A couple of weeks ago in the Daily Record there was a cartoon in the comic section of a family out for a walk. The parents were enjoying the walk and the kids were having comments about the parent’s pace of the walk. The captions of the comments from the children were in the order of, “I can run faster than you. I can run backwards faster than you. How come you walk so slow? Why don’t you walk faster?”
It seems the faster a person runs, the better it is for you. One reason is that if you run faster, you have a good chance at winning an award at a 5K or 10K race. The other reason is that if you run faster, you burn more calories. Running faster requires more energy and more muscle involvement and does burn more calories. This is a little misleading as the difference between running faster versus slower is not as much as a person would think.
There is a formula that is used to determine how many calories a runner or walker burns for a period of time. The formula takes the number of calories burned in the exercise, the number of minutes spent running or walking, and the weight of the person. As an example, a runner at an 8 minute pace burns .09 calories a minute (150 lb. runner X .09 = 13.5 calories per mile) and a brisk walker burns .04 calories per minute.
The reason there is only a slight difference in the number calories burned is the number of minutes the slower runner ran as a larger multiple. By running or walking a longer period of time helps keep the number of calories burned at a closer number that most people think. There are more benefits of running faster in terms of heart rate, muscle energy, and circulation but when it comes to calories the difference is not as great.
The difference between a slow runner or walker versus a sedentary person is the real difference. Calories burned running slow is much greater than the zero calories burned not moving at all. The parents were burning calories and the children were burning more calories running around the parents and jumping up and down. The difference is in the weight of a parent versus the small child and the gap between calories burned is not a great as a person might think. And after observations of children at various events whether it is at a park, playscape, musical outside, I very seldom see a child walk from one place to another. Children usually run in short spurts of speed from one location to another.
There are adjustments that need to be made at races for the various speeds of entrants. Unless the kid is a known fast runner it is better to put them back in the pack. The reason is that short burst of speed is followed by a walk about 50 yards into the race. Then the adults who are running tend to bump into them as they pass.
I have been at large races with several thousand runners and the race director will tell the slower runners to move toward the back of the pack. I have seen too many fast runners busting through a group of walkers that were too close to the front and cause a runner to just run through the line of walkers. I encourage walkers to enter the 5K races as a motivation to see other walkers and runners. The shorter races are not a problem usually other than the awards ceremony may begin before the walkers cross the finish line.
The problem as a race director in longer races such as a half marathon is for the volunteers out on the course. For a person walking a 15 minute pace per mile for 13.1 miles required the volunteer to be out on the road for over 3 hours. We had to publish on the entry form that the race course will close after 2 and a half hours. If the walker was moving at a 20-minute pace per mile the chances are that the last water stops would be gone by the time they got there. Long races require a brisk walking pace to please race directors.
