'soften' the impact and you're literally pounding the pavement'.
If one is running with adequate form then the surface doesn't matter. Treadmills don't inherently absorb shock loading.
According to this article in the Houston Chronicle (http://livehealthy.chron.com/treadmill-shock-absorbent-8169.html):
"The ground reaction forces on a treadmill are significantly lower than on hard surfaces, according to the 2008 study 'A Kinematics and Kinetic Comparison of Overground and Treadmill Running,' published in 'Medicine and Science in Sports and Medicine.' Hard surfaces such as concrete and asphalt create jarring impacts on your joints with each step. Over time, this can lead to joint injury or pain. The treadmill provides a softer surface, cushioning each step to reduce joint impact."
I LOVE THAT THIS STORY IS FROM THE HOUSTON CHRONICLE. Proud Houstonian right here.1 -
MeanderingMammal wrote: »rugratz2015 wrote: »You also need to note that running on a treadmill doesn't have the same impact on your feet and joints that road running does. it's quite a shock to the system when the road doesn't 'soften' the impact and you're literally pounding the pavement'.
If one is running with adequate form then the surface doesn't matter. Treadmills don't inherently absorb shock loading.
According to this article in the Houston Chronicle (http://livehealthy.chron.com/treadmill-shock-absorbent-8169.html):
Go to the source, not an opinion piece. The article significantly overstates the value.
You'll identify that significant contributors to impact loading are shoe design, and running form. In comparison the benefits of treadmill cf really world are negligible.
1 -
MeanderingMammal wrote: »MeanderingMammal wrote: »rugratz2015 wrote: »You also need to note that running on a treadmill doesn't have the same impact on your feet and joints that road running does. it's quite a shock to the system when the road doesn't 'soften' the impact and you're literally pounding the pavement'.
If one is running with adequate form then the surface doesn't matter. Treadmills don't inherently absorb shock loading.
According to this article in the Houston Chronicle (http://livehealthy.chron.com/treadmill-shock-absorbent-8169.html):
Go to the source, not an opinion piece. The article significantly overstates the value.
You'll identify that significant contributors to impact loading are shoe design, and running form. In comparison the benefits of treadmill cf really world are negligible.
LOL. I did go to the source, and cited it within the Houston Chronicle quote. I'll summarize it for you: The science did not support your opinion.
But ... whatever. It doesn't have much to do with the OP's question and if there is a bigger waste of time than arguing on the Internet, I haven't yet found it.0 -
MeanderingMammal wrote: »MeanderingMammal wrote: »rugratz2015 wrote: »You also need to note that running on a treadmill doesn't have the same impact on your feet and joints that road running does. it's quite a shock to the system when the road doesn't 'soften' the impact and you're literally pounding the pavement'.
If one is running with adequate form then the surface doesn't matter. Treadmills don't inherently absorb shock loading.
According to this article in the Houston Chronicle (http://livehealthy.chron.com/treadmill-shock-absorbent-8169.html):
Go to the source, not an opinion piece. The article significantly overstates the value.
You'll identify that significant contributors to impact loading are shoe design, and running form. In comparison the benefits of treadmill cf really world are negligible.
LOL. I did go to the source, and cited it within the Houston Chronicle quote. I'll summarize it for you: The science did not support your opinion.
But ... whatever. It doesn't have much to do with the OP's question and if there is a bigger waste of time than arguing on the Internet, I haven't yet found it.
I think we may have different views on what negligible means. I'm not sure if you're claiming to be the journalist that wrote that article, or whether you're suggesting that the article constitutes a source, rather than the study quoted?
Going back to the original point, where I'd suggest challenging your assertion is relevant... From the perspective of coaching a new runner, recognising that one can comfortably quote things to support ones opinion that misrepresent the realities.
For a race in the real world the originator needs to train outside. Whilst it's possible to develop CV capacity on a treadmill it doesn't replicate a race mechanically or environmentally. The other issue with a treadmill is the predictably of the movement increases risk of narrowly focused overuse injuries. If one follows the other advice upthread about artificially elevating the platform that can apply a disproportionate load to the Achilles, an element of the propulsion chain that can be vulnerable due to low blood supply.
Different surfaces have different training values. The monotonous foot strike on a treadmill is hugely inferior to fell running, for example. Any outdoor running, even on a hard surface like tarmac, is going to stimulate much more ankle strength through the variety of landing orientaions, elevation and descent. Personally I'd advocate getting onto the trail as by far the most challenging and stimulating running, but then that's the type of running I coach.
