Hacker News Reader

Comment by mbenjaminsmith | Hacker News Reader

I've heard countless times that if you're going to start exercising and stay with it you should compete -- for most people that means running and running races on the weekends once in a while or even training for a marathon.

I've done this in the past and I always overtrain and race too early. I have a bad race and stop training shortly after that.

I've found a much more effective way: Between my wife and I whoever is in the gym less in any given week has to pay the other person on Friday -- around $50. There is still competition (neither of us want to admit to losing) but there is also a very tangible penalty.

The combination is an excellent motivator and neither of us have missed a single day since we started it. It's similar to having a partner (a partner got me through 3 years of weight training in college) except that you don't have to work out at the same time, which is much better for busy people.

View on HN

Competing is definitely not necessary to stick with exercising.

I haven't participated in a race since around '93 or '94, we're talking 2 races that I've done - both Bloomsday runs in Spokane with family.

My current normal week has me at the gym every day and twice on Wednesdays. I do strength training 2-3 times and I usually run over 110km. The only person I compete against is myself.

I hate going to the gym, and I hate working out. But I much prefer having a BMI of 23.4 than the 40+ I used to be at. It's not fun, but once you get used to it and consider it a necessity, you can stay with it.

Of course, I'm not suggesting that everyone work out as much as I do. --A rather innocuous visit to the doctor earlier this month ended up with a blood test that showed a severe iron deficiency. So now I'm taking 300mg of supplements a day for at least 2 months... And that much iron tends to have a bit of an effect on my digestive system, although the opposite of what the doctor warned me about.

I mostly compete with myself. I am trying to do better now than I did earlier.

It helps that progress in my main forms of exercise (indoor climbing, weight lifting) is easy to measure, and relatively straight forward to drive at my level.

I also dable in dancing, where I am still so awful, that progress is easy to gauge. And mixed martial arts, where the whole point of the sport is some form of competition, even though sparring doesn't see you go all out.

Why do people choose running over biking, with the damage that running can cause?

1) Running has an appealing simplicity: very little equipment is required (just a decent pair of shoes), you can do it anywhere (city/country, on/off road), etc. 2) Biking is not some magical risk-free activity, you have to take care whichever you choose.

I'm pretty sure his point was that running in and of itself (outside of external factors such as other people on the road, etc.) is very detrimental to your health- specifically your knees.

Obviously doing any physical exercise you should be safe about it (wear a helmet while biking, have a light and reflectors if you ride at night, etc., and of course be conscious of your surroundings), but running solely by itself can be detrimental to your health because of the force you put on your knees on impact running on paved surfaces.

"Barefoot" running is much easier on the knees. You land differently and thus avoid the sudden jolting stops.

Yes, I will agree that "barefoot" running is better on your knees than with standard running shoes- also running with proper form would be, but alas- almost no recreational runner will do either of these things, and it is especially hard to do so on typical running paths (such as, you know, roads).

Given the constraints of what we're given, biking is far better for your overall health than running.

You don't need to run barefoot. Just tilt your foot forward and land on the ball rather than the heel. You can stick with regular running shoes and do this.

I walked in to work this morning, during which time many runners passed me. None of the women--and most of them were women--were heel-strikers; from my past observations, few women are. And of the three men who passed close enough to see, all landed on the middle of the foot.

I assume that was his point. However it is not a given that running is "very detrimental to your health"; in fact that's a pretty bold claim to make without any evidence or indeed consideration of the health benefits. It's true that knee problems are a concern for some runners (and indeed participants in many other sports), and something frequent runners should be wary of.

In my neighborhood, it's much harder to bike a long enough distance for a good exercise. You can get a much better workout using a smaller "track" when running.

Running isn't super bad for you. You need medium impact to build bone density, which is a major protective factor in old age.

How many calories are burned biking-vs-jogging? I think biking (on flats) is extremely efficient, so I would imagine that and average person would burn more jogging than biking...For example, if I bike 7 miles, I don't feel it anywhere near as much as if I ran 7 miles...

For calorie burning short intensive work outs are better. For example, deadlifts or playing squash for 30minutes is comparable to multiple hours of jogging.

A better comparison is going to be if you bike 7 minutes vs running 7 minutes.

You have to bike twice as long to get the same benefit as jogging.

Around here, biking is too damn dangerous. Narrow, twisty roads.

If you run on the balls of your feet, rather than heel-strike, the impact is greatly reduced.

I'd rather ask:

Why do people prefer to run for hours instead of a more intensive workout in a minutes?

Looking at the typical runners [0], why would you desire a physique like that?

[0] http://diaryofakalechic.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/marathon...

Some people simply like running for the pleasure it gives them. I guess it's the same with weight lifters. At some point the physique is a side-effect of one's regulard and healthy practice.

Note that sprinters as well as endurance runners have to lift some weight at one moment or another. When I run my first half-marathon I was surprised that my arms were more sore than my legs.

You could sprint (or sprint up stairs).

Running has more bang for your buck, so to speak. Among other things, you burn more calories per minute, work more stabilizer muscles and strengthen your bones. Its easier to get the intensity up (speed and strength work, fat burning), and to keep the intensity low (endurance building).

Both of the sports will cause damage, as they are both straight line repetitive motion exercises. In either case you want to think of them as specific or specialized uses of your fitness, while creating proper base fitness like flexibility and muscular balance in the gym/yoga etc. would be your non-specific work.

Any time you go very specific you are going to find a weak link.

Personally, I'd rather risk my knees than risk becoming impotent from sitting on a bike seat all the time :P

Any exercise is going to carry some risk of injury, it's up to you to learn how to mitigate it.

> Any exercise is going to carry some risk of injury, it's up to you to learn how to mitigate it.

Not all risks are equal.

As a musician (string player) and programmer, my neck, back, and wrists are under constant stress, and I find biking tends to exacerbate problems with those joints. Also, I live in NYC. I can go run in the park, or I can ride my bike and get hit by a car. I know lots of people who ride their bikes in the city, and every one of them has been hit by a car, including me.

If you do it right, it won't cause much damage. Have you tried barefoot?

I've had the same experience with competition and I'd say a lot of other members of HN would too.

Competition is too much of a motivator for me and my competitive personality. As soon as a competitive element is introduced to exercise it completely takes the fun out of it.

I would give slightly different advice: sign up for races, but don't compete.

I like having a race booked because it gives me a reason to get out and run even when it's cold and rainy: I want to be ready.

On the other hand, I've stopped caring how I do relative to other people. I go run the race. Sometimes I just run it for fun. Other times I'm working to beat a previous time. But either way, I keep in mind that my main goal is fitness, not victory.

Between 1979 and 1987 I ran quite a few marathons, with the odd shorter races, and a few ultras scattered in. Since the fall of 1987, I've run exactly two races, a 5K each of the last two years. My fitness goes back and forth, but I've seldom failed to keep running on the weekends, and taking long walks.

My experience with over training was that it gave signals that could be ignored only willfully.

Competition can be a great motivator--the thought of an upcoming bike race has been enough to get me up early or out riding in the rain on the days when it didn't sound like such a good idea.

But if you aren't wired for competition, consider companionship. If you run, joining the right weekly running club can do wonders for your motivation.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com