** Update ** I sat out the rest of last week. Rode Saturday - started out feeling great (legs still thrashed from the previous ride) but feeling strong. Half way through - still hitting numbers but not feeling strong.
I backed out 50% of the fit changes that I had put in the week before and felt better. Have made some more adjustments and will see if this gets me back to normal. Plan to engage the run again tomorrow... Have decided that I need to get to at least 90+% fresh feeling before loading up TSS for FL (yes - only 3 training weeks to get there). Better to be peaking into this race than trailing off with negative juju from poor training sessions.
Still planning on nailing this race - looking forward to affirmation or adjustment with the approach.
When I try to use the EN Calculator for Run HR Zones, I have a hard time making it fit. I've looked through the EN Run Testing Protocol, the Calculator videos, and searched, and haven't found any clarity with respect to which HR number should be plugged into the calculator to get the right zones.
Here is an example: I recently ran a 10K @ 46:xx. My avg HR for the entire run was 173, for the second half the avg HR was 175 and my max HR was 185.
I'm focused on TRP HR. The TRP pace given by the calculator is ≈ 8:45. This fits with my "feeling" while running. On a normal day, flat surface, I feel like 8:45 - 8:50 is the TEP zone that you described during the webinar. This also fits with my durability runs for the last six months... they all have gravitated towards that pace.
I'm struggling with where you think the HR should be. Based on the 10k (which was immediately after a 22 mile ride across town hammering my mountain bike... so take it for what it is worth)...
TRP (full run avg HR): 130-142
TRP (2nd half avg HR): 131 - 144
TRP (max HR): 139 - 152
All of my recent run data shows my HR to be 154-155 avg when I am running at a pace of 8:45 - 8:50 min/mile (TRP). That doesn't fit any of the calculator ranges...
My max HR in the last 6 months is 189 bpm (only because I haven't done a hard track workout... otherwise would be higher). Based on 189 bpm my TRP zones would be 142 - 155 bpm... this is the closest match to what I really see while running
My questions:
1. Which HR should be put into the EN calculator?
2. What does it mean that my measured HRs do not fall within the calculator zones?
3. Does any of this affect my training targets and/or workouts?
Thank you!
For reference, here are the calculator results for the three different HR inputs:
synchronization. That said, looking at your Dec running, you ARE NOT running at TRP pace of 8:45…almost all of your runs are at the very low 8s…you are calling these progressive runs and usually only 1 mile is close to 8:45s (usually faster).
When I look back I see an easy 4 mile run on 12/7 was 8:21 / mile pace with an AHR of 140. I can only assume if you ran at 8:45 pace — instead of 8:21 - that your HR would have been lower.
So my summary isn’t that there’s a calculator issue, but that you aren’t running at the pace suggested (8:45) to see that actual heart rate. Maybe your data is better than what I can see? Do me a favor, pick a day to run 8 miles at 8:45s…send me that HR data…
First 4 miles yesterday were at TRP. The last section was downhill + included strides so was faster.It was also 42º outside and I was cold the whole run)
Rich, first, sorry on my initial post...not sure where the first half of my message went leaving you only with "synchronization" -- but regardless...when I look at your second run above, I see 8:53 avg pace and a 145 avg HR. On the whole run AHR from your test, that's a 145 vs a 142 upper TRP end...or a 2% delta... I think that's within the margin of error.
Here's what I think happened. You rode your bike, then tested the run. Your HR was lower than if you had raced it as a full proper run only test. You probably would have seen an AHR of closer to 175 or maybe even 177....which is still lower than what you could have done earlier in the year, but you are tired after a full season...THAT, after all, is EXACTLY why we test vs just saying "I should run this fast and now I will do it"...the pace that is right for you now isn't the one that will be right in 6 weeks...or necessarily on race day. So don't be afraid that you are locked in a box where performance won't happen, or grow. Own these zones (I think 8:45s is great) until you retest...a proper run test, and we can evolve from there. Zooming our to look at all of 2016, you are on track!
