Use Google Earth to measure the trails best you can. It won't be right down to the foot, but it will be a fairly close measurement.
Can't beat running!
- Thread starter mb73
- Start date
Use Google Earth to measure the trails best you can. It won't be right down to the foot, but it will be a fairly close measurement.
new_tennis_player
Banned
I suspect a major culprit is that so many Americans and western peoples are so overweight, running is not a viable option.
I'm afraid too, quite frankly, and I'm at a normal weight. I want to protect my knees is all.
I'm afraid too, quite frankly, and I'm at a normal weight. I want to protect my knees is all.
I'm 44 years old, and my lower body simply won't tolerate both tennis and a running regimen. Shoot, it won't even tolerate a brisk walking regimen. Every time I started a moderate walking regimen, I strain my calf muscle on the tennis court. Even after addressing issues identified in physical therapy, my body just won't tolerate that kind of pounding.
I'm using the elliptical now and have not had any lower leg issues on the tennis court.
On a related subject, I've never understood why people think clay is easier on the lower body than hard courts. Every lower leg injury I've suffered has been on clay, where I feel I have to work twice as hard to maintain stability, compared to playing on a hard court.
I used to enjoy running, but that was back when I played volleyball in college. Pretty much ruined my hips with that sport...so far the joints are holding up with tennis, it's the soft tissue that is getting in the way of progress.
I'm using the elliptical now and have not had any lower leg issues on the tennis court.
On a related subject, I've never understood why people think clay is easier on the lower body than hard courts. Every lower leg injury I've suffered has been on clay, where I feel I have to work twice as hard to maintain stability, compared to playing on a hard court.
I used to enjoy running, but that was back when I played volleyball in college. Pretty much ruined my hips with that sport...so far the joints are holding up with tennis, it's the soft tissue that is getting in the way of progress.
maverick66
Hall of Fame
Running is the number 1 over use injury. No matter what your shape or your technique is overuse will happen. Runners are known as a PT's retirement fund. Unless your sport involves long distance running save your body and skip it all together.
If you really have a desire to do long distance training get on a bike. Its easier on the body and you wont have a broken down body by the time your 30.
r2473
G.O.A.T.
I would argue the "rule #8" applies to running as much as it does to lifting.
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?p=4758151#post4758151
That said, you are probably correct if we just consider the percentages and the likelihood that any given runner will develop any number of a myriad of running related injuries. Still, I wouldn't use that as an argument to dissuade people from running altogether.
I think most people (and especially most people in this thread) are easily capable of deciding for themselves based upon personal experiences if running is a good sport / exercise for them. As in most things, trial and error and a bit of common sense are the best judges.
snoopy
Professional
I keep coming across articles like this:
http://www.paleonu.com/panu-weblog/2010/3/21/still-not-born-to-run.html
http://www.paleonu.com/panu-weblog/2010/3/21/still-not-born-to-run.html
WildVolley
Legend
I still don't get distance running. But then, I never have. Do you actually feel good when jogging all those miles? I just associate it with suffering. I probably haven't run a mile straight without taking a break to walk in a decade.
On the other hand, I love to run. I love to run fast and then walk until my heart rate is normal again.
On the other hand, I love to run. I love to run fast and then walk until my heart rate is normal again.
Ever heard of runner's high?
I'm not a serious runner, but over the past 3 years I've run 1 marathon, 3 half marathons, and am currently training for another marathon. Sometimes I get into a euphoric state where my mind is about as relaxed as it can be and my body feels just the same. Also I love the way my body feels for the next couple hours after a long run. This is why I love running aside from keeping me fit and also being competitive and wanting to out-do myself and my peers each race. Plus I love the big races because of the crowds cheering really gets the juices flowing.
On the other hand when I'm not feeling good one day, I can go out and run in a state of misery the whole time. I know I have to run the training run so that I can perform better on race day, so I just have to suck it up til the next good day.
new_tennis_player
Banned
I can see people who are very young and very light enjoying it, especially in their teens. Having less body mass protects against injuries and and all else being equal, allows you to run faster.
The problem is, most people are not introduced to running in a gradual way: as in start with a long walk, then a brief jog mixed in, then some slow paced running.
