Steppenpig Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Feel free to post fun stuff about running too. I went for a long a few weeks ago and did something to my calves. It was a bit weird, because both calves gave up on exactly the same stride, and I had to hobble home. Next day right leg fine, left calf swollen, limping for 2 weeks. Tried running again pulled up after 20 mins, same problem. I have had "pulled muscles" or whatever before, but I have never had my calf swell up like this. It actually looks pretty good, because normally I have skinny calves. I don't run much these days, maybe a couple of times a year, but I do a fair bit of rollerblading (in season), which means I am reasonably fit, but it probably uses slightly different muscles, probably resulting in me not realising I am overdoing it when running. In particular, my feet pronate quite dramatically ~45° when I run, while with rollerblading the ankle is held firm by the boot. The injury seems to be on the inner side towards the back. If anyone knows about this stuff, or any good sites that discuss this sort of thing, I'd be grateful. Ta. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Hovis Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 I had one calf "pop" when running too fast downhill, it felt like somebody had thrown a stone at it. It was like a knot / tangle of muscle fibres had formed. I couldn't run on it at all for a few weeks and when I tried after a couple of months it felt like it was going to go again so I pulled up. It was nearly 6 months IIRC before I could run without feeling it and could get my confidence back but I was still careful not to go too fast downhill. I was fine for walking and would run uphill sections gently to keep testing it out. Not heard of both calves going but the answer always seems to be a lay-off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longtomsilver Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Are you sure it isn't shin splints? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turned Out Nice Again Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 switch to cycling? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onlyme2 Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Are you sure it isn't shin splints? I've had shin splints - or think I have from bowling, really nasty persistent ache but for me at least very much down the shins and front of lower leg and no calf issues at all. I think running after a certain age is a toss up between how much damage and good it does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccc Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 99% Not shin splints. Have a google of compartmental syndrome. Can be very serious and someone on here had it a while back. Worth checking just for safety. If just tight as ****** calves - lots of massage then stretching once they are healing is the best idea - will be agony but worth it in the end. Also if you pronate - look into running a different way. Forefoot 'natural' running has really saved me from having to give up. Almost no injuries these days. I truly do believe most running injuries are simply down to not doing it properly. Anyway before any of that - spend £40 on a good Physio recommended by someone to rule out anything serious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steppenpig Posted March 17, 2015 Author Share Posted March 17, 2015 I think running after a certain age is a toss up between how much damage and good it does. That applies to most things I do, including sitting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dgul Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 When I took up running many years ago I was told this mantra: 'too far, too soon, too fast'. IMO it applies to nearly everyone who runs 'a bit' or who take up running. I think what happens is the muscular and cardiovascular side improves quickly (or perhaps it is just technique)... But the skeletal / tendons side of things takes longer. So people run further / faster before they're ready - and get injuries. I would say that you're overestimating your bodies ability to cope with the impact in running, given that you're only going out every couple of months (say). Slow down & don't run so far - at least for a bit until your body adapts to your running. Another 'rule' I picked up back in those days was to wait as long again as the injury took to heal after it heals before going out running again - so if it takes 2 weeks before you feel ready to run again after an injury, wait another 2 weeks before actually going out running. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gigantic Purple Slug Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Feel free to post fun stuff about running too. I went for a long a few weeks ago and did something to my calves. It was a bit weird, because both calves gave up on exactly the same stride, and I had to hobble home. Next day right leg fine, left calf swollen, limping for 2 weeks. Tried running again pulled up after 20 mins, same problem. I have had "pulled muscles" or whatever before, but I have never had my calf swell up like this. It actually looks pretty good, because normally I have skinny calves. I don't run much these days, maybe a couple of times a year, but I do a fair bit of rollerblading (in season), which means I am reasonably fit, but it probably uses slightly different muscles, probably resulting in me not realising I am overdoing it when running. In particular, my feet pronate quite dramatically ~45° when I run, while with rollerblading the ankle is held firm by the boot. The injury seems to be on the inner side towards the back. If anyone knows about this stuff, or any good sites that discuss this sort of thing, I'd be grateful. Ta. Don't think running a couple of times a year is a good idea. If you are learning to run I would recommend the following : i) Lose weight. Even if I am 7lbs overweight it makes a big difference to my injury level. You shouldn't run until you are in fairly good condition. You can do this via other activities first. ii) Wear good shoes. Go to a running shop and buy good trainers. If it is a good shop then they will put you on a treadmill and video you. They will make sure you get a shoe that is consistent with your running style. iii) Focus on your technique. if you are running for long distances, focus on how you run