heart rate, pace, temperature, and finding the right training zone

Quoted message said:

Now I understand that heat puts extra burden on the cardio system and leads
to increased heart rate for similar effort. I am also sure that heat
doesn't raise the max heart rate, it just imposes a sort of overhead burden.
My question is: what is an approprate training level for easy days? This
leads to the question: what is the point of easy days?

Run your easy days at 70% of max, even when it's hot
(meaning you'll be running even slower). The point is to
lower your aerobic threshold and build endurance.

Quoted message said:

My inclination is to let my heart rate creep up on the easy
days, letting the days be just as easy on my legs but maybe
into the next HR zone.

The idea behind the monitor is to keep your effort <below> a
certain intensity. You're back to running by perceived
effort. Why bother with a heart rate monitor at all?

I've run with a monitor for the last several years and feel
I am running much better. I don't wear it on "hard" days
very often. Running trails at elevation (6200-8000) feet
makes it pretty easy to keep my heart rate up on those days.

Richard

dave d wrote in message ...

Quoted message said:

Gang,

Over the past 10 years or so I've been in a happy rut of
training at about the same effort most of the time and
racing at about the same pace. I finally have a bit more
time to train, so I'm attempting to be more scientific
about adding miles and maybe finally getting one of those

coveted

Quoted message said:

Peach Tree mugs and possibly a Boston qualifier.

My previous base pattern was to run about 2-4 times per
week, once or twice for 2.5 miles and the remainder 5-7
miles. My estimated max heart rate is between 190 and 195
based on self-performed max effort tests. I'm in my

mid

Quoted message said:

40s. When preparing for a 10K I'll up the mileage and do
intervals once a week or so. Preparing for a marathon I'll
do more miles (rarely more than
25/week) and do long runs ramping up to 22 miles or so 3
weeks before. I'm a huge believer in tapering,
preferring to run hard one week before a race and then
not all until the race. At my low mileage, time off
seems to help a lot before a big event. I partially
make up for the insufficient mileage by having enough
sense to

cut

Quoted message said:

back during a race if my goal becomes unreasonable and just
be happy to finish. My 10K PB is 43:53 and for the marathon
it's just under 4:00 (8:58 pace). My current focus is to
get my marathon pace down to 8:00 for a Boston qualifier,
if not by this December then by next year.

Up to now, I figured that since I had so many days off it
made sense to do all my runs fairly hard. Now that I'm
running more often I've been keeping the easy days (all but
2/week) to 2.5 or 5 miles or so at approx 145 BPM, or about
9:00 pace. It seemed almost silly to go this slowly at
first, but it certainly is easier on my joints and is
pleasant enough, so I have been doing this for a few
months. Now that it's getting hot, however, it's about
impossible to keep running at this low HR. I decided to see
what an easy pace,

equivanent

Quoted message said:

to 145BPM and about 9:00 per mile at 65 degrees, translates
to at 80 degrees. The answer seems to be 150 ramping up to
160 by the end. This is slightly slower than my cool
weather pace but feels like about the same effort, both
during and after the run.

Now I understand that heat puts extra burden on the cardio
system and leads to increased heart rate for similar
effort. I am also sure that heat doesn't raise the max
heart rate, it just imposes a sort of overhead

burden.

Quoted message said:

My question is: what is an approprate training level for
easy days? This leads to the question: what is the point of
easy days? My guess is that easy days let you get some
miles on the legs (do SOME new muscle damage), while
simultaneously allowing damage from recent hard training to
heal without undully stressing the other systems. On the
other hand, maybe considerations such as lactate threshold
are well estimated based solely on heart rate, and easy
days really should be run at this low heart rate even if it
forces walking. Bor-ing!

Clearly temperature changes the relative load on the
various systems (leg muscles, cardio, lungs). It reminds me
of the little running I did in the mountains of New Mexico:
I ran as hard as my lungs would let me, but my

legs

Quoted message said:

has a lactic acid jones on all week.

My inclination is to let my heart rate creep up on the
easy days, letting the days be just as easy on my legs but
maybe into the next HR zone. I'm interested in opinions on
the matter.