In PE classes, it's just: run. Without water. No warm up, nothing.
The problem is, most people are not introduced to running in a gradual way: as in start with a long walk, then a brief jog mixed in, then some slow paced running.
In PE classes, it's just: run. Without water. No warm up, nothing.
I'd love to see a long term study showing the injuries / effects that lifetime runners suffer, versus the illnesses / cardiovascular health of lifetime couch potatoes. It'd be hard, but it'd be interesting to compare positives too, even if just analysing a relative psych 'happiness' marker.
I'm going to hazard a guess that the active beats the inactive.
You make one of the better points I've seen made here.
I was a nerdy, indoor kid. The only sports I did were tennis (which as we know is not usually aerobic until you reach a high level), karate (definitely not aerobic) and I delivered newspapers locally (but into letter boxes, so all the cycling was 5 pedal strokes and then stop, again, not aerobic). When it came to PE, I hated running as I just wasn't aerobically built!
If there had have been a gradual program targeted at kids like me, instead of something targeted at kids who could already run (like the soccer players), I'd probably have found my love of all things fitness at a much, much younger age.
I still don't love running, but that will come I know.
maverick66
Hall of Fame
My point is that as tennis players running isnt needed. And interval training will help you more in terms of tennis and weight loss. If you keep the running short but hard you wont chew up your body from overuse and will be healthy. Long distance running should only be used for those who compete in long distance running.
Errr - that's so far out of the norms if you were my client I'd be sending you to a doctor, and hoping that the doctor sent you to a cardiologist.
In fact, all jokes aside, if you haven't had this stat medically tested and approved, I'd seriously be heading to a doctor, and soon. I'm not even kidding.
I know you run & play tennis a lot (or you did) but even the healthiest of the healthy can have heart problems, I knew a world champion mountain biker, one of the nicest and fittest guys I ever knew - who died only a couple of months ago with an undiagnosed heart problem (RIP Willo).
Catch: The only time I've seen my any of my high-end polar HRMs pull a number like 238/240 has been when riding (cycling) under high-power-power lines, where the interference sends them to max or thereabouts, or at least did with the older monitors. Perhaps this is relevant? I've never met or heard of someone with a max of over 210 (other than Greg Welch, the Triathlete, who was pulling 300 in episodes of Tachycardia, which saw the end of his career and I think a device installed from memory).
In terms of the general discussion: I don't disagree with your opinion on formulas being problematic, but it is important to consider the safety of the person being trained in regards to heart rate testing - both their cardio safety and their musculoskeletal safety. Many untrained people simply shouldn't hit their max. Now, on the plus side, using something like a karvonen formula that incorporates resting HR - well, that will give a lot better guide to appropriate zones than raw 220-age.
Last edited:
Sorry, didn't realise that your post was specific to tennis players.
Firstly - I suppose it depends on a definition of long distance, but anyways...
I'd contend that anyone doing (most people's idea of) interval work should have some kind of longer base running to prepare muscle & support structures for the higher efforts of (most people's idea of) interval work.
If the interval work is restrained and in context for the individual, well I suppose that's different.
maverick66
Hall of Fame
If you are in need of long distance work I would do it on a bike and save my hips and legs. Why would anyone want to put there body through that much repeated stress over and over again like running does? I know bad question in a tennis forum where we smash our bodies up already but that wouldnt that be more of a reason to try and avoid any activity that kills our bodies.
And before any kind of running program I would stress a proper strength routine. No matter what kind of running you do get your body ready with a good strength program. Just starting running whether it be long distance or interval without one is not smart.
r2473
G.O.A.T.
I'm gonna say that you haven't run too many miles in your life or hung out with the the (always cool) cross country crowd.
Seriously, can you explain why you would stress a strength routine for anyone considering taking up long-distance running?
What would the strength routine look like?
How long would one need to do strength work before one could start running long distnace?
What kind of strength work would you recommend while someone is training long distance? I can tell you that the last thing I was thinking about after a training run was "hittin' the weights".
Last edited:
I have to say, I do 'second' the questions above.
If a moderately healthy, non-runner came to me and wanted to start running - maybe train for a half-marathon, I'd be far more concerned with getting them slowly transitioning from walking to walk-running-to running, and having them do whatever core work they possibly can, than I would be having them do lower-body weights.
What do you guys think of a sort of casual, modified HIIT approach? Must one do it hard-core to see results, or is any sort of interval work of going faster and slower -- be it in the pool or on the track or bike, etc -- better than the going at a steady and slower pace for a longer period of time?
maverick66
Hall of Fame
I would think it would be important to get up there overall body strength and fix imbalances before they started running. Otherwise injury is gonna happen faster than normal for a runner.
What are you trying to accomplish? For tennis there are 2 important aspects that cardio can address. To be "fit" like nadal you need both.
1) Aerobic / slow muscle base - long distance running trains this. Unless you are in very poor shape you aren't going to be "winded" running long distance at a moderate pace. Instead you get tired when your muscles start getting fatigued. Running long distance trains your muscles to develop slow twitch fibers and increase their aerobic efficiency. Thus increasing stamina / efficiency.
2) Cardio / explosiveness - Real cardio training brings your HR to the limit. This is where intervals can come into play. If you play tennis at a reasonable level then this is important as you sprint for balls / etc. You can do sprints or just run faster for 40 seconds and then revert to a "recovery" state. You build explosive muscle this way and train your heart to handle that strain more efficiently. This can be done with sprints or fast/slow running intervals.
Interval is interval in terms of your heart. Running has the benefit of most directly utilizing the muscles involved with tennis. The best one style of cardio for tennis would be interval running. You can mix and match exactly how you do it but basically run at a moderate pace mixed with 20-60 seconds of faster running bringing your HR up and reverting back to your original pace for at least 2 minutes.
I have run a marathon and I do triathlons for fun. You are right. It is important and it is a big misconception that runners don't need the added weight of any functional strength. Not only does some muscle help stabilize, but the explosiveness is also important. Many distance runners incorporate strength and even explosive style running into their routines.
Both forms of training, steady state and interval, have their place in a fitness program. Using a pool or bike for intervals is going to be easier on your body. I would be real careful about running intervals until I had plenty of mileage under my belt. I do 20yd and 40yd intervals up and down the football field with my 8yo son and I pay a big price in pain for it.
maverick66
Hall of Fame
I think everytime I say do weight training people assume I am suggesting you squat 500-600 lbs. That isnt what I am saying at all. Running like any athletic event will leave your body with imbalances that will cause injury. If you can start off with fewer imbalances to begin with you are in a better position to succeed. If you let yourself get hurt then admit that you need to go on a strength program you are wasting time as you could have been doing it earlier and now you have to wait for an injury to heal up.
True but at the level that people here are running it doesn't even matter. To really develop a true running related stress injury you need to be an avid runner. Unless you have some other abnormality. Regardless some light gym work is always a good thing.
well...i stopped running regularly about 14 years ago when I turned 30 (and i was in Law School). I gained about 70 lbs since then. The bad health and problems associated with gaining that weight is much worse than the damage you may do to your body due to running, imho. Now, I am trying to work back up to my marathon training days.
It's not for tennis, but just general fat loss/being in shape and getting the bigging bang for the buck per exercise session. Any benefit to my lousy tennis game would be a nice bonus, but is not the goal here.
Are these numbers somehow important? Or is the concept behind them what's important?
I intuitively sense this. When I swim, I go almost as fast as I can for a short period (then slow for a while), and did so my first day in the pool. But on the track, some inner mechanism keeps telling me "don't you dare sprint!" and I've never come anywhere close to an all out sprint. The same thing happened while racing my daughter in previous years. She could basically beat by age 7 or so because I would never run all-out. On the track now, the most I can convince my body to do is increase my pace from "very slow" to "medium slowish" for 45 seconds or so before reverting back to very slow for another 2 minutes or so. (It's odd, because on the tennis court in the middle of a match, I will run all out for balls on many occasions.)
Last edited:
r2473
G.O.A.T.
One might say that you run "balls out".
You're making the assumption that a strength program, by default, will correct imbalances. Unless designed by an expert, and even then, a strength program has just as much chance of exacerbating imbalances as a taking up running.
