Asphalt Tracks

You do realize that tracks are asphalt underneath that rubber dont you?

BitumenMan wrote:

You do realize that tracks are asphalt underneath that rubber dont you?

assfalt no, concrete yes

Less than 2% off tracks have concrete underneath. Mostly because of the inferiority of the product.

sorry, i don't have links to any studies, but in my (small) community, the high school track is also asphalt, and the xc and track coaches often take the kids to the fairgrounds next door to the school to run on the 1/2-mile dirt track, figuring that it's better for their bodies, despite the fact that it is somewhat lumpy, has a couple of persistent puddles, and gets plenty muddy in wet weather.

as for me, i also do workouts on the dirt track or drive several miles to the next town. there, the high school has a synthetic track and generally wonderful athletic facilities, but lousy academics. it's all a matter of priorities; personally, i'd rather run in the dirt and know that the kids are getting a quality education than have a fancy running surface and low literacy and high dropout rates.

Your question hasn't really been addressed well. The best options out there for the most part are Polyurethane tracks that used shredded rubber tires bonded with polyurethane and have a height of about 5/8 of an inch or so with a base of asphalt underneath. This type of surface provides the best solution for preventing leg injuries. The alternative is a latex track that also uses shredded rubber, but is less thick (sometimes as little as 1/4 of an inch) and tends to be hard in cold temps and a bit softer (less than a polyurethane track) in warmer temps. The latex track is about 30% less expensive than the polyurethane track, but has only a life expectancy of about 8-10 years before it begins to disintegrate from ultraviolet rays. The surface of a latex track is more prone to leg injuries because it is much less resilient than the polyurethane tracks.

I suppose having an asphalt track and painting it will replicate a latex track, but would restrict using spikes altogether, while you can use spikes on the latex track. If you are an old guy you might remember the old grasstex tracks of the early 70's. They were hard and became damaged when used with spikes.

I don't think asphalt tracks really lead to more injuries than rubber ones. In fact, maybe less. When I was in my day, I did all of my training on roads and all of my intervals on an asphalt track and I was very rarely injured. I qualified for the OT marathon as well, just an indication of where my fitness was.

Everytime I hear of asphalt tracks, like reading your thread title, I remember one specific workout my training partner and I did. We went to the track (asphalt) for a three mile tempo, we were both tuning up for a 10k on the track. My 5k PR was 14:15 (still is). We wanted to hit about 4:45-4:50 miles. We usually weren't very competetive in training, but for some reason, this tempo became a race effort. The first mile was right at 4:45. Then we began to drop pace in brutal competition. We came through the second mile in 4:35 and the last mile in 4:25 for a three mile time of 13:45 with a 9:00 last two miles. I think I could've very easily set a new 5k PR on that day. There was just something about flying along on the asphalt track that day that was magical, at least for someone like me with rather pedestrian achievements compared to the top dogs. What I'd give to run even a 6 min mile now too.

I ran on an asphalt track for my HS career.(Early 2000s) The distance squad only ran on it for meets, otherwise workouts were around the outside of the track or in fields.

Surprisingly injuries weren't an issue with distance guys, but rather sprinters. We had a few broken arms and collar bones from hurdlers falling over or sprinters losing balance at the finish. Not sure if a rubber track could have prevented the breaks, but falling on the track was not fun.

I didn't like running on asphalt tracks, but it was really funny watching people do hurdles on them.

I have coached on asphalt, cinders and rubber tracks, and the rubber track has caused the most problems. I almost think it is the weather more than anything else. The runners seem to get shin splints when it is cold, not what type of track they train on. I coached in FL for five years and almost every track was a piece of crap and everyone got over their shin issues. And FL has some of the fastest runners around. So use the track.....

I prefer the Asphalt track. Mimics the roads better. There is one almost in my backyard at the Junior High. The local High School has a really nice all weather track but it is always being used by school teams.

Rubberized tracks are fine for racing but lousy for training. The rubber grabs the shoes, the knees can't rotate their usual 12 to 15 degrees, and this leads to all kinds of problems. I would not consider running very far on a rubberized track. It's amazing how many runners get injured after training on one and still can't figure it out. It helps to run barefoot.

Asphalt tracks, though hard, are fine for training. I could easily run 20 or 50 miles on one with no problem, the same as the roads. The smooth surface is fast, and they are not so tiring to the legs as are the spongy rubber ones.

Dirt tracks are my favorite for training, though they are hard to find anymore. They are very easy on the legs and great for running long distances or any other kind of training. I would use only flats on ashphalt or dirt tracks.

asphalt tracks are much better, even faster