CYCLING'S effect on RUNNING

I dont think its bad at all. Lance Armstrong, who trains as hard on a bike as anyone in the world, runs a 15 minute 5k

Motorcycling is the best form of sport and entertainment around after running of course. What you runners ought to do is wear red, white and blue capes like I did. It's great for attention and picking up chicks.

You should be alright. Keep in mind you are a runner not a cyclist. So, if you get on the bike, try to keep it in the smaller chainring (That's usually the 39 teeth front chainring for most modern road bikes). If you know your gears 39x15 is a good one. Spin and resist the temptation to push hard on the gears. I've noticed many runners 'mash' their hardest gears.

Nice and smooth at a good rpm. It's foreign, but you'll feel much better at the end of an ride. In fact, it may be foreign mostly because you're legs won't hurt! But remember, it's supposed to be aerobic.

Go out for an easy ride with some good cyclists if you have questions on pace. Find someone that has a similar body-type to you and emulate their cadence. If no cyclists are available try to ride between 12-15 mph or under 130 hr for an hour or so. Please wear a helmet that fits you properly.

If you mash, You can see some thickening. Just doing aerobic cycling and still running you should be fine.

Remember, the only way to get better at running is running. Cycling is a good way to buy some aerobic fitness without the pounding and can provide a decent mental escape.

My rough formula is 25-30 min of running = 1 hour of cycling. Now you realize why cyclists go for such long rides. A 4-6 hour ride a couple of times a week is commonplace for competitive cyclists. Crossing over, i'd compare it somewhat to marathon training.

As a long term strategy.. I wouldn't rely on cycling much more than a rehab tool or stealing some aerobic fitness. Cycling is nice for helping you learn how to stay aerobic. But, you should really learn how to do that via running.

I think Hadd (you can find his posts somewhere) mentioned that it's harder for a runner to start cycling then cyclist to start running. I'll agree with this only because running is generally shorter timewise and runners have a tendancy to push things anaerobic. Gotta "feel the burn" Which if you do on the bike long enough you totally bonk.

All that being said, My suggestion is to keep your summer runs longer, aerobic, and keep the bike in the garage.

also keep in mind that Triathletes run and ride without sacrificing leg speed... or thickening their quads. I would even say a HR of 120 - 125 may be high enough on the bike

I have to respectfully disagree. I began cycling after I completed my collegiate eligibility and began competing in duathlons. In the first year of training (both running & cycling), I gained 10 pounds, but kept at the same body fat percentage (6% or so). All that weight was increased muscle mass in my quads. I believe that it decreased my ability to run fast, although not so much that I didn't still kick the crap out of all the guys who were primarily cyclists that I was competing against.

Over the past few years, I have stopped competing in duathlons and have continued cycling and running on a lesser scale. I find it harder to regain my running fitness these days I attribute it to the extra muscle weight I still carry in my quads that is tough to get rid of.

If you do begin cycling, I do agree with the suggestion of keeping it in the small chainring and spin at higher RPMs as oppposed to mashing the big gears...

Wouldn't you get the same quad development from running a lot of hills? I find doing some cycling makes it easier to run hills.

Alan

how could you have gained 10 lbs. of muscle in your Quads alone?!?!? and have only done it in a year...

I find that cycling helps in the summer to break up training a bit. The biggest problem with cycling is that your average heartrate on an easy bike ride will be lower than your average heartrate on an easy run. Because of this, you should do some short invervals on the bike in order to get your heartrate up a little(ex: 8 x 1 min on 5 min off). This will also help break up your ride. As long as you are still running and only biking once or twice a week you shouldn't have to worry about thick legs. You will most likely just gain a little strength which will be beneficial once you start training hard or racing.

i have a method where 4 to 5m bike = 1m running.. it aint hard to bike (sometimes)

i also use HR as a judge... but that is solely based on what my heart can handle... bear in mind that if you dont ride your legs will go before your heart does just from muscle strain..

typical rides i can get up to my aerobic threshold and hold it for quite a long time. (as if i am doing a tempo run)...

i personally have not seen an adverse effects on my body..

I am a big advocate of biking 2x per week. It adds an extra layer of aerobic work without the pounding of a run. I generally bike a minimum of 2:30. For me, it's like the training log rule for running, if it's not over 5 miles, I don't record it as a run, likewise, if you aren't biking for more than 1 1/2 hours, its not really worth you time (unless of course you are hammering the whole time, which is not what I am advocating). I can give you anecdotal evidence about how it won't slow your running down (at least for all but the elite), but just as an example look at the top triathletes on the current ITU scene. These guys train primarily as runners and some of them can run with the elite. Simon Lessing, Simon Whitfield, and Greg Bennet can all crank out open 10ks right around 29 flat. Greg at bay-to-breakers this year beat some pretty good names in finishing 7th.

