|
2006/02/07, 12:32 PM
a friend and i were having a discussion about cardio. i told him that i could run 2.5 miles on the tredmill and on the eliptical machine and he siad that it is not the same as just running on the street. he said it is easier to run on the tredmill because the machine does some of the work for you, but i disagree. i think that running on the tredmill is just as good and that if i can run 2.5 miles on the tredmill i can runn 2.5 miles on the street. what do you think?
|
|
|
|
2006/02/07, 12:51 PM
On a treadmill you have less chance of getting hit by a car! :big_smile:
Seriously, I think you will find if you can run on a treadmill like that, you will be able to do the same on the street.
You are building endurance either way.
--------------
Strength and Honor!
|
|
2006/02/07, 03:41 PM
well from personal experience i got up to 3 miles on the treadmill in 30 mins, then i went home for break and i could barely run 1.5 miles outside on the street. when you run on the street you have air resistance (wind), hills, harder terrain to run through (grass, sand, etc), weather(it is harder to breathe in the cold air).....so i am definately a believer that you can run less distance with less speed outside.
|
|
2006/02/07, 04:00 PM
Yep, I have to agree with Nyxtikal, I find it easier to run on the treadmill, even using a hills program. I prefer to run outdoors though, just because it is outdoors, but it is tougher. I think it's important to incorporate both into your routine if you can. The extra impact of running outdoors is good for your bone density-although tough on the joints. Just my opinion....give it a try and let us know what you think.
--------------
Even if you are on the right track, you will get run over if you just sit there.
|
|
2006/02/07, 09:11 PM
Thanks guys...my perspective was simply from a "visual" standpoint. Never have been a runner, so I guess I wasn't qualified to answer the question. Glad we have members like you guys who know these things.
--------------
Strength and Honor!
|
|
2006/02/07, 10:25 PM
Just stands to reason to me if your stationary it's gonna be easier, your not actually keeping up any kind of REAL forward momentum. Same goes for a stairclimber or eliptical, like fly and nyx pointed out, compare the two in real life, walking or running stairs and riding a bike or much more difficult when not simulated. Even works on a mental level. You don't have that thought in the back of your head going, geesh, I still have to make it back! You can increase resistance in simulation but nothing compares to the real thing in my book. Just my opinion though.
--------------
Seize the day!
|
|
2006/02/08, 02:09 PM
OK, I just came in from a run outside...it's -7C(20F), -12C(10F) with the windchill....It's harder to run outside than on a treadmill:)
|
|
2006/02/08, 03:43 PM
Mojo, you are correct that you are not moving, but that only means you can go that much faster/intense. If you work out just as hard on an elyptical as on the roads, your heart will not know the difference. Your cardiovascular system only knows that a demand is being placed upon it, and it has to work to adapt to that demand.
--------------
Iron and chalk.
Pain is only temporary, it is in your mind. If you can still walk, then you can still run.
|
|
2006/02/08, 05:04 PM
The difference could also be psychological. However I would guess that running on a machine vs outdoors would be a lot different. Simply for the fact of on the real ground you're propelling yourself forward...rather then the ground moving beneath you and you keeping up. Just as I would expect that an non-motorized treadmill would be closer to running outside...you know one of those inexpensive ones that move from the movement and propulsion of your feet. Interesting experiment to jump from one to the other and see the difference.
|
|
2006/02/08, 06:11 PM
there is definately a psychological aspect to it. when you run on a treadmill you dont actually see the terrain go by as you run further, whereas outside you notice a lot more how far you have gone, then you start thinkin about that, then you start getting more tired because you think you have gone so far.
|
|
2006/02/08, 09:01 PM
What difference does it make whats propeling what?
If you get your heart up to 120 bpm for 40 minutes on a treadmill or on the gravel, do you honestly think that it will show? It might feel slightly different to the muscles, but if you think that it will make enough of a difference worth noting for our purposes (fat loss) then you are reading far too much into it.
If it is that much easier, than go faster to make up for it.
However, for a competitive runner, yes the mechanics are different, but this is a totally different question.
--------------
Iron and chalk.
Pain is only temporary, it is in your mind. If you can still walk, then you can still run.
|
|
2006/02/09, 10:25 AM
Good point Wrestler...however isn't that like saying if Machine weights are easier then free weights because of the mechanics of the device then just go heavier. I would think there would still be an aspect of form and balance involved whether we're talking about running or weights. I guess this is where it falls under the area of competitive running vs cardio activity to reach a health goal. However we always recommend free weights over machines.
