running on roads / pavement?

Last year in April I took up running and was doing circa 20 miles a week. I then did a couple of half marathons in September (on consecutive weeks actually) and was thinking of doing the Marathon because I felt really fit but about a week after the second half mar I got what I think was ITB and had to lay off the running pretty much until the start of the new year.
I was doing all my running on footpaths / roads. From all the experience of you seasoned runners out there - should I really be trying to vary my running surfaces (which is a pain as would involve lots of driving to do a run) or was it just that I upped the running too soon and did two races (1h40 pace) too soon after one another?

Condo131

A lot depends on your biomechanics. Some (like myself) can take a lot of abuse. Others need to watch surfaces, terrain and mileage under a microscope, so there's no quick answer.

However....
If at all possible, avoid or minimise concrete!
Especially avoid up-and-down surfaces (footpaths are particularly liable to this - gateways etc)
Avoid roads/surfaces where the camber make you feel that you are running along the side of a mountain, with one foot higher than the other)

Run on grass a fair bit - if you look hard enough, you'll find parks/playing pitches/forest trails/whatever-be imaginative! - somewhere near you.

do footpaths on roads (Dublin) count as concrete - I'm presuming yes?!
I'm aware of the camber issue and the dangers of doing too running involving hills (up and down).

Condo131

LostInDaHack wrote: »

do footpaths on roads (Dublin) count as concrete

No idea, but concrete is concrete, whether road/footpath/whatever.

LostInDaHack wrote: »

I'm aware of the camber issue and the dangers of doing too running involving hills (up and down).

Hills aren't too bad. The uphills will strengthen you, but you need to be watching your posture doing them - head up, looking ahead, good knee lift etc (having said that I probably look a right turkey when going uphill! :eek::o)

Downhill is a thing to watch though. going too fast/overstriding/leaning back/slamming the ground with your feet etc. You are more likely to get injured from downhill running than uphill, in my experience.

robinph

LostInDaHack wrote: »

do footpaths on roads (Dublin) count as concrete - I'm presuming yes?!

The footpaths round my routes are half concrete and half tarmac a lot of the time, with it supposedly being bikes on the tarmac section. I stick to the tarmac wherever possible.

macinalli

Have you done anything about the injury you had the 1st time? I'm no expert but from what I understand of ITB, if you do the same running again it will probably flare up again. There's lots of info available on Boards about ITB so worth doing a search on stretches etc to help prevent it.

I read up about ITB a lot and do one or two stretches before I run. Just hoping that it doesn't come back. I've been back running over the last 5 weeks and no return so for thankfully.

petermijackson

I always run on the road instead of footpaths, much easier on body. I have it somewhere in my head that there's a bit give on the tarmac where concrete is solid...so with that in mind I avoid footpaths and I'm the idiot running in the bike/bus lanes or running against the traffic :-)

Even when running through a park I will stay on the (tarmac) paths instead of the grass as I find that affects my rythm. Sorry op I'm not really any help with your injury...but there's my thoughts

Brianderunner

Condo131 wrote: »

concrete is concrete, whether road/footpath/whatever.

Not quite true, footpaths are worse for you than roads as they are made of concrete. Most of the roads in ireland are made with a layer of bitumenous material which is designed to be flexible under heavy traffic loads. not much of a difference between the 2 though to be honest.

robinph

Brianderunner wrote: »

... not much of a difference between the 2 though to be honest.

Well, one of them is concrete and the other one is not.

Concrete is about as bad as it gets for surfaces to run on though, tarmac is officially a liquid I think but it is noticeably softer to run on than concrete. Well I can notice the difference anyway.

petermijackson

Well I can notice the difference anyway

I have to agree, I also notice the difference between concrete and tarmac - on the rear occasions when I do run on concrete it feels like I'm really doing damage

Condo131

Brianderunner wrote: »

not much of a difference between the 2 though to be honest.

If you're only doing short distances on any one piece of concrete, you may not notice much difference, but over longer distances there is a significant effect.

