try the golf ball test...drop a golf ball on the surface and see how high it bounces, the higher the bounce the harder the surface. if there isnt much difference in the bounce then there isnt much difference in the impact on your body. but even though there might not be much difference in some surfaces, multiply that times 180 strides per minute and you can see that it will add up.
Anybody who doesn't know that asphalt is softer than concrete isn't running enough miles.
wags wrote:
... even though there might not be much difference in some surfaces, multiply that times 180 strides per minute and you can see that it will add up.
If there's a 1% increase in force you'll get a 1% increase in force whether you run 1 minute or 1 hour. Yes, if the force is 1 lb. more and you run for an hour that might add up to 10,000 pounds which looks impressive, but who cares? Add up your total impacts and you'll wind up with a value a few hundred times larger.
I think we can all agree with the poster who said that given two identical paths next to each other, one concrete and one asphalt, you'd be better off on asphalt. One thing that bothers me about the anti-concrete school of thought is that I've seen people avoid a perfectly good sidewalk and instead run on a busy road 5 feet away because "asphalt is better". That's just dumb.
wags wrote:
try the golf ball test...drop a golf ball on the surface and see how high it bounces, the higher the bounce the harder the surface. if there isnt much difference in the bounce then there isnt much difference in the impact on your body. but even though there might not be much difference in some surfaces, multiply that times 180 strides per minute and you can see that it will add up.
Does a golf ball have a brain, sensory and motor neurons, muscles, tendons, etc.? A golf ball is not a human.
Solution: Drop a baby instead.