“You think you’re a weak runner because you keep switching to a walk. In fact, you’re using Jeff Galloway’s method” — that is how the Russian running magazine Marafonets cheered up last week those who find it hard to run without stopping in the off-season. The Run — Walk — Run method has been around since the 1970s, yet it is still viewed with suspicion: how can you run a marathon faster if you walk part of it? Two studies answer this question from different angles: one at a road marathon, the other on a climb.

A marathon with walk breaks: the experiment from Halle

German physiologists Hottenrott, Ludyga and co-authors (Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 2016) ran a randomised experiment at a real marathon. 42 recreational runners (22 men and 20 women) covered the distance using one of two strategies: continuous running or a planned alternation of running and walking.

The results:

Finish times did not differ statistically: 4:14:25 in the run-walk group versus 4:07:40 for those who ran non-stop. That is a gap of about 7 minutes, but given the spread within the groups it cannot be distinguished from chance.
Markers of cardiac stress (B-type natriuretic peptide BNP, CK-MB, myoglobin) rose equally in both groups and returned to normal within 4 days. Walk breaks did not take any load off the heart.
After the finish, the walk-break group reported less muscle pain and fatigue.

The authors’ conclusion: the method does not reduce cardiovascular stress, but it lets recreational runners finish in roughly the same time with less discomfort.

Uphill: where the boundary between walking and running lies

The second study is a recent one. Finiel, Borrani and colleagues from the University of Lausanne (European Journal of Applied Physiology, 2026) put 17 trained runners on an inclined treadmill. The clever part of the experiment was that the rate of climb was held constant at 800 metres per hour: the faster the belt, the shallower the slope. This is closer to real trail running, where what counts is how many vertical metres you gain per hour, not your horizontal speed.

Each runner did six-minute bouts of walking and running at different speeds. The researchers compared the point where a person prefers to switch from walking to running on their own with the points where various measures “cross over” — energy expenditure, heart rate, ventilation and mechanical work.

On average the transition happened at a speed of 1.76 m/s (about 6.3 km/h) on a slope of 7.2° (roughly 12–13%).
The energy cost of locomotion and oxygen uptake gave a transition point that did not differ from the one the runners chose themselves.
Heart rate and ventilation pointed to transitions that differed significantly from the preferred one.

In other words, the body chooses its gait based on economy, and does so fairly accurately. Heart rate, on the other hand, is not the best guide to when it’s time to walk.

What not to believe too firmly here

The marathon experiment is a single race with runners at around the 4-hour level. For 2:30 marathoners the maths is different: every stop costs them more time. And a result that “does not differ” does not mean “the same”: for some people seven minutes is the difference between hitting a goal and missing it.

The climb was studied on a treadmill, with 17 trained people and one rate of climb. On rocks and roots, carrying a pack, in the third hour of a race, the transition point may shift. Six-minute bouts are not 50 kilometres with elevation gain.

Neither study compared specific run-walk ratios — 4:1, 2:1 or “walk only through the aid stations”. These data cannot tell you which is best.

How to apply this

Walk by plan, not from exhaustion. The point of the method is short walking breaks from the very start, while you still have energy. Switching to a walk after the 30th kilometre because you’ve “run out” is no longer Galloway — it’s the wall. We covered that in a separate article.
Beginners — use a simple ratio. For example, 4 minutes of running and 1 minute of brisk walking. If that feels easy, lengthen the running segments.
A first marathon with walk breaks is a legitimate option. In the experiment the difference in time was not statistically significant, and muscles were less sore after the finish. But if every minute counts, test the method in advance on your long runs.
On a steep climb, trust your feel. If running has become harder than walking with a long stride, you are probably right: your body senses the energy advantage. On a slope of about 12% (at a climb rate of 800 m/h), the boundary in the experiment was around 6 km/h: below that speed it pays to walk. On a different slope it will be different.
Don’t wait for a signal from your heart rate monitor. Heart rate and breathing indicate the transition point less well than your own sense of economy.
Practise power hiking in training. Walking hard uphill is a skill in its own right. With poles it pays off even more on steep climbs — details in our piece on trekking poles in trail running.
Build walking into your pacing plan. In the race planner you can account for walking part of the climbs, and check your finish prediction against the performance index.

The bottom line

In a randomised marathon experiment, recreational runners who alternated running and walking finished in 4:14 versus 4:08 for those who ran non-stop — the difference was not statistically significant.
Cardiac stress was the same, but those who walked had less muscle pain and fatigue after the finish.
Uphill at a constant climb rate of 800 m/h, the walk-run boundary the runners chose themselves matched the energetically favourable one: around 6.3 km/h on a 7.2° slope.
Your sense of economy is more accurate than heart rate. Walking is a tool, not a defeat.

Sources: Hottenrott K., Ludyga S., Schulze S., Gronwald T., Jäger F.S. “Does a run/walk strategy decrease cardiac stress during a marathon in non-elite runners?”. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 2016;19(1):64-68. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsams.2014.11.010 · Finiel L., Carron S., Margot C., Luc V., Malatesta D., Borrani F. “Energetic cost of locomotion closely aligns with the preferred uphill walk-run transition at constant vertical speed in runners”. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 2026. DOI: 10.1007/s00421-026-06363-x