I know stupid question but I need to know the basic difference between these two. Which ones are good for Gym? Walking or running.
How do they differ.. Running shoes are a bit expensive than walking shoes.
Running Vs Walking Shoes.. Which one to buy
accessdenied on 11/11/2014 - 14:32
Comments
Do you run?
What about anything else? Tennis? Go for walking shoes, thicker sole and more support.
If you're doing bodyweight stuff like planks and leg raises etc on a foam mat maybe running shoes as they're lighter and more flexible. Then again heaviers shoes would help in that area after you're fitter. They're not that much heavier, 50 to 100% but it's only 100 to 300grams. Nothing.
Running is bad for you anyways, the guy that popularised it decades ago died of a heart attack or something whilst running. Go figure. Stuffs your knees anyway.
Save the money and get the cheaper ones. Scoopon Shopping has some shoe deals.
"Running is bad for you anyways, the guy that popularised it decades ago died of a heart attack or something whilst running. Go figure. Stuffs your knees anyway."
haha so much terrible information in your post that I don't even know where to start….
Enjoyed that one as much as you.
Running is bad for you anyways, the guy that popularised it decades ago died of a heart attack or something whilst running. Go figure. Stuffs your knees anyway.
How can running be bad for you and how did anyone "popularise" running? People have been running since the dawn of time. Animals run, dogs run, cats run…etc. I wonder which dog and which cat popularised running for their species.
Seriously, I don't understand how running can be "bad for you", perhaps if you do it in excess, then yes, it might have a negative impact on your joints…etc. but then and again, so is lifting weights if you're doing more than you can handle.
Running is a natural human activity, we are built to run and our bodies are designed to withstand the forces involved with running. It's been that way for millions of years.
Sprinting short distances in short spurts on grass yes. Running marathons on concrete, yeah that's natural and been done for years. Millenia in fact.
Dunning-Kruger right here.
As per @trilby: Jim Fixx 'popularised' it. With a best selling book. More you know.
All bodies are created equal and human physiology hasn't changed for "millions of years" then according to your theory? Darwin wrote a book you might find useful. Sitting is also a "natural human activity" but I guess you've seen the recent ads about how that isn't good for you in the long run? My guess is you're a slow twitcher. Either way google will show you millions (est) of ways "running could be bad for you".
Running is a high impact exercise and as such can give rise to a number of significant injuries even for people with the "right" physical makeup and with a fair level of fitness. Some estimates suggest that 80% of runners will be injured each year - suffice to say that physios love runners. There are "better" ways of exercising - swimming, cycling, even yoga - but some people just lurv their running and there's "nothing wrong with that".
Answer to OP's question: as already suggested - cross trainers for the gym.
I've studied enough biology and human science to know about Darwin and his theories. If you admit that sitting is bad, then why are you sitting here replying? Why not stand all day then?
But seriously, if we're going to sit here and discuss how running is bad for you, why don't we talk about how typing is bad for you because of repetitive strain, how fatty foods are bad for you because of heart problems, how going outside is bad for you because you're breathing in all the crap cars are putting out these days and how confined spaces such as office buildings are bad because you can easily spread illnesses which are airborne.
So by your suggestion, we should avoid typing, going outside, going to work, eating most foods and basically living our lives because it is potentially "bad for us"? I don't buy that logic.
We're not talking about professional athletes who put themselves through hell and back, nor are we talking about marathon wannabes or people who think they're in the Olympics. We're talking about regular people going for a run, a completely normal human activity which humans have been doing for millions of years.
I find it bizzare that you quote 80% of runners are injured each year. That's a completely made up statistic. I used to run every day, I know people who run every day, we don't pretend like we're in the Olympics or run for hours, none of us get injured. Again, I reiterate, if you do stuff in excess, then yes, it will be bad for you, but nothing wrong with a casual run, no point trying to run a scare campaign.
@paulsterio: Childish response. I didn't suggest anything of the sort or ask you to "buy" anything (least of all the rubbish you subsequently wrote), although I can appreciate how you might draw such ridiculous inferences because that was how you got things so wrong in the first place. Ignorance, supposition and incorrect anecdotal conclusions are rarely a good mix.
