kovalchuk71 212 Report post Posted September 7, 2005 Is running better or biking? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Neo5370 132 Report post Posted September 7, 2005 I would say the rate you do either is more significant.......short all out effort (anaerobic) or slow and long times ( aerobic).But I'd say biking because it saves the impact on your joints relative to running. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cavs019 708 Report post Posted September 7, 2005 it depends on your methods, not the rate. I'm on the ice a ton so i use that as my cardiovascular conditioning. running/biking burns all the muscle mass that takes a ton of effort to put on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gongshow11 1 Report post Posted September 7, 2005 biking is the best route, less strain ont he knees Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
A_Steeves12 0 Report post Posted September 7, 2005 I bike to and from the gym round trip its about 6km. i find it helps after leg days my legs arnt as sore when i bike. at my cottage i would run up stream agianst the current at the beach. it was hard but i found it did good. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SB39 2 Report post Posted September 8, 2005 I'm not particularly fond of biking, especially since it worsens hamstring flexibility. I'm a big fan of barefoot sprinting on fields or hill sprints. They also work better, at least for me, since I do both outside, which is a lot easier on the psyche. Just work on correcting your running stride (hint: running barefoot helps this), and have good shoes to support you. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
biff44 0 Report post Posted September 8, 2005 A normal bike does negatively impact your flexibility. Something about pedaling when hunched over. A recumbant bike, where the pedals are out in front of you instead of directly below the seat, is far better.As far as biking after working out, a lot of NHL players will do just that. It clears out the lactic acid, which makes you ache like a hurt dog the next day. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SB39 2 Report post Posted September 8, 2005 Lactic acid isn't what makes you sore. It helps soreness and recovery to do some easy cardio, like biking, after a rough game because it gets blood flowing into the area, which has suffered micro tears as a result of intense exertion, and helps to start the healing process, moving in nutrients and white blood cells. Same reason why it helps soreness to do a light run or bike ride the day after a tough leg workout. It's a common misconception Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
biff44 0 Report post Posted September 10, 2005 I do not know what the science is, but there are some days when I work out hard, that a muscle hurts for 3 days afterward. But a few hours after I work out that area again, the pain goes away! There is something about musle recovery that requires repeated abuse! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kovy_Ribs_Fedo 3 Report post Posted September 12, 2005 biking is the best route, less strain ont he knees yep and mainly for heavy guys. those who play at least 4-5-6 time a week and train in the gym don't need to work on aerobic since they are already working on it on the ice and in the gym naturally. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jason Harris 31 Report post Posted September 12, 2005 I don't agree with that, Kovy, because skating and weights both tend to be anerobic activities, whereas biking/running/swimming are aerobic activities.From my experience, I would say the more fit I am anerobically the stronger my shifts are and the quicker my recovery for the next shift, whears the more fit I am aerobically the greater stamina I have for the entire game.I wouldn't neglect either aspect in your training. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gongshow11 1 Report post Posted September 12, 2005 u can easily make biking an anaerobic workout Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jason Harris 31 Report post Posted September 12, 2005 Agreed. Same as sprinting would be anaerobic, but I'm referring to a pace and duration that would be aerobic. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
myst3ry 0 Report post Posted September 12, 2005 I have a question that is somewhat related to this topic as well.. A few weeks ago i'd run around 6km a day, which I would be able to run in around 20ish minutes which I found to be respectable.. But what i'm finding is when I start actually playing hockey, it feels like my legs would be fine for the first half of the game, but would start to crap out on me after the second half.. I found the more I ran, the worst my legs would feel during the halfway point in a game.. After that point I decided to quit the runs, and just focus on building my leg muscles with squats that I'd do 2-3 times per week.. As soon as I started doing that, I found it increased my gameplay endurance immensiley.. What I dont understand is that I always thought running was good for your legs and hockey in general.. Is this true? Or is raw leg strength more important than running endurance? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SB39 2 Report post Posted September 12, 2005 You're in need of anaerobic conditioning, meaning high intensity activities with enough rest in between to extend the workout. Think liners, sprints, guerilla cardio and such to increase your anaerobic threshold. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites