Runners: Why are you too good for the sidewalk?

[Fingolfin269]

So because they race on the road you must train on the road?

Wow you completely skipped the majority of the post...

 

[Wyndru]

I always thought it was because you are not supposed to do anything but walk on a sidewalk (the same reason why bikes ride on the road also).

 

[Ayrahvon]

I always thought it was because you are not supposed to do anything but walk on a sidewalk (the same reason why bikes ride on the road also).

Other than small children, no one should ever ride their bike on a sidewalk. Bikes should be on the road going with traffic. If runners elect to run on a road they should run against traffic. I've typically avoided running in neighborhoods because of the risk of injury running on sidewalks that curve down for driveways. If I do run in those areas, I run on the road.

 

[AstroManLuca]

I always thought it was because you are not supposed to do anything but walk on a sidewalk (the same reason why bikes ride on the road also).

As with many aspects of the great neverending cars vs. bikes vs. runners debate, it depends on the area. Some sidewalks are huge and spacious and can easily accommodate runners and walkers. Some roads are too busy for anyone to safely run on them.

The hard part is when you have a road that's too dangerous to bike on, because the alternative of biking on the sidewalk is dangerous to pedestrians. I try to just avoid those areas, or if I must bike on the sidewalk, I do it very slowly and carefully and get off as soon as possible (or I just walk my bike).

There's another road near my house where you will sometimes get bikers biking on the road instead of on the bike trail, but that is actually safer because it's usually the really fast bikers doing that. If they were on the bike trail, they would present a danger to the slower bikers while also breaking the trail's speed limit. There are also sections where the walking/running path and the biking path become a shared path, so obviously it can get crowded and it's best for the really fast bikers to stay on the road.

 

[torpid]

Other than small children, no one should ever ride their bike on a sidewalk. Bikes should be on the road going with traffic. If runners elect to run on a road they should run against traffic. I've typically avoided running in neighborhoods because of the risk of injury running on sidewalks that curve down for driveways. If I do run in those areas, I run on the road.

Riding a bike on sidewalks is perfectly legal and reasonable in many/most places as long as the sidewalk doesn't run directly alongside entrances to houses/buildings.

 

[Murloc]

never seen anyone running on the road, but here the sidewalk is made from the same material of the road (stone if in the old city, otherwise asphalt) and if there's a driveway they just make the curb oblique to avoid destroying tires but the sidewalk remains unchanged.

Biking on sidewalks is banned because bicycles are vehicles and it can be dangerous for pedestrians. I understand that in some countries the road might be too dangerous though, but you better go slow then.

If you're running, you're still a pedestrian, so you should go against the traffic if you're on a road I guess.

 

[WelshBloke]

Its weird seeing people claim asphalt has more "give" than concrete for runners.

Really?

Go outside now and press as hard as you can on the road, give it a couple of punches for good measure. Report back with how much "give" it has.

People run on the road because its usually flatter, you don't get the sudden drops for peoples drives and the like. Some people run on the roads because they are apparently lacking in critical thinking skills however.

 

[Doppel]

Sidewalks are not as flat/smooth as the road. I refuse to believe asphalt is meaningfully softer--I know a lot of runners think it is. I think it's a myth and in their heads. The distance that even an elite runner's center of mass raises and falls with each foot strike is certainly hundreds of times more than the difference in distance of asphalt vs concrete strike; i.e. the asphalt is still so damn hard you can't notice. The softness of shoes and more significantly the "play" in all the joints makes it a meaningless softness.

I found earlier some link I couldn't really be bothered to read after I googled "concrete asphalt running myth".

 

[Train]

This guy does a pretty good job consolidating research done on the asphalt/concrete issue. It appears the consensus is yes, concrete is significantly harder, by enough to cause noticeable increase in injury. http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/144092.html

The hammer test described here can help show how the small difference in hardness makes a big difference in energy absorption: http://www.hillrunner.com/jim2/id184.html

 

[Matthiasa]

If one were to not wear shoes and not have any skin, muscle, and fat on their foot that might.. maybe matter.
Once shoes are tossed in, as well as you know having normal feet, it would 't matter.
When shoes and skin have 100x+ more give/ travel distance that extra fraction of a percent really doesn't matter.
a shoe displaces by a mm or two as does skin, a road or sidewalk by about nothing.

Now that doesn't go into the fact that sidewalks just suck in some areas and even walking on them you can hurt yourself.

 

[Leros]

I can run a few miles in the road without problems. I can't run a mile on a sidewalk without feeling some pains in my shins.

 

[Capt Caveman]

As someone who runs long distance, you might not notice the additional pounding on your body when running on concrete compared to asphalt or softer surfaces but when you're 10+ miles into your run, you can feel it.

Plus, I run on streets where it's wide enough for me to run and not impede other vehicles. Sidewalks suck. Uneven, tripping hazards and lots of people unaware of you.

 

[Matthiasa]

I don't run often, asthma that I developed in high school makes most strenuous activities less than enjoyable or safe for that mater, but I can definitly tell between grass and concrete or asphalt.

