Heart rate
301 watchers
Aug 2020
2:19pm, 19 Aug 2020
16,460 posts
|
Chrisull
work not worth
|
Aug 2020
2:25pm, 19 Aug 2020
12,674 posts
|
Badger
Agreed on the form; when I first started HR training, I had to run/walk, as the alternative was an ungainly hop from foot to foot rather than an actual run! Less of an issue these days, but maintaining a form which is closer to what I would be doing in a road marathon, say, is definitely a consideration. I think what I do does largely align with your first post above, J2R. My Garmin believes I never do anything anaerobic, but I believe the interval sessions actually are. |
Aug 2020
3:34pm, 19 Aug 2020
30,926 posts
|
SPR
What length and pace are the intervals Badger? I'm assuming it's not the optical playing up? I've done anaerobic according to my watch (whether it's assessment of it is correct is another matter). I believe it has a smarter way of picking it up than just HR as with anaerobic, the work starts and the HR catches up. Longer efforts become increasingly aerobic. I can see the point of easy being faster (within limits) if you aren't doing any faster/ harder sessions For specific 'strength' and speed 'strength' though, specific pace and hill sprints make more sense to me. Also proper strength can be done in the gym with heavy weights. I have wondered previously whether HM/ mara runners end up running faster on average though, due to faster aerobic runs that are more relevant to what they do. FWIW my average training pace hangs around 8:30. I ran 1499 miles from Oct 18 to Sept 19 (season), 959 were slower than 8mm, 359 were between 7:01 and 8mm. 7 were faster than 5mm, 11 between 5:01-5:30, 25 between 5:31-6mm. 137 in the middle of those zones. Average pace overall 8:36. Ran 2:14 for 800, 4:27 for 1500, and 16:26 for 5000. Not saying it's perfect training and it needs more at the fast end for the stuff I do, but I wouldn't change the easy much. fetcheveryone.com/img/summary/20181/92e645c05328f343bc12205c24c822e5.png |
Aug 2020
3:39pm, 19 Aug 2020
37,004 posts
|
Nellers
As SPR says HR is a poor measure when doing short fast intervals. By the time your HR gets up to the appropriate level you're through and into the rest period. You never have a consistent HR during the work portion in that case. I've done (on the rower) what are definitely anaerobic intervals and the ave HR for those sections isn't ever what it theoretically should be, whilst the ave HR for the rests is often only slightly lower as that HR peak subsides. For fast stuff I'd always work off paces rather than HR. HR is good for controlling the intensity of the aerobic stuff and for tracking fitness on a test piece/race (pace for pace has the HR dropped? Fitness gains!). |
Aug 2020
4:41pm, 19 Aug 2020
30,927 posts
|
SPR
Looking at my log, I did 4 x (70 secs @ 1500 pace, 70 secs jog rec, 33 secs @ 800 pace, 3 mins rest) a week last Saturday and that came out as 2.6 on the anaerobic training effect. It would be interesting to see how you'd get to 4+
|
Aug 2020
4:53pm, 19 Aug 2020
30,928 posts
|
SPR
This is what Garmin say: garmin.com Sample effects section straight after the anaerobic section says what effects they think certain workouts would have. |
Aug 2020
4:54pm, 19 Aug 2020
37,005 posts
|
Nellers
Presumably 70 seconds is only just about enough time for your HR to get up to the right level before you stop. Average is going to be too low. I guess to get a 4 you'd have to either do a really long anaerobic piece or set your zones wrong!
|
Aug 2020
5:00pm, 19 Aug 2020
52,037 posts
|
GlennR
70 seconds and recorded HR won’t peak until you’re on the rest section.
|
Aug 2020
5:08pm, 19 Aug 2020
30,929 posts
|
SPR
My guess is that it's about more reps not longer reps based on the link I posted. Longer reps would only work if I could maintain speed, otherwise they're less anaerobic or similar. The session that would have the highest effect according to the link is 10 x 400 meters @ 110-115% VO2 max. A google search says 110% VO2 Max is 1500-800. 70 secs at 1500 would be 400m btw and 33 secs at 800 would be a little more than 200m. |
Aug 2020
5:11pm, 19 Aug 2020
30,930 posts
|
SPR
It's definitely using HR but speed is a part of it. I presume because it measures VO2 max it knows what speeds are above VO2 Max for you as well.
|
Related Threads
-
Daniels Running Formula. The Definitive Wire. Jul 2023
-
Jack daniels marathon plan help May 2014
-
Polarized training Feb 2025
-
Low Resting/ High Training Heart Rate Jan 2021
-
No limit to the benefits of exercise in reducing the risk of cardiovascular disease Jan 2021
-
Resetting Max Heart Rate Dec 2020
-
Resting Heart Rate: Is it normal Oct 2020
-
Heart rate zones Jul 2020
-
Running Heart rate Jun 2020
-
Heart Rate monitors Jun 2020
Report This Content
You can report any content you believe to be unsafe. Please let me know why you believe this content is unsafe by choosing a category below.
Thank you for your report. The content will be assessed as soon as possible.