Skip navigation
Community: Exchange advice in the forums and read running commentary Resources: Personal running log, calculators, links and other tools for runners News: Running news from around the world Training: Articles and advice about fitness, race training and injury prevention Races/Results: Find upcoming races and past results Home: The Cool Running homepage
Cool Running homepage  Search Cool Running Community

2922 Views 45 Replies Latest reply: Mar 3, 2010 4:51 PM by murray64 Go to original post 1 2 3 4 Previous Next
  • R Reyna Rookie 1 posts since
    Sep 28, 2009
    Currently Being Moderated
    30. Feb 21, 2010 6:06 PM (in response to murray64)
    Re: What speed is considered running?

    If you haven't heard of this guy yet please check out his site...http://www.johnbingham.com/

    I just completed my first 1/2 marathon and came in in just under 3 hours.  Be proud of yourself and no matter what have FUN!

    Peace

  • clymb420 Rookie 1 posts since
    Feb 21, 2010
    Currently Being Moderated
    31. Feb 21, 2010 7:41 PM (in response to hewittja)
    Re: What speed is considered running?

    Yeah, but just because you drive a car on the highway doesn't mean your racing, either.  I think a lot of the responses on here have been from the little league parents' crowd where everyone gets a trophy for participating.  By this overly-nice interpretation, there are some competitive walkers out there who could finish before some "runners" who's feet leave the ground.  There is a difference between walking, jogging, running and sprinting and the faster you get the more personalized the differences.  I appreciate the few on here who actually answered the question originally asked, such as the person who mentioned what their Garmin considers running.  Like the Garmin eludes to, I'd say the U.S. Military's old 8 minute mile standard (prior to basic) would be a fair boundary for everybody between jogging and running.  From what the 2-mile "run" minimum says for me at my age, I'd have to finish in 17:42 to still be considered a "runner".

     

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Army_Physical_Fitness_Test

  • dwm082 Community Moderator 1,063 posts since
    Dec 14, 2007
    Currently Being Moderated
    32. Feb 21, 2010 8:00 PM (in response to clymb420)
    Re: What speed is considered running?

    Racing would be a subset of driving, just as sprinting would be a subset of running. As noted several times, running is defined more by mechanics than speed (i.e., both feet off the ground simultaneously at some point during the stride). This points out that the original question was perhaps framed incorrectly; there's no specific pace that needs to be achieved to be running.

     

    Don





    2012 Race Schedule

    Providence Marathon (4:48:55)

    Buffalo Half-Marathon (2:03:16)

    Chicago Marathon (October 7)

  • Stevemustangred Legend 681 posts since
    Oct 10, 2007
    Currently Being Moderated
    33. Feb 21, 2010 8:11 PM (in response to murray64)
    Re: What speed is considered running?

    This discussion would be better after a few beers.  That's why I am answering now.

     

    My 2 cents.  What is not walking must be running.  Race walkers can be DQ'd if both feet leave the ground.  Running occurs when both feet are off the ground.

     

    Some race walkers beat me at the marathon even when I think I am running.

     

    A few years ago I saw a video of myself "running" during the last quarter mile of a marathon.  I looked like I was barely moving.  But when I was running toward the finish I felt like I was flying.  It was also one of my faster marathons.  I get a lot slower in the final miles.





    Lies Spectators tell Marathoners:   1) Last Hill!    2) Almost there!  3) You look great!

  • ERTW Rookie 3 posts since
    Feb 21, 2010
    Currently Being Moderated
    34. Feb 21, 2010 10:04 PM (in response to Marykb)
    Re: What speed is considered running?

    Marykb wrote:

     

    I would beg to differ on one point of what you said.  According to the dictionary, running is defined as "moving at a speed greater than walking...." (and also where both feet leave the ground.)  So I would still maintain that a 20 minute mile isn't really running by the first part of the definition.  A 20 minute mile - or 3 mph - is a normal, every day walking pace.  To "run" at the same pace you walk doesn't fit the definition.  But supposing we discarded the first part of the equation and only went with the gait definition.  In that case I would honestly like to see someone running, both feet off the ground, at 3 mph.  Send me a You Tube of someone doing that (an able bodied adult) and then I'll believe it!

     

    As Apolytes notes, the 20min/mile number was simply hyperbole to make a point   As for the dictionary definition, I'd argue that it doesn't necessarily negate the point.  Generally speaking, as you accelerate your body will naturally switch from a walking gait to a running gait once you hit a certain threshold.  You can consciously override that instinct, but using the latter gait cycle at a pace slower than that threshold is almost always going to be at a minimal effort level for the individual and would likely fall into the jogging side of the balance.  Where that threshold happens to be depends greatly on the individual, and I don't really see how you could draw an objective line anywhere.