No-one is suggesting the running is inherently "bad for you" - a silly generalisation if ever there was one. It might be for many people, for others it will be good for their health physically and mentally. Nor is anyone running "a scare campaign". In my case I was stating the obvious - that your comments were wrong in so many ways - with a few very well understood facts thrown in. The 80% is indeed a (documented) guesstimate (google is your friend), because no-one knows the whole picture. One thing I am 100% confident of though - your "logic" that because running is "natural" and you didn't get any (obvious) injury from it, therefore it can't be "bad for you" is just arrant nonsense.
Running was a survival tool. Be we've evolved a bit. Neanderthals ran around quite a lot, but lacked the brain EQ and hunting skills of Homo Sapiens. So they died out.
Conclusion: why run when you can order your pizza online?^ Sarcasm; I'm mocking our modern age.
Possumbly never said one must shut themselves in a bunker; work-shy, devoid of sunlight, palatable food and internet p0rn.
The assertion was that osteo/connective/soft tissue injuries are more likely for the runner than the swimmer, cyclist, yoga-ist or (here's my contribution) walker. I happen to agree, so I don't run. Unless I have to.
Oh, and I'm such a non-conformist that I wear joggers for my walks. I know, right?
Jim Fixx who 'popularised' jogging (he wrote a best selling book in '77) died of a heart attack at 52, but it has to be remembered that he was genetically predisposed to it (his father died similarly at 43) and he had been a heavy smoker prior to taking up running.
Running and tennis shoes are different again - you need to change direction a lot in tennis, although many people use cross trainers for many sports now.That's the guy. Jim Fixx. Didn't know about the smoking.
I'd wager that if he hadn't taken up running he wouldn've have the heart attack though. It's so taxing on the body.
Cross trainers is a good option. Mix of the two.
My two cents worth. Running marathons on concrete does ruin our knees but a reasonable amount of running on the treadmill is good exercise and makes us fitter.
I believe most people advise to use grass fields rather than treadmill. Also, if you want to do cardio, I'd recommend using X trainer (aka elliptical) or a machine call grinder and do HIIT on it. 15 minutes worth of HIIT and you'd be more buggered than running for an hour… provided you do it properly.
@ProjectZero: Yep, HIIT is the way to go. Not only does it work but it's efficient.
"Pounding the pavement" for an hour is the dumbest thing anyone can do for their health, it's counterintuitive but still stupid. Every long distance runner dies early or in a wheelchair in their 70s. Or want to be.
@lenlynn: Not saying to never run, just saying running for more than 2 to 3 minutes on concrete is dumb. Stuff your knees up.
Wish I could invest in knee and hip replacement technologies as running is all the craze again/still.
HIIT and sprints are better.
This may not answer your question but I can suggest a good brand of running shoes for you.
I've tried Asics, Nike and Mizuno and by far, Mizuno is the best out of the three.
I've fat, so I took up some cardio before actually seeing a PT, here is my experience with the three brands of shoes I used.
Asics - Blisters within 15 mins, heel pain. Can't remember the model I had…
Nike - Slightly more comfortable, but still have terrible heel pain within 30 minutes. Lunarglide 4, said to be the better of the supportive running shoes of Nike.
Mizuno - Light weight, comfortable as hell, I still do get pain on my feet when doing running sometimes, but very rarely and when I do, it's basically I've been running for almost an hour. Wave paradox, again said to be the best of the supportive running shoes of Mizuno… comes with a hefty price unless you buy it overseas.
Basically, running does stress your knees and especially if you fat like myself, so having a good pair of supportive running shoes goes a long way for the times when you just want to give up.
Currently using my wave paradox for weights workout created by my PT, they're really good but cost quite abit too.
The recommended optimal health outcome (living longer) for running is achieved by:
Duration: 1-2.5 hours/week
Frequency: 2-3 times/week
Speed: Moderate pace (9.5-11km/hour -benefits diminish/heart damage increases above 12km/hour (5 min/Km)).