I will acknowledge that a study exists that suggests that impact loading in treadmills is lower than real world. My reason for challenging is that when one looks at the coaching side of things the importance of that isn't significant. There is a far higher contribution from running form, and to a lesser extent shoes.
I would also note that the contribution to effect also depends on distance/ duration. For a 5K runner the surface is a much lower component of risk factor than for an ultra runner. Proportionality is significant. Fwiw I do know a number of people who, for various reasons, have had to train predominantly on treadmills for marathons and beyond. Whilst tedious they did the job, but every one of those runners has identified that real world training adds far more richness to the training value.
4 -
^ @MeanderingMammal has it exactly right. There is benefit from impact on various surface, and various angles, and various conditions. The more every stride is identical, the more risk of overuse injuries. Trail running takes more effort than road and treadmill running, but because the terrain is not as monotonous as roads or treadmills it's easier on your body.4
-
So, I'm training for a 5K that's happening on April 1st. I run on the treadmill 3x a week for 32 minutes which is 2.60 miles for me. I NEVER run outside. In January I signed up for a 5K run/walk that was scheduled for today ( February 25). I figured since I be killing it with no issues on the treadmill for 32 minutes I could do the same outside. I WAS WRONG. I noticed the difference almost immediately after taking off. The pavement kicked my butt. I could only run for 17 minutes straight before tiring out. I felt kind of let down. Should I start running outside more and how often?
Once you start running on the street and get used to it, you won't want to go back to a treadmill. It's a totally different feel. Outside, you are propelling yourself forward. On a TM, you are avoiding being thrown from the machine.
When running outside, one thing I would recommend is that you make sure your feet land directly below your hips. If your feet hit the pavement in front of your body, it's called overstriding and you'll get knee pain.
I've only used a treadmill a few times over the past year, and it's just been when traveling. I run in the heat, the cold and the rain. No snow where I'm at but I did run in it in Chicago in December. Lol!
Happy running!
0 -
If you want a real workout, try trail running.
I tried it this past weekend and it took everything I had (which ain't much), but it was FUN!!!1 -
Totally agree with most of the responses, train outside some or a lot. If not set that treadmill incline up. I did road work before I started TM running and when I got on the TM I felt like the Flash⚡️. They are 2 different worlds, get that rd work in, you'll love it trust me0
-
Not until that little "-" thingy in front of the number goes away.
It's too frikken cold out there.1 -
Practice makes perfect. You want to train under conditions as similar to the ones you will be racing in as possible.0
-
MeanderingMammal wrote: »MeanderingMammal wrote: »MeanderingMammal wrote: »rugratz2015 wrote: »You also need to note that running on a treadmill doesn't have the same impact on your feet and joints that road running does. it's quite a shock to the system when the road doesn't 'soften' the impact and you're literally pounding the pavement'.
If one is running with adequate form then the surface doesn't matter. Treadmills don't inherently absorb shock loading.
According to this article in the Houston Chronicle (http://livehealthy.chron.com/treadmill-shock-absorbent-8169.html):
Go to the source, not an opinion piece. The article significantly overstates the value.
You'll identify that significant contributors to impact loading are shoe design, and running form. In comparison the benefits of treadmill cf really world are negligible.
LOL. I did go to the source, and cited it within the Houston Chronicle quote. I'll summarize it for you: The science did not support your opinion.
But ... whatever. It doesn't have much to do with the OP's question and if there is a bigger waste of time than arguing on the Internet, I haven't yet found it.
I think we may have different views on what negligible means. I'm not sure if you're claiming to be the journalist that wrote that article, or whether you're suggesting that the article constitutes a source, rather than the study quoted?
Going back to the original point, where I'd suggest challenging your assertion is relevant... From the perspective of coaching a new runner, recognising that one can comfortably quote things to support ones opinion that misrepresent the realities.
For a race in the real world the originator needs to train outside. Whilst it's possible to develop CV capacity on a treadmill it doesn't replicate a race mechanically or environmentally. The other issue with a treadmill is the predictably of the movement increases risk of narrowly focused overuse injuries. If one follows the other advice upthread about artificially elevating the platform that can apply a disproportionate load to the Achilles, an element of the propulsion chain that can be vulnerable due to low blood supply.
Different surfaces have different training values. The monotonous foot strike on a treadmill is hugely inferior to fell running, for example. Any outdoor running, even on a hard surface like tarmac, is going to stimulate much more ankle strength through the variety of landing orientaions, elevation and descent. Personally I'd advocate getting onto the trail as by far the most challenging and stimulating running, but then that's the type of running I coach.