Actually, I'm really not sure why you're so worried about running, given it's one of the most natural movements known to man. Humans were designed to stand, and to run. It's primal. Now I know we do things (like sit a lot) to affect this 'normal' state, but still, walking / running is one of the most natural things to do - far more natural than racking up some weight and doing a hamstring curl.
I support the fact that you're not suggesting huge weight... so in fact, let's see what you are suggesting.
Client:
40y.o. male
Largely inactive, desk job
Only sport is doubles once a week with mates for an hour before a beer.
No history of injuries or chronic illness.
Slightly overweight, BP within normal limits
Goal is to run a half marathon in 6 months.
What would you have him do, approximately? I'm keen to see.
Heathen. Tennis isn't the be all and end all? Your health is more important than a sport you play socially? Get off the forums
Concept, far more than the numbers. Work, recover fully, work. Google it and you'll find some good guides as to the numbers.
Probably a good thing, being built as a 'diesel' - long, slow, continuous effort - probably means you have a great aerobic base - good aerobic capacity - which will serve you well for health and wellbeing. Just don't go entering any races with 8 year old girls
Good story... as in people will learn from it.
Just remember that around 70% of the weight loss will come from your diet, so make sure you fix anything there that needs fixing!
The exact numbers are not important. But generally keep the intense part under 60 seconds. If you do sprints than you won't be able to go over 20 sec or so. If you run fast you should aim for around 30-50 seconds with around 2 min of recovery jog or brisk walk. Don't get bogged with #'s. The important thing is you raise your HR and lower it . . . repeat.
You don't have to all out sprint if you don't want to. You can do HIIT sprints but you can also do run / jog intervals. I jog around 8:30 pace for 2 min and then run 6 min pace for 30 seconds. Just to give you an idea.
I think the best bang for the buck exercise is run/jog combo. You will burn more calories than the sprints (you can do it longer) and you will also work your aerobic base a little.
If you wan't to lose serious weight than the worst cardio you can do is steady state.
Both can be pretty bad so I think thats a bad generalization. Not to mention as orange said it running won't help you lose weight if your diet still sucks which is how you get overweight in the first place.
Balls to the wall, baby.
Heathen. Tennis isn't the be all and end all? Your health is more important than a sport you play socially? Get off the forums
Health? Who said anything about health? Vanity is the chief motivating factor for getting/staying fit.
Probably a good thing, being built as a 'diesel' - long, slow, continuous effort - probably means you have a great aerobic base - good aerobic capacity - which will serve you well for health and wellbeing. Just don't go entering any races with 8 year old girls
Nope, this ain't me either. Not only can I not beat 8 year old girls in sprints, I can't beat 'em in the mile either. I never had great aerobic capacity, even as an athletic kid who lived to play soccer, and was always better at sprint type distances than longer ones.
I think I pretty much follow this formula, if not quite the intensity.
The worst thing?
As you wish.
In the context of cardiovascular focused exercise, I believe is what coy was referring to.
Well when I ran 3 half-marathons, I finished all of them between 1:42 and 1:45 (under 8:00/mile), and I'll say that none of runners in the pack at this pace were fat and looked out of shape. All of them were in decent shape. I don't think its a mere coincidence.
Yeah everything has its place but in terms of burning calories steady state isn't the best unless you do it for a long time.
Doing an interval run for 30 min is better than running moderately for 50 min or so. It also has the added benefit of working more aspects of your body.
Just pick what you enjoy doing the most. Its not like doing steady state won't get you results. Push comes to shove cardio is cardio for most people. Just get out there and do it. Eat healthy because thats where weight loss happens.
Doing an interval run for 30 min is better than running moderately for 50 min or so. It also has the added benefit of working more aspects of your body.
Just pick what you enjoy doing the most. Its not like doing steady state won't get you results. Push comes to shove cardio is cardio for most people. Just get out there and do it. Eat healthy because thats where weight loss happens.
Lol . . . you completely missed the point of my post.
Regardless anyone can lose weight without cardio. Doesn't matter if you do 10 hours of cardio a day or 10 seconds. Calories in < calories out = weight loss.
