Re: How do you keep track of progress?

Bear G said:

2) run it at the same aerobic intensity every week or every other
week at roughly the same time. A HRM is very useful to ensure you
remained at the right intensity.

The problem is that it is not a precise measure of intensity. Over a period
of a few months, your maximum heart rate could change (for example).

Quoted message said:

3) compare your times. If your training program is working you
should see a drop every week or two.

This will only happen if you're riding the beginner gains curve. But
when this is the case, the most you'll need to know that you're making
progress is a stopwatch.

Quoted message said:

And that's it. It's simple, easily incorporated in your workout
schedule, and provides positive reinforcement that you're making
progress. Or early warning if there's a problem. Improved
aerobic conditioning seen in one run (these benchmarks) should
indicate improvement in all runs.

It might or might not.

Quoted message said:

As Donovan points out you can use races to measure improvement in
specific events, but you may go months between races and

I think it would be desirable to race more frequently. Unless you're living
in a place where races are unavailable, I don't see much reason for a
competitive runner not to race quite often.

I also pointed out that you can use speed workouts, and because the intensity
is higher, these are not subject to the same amount of variability as training
runs.

Quoted message said:

conditions will inevitably be different.

This is also true of training runs.

An interval workout on a track minimises the variation (because it's less
affected by heat than a race or steady run)

Quoted message said:

Or you could maintain a database of all runs but

that would be really silly.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

Donovan Rebbechi said:

Bear G said:

2) run it at the same aerobic intensity every week or every other
week at roughly the same time. A HRM is very useful to ensure you
remained at the right intensity.

The problem is that it is not a precise measure of intensity. Over a period
of a few months, your maximum heart rate could change (for example).

This is the first that I've heard it could change so quickly. I
thought change was on the order of one point/year.

BTW, an experienced runner can go by feel. An experienced runner
like Ig and me can use the extra information even if it's not perfect.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

3) compare your times. If your training program is working you
should see a drop every week or two.

This will only happen if you're riding the beginner gains curve. But
when this is the case, the most you'll need to know that you're making
progress is a stopwatch.

I thought her program was for collegiate level runners. But that
doesn't mean much since she could have easily dumbed it down for
her audience.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Improved
aerobic conditioning seen in one run (these benchmarks) should
indicate improvement in all runs.

It might or might not.

When would it go the other way? N.B., I'm not refering to a
change of a few seconds over a run of many miles, but perhaps
something like a 5 to 10 second/mile change.

Quoted message said:

I also pointed out that you can use speed workouts, and because the intensity
is higher, these are not subject to the same amount of variability as training
runs.

I actually found more variability in my speed workouts but that's
almost certainly because of the unfamilarity.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

conditions will inevitably be different.

This is also true of training runs.

It's only one of many training runs, not all of them, and
conditions don't change that much over the course of a year. If
it's unusually warm or cold or rainy or whatever some run you
don't use it for comparison.

Bear G said:

Donovan Rebbechi said:

Bear G said:

2) run it at the same aerobic intensity every week or every other
week at roughly the same time. A HRM is very useful to ensure you
remained at the right intensity.

The problem is that it is not a precise measure of intensity. Over a period
of a few months, your maximum heart rate could change (for example).

This is the first that I've heard it could change so quickly. I
thought change was on the order of one point/year.

It can change depending on how heavy your training is. My max heart rate
has varied by as much as 10 points or so, depending on how heavy my training
is at the time.

Quoted message said:

BTW, an experienced runner can go by feel.

True to some extent, but it's not really predictive of race performance.
Usually if your training runs get slower, it's a sign that you're struggling
with the training load, and if they get faster, it either means that you're
reducing the training load, or adapting to it.

They are too far from maximal to mean a whole lot.

Quoted message said:

An experienced runner like Ig and me can use the extra information even if
it's not perfect.

You can use it for some things, but predicting race times isn't one of them.

The point I was trying to make to Igor, is that increasing the pace of
training runs should not be a training goal.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

3) compare your times. If your training program is working you
should see a drop every week or two.

This will only happen if you're riding the beginner gains curve. But
when this is the case, the most you'll need to know that you're making
progress is a stopwatch.

