For those who aren't familiar with mapmyrun, just click on Display Elevation Profile.
Not really.
How would you describe it?
Well the first mile has 100 feet of elevation gain...that's less then 2% slope.
Now THIS was hilly
With 40m elevation change, I probably wouldn't call that one hilly, but I would call this one hilly:
It's only 40m, but it's also only a 3.6 mile loop. I think of it as hilly, but not massively so.
hill question wrote:
It's only 40m, but it's also only a 3.6 mile loop. I think of it as hilly, but not massively so.
Sure, it's hilly in the sense that it's not flat, but when you see a thread title with the word 'hilly', you expect to see something special.
Sure, it's definitely not an epic hilly run. That's why I was asking to see how people would describe it. It's not flat but it's not like running in the Alps.
I posted a question here once about race strategy on a hilly course. I described the course complete with distances and elevation changes. About 80% of the responses were "that's not hilly" or "you should see the hills I run" (complete with links to routes). Looks like you're getting a similar response.
This website's good for comedy, but I wouldn't take anyone's opinion without a grain of salt. If it's a hilly run to you, then it's a hilly run. But you should really see the hills I run.
Rightfully so, though, really - I've never had the misfortune to post one of my running routes in Boston on this website and call it "hilly", but I thought I was running some big hills when I'd climb 200 feet or so...then I moved to the East Bay, where pretty much every route includes a 700-footer.
As for the original post...I'd call it "gently rolling". The post from the guy in CT is getting there...
woolyhillrunner wrote:
I posted a question here once about race strategy on a hilly course. I described the course complete with distances and elevation changes. About 80% of the responses were "that's not hilly" or "you should see the hills I run" (complete with links to routes). Looks like you're getting a similar response.
This website's good for comedy, but I wouldn't take anyone's opinion without a grain of salt. If it's a hilly run to you, then it's a hilly run. But you should really see the hills I run.
The OP does ask the question 'Would you describe this route as Hilly?' and people have given him the answer.
It would be fairly hilly for where I live though. The highest point within running distance of my house is 36ft above see level.
Actually, I retract my opinion. It very well might be hillier than any 3.6-mile run I could do from my house. That only gets you to the base of the hills and back...
Perhaps I am just used to hilly runs because I live at the end of a cul-de-sac that makes every run have the first 3/4 of a mile gain close to 300ft of elevation. If I lived somewhere very flat, then that would be a hilly run.
120 feet of elevation change? Not hilly. If you use it for hill repeats, it would be helpful. But, not what most people would describe as "hilly", I don't think...
Even by Boston standards, not hilly. Some elevation change, not "flat" per se, but definitely not hilly.
Is there a rule against attaching a helium balloon to yourself while running a road race?
Am I living in the twilight zone? The Boston Marathon weather was terrible!
How rare is it to run a sub 5 minute mile AND bench press 225?
Move over Mark Coogan, Rojo and John Kellogg share their 3 favorite mile workouts
Mark Coogan says that if you could only do 3 workouts as a 1500m runner you should do these
Red Bull (who sponsors Mondo) calls Mondo the pole vaulting Usain Bolt. Is that a fair comparison?