deacon mark

As a distance runner 35 years and running 40-50 mile weeks I got the cycling bug more. The last 2 years in particular I started riding about 100 mpw. I dropped to 30-40 miles running and after helping my running at first I wonder if it now is hurting it.
The last 3 months I go out to run and can barely run a 9-10 mile for 1st mile. Then I manage to get into my usual 8:30 pace. See my legs just do not feel as smooth running. Has any runners noticed this as the increase cycling? The positive is I ride pretty good and distance is not an issue. I do not really care about getting faster on the bike.

Most say cycling helps and I agree within reason. It does allow more cardio with less stress on the body. I just wonder in runners who take up cycling serious find going back to running notice changes. I am interested in any training experiences.

Bah Humbug

Nope, you're probably hurt by dropping 10mpw though.

hhnngg1

At levels of performance above recreational, which your 50mpw base definitely puts you in:
- You run less, you get slower on the run
- You bike less, you get slower on the bike
- There's little x-over effect for either if you're not a beginner or not coming from off-season/out of shape. Beginners do get x-over effects, especially from run -> bike, but those drop off really quickly as well.


As a pure marathon runner, I trained max 12 hours per week for about 90-100 mpw peak, 75-80mpw average. As a triathlete putting in 17hours per week, I ran about 38-45 miles per week, but biked more than double the time spent running. Result? I lost speed on all my standalone run times, and was about 7 minutes slower on a half marathon compared to my former pure runner self (despite about half the training hours.)


Duathletes and triathletes know this very well - you can't just gun one and expect to perform similarly in the other. Specificity rules.

Jfitalia

my aerobic threshold is much higher now thanks to cycling. I can see though where your form may suffer though however i am not big on plain long distance running. I stick with high intensity interval running and well as running bleachers and hills.

Velo Dog

I was a pretty serious runner, sometimes ~80mpw and usually 50+, for about 15 years. I'd cycled recreationally, but rarely more than 10 miles. In my mid-40s my knees hurt almost all the time and I switched to cycling, on alternate days at first and then more frequently. It helped my knees a lot, and I'm sure the aerobic benefit transferred between activities, but I did get slower at running. It wasn't a lot--7:15-7:30 range to 8+--and I also got older and changed jobs, so I had less time. I can't say definitively that cycling slowed me down, but I DID slow down.
FWIW, I'm 67 now and rarely run at all because of knee and ankle issues, but I still ride comfortably. My doctor 20 years ago was an anti-runner who warned me my legs would suffer eventually if I kept it up (I'm a Clydesdale, 6'4"/240). I loved running, but I wish I'd listened to him sooner.

gregf83 

It depends on the quality of your run training.
Are you doing any speed work or just running everything at 8:30 pace?
Did your weight change?
I expect you could keep your run speed if you kept the mileage the same but changed the workouts.

Bacciagalupe

The benefits of cross-training are more myth than reality. I.e. cycling won't improve your running. It's probably slowing you down specifically because you're spending some of your precious time on the bike rather than running.

This is one reason why triathlons are so hard. It's nearly impossible to really train for three different sports at the same time.

deacon mark

This makes sense looking for this type of runner. Obviously you ran at a high level just to do that mileage. My weight is actually about 4 pounds less than my prime running of 20 years ago. I sometimes like to do a very quick 4 mile run then go and ride a 50 mile bike ride. My reason is to get the endurance in without the pounding. It works but I can see I may have built some cycling muscles that really do not help running. I also feel like my stride and foot-plant motion has changed. This is just purely my perception and I always go on feel. My limit with cycling is I will never race and at almost 52 I not going to get faster on the bike.

hhnngg1

Hopefully you're avoiding running (if you don't totally hate it) because of a real, limiting injury, and not just a perceived injury from soreness post-runs.

That post-run soreness or leg fatigue is a good thing as long as you don't overdo it and allow for slow acclimation. It's forcing your legs to become fitter, and strengthening the ligaments and tendons in a way that cycling never will. This will thus make you much more resistant to injuries involving these tendons/ligaments, even in other sports or acts of daily living for older folks.

BykOfALesserGod

My cycling improved my run times for my 1.5 mile military PT test.

I did my most recent test 28 seconds faster after 6 months of cycling 100 mpw (10:08 to 9:40). I was forced to cycle due to running injuries which also meant that I hardly did any running during my recovery time frame (March to Sep).

During my test I could've gone faster but I was the lead guy that day and with no one to chase I was just phoning it in to the finish line. When I ran the course again two days later to motivate one of my people I actually pulled a 9:30.

I think what it is is that these activities improve overall conditioning and, for old fogeys like me, the mental effect of beating Father Time probably provides a a huge motivation boost.

speedwobbles

I ran a lot for a few years then took some down time last year, partly due to injuries and partly because the idea of spending a day on my bike in the mountains was way nicer than spending an hour or two running in the city.

Before I was running about 50-60 miles per week and that dropped significantly over the summer. In terms of riding, I did a ton of climbing and I think my average ride for the summer was about 5.5 hours. In the fall I ran a marathon off that training, I didn't start to even come close to pushing myself aerobically but my legs were pretty dead for the last third of the race... I still managed to put together a very even-split 3:23 though. So yes, I did notice a big slowdown, but (and I think you're in the same boat) I'm sure the slowdown was due to a decrease in running and not a detrimental effect of riding.