Just my 2 cents....feel free to give me change if you got any handy.
|
|
2006/02/09, 10:47 AM
Maybe the way to phrase it correctly is that running outside is "different" from running on a treadmill. On a treadmill, the terraine is always the same for each step you take and you get into an easy rhythm. Outside, each step is different as you navigate road grates, puddles, dog poop, cars, varying tarrain etc. I think it is akin to the difference of riding a stationary bike and riding outdoors, although the difference with the bike is more pronounced due to the balance aspect. Is one a better overall workout than the other, in my case yes. I definetely get a better workout when I run outside. How can I tell...I work up a bigger sweat, regardless of the weather and it takes me longer to cool down after a run outside....but maybe that's just me or maybe I just tend to run harder outside than on the treadmil...dunno...
As I said before, I think it's important to do both. Besides, if nothing else the fresh air will do you good!
|
|
2006/02/09, 10:48 AM
wrestler completely agreed
Sstump I would think the mechanics involved are the same...things that would be different are surface area(most paths are not smooth, and often the impact on the feet is assymetrical while running outside, as well as wind resistance ,etc)...however the muscles used are the same...the conditions are so similar that it doesn't matter for anyone but competitive runners, where that last 1-2% becomes significant...this is true for most things...like nutrition for bodybuilders vs everyday people...or competitive lifters vs normal individuals....(i.e. as long as you do something mostly correct/well...say 95% then you will get great benefits despite not doing that 5%...and as far as most people are concerned that's all that matters)
In weight lifting, the mechanics of free weights vs machines are quite different....the planes of movement are different, forces on the joints/stabilizers/etc are quite different....so it becomes a very significant difference....
|
|
2006/02/09, 11:37 AM
I would suspect the stabilizers to come into play more on an outdoor run then on a treadmill. As FOTW said navigating obstacles alone would incorporate some shifting of the center of gravity which would tie in a lot of the core muscles. Not to mention any down hill slopes in the outdoors would give you something you can't get from a treadmill (uphill yes, but never seen one that goes downhill).
Maybe I'm just nuts...but I would think that they're not that much different.
|
|
2006/02/09, 12:18 PM
wow i never thought that i would get such a response from both sides. i think that there is a liitle truth in irt all. i think that it was simply more a debate on weather i could do it or not. my husband says that just because i can run two miles on teh eliptical and on the tredmill does't mean i can do it on my own. i tend on proving him wrong, but not right now (it's only 12 degrees outside today) although i think that all of you are right to some extent and i really appreciate all of your input. thanks again and weather it is easier or not i intend to prove him wrong one way or another.:big_smile:
|
|
2006/02/09, 12:20 PM
good point, can't replicate downhill running on a treadmill...
this is why many points of view are so important :)
|
|
2006/02/09, 12:40 PM
« INTERMEDIATE STAGE IN LEARNING POSE METHOD OF RUNNING | MAIN | TOP 5 BEGINNER MISTAKES »
June 27, 2005
TREADMILL VERSUS OVERGROUND RUNNING TECHNIQUE
In response to an ongoing debate on Pose Tech's Forums
Pieter, your hero, Benno Nigg, as you quoted, made a statement that "It is not yet understood how the human locomotor system adapts to a particular treadmill running situation". Nevertheless, you are questioning: "How can this be different in biomechanics?"
Biomechanics is the science of applying the laws of mechanics to locomotor systems or biological systems. It is different from simple mechanics, because here we are talking of living beings and we also have to consider how to apply these laws through their psycho-emotional and mental systems. The next question to consider will be how do these systems interact? Do they interfere or coincide with mechanics? From this perspective the application of laws of mechanics to human beings is not so simple.
The scientific data and experience known to us say that treadmill running is easier then overground running. "It has generally been found that overground running does incur greater metabolic costs compared to treadmill running, particularly at faster speeds of running. At the present time the extent that other differences in running mechanics between overground and treadmill running affect oxygen uptake is not known" (Biomechanics of Distance Running, 1990, Editor P.Cavanagh, Human Kinetics, p.276).
Obviously these facts are in favor of difference between these kinds of running. The more mechanical work is done, the more the energy costs: this is a simple equation. But still the "other differences in running mechanics… (are) not known".
If we do accept that mechanics is the science, where the force, work and energy are studied in their application to various objects, then in biomechanics, the main thing is how it all applies to a living object. So to consider the differences between treadmill and overground running, we need to answer the following questions. What is the difference in the use of forces involved in both kinds of running? How is gravity involved in both cases?
Running on the ground we have to release the force of gravity to start and continue the run. Running on the treadmill we have to wait for the belt movement, which also goes in the opposite direction from our body. This is already a big difference: what moves our body and what force is involved? Sure the ground reaction will be the same because the transmitter of gravity to the ground is the same, which is the body weight. But which force is working to change the support or to move the body weight from one leg to the other? In overground run it is gravity, on the treadmill it is the belt, moved by an electric engine.
