vdot pace vs NGP

patachin

OK, so I have a predicted vdot HMP pace based off of my 5K test of 8:27.  Last Sunday I ran a half mary normalized graded pace of 8:24.  What can I conclude from these numbers, if anything?  That my 5K test is fairly predictive?  btw, my avg. pace for the half mary was 8:33.  Seems like the predicted 8:27 was right about in the middle.

On the other hand, is the vdot pace of 8:27 (from the EN zone calculator) a suggested training pace, not a race pace?  If so, maybe my race pace was too easy.  Should I have pushed it harded (I felt like I could have)?

Still new to this pace training stuff, so bear w/me, thanks, John

Nemo Brauch

plus or minus 3-5 second is pretty darn close and I'd say all those numbers make total sense. Two other things to consider are 1) how old your vdot is (if your last vdot test is very old and you've been doing a lot of OS type work, you may be due for a vdot bump), and 2) the magic pixie dust inside a race bib will always make you faster than a 5k vdot test done solo.

All that said, vDot is based on Pace, not NPG, so keep that in mind as well. NPG is helpful at comparing different runs against each other and makes us feel better about hilly routes, etc, but it's not the metric used for Vdot calcs.

Finally- if you crossed the finish line and felt mediately (not after you saw the clock or after you had your post-race beer, or whatever) that you still had gas in the tank, then you probably didn't push hard enough. But keep in mind that it's always easier to think "I coulda pushed harder" at mile 13.2 than it is at 13.0.

PS- Nice job- actually sounds like you executed quite well. Where was the race?

patachin

Thanks Nemo.  Even more than my time, I was happier w/the execution.  After "forgetting" to drink enough water in my fall marathon and paying badly the last 4 miles, this time round' I really focused on hydration and pacing, and was able to hammer the half (Wash. DC) at the end.

I am due for another 5K test.  Good point.  I've done 2, but the second one was a fail.  So my last real test was 9-10 weeks ago.  Going to do another test next week.  -John

cwhyte

As Nemo said, 3-5secs is nothing. That's definitely about as good as it gets in this game. More importantly, you need data from multiple races, not just one. Also, keep in mind that NGP will be off in windy races.

Remember, everything in this sport is a range. There is no EXACT number. Great example: I don't really understand why someone uses a 1-4 in the last digit of their FTP. Round up or round down. It's a range...

cwhyte

Posted By Nemo Brauch on 01 Apr 2011 08:52 PM

All that said, vDot is based on Pace, not NPG, so keep that in mind as well. NPG is helpful at comparing different runs against each other and makes us feel better about hilly routes, etc, but it's not the metric used for Vdot calcs.

Nemo, I don't entirely agree with that statement. No different than the bike, ideally you establish your VDOT based on data from flat terrain. Now we can question the accuracy of how NGP is calculated because of conditions like wind but it is NGP that is used to calculate rIF which again is the metric you should be focused on.

patachin

Assume rIF = running intensity factor?

I need to spend a weekend sometime getting my arms around the 3 or 4 most important metrics and why I should care.  Sounds like those are IF, Vdot, and NGP's.  And, whatever "VI" is? 

Thanks, John!

Al Truscott

John - if you haven't sprung for the Power Webinar yet, that's an excellent source  for both learning the lingo, and how to use the concepts in training and racing the EN way. It takes an investment of about $60 and 4 hours of time, but well worth it. For free, check out the "Training with Power" series in the wiki.

There's also a book which is the bible for this stuff, but it is not tri-centric, and can be confusing to us due to it's focus on single-sport racing.

patachin

Thanks Everyone.

Not to beat this into the ground.  But, today I did about 8 mi of hills.  Not surprisingly, my NGP on the climbs was faster than actual pace, and my NGP on the descent was slower than actual pace.  My rIF on the climbs was in the .900's and on the descents it was around .750-.800.  Applying the EN cycling advice/strategy for hills.... do these numbers suggest anything about tweaking my hill running strategy?  E.g., Am I not pushing it hard enough on the descents?

-John

mgraffeo

John, depends on what the intent of the run was. If you were trying to run dead even effort across the whole run, then maybe you would take that data and say that you can probably run harder on the downhills. However, that's rarely the goal of a training run, so it's hard to say what your takeaway should be.

As with workouts on the bike, workouts with highly variable pacing are a good way to deliver training dose (think 5 x 2.5/2.5 as an example). Steady pacing is a skill/technique for race day, not a training strategy.

cwhyte

Posted By Mike Graffeo on 12 Apr 2011 08:03 PM

Steady pacing is a skill/technique for race day, not a training strategy.

Oh!! I like that one. I'm stealing it. If you just would have ended it with: "Period. End of Story!!" ;-)

charris

Suggested sequel to the story: "But it's valuable to spend at least some time practicing steady pacing during training or you might find you're pretty bad at it come race day."

cwhyte

Posted By Craig Harris on 13 Apr 2011 06:30 PM

Suggested sequel to the story: "But it's valuable to spend at least some time practicing steady pacing during training or you might find you're pretty bad at it come race day."

Although... I'm trying to figure out what else people could be doing if they're not running relatively steady at least 50 - 70% of the time. You'd have to be super creative with your running if a majority of it is considered variably paced. Don't you think?

I do remember once a friend of mine telling me about this super cool run workout he was doing that day. I had to laugh because there's no way I could have remembered all of the changes in pace unless I was carrying around a little cheat sheet in my hand. The structure actually looked a lot like a swim workout.

charris

Can I say yes in theory, but no in reality? I hear you, but in my experience people are pretty bad at steady pacing - especially on varying terrain - despite supposedly doing an awful lot of it in training.

I'm just suggesting that people try be cognizant of this during training runs when they're not doing work intervals. For example, I have a variety of fairly hilly routes near my house.  During the easy portions of my runs, I'm often playing around/experimenting and trying to refine my steady pacing - e.g. one time I'll try maintain RPE on an uphill and see what happens to pace and/or HR, the next time I'll try maintain pace and see what happens to RPE/HR. PS: can you tell I'm in a running-only phase with a lot of time to kill?

 

It's no unlike riding where racking up TSS should be your focus, but you shouldn't forget about practicing the mental/physical skill/technique of riding steady (including hills) so you can execute on race day and minimize VI.

 

I realize that experienced racers are quite adept at this, but for less experienced folks, a lot of people could use work on the running side - minimize your rVI (I made that up) by not going up them too hard/easy and probably go down a bit faster than you're used to. And focus on what good technique/form feels like.

patachin

Thanks again team.  Very helpful as I work through the power and pace learning curve. -John