Why can't runners cycle quickly

[puffinbilly]

I'm a cyclist and I can't run, let alone run quickly

There's no need to, when you can cycle - that's what god made legs for - none of this walking or running nonsense.

 

[Dogtrousers]

When I was a runner I was a dreadful slow plodder. But as a cyclist I'm quite different. I'm ... er ... a dreadful slow trundler.

 

[Joshua Plumtree]

First one - there is loads of analysis that shows that the force exerted through the pedals, even when riding quite hard, is about 200 Newtons (about 20kg). Of course runners experience no resistance but we're still talking about, when cycling, resistance levels which are very low

Second one - as above. How "strong" your legs are has nothing to do with how fast you cycle unless you're a track sprinter. It's all about aerobic capacity as the forces involved are small enough for everyone to exert (that's the 200 Newtons)

Third one - this makes me laugh. If that was really the case why do all professional cyclists maintain what most people would consider a fast cadence? It's because they have worked out that, to cycle as fast as possible for a long time, allowing your aerobic capacity to be the limiter (fast cadence, low forces) rather than leg strength (slow cadence, high forces) gives the best results

Not quite as simple as that though, is it.

Anyone can spin in a high cadence but that doesn't mean they'll be hot on the heels of Alex Dowsett because he'll be pushing a higher gear.

The reason he can do that is probably a little more complicated. Aerobic engine etc. or is there also some superior leg strength to be taken into account?

 

[Citius]

or is there also some superior leg strength to be taken into account?

Let's not spoil a good thread with mentions of 'leg strength' ....

 

[ColinJ]

What is this obsession with leg strength ...?

Can you stand up from a sitting position and does your pedalling effort lift you out of the saddle***? If the answers are 'yes' and 'no' then your legs are strong enough to lift you, but on the bike they don't need to!


*** I know that sprinters usually sprint standing up. We have already covered leg strength in sprinters.

 

[jonny jeez]

This is my second post today including a link to something I read, so sorry about this.

I recently found this article by a guy who does a podcast on ultra running, who has started doing a series of articles about cycling for runners. I'm a runner who's getting back into cycling, so it felt fitting. In the article, he explains why runners (especially women) aren't particularly fast cyclists. I'd be interested in your views?

http://iancorless.org/2015/08/06/cycling-for-runners-why-cant-runners-cycle-quickly/

Of the two best riders I know, one is a runner. I know plenty of very good riders who are also runners and actually think runners make excellent riders...something doesn't track here.

 

[hopless500]

I'm not a runner (I HATE running), but found the article interesting, and could probably tick the female lacking leg strength box. Perhaps I do reach for the shifter far too easily

Same here.

 

[Cathryn]

Same here.

Same here!

 

[GrumpyGregry]

There are a few world class duathletes and triathletes that may disagree with this too.

Who generally ride bikes with different frame geometries to "normal" bikes to take advantage of their runners musculature?

 

[Milkfloat]

Who generally ride bikes with different frame geometries to "normal" bikes to take advantage of their runners musculature?

I thought it was the opposite - a Triathlon bike has a steeper tube angle meaning a more forward seat position to preserve the hamstrings for the run. I could be wrong though, I have never done a triathlon, I like to take my time getting dressed.

 

[Joshua Plumtree]

I thought it was the opposite - a Triathlon bike has a steeper tube angle meaning a more forward seat position to preserve the hamstrings for the run. I could be wrong though, I have never done a triathlon, I like to take my time getting dressed.

Same here. Think I could be a world class triathlete, but I don't like showing my undergarments in public.

 

[Tin Pot]

This is my second post today including a link to something I read, so sorry about this.

I recently found this article by a guy who does a podcast on ultra running, who has started doing a series of articles about cycling for runners. I'm a runner who's getting back into cycling, so it felt fitting. In the article, he explains why runners (especially women) aren't particularly fast cyclists. I'd be interested in your views?

http://iancorless.org/2015/08/06/cycling-for-runners-why-cant-runners-cycle-quickly/

Pseudoscience.

It sounds like science, but isn't.

The opening premise is that the difference between cycling and running is determined by the VO2 Max test.

There is no basis given or supported for that.

The point about cadence and triathletes is completely missed - it's about efficiency; fuel, power, heart rate, the lot. A higher cadence in a lower gear is more efficient in certain situations.

The only good part is that it encourages training in higher gears, which I would agree makes hill climbing easier as your legs strengthen. But I won't race like that.

 

[Tin Pot]

I thought it was the opposite - a Triathlon bike has a steeper tube angle meaning a more forward seat position to preserve the hamstrings for the run. I could be wrong though, I have never done a triathlon, I like to take my time getting dressed.

You're right.

 

[raleighnut]

Same here. Think I could be a world class triathlete, but I don't like showing my undergarments in public.

Go Commando?

 

[GrumpyGregry]

You're right.

Surely the tri position, as well as being aero puts less emphasis on/rests the quads? Most (endurance) "fun" runners have relatively weak hamstrings.