I will acknowledge that a study exists that suggests that impact loading in treadmills is lower than real world. My reason for challenging is that when one looks at the coaching side of things the importance of that isn't significant. There is a far higher contribution from running form, and to a lesser extent shoes.
I would also note that the contribution to effect also depends on distance/ duration. For a 5K runner the surface is a much lower component of risk factor than for an ultra runner. Proportionality is significant. Fwiw I do know a number of people who, for various reasons, have had to train predominantly on treadmills for marathons and beyond. Whilst tedious they did the job, but every one of those runners has identified that real world training adds far more richness to the training value.
@MeanderingMammal, I'm still waiting for you to back up your assertion that "Treadmills don't inherently absorb shock loading." I cited a published, peer reviewed study that disagrees with you. All you have done is complain rather offensively about the way I cited it and offer more unsubstantiated opinions without supporting your original (incorrect) point. I actually agree with most of what you said, but in my experience when someone dances around like that they are usually trying to avoid admitting that their original point was wrong.
From another thread, but appropriate here:
0 -
MeanderingMammal wrote: »MeanderingMammal wrote: »MeanderingMammal wrote: »rugratz2015 wrote: »You also need to note that running on a treadmill doesn't have the same impact on your feet and joints that road running does. it's quite a shock to the system when the road doesn't 'soften' the impact and you're literally pounding the pavement'.
If one is running with adequate form then the surface doesn't matter. Treadmills don't inherently absorb shock loading.
According to this article in the Houston Chronicle (http://livehealthy.chron.com/treadmill-shock-absorbent-8169.html):
Go to the source, not an opinion piece. The article significantly overstates the value.
You'll identify that significant contributors to impact loading are shoe design, and running form. In comparison the benefits of treadmill cf really world are negligible.
LOL. I did go to the source, and cited it within the Houston Chronicle quote. I'll summarize it for you: The science did not support your opinion.
But ... whatever. It doesn't have much to do with the OP's question and if there is a bigger waste of time than arguing on the Internet, I haven't yet found it.
I think we may have different views on what negligible means. I'm not sure if you're claiming to be the journalist that wrote that article, or whether you're suggesting that the article constitutes a source, rather than the study quoted?
Going back to the original point, where I'd suggest challenging your assertion is relevant... From the perspective of coaching a new runner, recognising that one can comfortably quote things to support ones opinion that misrepresent the realities.
For a race in the real world the originator needs to train outside. Whilst it's possible to develop CV capacity on a treadmill it doesn't replicate a race mechanically or environmentally. The other issue with a treadmill is the predictably of the movement increases risk of narrowly focused overuse injuries. If one follows the other advice upthread about artificially elevating the platform that can apply a disproportionate load to the Achilles, an element of the propulsion chain that can be vulnerable due to low blood supply.
Different surfaces have different training values. The monotonous foot strike on a treadmill is hugely inferior to fell running, for example. Any outdoor running, even on a hard surface like tarmac, is going to stimulate much more ankle strength through the variety of landing orientaions, elevation and descent. Personally I'd advocate getting onto the trail as by far the most challenging and stimulating running, but then that's the type of running I coach.
I will acknowledge that a study exists that suggests that impact loading in treadmills is lower than real world. My reason for challenging is that when one looks at the coaching side of things the importance of that isn't significant. There is a far higher contribution from running form, and to a lesser extent shoes.
I would also note that the contribution to effect also depends on distance/ duration. For a 5K runner the surface is a much lower component of risk factor than for an ultra runner. Proportionality is significant. Fwiw I do know a number of people who, for various reasons, have had to train predominantly on treadmills for marathons and beyond. Whilst tedious they did the job, but every one of those runners has identified that real world training adds far more richness to the training value.
@MeanderingMammal, I'm still waiting for you to back up your assertion that "Treadmills don't inherently absorb shock loading." I cited a published, peer reviewed study that disagrees with you. All you have done is complain rather offensively about the way I cited it and offer more unsubstantiated opinions without supporting your original (incorrect) point. I actually agree with most of what you said, but in my experience when someone dances around like that they are usually trying to avoid admitting that their original point was wrong.
From another thread, but appropriate here:
While treadmills may be designed to absorb shock, the point is moot if running form, shoes and the impact of repetitive movement aren't taken into consideration. Sure, there is a shock absorbing factor that asphalt doesn't have, but for me (and many people, actually) this is completely negated by the fact that when you're not actively moving your own body through forward space and utilizing propulsion to maintain form, treadmill running can be more damaging to joints and bones than running on asphalt or concrete.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.8K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 428 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions