April 7, 1986
Fitness
GET THE LEAD OUT OF AEROBIC EXERCISES
It is a sound theory that a body gains strength by working against resistance, recuperating, then coming back to work against additional resistance.
It is the theory upon which all strength training is built.
For aerobic fitness advocates, the resistance does not come from lifting or pulling or working against additional weight, but rather by increasing either the speed at which workouts are done or the length of time the exercise is done, or both. There are no short cuts.
Unfortunately—especially for the person just becoming involved in fitness—certain equipment manufacturers and fitness “experts” would have you believe otherwise.
The most common “short cuts” cropping up with increasing (and frightening) regularity are wrist weights, ankle weights, weight belts, and weight vests.
The weights that are attached to various parts of the body for the purpose of building strength are nothing new; they’ve been around for years. They crop up, make a short stand, and are relegated to the trash heap. Their current reincarnation has continued longer than usual primarily due to the increase in interest in walking.
People taking up walking seem to feel that, by wearing ankle and wrist weights or weight belts or vests, they will increase the speed by which they gain fitness. The problem with the various types of attachable weights is that they add stress and strain upon the legs, ankles, and feet.
Many people who decide to take up walking or jogging do so with the object of losing some unwanted pounds. The extra weight a person carries through the daily workout provide stress enough.
The novice aerobic exerciser is prone to injury to begin with, especially if he or she comes to exercise after a lengthy absence. Sure, one can become aerobically fit in less than two months. But it can take the joints, ligaments, and tendons years to catch up to the level of fitness the heart and lungs achieved at the onset.
The last thing the ligaments and tendons need is extra weight bearing down on them with each step. A few extra miles per week or an extra half-hour of aerobic dance per week would produce similar strength results minus the strain.
Even experienced exercisers should be careful about taking on artificial weight in an attempt to build strength. The classic story of how this plan can go awry revolves around Emil Zatopek, the Czech Olympian, perhaps the greatest distance runner of all time.
Toward the end of an incredible career, Zatopek felt his age was catching up to him. To prepare for the 1956 Olympics, he began doing hill workouts while carrying his wife on his back. With the Games on the horizon, he popped a hernia, destroying his chances to repeat as an Olympic gold medalist.
Aerobically speaking, you can accomplish pretty much everything you want to with the weight you’re already carrying. There’s no need to add extraneous pounds.
April 14, 1986
Fitness
THE BOSTON MARATHON SPRINTS TO CATCH UP
At high noon next Monday, at the eastern edge of the Hopkinton (Mass.) green, a gun will fire and more than 5000 runners will start the 90th annual run toward downtown Boston.
The Boston Marathon is the longest-running annual marathon in history. It was started by a group of Boston track fans who had attended the Olympic Games in Athens in 1896 and were fascinated by the introduction of the marathon event. (The Boston race has been canceled only once in its history: the wartime year of 1918.)
The race is doubly historic this year because it is the first year that the Boston Athletic Association Marathon will offer prize and expense money to world-class runners.
The controversy surrounding the radical change provides no fence to sit upon—the two camps are clearly drawn. The traditionalists feel that America’s most notable marathon tradition has been badly compromised. The progressives feel that without the introduction of the carrot on the stick, the marathon would have withered up front.
One factor that caused the pressing of the panic button was the size of the 1985 field—it was down for the first time in years. What observers of the race didn’t realize was this: Many runners who filled the fields in 1983 and ’84 were baby boomers now in their late 30s; with the qualification standard for men under age 40 set at 2 hours, 50 minutes, it is increasingly difficult for that age group to run under 2:50.
In other words, many of Boston’s “regulars” from 1978-84 just plain can’t run fast enough to qualify. That will begin to change this year, however, as the baby boomers turn 40; the qualification standard will soften by 20 minutes, to 3:10—nearly a minute per mile less over the length of the qualification marathon.
It is true that the world’s best marathoners were no longer coming to Boston to race. The professionals were being lured by big-money offered by Chicago, New York, London, and others. And top marathoners can only run two or three quality efforts a year. Why should they go to Boston? For prestige? For the stew served after the race? Of course not. The top marathoners these days run to pay their bills.
The tradition of Boston attracting top international runners is relatively modern. The foreign invasion began in 1946, when Stylianos Kyriakides of Greece won. Since then, few Americans have won the race, although the field is predominantly American.
For the vast majority of the field, however, who wins in secondary to personal effort. They’ve worked sometimes for years to train in what little spare time they have to qualify and compete with other amateurs who’ve also worked their tails off. The depth and quality of the Boston field has no equal. Despite having three times the numbers of starters, New York City’s highest number of sub-three-hour finisher came in 1982, with 1604. In 1983, Boston had 2647 under three hours—49 percent of the starters.
For the 5000 or 6000 marathoners who trained hard for the honor of lining up in Hopkinton, the fact that the winner stands to make as much as $75,000 with a new world’s best is totally extraneous. It doesn’t much matter who first crosses the new finish line near the John Hancock Building. The heart, soul, and spirit of the race is still the amateurs who paid their own way by gut-busting hard work.
