Walking Faster aka Speed Walking

[Just Bill]

JB, are you sure you were using the right technique with the pole? Did you see the whole video I posted in post #1?

The poles drag behind you. You don't reach out with the poles except on down hills.

I first thought trekking poles were gimmicky until I tried them. I'm glad I watched a good training video first.

I keep mine extended long. The long length doesn't seem to matter when on flat or uphill terrain and then they are always ready for the downhills.

I'm going to post this video again. Notice how nothing changes with the arm swing when walking it just a matter of DRAGGING the poles and pushing off. Don't over think it.

The poles help me so much on the uphills. It's like 4 wheel drive and they're great for balance on the downhills.

I read somewhere that 95 percent of successful thru hikers used poles. I doubt these hikers would be toting the poles if they didn't work.

Yar, I feel fine with my bout of pole use. I did a fair bit of cross country skiing in my youth. Cut more than my share of hiking sticks and paddled a time or two as well. Like you say, you don't need to think too hard.

The video you posted does an excellent job of showing how to use the straps, it is disturbing how often you see folks with poles using them incorrectly.

@1:30 she makes a fine point- "Before we learn to Nordic Walk, first we must learn to walk"
@2:00 things start to fall apart.

Nordic walking, even delivered with the proper Scandinavian accent, is not trail walking. She states several times that it's purpose is to use 90% or more of your muscle groups to mimic the excellent exercise of Nordic skiing. It is a fitness technique. Much like we all agree that the Ankle and Wrist weight craze of the 80's was a great way to work out. In hiking though we all agree that wearing heavy boots and wrist weights (heavy poles) is not really a great way to travel all day for days on end. Great idea when you have 30-60 mins a day three days a week though!

You must also remember the motion of cross country skiing, wherein you are making an effort to push the front foot out prior to weighting it and thrust with the poles to transfer into a gliding motion. With no glide though it's pretty bad form. Cross country skies also have a camber built into them that takes up some of the downward force off our knees when over-striding this way. It is a difficult motion, only made efficient when the skis which inspire the technique are under foot.

I tried to post photos but it's not working right, but the pdf has some examples comparing the two to show it better.walking.pdf

Also, for every story you hear about how "poles saved my life" you hear two stories about how poles got tangled up in that dragging motion and nearly dislocated a hikers shoulder or flipped them onto their back. Poles are not exactly graceful at all times either. You may catch me wind milling my arms or even on the ground, but you can say the same of any hiker on the AT, poles or not.

Finally-
I tried poles to see if they would make me faster.
They did not, they made me slower, more fatigued, and a bad walker. Even with "proper" form.
At some point I may find them to be of benefit, likely when my natural ability starts to give way to age or joint issues.
Until that time comes though I have found poles to be much less efficient and more importantly, they spoiled my walk.

It isn't that I care what anyone does, or feel the need to push my choice. All I care about is that you make the right choice for you and that you have the best experience you can have. The goofy looking fella in the pdf above comes from a group of folks who like to say, "When you can run on the earth, and with the earth, you can run forever" I personally feel, because it is so little discussed or talked about, that few get the chance to walk in balance, to flow.

A bit like saying Vanilla is my favorite ice cream because I never got to try Chocolate. Both are good flavors, there is no best- but you have to try them both to know for sure which you prefer. I honestly don't care which you prefer, and personally I try every "strawberry" flavor that pops up too, just in case I prefer that. Be curious!

[Dogwood]

"That book ain't coming out any time soon...Just a book of bull**** and lies."

Don't be so coy and self deprecating. You make lots of good pts. You are obviously a deep thinker and passionate about many a backpacking topics .......and long fingered poster which you should keep doing as it makes my long winded posts less obvious.

Vacuous, really Lonehiker? Maybe voluminous but not vacuous.

[Just Bill]

Vacuous, really Lonehiker? Maybe voluminous but not vacuous.

Depend how much you've been drinking.
But time to close up the V section of the dictionary for the evening I think.

It's a good discussion, let the insults fly by like skeeters outside a headnet.

