Running on Soft Surfaces

I also had a question:

If you run downhill but on a soft surface - is it still less impact on the knees as opposed to running on a flat asphalt road?

Balki_Bartokomous wrote:

I'm looking for either scientific reserach...

Idk what this is

Tadpole wrote:

Balki_Bartokomous wrote:

I'm looking for either scientific reserach...

Idk what this is

sorry research....need to check spelling next time

Jack Daniels did some amount of research on this very subject. He found that the surface didn't really have an effect on injury. I don't know what he specifically studied or how large a sample group he used etc. but those were his findings. Maybe you could make a post for him to answer specifically. In my experience it makes no difference.

Running on soft surfaces is definitely the better option. I would suggest if time is an issue that you go to a softer surface at least occasionally, for your longer run or whatnot. I am very much convinced that there is a significantly reduced occurrence of running injuries when a soft, good surface option is chosen.

Here's how I see it. Hit a soft surface with you hand. Repeat this 100 times. Hit the road with your hand. repeat 100 times. Do this little experiment all over again wearing a glove on your hand if you think the cushioning makes that much of a difference. Now you've tried them all, which would you rather do, hit a soft surface over and over again every day for months on end, or hit a concrete or asphalt one?

iseethelord wrote:

Here's how I see it. Hit a soft surface with you hand. Repeat this 100 times. Hit the road with your hand. repeat 100 times. Do this little experiment all over again wearing a glove on your hand if you think the cushioning makes that much of a difference. Now you've tried them all, which would you rather do, hit a soft surface over and over again every day for months on end, or hit a concrete or asphalt one?

We have a winner.

Obviously a softer surface would cause less stress due to pounding. It would also depend on the injury. If the injury is caused by repetitive motion, soft surfaces aren't really going to help.

I'm not a real doctor, so correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't IT band injuries caused by repetition, not stress?

With that in mind, it won't matter where you run, so you can save the driving time going to the trails. Just take care of the IT band issues, and, as they say, keep it on the 'crete.

'If the injury is caused by repetitive motion, soft surfaces aren't really going to help.'

The softer surface will not be level though, each time you put your foot down it will move in a slightly different way thereby reducing the repetitive effect

IT band injury is not something I've not come across though so not too sure. Apparently a road camber is bad for it and so is running downhill

This is a terrible argument, and one that is frequently used. It completely neglects the fact that humans have proprioperception. The hand was not made to absorb landing shock. It is a poor analogy, why not just ask if you would rather have your foot strike a hard vs a soft surface without a shoe?

Research on this subject shows that individuals implicitly adjust the stiffness of their limbs which makes the impact forces about the same.

In my experience, running on grass can be really jarring. It is almost like the impact is extended and turn over is not as fast. My favorite is a dirt road. Maybe it is psychological, maybe physiclogical. Any way, I think that the soft surfaces thing is blown out of proportion.

Just wait though, someone will bring up the rediculous golf ball analogy "just drop a golf ball on the street, then drop it on the grass".

Injury depends on certain running scenarios.

First scenario: Casual jogging on a rubberized synthetic track in the long run will cause numerous injuries starting with the calf. This reason is based on the heel strike itself. As the heel strikes the track in general jogging there is not enough rebound pressure for maximum foot lift off, due to the rubberized track absorbing all the heel shock. Now you may think because the track is softer less this will add less pounding on the body, however because their is not enough shock foot lift off then the damage can be worse, because the body will make adjustments to this workout. Once you continue your training on a hard surface the stress compensation is not equalized. Because of this the leg muscles can be erratic in its adjustments from hard to soft, and Calf injury will result.

Most runners do not realize that the calf injuries they suffer comes from soft surface running at a casual pace.

I agree that that analogy with the golf ball is overly simplisitic and does not do justice to the multititude of factors involved......can a scientific person add more to this?.....

Also wondering about grass vs. trails/dirt roads.....I also find grass to be "jarring" and because it usually isnt flat, I wonder if there are is a negative impact from that?

I like packed gravel or hard dirt best. I don't have any scientific evidence, but it feels like a soft surface makes a difference. I run on both though, probably 60/40 gravel/asphalt.

As another poster mentioned, with IT band you should make sure you're running on an even (non-cambered) surface first of all. Run in the middle of the road if traffic is not an issue where you run. If you run on a slanted side, go out and back so that you are shortening one leg the whole time. There may be other factors contributing to IT band problems, but for me it partly had to do with running on a canted surface.

so that you ARE NOT shortening one leg the whole time.

always injured wrote:

I like packed gravel or hard dirt best. I don't have any scientific evidence, but it feels like a soft surface makes a difference. I run on both though, probably 60/40 gravel/asphalt.

As another poster mentioned, with IT band you should make sure you're running on an even (non-cambered) surface first of all. Run in the middle of the road if traffic is not an issue where you run. If you run on a slanted side, go out and back so that you are shortening one leg the whole time. There may be other factors contributing to IT band problems, but for me it partly had to do with running on a canted surface.

This is a good point. Its impossible not to run on a slanted surface unless I run smack dab in the middle of the road....so I try to even it out by giving each leg equal time runningon a slant.

i figured out that soft surfaces are much easier on the body when i spent a week in a downtown area and could only run on bricks, cobblestones, and sidewalks. i was sore for a week afterwards. but, i think that if i were training for a marathon, i'd do a some running on the hard stuff to get my body used to the differences.

Analogy and speculation about which surface is more or less likely to cause ITBS is a very poor second to empirical data about what real runners experience in the real world.

If you can find some scientific research which speaks to that, which you trust, fine. Since you also opened the door to personal anecdote: I've found surface less of a factor in ITBS than shoes and stretching. The "shoes" part of that equation, for me, means that "support" trainers predisposed me to ITBS, neutral was much better, and 4 oz flats (transitioned to over a couple years) are best.

I tend to run on dirt, grass, or wood (e.g. boardwalk) when available, but am not bothered by a steady diet of asphalt and concrete these days. Agree with the poster that crowned roads are bad - it's the slope more than the surface, it's like having a leg length discrepancy.

Just wondering why you feel as though flats work better for you than regular cushioned trainers? I have switched from a regular (12-14 oz.) cushioned trainer into a "lightweight trainer (9 oz.) recently and have found the lightweight shoe to cause less inflamation in my hip (my ITB pain is on the lateral side of my leg just below the iliac crest (IT band origin) than the regular shoe. Hmmmm, guess it doesnt matter why as long as it helps, just curious though.......

Balki_Bartokomous: Just wondering why you feel as though flats work better for you than regular cushioned trainers?

I'm not certain. Maybe it's a that the more a shoe affects one's stride (with motion control, cushioning, inflexibility...), the more predisposed you are to certain injuries - in other words, the shoe is forcing the body to do what it wouldn't naturally do. Maybe it's better footstrike, or more proprioception because I'm less insulated from the ground below, or maybe it's all down to something like higher stride rate (because the flats are lighter and/or less cushy).

But it works for me, and a number of others. And yeah, I used to be more prone to inflammation, tightness, and soreness in my hip / glute / upper hamstring region, on one side (right) only - it was my running nemesis for years - and that seems to be nearly a non-issue in minimal flats.