Distance: Maximum 32 Km/weekGoogle "the dose of running that best confers longevity" and "run for your life".
dunlop volleys
Different activities require different footwear, but it depends on how serious you are about that activity. For example, if you're going to the gym and lifting free weights, you want flat shoes like dunlop volleys or converse allstars - something with a flat and minimal sole that doesn't compress much under load.
Walking you tend to land on your heel first and running you tend to land on the balls of your feet first.There's been a big shift to barefoot running over the past few years, so you'll find a lot of minimalist shoes out there, with little support and thin soles.
If you're looking for a compromise, probably go for a running shoe over a walking shoe, as running tends to be the most stressful activity. Depending where you live, go shopping at the factory outlets as there are always bargains to be had. The current range of running shoes is really not all that different to last year or the year before, so save yourself lots of money by buying older models - I usually pick up shoes around $60 - $80 that were selling for over $200 when new.
I'm a gym instructor, and been into running in the past two years so still very new compared to the veterans. Running was not my thing at all but I have gone from 5km struggle-town to half-marathon successes and helping the local Nike Run club. All I can say is choose what works for you, and it is worth seeing a specialist about footwear… Go once to get their advice for the first time then you can freely buy shoes yourself.
For example, in Adelaide we have a place called the Running Company who will analyse your movements on a treadmill and recommend the right shoe. Sure, they also try to sell you their shoes, but you can also simply pay for the analysis and go do your bargain hunting later.
When I say what "works" for you covers a number of factors but at the end of the day you have to feel comfortable and the shoe has to complement your style of running. Everyone can tell you what they wear, but ultimately you're stuck "buying and trying" until The One comes along, which is why I'd recommend the analysis.
The final thing with getting the analysis is they may advise you need some shoe inserts (orthotics) which provides extra support, beyond the level most running shoes will not provide. Again, you might look at running shoes with special "stability control" or "dynamic support" and think that's great, but really, without buying them all, a running specialist or podiatrist needs to help you.
Regarding gym shoes, like someone posted above, get cross training shoes to accommodate a mix of cardio work, classes and weights routines. I suggest something that is a normal flat shoe (i.e. one that doesn't make you feel high off the floor so you become unbalanced) and one that is very comfortable as you're going to be wearing these frequently. Weight lifters like to wear Dunlop Volleys (as someone above mentioned) as there is no need for high tech shoes (unless of course they are special Power Lifting shoes) and you don't want to feel unbalanced when lifting weights. This is not to say you can't wear running shoes to do weights, it comes down to, again, what feels right for you.
Regarding walking shoes, because of the reduced levels of impact and stress upon the shoe, they don't have to be built as tough or be as technical as a running shoe, hence you'll notice a big price difference (cheaper). If you had to pick one, go with a running shoe, which you can walk AND run in.
My final advice is to look at getting two pairs of shoes (or more!) … one purely for running/walking, and one for the gym. Not only will you choose them for their different purposes, but you will get maximum life out of each pair. I rotate 2 pairs of running shoes and 2 pairs of gym shoes to keep the wear and cushioning reduction even.
Sorry I could not specifically advise a brand (FYI I only wear Nike, fits me perfectly) but this journey has to be a personal one!
Good Luck!
Sorry, this is more of an aside and you probably went shopping already! A friend of mine was recommending Skechers for walking/general use and when I went in to take a look, the sales assistant said the running shoes had laces because the shoe will actually stay on as you'd tie it firmly; the walking shoes might come off when running because you just slip into them, I still jog lightly in them though.
Different priorities. Walking shoes tend to provide better support for walking, running shoes, better support for running. Walking shoes tend to place more of an emphasis on durability at the expense of weight, running shoes tend to place more of an emphasis on lightness at the expense of durability. Walking shoes tend to offer better support and comfort for long hours whereas running shoes sacrifice that at the expense of cushioning, which is arguably more important for running.
Which ones to buy will depend on whether you are walking or running, hence the name.
If you want shoes for gym, then you are looking for cross-trainers, which provide better support and durability for gym as opposed to running shoes which will probably break after not too long and walking shoes which won't provide enough support.