Do you believe this? Scientific study: Running on trails isn't any better for your legs/injury prevention than the roads

Difference between some rocky and rooty trails vs a gravel path

I am amazed how many people here avoid trails altogether because of the potential unevenness!

But then again, I see people running on the street in traffic because they don't feel confident to navigate sidewalks.

It's like gym bros who only worry about aesthetics in the mirror but are not actually strong in a functional sense. What's it like to be trapped on smooth, flat roads? Most here should take a break from focusing on pace every once in a while and have some fun engaging body and mind on an uneven trail! I feel like the typical LRCer is a joyless pace slave and that makes me sad.

versatile wrote:

I am amazed how many people here avoid trails altogether because of the potential unevenness!

But then again, I see people running on the street in traffic because they don't feel confident to navigate sidewalks.

It's like gym bros who only worry about aesthetics in the mirror but are not actually strong in a functional sense. What's it like to be trapped on smooth, flat roads? Most here should take a break from focusing on pace every once in a while and have some fun engaging body and mind on an uneven trail! I feel like the typical LRCer is a joyless pace slave and that makes me sad.

Week ankle go crack

Weak* lol

versatile wrote:

I am amazed how many people here avoid trails altogether because of the potential unevenness!

But then again, I see people running on the street in traffic because they don't feel confident to navigate sidewalks.

It's like gym bros who only worry about aesthetics in the mirror but are not actually strong in a functional sense. What's it like to be trapped on smooth, flat roads? Most here should take a break from focusing on pace every once in a while and have some fun engaging body and mind on an uneven trail! I feel like the typical LRCer is a joyless pace slave and that makes me sad.

I did most of my runs on smooth flat roads and was never a joyless pace slave. I never had any strong ideas about preferring one surface over others. Mostly I ran on roads and streets because that's what were available when I went out the door. Sometimes I'd have no idea if there was trail somewhere but even if there was I wasn't usually keen on driving to it.

the most likely answer is that it's best to do all of it. mix up the stimulus. strengthen different body parts, imbalances, etc. roads may be good rest from many days on the trails, and vice versa.

this is me. my favorite part of running is that you just have to step out the door and it's there. I have to drive 40 minutes to find good trails. I'll do it on occasion, but it is not even close to being a regular part of the routine.

600yd/600m man wrote:

Psychologists, physiologists and sport medicine medical doctors seem to be taken seriously with these extremely small sample studies. Economists, sociologists and Big Pharma tend to have sample sizes greater than 100,000. I cannot take a study seriously with a dozen or two dozen individuals.

Not only the very small sample size, and questions about measurement sensitivity but the researchers are highly unscientific to draw any conclusions particularly as they did. Their study did not show there was no difference in injury or even shock incurred. The study was designed to see if there is a measureable difference not to see if there is no difference. Subtle but this meaningful distinction.

What increase injury risk when it comes to surface is mainly when the runner change surface too often and the feet, legs and body have to adjust each time based on the surface. I myself trained mostly at gravel and had very few injuries.

suspicion in the ignition_ wrote:

I was always under the impression that the benefit of trails was more about: a) less REPETITIVE stress (not necessarily less stress) and b) creating more strength. Thus, one would think people would be less vulnerable to overuse injuries would be in better shape and a runner’s body would be stronger and able to deal with more stress. In particular, your ankles get stronger from the uneven footing.

Thus, my hypothesis isn’t that you are less likely to get injured on any given run on a trail, but that over time, your body handles stress better and the stresses will be diverse enough that overuse is less of a concern.

I agree here 👍

This reminds me of the recent research suggesting that hills vs flats doesn't matter re your achilles - treadmill science showing that each are equally stressful. That said, I vote for experience over the science. Exercise physiology is always behind experience. Researchers can't even explain why running more than 75 miles a week is beneficial notwithstanding that long-distance elites can't run that kind of low mileage and remain competitive. Trails definitely feel better to me than concrete sidewalks. Trails simply feel better. That said, I've probably injured myself more on trails in so far as rolling ankles on rocks and roots than on any concrete sidewalk. I rolled into the rhubarb three times during my last trail race. I've never tripped and fell in a road marathon. I feel like this has been studied to death. Researchers would likely have me believe that my biomechanics would adapt such that I would see no stress difference were I to do my long runs in cleats, Hokas or barefoot - I beg to differ. I vote for trails, but for rocks and roots...

Not buying it!

