X-country skiing is like swimming in as much as it a technique dependent activity. Good technique = less effort.

I agree with that. BUT, my question was more about whether I can equate a 2hr run to a 2hr ski session, or whether I should go longer when skiing (both done at the same HR)

Ziva,

I am also a fan of x-country skate skiing. I have heard that skate skiing is a good proxy (i.e., uses similar muscles) for cycling and that classic style x-country skiing is a good proxy for running. Your long ski workouts will obviously help you maintain your aerobic capacity, but I suspect your running specific strength will decrease if you only do skate skiing workouts. Can you incorporate some classic skiing (or aquajogging) also?

Out of curiosity, what is it about your asthma that allows you to ski, but not run? Feel free to tell me to mind my own business.

Good luck.

Cheers,

Matt

I like skate more, the trails are groomed for skate more often than classical where I'm at right now, and my classic skis, poles, and shoes are on the other side of the Atlantic, so I want to stick to skate technique for this month. :) If the consensus is that I should ski classical instead of skate, in order to stay more running-specific, I may get another classic ski set.

Re: asthma: I had an asthma attack that was crossing over into systemic anaphylaxis to some unknown air allergen while running two weeks ago in town. The town/city is in a valley and we've been having pretty bad weather, so I have been instructed not to exercise outdoors in the valley for a while. I have no probs while skiing, and I attribute that to cleaner air.

The quick answer (without seeing your technique) is no. Since XC Skiing uses all muscles for propulsion, it is not as hard on the legs as running. You can go out day after day and XC ski for 2 hours, but you would not be able to do that running.

2 hour Run = 3 hour XC ski

or

60 second running = 90 seconds XC skiing (and for my XC ski technique, even that is generous).

I don't think you need to be concerned with translating aerobic endurance from skiing to running (assuming some degree of skate technique efficiency). Any aerobic effects will be overshadowed by losses in mechanical specificity. I skate and stride all winter and can jump back on the bike in the spring almost where I left off in the fall. In terms of running, my spring build-up requires more time to adapt to the impact of running.

Intuitively, classic is better for running (plane of motion), however, I can't cite any science that quantifies any advantage over skating.

Maybe it's a good time to take a break from the pounding of running and freshen the spirit with a change of pace.

Two other thoughts: you could go for a short run immediately following your ski to minimize the run specific detraining (you get some impact on fatigued legs and clean air); include some high cadence work in your ski workout to reduce the glide phase (non-existant in running).

I raced Nordic starting 25+ years ago before I was a runner or did any tri's. These days I coach college XC and Nordic. I'm going to disagree with the posts above about comparable intensity. IMO what feels like a similar intensity in running and skiing, say level 3-4 (on a 1-5 scale 5 being hardest), always has me come out with a higher heart rate while skiing. The athletes I have who do both sports create the same data. I'm convinced it's because you add arms for skiing. So, to answer the original question, I would equate 2 hours of Nordic skiing to a 2:30 run. The only time this doesn't seem to be true is if you're training somewhere with super long climbs and long descents. In this case I've found that it's too hard to sustain the heart rate on the climb (we're talking a 15-20+ minute climb that we do regularly at one of our training sites) because there comes a point where you just back off to get some kind of recovery. Then once up top you get the long recovery so again your heart rate is going to be lower. In a more typical rolling terrain training day my skiers sustain higher heart rates than my runners. And if you're doing "stop/start" skiing, rather than continuous motion you're going to need longer time out there.

In training my runners and skiers use a same (very steep!) hill in the fall, about 45-60 seconds long. When we train out here it's never for an easy day. The skiers use poles and do hillbounding, the runners run the thing, so not the same workout, but supposed to feel like a similar intensity. For heart rates up top my skiers are usually 185-195 with occasional heart rates above 210. My runners are usually 170-190 but I've never seen a heart rate over 200 with my runners.