Romans8:28

For me serious cycling has crushed my running... At least two reasons: 1. All the time I spend riding (a lot), used to go in part to running, so my running mileage is way down 2. The muscles I have grown/developed in my legs form cycling, do not help running whatsoever, and the extra muscle mass has further slowed my running pace. PS: cycling does nothing to improve my aerobic condition with respect to running, only makes me weaker IMO

c0lnago

You want to be a faster runner, run more. You want to be a faster cyclist, pedal more. You want both...2-a-days and/or bricks. Otherwise something will suffer.

Will G

One of my cycling friends is an Orthopedic Surgeon. When asked about running, his reply was "Don't. I replace a lot knees and hips of runners." I was noticing aches and pains when I started on run that would go away after a mile or so. Other than running from rabid dogs or zombies, I don't run anymore.

hhnngg1

I wouldn't go to that surgeon. His opinion has been disproved by an impressive amount of research all of which show that running does not destroy your cartilage and that there's no 'limited lifespan' of your knees. In fact, running moderate amounts has been shown to IMPROVE cartilage and function over long-term studies. (They don't comment on intense hi-volume running just because they didn't study it - there's no real data showing that even running prodigious amounts injures your knees early.)

RT

I stopped running for exercise when my knees began hurting. Went back to the bike and my knees no longer hurt. I do not need a medical degree to determine cause and effect here. Maybe it is not true in all cases, but the jarring, gravity-assisted beating my bones took is history.

A little physical therapy never hurt anyone either. I found out in my mid-40's that my gait needed correction and had been walking 'wrong' for lack of a better term for years. My feet are slowly improving with a conscious effort to walk correctly.

milkbaby

The problem is both runners AND cyclists are too stupid to stop and fix their problems when they get an overuse injury from their sport. I know runners in their 70s who ran competitively and recreationally from their youth without any problems. They were probably the ones who didn't stupidly overdo it and insist on continuing to run or cycle when they were injured.

mpath

+1. Underscoring our own competitive drive is a lot of peer pressure rhetoric disguised as "motivation", ie. HTFU, if it doesn't hurt you're doing it wrong, I don't have time to run - I make time, etc etc.

hhnngg1

While true, far more likely than a real over-use injury for a lot of people on this forum (who don't run much at all, if barely) is normal aches and pains from adapting to weightbearing run motion, which is NORMAL.

If you think you should be able to get up from very little running, and suddenly be able to run without any pain at all, you're fooling yourself. As an older adult, where you're often much more sedentary than you were as a youth (where you at least had ball sports or gym class, etc. to keep you moving on your feet), it becomes even more noticeable, but that doesn't mean running = bad for you. SO many people on these forums give running a try for a few weeks or even 6-8 weeks, then conclude that because their knees/legs hurt, they're getting injured, which is often not the case. Beginners and even intermediate runners rarely can even do the kind of volume that it takes to approach overtraining - their bodies can't even get to that point.

Cycling just happens to be nonimpact and nonweightbearing so you can get back on and ride farther and longer without immediate soreness or strains of the tendons, but it also won't strengthen those tendons as well as running.


True overuse injury is when you've gone through the normal cycles of training and adaptation usuallyover months if not years, and instead of acclimating, have breakdown and increasing true injuries. For a recreational beginner runner, odds are far higher than experienced pain is normal aches and pains as response to the training load than a genetic inability to run, even at middle age.

Unless you've been running or playing field sports of some sort regularly, it can take 1-2 years simply to get your ligaments and tendons strong enough to deal with running regularly. This isn't because running is harmful - it's because you have to build up those slow-regenerating tendons and ligaments to appropriate strength.

lechat

^ Agree. I think most people give up before they reach the point where their routine route ceases to be a drudge and seems effortless. One day you'll end your run because you need to. Not want to.

StanSeven

It takes a few minutes also to get warmed up and loose running. The first mile is always tough and often a little painful. Then I feel better and actually "great" is a good term for the way I feel most days. But the first mile never gets easier no matter how much I run.

gavo

+1
Both sports can coexist but I really think neither one can benefit the other.
However, both help the engine . I've been injured off and on the last couple of years and I haven't been able to participate in any triathlons. But when I do them I consistently run faster coming off the bike. I guess it all depends on what you're after. Each build specific muscle groups and work well together but one won't make you better at the other.If you're trying to be specifically competitive at running, run more.

hhnngg1

Actually, at up to early competitive levels in both sports, they definitely cross-interact. Running in particular will x-over decently to cycling until you start hitting competitive racing levels. A sub-3 hour marathoner will likely outride 95%+ of recreational cyclists at all distances with a measly 3 weeks of training simply due to his aerobic and leg endurance. The cycling cross over less well mainly because the tendon/ligament strains will limit you far before you can even tap into your cardio or endurance base but it still will x-over - I've never met a Cat1/2 x-over to running who's been butt slow on the run; in fact, the Cat1 cyclists I've met who have x'd over (ok, I've only met 3 of them but it's enough for me) have all been good runners very quickly, likely running a mile in 5:30 with very little training.

In the triathlon clubs, the guys to fear on the group ride who come out of the blue are the ex-competitive collegiate runners. They show up kind of clueless, but you're know that they're going to start bringing the pain after a few weeks, if not that day. They don't start slow, and they don't stay slow for long.

It is true though, that once you're dealing with decent competitive cyclists (like a California Cat3), if you don't specifically train cycling, you're not going to be able to ride even at that level without serious bike training, even if you're a elite runner.