Ideas?

Dave

To me there are 3 basic levels I train at:

First, 4 times a week for 0:40 to 1:30 I run or cycle at
moderate intensity. For me this is HR 135-150 (my max HR is
about 190 for running and 185 for cycling). This is for
aerobic base conditioning - training the heart-lung and
basic circulatory system and teaching the body to
efficiently feed the muscles while exercising. My intensity
for these efforts is based on feel and the response I'm
getting from my HR. If my HR responds quickly and I feel
fresh, I go a bit harder (closer to 150), except for the
long run or bike when I hold back a little.

Second, two days a week I like to do either active rest or
full rest. Active rest would be about HR 115 to 130, and can
be easy cycling, incline treadmill walk, or a slow jog. The
main benefit of active rest is to assist recover by getting
some circulation through the body without stressing it.
Usually the body is much happier if you don't take a full
day off but do something because its so used to it, and it
helps you recover.

Third, would be a speedwork day, which is aimed at making
you faster with better endurance for racing. The intensity
of this effort depends on your lactate threshold (LT).
Basically your LT is the highest consistent effort level
you can sustain for about one hour, and it will vary as
you train it or stop training it. The goal is to find your
current LT and then train at it or slightly above it with
intervals, tempo runs, or fartlek workouts. Some weeks I
will do more than one day with LT like efforts, but that's
usually unintentional when I'm bike riding up a very steep
hill or something. LT work, like max HR is sport and
muscle specific (so my biking LT work only carries over
some to running).

You won't get much faster without LT work, and you won't get
much faster working hard but below your LT either. That is,
its very possible to run hard with virtually no more benefit
than running at your aerobic pace, while doing a great deal
of muscle damage to your legs in the process. For example,
my current running LT is about HR 165, and what I consider
(based on feel and experience) to be my optimal aerobic
training pace is HR 145. If I train at HR 150-160, it wears
my legs out but does very little to make me faster because
its not quite high enough to actually push up my LT. I call
this the junk zone and avoid it whenever possible.

There are many ways to do LT training, and some do slightly
more intense training called VO2max intervals as well. In
the past I've done LT intervals of 4-5 mins at 100 to 103%
of current LT, with about 2 mins rests, repeated from 3 to 6
times depending on my ability that day. Some prefer slightly
longer intervals. I also like the fartlek run because its
more creative and fun. You speed up and slow down with some
long sustained efforts and some rest in between. When I'm
doing fartlek, I make sure my HR rises above the junk zone
into the LT zone during the efforts. There are so many ways
to do speedwork you have to find what works for you. Usually
my LT will rise from about where it is now (165) to the mid
to upper 170s after a couple of months of speed training.

To estimate your current LT, you can simply record your avg
HR during a 10k race in which you're going as hard as you
can for the distance. If your time is 50+ mins then the avg
HR during the race is likely very close to your LT. If your
time is less than that, then your LT might be slightly lower
than your avg HR during the race. For a 5k race usually your
avg HR will be higher than your LT by a bit more than a 10k
because a 5k is more anaerobic, but it can still give you an
idea. For me, I measure it during interval training. I do at
least 4 efforts at what I guess is my LT and then "read" my
recovery between sets, my ability to reach the same HR on
the next set, and my ability to recover over the next few
days. I make note then adjust my target. After only 6
sessions you should see your LT and your speed improve. Of
course there are many other ways to find your LT. Good luck
and stay out of the junk zone.

- Tony

Tony said:

LT work, like max HR is sport and muscle specific (so my
biking LT work only carries over some to running).

This is something I've been wondering about - cross-over
effects of various training.

Wouldn't the cardiovascular effects of LT training
carry over fairly strongly where the same muscle groups
are involved?

