|
Dec 2007
3:21pm, 9 Dec 2007
34 posts
|
Turning point today in my HR training. Did 5k at ave 10.29 m/m pace. Can't believe it! Difficult to know true ave HR because it played up again for 1st half mile, but only really crept above 70% slightly in final mile, so think it's fair to say that this run was round about 70% in total if not a bit below. Really pleased with this as well especially since it was quite windy out there today.
Also very happy because of how comfortable doing this pace is for my legs. Keeping this 70% programme going has really helped in removing any after effects of running. Apart from early twinge, have pretty much been shin splint free.
|
|
Dec 2007
3:46pm, 9 Dec 2007
2,186 posts
|
hellen
did a HM today, 11 mins SLOWER than last year thanks to all the slow running with HRM training.
Have been doing HRM trianing since Jan ie just after the HM last year. I knew todays time was not going to be very good so decided not to push myself and risk injury but just enjoy it. Went a bit faster than LSR pace but still at a reasonably comfortable pace
In the second half passed loads of people and even more in the last mile cos I decided to give it my all in the last mile.
If I had run with the same effort as last year I woudl have been faster but still nowhere near last years time, havnt checked the HR, think it was around 80% though judging by my effort. Last year I had just got my HRM but wasnt doing parker, it was 88% last year on this HM
|
|
Dec 2007
6:14pm, 9 Dec 2007
81 posts
|
Hellen,well done on getting out in this awful weather!
(Wish I could have done but on call again)
I couldn't decide, though, if you were pleased with your run and enjoyed it or not?
|
|
Dec 2007
8:24pm, 9 Dec 2007
2,187 posts
|
hellen
enjoyed it cos I took it easy but annoyed that having trained hard for a whole year I was 11 mins slower!
|
|
Dec 2007
9:33pm, 9 Dec 2007
34 posts
|
Another question for the experts if you don't mind! In this training method is it really an issue to do easy runs in the 70-75% WHR range - i.e moving to the "Grey Side", instead of sub 70%, provided HR does not get over 75% during the run?
Whenever I go out on sub 70% WHR runs I always feel I'm running un-naturally / uncomfortably slow and fighting against my HR, even after 14 weeks of HRtraining. Decided today to do my long (9mile) run in a different way.
I chose to run at a naturally easy pace based on my breathing, perceived effort etc, and not worry too much about my HR. My only concern was to make sure that I was not running at over 75% WHR (160bpm).
The difference was great, my running felt fluid and natural, it seemed like less effort and more importantly I enjoyed it. When I got back my average HR was still only 152bpm. (70% = 153) but I had spent a significant portion of time around 72-73%, but it felt much better at this pace. Is doing this likely to slow down improvements in aerobic fitness?
Thanks again for your help (PS any answers on my questions on previous page gratefully appreciated)
Cheers, Mark
|
|
Dec 2007
9:44pm, 9 Dec 2007
2,188 posts
|
hellen
scuba, dunno but I have had the same prob as you, sub 70% feels akwardly slow. over the last month or so I have been ignoring the HRM and doing what FEELS easy, these runs have often come out as sub 70% runs, I think cos I am more relaxed when I am not being a slave to the HRM so my HR is naturally a bit lower. I have doen quite a few runs of 9miles + sub 70% in the last month. From jan to oct when I was doing the parker method more seriously I counted 9 miles as a LR and did 70-75%, I could not manage to keep under 70% for a LR yet when I turn my mind off the HR I can do a 9 mile run sub 70%!!
|
|
Dec 2007
9:45pm, 9 Dec 2007
1,990 posts
|
Girlie
Scuba, according to the Parker book, you can go upto 75% on long runs, which is what most people do anyway.
I don't think i've ever had a long run that was a true sub 70%, my HR always drifts upwards in the last couple of miles.
I can sympathise with your frustrations at the slowness and feeling unnatural for the sub 70% runs, I've had that a lot in the past. I also found my rate was naturally lower ont he days I decided to just run.
I'm no expert, but from what I've learned on here, is there are other HR training guides, most people on here use the simple Parker philosophy of staying below 70% or above 85%. I think the problems arise when you try to mix and match the different principles.
|
|
Dec 2007
11:21pm, 9 Dec 2007
35 posts
|
Thanks Ladies, that is helpful. Hellen, that sounds exactly like me - a slave to the HRM. I think you're right, worrying about the HR is more stressful, so HR goes up! Catch 22. From what you both say 75% sounds OK then. It'll certainly feel more natural, which has to be a good thing. I think I'll give it a go.
Thanks again.
|
|
Dec 2007
11:46pm, 9 Dec 2007
79 posts
|
IanRunner
Hellen. I can imagine how you are feeling after all your training.
I have to say I would be questioning whether this was the best of type of training for myself if it happened to me.
I know you have read Advanced Marathoning, I have just got it myself for my marathon in May. From what it looks like most of the programmes in there get you train at slightly harder level than what you do during Parkers Methods, which might be what you need. I am going to give it a try myself in the new year.
|
|
Dec 2007
9:24am, 10 Dec 2007
2,189 posts
|
hellen
yes Ian, I ahve the book and am thinking of following a variation on a theme of it. There is no way I can do midweek 14 mile runs cos I am slow but I am planning on doing 1 or 2 medium long runs 90mins + per week.
I need to establish my MP for april. Was wondering if this seems realistic.....
Yesterdays HM was not raced, looking at the stats it works out to be at my marathon HR, now I know that in a marathon my HR will drift.This was a hilly HM and I didnt taper for it. So, would it be reasonable to assume that with taper, on a flat course and 4 months training I could do the same pace for the same HR in the marathon?
|
Daniels Running Formula. The Definitive Wire.
Jul 2023
