|
Oct 2009
12:12pm, 11 Oct 2009
5,623 posts
|
Boab
Hendo, Hadd doesn't mention resting heart rate, probably because it varies from day to day so uses on percentages of Max HR, whoich only changes every few years.
|
|
Oct 2009
12:13pm, 11 Oct 2009
5,624 posts
|
Boab
This post from Hadd sums up the intervals debate.
While there is something to be said for your argument to run only aerobically and leave the faster stuff for during a race, I think the real problem is just doing the interval work too early.
Many people jump into fast training before they are ready for it, in the belief that to race fast they must train fast. What they need to understand is that there are a number of things they must do FIRST before they will be able to benefit from the fast training.
If your lactate threshold pace (LT) is very low due to insufficient aerobic background, then any running at the usually recommended interval paces of 3-5k (which is way above LT pace) will cause floods of lactate and rapidly cause high symptoms of stress. Apart from the discomfort, this will not cause the adaptations you seek.
The LT of some runners can occur at 60% of vVO2max pace (which we will call 3,000m pace for the purposes of this post). So running so far above LT when he does his interval repeats is going to cause this guy severe discomfort and very high lactate. Probably finish up with a headache, sucking wind after each repeat and maybe even throw up if he is stupid enough to do too many repeats. And he will not improve, next week they will be just as difficult again.
If he moves the LT up to 80-85% of vVO2max (or higher), then the energy from the anaerobic system required to boost him to 3k pace will be much less. Meaning lower stress, much lower lactate, and significantly improved adaptation afterwards.
If you slowly build up the aerobic system, maximising the aerobic ability of every muscle fibre, then any lactate caused by training at 3-5k pace will be reduced. This, for a number of reasons:
1. More, and stronger, fibres will be aerobically trained and will be able to generate a large amount of power (with low commensurate lactate) to get you close(r) to 5k pace, and the need to recruit extra (non-aerobically trained) fibres will be small and the total lactate caused by such fibres will be lower. Without adequate aerobic work, the many fibres recruited will be creating lots of lactate, and this will happen at earler/slower paces.
2. When lactate is created in working fibres, this is leaked out into the blood and can be picked up by other, aerobically trained fibres and used/converted back into a source of energy. This lactate production and clearance helps the blood lactate to remain stable and not rise to stressful levels. Obviously, with too many untrained fibres, lactate is produced faster than it can be cleared (because there are not enough aerobically trained fibres) and will rapidly go out of control.
So, jumping into interval training must only be done when the LT is brought up as high as possible so the requirement for assistance from the anaerobic system is as low as possible. Too many runners START interval training far too early in the season, long before they are ready to deal with it.
Note above where I wrote:
"To move your LT don?t just jump into so-called ?tempo? runs. These would be too fast/hard and not cause the effect you want. Begin from the ground up and work until eg: a 90 min is no longer ?long?. Then work until a once-or-twice-per-week 10-mile run at 5k-pace + 1 min is no longer hard (you could go round again, although you don?t). Then until a session of 3 x 20 mins @ 5k pace + 40 secs is not THAT uncomfortable (and you could do more)... and maybe only THEN begin to work at paces such as 5k-pace + 30 secs (2-3 x 15 mins) right on up... (eventually to 2000m repeats at 10k-pace). All the time being careful. You cannot rush this."
Good ways of checking/proving this, is whereas many runners will do 10 x 400m at 3k pace, they are less keen to run 800m repeats at 3k pace, and fewer still want to run repeat 1,000s at this pace, and when it gets to 1200s they are remarkably few volunteers. Obviously, the longer the repeat, the more you must rely on the aerobic system.
Done properly, the aerobic system can be improved to a tremendous extent. Look at Paula and her 5.14m/m marathon (and this pace is 99% aerobic)... and much of her day-to-day aerobic running is done at sub-6.00m/m pace at which she is extremely comfortable.
The point being that when she runs at 3-5k pace, the stress on her will be less than the equivalent stress on a less well trained runner at his/her 3-5k pace. This, even though Paula will be running significantly faster in most cases.
Maximise the aerobic system so that it can do its full share of the work before even considering traditional "speed" training.
|
|
Oct 2009
12:15pm, 11 Oct 2009
43 posts
|
Same physiological limitations that mean even if you're running like a tortoise, even if it feels comfortable for a decent distance, if you're poorly conditioned your heart rate is still going to elevate sometime and you're going to flop. Hence why even the slowest marathon runners can feel broken at the end, or well before it.
|
|
Oct 2009
12:15pm, 11 Oct 2009
44 posts
|
Crosspost
|
|
Oct 2009
12:18pm, 11 Oct 2009
45 posts
|
Good article grab boab
|
|
Oct 2009
12:19pm, 11 Oct 2009
4,665 posts
|
Fenland Runner
slow quick merely relative terms
|
|
Oct 2009
12:23pm, 11 Oct 2009
46 posts
|
True, but then that shouldn't be used as an excuse for PC either 
|
|
Oct 2009
12:26pm, 11 Oct 2009
807 posts
|
lunaman
Great thread - I'll be watching this with huge interest. Got as far as my first 2400 Hadd test in Jan, immediate injury led to me following almost the direct opposite approach - FIRST - since, and avoiding racing. Keen to re-start this autumn, so I'll be lurking and sharing I hope.
|
|
Oct 2009
12:49pm, 11 Oct 2009
981 posts
|
jamborigg
This is probably a silly question but is the heart rate that is mentioned an average or does it have to be exact
|
|
Oct 2009
12:54pm, 11 Oct 2009
50 posts
|
Like Hadd said, if you're working from MHR, you can give it a couple BPM leeway, it doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things. Just keep within a couple of BPM of a given point of what you're doing. Hence also why he gives a range of a few BPM, rather than saying "No, it must be exactly 155 BPM or everything will fail".
|