Cardio effects, if I understand it correctly, include
such things as
1. increased heart size
2. increased blood volume
3. increased number and size of mitochondria as well as
enzyme changes
4. increased number of capillaries

Neuromuscular system effects
5. increased strength of muscles, tendons
6. increased power (although not as much as if you were
doing drills to promote power)
7. increased coordination

Specifically at LT and above
8. ability to clear lactate in muscles

At my level of ignorance, I'd expect:

1 and 2 to be independent of whatever activity you're doing

3 and 4 to have similar effects if using the same muscles,
that is, running and biking might have a fair amount of cross-
over (leg oriented), swimming would have less cross-over
(esp. if weak kick), and xc skiing might cross-over with
running for the legs (but skiing has more upper body demands
than running)

5, 6, and 7 to depend strongly on the activity (specificity
in training)

8 to be like 3 and 4 - effects depend on muscles used, but
not necessarily used in same manner. That is LT on bike
might cross over reasonably well for running - at least
with regards to lactate clearing (but not for
neuromuscular effects).

Or is there physiology that would make very little of 1-4
and 8 cross over from mt biking or plyometric-like drills to
running? I haven't read that much about the mechanisms of
what happens, so I may be approaching this very naively.

I seldom do "speed" work where a person is going faster to
have effort level above LT. However, I usually do "hard"
workouts (close to LT or above), close to once a week much
of the year when running consistently
(ie. not during field season) - but they might be steep
hills (running or mt biking), breaking trails with xc
skis or snowshoes, cross-training class, etc. That
is, I'm usually going slower in hard workouts than
regular ones, but effort level is greater. In cross-
training, we have drills which include high steps,
butt kicks, skipping, single-legged hopping (forward
and backward for everything to here), jumping over
mats (forward and sideways), etc in a rapidly moving
line led by instructor. That is, keep up with group
or be run over (or step out for a moment so you don't
barf on his mats).

Because all these activities have strong leg
components, I've been assuming I'm getting the bulk of
the cardio benefits of LT training, but not the
specificity for running.

Or have I been working under false assumption?

Dot

--
"Success is different things to different people" -Bernd
Heinrich in Racing the Antelope

"dave d" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

My previous base pattern was to run about 2-4 times per
week, once or

twice

Quoted message said:

for 2.5 miles and the remainder 5-7 miles. My estimated
max heart rate is between 190 and 195 based on self-
performed max effort tests.

Quoted message said:

... Now that I'm running more often I've been keeping the
easy days (all but 2/week) to 2.5 or 5 miles or so at
approx 145 BPM, or about

9:00 pace.

Quoted message said:

It seemed almost silly to go this slowly at first, but it
certainly is easier on my joints and is pleasant enough,
so I have been doing this for

a

Quoted message said:

few months.

That's 74% of your maximum output -- I consider this to be a
medium effort.

My max is 192 and I cruise at 130-135 pulse all the time on
my easy days. It's the base mileage + the particular mixture
of speed work that gets you to your potential. Recovery days
at 67-70% max hr. may seem like junk miles, but they keep
the base up, and get you ready for your next hard workout.

If you want to improve, you probably need to increase your
base mileage (and remove the hard days while you're doing
it!). After you've notched up your mileage for 6-8 weeks,
gradually reintroduce hard workouts.

Now that it's getting hot, however, it's about
impossible to

Quoted message said:

keep running at this low HR. I decided to see what an
easy pace,

equivanent

Quoted message said:

to 145BPM and about 9:00 per mile at 65 degrees,
translates to at 80 degrees. The answer seems to be 150
ramping up to 160 by the end.

That is a hard workout, really a Lactate Threshold type run.

Quoted message said:

My inclination is to let my heart rate creep up on the
easy days, letting the days be just as easy on my legs but
maybe into the next HR zone. I'm interested in opinions on
the matter.

Accept the fact that you go slower in hot weather -- still
use effort (%hr) as your guide.

-- Dan

Dot wrote in message ...

Quoted message said:

Tony said:

LT work, like max HR is sport and muscle specific (so my
biking LT work only carries over some to running).

This is something I've been wondering about - cross-over
effects of various training.

Wouldn't the cardiovascular effects of LT training carry
over fairly strongly where the same muscle groups are
involved?