     

    Naturally, if you took that phrase to mean moving at a speed greater than the average walking pace then things may be different.  The problem with that strict interpretation, however, is what do you call locomotion that uses the running gait cycle but that falls below that average walking pace?  By this particular definition it's not running, and as jogging is defined as a subtype of running ('running at a leisurely pace') it doesn't strictly fit into that box either.  It's also not walking, as that explicitly requires one foot to be on the ground at all times.

     

     

    The problem with dictionary definitions is that they need to distill complex ideas into a handful of words, so they are often simplistic and overly general.  In most cases, people will run faster than they walk so in the vast majority of scenarios this definition makes sense.  The problem is that there are edge cases (eg racewalkers) that can throw a wrench into the works. Running is more than simply both feet leaving the ground at a given time (hopping would meet that basic criteria), but is a specific sequence of complex movements that would be difficult to describe without going into heavy technical detail.  If dictionaries did that for every word in the English language, you'd need a forklift to move them around   As such, they use simplified definitions and leave the detailed ones to technical literature specific to the disciplines that need that additional detail.

  • Marykb Legend 1,347 posts since
    Jan 16, 2008
    Currently Being Moderated
    35. Feb 22, 2010 5:08 AM (in response to ERTW)
    Re: What speed is considered running?

    ERTW wrote:

     

    As Apolytes notes, the 20min/mile number was simply hyperbole to make a point


    No, I don't think that is hyperbole at all.  As I said in my last post, I was received some angry responses from a "runner" on another thread when I said you can't run a 20 minute mile. She said she actually runs a 21 minute mile.

     

    The definition of running:  to go by moving the legs rapidly, faster than in walking, and (in a two-legged animal) in such a way that for an instant both feet are off the ground would rule out "running" at 3 mph (walking pace) AND it would rule out race walking (both feet on the ground.)   I don't think that is ambiguous at all!  As for your point about what would you call a pace that uses a running gait, but is slower than walking - well that is where I wanted to see a You Tube of such a feat.  I don't see how it is even possible to move forward, with both feet leaving the ground, without going at least somewhat faster than a walking pace.  But if I see it, I'll believe it!

     

    At the end of the day, though, it really doesn't matter what the definition of running is.  Someone who is happy saying they "run" a 20 minute mile (and it is not an exaggeration, there are folks who claim to do this!) can call it whatever they want.  And meanwhile I can say I look like Catherine Zeta Jones and I won't let anyone tell me different! 





  • JimFive Expert 39 posts since
    Apr 8, 2008
    Currently Being Moderated
    36. Feb 22, 2010 5:56 AM (in response to Marykb)
    Re: What speed is considered running?

    Average walking pace doesn't matter, even for those definitions.  The individual's pace is what matters.

     

    Apart from that I think we're getting into ambiguous territory because Running means different things in different contexts.

     

    In physionomy running is a bipedal gait using alternating legs in which both feet are off the ground at the same time at one point in each cycle.  (For the person who doesn't think it is possible to do that slowly, you need to get out more.)

     

    The "dictionary definition"(*) that says "faster than walking" is absurdly ambiguous but also wrong.  When I started running again after a long hiatus, my running was SLOWER than my walking.  My mechanics were there, but my fitness wasn't.

     

    Within the context of the amateur racing community, running means different things to different people.  People who have always been fairly fast and fit tend to have a mental limit on what pace they consider running.  Those who have had to work for every 6 second pace increase from 15 min/mile tend to have a much more relaxed idea of what running is.

     

    As for the running/jogging/sprinting distinction, sprinting is easy, above the anaerobic threshold.  Jogging is running, but is (by definition) what joggers do.  So, what separates a Jogger from a Runner?  Attitude.  A jogger is a fitness runner who is not interested in improving their pace.  Joggers tend to run the same route at the same pace every workout day.  You don't have to enter races to be a Runner, but the transition from Jogger to Runner tends to be when the jogger enters a race (and therefore begins to care about their pace)

     

    (*)A note on dictionary definitions.  Dictionaries conflate different aspects of a word in order to generate the broadest definitions.  Their goal is to cover all of the possible contextual uses of a word in a small space.  So a definition of running that says "moving at faster than normal pace" is not necessarily talking about the physical act of running but is also trying to include such expressions as "running late" and "running around" etc.  Also, general dictionaries tend to report on how words are used colloquially not technically--technical definitions change much less frequently.

    --

    JimFive

  • ERTW Rookie 3 posts since
    Feb 21, 2010
    Currently Being Moderated
    37. Feb 22, 2010 7:49 AM (in response to Marykb)
    Re: What speed is considered running?