I wasn't saying whether or not running helped lose weight. I was trying to illustrate that the damage running can do can be just as / more severe as being 50lbs overweight. You can always improve your health but you can't change your knees once you destroy them. Not everyone experiences stress related injuries but then again not all people 50lbs overweight suffer the consequences
Many runners who reach their 50's-60's can no longer do activities we take for granted. . . You better believe they would trade their knees in exchange for 50lbs on their abdomen. You can lose the weight but you can't get your legs back.
Indeed, more of the body, and in better ways that are more practical for living too.
Exactly. Within reason, doing almost anything is better than nothing.
I'm sold. Who doesn't want better results in shorter time? I just hope this HIIT stuff isn't some fad, and in ten years from now, it will turn out to be virtually baseless, as many of these fads do.
Definitely true as well.
AudiOphiLiA
New User
Have any of you guys ever seen the Real Sports episode about barefoot running?
There's a growing movement of runners who swear the modern running shoe is the cause of modern day joint problems.
Hard to sum up the info, but it's worth watching on demand.
There's a growing movement of runners who swear the modern running shoe is the cause of modern day joint problems.
Hard to sum up the info, but it's worth watching on demand.
Kevin T
Hall of Fame
I want someone to link all these studies that show running destroys your knees/joints. Let's see the results of runners vs. non-runners. There are plenty of excellent studies, performed at world-class universities, involving tens of thousands of participants, showing runner's knees/rate of arthritis are no worse (and often better) than non-runners. Anyone?
albino smurf
Professional
Yeah I've seen more studies that state that runners have less arthritis than non-runners as well.
NineMileSkid
Rookie
Of course, building one's aerobic base is not all about burning calories.
Kevin T
Hall of Fame
Absolutely. It's one of those 'accepted' theories in healthcare that have no scientific basis. Docs also used to tell patients to start smoking back in the day. In my experience, the older PT's, including my mother-in-law, two aunts and my first PT after wrecking my knee snowboarding, all preached the running is bad theory. I also have two good friends/colleagues that are PhD-trained PTs involved in distance running. They'll tell you there's no good research RE running being bad for joints/runners having a higher rate of disability in old age.
http://health.usnews.com/health-new...s--and-1-truth--about-running-and-your-health
http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,7120,s6-241-285--12232-0,00.html
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1948208,00.html
http://www.examiner.com/x-19794-Boston-Triathlon-Examiner~y2010m1d2-Is-running-bad-for-your-knees
Last edited:
I was trying to demonstrate that you will seldom find someone who runs alot and remains 50 lbs overweight because they eat too much. Thats all.
Its not a fad. Fad's are generally a result of ignorance like no carb diets / sugar busters / etc. Just people willing to pay money to make up for their lack of effort. It's science. Here is how each aspect of cardio works.
HIIT (sprints) - when you sprint you work the fast twitch muscle fibers which give you the "bulk." You train explosiveness which is why sprinters are packed with muscle. You basically kill yourself doing sprints for about 10 minutes. You burn the most calories as humanly possible in ~10 min, build muscle, and also trigger your body to burn calories AFTER your training session. The benefit is the mass amount of calories you can burn. The "bad" is that these calories come from all sources (fat AND muscle).
Steady cardio - works the slow twitch making your muscles more efficient at utilizing aerobic respiration. Whats good about this type of metabolism is that it burns mostly fat. But to enter this fat burning zone you need to be running at low intensity for long periods of time. That is boring. Some bodybuilders use this method because it burns less overall calories and a higher % of fat. Thus they can keep their muscle and burn fat at the same time.
Interval jog / run - mix of the 2
Its all about your diet though. The cardio doesn't matter that much. You control how much / how little weight you lose by eating. You should aim to lose no more than around 2 lbs a week. Anymore is water / muscle weight which will leave you drained of energy and motivation.
Power Player
Bionic Poster
HIIT is the best way to lose weight while running. Back in the day, they used to call them "suicides". Regardless, it works. Hell, tennis works and can be a form of HIIT depending on how hard you play each point.
r2473
G.O.A.T.
1) Let me get this straight.....sprinting in itself builds muscle?
2) You believe in the so called "Afterburn effect"? I know this is the theory, but I have my doubts (and have read things that call this claim into question).
http://www.drlenkravitz.com/Articles/epocarticle.html
(The above link is different from what follows. Two different sources).
