There's a local runner who's pretty fast who does this. He rabbits, then pauses, walks like five steps or so and then rabbits again.
Is there any conceivable benefit to this?
There's a local runner who's pretty fast who does this. He rabbits, then pauses, walks like five steps or so and then rabbits again.
Is there any conceivable benefit to this?
Interesting strategy. Would walking for about five seconds really be enough time to slow down the heart rate and feel ready to go fast again? Not sure. Seems like it might be better if he just ran a little bit slower and didn't stop?
This guy ran close to 4 minutes for the mile in college, he's 54 now. His 5k's are in the 20:xx area, plus he's got a gut. He runs a lot of the local races. It's just annoying to me to have some guy w/a gut sprint by me. The last 10k I was in front of him until the last mile+ and he ended up finishing 2 minutes ahead of me.
xerosaburu wrote:
There's a local runner who's pretty fast who does this. He rabbits, then pauses, walks like five steps or so and then rabbits again.
Is there any conceivable benefit to this?
No, there's not.
Sounds like he has natural speed but lacks endurance.
More endurance training, and lose some weight, and he would easily break 20 mins.
xerosaburu wrote:
There's a local runner who's pretty fast who does this. He rabbits, then pauses, walks like five steps or so and then rabbits again.
Is there any conceivable benefit to this?
There can be benefit if his aerobic endurance has dropped significantly over time. It’s common for newer runners to be able to run-walk faster than they can continuously run for 10K or more distance, but it’s less common for 5K.
Sounds a bit useless. But it wouldn't hurt to try it. I've resorted to 10 - 15 second walks during 5k races and it really helped. But just a few seconds - makes no sense. Maybe he does some super fast bursts right before, or right after, using his phosphocreatine system to advantage, and not pausing so long that his circulation of metabolites isn't hampered?
... you could just ask him.
xerosaburu wrote:
This guy ran close to 4 minutes for the mile in college, he's 54 now. His 5k's are in the 20:xx area, plus he's got a gut. He runs a lot of the local races. It's just annoying to me to have some guy w/a gut sprint by me. The last 10k I was in front of him until the last mile+ and he ended up finishing 2 minutes ahead of me.
If you were ahead of him until the last mile, how do you know he was doing the Gallowalk? And how did you lose 2 minutes to a 54 yr. old with a gut in just one mile?
About ten years ago there was a woman in my age group (we were both early 50s at the time) who ran this way. We were both running in the 45-47 minute range for 10K, and I found it somewhat annoying to race against her as we kept leapfrogging each other, I running a steady pace and she stopping to walk for brief periods every mile or so. I could never figure out how this was a good idea but it seemed to work for her.
When I was in 22:xx/47:xx/78:xx 5K/10K/10mi. condition, I would stop at all water stops, drink two or three cups a water at each stop. That's almost the same as taking walk breaks.
Maybe he just enjoys running fast, and would rather take a few walk breaks than go at a slower even pace.
It seems counter intuitive.
In the limit of a short race like 400m, it is clearly a huge disadvantage due to time lost and having to re-accelerate. In a longer race, it would also seem inefficient since if you are fit enough to quickly recover significantly, then you should be fit enough to continue at a slightly slower pace.
Agree. Although the runner might be just enjoying the run, not trying for time. That's what most fun runners do. It's a hobby.
Or... he is tempoing that run. With intervals.
aerobe wrote:
There can be benefit if his aerobic endurance has dropped significantly over time. It’s common for newer runners to be able to run-walk faster than they can continuously run for 10K or more distance, but it’s less common for 5K.
This. All of this.
Did you pound the table in frustration?
xerosaburu wrote:
This guy ran close to 4 minutes for the mile in college, he's 54 now. His 5k's are in the 20:xx area, plus he's got a gut. He runs a lot of the local races. It's just annoying to me to have some guy w/a gut sprint by me. The last 10k I was in front of him until the last mile+ and he ended up finishing 2 minutes ahead of me.
This thread has possibilities. Don't squander it people!
kmaclam wrote:
xerosaburu wrote:
This guy ran close to 4 minutes for the mile in college, he's 54 now. His 5k's are in the 20:xx area, plus he's got a gut. He runs a lot of the local races. It's just annoying to me to have some guy w/a gut sprint by me. The last 10k I was in front of him until the last mile+ and he ended up finishing 2 minutes ahead of me.
If you were ahead of him until the last mile, how do you know he was doing the Gallowalk? And how did you lose 2 minutes to a 54 yr. old with a gut in just one mile?
Maybe the OP might have been doing some walking as well in the last mile?
Was this a Half Mary or a Full Mary?