I thought her program was for collegiate level runners. But that

Then I disagree that aerobic training runs will get faster over such a short
interval of time. This has not been my experience.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Improved aerobic conditioning seen in one run (these benchmarks) should
indicate improvement in all runs.

It might or might not.

When would it go the other way?

When you increase training load.

Quoted message said:

N.B., I'm not refering to a change of a few seconds over a run of many miles,
but perhaps something like a 5 to 10 second/mile change.

I don't believe a 5 to 10 second per mile improvement in race times will be
as easy to detect in training runs as it would in a race or an interval
workout.

Quoted message said:

I actually found more variability in my speed workouts but that's
almost certainly because of the unfamilarity.

If you perform the same workout twice on a track, and you do the workout
correctly, they shouldn't vary much at all. The average times for my last
4x1200m workouts vary from about 4:07 to 4:10 and most of that variation is
accounted for by a monotonic downward trend.

Quoted message said:

It's only one of many training runs, not all of them, and
conditions don't change that much over the course of a year. If

Temperature changes throughout the year.

Quoted message said:

it's unusually warm or cold or rainy or whatever some run you
don't use it for comparison.

The problem is that any day of summer is unusually hot compared to any
day of winter.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

Donovan Rebbechi said:

Bear G said:

It's only one of many training runs, not all of them, and
conditions don't change that much over the course of a year. If

Temperature changes throughout the year.

Sorry, I was thinking "month" and typed "year". It depends on
where you live, of course, but you might see a change of 10-15F at
the same time of day over the course of a month but see a change
of 30F over the course of a single day.

Ignoramus11685 said:

In article said:

Quoted message said:

An experienced runner like Ig and me can use the extra information even if
it's not perfect.

I am not "experienced" in what I am trying to accomplish, namely, run
a marathon under 4 hours. I have a lot of experience running
recreationally, that's all.

Man, my IQ must have dropped fifty points when I wrote that thing,
I'm as bad as Bush with my malapropisms. (Regardless of your
political affilitation you have to admit that he says the
strangest things.) It was my earlier run, yeah that was it. The
blood had rushed from my head.

Obviously I meant _in_experienced runner.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The point I was trying to make to Igor, is that increasing the pace of
training runs should not be a training goal.

Donovan, this does sound counterintuitive to me. My objective is to run my
races faster that my last race. Would I not want to run faster, during
training?

Over time you'll naturally run faster. But you want to keep
most(?) of your training runs LSD to develop your aerobic capacity
for endurance events. If you run faster you'll use different
metabolic pathways and you'll get far less aerobic benefit. Speed
and tempo work is different since it's training the muscles to
work faster/harder, not for longer periods at higher loads.

I remember somebody mentioning that LSD develops capillaries and
mitochondria and stuff, but they may have been thinking about
_Star Wars: the Horrid Prequels_.

Ignoramus11685 said:

Quoted message said:

You can use it for some things, but predicting race times isn't one of them.

The point I was trying to make to Igor, is that increasing the pace of
training runs should not be a training goal.

Donovan, this does sound counterintuitive to me. My objective is to run my
races faster that my last race. Would I not want to run faster, during
training?

No. You want to run faster during racing. It doesn't matter a whole lot if you
run slowly during training runs, and increasing the pace of your aerobic
training runs won't necessarily make you go faster. The systems you are trying
to train with easy distance runs respond well at low intensities. Push the
pace and the anaerobic system picks up the difference -- so you don't get an
increase in training effect, because the extra work does not place load on the
fitness components that you are trying to train (and it is not intense enough
to load the components that get trained with speedwork).

You should do your speed work at a good pace, but day to day training runs
should be at a comfortable pace. Speed work is a better predictor of race
performance than training runs.