[Pedaling Fool]

I have my fair share of hiking with hiking poles and without. I've decided to not use them ever again, luckily I only bought cheap sticks, because I always knew I was just experimenting with them.

Basically, I've decided that they make me too dependent on them for things my core muscles should be doing, such as balance. And if my knees get too sore from downhills, that just means I must spend more time working them up.

However, I can't comment on how they are with respect to speed hiking, since I've never really gotten into that; I just like to leisurely hike, nothing else. Although, I will say when looking at the "pros" in the sport for guidance most people see what they want to see, i.e. they focus on the ones that use a particular piece of equipment or employ a certain technique...

You want to walk fast, you gotta walk and walk and walk...It's a sad fact of life; there are no shortcuts.

I ride bikes with a lot of people that attempt to emulate the pros in the sport of cycling (go to any local cycling club and you'll see them), they buy the bikes for thousands of dollars and all the associated support equipment and clothing... However, I on a much cheaper, heavier bike with panniers, not to mention I weigh over 200lbs can easily keep up with these people and in many cases out perform them. Why? Because I have thousands and thousands of miles on my bike, simply because it's my form of commuting.

However, I am somewhat of a lance-wannabe myself, so I do more than just leisurely pedaling, including a lot of sprinting (always have), which has very much developed my cardio system and I have a lot of long tours on a bike which have developed my endurance.

The point being that it's not the equipment it's the person that is the overwhelming factor. Of course if I were riding with others with the same experience as me and they had all the expensive stuff they would have a big advantage, but to look to that stuff before building the "engine" is folly.

Just face it, if you want to be a fast walker, you gotta get out there and walk and walk and walk.... and after that, then you can look at all the cool looking gizmos.

I've saved tons of money over the years not fretting over all the gizmos and the bigger payback is that my health and raw abilities are far more worth any gizmo out there.

[Just Bill]

Yar, trail time is the only sure way. But in knowing what the goal is you can often reach it faster.

When I got into speed hiking more purposefully and explored minimalist style footwear I got the opportunity to speak with a local shoe store owner who has serviced the local high schools and running community. He performed a gait analasis but even more interesting, helped me understand a bit about "reading your shoes". No matter what you do, say you do, hope you do, or plan to do- at the end of the day your shoes will tell the true tale. I have found this advice very helpful in general and instructive in relation to my form.

Poles or not- flip over your shoes and see what they look like- and then visualize where those wear patterns come from in relation to your stride. Find a good shoe salesman and bring your worn shoes in to have them take a look for you if needed.

Again- sorry for PDF, but this isn't posting well for me. But here are my shoes, and the wear they see when doing my best to emulate the woods walk described by Kephart and many others.
Technique costs you nothing but time, adds no weight, and improves your experience.
It is also the hardest to discuss, the most difficult to obtain, and the easiest to dismiss.
Just because something may takes years to develop, it shouldn't be dismissed or ignored any more quickly than the advice to buy good gear once that lasts for years over cheap gear that lasts a trip.

No single thing affects walking more than walking, I feel it should receive the same attention to detail and value you would devote to any critical piece of equipment. Especially as this item will truly last a lifetime.

[Dogwood]

Lots of informed advice JB. Do you run?

[Just Bill]

Lots of informed advice JB. Do you run?

It's on the list... We all have something we should do but we don't
I did when I was in HS, and still occasionally do sporadically. I don't like it much, but the reality is that being able to hike 200+ miles a week with two kids ain't happening- running even a 1/4 of that is a decent substitute- but whenever I set out to- I just end up hiking...
Last year was my best bout- I was running about 40 miles a week- mainly in the form of run walk variations over the course of longer hikes.

We'll see- the only real reason to do it is to train for a record attempt- not sure if that's in the future after the lessons learned on the LT attempt. For Records; looks like the hiker, no matter how crafty or skilled, will need at least a passing level of Ultra running ability and not running is no longer an option.

