|
Oct 2011
8:14am, 18 Oct 2011
44,735 posts
|
Gobi
I agree that people get too hung up on being exact but then I rarely run at 70%, far too much like hard work
|
|
Oct 2011
8:15am, 18 Oct 2011
4,667 posts
|
Nikaim
I guess the proof of the pudding will come if or when I see any improvements running that way!
|
|
Oct 2011
8:17am, 18 Oct 2011
44,736 posts
|
Gobi
The other side of my statement Nikam is I find it interesting that when something is not perceived to be working the option for 9 out of 10 people is GO HARDER.
I'm in the go easier camp
|
|
Oct 2011
8:24am, 18 Oct 2011
2,891 posts
|
icemaiden
I think I have grown out of the idea that my 70% pace 'should' be faster as my race paces improve. I haven't found it to be the case and am quite happy trudging along at 70% for my long runs whatever it is. Going at near my MP with a buddy for 3 or 4 months at the end of last year, early this year got me injured and I missed 2 months of any kind of running. Working on my form and abs and back and going back to sub 70% for long runs got me a 19 min Mara PB on Sunday. If you run at Mara there's nowhere to step up to on the day.
|
|
Oct 2011
8:37am, 18 Oct 2011
4,668 posts
|
Nikaim
I know what you're saying, I was running at MP + 45 secs approx so it still felt relatively easy, definitely not flat out but points taken nonetheless. I just wanted to know that I was comfortable running at that speed over a long run, Since doing HRM training although my 70% pace hasn't got any faster I have scored pb's at 3.5 mile, 10k and HM so it's worked well there! I would just be happier if my 70% recovery ceiling and MP + 45s or 1min were about the same 
|
|
Oct 2011
9:01am, 18 Oct 2011
3,507 posts
|
Bazoaxe
My first post marathon run this morning and surprisingly I kept almost all of the HR below 70% max, the average was 3 BPM under 70% and I saw about a 15 second pace improvement as well.Ive yet to see any real and sustained HR improvements in my roughly 10 weeks training at HR, however I did fine that I got through the 26.2 well and due to sensible early pacing I ran well at the end.
|
|
Oct 2011
9:12am, 18 Oct 2011
8,438 posts
|
Meglet
I also haven't noticed much of an improvement in pace of sub-70 runs, though it is easier to keep HR sub-70. However it does usually result in better race times and of course I don't end up knackered after running either.
|
|
Oct 2011
9:18am, 18 Oct 2011
3,509 posts
|
Bazoaxe
This is interesting, so which HR bands do people see improvement at 75% or 80% or higher ? Ive only seen small changes in occassional runs, nothing consistent yet, but in the 2 races I have run, although the HRs have been I, ive run negative splits and felt good at the end
|
|
Oct 2011
9:22am, 18 Oct 2011
8,439 posts
|
Meglet
I haven't done much road-racing recently so difficult to say how much I've improved. However, I have done a couple of Lakeland Trails> The first was 9 miles, considering I hadn't run much more than 6 in training, and that the routes are tough, I felt much better than expected towards the end, my endurance is pretty good.
I do find that doing HR training has helped me with judging effort-levels, and therefore can tell easier when to back off or go a bit harder.
|
|
Oct 2011
9:43am, 18 Oct 2011
1,867 posts
|
daviec
I've seen massive increase in my sub 70% runs. Mine tend to be around 65/66% WHR and I've gone from 8+mm down to 7.3x/mile. My 75% WHR runs (80-82%MHR sub LT) have gone from 7.20/mile to 6.45/mile. Even my recovery pace (60% WHR, 70% MHR) have improved to just over 8mm.
|
