Biking

[Irish Teets]

from a fitness standpoint, how good is biking for you? Not as good as running?

Im thinking about going biking a regular basis to just add another thing to do to keep me active. Thanks

 

[Henry Swanson]

It's not that one is better than the other, they're just two different types of training. Ideally you should try doing both.

I like biking though.

 

[jadizm]

Biking is just as good as running. Biking is a bit funner though.

 

[grrthetree]

Biking is less impact and in some cases less of a cardio workout, but if you really work the bike it'll be the same if not better. But to be very good you should aim for doing both, then vary how you run.

 

[Ian Coe]

Biking is less impact and in some cases less of a cardio workout, but if you really work the bike it'll be the same if not better. But to be very good you should aim for doing both, then vary how you run.

better....then running......get out



I will plus one your doing both comment though

 

[grrthetree]

Answer me this...
A road or trail biker hauling ass for the same time a runner is running a 9-10 minute mile, I'd say the biking is harder on the cardiovascular system.

 

[UWCyclist]

First post for me on here, so here goes.


As far as saying that biking is a bigger strain on the cardiovascular system, it purely depends on the person. I, for example, can go for a 80-110mile bike ride and my max HR will be !75-180bpm. My roommate, a cross country runner and track runner, can go run for 13-15 miles and his max HR will be 175-180bpm. We swapped roles, and his HR was well over 200 near mile 10 of the bike, and I was only 6 miles into the run when my HR was well over 200. If your body is used to one type of cardio, it won't strain the body as much.

If you're not a runner, but haven't biked in a long time, biking will hurt more, because of thousands of factors, and vice versa.

In a perfect world, everyone would do both. I will say that personally, running kicks my cardio's butt everytime I go for a 5k run, but like I said before, it differs for everyone.

You can't compare a cyclist biking for the same amount of time a runner runs. It's apples and oranges. Remember, when you are on a bike, you have tons of mechanical advantage on your side that you don't have when running. Throwing the different gear ratios in there makes the bike even easier. What do most people do when biking up a steep hill? Shift to an easier gear, but you can't "shift" to an easier gear when running. A good rule of thumb is take your biking mileage and divide it by 5.5 to get an equivalent running distance.

Cliffsnotes: Both work your cardio system, and both depend on what you and your body is used to.

 

[big_john127]

Great post UWCyclist.

The longest bike ride I've been on was 150mi over three days including about 10 passes or so with the highest pass beind Independence Pass in Co. at 12,00 ft.

The longest run I've been on is 2 mi. over twenty minutes.

Both is good, but if you want to pick one to kick your ass I'd say running.

 

[FatTire]

im noticing a trend here. seems the fit set at sherdogg are enlightened and see that both is almost always a better option that one or the other.

excellent post CW.

for my part, i love mountain biking, and run only because its sometimes necesary for fitness.

 

[Heatmiser]

Running and Cycling are both great and can be equally strenuous. The effort you put out, whether on a bike or in your running shoes is completely relative. That is to say, you can ride hard or easy, or run hard or easy, but maximum effort for either activity will tax your heart at approximately the same level. Remember that cardio encompasses much more than just your heart though. Everything from your central nervous system and neural pathways, to the mitochondria in the cells of the muscles performing the exercise are involved. This is why, as one poster stated, cardio is very sport specific. If you run, you'll be a good runner. Your cycling ability will benefit from the spillover, but you'll never reach maximum cycling potential by running. The same applies to MMA, and therein lies the rub. Since you never know what muscles willl be taxed the most in an MMA fight, you need to have a broad spectrum cardio routine in order to cover as many bases as possible.

 

[UWCyclist]

You're definitely right on that the fit and enlightened crowd know to do both.

Look at it this way: if you're training for a fight and you get your ass kicked by biking....I'd continue to bike so your cardio develops, or vice versa. (obviously, time before fight and yadda yadda yadda factors in, but work with me here)

Maybe that's not the best way to word that, but what I'm trying to say is if you're trying to develop a better cardio fitness standpoint, do what makes you work for it.

 

[armyofnicks]

You want a bike workout? Ride a fixed gear.

 

[PWR1982]

If I understand this correctly than its good to use both, but for example would a good cyclist be same/less/more gassed than a good runner when in a mma fight ?

By good I mean on the same level. I ask this just to know whether a biker can be same good conditioned for a fight as someone who only runs - not that I would only do one of the two, but just out of curiousity, to know which is slightly more important.

 

[UWCyclist]

That's a tough one to answer. It's been a long time since I've fought (herniated disc due to trials biking), so I'll just give my personal experiences.

My background in cycling is BMX racing. A lot of explosive power (basically motocross on a regular bike, around 1300' in 30ish seconds.) I've raced that for 11 years. I've raced road races and criteriums, and mountain bike races. Explosive power is great for MMA, but combine that with endurance from long road rides, it's a great combination.

At my gym, there was a track and XC runner. He specialised in the 400m event, right on that threshold between endurance and explosive power, and would run around 40miles a week.

He kicked my ass in conditioning all the time. It was hard to go 3 full rounds with him, because he would never get tired.

Bottom line, it purely comes down to the person. I'm sure a cyclist that put in 500 miles a week versus someone who ran 30 miles a week would do better. There's just way too many factors to give a definite answer.

What would I rather do for MMA? A lot of sprints followed up by a couple mile run.

What would I rather do for fun? 110 mile bike ride followed up by a nice local brew.

 

[endubrules**]

Running is tough on your knees. Biking is tough on your prostate. I think that mountain biking is way more fun than running, and can be a better work out because you will go longer and probably push yourself harder. Also, for a street bike, I ride a fixed gear bike, which is a great work out. Fixed gears don't let you coast. Definitely a better work out. Personal preference as to which is more fun (freewheel vs. fixed gear)