This isn't complicated. Simply put, trails (aka soft surfaces) are less stressful on the legs...PERIOD! Hard surfaces create much more shock/impact than soft surfaces, thus less fatigued over a period of time. Try this experiment, train for 1 week in your racing flats and then one week in your cushioned training shoes. You'll notice a HUGE difference between the two.

dumbguydoingdumbstudy wrote:

This study made me realize that softer vs harder surfaces makes no difference. So I switched out my punching bag with one made of concrete since it will last longer.

So good,

versatile wrote:

...the typical LRCer is a joyless pace slave and that makes me sad.

Brojos, can you please change my screen name to Joyless Pace Slave?

Thanks and Merry Christmas,

-A joyless pace slave

Probably valid, but do we really run trails to prevent injuries? Avoiding cars, stoplights, stupid people and not knowing what might be beyond a wooded turn or mountain peak are the real reasons to stay on the trail. If you're running technical and rocky terrain, your chances of injury are substantially higher. Hard packed sand or grass has to be better than pavement IMO.

They don't really say how sensitive the accelerometers are. If you are running the same pace, the accelerometer data would be very similar regardless of the surface (running slower on dirt in and of itself would reduce loading indirectly). What is of primary concern would be the difference in displacement, which would be a fraction of an inch (likely beyond the sensitivity of the accelerometers). Short of implanting strain gauges on a person's bone, I don't know that you can get an accurate measure of the actual difference in stress on the bone (maybe they could enlist individuals with prosthetic blades to measure the difference). I've always felt great running on dirt and will continue to do so as much as possible. Running longer distances, even a difference of 5% can make a huge difference. If you are running 80 miles a week (assuming an average stride length of 30 inches), that is about 170,000 strides (or 85,000 strides per leg each week). With that number of cycles, small differences become big differences. Go do a 100 squat jumps on a bare concrete floor and then go do 100 squat jumps on a padded floor and see if you can tell the difference in impact on every part of your body.

versatile wrote:

I am amazed how many people here avoid trails altogether because of the potential unevenness!

But then again, I see people running on the street in traffic because they don't feel confident to navigate sidewalks.

It's like gym bros who only worry about aesthetics in the mirror but are not actually strong in a functional sense. What's it like to be trapped on smooth, flat roads? Most here should take a break from focusing on pace every once in a while and have some fun engaging body and mind on an uneven trail! I feel like the typical LRCer is a joyless pace slave and that makes me sad.

I have two reasons to not like the unevenness of trails:

1. I have an arthritic knee that buckles on uneven surfaces.

2. I am EXTREMELY clumsy. Uneven surfaces often result in face plants.

If you could show me a continuous soft trail that was level, I'd be sold. Since I know of no such thing near me, I run on sidewalks and lightly traveled roads. I am not a joyless pace slave as I run by time without knowing exactly how far I've gone (old school Timex watch, no Garmin or anything).

snowdays wrote:

like 80% of common running tips are old wives tales that have no basis in reality. "running on soft surfaces prevents injury" is one of many

Well, ask Marius Bakken about muscular tension on soft surfaces vs hard surfaces.

There is a difference between the two, how much it impact injuries is the question.

This is a perfect demonstration of why all the scientific studies of running are so frustrating. They attempt to isolate a single variable and determine something definitive about it in an "all-or-nothing" fashion.

Other unofficial examples/debates:

-"High intensity intervals improved performance more than easy running over the course of 6 weeks in recreational runners." Well no sh!t, that's why they are a part of the vast majority of training programs at some, but that doesn't mean that is what you should do them all the time.

-"Moderately trained runners that engaged in 10 weeks of heavy weight training improved their performance more than those that did not." Well duh. The group that had new stimulus adapted to it and their performance improved as a result. That doesn't mean our training programs should make heavy lifting the main focus (although it may indicate it should be included).

-"Should I run singles or doubles?" Why do you think it needs to be all one or the other? They both have pros and cons.

Double some days, and run once on others!

So accelerometers showed no significant difference in their data on the head and shin on trails vs paved surfaces...that doesn't mean the human body's interaction with those two training surfaces is identical, but it does lend something to the credence that running is running and will involve impact. To me, the real takeaway from this study and thread is that different surfaces can have different purposes in training, and different people respond differently (both in terms of their physical and mental experience) to different surfaces. Find the mix that works best for you (or, if you are a coach, for your athletes)!