Heart rate
298 watchers
Jan 2019
2:05pm, 12 Jan 2019
13,909 posts
|
Bazoaxe
The garmin would have to be paired with the other HRM so unlikely unless it was the same 'code' if thats the right term
|
Jan 2019
2:17pm, 12 Jan 2019
11,534 posts
|
Rosehip
That's what I thought.
|
Jan 2019
2:57pm, 12 Jan 2019
1,356 posts
|
Flatlander
I believe you are correct Bazoaxe. However there have been several occasions where I have turned up alone to the start of a club training session and when the rest of the group arrives, my Garmin gives multiple "Heart rate monitor detected" notifications. Probably all that means is that their presence has been detected, although my Garmin doesn't appear to be connecting with them. |
Jan 2019
6:02pm, 12 Jan 2019
1,755 posts
|
J2R
I had a strange situation last week where I was running along with Mrs J2R and our heart rates were reading the same, even though mine is normally 20-30 bpm lower. Her TomTom Runner watch was picking up my heart rate monitor strap, not hers. Her watch had originally been paired with the strap I was using, until I got her the armband one she now uses. Unfortunately, in an attempt to make things easy for the user, TomTom have made what I think is a stupid mistake of allowing you to simply select inbuilt (wrist) HRM, or 'External', and it automatically connects to an external one if it detects one. But you can't specify which external one, if there's more than one, and you can't explicitly unpair. Bloody irritating design.
|
Jan 2019
6:40pm, 12 Jan 2019
422 posts
|
SSLHP (Shoes smell like horse piss)
probably best logging in separately in turn before you start running
|
Jan 2019
8:57pm, 21 Jan 2019
13,906 posts
|
Chrisull
Ok let's throw the cat mewling amongst the pigeons once more. So, in exact opposite to perceived wisdom, the last two months I've stepped up ALL of my easy pace runs to well what would be termed the bottom of the no mans land. So this is a "conscious decision" not an accidental "because I am fitter" kind of thing. So no truly easy paced runs. So 3 days of my 5 running days are at this 80% level of HR Max. My thinking is IF your average pace is higher, then you end up with a faster marathon as it shows on fetch. So the rate at which you train at determines to a small extent, the level at which you can race at, and how fit you are, NOT the level of fitness where you are determining how you train. So shoot me for this crazy mixed up thinking (my logic being the greater the stimulus, the greater the adaptation). So today I go out for my first truly easy paced run in a month or so(after having set a course pb 2 weeks ago, and then a 2nd fast course time on a second race I've run 10 or 11 times). And my HR has dropped. In fact it was nestling in the 114s, 115s on some flattish downhills regions I never see outside of walking, and if it hadn't been static'ing around like a bugger, it would have been comfortably my average lowest HR run ever, and not even at a super slow pace (9.40 pace on a hilly route). Years ago I've done 9 weeks of MAFF once and never approached this kind of low HR. So yes I understand the benefits of running at low pace, less injury, boost mitochondria, muscle development. But here, my training program is the same as last years, apart from strength training, I have been taking iron supplements. Convince me, given the above that I'm better off running in zone 2 rather than on the cusp of 3... |
Jan 2019
9:01pm, 21 Jan 2019
4,460 posts
|
TeeBee
*watches with interest*
|
Jan 2019
8:46am, 22 Jan 2019
30,172 posts
|
HappyG(rrr)
I'm not HR aficionado Chris, as you know, but could it be that you *have* successfully trained in zone 2, and you are now reaping the rewards? Hadd training encouraged a good base to be built by staying in that zone for quite a long time, which people find hard. But it had a second part to the training, where tempos / LTs etc. were prescribed and these were higher HR runs. So perhaps once you have achieved an aerobic base, with zone 2 training, you then can do more, higher HR zone running, and still keep the overall HR improving (i.e. lower HR for faster pace)? Pure conjecture from me. No knowledge here.  G
|
|
Jan 2019
8:50am, 22 Jan 2019
13,955 posts
|
Bazoaxe
Yes, its not unlike a HADD approach which for some people works very well and it may be that this would work for Chris. The one challenge with HADD though and particularly so for Chris is the impact of hills on running at a consistent hearrate so you can demonstrate no HR drift. Once you are doing these 80% max runs (twice a week up to 10 miles) with no HR drift, you start to increase the max.
|
Jan 2019
9:31am, 22 Jan 2019
66,002 posts
|
Gobi
This cat stopped commenting but I still read
|
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
