|
Jul 2020
3:01pm, 1 Jul 2020
30,362 posts
|
SPR
Gobi - IIRC polarised had a three zone model and a five zone model. Z1 to Z3 in five zone model was Z1 in three zone model. Z1 had 80% (this can be split further in the 5 zone as majority of 80 was Z1/2). Z2 (Z4 in five zone) was circa 10, Z3 (Z5 in five zone) was circa 10.
|
|
Jul 2020
3:03pm, 1 Jul 2020
30,363 posts
|
SPR
That screen shot was from six years ago so a while since I've looked at it. It's possible I've misremembered.
|
|
Jul 2020
3:06pm, 1 Jul 2020
30,364 posts
|
SPR
I think it was Z1-2 80, Z3 10, Z4-5 10 actually.
|
|
Jul 2020
3:25pm, 1 Jul 2020
70,611 posts
|
Gobi
I dont like those zones too high
|
|
Jul 2020
3:41pm, 1 Jul 2020
74 posts
|
Big_G
I've looked at this before for myself:
Max HR: 195
RHR 53: (as an aside, I've noticed my RHR is actually lower before I go to bed - sometimes 48 - but I've used RHR from the mornings. Is this correct, or for accuracy should I flip to my nighttime RHR?).
My MAF rate is 132-142 (68%-73% of Max). Graph below of what my training has been for the last 8 weeks, where I've averaged just over 60 miles per week (I've actually done 9 weeks of this but there was a problem generating the graph for 9 weeks).
Using the Karvonen formula.
195-53 = 142
- Zone 1 upto 60%: 138
- Zone 2 upto 70% 152
- Zone 3 upto 80%: 166
- Zone 4 upto 90%: 181
I like to think I'm in the right zone in terms of building a base. I expect I'll introduce speed work at the end of July as that will then be 3 months of this; not that long in the big scheme of things I know, but hopefully long enough to at least see some improvements. If nothing else, it has helped me be far more consistent that usual.
I suppose from the Karvonen formula and the recent discussion I could push it up very slightly (i.e., 145bpm wouldn't do any harm), but is there actually any point to that? I'm quite happy at 142 or below and am actually running "properly" if that makes sense (i.e., although slower than I'm used to running, I am running in my usual gait). I live in a hilly area and do have to walk moderate hills to keep below 142, but to be honest upping it to 145 wouldn't really change that too much. After 3 months of this, I may restart running those hills albeit at an easy effort, but what are the thoughts on that - would that not be a good idea?
When it comes to introducing speed work I was just going to pick some sessions from Fitzgerald's 80/20 book and if I get back to racing regularly, use those races as part of the 20%. I know a Half would mean I need to do 65 miles a week to stay within the 80/20, but I'm just talking generally for now.
Any thoughts?
|
|
Jul 2020
10:41am, 2 Jul 2020
30,368 posts
|
SPR
Gobi - Had a quick look at video those zones came from and my post 30364 is correct.
It's all be based on the LT zone being Z3 (you alluded to this in your post about 85% being threshold).
The two elite athletes they show with the five zone training do the majority of their training in Z1 (looks to be 70-80%). I guess nuance is lost when things are boiled down to quick numbers.
|
|
Jul 2020
11:04am, 2 Jul 2020
70,639 posts
|
Gobi
SPR - I'm no scientist and have used research and training for ultras to come up with an approach that works and allows volume with minimal injury.
You can make quick gains if you skirt the high Z2 into Z3 approach for a few weeks but the fatigue associated with it can lead to form break down and niggles if you over cook it.
Also the Z3 gains are often lost if the Z1/2 development is not done well enough. HR training works based on principles around fat burning for efficiency and Capilarisation (ie bigger veins with more blood means more blood to muscles)
BIG_G - the thing with RHR is consistency, pick a time and use it. If it is higher in the morning you are not spending enough time relaxing before you take the reading. ( probably)
The Maf issue I think is the HUGE period of low intensity without any speedwork in the early months. I remember reading something about how if you did anything fast you were ruining the base period.(It was an interview with "THE MAF himself" It's a little too prescriptive(like a religion) I know when I was training well I used to do NO speedwork through NOV DEC JAN however I was racing be it XC parkrun 10km most weeks.
|
|
Jul 2020
11:20am, 2 Jul 2020
1,326 posts
|
Paul N
Hi Gobi, hope you don't mind fielding another one.
Needless to say my contribution is a bit less technical than the few of the above. I'm still on the caveman "fire make Paul warm?!" stage of this!
Zone 2, 60-70%, is that of simple Maximum Heart Rate or using this Karovnen formula that is bandied about?
There seems to be about 15 BPM of a difference which is roughly a 9 minute mile vs. an 11 minute mile.
|
|
Jul 2020
11:22am, 2 Jul 2020
70,643 posts
|
Gobi
I'm a KArvonnen fan as I believe it gives a more accurate zone
|
|
Jul 2020
11:43am, 2 Jul 2020
1,327 posts
|
Paul N
Ah - that might make things a little easier.
I'm 39, my resting heart rate (last three months per Garmin) is 50 bpm.
My zones at a 60/70/80/90 split would be
Z1 116 - 129
Z2 130 - 142
Z3 143 - 155
Z4 156 - 161
Z5 162 >
Anything look particularly out of place to you in that thinking.
|
Daniels Running Formula. The Definitive Wire.
Jul 2023