Oct 2007
10:49am, 30 Oct 2007
1,827 posts
|
eL Bee!
Oooh - look - people to meet at FLM
That'll be easy - it's not a big race
|
Oct 2007
10:51am, 30 Oct 2007
1,976 posts
|
hellen
you'll easliy beable to see us elbee on that bit where the course doubles back and the faster /slower runners can wave at each other
|
Oct 2007
10:52am, 30 Oct 2007
1,828 posts
|
eL Bee!
ROFL Helen - I wish!!!!
Although I did see the leaders on that stretch of the Highway in 2006 - it was AWESOME!
|
Oct 2007
11:09am, 30 Oct 2007
42 posts
|
Jaffers
Dio - the answer to your quest, I think, lies in Hadd's theory. I can't access the link from work, but do a search on Hadd and letsrun.com. There is a lot to digest but it's all good stuff. The key thing I remember is the following analogy: Your energy system is like a tube of toothpaste, where you hr increases as you move along the tube. If you start squeezing the tube from the middle ie training at too high an hr, you'll never get the toothpaste out at the end of the tube ie you won't get the benefit from training your heart to work at low levels.
I probably haven't explained it too well but it made sense to me at the time. There is also an explanantion of why some people find it easier to run faster than to run slower - which sounds like the holy grail you're after.
Have a look at let me know what you think.
|
Oct 2007
11:35am, 30 Oct 2007
2,778 posts
|
Diogenes
Jaffers, just had a quick look. Appears to be some good stuff there that I need to read more closely to fully assimilate.
|
Oct 2007
11:47am, 30 Oct 2007
43 posts
|
Jaffers
There is almost too much, but it's worth wading through. I found the technical stuff really good, but it took the odd re-read just to get my head round it. But it was well worth it. Happy reading!
|
Oct 2007
8:46pm, 30 Oct 2007
16 posts
|
Hi all,
I am on week 2 of my HRM training, and have some numbers for you to crunch to help ensure that I am not deluding myself, not being a mathematician an all that.
Last Tuesday I did my first <70% run and recorded the following averages; 67% WHR, 5.06 miles, 12:20 pace
Today I started my second week and recorded the following averages; 67% WHR, 5.64 miles, 11:48 pace
To me, it looks like I have improved my pace by 32 seconds in the first week, or will the small increase in mileage negate some of this?
To give you the bigger picture, below are the stats for all my <70% runs over the last week, which shows a steady pace improvement, some of which could be due to a slight increase in average WHR.
Tuesday; 67% WHR, 5.06 miles, 12:20 pace Friday; 66% WHR, 6.21 miles, 12:11 pace Sunday; 68%, 9.14 miles, 12:02 pace Tuesday; 67% WHR, 5.64 miles, 11:48 pace
Am I going mad or should I be giving myself a big pat on the back
Regards, Jason
|
Oct 2007
8:48pm, 30 Oct 2007
1,845 posts
|
eL Bee!
Oh dear eoshero - leave a double space after < or > or everything gets stripped out of the post (It thinks you are writing HTML code)
|
Oct 2007
8:52pm, 30 Oct 2007
17 posts
|
Thanks, I shall give it another go.
|
Oct 2007
8:59pm, 30 Oct 2007
18 posts
|
Hi all,
I am on week 2 of my HRM training, and have some numbers for you to crunch to help ensure that I am not deluding myself, not being a mathematician an all that.
Last Tuesday I did my first < 70% run and have compared this to today’s run, which (to me) shows a 32 second improvement in pace. Could some of this be negated due to the increased mileage and/or small increase in WHR? Or should I really be giving myself a big pat on the back?
Below are the stats for my easy runs (whilst HRM training) to date. Tuesday: 67% WHR, 5.06 miles, 12:20 pace Friday: 66% WHR, 6.21 miles, 12:11 pace Sunday: 68% WHR, 9.14 miles, 12:02 pace Today: 67% WHR, 5.64 miles, 11:48 pace
Regards, Jason
|