Pacing IM Marathon by HR
Not a new topic, but I thought with the racing year over, and maybe some people gaining experience with this strategy which we discussed summer 2012, it might be worth generating some thoughts/reaction on this topic. The general idea is, HR may be the "best" way to pace an HR marathon given variations in terrain, temperature, and other factors which sometimes conspire against using pure pace or RPE during a race. Here are a number of links from EN to consider:
Some initial reaction on the forum about Coach P's race report form IM TX '12, where he unveiled his strategy and won his AG: http://members.endurancenation.us/Forums/tabid/57/aft/9018/Default.aspx#112527
Two months later, Coach P's blog entry and forum thread, a bit more formal in recommendations: http://members.endurancenation.us/Forums/tabid/57/aft/9607/Default.aspx
More reaction, a month further on: http://members.endurancenation.us/Forums/tabid/57/aft/9878/afnp/122563/Default.aspx
And a Wiki post about what one can do to "train the mind" to get ready to work at the level required to hold the HR suggested: http://members.endurancenation.us/Resources/Wiki/tabid/91/Default.aspx?topic=Marathon+IM:+Training+to+Run+A+Steady+Pace
I think two of the things EN does better than anyone else are race execution, and group learning. After my experience recently at IM Arizona, where I successfully implemented the strategy despite not believing that I could work at that level - ending up with a negative split marathon run at my LRP - I'm interested in hearing others' experience, either deliberate or inadvertent, with using HR to pace IM marathon, and also thoughts about how one might best train to execute like that.
Comments
Funny side note that now makes sense. When I came up to coach P when exiting the state park at IMFL this year and told him how my gut cramps had reduced me to walking in the park, he said something about HR...can't remember what exactly, it's a little blurry. Being new to EN since NOS 2012 and doing everything on the run SOLEY by pace since then, I remember thinking, "why would I even have a HR strap on, and be monitoring HR". Oh well, live and learn
Interestingly, I ran the run leg of Challenge Penticton this year - so just the stand alone marathon - something I had not done since 1992! My IM marathon times are in the 4:02-4:10 range. The stand alone time using the same basic HR protocol? 3:53. So not THAT much faster.
I think a lot can be learned from using a HR strap on those long runs leading up to a race. Yes, pace is key for workouts and I use my Garmin religiously throughout the season. But on race day, I really do like the simplicity of the HR monitor only.
---Ann.
I agree that the concept is much easier to execute and it does take into account the course and conditions much better than pace.
I can't really add much as I haven't (yet) had a truly good IM run — only started 2 and dnfed the first one as my bike gears refused to change and mechanics could not get them to work..
That said, I train with pace, including race rehearsals.
To execute, the first 60 mins I sit on (126 bpm) heart rate 5 beats below my IM bike rate (131 bpm). Then sit on bike rate until 18 miles, then see what I have got left.
As an aside, I think the key is to find out what each peeps protocol works best. I hope to finesse my own based on successful IM run executions.
Just off the top of my head, I applied the HR strategy to my last IM in 2012. I ran 46 minutes faster than 2010 after a bike that was 1:20 faster. 2012 was the year that the IM training plans called for all Thursday long runs at IM pace. I used those runs to learn where my HR should be when I was running zone 1 pace. I always wear my garmin for runs so have both pace and HR. During IMLP 2012 it gave me something very concrete to focus on. I didn't worry about walking up the hill in town because I was just following my plan and my HR dictated that I walk. I am racing again IMLP 2014 and plan to use the HR strategy.
I will be interested to follow this thread and see what the smart folks have to say. Looking forward to the discussion.
As we know, racing a iron marathon is much different than racing standalone marathon so should be approached differently. To my mind, it seems that if you are negative splitting a iron marathon, you are leaving time on the table. Physiologically, makes sense to me that the fastest times would come from first 1-3 miles easy working into it. Then through to miles 16-20, fast pace per pace and HR. And the final miles as able. If your final miles are as fast or faster then the earlier miles, then you probably should have gone faster earlier and ended up with a better complete time.
I remember calling coach P to task for apparently not following the EN protocol. I seem to remember both coaches saying that the goal is negative splitting the EFFORT not the pace.
Anyhow, the above seems like what works for me. Hopuefully i can realize the its full potential this next year.
what test distance do you use to figure out your IM HR zones?
Here's the way I see it... In the twelve weeks before an IM, we do a lot of MP "intervals" during our long runs. The HR I hit during those intervals towards the end of the build cycle is the HR I'm aiming for during the IM itself. My pace during the IM, of course, will be a lot slower, but the RPE and the HR of those training MP intervals seems to equate to what happens and is manageable on race day. After the first 3-8 miles, of course. So using an HR monitor during training is essential to making this method work on race day, in order to lock in the feel and HR of the MP pace.
EG, for me, on the long runs I'm doing 20-30 minute intervals @ a 7:40-50 pace during my prep this fall for IM AZ, with an HR of 128-138. On race day, after about mile 6, I was going about 9:05-10 at the same HR and RPE. These paces do NOT include any walking during aid stations. I'm talking about the pace I am actually running at.