Cardio effects, if I understand it correctly, include such
things as
1. increased heart size
2. increased blood volume
3. increased number and size of mitochondria as well as
enzyme changes
4. increased number of capillaries

Neuromuscular system effects
5. increased strength of muscles, tendons
6. increased power (although not as much as if you were
doing drills to promote power)
7. increased coordination

Specifically at LT and above
8. ability to clear lactate in muscles

At my level of ignorance, I'd expect:

1 and 2 to be independent of whatever activity you're doing

3 and 4 to have similar effects if using the same muscles,
that is, running and biking might have a fair amount of cross-
over (leg oriented), swimming would have less cross-over
(esp. if weak kick), and xc skiing might cross-over with
running for the legs (but skiing has more upper body
demands than running)

5, 6, and 7 to depend strongly on the activity (specificity
in training)

8 to be like 3 and 4 - effects depend on muscles used, but
not necessarily used in same manner. That is LT on bike
might cross over reasonably well for running - at least
with regards to lactate clearing (but not for neuromuscular
effects).

Or is there physiology that would make very little of 1-4
and 8 cross over from mt biking or plyometric-like drills
to running? I haven't read that much about the mechanisms
of what happens, so I may be approaching this very naively.

I seldom do "speed" work where a person is going faster to
have effort level above LT. However, I usually do "hard"
workouts (close to LT or above), close to once a week much
of the year when running consistently
(ie. not during field season) - but they might be steep
hills (running or mt biking), breaking trails with xc
skis or snowshoes, cross-training class, etc. That is,
I'm usually going slower in hard workouts than regular
ones, but effort level is greater. In cross-training,
we have drills which include high steps, butt kicks,
skipping, single-legged hopping (forward and backward
for everything to here), jumping over mats (forward
and sideways), etc in a rapidly moving line led by
instructor. That is, keep up with group or be run over
(or step out for a moment so you don't barf on his
mats).

Because all these activities have strong leg
components, I've been assuming I'm getting the bulk of
the cardio benefits of LT training, but not the
specificity for running.

Or have I been working under false assumption?

I think you've done more reading about it than me, and I
think your assumptions are correct. There is some carryover
from LT training on the bike to running, and I've been
sucessful doing this in the past. It takes less time to get
into peak form with running LT workouts if you've done them
on the bike first for a while. You still have to put in a
good month of running speedwork to gain the full benefit.
Also, running uses the hamstrings much more than cycling,
and cycling uses the quads - in my exeperience they are not
as similar as you might think.

The other thing is if your goal is running, cycling too much
can easily overdevelop your legs and that will slow you
down. One way to combat this is to cycle always with a high
cadence and easier gears. For trail runners cycling probably
helps because you need stronger quads anyway...

- Tony

Quoted message said:

Dot

--
"Success is different things to different people" -Bernd
Heinrich in Racing the Antelope

Dan Stumpus wrote in message ...

Quoted message said:

"dave d" <[email hidden]> wrote

.........

Quoted message said:

Now that it's getting hot, however, it's about
impossible to

Quoted message said:

keep running at this low HR. I decided to see what an
easy pace,

equivanent

Quoted message said:

to 145BPM and about 9:00 per mile at 65 degrees,
translates to at 80 degrees. The answer seems to be 150
ramping up to 160 by the end.

That is a hard workout, really a Lactate Threshold
type run.

Or worse, its a 'junk' zone run - not quite high enough to
train LT, but high enough to do too much damage for
regular training.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

My inclination is to let my heart rate creep up on the
easy days, letting the days be just as easy on my legs
but maybe into the next HR zone. I'm interested in
opinions on the matter.

Accept the fact that you go slower in hot weather -- still
use effort (%hr) as your guide.

I agree that you have to slow down in hot weather to account
for the general system fatigue that will accumulate if you
train at too high an effort. That being said, I think there
can be some allowance for cooling, without letting the HR
creep up too high. My rule of thumb is to allow my HR to
creep about 5 bpm when its very hot or hot/humid, but still
I have to slow down some.

- Tony

"Tony" <qtrader2@(remove)hotmail.com> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Dan Stumpus wrote in message ...

