If you search “ways to improve running performance” online, you will likely find advice that promotes the idea of “the running buddy” or the “buddy system.” The idea is that running with a friend or in a group will encourage a higher intensity workout that, in turn, will make you a better runner. It’s a common practice now. But just because everyone says it, does that make it true?
The Exception or the Rule?
William Leer is an American Track and Field athlete. In the last two years he has changed his training routine and set a PR in nearly every race that he competes in. The secret? Sara Barker, from RunnersWorld.com, found that it’s because he’s been training by himself. After one of his hot streaks in early 2013 she interviewed Leer, and uncovered that for a long time he had relied on teammates to keep him running. “’But I don’t have that luxury anymore,’” he said in the meeting, and ‘”it takes a good amount of discipline,”’ to run consistently. Training on his own has made him accountable for his own results, and he believes it ‘“makes [him] pay more attention to what [he’s] doing.”’ Just like Trisha Reeves said in her article, “5 Benefits of Running Alone”, on Active.com, “when you only have yourself to listen to, you’ll hear what your body has to say.”
On every run you want to be completely engaged with your body, listening to its complaints and feedback, and a running buddy will only block that out. Although the conversation may keep you entertained, it “can sap your energy and be a huge distraction.” According to Reeves, when you run with a partner you end up listening to your buddy, not your body. Although articles from popular sites such as RunnersWorld.com and Competitor.com may argue that the “buddy system” is great for improving your athletic performance, Andrew Carnes, from Kent State University College, found that even that may not be true. Their “contentions,” he claims, “support a connection between social factors and exercise behavior,” but are founded in research only “concerned with performance in front of an audience or in a competitive setting.”
The Myth
Dating back more than a century, to 1898, are the original ideas of social facilitation and its effect on athletes. The belief, at the time, was that running with a peer augments athletic abilities, and improves performance. The first test to prove this, however, was done in a competitive setting, where Norman Triplett compared the race times of cyclists competing against one another to the race times of those competing against the clock. While the experiment yielded results that support the idea of social facilitation, they do not analyze the effects of peer influence on free-choice, or voluntary exercise. In his 2014 dissertation, Carnes proposed to solve this.
As he puts it “the present study differed from the [previous studies] by allowing participants to voluntarily alter the distance of the run, just as they would be able to on one of their customary running sessions,” and what he found came to his surprise. The results showed that “the presence of a same sex peer of similar ability, whether familiar or unfamiliar, had no effect on [running speed, distance, or duration].” Although it was hypothesized otherwise, in correlation with the common belief, the myth of social facilitation was busted. From a study of 24 recreationally competitive runners, Carnes discovered that there was no statistical difference between runners who ran by themselves, with a friend, or with a random runner of the same skill level, and as a result, the theory of the “buddy system” was debunked.
While Carnes was able to prove that a running buddy won’t make you a better runner, there was one thing he still couldn’t prove; does a running buddy make you more likely to stick to a training routine? Gail Kislevitz, in her article, “8 Reasons to Run with a Partner”, says it does. “If you’re apt to missing runs for no good reason,” she claims, “running with a partner will help” because you won’t want be a “no-show” to a friend. Her opinion is that a running buddy is great for accountability, but it opposes what Leer originally said. To him, having teammates to push him on was a “luxury” that didn’t hold him responsible for improving on his own. Instead, he found success by training solo, and by learning self-discipline. He improved by listening to himself.
The Tip
So is there a middle ground? A best of both worlds? In her article on RunnersWorld.com, Jen A. Miller notes the importance of finding “the right balance,” between social and solo training. “With so many advantages to solo and group training,” she says, “it’s smart to do both.” By running on your own most of the time you can focus on your form and pace, but you may lose motivation. By running with people most of the time, on the other hand, you may stay entertained, but you may also never improve your performance. The best advice, then, is to try a little of both. If you tend to run one way more than the other, do the opposite on your next run and see what you think.
How do you like to run? Do you like to run with a partner or run solo? Let us know in the comments below and give us your input!
Along with founding and writing for Runnerstongue.com, Sam Voss writes for RunSafe.me. While looking for a new fitness app to track his runs and share his workouts with friends, he stumbled upon theRunSafe App, and later got in touch with the co-founders, Violet and Sharif, in late 2014. Since then, he has been writing for both blogs, contributing to content marketing on other forums, and composing articles on running, tips, and reviews for everything runner-related. Along with being an avid runner and writer, Sam also enjoys hiking and biking in his free time. Check out more from Sam on Twittter and on the RunSafe Blog!