I've used HR as my primary guide for races since about 2010. In fact, I have really run one IM very strictly by pace, and while it worked very well, my findings after that experience was it was just impractical to apply to any course, aside from Louisville, Roth or Florida. Canada? Too windy / hilly. CDA? Too hilly. WI? Too hilly and my watch died. AZ 2009? Too hilly.
After flipping to HR, I've ended up executing based mainly on HR range instead of any one strict number. From my recent set of races, it has been successful inasmuch as it has let me execute (mostly) predictable runs, to negative split the time, and to meter (metre?) out effort and everything else that matters to make sure there is a lot of fuel in the tank at mile 18.. All of this, of course, has been based on execution that is aligned with the EN framework (0 to six, six to 18, 18 to finish). Recent HR numbers (edit to update 26/12):
Interestingly, I've spent a LOT of time thinking about my more recent HI run, and I knew I had botched it by the time I was at the Ali'i turnaround (~ 5 miles). as the day unfolded, I just didn't have the pop for miles 6-26 that I usually have, and the numbers seem to support that experience. However, I had lower run fitness at HI this time around, and I have wondered if I HAD executed perfectly, if I would still have been at 3:40. My suspicion is that I would have.
One more piece: although these numbers end up falling more or less in the same regions, I have not been firm on a specific HR range until I am moving, and I am able to see how my rate of perceived effort is matching up with my HR. In other words, 153 bpm (or whatever) has felt very different in each of the races, and I've taken much more of a view of letting RPE confirm a specific HR rance before actually committing to it.
Last item: one of my better (measured only by gutsiness) runs was WI, when my Garmin kicked the bucket ar around 10k. If I had the stones to try it again, I would love to make an attempt at an IM run with nothing but a timex Ironman telling me overall run time. Maybe next year I'll try to make a Science Fair low stakes race where I put my Garmin in my back pocket to collect data and review in the postmortem, but execute on time and effort.
@ Dave - what are your HR zones? I'm trying to confirm Coach P's belief that starting on the cusp of Zone 1/2, and then finishing mid-high zone 2 is the way to execute a successful edge of the envelope IM marathon. Additional data would be correlating to your HR at the end (last 30-45 minutes) of the bike. This all assumes one has executed the bike properly, of course.
The new AZ run course is minimally hilly. There were exactly 10 minutes (max 4-5 % grade) when I was running up hill during the 250 minutes it took me. Compared to CDA or WI - nothin'
Also I'm interested in people's thoughts about what elements of training might make a difference in being able to execute an IM run via HR. My belief is that the long runs, where we focus on MP intervals for up 90 minutes, is the key training element. The RPE of that MP stuff seems to me exactly the same as the EP pace on race day.
I've done a few IM runs using just a Timex watch, looking at mile spits along the way for info, basically running on RPE. Those were my fastest IM run spits. I'm convinced pace is a rein, not a whip for me. I reverted to RPE this year @ IM AZ, and was following my HR with a bit of trepidation as I watched it rise, as it was higher than I'd seen it in the races when I wore an HR monitor. Running by RPE requires an enormous amount of focus and determination; HR may or may not be a valuable crutch, but only as a whip, I think. Using RPE by itself is a Zen Master, black belt sort of a deal, and getting to that point for newer racers might be better done with HR than pace. That's the theory here.
Al - ask and ye shall receive. I don't have HR data for races before 2011, but this should give a sense of the recent experiences. I would ballpark my ranges, as of race day(s), as:
z1 140 - 148
z2 149 - 157
z3 158 - 166
z4 167 - 174
As for the training question, there are two key sessions that HR comes in to play for me: (a) the long run, and (b) weekend bricks. My long runs are "EN modified," but typically have a 30-50' EP component, 20-40' MP, 25-60' HMP, and the remainder MP. It's the work at HMP and remainder MP that are most instructive in mimicing the efforts that a hard, negatively-split IM marathon require. The other sessions, done as 40' brick runs after the weekend long ride and the ABP ride are at EP (unless I can muster energy to do the second half at MP, but this is rare), and seem to mimic the mental and physical place I find myself between miles 8 - 18. As I've mentioned in other threads, the above elements are done on a track at pace first, HR second / fyi, and the top priority to perfect form 100% of the time (parenthetically, I try to game the track laps as Form Fartleks in tyhe bricks, where lap 1 is emphasizing / concentrating on, say, footstrike behind the stance line, next lap is concentrating on forarms parallel to the gound and pulling elbows back, next lap is counting strides, and so on.
Thanks for your thoughts on this Al. Below is my data for three years on IMC 2010-2012. In 2013 at IMC Whistler I had a very poor run due to nutrition and simply haven't updated the spreadsheet due to lack of motivation and the lack of apples-to-apples course.
In any event, for me, I feel HR is a whip late in the run. I had my best run (closest to my potential or vDot) in 2012 but honestly when I looked at my HR late and realized it wasn't going up, but actually DOWN, I realized I had more on the table and that I need to learn how to HTFU.
It is also unusual that my HR is consistently higher in the bike than the run which leads me to believe I'm typically biking too hard or not pushing hard enough on the run. Or both.