The comparison between walking and running was an interesting one for me. I admire the walkers that we see on our running route in the afternoons, many of them in their 70s and 80s, staying fit and enjoying themselves. If one of them says something like "I can't go as fast as you" as I run by, I will invariably say something self-deprecating and encouraging, like "That's a much more sensible pace, believe me!" or, if we pass them more than once, "I just can't seem to get ahead of you!" And I discovered Sunday when I took a long walk around our regular running route with Martha that I noticed much more around me, even had time to stop and talk to others who were out, or to more closely examine something seen along the road. But yesterday I was able to make a direct statistical comparison between two known four-mile loops:
RUNNING
Distance: 4.00
miles
Elapsed time:
1:10:12
Pace per mile:
17:33
Heart rate on climb:
106
|
WALKING
Distance: 4.00
miles
Elapsed time (12/30/13):
44:14
Pace per mile:
11:03.5
Heart rate: Unknown
|
I don't know what my heart rate has been while running because I have not yet succumbed to the temptation to wear a heart-rate-monitor when I run, but surely it has been more than 106. According to one chart I consulted, that put me in the "weight management" zone of 60%-70%. On a good day I am definitely iin the aerobic zone (70% - 80%) or the anaerobic threshold zone (80% - 90%).
That explains a lot about why I became a runner: I can simply cover distance more quickly, which when I worked a regular job and had only a small window in which to exercise was an important factor. It is also a good thing, according to much that I have read, to get that heart rate up from time to time into the higher zones.
As for the exhilaration upon reaching the summit on a clear clear day in late February, high cirrus clouds streaking the sky, and the solo songs of Spring birds high in the bare branches of those big oak trees along the way? Whiteside in the distance? The sweet, sweet air. Exactly the same.
No comments:
Post a Comment