|
Oct 2016
12:25pm, 14 Oct 2016
1,121 posts
|
larkim
Ah, OK - I'll get them logged and start to build up some better, clean, recent data. I think I've generally got the HRM out for long runs, race efforts and tempos, and done less monitoring of the moderate pace stuff.
Training log is open to any / all for viewing, so insights from the meagre buffet of data available much appreciated if that sort of thing floats your boat!
|
|
Oct 2016
12:28pm, 14 Oct 2016
10,581 posts
|
Bazoaxe
The PB differences is interesting and I went to check mine and found:
5k = +16s
10k = + 14s
HM = + 11s
Mara = + 28s
Suggests HM is my best distance and I have a bit to still find at marathon.
I agree with Gobi, learning run to HR is hard, but needs the HRM to enable that and to ensure you run those runs at the correct effort levels.
I am about 6 weeks in to a HADD base period and have been starting to see improvements in the last 10 days or so.
|
|
Oct 2016
12:36pm, 14 Oct 2016
1,122 posts
|
larkim
Cheers Baz. I suppose I still don't really know what I'm looking for in the numbers though, which is one of the reasons I've not worn it religiously recently. Feb through to March were well documented though, and as I felt I was in good shape there I would appreciate some pointers which might either confirm or refute that I'm likely to be getting optimal results from the range of HRs that I was using then. http://www.fetcheveryone.com/training.php?uid=58100&startdate=2016-02-01&enddate=2016-04-30&sortfield=date&direction=DESC&view=heart&totaltab=R&totaltab_type=D&category=&subcategory=&trainingview=
|
|
Oct 2016
12:50pm, 14 Oct 2016
211 posts
|
dibbers
I've been using a HRM on and off for 3 years now. I think it's great for establishing your correct pace, perceived effort and breathing pattern on each of your appropriate runs -aerobic, Threshold etc. But, heart rate drift moves me out of the correct training zone after about 12 miles on a long slow run, or half way through a 3-6 mile threshold run. For this reason, I abandon it at this point and just maintain my pace. I would never use it in a marathon as I believe it would lead to under performance
|
|
Oct 2016
12:53pm, 14 Oct 2016
10,583 posts
|
Bazoaxe
My view is you need to settle on an approach and stick to it and taking advice from others who have seen success to guide you will help. i.e. Gobi has successfully deployed this approach and achieved results most of us would love to have
When I first started to monitor my HR I classed 8mm as a recovery run but actually when I realised the HR for that pace I was working way too hard. I hard to really be patient and control myself running particularly slowing before I mastered it. I am now able to run at HR levels significantly lower numbers than I could, albeit the pace on those can be variable and I need to keep at it to improve.
I am to continue my current plan until the end of the year and will then switch to a more marathon focussed plan early next year.
|
|
Oct 2016
1:02pm, 14 Oct 2016
1,123 posts
|
larkim
That's my problem - I don't actually know what approach I am / should be taking! (Actually, to be fair in general I'm following Hal Higdon short term training plans for half marathon distances - but I don't know if its possible to say whether that is "ideal" for me or not)
I know HADD would say run too few miles (in fact, I doubt many would disagree with that, and I need to reconcile time out of the house away from family etc against personal goals in terms of running achievement), several plans might suggest I don't run easy enough in long runs (though I am endeavouring to correct that), but other plans like Furman would be happier with my mileage / pace (though it would be equally critical of lack of cross training supplementing the running).
If there was something in my logs which stood out to others as a lightbulb moment indicating either that I'm actually fairly well optimised or I'm missing a bucket load of pace, particularly with reference to the heart rate data that is there, it would be really useful to me to hear that!
|
|
Oct 2016
1:57pm, 14 Oct 2016
10,585 posts
|
Bazoaxe
I think you need to:
- know fairly accurately your true max or HR zones
- be very disciplined and don't stray outwith the prescribed zones
- the more miles you can run the better (within reason)
- the easy miles need to be truly easy and in the right zones and are as important as any harder miles
Overall, you need time and patience and you don't get results quickly.
There are some examples of people who get great results such as DavieC, Boab, Gobi, PtB and others like me who try hard and might not be as disciplined or know the zones as well and get decent but not the best results !!!
|
|
Oct 2016
3:07pm, 14 Oct 2016
1,125 posts
|
larkim
Thanks. Assuming step one (getting the max and zones sorted) is critical, is self-assessing this a suitably trusted approach? I've seen varying techniques (usually involving hills and escalating effort levels) described, are these sufficiently robust to be used as baselines compared to shelling out for lab-based testing?
|
|
Oct 2016
4:36pm, 14 Oct 2016
59,029 posts
|
Gobi
Works very well if your data is correct
|
|
Oct 2016
5:04pm, 14 Oct 2016
10,586 posts
|
Bazoaxe
yep, and that's maybe where I fell down. I find it very hard to put in the effort to get a max that is reliable..
I used to use 189 for reasons I don't recall. I then downgraded that to 181 as I knew I often saw high 170s and sometimes 180/1 at the end of Parkruns. Then one day I saw 184 , again in the last bit of an all out Parkrun effort and so changed my max up to 184
I suspect thaht when I used 189 I was running harder than I should have been to get benefits. Recent use of 184 has shown some nice improvement and I am shortly heading off for a 10 miles run at 80% max and hope to see the good signs continue in that run
|
Daniels Running Formula. The Definitive Wire.
Jul 2023