    Marykb wrote:

     

    No, I don't think that is hyperbole at all.  As I said in my last post, I was received some angry responses from a "runner" on another thread when I said you can't run a 20 minute mile. She said she actually runs a 21 minute mile.

    Sorry, I didn't mean to say that it was impossible - simply that I used that number to make the point that IMHO pace isn't really relevant to the argument.  To me, whether that is running or not is simply a question of how that person goes about maintaining that pace - if they follow through the same leg movements as any of us, just with a slower turnover and shorter stride length then I have no problem calling that running.  With that said, I have trouble forcing myself to stay at a running gait at any pace below a 6min/km (~9.7min/mi), so I can't really imagine doing it such a slow pace.  That doesn't mean that I think it's impossible, just that it requires a very different physiology than I happen to have

     

    Either way, I think that JimFive's post above covers my feelings a lot more eloquently than I did, so I'll defer to it for my arguement.  The only thing that I might argue with his post is that the distinction between jogging and running isn't so much down to the attitude of the person as a whole, but more down to their attitude at a specific point in time.  That is, IMHO a runner can still go out for a jog and a jogger can still go out for a run.  For instance, I'd clearly fall into the runner camp by that definition (a 3:28 marathoner working towards a 3:10 BQ), however while most of the time I strictly follow a detailed training plan to try and improve my speed and endurance, I still periodically go out for a light jog every once and a while to just enjoy things without worrying about pace or training effects.

     

    At the end of the day, though, it really doesn't matter what the definition of running is.  Someone who is happy saying they "run" a 20 minute mile (and it is not an exaggeration, there are folks who claim to do this!) can call it whatever they want.

    On this we can definately agree.  Languages are inherently fluid entities by their very nature, and words are defined by how people choose to use them.  It's good to discuss these sorts of things, but it's sometimes easy to get hung up on semantics rather than focusing on the greater points

  • Apolytes Rookie 5 posts since
    Feb 20, 2010
    Currently Being Moderated
    38. Feb 22, 2010 8:34 AM (in response to clymb420)
    Re: What speed is considered running?

    clymb420 wrote:

     

    Like the Garmin eludes to, I'd say the U.S. Military's old 8 minute mile standard (prior to basic) would be a fair boundary for everybody between jogging and running.  From what the 2-mile "run" minimum says for me at my age, I'd have to finish in 17:42 to still be considered a "runner".

     

     

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Army_Physical_Fitness_Test


    So what happens if you run an 8:02, are you not a running? No sorry have to hit 8:00 you were clearly jogging at an 8:02 pace

     

    Arbitrary boundaries are just that...arbitrary.

     

    If i were to use delimiters for 'Jogging' vs 'Running', although jogging is by definition running...however for arguments sake, then I would take from the definition of sprinting and use an effort based measurement. In which case both sprinting, and jogging would be used to describe different degrees of running on an individual basis. Therefore general use time requirements would still not be possible.

  • Marykb Legend 1,347 posts since
    Jan 16, 2008
    Currently Being Moderated
    39. Feb 22, 2010 8:46 AM (in response to ERTW)
    Re: What speed is considered running?
    That is, IMHO a runner can still go out for a jog and a jogger can still go out for a run.

     

    I totally agree with that.  For me the difference between running and jogging is my stance.  If I am leaning into it, pumping my arms, and not able to carry on a conversation, I am running.  If I am in a relaxed posture with my arms swinging slightly but not pumping, and can talk in short sentences, I am jogging.  Ten years ago the pace I would have been jogging is a running pace to me now.

     

    But still, I will risk being unpopular to admit that I don't consider someone doing that slow-mo, exaggerated "pseudo running" thing as really running. (If you're honest, you know exactly what I'm talking about.)  And you can all jump down my throat if you want, but that is just reality.  If I ever get too old, injured or infirm to actually run, then I will WALK and be proud of it but I'll never do that fake run thing!





  • JessicaBridie Rookie 4 posts since
    Sep 7, 2009
    Currently Being Moderated
    40. Feb 22, 2010 9:49 AM (in response to murray64)
    Re: What speed is considered running?

    It definitely depends on the runner. For many people 12-13 minute miles is "running," because that is what their body can physically handle. On the other hand, some people cannot physically run that slow. In my case (I'm trying to BQ so I'm a slightly more competitive runner than many of you), I phyisically cannot start running (having both feet off the ground) until I hit about 5.5 mph, or about a 10:50 pace. I normally walk at an 11-13 minute pace. I consider anything over a 9:30 pace a jog, and anything under to be a run. But that's just me.

