The shaven-headed runner has an extreme advantage because you can sweat unimpeded from a vastly increased surface area of chrome dome with little fat beneath it.
Not so important for body hair, which is already thin enough to sweat through.
The shaven-headed runner has an extreme advantage because you can sweat unimpeded from a vastly increased surface area of chrome dome with little fat beneath it.
Not so important for body hair, which is already thin enough to sweat through.
There are more sweat glands on the soles of your feet than scalp, so to truly benefit, one should shave all head hair and run shoeless and sockless. By my calculations, the increased sweat efficiency would lead to a 3 hour marathon runner completing the marathon in approx 1:52, with blisters creating a natural bouncy gel cushion.
The shaven-headed runner has an extreme advantage because you can sweat unimpeded from a vastly increased surface area of chrome dome with little fat beneath it.
Not so important for body hair, which is already thin enough to sweat through.
There are more sweat glands on the soles of your feet than scalp, so to truly benefit, one should shave all head hair and run shoeless and sockless. By my calculations, the increased sweat efficiency would lead to a 3 hour marathon runner completing the marathon in approx 1:52, with blisters creating a natural bouncy gel cushion.
I can answer this with complete authority; have been running 40+ years, got complete alopecia 4 years ago, used to have long hair in ponytail and full beard. Time improvement because of hair loss: 0
Remarkably, I read once somewhere (Scientific American) where they had done some calculations including this kind of thing - though I think it was for people fast enough to win olympic gold - and while their calculation said it was miniscule, the savings were more than 0. Perhaps a few seconds over the course of a marathon, to best of my memory. Since a 3-hour marathoner is running nearly 50% slower, and wind resistance has exponential relationship (remembering from cycling where resistance is key factor), this would be even less for you ... i.e., don't waste your time! :-)
Back in '89, Greg LeMond won the Tour de France over Fignon with a blistering final time trial. LeMond wore an aero helmet and aero bars. Fignon weent helmetless with ponytail flapping in the wind. Both had shaved legs. Fignon lost by 58sec over 15 miles and lost the tour by 8sec.
Therefore, you could expect approximately a 90sec improvement over the greater distance of 26mi. It is scientific proof.
Not exactly the answer to original question, but you can extrapolate from that: cutting long hair short (not fully shaving it off) saves about 5.7 seconds. For the entire race, not for a mile :)
2 seconds per mile per pound of extra weight is sometimes used as a guide, or 52 seconds in a marathon. So even an ounce of hair should be worth just over 3 seconds from the weight reduction alone. Maybe some help also from the extra cooling. That can be enough to move up a place or two in one of the bigger marathons. And don't forget to clip toenails and fingernails for some more weight savings.
Don't shave. Instead, grown a beard, get a man-bun and let the arm hair go wild. Get on an ultra-trail and let your bearded spirit fly along mountain trails like an eagle. At 11 min per mile.
LeMond had a clip-on aero handlebar. That gave him a decisive advantage. He was the first to use it in a professional road race. Triathletes already knew by then.
@o.p. ; if you can figure out how to run with your arms in praying mantis position, then you will have the advantage you are looking for. The hairs won’t make a difference, possibly even the opposite because of stalling airflow over the skin with hair (this effect is used in skinsuits for speedskaters)
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.