I'm amazed at how many people still think you can just jump up and down on a treadmill instead of running.

Hardloper wrote:

legsss wrote:

Air resistance is not the only difference.

legsss wrote:

That may be true, but it's all mental. Has nothing to do with the treadmill physically.

I don't get it. Are you trying to say there are no differences, or that there are more differences besides air resistance? If you're going to be wrong can you at least be internally consistent?

I'm not wrong. As usual, it's you that is having trouble reading and understanding. Those two statement that I made are not contradictory at all.

Losertown wrote:

Off topic, but..... speaking of treadmills, anyone ever see walkers at the gym set the incline to the highest grade, and rather than lean into the incline as you would walking up an actual hill, they hold onto the handles and lean back, creating a 90 degree angle with their body and the ramp. What is that?

I have no idea. Whenever I've seen that at a gym, I wonder if they're onto something, but, uh.... no.

I think the benefit of having no wind resistance on the treadmill is offset by the fact that there is not any cooling effect because you are running stationary. I sweat like a pig on that thing compared to running outside. It makes the runs tougher in my humble opinion.

What if you tried to launch a jet airliner from a giant moving treadmill instead of a runway?

yes but does the airplane take off?

If you simplify the problem (no air resistance, constant speed) running on a tread mill is no different. Air resistance makes some difference but so does the constant speed of the treadmill. When you accelerate and decelerate running outside, you are doing work (applying force over a distance). Treadmills force you to a constant pace and hence no work is done (in the horizontal direction). You do the same work indoors or out from "bouncing up and down" (the vertical component).

I am amazed that people think you are going somewhere when you run around a track and count the distance.

Wow! I didn't know treadmills could spin that fast!

leg speed wrote:

Usain Bolt on a treadmill

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVBHdmDjmg4

So an airplane on a treadmill will no take off?

webfoot wrote:

your an idiot wrote:

No, it's not. On a treadmill you can spend more time in the air with a more vertical jump.

I'm truly amazed by the stupidity of letsrun posters.

No. You can spend more time in the air with a more vertical jump outdoors as well. Every runner has done this drill.

On the treadmill you can't simply jump vertically and expect to stay on the belt. This gets back to the original title of the thread. The moving treadmill belt will throw you off the back.

You're making a valiant effort webfoot and I understand your frustrations. During my years of arguing with people about this fact, I've come to the conclusion that some people's brains just aren't wired to be able to understand the concept. No matter how succinctly you explain it to them, they still think that if you just run "bouncier", then you can run at x pace easier on a treadmill than you can outside. Nothing you say will convince them otherwise, because they aren't thinking about angles/pushoff, they are just thinking about being up in the air while that belt is moving.

You are wrong.

Ho Hum wrote:

It's not like nobody's ever looked at this, either.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8887211

Where in that abstract does it tell you about the wind blowing that day. There is absolutely no mention of the wind. For all we know, it could have been blowing at their backs at 10 mph. There is also no mention of the temperatures this study was done at. If the temps and humidity are high, the cooling effect you get from the air resistence will allow less expenditure of energy. If they are high with no cooling effect, it takes the body far more energy to dissipate heat than it does to overcome wind resistence at a low level.

The other point I found interesting is why they felt the need to do the treadmill 5 times but only ran the control on the road 1 time. Wouldn't that greatly increase the chance that the road portion produced flawed data?

Another problem with the study is that they only ran 6 minutes before taking a 6 minute break. You can BARELY break a sweat in 6 minutes and that greatly reduced the heat dissipation skewing the results one would see doing a hard hour or 2 hours continuously on a treadmill.

I don't doubt the conclusion they came up with for very short runs on a treadmill compared to running on a perfectly level road with absolutely no wind but to use that information for ALL treadmill runs is ludicrous

aero wrote:

So an airplane on a treadmill will no take off?

Nae, it wilna take off. It disna hae powered wheels.

george oscar bluth wrote:

You're making a valiant effort webfoot and I understand your frustrations. During my years of arguing with people about this fact, I've come to the conclusion that some people's brains just aren't wired to be able to understand the concept. No matter how succinctly you explain it to them, they still think that if you just run "bouncier", then you can run at x pace easier on a treadmill than you can outside. Nothing you say will convince them otherwise, because they aren't thinking about angles/pushoff, they are just thinking about being up in the air while that belt is moving.

Thanks. I'll try one more attempt. :)

Here is a mental exercise.

Let's say a skinny guy distance runner is on a moving sidewalk at an airport. The sidewalk is moving at 10mph (6 minute mile pace). Suddenly the guy moves past a hot girl sitting beside the sidewalk, so he immediately turns around and starts a conversation with her while running 6 minute mile pace.

Observation: Are we all agreed that running 6 minute pace against the 10mph moving sidewalk will keep the guy next to the hot girl sitting beside the sidewalk?

Now the guy isn't the sharpest tool in the shed. He's starting to get tired running 6 minute miles, but he "knows" a secret to treadmill running that he thinks will apply to the moving sidewalk (after all, both are simply moving belts). The guy decides you can simply hop vertically and the moving belt beneath him will do all the work for keeping him in place. The guy begins hopping vertically. What happens?

A) He stays in place against the moving sidewalk, impresses the girl with witty conversation, and gets lucky later

B) The moving sidewalk carries him away and he loses the hot girl

C) Hopping vertically is such a powerful treadmill technique that is incredibly moves him against the moving sidewalk, as if he is running 4 minute miles. He loses the girl but Salazar signs him on with Nike Oregon Project to learn this new incredible running technique.

kkks wrote:

Super Jay Five wrote:

The AMAZING physics fact that I did not know is this: EVERY runner (fastest sprinter to little old lady) spends EXACTLY the same time in the air between steps (.3 of a second)! I saw this on a NOVA show. The way to speed up is to run MORE UPRIGHT so your knees are closer together.

Please tell me you're joking about this being on NOVA

No Joke! It was a NOVA program called "Making it go FASTER". The guy had videos of all types of runners and they ALL had the same time between steps (.3 of a second).If that is true that is an amazing fact. If that is wrong tell us why and what are the true facts.

B

Super Jay Five wrote:

kkks wrote:

Please tell me you're joking about this being on NOVA

No Joke! It was a NOVA program called "Making it go FASTER". The guy had videos of all types of runners and they ALL had the same time between steps (.3 of a second).If that is true that is an amazing fact. If that is wrong tell us why and what are the true facts.

Bolt took 41 steps in his 9.58 WR 100m. 41 * .3 = 12.3 seconds. Hmmm, something doesn't add up.

webfoot wrote:

Super Jay Five wrote:

No Joke! It was a NOVA program called "Making it go FASTER". The guy had videos of all types of runners and they ALL had the same time between steps (.3 of a second).If that is true that is an amazing fact. If that is wrong tell us why and what are the true facts.

Bolt took 41 steps in his 9.58 WR 100m. 41 * .3 = 12.3 seconds. Hmmm, something doesn't add up.

Interesting. That means Bolt had a LONGER stride AND he made it QUICKER, two things that you would think are somewhat mutually exclusive. But I guess he just has so much more power than anyone else so he can do it.

Super Jay Five wrote:

two things that you would think are somewhat mutually exclusive.

Not us, just you. Us being anyone that passed highschool science.