DFW running club mark 2!! ALL ARE WELCOME!!!

becky_rtw

Indeed - I would agree with Uk but in a way its been happening for a while..just lost my cool a bit there...anyway

Tilly here's a great post from Rich from the old thread on the whole idea:
The problem is that the body is not really capable of going from no running to regular running in one step. It has to be prepared and then gently cajoled into taking on a workload it doesnt really understand.

As you start to run, during the first 6-12 weeks there is a slow demineralisation of the bones in the lower legs ie they become weaker and more vulnerable.

By going straight into running the lower limbs are taking on too much of the overall workload and, therefore, the demineralisation is worsened causing various potential injuries including stress fractures.

Shin splints are always an indication that the work being done is too intense for the current state of the lower limbs. This is usually hard to understand because they are generally encountered when running is still at a very slow pace and over a short distance. It doesn't matter, shin splints will normally kick in between 1/2 mile - 1 mile into a run and are a sure sign that the body hasn't been prepared properly.

Many people accept that running involves being injured on a regular basis and have very hit and miss training routines, but it is not inevitable.

As has already been said, the first stage is to build 'core strength', principally in the buttocks and lower back. The best way of doing this is through walking, ideally walks of 4+ miles and with some hills involved if possible.

Professional marathon training programmes generally insist on a minimum of 6 weeks, and sometimes up to 12 weeks, of predominantly walking before even thinking about taking on a regular running schedule. This basically applies to anyone who hasn't run for at least 12 months or someone beginnning from scratch.

The good news, as Becky mentioned, is that this stage burns more fat per mile than running and therefore increases the power/weight ratio from 2 directions - stronger muscles and lower weight.

After about 4 weeks it is okay to start the odd session off as a run. If you would normally do a 6 mile walk, for instance, set off running and if you are comfortable to 3 miles and then start to feel a little strain, then stop and walk the remaining 3 miles. Do not restart - that is the way to create unnecessary muscle tear. Eventually, you will run the whole route. At this stage you will be ready to run every 3 days. Once you are fully recovered after 48 hours you can then bring that down to running every 2 days and so on.

It might sound like slow laborious work, but trust me this is the quickest way of making progress, getting fit and losing weight!:D

(All credit to RichOneday for this as I said )

becky_rtw

I really didnt mean to get cross at anyone by the way - but perhaps we do need a fast facts page since we're basically getting the same 5 questions over and over again...
They are in my eyes:
1. I want to run walk is this schedule okay?
2. How do I choose good shoes?
3. I have sore shins/stitch/chest etc am I okay to run still?
4. I run x distance in x time - how can I get faster?
5. I've never run before but want to do the London marathon when should I start training?? (okay so thats a little tongue in cheek but you get the idea)

Anyone want to write an answer to one of them and we can compile them into fast facts

becky_rtw

Ukevas wrote: »

The real becky will be along soon... and back to her chipper self...my guess is just lack of endorphins from not running for a few days....

Not running a few days , I've not been out since last weds and I'm not allowed to go out till next Monday at the earliest now _pale_:eek::eek::eek:

tilly2484

Thanks Becky, means alot. I'll try not and ask all the same questions! I think a fast facts would be a good idea. Anyway just lurking on the page inspires me. xx

becky_rtw

Normally we are very nice - honest

Running is good for you and makes you feel great, but I've got possible anaemia so am pretty grouhcy at the moment - no excuse though

But yeah walking is the way to go

And I'll work on getting the experts to do some of those answers

sammy115

Hey Becky, I thought you were going to bed.....

Can I put in very small letters that I started to run using the run/walk method.....although I use the term running very loosely - it was more of an elevated walk. I am not entirely sure I would have carried on running if I had had to walk completely at first or run right away. I am not saying that I am right and I am most definitely not an expert - it is just my experience........

sammy115

*sammy runs off a little bit scared now*

RichOneday_2

The reason why the run/walk/run subject keeps coming up is that it is so widely publicised.

It may be the best way in the world to get started, but a survey of any random sample of 1000 regular runners wouldn't find many who had started with such a regime.

That is because you never get to hear how many people start this way, find it too hard and give up. Or how many people start this way, develop repetitive injuries and give up. The few that do progress onwards have done so despite using run/walk/run and probably because they have progressed relatively quickly and ditched the idea quickly into the bargain.

You only have to experience the straining aches of the lower limbs when trying to restart to know that it cant be healthy. It is bad enough for runners on trained muscles but these programs are, by their very nature, targetted at beinners with untrained lower leg muscles and usually carrying excess weight. It is a horrible combination.

Far better to strengthen the muscles, lower the weight in preparation and then run slowly and comfortably when the body is better able to cope with continuous running.

But, and this is a big but, most people are impatient and the magazines know they wont get much of an audience to a running magazine if the first thing they say is go off and walk for 6-12 weeks. It is difficult to sell running gear to walkers at the end of the day and they have to keep their advertisers happy.

sammy115

RichOneday wrote: »

That is because you never get to hear how many people start this way, find it too hard and give up. Or how many people start this way, develop repetitive injuries and give up. The few that do progress onwards have done so despite using run/walk/run and probably because they have progressed relatively quickly and ditched the idea quickly into the bargain.

You only have to experience the straining aches of the lower limbs when trying to restart to know that it cant be healthy. It is bad enough for runners on trained muscles but these programs are, by their very nature, targetted at beinners with untrained lower leg muscles and usually carrying excess weight. It is a horrible combination.

Far better to strengthen the muscles, lower the weight in preparation and then run slowly and comfortably when the body is better able to cope with continuous running.

But, and this is a big but, most people are impatient and the magazines know they wont get much of an audience to a running magazine if the first thing they say is go off and walk for 6-12 weeks. It is difficult to sell running gear to walkers at the end of the day and they have to keep their advertisers happy.

I totally agree with everything you have said Rich but I am one of those people who would have been put off by the thought of either just running (too scared) or just walking (yes I am one of the impatient ones) - the run/walk method got me back into the world of running and I am grateful for that.

I am not trying to make a point or anything here or even disagree with you - in fact I am not really sure what I am trying to say just that it 'seemed' to be the only way for me.

sammy115

Maybe thats why I am still soooooo slow.......:rotfl:

I'll get me coat!