April 21, 1986
Fitness
SEE A SPECIALIST WHEN TREATING AN INJURY
Incoming mail this time around covers a lot of territory, from treatment of injuries to the philosophy of jogger vs. runner. Let’s jump right into some queries.
# ICE ALLERGY—In response to the column on use of ice to treat injuries, George Buell of Pleasant Hill asked about the admonition not to use ice in certain situations, among them when the sufferer has an allergy to cold.
Most of my information on medical subjects—especially athletic injuries—comes from books by sports-medicine specialists, talking with medical doctors interested in sports, and personal experience.
In any matter such as this, it is best to consult a medical professional who specializes in treating sports injuries. Ask about the use of a non-aspirin anti-inflammatory as a prophylactic against swelling of the affected area; elevate the area after exercise in order to lessen swelling. Also ask about receiving treatments with an Acuscope to speed healing of the injured area.
# JOGGER VS. RUNNER—“Regarding the difference(s) between runners and joggers, a useful distinction was offered by Nancy Dietz in The Chronicle two years ago,” writes Eric Essman of the Lawrence Berkeley labs. “The distinction is based upon technique rather than distance covered or time. A jogger always has one foot touching the ground, while a runner’s motion has more thrust and spring, like a series of controlled leaps.”
With all due respect, Nancy’s definition is not an original one. It falls apart when you biomechanically study marathoners like Amby Burfoot and Alberto Salazar, who are notorious heel-and-toers and run very low to the ground, as opposed to someone like Bill Rodgers, who spends most of his time airborne. Two more distinct styles you couldn’t find than former college roommates Burfoot and Rodgers, yet both were—and are—quite good runners. I’ll stand by the conclusion of the column in question by saying the entire subject is much ado about nothing.
# FITNESS BEYOND 50—Charles R. Rush of Ashland, Ore., commented on the daily dozen exercises culled from “Elaine LaLanne’s Fitness After 50” in a previous column. He wrote: “I would appreciate it if you could send me a list of books and exercises for a man of my age (55), if you can.”
I’m glad Charles added “if you can.” There are precious few books beyond LaLanne’s written specifically for people over 50 who want to benefit from the fitness revolution. This is unfortunate, because now that the initial ballyhoo of the fitness fanatics in their 30s and 40s has calmed down, there are a good number of Americans in their 50s and 60s and 70s who are taking up fitness in a cautious, careful way.
And for the more mature Americans, “cautious, careful” are the key words. Virtually any fitness book can be adapted to your age group by faithfully editing out the exercises that would be harmful to areas of the body that have taken a strain over the years (especially the back), by starting and progressing slower than the books suggest, and certainly by visiting your doctor for a good checkup before starting on a fitness program.
Be gentle with yourself, listen closely to the feedback your body sends during and after exercising, and don’t overdo it. Learn to walk before you run.
April 28, 1986
Fitness
MANY ADVANTAGES, FEW DRAWBACKS IN ENDURANCE SWIMMING
Endurance swimming is the best total fitness activity there is. As an all-around exercise, it has a multitude of things going for it:
# Done at a consistent but comfortable pace, distance swimming (20 minutes or more each session) bestows terrific cardiovascular benefits.
# It burns a considerable number of calories.
# It develops good muscle tone and promotes flexibility (especially if you vary your strokes during the same workout).
# Most important, it causes few, if any, injuries.
Jack LaLanne, the dean of American fitness, uses swimming as the backbone of his fitness program. Although he performs other fitness activities, his accomplishments in swimming are legendary.
“There are a number of advantages that swimming has over many other endurance activities,” says Dr. Kenneth Cooper, the father of aerobics.
“For example, it’s much easier on your muscles and skeletal structure, mainly because of the natural buoyancy of the water. Aas a result, you’ll be less likely to confront such things as knee and ankle problems, and shin splints.”
Cooper also cites the calorie-burning benefits: “A swimmer will range from burning five to 20 calories a minute, depending on the speed and the stroke.”
Swimming does have its drawbacks. For many it is difficult to learn, hard to get access to a swimming pool, and frustrating to cope with crowds and limited pool time.
But there are ways of overcoming those problems.
Swimming has been a godsend for many runners I know who dropped out of the sport because of chronic injuries. Besides minimizing the potential for injuries, swimming can be used to carry you through the healing period.
For many years “pool running”—which doesn’t require knowledge of swimming strokes—has been used as a training technique to keep up an injured athlete’s fitness level while developing additional muscle tone.
In chest-high water, the athlete spends 20-30 minutes running against the resistance of the water. The exercise is excellent for muscle development and provides good aerobic fitness while injuries heal and can be done in the most modest of pools.
During the past few years, this exercise technique has been further refined. One of its long-time proponents, Glen McWaters (honest, that’s his name), invented a flotation device called Wet Vest that allows the athlete to work out even in deep water while keeping the body perpendicular and the head above the surface.
If you’ve ever tried to run in water, you’ll recall that it requires quite an effort to make progress.
McWaters claims that depending on the effort expended, running in water can offer 12 to 43 times the resistance of running on and while offering none of the injury risks.
It certainly beats sitting around and feeling miserable while licking the wounds sometimes associated with land-bound aerobic sports.