Over 50's club

325 watchers

LazyDaisy Apr 2018 6:37pm, 3 Apr 2018 22,007 posts	0 LazyDaisy Excellent and interesting blog post Canute. I have Bint's copy of The Chimp Paradox on my bedside table and from time to time I find myself negotiating with my Inner Chimp. Clearly what I need to cultivate is the habit of pointing out to the chimp that, actually, I can run at what it claims is too fast a pace
Canute Apr 2018 7:03pm, 3 Apr 2018 1,868 posts	0 Canute Dvorak That is very interesting. It is of course of questionable value to speculate on the basis of little evidence, but your experience of above average performance in the very specific circumstances of a race suggest that you have a well developed ability to engage dopamine-releasing neurons in those circumstances. This would suggest that the synapses that are particularly well developed are the connections of a set of nerve cells projecting from your frontal cortex to the ventral tegmental area in your mid-brain. But that is a wild speculation. LD, yes the Chimp Paradox is an important part of the picture. But it is worth working on developing the required mental control even when your chimp is not trying to undermine you.
57.5 Degrees of Pain Apr 2018 7:27pm, 3 Apr 2018 3,714 posts	0 57.5 Degrees of Pain Interesting views Canute. I have found that concentrating on breathing can be a powerful pacing tool, maybe it helps performance too. And I am usually a better racer than performer in interval sessions so there must be something going on beyond purely physical factors.
steve45 Apr 2018 9:41am, 4 Apr 2018 2,469 posts	0 steve45 I have a book once recommended in "Runners World" called "Mental Mastery" by Ken Way and yeas, 57.5 there is a lot going on beyond purely physical factors. A lot of the techniques in the book are strongly evidence based and well worth pursuing. The grunting you mentioned Canute is something that weight lifters do of course, and javelin/shot put/discuss throwers.
struthious Apr 2018 1:40pm, 6 Apr 2018 959 posts	0 struthious Hello everybody. I am new to running not having been able to devote much time to it until my retirement at age 65. Now, 4 years later, still in the youth of my old age at 69, I seem to have a serious addiction. I have followed the discussion on polarised (80-10-10) training and it appeals but I need to get my heart rate zones sorted and am in need of your collective wisdom. In preceding years I have used 220-age to determine my 75% heart rate but apparently that calculation is worthless. My monitor (its a Garmin belt around the chest type) gives consistent and stable readings of resting 50-52 bpm and max 168-172 bpm which = a 75% training rate of around 133-135. This rate is quite a bit higher than I have become accustomed to. Sooo, to my quandry. Do I stick with my monitor results and just go for it? (preferred option.) Or do these numbers sound inaccurate in your experience. I am running everyday and happier for the greater consistency, do my HIIT at a coached track session once a week though its probably a little less than the required 10%. I haven't tested for max heart rate in previous years having been a bit lazy and accepted the 220-age thing so the 170 bpm comes as a bit of a shock.
Fenland Flier Apr 2018 2:19pm, 6 Apr 2018 767 posts	0 Fenland Flier Hi struthious, to find a more accurate HR it has been suggested to me to: Find a steepish hill, warm up before hand and run up the hill as hard and fast as possible for a minute, walk down and repeat for a total of 3 times. The last rep should give you your top HR. Be honest and give it your all. My top HR is 194 bpm so don't worry about 170
eL Bee! Apr 2018 4:01pm, 6 Apr 2018 20,362 posts	0 eL Bee! struthious I'd be a little cautious with the eyeballs out session for your Max HR. It's fine for spring chickens and the youthful, but there are significant risks associated with it as we get older, and you are by your own admission, relatively new to this lark! (Previously a Cardiac ITU Nurse, so heart stuff is my thang!) I'd stick with your monitor results. Because it is a measured HR, and not a ridiculous one at that, and some people are able to hit higher numbers than the 220-age calculation. Further to that, your 70-75% of MHR should be "Able to hold a conversation" effort. If you can't, crank it back a bit.
Flatlander Apr 2018 4:08pm, 6 Apr 2018 1,094 posts	0 Flatlander Hi struthious, Yes, "220 - your age" for determining your MHR has been discredited since it is a "one size fits all" which doesn't fit all. FF's suggestion of finding your MHR is good. Another method is your HR at the end of a hard 5k race. Other methods are available. You might like to look at this thread fetcheveryone.com/viewtopic.php?id=3882 It's a bit inactive at the moment, but read back and there are some good discussions. Other training threads include HR discussions from time to time. When you look at your training HR zones, you need to decide whether to use % of MHR, or % of WHR (MHR - RHR) since you'll get different zones. Most people seem to prefer WHR since that gives more relevant zones. Good luck with your training :-).
Dvorak Apr 2018 4:20pm, 6 Apr 2018 15,783 posts	0 Dvorak Assuming that you weren't quite absolutely flat out for your recorded max 172 bpm(during, or after ;-)), I'd take that and add 5. A max of 177 sounds perfectly credible for you. That would give you a rate for easy pace for HR training purposes (70%WHR) of 139 bpm or below. Try that and see how you feel. (And report back :-).)
eL Bee! Apr 2018 4:42pm, 6 Apr 2018 20,363 posts	0 eL Bee! Dvorak - careful! JHuff was flamed mercilessly on the Heart Rate thread for having a MaxHR calculated just like you suggest Although it is just as valid as anything else done anywhere but a labaratory!!