The next thing to consider is the difference in muscle work in these two kinds of running.
On the treadmill, our main concern is to not release the upper body and keep the feet moving according to the moving belt. In the overground run we have to make sure that our feet catch the upper body moving (falling) forward, with no consideration to the ground, which is a quite different physiological and psychological task. So here the muscles are involved in two different logical sequences and hierarchical relationships in order to serve the main task: to catch the belt, in the first case, and to catch the body, in the second.
Consequently, all neuromuscular patterns are developed for these different goals: to serve the moving belt speed or the falling body velocity. It is the difference in operational systems. In the first case the main thing is the moving belt, and everything is lined up according to this main parameter. In the second case, the main parameter is the falling body, and everything is done to serve the purpose of its proper movement. An also, in the first case, we are controlling the feet movement according to the moving belt. In the second case, we are controlling the feet position according to the falling body.
So, though the forces are the same, their involvement is different. Coordination wise, serving the body falling is a much more sophisticated process in terms of time and space, than serving the belt moving with the specific speed and body position fixed in the same space. From the emotional perspective, running on the belt is a much more predictable and less scary activity, than a "free" falling body movement.
The above-mentioned creates a "slight" difference in the whole perception of running: one with a required attention to the body position in relation to the feet (overground), and the other with attention to the feet in relation to the belt (treadmill). So, we have two different biomechanical systems of movement, which are not yet supported by the science of running, because the research is not done yet.
At the present time our discussion is not fruitful at all, and we spend too much time and energy without benefiting anyone. We are still at a guessing stage and operate with a very limited knowledge about the subject of discussion. We build our theories on pure theoretical assumptions that it could be this way or that way, and no one has any real data. We can share our understanding of this problem with support from known data and experience, but I do not see any benefits when we are crossing the borderlines of sharing to arguing. Then we have to ask ourselves, what is the goal of our discussion?
Dr. Romanov
from http://www.posetech.com/training/archives/000188.html
|
|
2006/02/09, 01:47 PM
So dunngirl8, let us know if you do your 2.5 miles outside! I'm sure we're all curious to know how you make out:big_smile:
|
|
2006/02/09, 02:02 PM
Good post Menace...looks like he explains the difference but still isn't sure of what it equates to...which is pretty much where we got to as well. That's kind of what I was trying to get at with the propulsion statement.
Oh and wrestler...it makes a difference what gets our heart rate up to 120. If I ride a rollercoaster that'll get my heart rate up...but it's not exactly a workout. :big_smile:
dunngirl...keep us posted.
|
|
2006/02/09, 08:33 PM
Nicely put stump.
--------------
Seize the day!
|
|
2006/02/09, 09:00 PM
Wow, this post has taken off. Glad I bowed out :big_smile: ...I will be the first to admit, not a runner now, never was. I visualized it simply from building endurance standpoint. Interesting discussion.
--------------
Strength and Honor!
|
|
2006/02/10, 09:28 AM
It's a good topic...kind of sketchy and no real answers. Good for a discussion of views, ideas and opinions. Someday someone will hook someone up to a monitor and measure both forms of running and give us a final answer...until then it's just a civil debate. Which are always good to have...keeps the mind sharp...and mine needs all the help it can get these days. :big_smile:
|
|
2006/02/10, 07:07 PM
I can only tell you this - I could run more than 2 miles on a treadmill, 2 miles on the inside track at the gym, and outside sucked royally. I don't know if it was the propulsion aspect, the resistance of the air, what. But I just could never get into an 'easy' run outside. I just figured that I am not a natural runner.
--------------
Never, never, never, never give up.
- Winston Churchill
|
|
2006/02/10, 10:10 PM
You don't do cardio to work your stabilizer muscles in your legs, or to train the muscles. You weightlift to train muscles. Steady state cardio is for your lungs and your heart. 100bpm is the same inside as it is outside.
Yes, the biomechanics is different. That is why I would never train a RUNNER on a treadmill. But someone looking to build up their heart and lose some weight, it will not matter if the mechanics are different, the purpose is the same. The article menace posted does not disagree with me at all.
A rollercoster getting your heart rate up is a workout. Its a form of stimulation. The only difference is, your only on it for 5 minutes. Ride a roller coster for 45 minutes, and tell me its not a workout. I'll tell you what, if you're volunteering, give me a few years, I'll make it my thesis for my masters degree.
"Effects of Adrenal Gland Stimulation vs. Steady State Cardio"
I'm sure it will be the easiest 45 minutes of your life.
--------------
Iron and chalk.
Pain is only temporary, it is in your mind. If you can still walk, then you can still run.
|
|
2006/02/11, 03:18 PM
Hmmmm...
--------------
Seize the day!
|
