Was wondering today, as I was doing a hill workout, if there was a general 'rule' when one is mapreading and sees an over v around route choice. I figure the rule might look something like: For every x contour of climb, I'm OK to go y meters of off the straight line on the level. As I was pondering it, my first, rough idea was something along a 1:2 ratio, so 50 meters of climb, I could go 100 meters out of my way (I guess that would be 200 total, with 100 out of the way and 100 to come back)... but that's really just theoretical, haven't really tried it.

In a different approach, I wondered about comparing energy use. I would guess one would want to arrive at the same point, at about the same time, with about the same amount of energy expended. As I completed one hill interval and was gasping for breath, I wondered if it would be fair to compare the distance I ran up the hill, factoring in contours somehow, to how far I could run on the level with the same effort. (But I highly suspect that on a course, I would put out more energy running up the hill than if I was running on the level -- just wanna get to the top of the hill!) And I wondered, too, if, with a slower speed for both, the comparison would hold.

That said, the figures from a couple of recent hill workouts: A longer hill: On the governor's land. Uphill starts at a bridge across the creek (just over the '8' in the dark red '28') and goes south up the hill along its eastern side to the top. http://www.topozone.com/map.asp?lat=39.0675&lon=-95.7429&s=24&size=l&symshow=n&datum=nad83&layer=DRG25 Distance (climb + straightline):(140 double paces) about 540m Climb: about 50m Time: about 3:20 Effort: Hard (HR>165) Equivalent 'Level' Distance: about 720m So here, the 2:1 is about right. Could go 100m out of my way, and 100m back, which would add 200m. 540climb v 720level

A shorter hill: From just above the 'n' in Quinton straight south to the top of the hill. http://www.topozone.com/map.asp?lat=39.0291&lon=-95.6906&s=24&size=l&symshow=n&datum=nad83&layer=DRG25 Distance: (about 45 double paces) about 175 m Climb: about 25m Time: 1:10 Effort: Hard (HR > 165) Equivalent 'Level' Distance: about 250m Here again, it's close. 25m climb, could go 50m out of my way, and 50m back and that would total 275 on the flat. But seems to be less advantageous with a shorter hill.

I'd welcome thoughts.

-- Fritz (fpmenninger@hotmail.com), November 20, 2003

Answers

Should you even be out training on the governor's land?

-- Mook (mook@mook.com), November 21, 2003.

I think that judging over/around choices is highly personal based on fitness, navigation ability, and probably quite a few other factors. I started a discussion on Attackpoint regarding this last winter. I won’t rehash the whole thread here, but the consensus was that 5m < 1m climb < 7m.

I believe the results that Fritz is seeing (closer to a 4:1 ratio) is the result of something often overlooked when comparing times: the marginal cost of extra effort. At low speeds, resistance is fairly linear. Thus, a 10% increase in effort results in a 10% increase in speed. At faster speeds, non-linear components (typically squares, but if you go fast enough even higher order terms show up) become prominent. A 10% increase in effort may only get you 2-3% extra speed.

If you compare your climb vs. distance at race pace (significantly below the hard efforts described in Fritz’s post for all but the best navigators), you get a multiplier in the 5-7 range. At hard efforts, the relative effect of the climb is reduced because the extra effort buys you a lot more on the climb than on the flat.

On the other hand, when climbing, you are almost always below your optimal navigation speed. Choosing the over route allows you to take advantage of your fitness in ways you might not be able to on the flat unless the flat route is technically easy. If fitness is a liability (as it is, sadly, for most US orienteers) then around routes become more desirable. I believe this to be the origin of the total bogus 10:1 rule so often quoted by the 20 minute/K crowd.

This is consistent with what is generally observed: the better shape runners tend to run closer to the red line than those who are sucking wind.

-- ebuckley (ejbuckley@earthlink.net), November 24, 2003.