Heart rate
1 lurker |
298 watchers
Nov 2007
11:46am, 12 Nov 2007
174 posts
|
Joopsy
Did 12.58m on Sunday at 70%. Strayed over a couple of times but not by much and I really have seen my times getter faster as I have got further on from my illness. What was 12mm two weeks ago on the back of illness has now moved on to 10:27mm! This just goes to show how much it can be affected. HR training rocks! |
Nov 2007
12:22pm, 12 Nov 2007
2,110 posts
|
hellen
If you use your stick on your calves girlie then that should help with the tightness you get from speed/tempo runs. I have read that tempo runs are better for marathon trianing that intervals anyway!
|
Nov 2007
1:41pm, 12 Nov 2007
491 posts
|
Ted
'minced' that term is underused IMHO. Nice usage Girlie |
Nov 2007
1:58pm, 12 Nov 2007
1,568 posts
|
Girlie
T3d- I often mince tbh- it's my running style! You'll see it in action in my next few races!
|
Nov 2007
10:11pm, 12 Nov 2007
1,641 posts
|
Boab
Grey Area - can someone give me some typical examples of this please? 10k race pace and 75% WHR pace would suffuce thanks, just trying to understand what it is. |
Nov 2007
10:14pm, 12 Nov 2007
2,152 posts
|
eL Bee!
Marathon Pace - for, say 10 miles. Too hard to be easy - to easy to be hard ½ Marathon Pace for, say 7 miles. ----------------------- " ----------------------- |
Nov 2007
10:25pm, 12 Nov 2007
1,642 posts
|
Boab
ah, so there is a distance/time variable to it. That makes sense now, so 18-20 miles at marathon pace is too long to be easy? And you probably won't stay in the grey zone for all of that run, would that be correct?
|
Nov 2007
10:33pm, 12 Nov 2007
2,153 posts
|
eL Bee!
18-20 miles at marathon race pace will tend to fall in the 78-82% WHR area. So yes - too hard to be easy - and some would classify your long run *anyway* as a hard session, even if you do it at Recovery Ceiling HR! There are few marathon programmes that would advocate running your longer runs AT marathon pace - certainly doing 18-20 miles with 14 of them at marathon pace, late on in your programme, will make sense. TBH the idea of Grey Zone is a bit woolly. Because runs of ALL intensities have their place in addressing specific training needs. I think that runs without a specific purpose fall into the category of 'Grey' ( |
Nov 2007
10:42pm, 12 Nov 2007
11,163 posts
|
So if a person's training objectives were to train at below 70%WHR on easy days and at or ABOVE 85%WHR on hard days one could say that if all of said person's runs fell into between 70%WHR and LESS THAN 85% WHR then that person would be training outside of the original purpose of their training regime. Put simply, they would be training in the grey area would they not? |
Nov 2007
10:44pm, 12 Nov 2007
2,154 posts
|
eL Bee!
In that particular case yes, Ian. If their training goals were being served by those parameters, then runs that fell without said parameters could be said to be without specific purpose! |
Related Threads
- Daniels Running Formula. The Definitive Wire. Jul 2023
- Jack daniels marathon plan help May 2014
- Polarized training Jan 2024
- 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