and how your feet impact the ground. Ideally you should be just skimming over the ground, not raising your feet high up and smashing them into the concrete. After some time practising this becomes second nature. With the correct shoes and technique, your impact should be no worse than someone walking round all day normally at a couple of stone overweight. I don't think running is something to be taken lightly, because you can injure yourself if you on't do it properly. That's why going out twice a year isn't really on. Either you do it properly (get good shoes/join a club/focus on your style/get technique coaching) or not at all. You don't have to be wanting to break world records to make technique coaching worthwhile, and getting tecnhique coaching is more than about running fast, it's also about running with minimum impact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Hovis Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Don't think running a couple of times a year is a good idea. If you are learning to run I would recommend the following : i) Lose weight. Even if I am 7lbs overweight it makes a big difference to my injury level. You shouldn't run until you are in fairly good condition. You can do this via other activities first. ii) Wear good shoes. Go to a running shop and buy good trainers. If it is a good shop then they will put you on a treadmill and video you. They will make sure you get a shoe that is consistent with your running style. iii) Focus on your technique. if you are running for long distances, focus on how you run and how your feet impact the ground. Ideally you should be just skimming over the ground, not raising your feet high up and smashing them into the concrete. After some time practising this becomes second nature. With the correct shoes and technique, your impact should be no worse than someone walking round all day normally at a couple of stone overweight. I don't think running is something to be taken lightly, because you can injure yourself if you on't do it properly. That's why going out twice a year isn't really on. Either you do it properly (get good shoes/join a club/focus on your style/get technique coaching) or not at all. You don't have to be wanting to break world records to make technique coaching worthwhile. Definitely this. Half a stone over and I don't enjoy it at all, it's hard work. Running is a good guide for telling you what your natural weight should be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gigantic Purple Slug Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Definitely this. Half a stone over and I don't enjoy it at all, it's hard work. Running is a good guide for telling you what your natural weight should be. I'd agree with that. I also find pull ups a remarkably good indicator of whether I am in balance or not. They are brutal, there is no hiding place or excuses. If you are significantly overweight your pull up capability is going to be dismal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StainlessSteelCat Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Sounds like a achilles tendon tear or rupture to me. I have had it happen to me once during an abrupt direction change, and speed up. The classic symptoms are a pop/sensation that something has brushed past your ankle - then instant debilitation. I think mine was minor as I was only out for about three weeks. Possibly worth seeing the quack about. I am very careful to replace my running shoes regularly now, and to mix up the running a bit. If I feel my achilles pulling a little from hill running, it's back to some gentler flatter running for a few days. A couple of runs a year I suggest is not really enough training to avoid injury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hail the Tripod Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 I'd agree with that. I also find pull ups a remarkably good indicator of whether I am in balance or not. They are brutal, there is no hiding place or excuses. If you are significantly overweight your pull up capability is going to be dismal. How many should you be able to do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Hovis Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 How many should you be able to do? I have it on good authority that half of one is the recommended maximum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueRat Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 I used to run but my knee got a bit crunchy. I walk now but it's not as effective at keeping the weight off. I think swimming is the answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hail the Tripod Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 I have it on good authority that half of one is the recommended maximum. I did 47 once when I was at school. I can do at least 8 now, and I could do with losing at least a stone. Some of my mates have never managed 1 even when they were dead skinny. According to this (http://www.livestrong.com/article/344524-how-many-pull-ups-can-the-average-man-do/) 8 is decent: Males over the age of 18 are expected to perform 8 repetitions of pullups to be classified as in “borderline shape” according to the President’s Council. The average number of pullups a male can do begins to decline around the 31 to 50 age bracket, and is normally associated with a decline in physical activity and an increase in weight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gigantic Purple Slug Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 How many should you be able to do? I have no clue. I'm not going to boast/embaress myself by quoting numbers, but if you can't do a single pull up you've got to be asking yourself some questions about your poor strength to weight ratio. Ironically my guess is that a lot of elite athletes wouldn't be able to do a single one. Primarily because they are not well balanced. Edit, 8 I would say is good compared with most people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GinAndPlatonic Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Running shoes are very important. Imho, but any shoes with heels higher than the soles are not good. We should wear shoes that fit around our feet not the other way round. I reckon these high tech super fandangle running shoes are bad for our feet and bad for our natural gait. Im not saying revert back to plimsolls but any shoe that allows your feet to act naturally is good. http://www.unshod.org/pfbc/pfrossi2.htm http://www.runnersworld.com/running-shoes-gear/barefoot-running "Following the boom of barefoot runners, running shoe companies such as Nike, New Balance, Saucony and most notably, Vibram with the FiveFingers shoe, began making minimal shoes. Minimal running shoes are an alternative for runners who want to try barefoot running but also want to protect their feet from dirt, water, rocks and other roads hazards. The barely-there nature of the shoes put little between you and the ground, imitating barefoot running so you don't have to put your vulnerable soles at risk." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gigantic Purple Slug Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Running shoes are very important. Imho, but any shoes with heels higher than the soles are not good. We should wear shoes that fit around our feet not the other way round. I reckon these high tech super fandangle running shoes are bad for our feet and bad for our natural gait. Im not saying revert back to plimsolls but any shoe that allows your feet to act naturally is good. http://www.unshod.org/pfbc/pfrossi2.htm http://www.runnersworld.com/running-shoes-gear/barefoot-running "Following the boom of barefoot runners, running shoe companies such as Nike, New Balance, Saucony and most notably, Vibram with the FiveFingers shoe, began making minimal shoes. Minimal running shoes are an alternative for runners who want to try barefoot running but also want to protect their feet from dirt, water, rocks and other roads hazards. The barely-there nature of the shoes put little between you and the ground, imitating barefoot running so you don't have to put your vulnerable soles at risk." Well, the debate about the benefits/drawbacks of barefoot running has raged on here before. I'm a non believer, but IMO anything that encourages people to think about their style and to try to minimise their impact has got to be a good thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccc Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Well, the debate about the benefits/drawbacks of barefoot running has raged on here before. I'm a non believer, but IMO anything that encourages people to think about their style and to try to minimise their impact has got to be a good thing. It has indeed. However one thing is beyond doubt and shown in studies. You get a person who has always run barefoot - put them in chunky 'supportive' running shoes = they Instantly run differently. Now whatever side of the debate you are on - nobody can say its a good thing. Anyway if anyone is interested masses of info and debate online. Well worth spending some time on. And I agree with everyone else - a few runs a year is not likely to end up well or do you any good !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GinAndPlatonic Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 I do not run anymore but still walk/hike between 10 and 20 miles across open fields. I have hiking boots with a virtually flat heel now, after using "proper hiking" boots with heels for twenty years or more. It felt odd at first with low heels but I noticed straightaway how much easier it was hiking up steep hills and also what a difference to how I felt generally after a long days hike. I will never go back to heeled footwear again. I`m guessing it would be the same for running. "The structure of the human foot and lower leg is very efficient at absorbing the shock of landing and turning the energy of the fall into forward motion, through the springing action of the foot's natural arch. Scientists studying runners' foot motions have observed striking differences between habitually shod runners and barefoot runners. The foot of habitually shod runners typically lands with an initial heel strike, while the foot of a barefoot runner lands with a more springy step on the middle, or on the ball of the foot." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barefoot_running Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GinAndPlatonic Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 There is a great article here about young Kenyan runners and the tough physical life they lead compared to many in the west. I`m not trying to prove a point one way or another, just that I found the article really interesting. http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2011/feb/22/running-fitness-iten-kenya-school Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gigantic Purple Slug Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 There is a great article here about young Kenyan runners and the tough physical life they lead compared to many in the west. I`m not trying to prove a point one way or another, just that I found the article really interesting. http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2011/feb/22/running-fitness-iten-kenya-school I don't find that article very scientifically convincing. Sounds more like the person who is writing it has an agenda regarding barefoot running and is applying it. In my running club there is a wide range of speeds and capabilities. But there are people there who are always going to be able to run faster than me, irrespective of what footware both of us are wearing. I also understood that the claimed main "benefit" to be got from barefoot running is reduced injury. Whereas it seems in this article that barefoot running is claimed to have an impact on speed. Kids don't get injured anywhere near as much as adults, so as a consequence footware is much less likely to have an impact on their performance or susceptibility to injury. it's far more likely the kid who ahs the flash trainers can't be bothered to try because she already has some ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccc Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Yes when young you always seem to get injured less and recover quickly. Got to be more careful when older. Hence why I feel ensuring you run 'properly' gets more important as you go along. PS - never run close to barefoot myself !! Just use minimal shoes and run the same way. If interested inov8 are excellent and British made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
19 year mortgage 8itch Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 What are you running from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.