How effective is running in place?
September 24, 2013 5:23 PM Subscribe
If you ran in place with sufficient vigor, could you achieve the same CARDIOVASCULAR results as you would on a treadmill? Why or why not?
Yes, in most cases, depending on how vigourously you would be hitting the treadmill.
You're going to get more work out of more large muscle groups on the treadmill (because you're using all the same "bounce me up and down" muscles, plus a new suite of "push me forward" muscles), but that just means that you don't have to actually move your limbs as fast to hit the same heart rate.
If you're targeting a heart rate that can be comfortably hit by running quickly in place (which you almost certainly are), then yes. There will at some point be a limit to how fast you can move your limbs while running in place and an attendant maximum heart rate (unless you add additional superfluous movements like, say, with a jump rope). By switching to a treadmill and engaging those additional muscle groups, you could, if you run fast enough, press past the the maximum heart rate you hit while running in place.
posted by 256 at 5:41 PM on September 24, 2013
You're going to get more work out of more large muscle groups on the treadmill (because you're using all the same "bounce me up and down" muscles, plus a new suite of "push me forward" muscles), but that just means that you don't have to actually move your limbs as fast to hit the same heart rate.
If you're targeting a heart rate that can be comfortably hit by running quickly in place (which you almost certainly are), then yes. There will at some point be a limit to how fast you can move your limbs while running in place and an attendant maximum heart rate (unless you add additional superfluous movements like, say, with a jump rope). By switching to a treadmill and engaging those additional muscle groups, you could, if you run fast enough, press past the the maximum heart rate you hit while running in place.
posted by 256 at 5:41 PM on September 24, 2013
In theory yes, but i really doubt you could run in place with "sufficient vigor" for any reasonable length of time.
posted by pete_22 at 6:30 PM on September 24, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by pete_22 at 6:30 PM on September 24, 2013 [1 favorite]
No. You might be able to attain the same heart rate and get much of the same cardiac training response, but the process of building and enhancing your capillary supply to the various muscles (known as capillarisation) involved in running would almost certainly be reduced. Even if you are just thinking of your aerobic system and not the entire circulatory system, it will be challenging to enlist the same oxygen demands from your cardiovascular system with the significantly lightened muscle loads.
posted by Lame_username at 8:10 PM on September 24, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Lame_username at 8:10 PM on September 24, 2013 [1 favorite]
A woman named Leslie Sansone has a whole line of workout dvds based basically on this idea, walking and sometimes running in place or in a very small area. But it's very hard to reach the intensity of running, it seems to be more targeted to get the benefits of a fast walking pace at best. Denise Austin did a video like it too, and there are a few others as well. Lots on Netflix if you have it and are curious.
posted by lemniskate at 10:01 PM on September 24, 2013
posted by lemniskate at 10:01 PM on September 24, 2013
When I first got my heart rate monitor I played around with different movements to see what would ramp up my heart. Two things elevated my heart rate while standing in place: lunges, and marching in place, high knees and all. FWIW.
posted by AnOrigamiLife at 3:18 AM on September 25, 2013
posted by AnOrigamiLife at 3:18 AM on September 25, 2013
If you doubt the cardiovascular significance of the moving belt on a treadmill, try cranking up the slope. The difference in exertion is dramatic. I do not believe you could replicate the exertion of running uphill on a treadmill while running in place.
Since you're not actually gaining elevation on a ramped treadmill, you may be wondering about the physiological basis for the very large difference in exertion. My non-expert belief is that when you run in place, a lot of energy is stored in your tendons and then returned to you on the rebound. But when you're on a treadmill, you don't have a fixed surface to push off. So instead of storing energy by stretching your tendons, it is sapped by the smooth movement of the belt. This is the same reason that running on loose dry sand is much more tiring than running on asphalt.
posted by ryanrs at 3:38 AM on September 25, 2013
Since you're not actually gaining elevation on a ramped treadmill, you may be wondering about the physiological basis for the very large difference in exertion. My non-expert belief is that when you run in place, a lot of energy is stored in your tendons and then returned to you on the rebound. But when you're on a treadmill, you don't have a fixed surface to push off. So instead of storing energy by stretching your tendons, it is sapped by the smooth movement of the belt. This is the same reason that running on loose dry sand is much more tiring than running on asphalt.
posted by ryanrs at 3:38 AM on September 25, 2013
Info on running in place (a protocol called 100-ups) is mentioned in a NYTimes article on barefoot running.
posted by entropone at 6:52 AM on September 25, 2013
posted by entropone at 6:52 AM on September 25, 2013
« Older Arabic language music for a wedding | New friend always invites me on group outings.... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by Scientist at 5:28 PM on September 24, 2013 [1 favorite]