  • architeuthis Amateur 32 posts since
    Dec 14, 2008
    Currently Being Moderated
    41. Feb 22, 2010 11:45 AM (in response to clymb420)
    Re: What speed is considered running?

    murray64, when I see guys like you on the street all I feel is pure respect. Keep running your run and believe in yourself!

     

    clymb420 wrote:

     

    Yeah, but just because you drive a car on the highway doesn't mean your racing, either.  I think a lot of the responses on here have been from the little league parents' crowd where everyone gets a trophy for participating.

     

    clymb420, I think your response is from  the little league parents who start fights at the game crowd where everyone gets a  trophy for being a hyper-achieving jerk. No offense. I am friends with plenty of guys who do sub-6 miles, and they don't look down their nose at 7-min or 8-min milers and say they aren't runners, so pay it forward to the slower folks.

  • nerdette Rookie 6 posts since
    Sep 10, 2009
    Currently Being Moderated
    42. Feb 22, 2010 12:13 PM (in response to murray64)
    Re: What speed is considered running?

    I love this thread so much I had to actually stop being a reader and become a poster over it! Does that mean I have to get both hands on the keyboard at the same time?? lol

     

    I am slow, and I don't care. I get the job done. I've only been running since the fall and when I started, there were plenty of walkers on the track who were faster than me. It bears mention that I've since found out they are actually racewalkers, but I didn't know that at the time. Even back then, I just sort of looked after them with this weird awe: Wow, they're faster than me and they're walking! Now we're on a smile-and-wave basis and I pass them when I'm running (sometimes) and they roast by me when I'm walking.

     

    Thank you for this thread. I am registered for my first half in April and plan to walk & run, and this thread taught me many things. Mostly, that it doesn't matter to anyone but me. But also that running IS speed and jog and plod and sprint and trot and fast and slow and any and all of the things our feet, legs, and selves make it. Run on, Murray! Public running, you know, means nothing to anybody but you...so ignore the world and do your thing. Who cares how slow you are or how fast you are? Just do it (oh gosh I didn't mean to sound like an ad but it worked right there...sorry!) for YOU.

     

    Oh and to whomever mentioned the "Rear Security" thing? Laughed out loud, thank you very much for sharing





    "You are your choices." ~Seneca

  • cmon2 Amateur 20 posts since
    Feb 26, 2010
    Currently Being Moderated
    43. Feb 27, 2010 11:28 AM (in response to nerdette)
    Re: What speed is considered running?

    interesting thread.

     

    it sure depends on the individual. who cares what others think?

     

    as for me I've just invented a nice definition of jogging vs running, though it may be an arbitrary one: when I need to lift my legs off the ground more, then I'm actually running, otherwise just jogging. the only possible problem for me with this definition is that I only need to lift my legs significantly for paces faster than 6:30min/mile or so but my heart didn't keep up with that definition yet

     

    I usually walk at 11-12min/mile in a leisurely way but I can easily speed up that walking to 10min/mile or maybe a bit faster than that. if I try to go faster than 9:30min/mile or so then I really really feel the urge to do it in a running gait style. (maybe this could probably change if I trained for faster walking, but I don't know as I've never tried any training for it.) I liked that definition in this thread that made a distinction based on the pace where you feel this urge. and it is true that when running at any pace slower than this it feels very easy and slow to me (my heart disagrees for the time being though!).

     

    I can physically not run much slower than 13min/mile, one reason is my stride length becomes too short, though I can force it to be maybe even shorter but it is really stretching the limits (possible I do a too fast turnover?) and the other reason is my knees don't like it after a while (I read an article about the reason for that and it totally applies to me). but I know of people who run 16-17min/mile pace for 10 miles or even longer! so it is possible for some people.

  • architeuthis Amateur 32 posts since
    Dec 14, 2008
    Currently Being Moderated
    44. Feb 27, 2010 2:33 PM (in response to murray64)
    Re: What speed is considered running?

    Clearly, the answer to this question is dependent on the reason you want to know. Why do you want to quantify the difference between "running" and jogging"? If it's because you want to know when "runners" will stop looking down on you, then the question is irrelevant. For a casual runner, no matter what your speed there will be runners who cheer you on, runners who think you are pathetic, and runners who are indifferent.

     

    If it's because you want to set a personal goal, then set the goal and don't worry about what it's called. My favorite goal is "faster than I ran the race last time". My second favorite is "just finish" which sometimes is the only realistic goal if you have been injured, sick, burned-out, or not able to train.

     

    I can't think of a good reason this distinction needs to be made.

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Legend

  • Correct Answers - 10 points
  • Helpful Answers - 7 points