One I can run without shoes on, the other I would likely break every bone in my foot if done for more than the shortest of distances.

 

[silverpig]

This guy does a pretty good job consolidating research done on the asphalt/concrete issue. It appears the consensus is yes, concrete is significantly harder, by enough to cause noticeable increase in injury. http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/144092.html

The hammer test described here can help show how the small difference in hardness makes a big difference in energy absorption: http://www.hillrunner.com/jim2/id184.html

The article he references clearly states:

"INTRODUCTION: Although running surface stiffness has been associated with overuse injuries, all evidence to support this suggestion has been circumstantial."

"RESULTS: The rubber-modified asphalt was found to exhibit the greatest amount of mechanical impact absorption, and the conventional asphalt the least. The comparison of peak impact force values across surfaces for the group of subjects demonstrated no significant differences in magnitude of force. However, a significant reduction in loading rate of peak impact force was detected for the rubber-modified surface compared with conventional asphalt (P < 0.1). Although analysis of group data revealed no significant differences in kinematic variables when running on the different surfaces, a varied response to surface manipulation among runners was demonstrated"

And the other one he quotes says:

"The ground reaction forces at the foot and the shock transmitted through the body to the head when running on different surfaces has been presented. Although differences in the vertical force and acceleration were measured, they appear to be relatively small. It may be possible that the runner is subconsciously able to adjust the stiffness of his leg just prior to heel strike based upon his perception of the hardness of the surface. It is doubtful that differences of this small magnitude in vertical force would lead to a higher incidence of injury on a particular surface."

Gotta love that part about being able to sense that the ground is hard before you strike lol.

 

[KillerCharlie]

I like the softer feel of pavement than a concrete sidewalk, but I only run on the road if it's an empty neighborhood street. Any semi-busy road I take the sidewalk.

 

[QueBert]

Seriously? I can't imagine asphalt having any more give than concrete, unless you weigh 5000 lbs.

Makes a HUGE difference, when I jogged I couldn't go a mile on the sidewalk before my shins were killing me, on asphalt I never had any issues with discomfort. To this day I hate running on pavement unless I absolutely have to. There's a reason you'll never a marathon ran on pavement.

 

[cronos]

Runners run on the road and at the same time, bikers ride on the sidewalk

 

[SpatiallyAware]

My knees are bad so I can only run in busy intersections, on racecar tracks, and airport runways.

After all those are the softest surfaces. Everyone else can just f themselves and be patient, I need to get my jog on.

 

[tcsenter]

Plus, I run on streets where it's wide enough for me to run and not impede other vehicles.

You've got one of those "wide stances", eh?

 

[Vdubchaos]

I can pretty much always tell if a car is coming up behind me, I have these things called ears. Be it on foot or on a bike I would much rather be moving with traffic and do subtraction for total impact energy rather than addition on the chance I get hit.

It doesn't matter if you can tell or not.

WHen you hear it, do you look over or pull to the side to see if the car will hit you?

YOU HAVE TO ASSUME PEOPLE ARE STUPID AND WILL MAKE A MISTAKE.

Running on that side of the road = taking a risk with your life.

If Running worth that?

Personally I don't like putting my life in other people's control, but that's just me.

 

[JD50]

I can pretty much always tell if a car is coming up behind me, I have these things called ears. Be it on foot or on a bike I would much rather be moving with traffic and do subtraction for total impact energy rather than addition on the chance I get hit.

Really? You think that's gonna make a difference?

I hear cars too, but I'd much rather be facing them when running so I can SEE if they're paying attention.

 

[Vdubchaos]

Really? You think that's gonna make a difference?

I hear cars too, but I'd much rather be facing them when running so I can SEE if they're paying attention.

Smart

I've seen way too many people do WAY too much crazy shit to put my life in their hands.

When we ride bikes we stay on walk ways. If we HAVE to go on the street we go against the traffic (and yes, idiots seem to think I shouldn't be there.....fuck them).

 

[WelshBloke]

Smart

I've seen way too many people do WAY too much crazy shit to put my life in their hands.

When we ride bikes we stay on walk ways. If we HAVE to go on the street we go against the traffic (and yes, idiots seem to think I shouldn't be there.....fuck them).

Umm, if you're on a bike you shouldn't be on the pavement and if you're where you should be (on the road) you should be travelling with the traffic flow.

 

[rh71]

if you're complaining about obstructions, etc., drive yourself to a track at a school or something. Why would you want to run where you have to stop for cars and lights?

 

[ControlD]

if you're complaining about obstructions, etc., drive yourself to a track at a school or something. Why would you want to run where you have to stop for cars and lights?

You run where you can when you can. I'm sure we would all love to have access to nice soft running trails with nothing to worry about except the occasional slow runner in front of us but that just isn't reality. I try to avoid any traffic whenever I can but some days my only chance to run is to step outside my house and run on the road.

Most of the schools around here no longer allow the public to access their tracks (which sucks for running any kind of distance anyhow) since the last waves of school violence went through.