[rocketsocks]

It's on the list... We all have something we should do but we don't
I did when I was in HS, and still occasionally do sporadically. I don't like it much, but the reality is that being able to hike 200+ miles a week with two kids ain't happening- running even a 1/4 of that is a decent substitute- but whenever I set out to- I just end up hiking...
Last year was my best bout- I was running about 40 miles a week- mainly in the form of run walk variations over the course of longer hikes.

We'll see- the only real reason to do it is to train for a record attempt- not sure if that's in the future after the lessons learned on the LT attempt. For Records; looks like the hiker, no matter how crafty or skilled, will need at least a passing level of Ultra running ability and not running is no longer an option.

Hey JB...goin on?

If ya mean hiking is no longer an option because of the time required to get away from home stuff and chilrens, then (as you say...) that's a big 10-YAR. Many have been there, even after life settles down getting time away is at a premium.

but if ya mean ultra running because the bar has been set so high by those with the FKT, then I have kinda chewed on this one and have come to the opinion that there is room for hiking and laying down a decent attempt...but not by me brother, way beyond my skill set.

Here's what I mean. There's hikin' and there's trail running, just like there's running and speed walking. Two Completely different activities in the books of records...so why not with fastest hiked trail times. When did it become OK, thanks for letting me know to hoof it at a runners pace when astablishing fastest known hiking of the AT? Anywho, just my two schamoleans.

[rocketsocks]

Oops, that OK, thanks for letting me know is a default when I type okay. Use that a lot for me kids

[Just Bill]

Hiya Socks!

More the former in regards to having time to train. Walking 50-60 MPD to train ala Ward Leonard is a lifestyle- Ultrarunning to achieve the same- a time compromise with nearly the same benefit from a physical standpoint. But much is lost in other areas.
And also the thought that such training and said attempt begins to sour the reason to go in the first place- that's it's supposed to be fun.

As fer splitting the FKT's- I'm not a fan. Whether you walk, hop, skip, jump, or run- the fastest time is the fastest. And on the AT at least, the terrain imposes it's own speed limit just fine on its own.

Even the relatively small difference on paper between 3.5MPH and 4MPH gets hard to close without some jogging. Without a good base of Ultrarunning maintaining that pace becomes impractical. Even with fantastic technique and efficiency combined with a bit of sleep deprivation the current FKT's are at the edge of what is possible at speed hiking paces. Joey Camps trip this summer being a fine example- if he had the ability- at the speed he was travelling and the reduction in hiking hours- much could have been done to care for feet, body, and mind. Needed time impossible to recover any other way.

As fer me personally- I know it's mainly a theoretical exercise. An FKT just a great thing to study and to work on in context of that great running concept of a "personal record". I also learned on my LT trip- the difference between a 60, 75, or 90 day hike is tremendously substantial in terms of the experience had and choices made. More and more I see the wisdom of these trips as an ideal balance between fast and free or slave to the attempt.

As the whole point is to expand that feeling of fulfillment in motion- crossing the line has less and less appeal. If ever I put the pieces together and my style allows the pace needed- fantastic! But I have come to realize that sacrificing my personal style invalidates my connection to the trail, and as a result invalidates the hike itself. I still believe that an FKT is just a carrot at the end of a stick- the hike itself the only reward.

When I was on the LT I skipped the summit of Whiteface. On a stunning day in one of the most beautiful places I've ever been, with clear weather, good views, and fall colors- I walked by to save fifteen minutes. I skipped a sight many a hiker would call the highlight of a three week LT thru, maybe even a highlight of a lifetime of hiking. It's a choice that violated every reason I have to hike and poisoned my connection with the trail.
About an hour later the trail broke my foot.
Lesson learned.

[1azarus]

so, says Just Bill: "FWIW, it has been my observation of fairly fast folks who do go with the cripple sticks that they use them a bit shorter than average so as to achieve a slight forward lean, longer gait and better footwork. I obviously cannot speak from experience, but just passing an observation along."

I am glad to hear that -- i have long wondered about pole length... at 5'-6" I use a 105 cm pole, 10 cm shorter than usually recommended length. I feel like it requires less arm lift, and uses less energy for the same result. AND i don't cotton to adjustable poles... i figure it is hard enough to learn how to walk with one length.

[Dogwood]

Want a FKT? Create a category of FKT for yourself. Don't be so quick to dismiss the idea. I wouldn't be so surprised if that happens seeing how many folks and our U.S. culture is gaga about speed. It seems so many have the idea that if something is worth doing it is worth doping fast. I could see categories for seniors, various other age groups, gender, regions, amateur, professional, etc not just supported, unsupported, yo-yos, etc . You could create a FKT father of two mid west upper Chicago while wearing a red hat long winder WB poster category! You'd be a sure win in that category JB.

It's all based on the honor system too. We see how well that has worked out for those supposedly completing thru-hikes. Uhh ohh there's a BIG can of worms I opened up.

[rocketsocks]

"I still believe that an FKT is just a carrot at the end of a stick- the hike itself the only reward"
this is the way I'd view an attempt as well.

I see your points (the training involved, and time to achieve relevance worth an attempt) otherwise what's the point. To keep ones eyes on the prize can only last as long as one stays pretty consistently in the game and relatively healthy and maintenance free, so in an attempt to hoof it an make up some time as a tool/technique I suppose it would be the only way to save a potential failed attempt, an after say 1,800 miles or so, yep, steppin' livelier than before could be the saving grace. At some point I guess the evolution of the activity has become the reality, and nothin' changes if nothin' changes. So yep, it's quite the commitment to plan, execute and achieve, that's what makes it a cut above the rest, and rightly so. kudos to dems that try, it ain't me babe. Naw no no. still enjoy following along tho.

[Malto]

It's on the list... We all have something we should do but we don't
I did when I was in HS, and still occasionally do sporadically. I don't like it much, but the reality is that being able to hike 200+ miles a week with two kids ain't happening- running even a 1/4 of that is a decent substitute- but whenever I set out to- I just end up hiking...
Last year was my best bout- I was running about 40 miles a week- mainly in the form of run walk variations over the course of longer hikes.

We'll see- the only real reason to do it is to train for a record attempt- not sure if that's in the future after the lessons learned on the LT attempt. For Records; looks like the hiker, no matter how crafty or skilled, will need at least a passing level of Ultra running ability and not running is no longer an option.

I suspect swami would disagree with this. Two records in 2012, little running history, no ultra that I'm aware of.

[rocketsocks]

Want a FKT? Create a category of FKT for yourself. Don't be so quick to dismiss the idea. I wouldn't be so surprised if that happens seeing how many folks and our U.S. culture is gaga about speed. It seems so many have the idea that if something is worth doing it is worth doping fast. I could see categories for seniors, various other age groups, gender, regions, amateur, professional, etc not just supported, unsupported, yo-yos, etc . You could create a FKT father of two mid west upper Chicago while wearing a red hat long winder WB poster category! You'd be a sure win in that category JB.

It's all based on the honor system too. We see how well that has worked out for those supposedly completing thru-hikes. Uhh ohh there's a BIG can of worms I opened up.

Caveats...it's what's fer dinner...I like it.

[Just Bill]

I suspect swami would disagree with this. Two records in 2012, little running history, no ultra that I'm aware of.

Laz-
LOL, I was carefully choosing my words and cringing a bit during the hiking pole portion of our conversation the other day...

Malto-
I would disagree with my own statement a bit as well. The well known FKT's come to mind first, but there are other records to be sure. I don't know much about Swami other than the shear volume of hiking he has done and his silky smooth radio voice on the trail show.

I think we were discussing this a bit before on Coffee's marathon thread... Regardless of actual formal events, I think many of us have a "passing" level of Ultra Running ability. Technically many speed hikers complete more ultra's than most Ultra runners. A girlfriend of mine is very active and did her first Ultra this season. I was going to join her on her second event but she got hurt and had to bow out.