Quoted message said:

"dave d" <[email hidden]> wrote

.........

Quoted message said:

Now that it's getting hot, however, it's about
impossible to

Quoted message said:

keep running at this low HR. I decided to see what an
easy pace,

equivanent

Quoted message said:

to 145BPM and about 9:00 per mile at 65 degrees,
translates to at 80 degrees. The answer seems to be 150
ramping up to 160 by the end.

That is a hard workout, really a Lactate Threshold
type run.

Or worse, its a 'junk' zone run - not quite high enough to
train LT, but high enough to do too much damage for
regular training.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

My inclination is to let my heart rate creep up on the
easy days,

letting

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the days be just as easy on my legs but maybe into the
next HR zone.

I'm

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

interested in opinions on the matter.

Accept the fact that you go slower in hot weather --
still use effort

(%hr)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

as your guide.

I agree that you have to slow down in hot weather to
account for the

general

Quoted message said:

system fatigue that will accumulate if you train at too
high an effort. That being said, I think there can be some
allowance for cooling, without letting the HR creep up too
high. My rule of thumb is to allow my HR to creep about 5
bpm when its very hot or hot/humid, but still I have to
slow down some.

- Tony

Thanks for all the replies. I see the wisdom in staying away
from LT most of the time, but am still trying to figure out
just where that line is. I have read quite a few places that
the LT/HR relationship changes with temperature, but have
not seem much specific written about how much. I saw a quote
from Lance Armstrong today on the subject, and he said that
he watches the HR but in the end listens to his legs. That's
what I've been trying to do since it got hot. Based on some
unanticipated soreness Monday I think that I guessed a
little high Sunday. I'll back off a bit more, maybe to this
last +5 BPM recommendation, and see what happens.

Dave

dave d said:

Thanks for all the replies. I see the wisdom in staying
away from LT most of the time, but am still trying to
figure out just where that line is.

Why not just use conversational effort for your easy runs?
Based on my interpretations of readings, it seems like
breathing and LT are more directly connected than hr and LT.
When your conversation gets choppy and just a couple words
at a time, you're probably in LT zone. When you're gasping,
you're above it.

Quoted message said:

I saw a quote from Lance Armstrong today on the subject,
and he said that he watches the HR but in the end listens
to his legs.

Legs work, as does breathing and other body signs. Heart
rate is a convenient way of quantifying things and
logging data.

Dot

--
"Success is different things to different people" -Bernd
Heinrich in Racing the Antelope

Tony said:

I think you've done more reading about it than me, and I
think your assumptions are correct.

Actually, it's been more a matter of trying to figure out
appropriate training when most training is during Alaska
winter (running on most kinds of snow is different than
running on dirt) and race opportunities are usually in May
before field season kicks into full swing. Standard training
schedules didn't work that well for me. It's very rare that
I've been able to do a simple running race (exactly one to
date after 3 yrs, and the last 2 were cancelled) and there's
usually been a bike component to about half my races so far
(duathlon, winter tri). Other events have been snowshoe
running and orienteering.

Quoted message said:

Also, running uses the hamstrings much more than cycling,
and cycling uses the quads - in my exeperience they are not
as similar as you might think.

True, but uphill and downhill running (typically 10-30%
slopes on my trails) also emphasize different muscles than
flat running, although LT may not be a big issue with
downhill running as it is with uphill.

Quoted message said:

The other thing is if your goal is running, cycling too
much can easily overdevelop your legs and that will slow
you down.

I've used it mostly as rehab (achilles) in the past, and
there's a fun trail duathlon early in the season that I've
been able to do a couple times.

Quoted message said:

One way to combat this is to cycle always with a high
cadence and easier gears.

I'll do that when biking to work or cruising streets, but
it's not realistic on trails where the slopes can be up to
30%, but I usually stick to the 10-15% ones after having
been almost bucked off a steeper one when front wheel popped
up. I go with the easy gears, but it's not exactly a high
cadence 😉

Quoted message said:

For trail runners cycling probably helps because you need
stronger quads anyway...

agreed.

Thanks for your comments.