Long rides, like 3-5 hours will significantly help with the capillary development. Unless you are in the 28:00 10K range cycling will help out your running. Don't believe that you'll gain 10 pounds in your quads alone, that's crap. Think of what 5 pounds of steak looks like, do you think you are going to put that much on each leg within a summer of cycling? Hell no. You'd be lucky to put a pound on each leg within 3 - 4 months. I do mean lucky too as it will help with your peak output. I would go to a cycling/triathlon forum and get their opinions, runners that are strictly runners aren't the ones to be asking.

thanks for all the input, fellows.

i'm in the process of upping bike mileage this summer. I've used it a couple of summers to try and gain aerobic strength before increasing my running miles in the fall. The key is to hammer like hell on the bike cause you don't get your HR up but if you ride with a bunch of hard core riders or do intervals just like you would in running, you'll get pretty strong.

The short term effects of increased bike mileage are a bit of dead-leggedness on the runs. i can maintain pace during tempos but the pace is a bit slower than when just running. After about a month though, after adapting to the mileage, the running times come back down.

In the fall when i drop the biking and increase my running miles, i'm stronger aerobically and i feel like i can fly up hills. i also seem to be able to up my mileage without getting injured or overtrained as easily. nothing scientific but it works for me.

The key is stand up bicyling!

Cycling makes you impotent. Forget how it may affect your running and think how it will affect your love life!

I was a cyclist before switching to running when my son was born. I just didn't have the time required to compete at the level I was used to. A long ride on the bike was about 4 hours while my current long run is only about an hour (still working on base). I raced mountain bikes for many years although the majority of my training was on the road with the local road racers.

This bit about your quads getting huge is just not true. The suggestion that if you do gain muscle in the rump and thighs it doesn't go away is ridiculous. While I have lost weight in the thighs and rump since taking up running I'd say it's only about 3 or 4 pounds. If anyone has ever seen an elite bike racer then you know they are rail thin. Some american crit specialists get thick because crits are nothing but one hour hammer fests and you have to be able to beat and bang in the pack to hold your position but put them on a hill and they drop like a rock.

I think cycling is actually good for the knees because it keeps the quads strong and the knees feeling good. Just don't over do it on the bike, your runs should be your quality work out.

LHD wrote:

I think Hadd (you can find his posts somewhere) mentioned that it's harder for a runner to start cycling then cyclist to start running.

My experience has actually been the opposite. I was unable to run for about 10 weeks last year. I replaced most of my running with cycling, and some of the running with other cross training (swimming, stationary bike, stairmaster). Assuming that 1 hour of running would need to be replaced by 2 hours of cycling, I soon realized that I couldn't possibly double my training time, so I tried to maintain the equivalent of 75% of my previous running volume (i.e, only increased my training time by 50%), with the hope of maintaining or only slightly reducing my running fitness.

Once I was able to run again, I was shocked at how out of shape I had gotten. I was huffing, puffing, and even my endurance had fallen. I had expected to have difficulty at faster speeds, but I had thought that with 4 hour rides, my ability to complete long, easy runs would still be OK; yet I suffered through the latter parts of any run over 90 minutes. Although, I had reduced my training volume, my fitness wasn't what it was when I was running that amount (a year before).

However, the cycling wasn't solely to blame. I had gained weight, both in leg mass from cycling, and in bodyfat. Cycling didn't keep me as lean as running does (even though I was figuring 1 hour of cycling burns 500 calories, and 1 hour of running burns 800). Cycling also made me hungrier than running, and for every hour I rode, I was tempted to (and many times did) eat nearly 1,000 calories more than normal, as apposed to the 500 I actually burned. I can attribute some of this weight gain to my own recklessness and gluttony, but some came from the added leg mass from cycling. That extra leg mass, combined with cycling's limited range of motion, also led to a reduction in flexibility, which shortened my stride, and made me feel like my legs barely left the ground when I was running.

Now that I am able to consistently run, I ride maybe once every couple of weeks, when I feel too beat up to run, and sometimes replace a second run with a short ride. Interestingly, I don't feel as bad on the bike now as I did running after weeks of only cycling. By breathing seems easier when climbing, and I generally feel "fitter" on the bike. The difference is on flat roads, I can't push the bigger gears while keeping my cadence up, which can be attributed to less sheer leg power.

My example involves the extreme scenario of completely replacing running with cycling. However, I have experimented with cycling about 100 miles/week as cross training. While this adds extra aerobic work, the stress on the leg muscles causes a stiff, sore, dead-leggedness that makes it difficult to run faster sessions. It is best used to add extra aerobic time to an high-mileage, low intensity base-building period.

I have several theories as to why this happened.

How many mpw would you guys suggest?

I am running around 80 miles a week and road biking anywhere from 100-200 miles a week. In my opinion and experience a person will not build up those quad muscles by biking if they are also running.