A few nit picky items...
"Lyndon" <airlyndon@aol.comnospam> wrote in message news:20040213141254.21817.00002049@mb-
m06.aol.com...
> >OK, last question for the day. :) According to the info I've read, my maximum target heart rate
> >(85%) is 162 bpm. I reached this number because the chart at the gym says for my age group (28),
> >the maximum target heart rate for the most effective range is 85%, which is 27 beats per 10
> >seconds, or 162 bpm.
> >
> >I own a heart rate monitor, and used it for the first time the other night. As I ran, I found
> >that my heart rate was constantly in the range of 175 - 185 bpm. When it rose to 190 bpm, I
> >slowed down to a brisk walking pace for a minute or so, then stepped the pace back up.
> >
> >Now, my problem is that I used to run quite frequently up until a year ago, then ran infrequently
> >for a year, and am just now trying to get back into a regular routine. In the past, I never
> >monitored my heart rate. I just ran a 5K as fast as I could, at a constant pace. My times were
> >typically around 25 minutes.
> >
> >Is it possible that when I was doing this 3 times a week, I was shortchanging myself by keeping
> >my heart rate so high? Or is it OK? Is 185 bpm an acceptable heart rate for me to maintain for a
> >half-hour run, or am I over-extending myself?
> >
> >Any advice from heart-rate experts here? Thanks,
> >
> There are really two issues here.
>
> (1) Gyms, at least in the US, have to worry about lawsuits, thus don't
want to
> tell people to go above a true 90% MHR without medical clearance. But
health
> clubs are also talking about TOTAL fitness, including strength, which
includes
> more than just how to improve your 5K time. When you begin to accumulate lactate by going above
> 80-85%, you also accumulate muscle damage, which
takes
> time to recover from, and this reduces your ability to gain strength with weights. So groups like
> ACE (the organization that certifies personal
trainers
> in the US) recommend running at a MHR of 50-85%, and while many
here--myself
> included--would be inclined to describe this as BS, it works for many
people
> who are not training to run races for PRs.
To my knowledge, the threat of a lawsuit has nothing to do with the supposed "zones", I
have never heard this attributed at all. I am not aware of any connection between going
above 85% of VO2max and accumulating more muscle damage. Yes, it takes more recovery,
but not because of muscle damage. In cases where people do something new (like running
hard), the damage is from the unaccustomed activity not necessarily from what the
intensity is since even a beginning runner will get sore even at low intensities. ACE
is one of many organizations that offer personal trainer certification, not "the".
>
> (2) If you get your maximum heart rate right, 80-85% of that rate is what
is
> known as steady state running. This is the most efficient part of the
aerobic
> range--provided that you can recover from the amount of running you do at
this
> range. And while you may eventually want to do some speedwork
faster--tempo
> runs, mile repeats, 200's/400's and the like--you can improve distance
speed
> quite rapidly (and gain strength in the weight room at the same time) if
you
> can get in 2-3 workouts of 30-60 minutes each per week.
define "efficient". In rats anyway, high intensity intervals (equivalent to VO2max workouts)
did a very good job of developing mitochondria, aerobic enzymes, etc. Humans may (and I think
do) have the same capability. In this case you could get better results in a relative short
amount of time.
>
> So, the real issue is to manage to guage your heart rate intensity
correctly.
> Notice, I didn't say MAXIMUM heart rate, because MHR isn't really what you
want
> to know. What people really want to know is their anerobic threshold
(AT),
> lactate threshold, or ventilatory threshold (which are all really
different
> terminology for the same thing).
To a lay person, the three terms may be used interchangeably, but they are not the same
thing. The first term ("anaerobic threshold") is argued by many to be a misleading name
since one does not become "anaerobic" at all. In fact, oxidative processes still make a
substantial contribution. Ventilatory threshold may well lag and there is a school of
thought that what people think it measures is not really being measured at all;
basically that this "threshold" does not coincide with lactate threshold. Practically
speaking, regardless of how one assesses this idea, the correlation between what is
being measured and endurance performance is quite good (Coyle probably has the best
paper using well-trained cyclists).
One way of figuring this out is to do a MHR
> test, which might be something like 4X800m hard, and then run the last 1-2 minutes as hard as you
> can. But another way is to find your (approximate)
AT:
> Start at something slower like a HR of 150, and gradually increase the
pace
> (treadmill works fine for this); Eventually you will find a point where
the
> breathing becomes noticeably harder. This point is roughly your AT. For
most
> people, the AT is about 90% of MHR. Tempo training is done at this pace
or HR.
> 5K training (intervals) is done about 10 bpm faster than this. Steady
State
> running (the upper speed limit for continuous aerobic running) is done
10-20
> bpm lower than this. When you start to run outside, your AT pace will not
be
> the same as what you do on a treadmill, but the heart rate will translate
well. I disagree that the HR will necessarily be the same. If it is cooler inside on the TM than
outside, one must account for this.
>
> Lyndon "Speed Kills...It kills those that don't have it!" --US Olympic Track
Coach
> Brooks Johnson