Dot

--
"Success is different things to different people" -Bernd
Heinrich in Racing the Antelope

point of easy days? i train with a HM and easy days are for
your tendons / lig / joints to 'catch up' with your muscles
on your hard days. I call easy days active resting. It is in
rest that your heal not while your run your butt off. Your
body needs those day to recover . It helps also in not
overtraining. I did train in Glorietta MN and let me tell
you that was H*ll . i agree that walking is boring . I
thought so untill i started ultras now part of my trains
goes into Walking if you can believe that. hope this helps
OH i read that LT ( wish i could find it) is right about 75%-
78% of maxHR. I train at 75-78 on easy days plodzilla

Quoted message said:

Gang,

Over the past 10 years or so I've been in a happy rut of
training at about the same effort most of the time and
racing at about the same pace. I finally have a bit more
time to train, so I'm attempting to be more scientific
about adding miles and maybe finally getting one of those
coveted Peach Tree mugs and possibly a Boston qualifier.

My previous base pattern was to run about 2-4 times per
week, once or twice for 2.5 miles and the remainder 5-7
miles. My estimated max heart rate is between 190 and 195
based on self-performed max effort tests. I'm in my mid
40s. When preparing for a 10K I'll up the mileage and do
intervals once a week or so. Preparing for a marathon I'll
do more miles (rarely more than
25/week) and do long runs ramping up to 22 miles or so 3
weeks before. I'm a huge believer in tapering,
preferring to run hard one week before a race and then
not all until the race. At my low mileage, time off
seems to help a lot before a big event. I partially
make up for the insufficient mileage by having enough
sense to cut back during a race if my goal becomes
unreasonable and just be happy to finish. My 10K PB is
43:53 and for the marathon it's just under 4:00 (8:58
pace). My current focus is to get my marathon pace down
to 8:00 for a Boston qualifier, if not by this December
then by next year.

Up to now, I figured that since I had so many days off it
made sense to do all my runs fairly hard. Now that I'm
running more often I've been keeping the easy days (all
but 2/week) to 2.5 or 5 miles or so at approx 145 BPM, or
about 9:00 pace. It seemed almost silly to go this slowly
at first, but it certainly is easier on my joints and is
pleasant enough, so I have been doing this for a few
months. Now that it's getting hot, however, it's about
impossible to keep running at this low HR. I decided to
see what an easy pace, equivanent to 145BPM and about 9:00
per mile at 65 degrees, translates to at 80 degrees. The
answer seems to be 150 ramping up to 160 by the end. This
is slightly slower than my cool weather pace but feels
like about the same effort, both during and after the run.

Now I understand that heat puts extra burden on the cardio
system and leads to increased heart rate for similar
effort. I am also sure that heat doesn't raise the max
heart rate, it just imposes a sort of overhead burden. My
question is: what is an approprate training level for easy
days? This leads to the question: what is the point of
easy days? My guess is that easy days let you get some
miles on the legs (do SOME new muscle damage), while
simultaneously allowing damage from recent hard training
to heal without undully stressing the other systems. On
the other hand, maybe considerations such as lactate
threshold are well estimated based solely on heart rate,
and easy days really should be run at this low heart rate
even if it forces walking. Bor-ing!

Clearly temperature changes the relative load on the
various systems (leg muscles, cardio, lungs). It reminds
me of the little running I did in the mountains of New
Mexico: I ran as hard as my lungs would let me, but my
legs has a lactic acid jones on all week.

My inclination is to let my heart rate creep up on the
easy days, letting the days be just as easy on my legs but
maybe into the next HR zone. I'm interested in opinions on
the matter.

Ideas?

Dave

gentolm said:

OH i read that LT ( wish i could find it) is right about
75%-78% of maxHR.

I thought LT was closer to about 85-90% max hr (80-85% using
Karvonen).

Quoted message said:

I train at 75-78 on easy days

That makes sense. Does that suggest that 75-78% in 1st line
(for LT) may have been a typo??

Dot

--
"Success is different things to different people" -Bernd
Heinrich in Racing the Antelope