What if you Just cycle instead of easy / recovery days?

What about Crossfit?

Please don't bring CrossFit into this.

100% quality running only wrote:

Hypothetically, if I did all my easy runs for time anyways say like 45-60 minutes or so, what if I just cycled instead at a similar HR. Then all my running would only be for quality? Would this is theory work just as well as running full time?

Might this even be better? Since cycling is easier on body than the pounding of running?

The problem with cycling for runners, is that your feet are locked in place, very far apart. Different actions. This is why cyclists find it so hard to adapt to running. It takes thousands of miles of running to get to a decent level, so by missing out on the easy running days, you are wasting precious training time.

Is there any concrete evidence (published studies), that show that cycling/swimming on non-workout days does not translate to better races? Just curious.

From personal, albeit limited experience, I found that doubling on easy days followed by a rigorous maintenance routine was most effective for me, both in terms of improving as a runner and for injury prevention. These days I don't leave the field/gym until I have worked out all the soreness/tightness. Spending the extra 40min is worth it for me.

There is evidence that some triathletes are fast runners. They are also training up to 35 hours per week.

Does anyone remember that article/blog post Desiree Ficker wrote about going from triathlon training to just running before the 2008 Olympic Trials marathon? She ditched tri training for a while and just focused on running. She wrote an article on how much faster she was at running when she dropped the other two sports.

MikeRoss BAA wrote:

What were you results?

Metric Miler wrote:

Funnily enough, being injury prone, I did this. I was surprised with the results.

Yes, what were your results, Metric Miler--good or bad?

To the OP: You ask a great question, one which I have considered off and on for the past two years. I have had injuries, and so that is why I am considering splitting my time with biking. The problem for me, though, is that my injures have been glute/groin-oriented, and so biking tends to irritate those areas, especially the groin. Also, I do not live in a good area for longer bike rides, and so the stationary bike is my only true/convenient option.

Josh Spiker ran 4:05 in high school with a philosophy similar to this. I coached a girl to 4:40 1500 10:08 3k with a likewise similar philosophy.

It is not how I coach unless an injury is involved but it is incredible effective for middle distance runners. Honestly, I'm afraid to try it with distance runners.

What injuries have been involved, coach? As I have indicated above, the biking can irritate my groin and/or glute areas.

What a great post, Jerry--thank you.

I completely agree, and your point about "feel" is often overlooked. One's breathing says it all. I have gotten a good dose of this universal truth lately, as I am trying to recover from an injury. I am able to run a little now (after about a month hiatus), but my "feel" is completely different. Yesterday, what should have been four easy-moderate miles felt more like ten miles. My breathing was fast and labored. These ramp-up periods are so deflating.

With regard to your experience, it seems like you found the perfect balance in that nine-month period. I would love to work in some biking, but I wonder how my groin (and back?) would feel if I were doing regular biking.

Wish others would chime in, sounds like it could work though.

Locked?

1977 called, and wants its bike fitting back.

I hope this doesn't sound dismissive, evasive, or pedantic, but: Just try it. I tend to think people ask these "what if?" training questions seeking confirmation. Essentially: "Tell me this idea I have is a good one, as I'd like to implement it." Unfortunately, outside of extreme scenarios ("What if I trained by jumping on a trampoline for two hours a day?") it's hard to say whether something will "work" or not. It's even hard to say after the fact, since we can never really isolate variables in our real lives. The good news is that interest in and excitement regarding a training program matters quite a bit, insofar as we're mostly all hobyjoggers. So, enjoy your hobby. Try the training that interests you. See what happens.

18342772 wrote:

Essentially: "Tell me this idea I have is a good one, as I'd like to implement it."

Yep, that sums up this thread.

I am guessing it will work fine in the short-term (immediate weeks and months), but for serious long term improvements you really just need run more.

Jon Orange wrote:

The problem with cycling for runners, is that your feet are locked in place, very far apart. Different actions.

And swimming of course is even less like running. Must be completely useless then.

Jon Orange wrote: It takes thousands of miles of running to get to a decent level, so by missing out on the easy running days, you are wasting precious training time.

Yes, more great points. Let's review:

Cross-training like swimming and biking are pretty much useless and a "waste" of "precious training time", and "It takes 1000s of miles of running to get to a *decent* level."

hmmmmm.....What was that kid's name, Lukas something? Let's look at his history:

* Claimed he did almost ALL his base as swimming/bicycling, and only ran quality mileage, with a low volume of running

* broke 4:00 in HS and destroyed the 2 mile national record, running 8:29, while most recent all time HS greats couldn't break 8:40

Makes you wonder, huh?

(oh forgot to add: dropped the cross-training and upped his running mileage, and ran much worse than expected in his sole college season.)

I've done cross training on a road bike since 2013 when I had problems with shin splints. I would say that the long rides (2.5h+ say) have helped me, but then I've tended to not cope well with long runs due to being very injury prone. I am quite conscious now though of whether its a flat course where I can do work continually or whether its undulating when it's very hard to maintain useful work on the downhill parts. If you use a turbo trainer that factor doesn't come into it of course. I set my masters 10k pb by 90s off a month or so of long rides (69, 75, 92 and 125km). I can't prove that was what did it but pretty confident.

MikeRoss BAA wrote:

What were you results?

Metric Miler wrote:

Funnily enough, being injury prone, I did this. I was surprised with the results.

So, for clarification I did an easy bike session 3x a week, 45 to 75 minutes at around 60-70% MHR. I ran track 2/3 times a week. All my running each week was a combined total of around 10km, but it was fast.

I ran 1:51.1 for the 800m but felt I lacked aerobically. It is possible to run well in this way, but cycling isn't quite a substitute for running.

It definitely is not better, but it isn't bad either, better than nothing for sure.

outsiderunner wrote:

What injuries have been involved, coach? As I have indicated above, the biking can irritate my groin and/or glute areas.

I may not have been clear. I'm not worried about injuries from biking, I only use biking with my longer runners if they're injured from running. With the injuries you describe I'd make sure a professional fit you on the bike.