Concept2 Forum

I row to keep in shape and I've found that of all combinations rowing & hill running seem best complimented . . . i.e. . . . the rowing helps the hill running, the hill running helps the rowing and both combined give you incredible fitness as measured by weight maintenance, low blood pressure and pep in the step.

I've tried combining rowing with programs of rope jumping, weight lifting, boxing, push-ups, Heavy Hands walking and kettlebells.

Each compliments rowing in some way but of all activities, hill work seems the best.

Beginners (even if fit) should start [u]walking[/u] up hill because the stress is different on the legs, ankles and feet than flat walking or jogging. Call this Level 1.

From there work slowly to "sprints" which means just get up the darn hill as fast (and safely) as possible. Call this Level 2.

The next step is to start carrying things up the hill. I've carried everything from 2-lb hand weights to 40 lb bags of dogfood. Level 3.

From there you can add exercises before and after the hill sprint. For example, squats before the sprint, then drop down for push-ups at the top. Level 4.

That's just a very simplified progression . . . obviously, length of hill, slope and your speed will all impact the stress your body experiences. I started with one hill workout a week (5-6 times up the hill) and eventually increased to three workouts a week. Each workout includes stretching, a walk to the hill, more stretching and then the sprints themselves.

By the way, when you carry things up the hill, especially large bags of stuff . . . don't be surprised if folks pull up and ask you if you want a lift up the hill.

Say no and continue plugging for a great workout to compliment your row.

I like to run, too, but when I'm running, I actually like to go somewhere, since I don't actually go anywhere on the Concept2. I live in hill country, and include hills in every run, but just can't stand the idea of running up them just to go down them and do it over again. I prefer just running on to the next hill. And carrying bags of dogfood up a hill? Man, you are a bit crazy! I'm sure hill repeats would be a quicker path to fitness, but exercise for me is as much for mental and emotional benefits as it is physical ones.

Very interesting, I like hill running since it's similar to the "final rush" of a race (in other words it's hell and it never ends), i like it a lot also because it never gets boring (long runs drive me crazy if there's no variety in altitude) and it helps developing some strength not only endurance...
The part where you carry things up the hill, well I guess for me that's overkill but I knew a couple of coaches who used that kind of training (instead of dog food you had to carry your rowing partner -ouch!)

I like to load my backpack and carry loads up hills when getting ready to do mountain hiking. (eg: Kilimanjaro-was great when getting ready for that trek) The rowing does compliment the hiking well, as does biking on hills. I usually weighted with rice and water. If I had a dog I would probably use dog food!

Pam

So how do you run uphill (without weights)?

My googling reveals that common recommendations are, among other things, to use smaller steps than during flat running. I'm not convinced about this particularly though. Anyone with thoughts or insights on this?

Carl Henrik wrote:So how do you run uphill (without weights)?

My googling reveals that common recommendations are, among other things, to use smaller steps than during flat running. I'm not convinced about this particularly though. Anyone with thoughts or insights on this?

Carl,

I live in hilly, mountainous Colrado and have done quite a bit of trail running and racing including the Pikes Peak Marathon and Ascent. The answer is that if you are doing distance on a continious uphill, it is much more efficient to take smaller steps, maintaing a somewhat normal running cadence. Similar to shifting into a lower gear on a bike to maintain cadence. If you are doing hill repeats, conventional wisdom is to do longer strides in kind of a bounding movement to build strength and power.

Rich

Rich

Thanks Rich, that sounds like an explicit differentiation of scenarios I was missing in some of the recommendations I saw.

I would also like a differentiation between what one tells the body to do, and what is the result of this. If you try to do the same thing on uphills as on flats then the steps will be shorter because you land quicker on the relative elevation of the following step. On top of this, step length will further be decreased by the reduction of speed and bounce.

Knowing this the recommendation for smaller steps is ambiguous. Do you change what you tell your body to do or should you just continue telling your body to do as before and not try to manipulate the step length. There are usually biological inefficiencies in change.

Based on the relative elevation of the following step you could even tell your body to push harder as in going for a longer step and yet the result will be a shorter step than on the flat.

So, at every hill I'm really at a three way crossroad. Either I increase, decrease or maintain the intent of each stride. This is really all I can do, I can not effect the hill to allow longer or shorter steps. Another problem is that although you can get a feel for cadence differences in actual step length is harder to determine, but it's easy to feel what you are trying to do.

If the wished result is a shorter step having identified the above crossroad I still clearly have an option that will potentially make me more efficient.

What is the right way to go I think can vary depending on physical status, people around you, specifics of the hill, specifics of the race trail and your progress along it. I'm not convinced there are no situations in which the intent of long steps is more efficient. In fact I believe there are many. The most typical example might be when feeling strong at the end of the
race going up a steep hill and trying shake your opponents.

Do you change what you tell your body to do or should you just continue telling your body to do as before and not try to manipulate the step length. There are usually biological inefficiencies in change.

I do not try to manipulate the stride length, rather I focus on maintaing cadence. Stride Length takes care of itself. The only time I consciously change stride length is if I am in a very rocky section and it makes sense to take a certain path.

What is the right way to go I think can vary depending on physical status, people around you, specifics of the hill, specifics of the race trail and your progress along it. I'm not convinced there are no situations in which the intent of long steps is more efficient. In fact I believe there are many. The most typical example might be when feeling strong at the end of the
race going up a steep hill and trying shake your opponents.

Yes, I agree with you. all of those mentioned dictate stride length and frequency. I also agree with you that, messing with stride length or frequency usyally does not result in improvement. Run by feel. As the terrain gets steeper, your stride will naturally shorten. Need to pass an oponent? Lengthen stride, bound and go.

Rich