Poisson's ratio (for the layman, an engineering measure of deformation of materials) for common running surfaces are as follows (the nearer to 0, the worse for running on):
Concrete: 0.1 to 0.2
Stone: 0.2 to 0.3 (However I find those cut stone footpaths in Spain & Portugal are murder to run on)
Undrained saturated clay: 0.5
Stiff sandy silt clays 0.2 to 0.4
medium to loose sands 0.4
Dense sands 0.2 to 0.45

TARMAC: 0.35

So.......For most of us anyway, tarmac would be the surface of choice.
Clearly grass is better as the above clay and sand figures testify - and grass will improve the effect even more - but, I find, you can only do so much on grass, e.g. 20 miles around a relatively few fields is something that gets a little bit boring.

Concrete is a big loser - avoid!!

Highway_To_Hell

All my running is done on paths and mostly Tarmac, but last year I added running Dunlaoighaire pier to my route and within a week I felt it in my leg joints. Once I stopped running the pier the problem went.

This has turned into an interesting discussion complete with engineering input...
Looks like I'd be better off trying to run on the cycle paths (sort of paved tarmac type material I guess - even though in some cases this has been laid over concrete) wherever possible.
Not sure about running on the actual road surface around Dublin - you would be horned out of it and worse...
Personally I don't like running on grass - there is very little feedback and it's too spongy and is actually quite tiring.

Hard dirt-tracks might be ok though - any good ones around Dublin?

Krusty_Clown

Highway_To_Hell wrote: »

All my running is done on paths and mostly Tarmac, but last year I added running Dunlaoighaire pier to my route and within a week I felt it in my leg joints. Once I stopped running the pier the problem went.

Agreed. The pier is very very tough/solid ground particularly as it's a polished surface. I find concrete easier to run on than the East Pier. Why not run on the other pier though? The west pier isn't properly surfaced, so is a mixture of gravel, grass and clay and is a lot more accommodating. The gravel can be a little annoying, but not nearly as harmful as the surface on the other one. It's nice being able to run out over the sea, and enjoy the sea views, as long as the wind isn't too harsh.

cfitz

LostInDaHack wrote: »

Last year in April I took up running and was doing circa 20 miles a week. I then did a couple of half marathons in September (on consecutive weeks actually) and was thinking of doing the Marathon because I felt really fit but about a week after the second half mar I got what I think was ITB and had to lay off the running pretty much until the start of the new year.
I was doing all my running on footpaths / roads. From all the experience of you seasoned runners out there - should I really be trying to vary my running surfaces (which is a pain as would involve lots of driving to do a run) or was it just that I upped the running too soon and did two races (1h40 pace) too soon after one another?

The surface discussion is an interesting one. But regardless of what surface you had been training on, to do two half-marathons in consecutive weeks off of 20 miles per week training is pretty ridiculous. To do one half-marathon off of that training is a bit mad - and then to do it again a week later...

When I was on 60 miles per week training for 10k my coach used to tell me to try put 4 weeks between 10k races.

Yes I do realise that that was foolhardy at best doing a second one so quickly and was what probably the main reason in getting that injury. In fact I did push it a bit towards the end of the second one and I'd say that that's what did it. I had been running 20-25 miles a week for 4 to 5 months before that though and had worked up to 10 miles before the race. Also I was only running at 1h40 pace which is not exactly a high standard and that tough on the body whereas you were probably doing competitive 10ks.

Highway_To_Hell

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

Agreed. The pier is very very tough/solid ground particularly as it's a polished surface. I find concrete easier to run on than the East Pier. Why not run on the other pier though? The west pier isn't properly surfaced, so is a mixture of gravel, grass and clay and is a lot more accommodating. The gravel can be a little annoying, but not nearly as harmful as the surface on the other one. It's nice being able to run out over the sea, and enjoy the sea views, as long as the wind isn't too harsh.

Occasionally I add that Pier onto my run, its nice but I find the surface a bit uneven and seems to be more prone to dog sh!t. I currently have a peroneal tendon problem and I am only back after 30 days of no running and I am been extra careful about the surface I run on so I will keep to the paths/road for the moment.

Thanks

Krusty_Clown

Highway_To_Hell wrote: »

Occasionally I add that Pier onto my run, its nice but I find the surface a bit uneven and seems to be more prone to dog sh!t. I currently have a peroneal tendon problem and I am only back after 30 days of no running and I am been extra careful about the surface I run on so I will keep to the paths/road for the moment.
Thanks

It'a real shame that there isn't a tar-macadam cycle / running track around Dublin bay (Howth to DunL / Bray). I know there were plans to put one in place, but haven't heard anything since. Low cost, but massive gain for the councils and corporations involved.