|
Dec 2016
11:23pm, 18 Dec 2016
23,237 posts
|
SPR
So take your 5k the other day, it's obvious that for the first mile and a bit your HR monitor wasn't working correctly and your avg HR for the run given the stats for the last mile and a bit is likely to have been around 180.
|
|
Dec 2016
11:49pm, 18 Dec 2016
23,238 posts
|
SPR
Back when I used to wear a HR monitor the highest I averaged for a race was 189 in a 10k lowest was 183, everything else was inbetween. I maxed out over 200 in many of those races. My max was 207 with 206 in another race. Later I hit 215 at the end of an 800m race and 212 in 5k race.
So as you can see not 4-5 beats from max. No way am I going to be a 200 plus for a whole race and Hadd hints at this in his PDF as the Mara HR is the same for above 193 even if above 200. Granted I didn't have much training background then but that brings me to my second point...
If you think you need to push harder you need to do specific training (race pace/ lactate tolerance etc) not try and push harder.
Of course increasing the HR at which you are aerobic also helps which is what Hadd is aiming at.
|
|
Dec 2016
11:53pm, 18 Dec 2016
4,750 posts
|
Huntsman
SPR - I wrote I get to within 4-5 beats of max. My average is around the 92%.
|
|
Dec 2016
11:55pm, 18 Dec 2016
23,239 posts
|
SPR
Sorry misread.
|
|
Dec 2016
12:01am, 19 Dec 2016
23,240 posts
|
SPR
Hunt - Not sure if your 5k on the 17th was current best pace, but the HR graph is exactly what I'd expect. Compare that with Brunski and it's obvious his HR monitor was playing up.
|
|
Dec 2016
12:24am, 19 Dec 2016
112 posts
|
Brunski
Yeah looking at the stats after its obvious my hrm on Saturday was playing up at the start, and I agree with the feeling of the 180 or thereabouts for the average - possibly 165 climbing to 185, touching 190 at the end.
I don't race to hrm, I tend to race to feel and position and a cursory check of pace, my idea of picking say 180-185 bpm for a 5k was more just using a parkrun as an experiment to see what I get by running to HR, assuming I felt the hrm was working.
I'm pretty sure the monitor was working accurately today, and after watching it on several runs I now know what 145bpm feels like.
You are also right that I do need to train smarter, and make sure I do the sub-lactate runs - I've run harder each Thursday at say 150-155bpm of similar, but not consistently.
Thanks for the advise SPR and Huntsman.
|
|
Dec 2016
10:22am, 19 Dec 2016
4,756 posts
|
Huntsman
Yeah, the 5k on 17th was 100% full beans. Didn't run to HR but to race pace effort.
I use the HR data as feedback afterwards.
I haven't seen any positive feedback on Fetcheveryone about the Tom Tom HR monitor.
|
|
Dec 2016
11:25am, 19 Dec 2016
32,919 posts
|
Hills of Death (HOD)
I did a 5k at 22.27 on Sat which was 88% of max didn't feel hard I know there's more to give
|
|
Dec 2016
12:15pm, 19 Dec 2016
72 posts
|
glucotab
Finding the daylight muddy routes drive the HR up a zone. While good for Sub LT sessions I guess, gonna have to find more non-slip routes for general 75%ish. I think if I go slower in the mud, I`ll probably fall over - as in actually slip in the stuff. Not a problem most days as on the lamplit streets.
Also, think I`ve guestimated a workable max HR, and aiming to spend next 4 weeks with a couple of zone C sessions, before hopefully moving it up to zone B - which may end up being as far as I can take it before a spring marathon.
|
|
Dec 2016
12:56pm, 19 Dec 2016
489 posts
|
Ulric
That's one of the highest max figures I've ever heard of SPR (fast enough to trigger my defibrillator!).
But how did you manage to hit 212 in a 5k race when your best average is only 189? You didn't post what the average for that race was but doesn't that mean your 5k was <89% MHR?
|
Furman Institute of Running and Scientific Training (F.I.R.S.T.) acolytes!
Mar 2025