On of the posters in this forum, Dan Stumpus, used to run very fast marathons
(close to 6 minutes per mile) and use aerobic training runs of 8 minutes per
mile. That's like you doing your training runs at 12 minutes per mile. Even
my relatively fast 7:15-7:30 minute per mile training pace is more than a
minute per mile slower than my half marathon race pace. Also, if I just don't
feel like running fast on a given day, I might run with a friend at a much
slower pace -- 8, 9, or whatever. As long as the miles go into the diary, it's
all the same to me. Likewise, Steve Common used to run comparable times to me,
yet often trained much slower (as slowly as 10 minutes per mile)

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

Bear G said:

Or you could maintain a database of all runs

that's what I do (Access, described in earlier, but fairly recent, post).

Quoted message said:

but how do you compare a 4
mile run in the morning with a 6 mile run in the afternoon?

that's what I don't do

As Lyndon pointed out, it's not day-to-day progress that you monitor,
but over time. Also, you probably are doing different workouts on
different days - working different systems - so there's no real reason
why they should be directly comparable. Having a fixed routine that you
"test" every so often, like Sam described, would be a good way to go if
you have fairly constant conditions.

I usually measure progress by either how much more of a regular route I
can run, how few walk breaks I have to take up a hill or on a route, or
how I feel after a particularly hilly or long run - or whether I can add
more hills or distance to the route. I may notice that on my relatively
easy hills, I can go in multiple speeds now (almost springing up the
easiest) and still be below LT (used to be just *doing* the hill was
barely below LT). (Actually, the fact that I can run all the hills on
that one system without messing up my Achilles is *substantial* progress
compared with 2 yr ago.)

In prior years, I was running mostly in winter and the snow or mud
conditions just varied so much from one run to the next that it was hard
to judge anything. This year, we had a hot, dry summer (less field work
so I could run), so the paces (as calculated later; I run by effort) are
*somewhat* similar (within a few min/mile) for different types of runs.
But I envision them as a scatterplot, not specific numbers.

I've considered trying to do 6 or 12 min or similar tests, but my
conditions just vary too much from one week to next to make it
meaningless in most years.

The primary purpose of my log is to track volume for injury prevention,
but I also use it for clothing, food/fluid issues as well as
"performance" (very loosely used here 😉

Dot

--
"So many people get stuck in the routine of life that their dreams waste
away. This is about living the dream." - Cave Dog

<< Having a fixed routine that you
"test" every so often, like Sam described, would be a good way to go if
you have fairly constant conditions. >>

What's a good test?
For personal best?
For ALL systems.
Many, many thanks.
My appreciation in your bank.
Systems? Now a scattershot approach for me.

_______
Blog, or dog? Who knows. But if you see my lost pup, please ping me!
<A
HREF="http://journals.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo">http://journal
s.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo</A>

Dot wrote in message ...

Quoted message said:

snip<
The primary purpose of my log is to track volume for injury prevention,
but I also use it for clothing, food/fluid issues as well as
"performance" (very loosely used here 😉

Dot

I use my log to keep a basic record of volume, time in my case, and to stay
motivated. When I started keeping exercise logs 4 years ago my consistency
went way up. Similarly, I keep a food log with my own kind of short hand
for foods and portion sizes. The food log isn't an accurate food count in
any way, but over time it helps me make better food choices.

- Tony

"Tony" <qtrader2@(remove)hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:nsT7d.4922$ae7.2935@trndny07...

Quoted message said:

Dot wrote in message ...

Quoted message said:

snip<
The primary purpose of my log is to track volume for injury prevention,
but I also use it for clothing, food/fluid issues as well as
"performance" (very loosely used here 😉

Dot

I use my log to keep a basic record of volume, time in my case, and to
stay
motivated. When I started keeping exercise logs 4 years ago my
consistency
went way up. Similarly, I keep a food log with my own kind of short hand
for foods and portion sizes. The food log isn't an accurate food count in
any way, but over time it helps me make better food choices.

- Tony

I keep a very basic log of running, walking, and biking (one program) that I
mainly use to keep track of miles on my equipment, though it's nice to see
mpm times decline over time. I have a different log for my weightlifting
and a separate record for my golfing (handicapping, etc.). Last but not
least, I keep a pretty decent food log. Even though it seems like a lot of
logging, it's only a few minutes out of my day. Each of my logs has come in
handy in various situations.

BTW, the runner's log I use is Palm based and a cool little $5 program.

Jenn