The other day, as I was being thrashed by a heavy lap swimmer, I once again pondered the difference between a swimmers body and a runners body. I have seen quite a few husky guys, carrying quite a bit of extra weight, who are also very good swimmers. On the other hand, you won't see runners who are carrying extra weight (unless they have just begun running). I think that there maybe a chicken-egg thing here (heavier guys tend not to go in for distance running) but I think that there are other considerations. One of them is that swimming tends to arouse appetite while running tends to suppress appetite.
Having said all that, I just can't yearn for a runners body, even though I would love to drop 5 kgs. I just do not want a body with no arms or shoulders. Also, maybe it's me, but this guy looks like an anorexic model:
profile.ak.fbcdn.net/.../41576_284212555090_8345297_n.jpg
Okay, so wouldn't it seem that a runner is going to pound the living cr%p out of their knees, ankles and feet if they run with too much weight?
Whereas, a swimmer has water helping to displace their weight, making it a bit easier on the key joints?
Exactly, it's almost natural selection - you won't last long running if you are carrying excess weight. Visualize or try this:
Step 1: Get two bowling balls
Step 2: Secure one in a back-pack and the other in a front baby-pack
Step 3: Run and see how it feels after maybe .5 miles
Two bowling balls weigh about 32 pounds and that's probably less than many are over an ideal weight for running. To run you have to get rid of extra weight or self-destruct, as in carrying bowling balls. Those distance Kenyan runners are bean poles for a reason.
Probably not a good idea to swim with bowling balls strapped on, but your weight in a pool due to bouyancy is about 1/5, so the two bowling balls weigh only 6 pounds, and at 190 pounds, I'm like 38 pounds in the water.
Additionally, running encounters comparativley little resistance. Drag or resistance in the water to swimming is much greater; it's directly related to the streamlined form and exposed surface area, thus the emphasis on streamling and reducing resistance with shark skin like new suits.
Okay, so wouldn't it seem that a runner is going to pound the living cr%p out of their knees, ankles and feet if they run with too much weight?
Whereas, a swimmer has water helping to displace their weight, making it a bit easier on the key joints?
Exactly, it's almost natural selection - you won't last long running if you are carrying excess weight. Visualize or try this:
Step 1: Get two bowling balls
Step 2: Secure one in a back-pack and the other in a front baby-pack
Step 3: Run and see how it feels after maybe .5 miles
Two bowling balls weigh about 32 pounds and that's probably less than many are over an ideal weight for running. To run you have to get rid of extra weight or self-destruct, as in carrying bowling balls. Those distance Kenyan runners are bean poles for a reason.
Probably not a good idea to swim with bowling balls strapped on, but your weight in a pool due to bouyancy is about 1/5, so the two bowling balls weigh only 6 pounds, and at 190 pounds, I'm like 38 pounds in the water.
Additionally, running encounters comparativley little resistance. Drag or resistance in the water to swimming is much greater; it's directly related to the streamlined form and exposed surface area, thus the emphasis on streamling and reducing resistance with shark skin like new suits.