Point being- her first ultra was one of those 12 hour loop races. She did 42 miles and finished "in the pack". Her second race was to be an 18 hour 50 mile trail race. You had to make a cutoff at 14 hours in. I would have struggled for sure, but odds were decent I could finish- not compete by any means- but complete the race. I've done that before with a pack, so have many of us. Hell, how many hikers do the four state challenge every year.

I have to imagine Swami would have little or no trouble with that, in fact in the 50-100 mile races, I would imagine he would do pretty well overall.
To me- that level of fitness is either maintained Swami style, or Ultra-runner style. At the longer distances, the line is very blurry.

But from a PCT or AT or even LT FKT point of view- I don't think that level of fitness is enough, or at least these FKT's toe the line.
I could be wrong, I hope I am actually, but I think Matt and Scott were good examples of "perfect" hikers.
Joey was a step or two away, primarily with a competitive Ultra-running background.
I don't know enough about Anish to say- but in the hike at least, she was clearly moving at competitive Ultra speeds.

[Pedaling Fool]

Yar, trail time is the only sure way. But in knowing what the goal is you can often reach it faster.

So, what is the goal? I guess that's a question for the OP.

When I first started running I don't exactly remember my first goal, but I think it was something like: "If I could just run 5 miles as if it were nothing (i.e. routine, not a big deal), I'd be happy..." However, that goal was surpassed long ago; the goal line keeps moving

But we do need goals or else it does become difficult to justify beating yourself up every time you go out for a run (or a walk). One thing I noticed is that it can be very demoralizing to set too big of a goal to early, gotta start small. And don't expect your new PR (personal record) time to be a new standard -- it's not, you will go slower the next time and wonder ***. You gotta look for the little, less perceptible improvements, other than time. There's a lot that can be said here, but I gotta go...chores

[Malto]

So, what is the goal? I guess that's a question for the OP.

When I first started running I don't exactly remember my first goal, but I think it was something like: "If I could just run 5 miles as if it were nothing (i.e. routine, not a big deal), I'd be happy..." However, that goal was surpassed long ago; the goal line keeps moving

But we do need goals or else it does become difficult to justify beating yourself up every time you go out for a run (or a walk). One thing I noticed is that it can be very demoralizing to set too big of a goal to early, gotta start small. And don't expect your new PR (personal record) time to be a new standard -- it's not, you will go slower the next time and wonder ***. You gotta look for the little, less perceptible improvements, other than time. There's a lot that can be said here, but I gotta go...chores

Had a chuckle over your post. I used to try beating my long daily hiking record of 57.4 miles. But it takes almost 19 hours just to start setting a new record. I pretty much figured it's not worth the time.

[Chair-man]

flip over your shoes and see what they look like- and then visualize where those wear patterns come from in relation to your stride.

OK, so I did this and as it turns out I'm wearing out the outside of my heels more than the rest of my sole. An internet search of shoe wear says I have supination . It's only on the heel, the rest of my sole is wearing evenly. It's said to be not that uncommon and not a real problem.

If your wearing out the inside of your soles it's called pronation. Learn something everyday.

Here's a couple of photos of the bottoms of my La Sportiva Wildcat trail runners.
Bottoms
Bottoms.jpg


The heel
Heel.jpg


I'm just going to have to make a conscious effort to land on the center of my heel when I'm walking.

[MuddyWaters]

When Krissy Moehl and Jenn Shelton set out on their JMT record attempt FKT this summer, guess what they were carrying and using? They were several hrs ahead of record pace until Krissy's giardia issues slowed them.

Not ultra slouches either. Jenn holds the fastest time in a 100 miler of any woman anywhere, and Krissy won the hard rock, regarded as the hardest ultra 100 mile race.

However, Darcy Africa, 3 time straight woman's hard rock winner did not. she bailed at the sawmill pass trail jct presumeably because she was behind record pace after only 60 miles.

I would suggest that what is faster, depends on the terrain. Steep downhills where your feet slide with every step on gravel, you will benefit from poles. Uneven rocky trail, benefit as well. Wet rocks or slippery, yep. Flat moderate trail, smooth trail, put them in your pack.(or ditch them with your support crew)