Poles on the trail: they take load off your legs, but they don't make the work easier
A fresh study measured the cost of transport uphill before and after a 31-kilometre race. Poles reduced the load on the legs — but total energy expenditure doesn't drop, and by the end of the race the arms are just as tired.
The argument about poles on the trail usually runs between two extremes: “crutches for the weak” versus “nobody goes into the mountains without them.” Both positions miss, because they are debating the wrong thing. The right question isn't “is it easier with poles,” but what exactly gets easier and what you pay for it.
What was measured
A study in the European Journal of Applied Physiology (2026) was cleverly designed: it tested poles not on fresh legs, but in a state close to a real ultra.
16 trail runners walked on a treadmill at an incline of 18.6° — with and without poles — twice: before and after a race of 31.2 km with 2086 m of climbing. The researchers measured vertical cost of transport (how much energy it takes to climb one vertical metre), foot push-off force, and the force generated by the arms.
Three findings:
- With poles, cost of transport and foot push-off force are lower. The load is redistributed — the arms take on part of the work.
- After the race, vertical cost rises. A tired runner spends more energy on the same climb, poles or no poles.
- After the race, the force generated by the arms drops. The arms get tired too, and by the end of the distance poles work worse than they did on the first climb.
That last point is the most underrated. Poles aren't free: they shift part of the load onto the shoulder girdle, which in most runners is untrained.
The big confusion: “easier on the legs” ≠ “easier overall”
Here lies the reason the argument never ends.
Studies of total energy expenditure give a mixed picture: when walking with poles over rough terrain, the overall metabolic demand may even be higher than without them. But the athlete doesn't feel it — because the load is spread across more muscles, and less of it lands on the legs.
In other words, poles don't save energy. They change how the load is distributed — and that is exactly why they work over long distances. In an ultra, the legs fail before the fuel runs out. Anything that postpones the moment when the quads stop pushing is worth more than a few percent of efficiency.
Hence the practical conclusion: in a short race, where the legs don't have time to break down, poles can be pure dead weight. Over a distance where you'll spend many hours in the mountains, it's the opposite.
Where poles work best
The data on gradient is fairly consistent. Maximum vertical ascent rate is reached at inclines of roughly 15–25°, and that is exactly where poles help push fatigue back.
The logic is simple. On a gentle climb you're still running, and poles get in the way of your arm swing. On a very steep slope you're pushing on your knees or on the slope itself, and poles become awkward. Between those extremes lies the zone where you power-hike with a strong push-off — and there a pole gives you a real point of support.
The second scenario is descents. Poles reduce impact loading on the joints, which is especially valuable after many hours of running, when the muscular damper no longer works. But on a technical descent, where you need free hands for balance and to catch yourself, they turn into a liability.
How to use this
- Train your shoulder girdle, not just your legs. Since arm force falls by the end of the race, poles without a prepared upper body will fade right along with you. Rows, push-ups, triceps work — not for aesthetics, but so the poles work at kilometre 25 the way they did at kilometre five.
- Practise the technique in advance. Poles are a skill. Pulling them out for the first time on race day is a way to lose time and break your rhythm.
- Account for weight and logistics. Folding, stowing, straps, what to do at aid stations — all of it gets rehearsed in training.
- Decide by the course profile, not by habit. A long climb in the 15–25° range — take them. A flat or mostly runnable race — probably not.
- Check the rules. In some races poles are restricted or banned on particular sections, and in others you can't change your decision mid-race.
- Don't expect energy savings. Expect fresher legs at the end. Those are different things, and the second matters more in an ultra.
Limitations
The sample is small — 16 people, all trained trail runners — so extending the conclusions to beginners deserves caution. Walking was measured on a treadmill at a fixed incline, not on a real trail with rocks, roots, and changing terrain, where pole technique is quite different. And most importantly: the study measured cost of transport, not finish time — nobody has shown a direct link of the form “poles give you this many minutes over the distance.”
Key points
- Poles reduce cost of transport and foot loading uphill — that has been measured.
- But total energy expenditure doesn't drop, and sometimes rises: the work is redistributed to the shoulder girdle.
- The value is that the legs stay functional longer — in an ultra that decides more than efficiency does.
- The arms get tired too: after 31 km with 2086 m of climbing, the force generated by the arms was lower.
- The working zone is inclines of roughly 15–25°; on gentle terrain and technical descents poles more often get in the way.
- Train your upper body and your technique in advance — otherwise poles will stop helping in the second half of the race.
Sources: “The impact of pole use on vertical cost of transport and foot force during uphill treadmill walking before and after a simulated trail running competition”, European Journal of Applied Physiology, 2026. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-025-05881-4. Giovanelli N. et al. “Do poles save energy during steep uphill walking?”, European Journal of Applied Physiology, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-019-04145-2. “The Energetic Costs of Uphill Locomotion in Trail Running”. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9787284/