Uphill vs downhill running (physiology question)

SomeBlokeFromTheInternetz wrote:

That makes me believe shorter legs and higher cadence have a lot to do with it. Not necessarily weight related.

For me, this feels true. I'm 135 lbs at 5'10, and an awful uphill runner, relative to my downhill. I also have short legs for my height, and a high turnover. To echo what a previous poster said, I feel as if, even on a slight decline, I can simply "roll". The key for me is staying relaxed and letting this happen; too many, I think, try and "sprint" down the hill, overstride, and end up braking.

[quote]LM wrote:

Good god this is me. I'm a totally shit uphill runner, a slowish flat runner (17:50), and I assume a pretty decent downhill runner, as I've run 4:05 mile going down 4% grade.'

Was this in a measured race? No way are you going that much fater downhill

I'm 6'4", 175 with long legs and I am absolutely godawful at uphills. Back in college I would get beat in hill workouts by guys that were 2:00 slower than me in an 8k. I've always wondered why this was. There has to be some research out there on this topic.

Sherpa wrote:

Let's say hypothetically that two runners are the same speed and have similar race times from 400-10000 meters. But when running up hill runner A is stronger and labors less. But when running downhill runner B is way faster than runner A. What would explain this phenomena?

This phenomenon, these phenomena.

Singular, plural. A phenomenon, two or more phenomena.

You're welcome.

bigtool05 wrote:

I'm 6'4", 175 with long legs and I am absolutely godawful at uphills. Back in college I would get beat in hill workouts by guys that were 2:00 slower than me in an 8k. I've always wondered why this was. There has to be some research out there on this topic.

UPHILL:

study by Paavolainen and colleagues (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11001396) showing that uphill running depends more on aerobic base than anything else (runners, triathletes, and xc skiers of equal VO2 max did equally well on uphills).

DOWNHILL:

haven't seen much, closest is maybe some relation to COM height and leg swing time (http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/1998/04.30/StudentSolvesMy.html).

I'm 6'1" with fairly long limbs (legs and arms) for my height and I'm terrible at downhill. I'm generally quite good at uphill. I do better at gradual, long uphills than steep uphills (of any length). So I still suspect for very steep uphills there is a good posterior chain and quad strength component to going up fast on the really steep stuff (in addition to just VO2 max). The guys (and girls) who I know that are best at downhill have short legs.

One more data point: I'm short, with relatively short legs for my height and also a very high turnover and a shuffle stride. I am much much better at downhills than uphills, to the point where I sometimes inadvertently drop people during easy runs, just because I find it harder to apply the brakes on hills.

I'm not great at uphills in general. What is interesting is that I am better at hills the steeper they get. False flats that other people barely notice really get me, while I can keep up much better on steeper hills.

Recently I ran an XC race with some extremely steep downhills, and later in the race my quads and hamstrings both tightened up to the extent that they were difficult to move at all. I ended up slowing down and getting dropped to last place before collapsing with a DNF.

Does very fast, steep downhill running typically cause things like this? I assume so much hammering on the upper leg muscles could possibly cause them to burn or tighten, but is this reaction normal? In any case, how might this be prevented?