Comments
I sat out the rest of last week. Rode Saturday - started out feeling great (legs still thrashed from the previous ride) but feeling strong. Half way through - still hitting numbers but not feeling strong.
I backed out 50% of the fit changes that I had put in the week before and felt better. Have made some more adjustments and will see if this gets me back to normal. Plan to engage the run again tomorrow... Have decided that I need to get to at least 90+% fresh feeling before loading up TSS for FL (yes - only 3 training weeks to get there). Better to be peaking into this race than trailing off with negative juju from poor training sessions.
Still planning on nailing this race - looking forward to affirmation or adjustment with the approach.
Which HR to Use for the Calculators?
When I try to use the EN Calculator for Run HR Zones, I have a hard time making it fit. I've looked through the EN Run Testing Protocol, the Calculator videos, and searched, and haven't found any clarity with respect to which HR number should be plugged into the calculator to get the right zones.
Here is an example: I recently ran a 10K @ 46:xx. My avg HR for the entire run was 173, for the second half the avg HR was 175 and my max HR was 185.
I'm focused on TRP HR. The TRP pace given by the calculator is ≈ 8:45. This fits with my "feeling" while running. On a normal day, flat surface, I feel like 8:45 - 8:50 is the TEP zone that you described during the webinar. This also fits with my durability runs for the last six months... they all have gravitated towards that pace.
I'm struggling with where you think the HR should be. Based on the 10k (which was immediately after a 22 mile ride across town hammering my mountain bike... so take it for what it is worth)...
All of my recent run data shows my HR to be 154-155 avg when I am running at a pace of 8:45 - 8:50 min/mile (TRP). That doesn't fit any of the calculator ranges...
My max HR in the last 6 months is 189 bpm (only because I haven't done a hard track workout... otherwise would be higher). Based on 189 bpm my TRP zones would be 142 - 155 bpm... this is the closest match to what I really see while running
My questions:
1. Which HR should be put into the EN calculator?
2. What does it mean that my measured HRs do not fall within the calculator zones?
3. Does any of this affect my training targets and/or workouts?
Thank you!
For reference, here are the calculator results for the three different HR inputs:
Full-Run Avg HR = 173 bpm
Second-Half Run Avg HR = 175
Full-Run Max HR = 185
When I look back I see an easy 4 mile run on 12/7 was 8:21 / mile pace with an AHR of 140. I can only assume if you ran at 8:45 pace — instead of 8:21 - that your HR would have been lower.
So my summary isn’t that there’s a calculator issue, but that you aren’t running at the pace suggested (8:45) to see that actual heart rate. Maybe your data is better than what I can see? Do me a favor, pick a day to run 8 miles at 8:45s…send me that HR data…
First 4 miles yesterday were at TRP. The last section was downhill + included strides so was faster.It was also 42º outside and I was cold the whole run)
https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/983805150
Basically this whole run
https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/966687307
>> When I look back I see an easy 4 mile run on 12/7 was 8:21 / mile pace with an AHR of 140. I can only assume if you ran at 8:45
>> pace — instead of 8:21 - that your HR would have been lower.
That was a treadmill run. My watch says 8:21, but the treadmill was in the 8:50 range on average.
Here's what I think happened. You rode your bike, then tested the run. Your HR was lower than if you had raced it as a full proper run only test. You probably would have seen an AHR of closer to 175 or maybe even 177....which is still lower than what you could have done earlier in the year, but you are tired after a full season...THAT, after all, is EXACTLY why we test vs just saying "I should run this fast and now I will do it"...the pace that is right for you now isn't the one that will be right in 6 weeks...or necessarily on race day. So don't be afraid that you are locked in a box where performance won't happen, or grow. Own these zones (I think 8:45s is great) until you retest...a proper run test, and we can evolve from there. Zooming our to look at all of 2016, you are on track!