One thing I find is that when I return to running in the spring my aerobic fitness and strength are a lot higher than they were in the fall. Despite this I find the conversion back to running challenging. The muscles just don't seem to work fluidly for the first week or so.

I agree 100% that skate skiing translates better to cycling and classic skiing translates better to running, but even classic skiing, good classic skiing, is becoming more power based every year. Having said that, my top skier last winter was a stronger classic skier but was a semipro mountain biker. And on my women's team the best skiers I have had over the years have generally had better skate results and most also run XC in the fall.

So, to just maintain "long run endurance", I think you can get away with less time on Nordic skis than your running time (depending on the terrain and if you can keep from taking breaks), but expect to have some readaptation time when you get back to running. Enjoy your skiing

Hi,

Not sure if it is an option, but if the location for X-c skiing is OK for your asthma, then if you have access to snowshoes, you can do that. The conversion is usually time for time, in comparing to running. In the literature, there are at least two (that I know of) that have shown an increased VO2 max as a result of snowshoe training as compared to just running for a treadmill test (running). Between skate skiing and snowshoeing, you will build an unbeatable base for the upcoming season.



Stephen J

---

I believe my local reality has been violated.
____________________________________________
Happiness = Results / (Expectations)^2

"Enjoy your skiing "

Heading out at lunch time. Should get a full hour in.

Great post and sold ideas on xc-skiing. I agree on all points. As is usual here, people are tending to over-think things a bit much. It's pretty straight forward:

1. XC skiing whether skate or classic is an outstanding off season training option for triathletes.

2. Technique is going to be the key limiter in the early days for newbies to classic and/or skating. ANY xc session is going to seem REALLY hard until technique is refined and one becomes more efficient

3. The great thing once technique is refined is that you can go for a very long time( similar to cycling ie hours) with out really killing yourself or maxing out certain muscle groups, so it's a great sub for those long sustained aerobic type of training sessions that you would do on the bike, but in many ways even better, because you are using as noted many more muscle groups.

4. Regarding what is "better" - skating or classic, that's not a question that is easily answered. They are both great and ideally a skier should be able to do both well. I would always let conditions and terrain decide what I would do. There are certain weather conditions that make skating a better option. Ditto with terrain ie really hilly terrain, is perhaps best done with classic technique where as gently rolling terrain is best done skating. Long sustained climbs done skating can REALLY max you out unless technique is very refined and you are very fit

5. Final tip leave the HRM at home. In the early going, you will see numbers that are off the scale scary. Don't worry. It's all good.

Enjoy the winter wonderland.

Fleck

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

Thank you for all your ideas!

I am just out there to enjoy the skiing, since I'd be skiing whether or not I could run, just wasn't planning on doing it exclusively. I have a goal to jfski as much as I can fit into my schedule, and as per DevPauls thoughts extend my sessions from current 2.30hrs to over 3hrs. My focus in training this past year has been to prevent HR drop-off during efforts over 2hrs. This is why I am concerned whether I can equate skiing time with running time.

I don't think I detrain too much after not running for a while, as I used to not run at all during the season in my past life as a rower, and then get back into doing marathon mileage without a problem in the rowing-offseason, but I like the idea of running after skiing, sort of like a brick...will try that.

We have an inch of fresh snow outside :) so happy skiing to all!

Ziva

Sure, I can do a 3 hour XC ski race at >170 bpm, and do another one in 3 days. I can also bike for 3+ hours at a similar intensity. I can't even run 90 min at 170 bpm, forget about 3 hours. My legs would just fall off from the pounding.

So yes, I can sustain a much higher HR while XC skiing, but running takes more "recovery units" out of my body. So really, my equation is related more to what it take out of my body, and in the big picture of day in and day out training, this is what matters. How else do you think Tour de France cyclists can race that hard for that long, for so many days. Its the recovery side that is easier in biking than running. XC skiing falls somewhere in the middle.

Your cardio system recovers more easily from hard sessions than legs.