Heart rate
1 lurker |
301 watchers
Feb 2009
12:37pm, 18 Feb 2009
865 posts
|
Deenzy
I am also going to do another Hadd test soon, my first one was on New Years day, I will be interested to see the difference
|
Feb 2009
12:39pm, 18 Feb 2009
2,048 posts
|
Lizzie W
Thanks Roo *sends patience & cake*
|
|
Feb 2009
12:41pm, 18 Feb 2009
866 posts
|
Deenzy
Yes Roo keep at it, my post was aimed at encouraging you to persist, stick at it and results will come 
|
Feb 2009
1:37pm, 18 Feb 2009
17,677 posts
|
Results will come. The thing to do is completely forget about pace. If you are running to heart rates then pace is irrelevant. If I am doing a HR run I never look at pace at all until after the fact as a reference out of interest. Similarly when running to pace I ignore HR until after the run which I look at out of interest. It does not influence what I do in the session one iota... As several people on here have proved, you will just end up frustrating yourself looking for miniscule improvements. Any training is about gradual changes over a long period of time. Not sure what the answer is for people such as Girlie. They have tried very hard indeed but haven't got results that they hoped for. I have a feeling there may be something wrong with the numbers for certain people. One big risk and one I have noticed in myself when I started and in lots of people. When tehy attempt to stay under a number, teh instant their HR goes over it say 144 for example they drop the pace very quickly and in a large chunk, they basically over correct, this results in HR dropping and then they attempt to get it up by making a similar increase in pace. I'm not saying everyone does this but it is something to bear in mind. Do not worry about being under, under is good and 65% or less is probably even better for most folk. Just keep it low. Don't worry when it rises either, do not take action straight away, just make small and gradual changes and give chance for teh HRM to catch up. This time lag betwen reading device and HR actually changing causes 'bell ringing" in my view or it can as I have described. The main thing though is patience. I jogged around walking for a bit up many hills where I live for a couple of months or more before I could actually jog all the way round a route. |
Feb 2009
1:43pm, 18 Feb 2009
1,177 posts
|
Peacey
Just had a pleasing lunchtime run. 6.71 miles in 52.30. Av Pace 7.49mm, Av Bpm 143 (64% WHR) I dont think i have run that pace before with that low a WHR Very Pleasing even if my knee is still giving me a bit off gip. |
Feb 2009
1:55pm, 18 Feb 2009
5,457 posts
|
Girlie
Ian, I would love to know where I went/am going wrong with this, as it seems a better way to train. My RHR is taken first thing in the mornign, when I chose to check it. My Max was set in a peoper test of either running very hard( and injuring myself) up a steep hill 5 times, or in a sprint finish at the end of the race. The numbers I work to are 46RHR and 192 Max WW also has had similar problems, especially after a race, we could never pick p where we left off and it would take at least 2-3 months of hard work just to get back to where we were just before the race. |
|
Feb 2009
2:02pm, 18 Feb 2009
17,679 posts
|
Girlie, so have you stuck to the majority of your running under 70%WHR and that is for every mile of the heart rate runs you do? Have you never seen an improvement in your pace for a given heart rate? What sort of terrain do you run on? The only other thing I can think of is running form. Do you and /or WW have any running form issues? Sorry, don't want the efficiency argument to rear its ugly head... I am at a loss Girlie to be honest, It seems to work for most people. Maybe you and WW are just unlucky? |
|
Feb 2009
2:06pm, 18 Feb 2009
17,680 posts
|
I hope these stats come out ok. Girlie, I put your details into my spreadsheet here if you cant read it. Just checking the numbers but I'm sure you will have done them ok... spreadsheets.google.com 192 46 100% Sprint finish 192.00 95% Intervals 184.70 90% 5K 177.40 85% 10K / tempo 170.10 80% Half marathon 162.80 75% Marathon 155.50 70% Recovery ceiling 148.20 65% or less Slow recovery 140.90 60% 133.60 55% 126.30 50% 119.00 |
|
Feb 2009
2:06pm, 18 Feb 2009
5,459 posts
|
Girlie
Ian, I'm not into the pose and efficiency business, I have enough trouble remaining upright and goign forward as it is! I have done runs that have been entirely below 70%, but my problem was, by only doing 70% runs or less it cost me my pace, I just got slower and slower and couldn't pb or get decent times at shorter races, by switching to perceived effort and introducing speed work since last May, the results speak for themselves. I'm only now seeing an improvement in pace for given hr, 12 months ago it was around 11-11:30mm for 70 % avg, now it is 10:00 - 10:30 for 70%! We both run on the road. |
Feb 2009
2:06pm, 18 Feb 2009
4,770 posts
|
Pammie
Deenzy been a long time since i've done a Hadd test. Good luck with yours Nice one Peacy did my 3rd proper run since injury getting back there 68% whr average but almost 40% was over 70%. but better than Saturday when average run was 81%WHR |
Related Threads
-
Daniels Running Formula. The Definitive Wire.
Jul 2023
-
Jack daniels marathon plan help
May 2014
-
Polarized training
Apr 2024
-
Low Resting/ High Training Heart Rate
Jan 2021
-
No limit to the benefits of exercise in reducing the risk of cardiovascular disease
Jan 2021
-
Resetting Max Heart Rate
Dec 2020
-
Resting Heart Rate: Is it normal
Oct 2020
-
Heart rate zones
Jul 2020
-
Running Heart rate
Jun 2020
-
Heart Rate monitors
Jun 2020