Does The Exercise After Burn Effect Work
Sometimes with the thing’s we read, we can develop beliefs that once you see them everywhere that eventually. We can tend to believe them even though we don’t know whether what is being said is correct or incorrect.
What has been said however is that once you are exercising, you tend to burn fat but not only that, you tend to burn it after you have finished exercising. This is what is known as the after burn effect. This so-called effect is supposed to be a key ingredient to weight loss or so we are told.
It now seems however that this is not the case, it’s just a mere myth, this information came from a article titled Exercise Improves Fat Metabolism in Muscle but Does Not Increase 24-h Fat Oxidation from the (Exercises and Sport Sciences Review April 2009).
Edward Melanson who is a exercise physiologist said that to his surprise found that exercise has little or any effect at all as regards the 24 hour after burn effect, he used a interesting way to put this theory to the test, just to see what would happen. In the study, sixty five candidates were chosen and they all had different exercise lifestyles which were grouped into four types they were, well trained, obese, sedentary, and lean.
During the study they cycled at different exercise intensities, until they reached a point where they burned 400 calories, after this they were monitored for 24 hours just to see what the effects were. They were monitored very closely and were allowed to eat food, when the results came in none of them reported that, any kind of enhanced fat burning had occurred. Both during and after their workout, this study has caused quite a bit of stir amongst fitness experts whom suggests that exercise, can boost your metabolism for longer than previously was suggested. This study doesn’t suggest that say that you shouldn’t exercise regularly, but to bear in mind.
That a moving body will burn more fat compared to a sedentary one, and not to get too concerned about whether or not you are burning fat after your workout.
There has been lot of confusing messages sent out by certain writings, saying that certain types of intensity of exercise will burn more fat, but the researchers say this is without merit.
As for the so called after burn the amount of calories burned they say, isn’t that impressive. Pascal Imbreault who is a associate professor at Ottawa University ’s School of human kinetics, says that any kind of exercise after burn will usually finish after a period of 15 and 35 minutes.
And even though the amount of calories burned which, can depend upon the intensity of the exercise and the overall bodyweight of the person. The actual burning of calories while resting is very minimal he says. He is quoted as saying “ Exercise is not that powerful,”
Another one of the over quoted sayings is that increasing your muscle tissue, will enable your body to burn more calories while at rest. The overall idea that muscle is more metabolically active, than fat isn’t realistically what happens.
Imbreault says that muscle requires more calories, than muscle that isn’t being used. He also goes on to say that when at rest both muscle and fat, both need the same amount of calories, in order to sustain themselves. Does this mean then that all those hours training a certain way in the gym was for nothing after all, having the muscle is a benefit. Even though if you probably thought it was doing more than it actually was, keeping muscular is far less likely to stop you from having a injury, will improve your overall athletic performance.
Last edited:
Thats the exact attitude that creates so much confusion about running. People always want generalizations and easy answers. What shoe should I buy? What strike should I use? Will running injure me? The truth is its not so simple. I have done undergraduate research about this and have read many of the studies you suggest.
First of all the key thing to understand is everyone is built differently. These barefoot running advocates always point to mexican / african tribes to show how beneficial running barefoot can be. That my friend is evolution in action. These people have been isolated / running for centuries. Thus their gene pools contain a higher % of alleles for better running anatomy. That doesn't mean someone from america can't be built the same. That is simply illustrating that more people in these tribes have builds that are better suited for running than many americans.
That leads me to my next point. What defines a "runner?" Distance running vs recreational running. . . People who run 10 miles a week often have nothing but praise. Its not until you really start running at a high level where the stresses begin having negative effects. Balance is key to life and when you take basically anything to an extreme, it will have negative effects.
Lastly you have to take into account what types of people these studies analyze. On one hand you have the runners (often healthier in every aspect) and on the other you have a typical american. What is a typical american?? OBESE (out of shape / limited exercise / bad diet) !!!! That is the #1 cause for poor joints. They don't exercise and their tissues don't become stronger / rebuild as they do when you run.
In conclusion running, like anything, is all about balance and moderation. There are plenty of alternative methods to strengthen your body and avoid the impact.
Similar threads
- Colorado Lefty
- Health & Fitness
