|
Nov 2016
6:50am, 10 Nov 2016
8,106 posts
|
Boab
BS, there are a couple of prerequisites before starting to HADD according to the long document (basically some forum posts on Letsrun.com). They are:
1. Get an accurate measure of your max HR.
2. Get consistently running at least 50 miles a week.
Personally, I wouldn't go near a Hadd test before I could tick off the above.
There are a number of methods for gaining a max HR. Take a couple of days off/very easy. Then run a parkrun at full pelt. Or find a steep hill and sprint 100-200 metres up it, at max effort, and jog back down. Repeat 6-8 times until you can't do any more. Or get to a track or flat piece of ground and run a flat out 800m, rest for 30 seconds and then run a flat out 400m. In each of the methods you will get a fairly accurate max HR reading towards the end of the session. This assumes that the monitor you use is working ok.
If you are unsure that the reading you get is accurate, wait a week and do it again.
After that get your mileage up to 50 miles a week and feel comfortable with it. Then you can think about doing the 2400 test. Most on here don't use it, but I found it useful as I wasn't racing at all and parkrun hadn't come to Scotland at the time 
|
|
Nov 2016
10:39am, 10 Nov 2016
4,987 posts
|
daviec
Never doing a max HR test again, lol. I find if I've got any level of cardio fitness my legs will give up way before my HR maxes out. 197 that I measured years ago does me fine for now.
Teknik - yeah I push on past 10 miles later in the block. I might go as far as 15 once or twice when I feel my sub LT is converging on MP. If I've got time before the race I'll also swap a sub LT for some long tempo intervals with a view to hitting 1x7 miles at HMP after a few weeks. I think I picked that up from hadd stage 2 stuff I found somewhere.
Long way to go yet, but with my target race so far or this time I might for all that in. Easy run this morning was slightly slower than last time but I was ready for an easy day. Clocked 49 miles this week already and the cumulative fatigue is setting in. Better get used to it
|
|
Nov 2016
6:47pm, 10 Nov 2016
63 posts
|
Brunski
Well I managed 8 miles earlier at 150-155 bpm. I didn't feel like it was a pace I could 'easily' have maintained from much longer but came out with a 6:45 mm average and it was a bit of a headwind on the way back (and what little slope there was too). I topped it up with a 4 mile run home but at a lower HR.
My TomTom hrm behaved today, it was fully charged and I fitted it nice and snug to the wrist (thanks for the tip).
I've got up to almost 40 miles so far this week, doing another hour tomorrow, parkrun Saturday and hopefully 10-15 miles Sunday should get me in the 60-65 mpw ballpark
|
|
Nov 2016
7:27pm, 10 Nov 2016
1,555 posts
|
Westley
Hmmm...interesting statistics on my run this morning: MP miles of 06:57, 06:22, 06:39; 06:48, for corresponding average HR of 146, 158, 160, 158. It felt very manageable. Wish it was not during the final taper week and that I could have stretched it out for a few more miles to see if they were a fluke or not and that it's reasonable to say it's sustainable over 26.2; now I'm presented with the quandary of whether to pursue a sub 3 or stick with my original plan of a 03:05-10 taking it fairly handy and not racing all out.
I think the quasi move to Hadd LT runs might have had a positive effect, but the next training cycle will be the proper application of Hadd and I hope reaping of its benefits.
|
|
Nov 2016
7:28pm, 10 Nov 2016
1,556 posts
|
Westley
Nice pace Brunski. What % of MHR is 150-155?
|
|
Nov 2016
8:25pm, 10 Nov 2016
64 posts
|
Brunski
Thanks Westley, yeah happy with run/pace today.
I make it around 75% of MHR as that is 205 (although it's been rightly questioned how accurate that is given my TomTom cardio HR watch).
Only way I'll see how correct it is will be when I get comfortable at this and start pushing the HR up, there wasn't any heart rate drift today but I slowed on the hills and I still think I'm a bit of a soft runner. Today was comfortable(ish) on the whole, but on the way back I was into a headwind, a bit of rain and the last mile was uphill...so I was glad to get back to the office
|
|
Nov 2016
8:44pm, 10 Nov 2016
65 posts
|
Brunski
Hey sorry, should have said Westley looking good for around the 3:00 mark. I ran York marathon last month and was struggling to decide what to go for. About 8 weeks before I went on a flat 18 mile run with a bunch of similar runners and got dropped by them, leaving me struggling in with a 7:09 average. This made me think there was no way sub3 was on the cards. I picked up the mileage and added 10k-10mile tempos, had a decent taper and came out with a 3:02:25 marathon. Sounds like you're in a similar boat. I found a few running around 6:48 pace and just stuck with them. I went through the half in about 1:29, in hindsight I'd have gone for 1:28 to account for a drop in pace 2nd half.
Good luck in the marathon, which one you doing?
|
|
Nov 2016
10:04pm, 10 Nov 2016
1,557 posts
|
Westley
Harrisburg in central PA. Very flat course and small affair with minimum of fuss. After the amateur debacle the US Marine Corps put on last year I fancied a return to a small race whose organisation I knew and could trust.
|
|
Nov 2016
11:29am, 11 Nov 2016
411 posts
|
Daz Love
So I just done a 30 min at 75% and It was the strangest experience ever for me since running!
Now I know I am not in the shape I was this time last year due to injury but would put a good few quid on me being able to run a 5k in 18 something at the minute.
My 75% HR Max of 148 based on 197 had me running for 30 mins at 10:05 min miles. Is that normal and if so what does that tell me? I even went a fair bit higher up some hills that I couldn't avoid.
|
|
Nov 2016
12:04pm, 11 Nov 2016
5,827 posts
|
paul the builder
Daz - Well done for giving it a go, and seeing the run through. I'm sure it was weird, and you must have considered bailing out seeing that pace on the watch... But it doesn't surprise me especially. Shows how unused you are to running at an easy pace! All your other runs that I can see have you bombing around with HR in the 170s, even up in 180s sometimes.
The idea that Hadd explicitly calls out is that if you (say) can run 7:30m/m pace for 175bpm now (seems there or thereabouts for you), but only 10:00m/m pace for 150bpm. Then an investment in time to train yourself at the low HR level will bring you improvements (pretty large, and pretty quickly in your case I'd think) at that 140s bpm level. In 2-3 months I'll bet that's below 9m/m, and in 6 months I'll bet it's close to 8m/m. And by that time - you can bet the pace you get for 175bpm will have improved too, even without working that level yet. (Obviously not by 2m/m, but by some smaller amount, maybe 30s/mile).
Thing is - some mindsets are just not suited to training this way. And equally some revel in it. It takes a patience, an ability to care only about the best thing in the long term that not everyone has.
|
