Pacing Q - Variance vs. Test

talltim

Hey all.

I know that the OS workouts inspire quick adaptation, but I can't believe it accounts for what I have been seeing, hence my question with a little background.

Because of some work issues, I tested the week prior to Oct OS start, and then started OS on time.  Pre-OS, I was 2 ish weeks post an Oly race, and prior to that 8-10 weeks of solid training, at least from a traditional tri perspective.  I did a few OS inspired workouts in those 2 wks with the free trial plan.  End of last week and this week, my run paces in workouts are 15-30 sec per mile faster (at LTHR) than the pacing produced by the testing results.  Bike is also improved mph at LTHR, but not by as much -- probably < 1 mph all else being equal; indeed, that might be just the difference between testing on the tri bike and switching to the road bike for safety and light set-up.

My question is whether perhaps I screwed up my run test and should re-do it - or if not, I assume go to the LTHR indifferent of pace?

Appreciate insights.

Thanks

 

Keith Wick

I would stick with the test you have unless there is some drastic reason why you didn't run faster. Since your running by pace, your LTHR on the run really doesn't mean much. Pace is a much better indicator as HR can vary due to many factors. As Coach Rich says, there is your could of pace and the one you actually ran. You only get to run the could of pace if you've proven it by testing. Besides, there is another test coming in a few weeks anyway, so you'll have your shot at redemption.

As far as the bike, was the test on a trainer? If not, then mph doesn't really mean anything due to environmental conditions. If it was on the trainer, I'd agree that there should be some difference between tri and road bike. Remember that aero position will easily get you that 1 mph back once your on the road.

good luck,
keith

jburbatt

And if this is your first time testing, you'll likely be able to do better as you get used to the workouts. It's generally not important to redo a run test unless something is really off, i.e. you were sick, it was 100 degrees out, etc. You'll test again soon enough, no need to jump the gun

Coach Patrick

Most of us much up first ever test as you have described. Since you have 8 weeks to go until the next test, you might find yourself falling asleep at TP for the run. If you do, you can either work in a retest or just fudge your OVERALL NUMBERS a bit faster (by playing with vDOT in data tool). DO NOT just move one number (i.e. my intervals are faster but my longer runs are slower etc). Let us know what you decide!

talltim

Thanks for this Patrick.

End of last week, and even after what was for me a big effort on Saturday on the bike (so-called Banjo ride), I was running what should be LT pace at HM heart-rates on Sunday's intervals. Seeing it across all zones, incl the scheduled EZ pace Tues brick which was a good 30 sec/mile faster than zones would indicate. I'm going to give it probably through this week and then will most likely move the whole set of numbers up if its still the same effect.

kjanracing

I had a similar question. I tested a couple weeks before starting the Oct. OS and found my pace numbers to be rather low. So I just started the OS on time and did the tests again and used those numbers. Coming off IMLOU I wasn't in a fast running mode and hadn't run fast most all year. I still usually run a little under my pace numbers but I think i'm keeping the intent of the workout. Kindof paraphrasing Charlie Daniels, he says in his book not to fiddle around trying to always "race" yourself and go all out and beat your pace from last week. Train your tested Vdot paces and readjust when you retest. Then you'll have the thrill and confidence boost of seeing a real improvement from the retest.

That is what my approach is going to be anyway... or maybe I don't know Jack.

Kurt

Coach Patrick

@Kurt, that's _exactly_ what you want to do. There's a lot of fiddling here inside EN, your approach is welcome (and I'm positive it'll pay off!).