|
Sep 2011
12:27pm, 19 Sep 2011
3,151 posts
|
GlennR
It doesn't work like that Bazo. You just do the runs at the right HR - try to ignore pace, it only really comes in the long term.
|
|
Sep 2011
12:29pm, 19 Sep 2011
3,411 posts
|
Bazoaxe
Yeah, know that Glenn, just yesterdays 70% run felt easy and was at a better pace than previous 70%ers.....todays 80% felt hard and was slower than other 80%ers......
Stick to the plan and all that.....
|
|
Sep 2011
1:00pm, 19 Sep 2011
1,809 posts
|
daviec
Some days are like that Baz, you seem to have the right attitude about it.
I had been running with my garmin only as an HRM/stopwatch as the gps had stopped working. I've now got a replacement but I've stopped displaying my current pace which I always used until the problems started. I realised I prefer not to know. I still get mile splits which give me an idea how I'm doing every now and then, but I just make sure I'm in the right HR zone and get on with it. I'm really enjoying my runs just now 
|
|
Sep 2011
2:16am, 20 Sep 2011
987 posts
|
Westley
Hi all. I am trying to incorporate HR training into my training. Consequently I did a max HR test today from the Marius Bakken website. Fifteen minutes warm up then five one minute intervals beginning at 150 HR and increasing your HR by 10 bpm per interval until the fifth interval where you try and further increase the effort to record your MHR. This gave me a max HR of 185. Seems a bit low? In may last year I got 190 at the end of a 5k race.
Later today I did another Max HR test. Not sure if that's recommended! The Hadd Max HR test. Twelve minutes warm up, 800m at flat out pace, two minutes of recovery walking, 400m all out. This gave me a maxi of 183, recorded at the end of the 800m phase. The lactic acid build up during the 400m phase was brutal and I just could not get the legs to turnover.
Both of these felt like Hell at the end, especially the Hadd test. Through my peripheral vision I could see people looking over their shoulder at the wheezing psycho with the look of pain mixed with terror. I certainly do not have any urge to another one any time soon.
I have read that as your aerobic fitness improves your max HR declines, and my aerobic fitness is greater than may 2010, but 185 still seems a bit on the low side? Comments and thoughts gratefully accepted.
|
|
Sep 2011
7:21am, 20 Sep 2011
255 posts
|
puzzler
Hi Westley, they do look a little bit low - my understanding was the opposite of yours i.e. a person's max HR tends to decline with age but for fitter individuals it may decline at a slower rate. On that basis I'd be surprised if your max had dropped 5 bpm in a year.
Has anyone tried doing a max HR other than by running? I don't go to the gym now but I used to do the occasional aerobics/circuits class (I know they've all got different names now so this shows it was a few years ago) and there were points when I did that that I felt my heart was going to jump out of my chest. I reckon if I tried to do one again I'd get close to my max.
|
|
Sep 2011
7:39am, 20 Sep 2011
44,231 posts
|
Gobi
Westley - let me help you relax a little
Spent my entire early 30s working to a max of 184 which turned out to be a little lazyness as I had another test at 36 and hit 186 where it stayed until 2009. Got injured and although now back and training multiple tests have supplied a max of between 178 - 182 when running. Max declines with age(I am nearly 41) and I seem to have lost between 4-8 beats in 2 years but my ability to run near max has improved so although I maxed out a 181 in a 5km recently I had run 2kms near the end at 178 avg.
Tests on other devices - all cycling but different situations
Turbo trainer - 171 (I used this to work out zones for indoor winter training and if I have done a turbo session)
Hill climb - 178 (I was basically running on the bike up a steep hill and I don't use this HR I am just aware of it)
Time trial - 175 (I use this for training I log that is done outside)
|
|
Sep 2011
8:32am, 20 Sep 2011
1,811 posts
|
daviec
Westley, you've been doing some good training so there's a chance you just struggle to get near your max due to your fitness. I've only ever done a max test when I was about to start training again after a layoff. I find it very hard to get my HR right up just now unless I'm in a race, but when I've lost fitness my HR shoots up no problem and I can get a max from the 800/400 or hill test.
|
|
Sep 2011
12:19pm, 20 Sep 2011
988 posts
|
Westley
Cheers Gobi, Puzzler, Daviec, certainly food for thought. I have been reading about Hadd training of late and everything you and Daviec say chimes with it. If I read Hadd and Pfitzinger and Douglas correctly, your Max HR actually increases if you've been injured or lost fitness, or at least it's easier to get it higher than if you are well trained.
|
|
Sep 2011
12:21pm, 20 Sep 2011
6,613 posts
|
Keefy Beefy
Differently put: You'll be blowing out your arse far more easily when you've let yourself get unfit and (better still) a bit podgy.
|
|
Sep 2011
1:21pm, 20 Sep 2011
2,524 posts
|
paul the builder
I find it very hard to believe that your max HR actually changes with your state of fitness. What part of the body's physiology would lead to an increase in the max HR if we're less fit?
I find it very easy to agree with Keefy's words, on the other hand.
|
