Base Training

41 to 60 of 11,533 messages
17/09/2003 at 12:26
Different tests - Hadd is testing LT while the Allen/Maffetone test is simply seeing how pace increases at slow aerobic efforts.

Hadd's LT test is pretty much the same as Conconi which seems to work, but at Uni the physiologists loved to tell us it wasn't very good (can't remember why). If you use Hadd's test you MUST do a long warm up first so that results are too heavily affected by cardiac drift.

Personally I prefer the more natural approach. Do you have lactate in your legs - you've gone too hard, slow down immediately and don't go that hard again!!
Back in my Tri days I remember doing some LT work on the bike doing reps up the switchbacks of the big climb in Lanzarote. At 165bpm I could ride the whole climb (18min) without lactate. If the pulse rose to 167 I could feel the lactate and the change in breathing.
It is good to be aware of your body like that and observe what the HR is doing rather than be a slave to a set of numbers that may or may not be right. It helps a lot in knowing when to back off in racing and training too.
17/09/2003 at 12:29
And just to add that once I want to start running above FB pace this time round, I plan to increase pace on 3 runs very gradually - I will FEEL my way slowly up to LT. Don't see the point in testing it now - all it will do is tell me that it is higher later - but then I already knew that would happen...
17/09/2003 at 13:05
When are you planning to race PM ? Are you targeting the Spring?
17/09/2003 at 13:28
May have to postpone a bit Popsy - doing this Pose method thingy has slowed me down somewhat. I have no desire to go out a race each week and I love the training so no rush... I had hoped to get to the 1hr a day by end of August, but now with Pose I'll be back there in Nov I think. Then 6 months proper base building, me thinks... No rush. I'm running really well on these shorter runs and am full of confidence for the long run. Don't want to balls things up by rushing them.
Probably aim for a fast marathon next summer, maybe do some shorter stuff for training in spring. May also turn up to a race and plod it...
17/09/2003 at 13:29
How's your ankle, BTW? Have you considered Pose?
17/09/2003 at 13:30
Do you have to do long runs with this type of training? I currently do hour long sessions but am considering running to and from work as a partial replacement, which I do twice a day and takes 15 minutes each time. Will I get the same benefits from this approach?
17/09/2003 at 13:38
BR will tell you that for SERIOUS marathon training you'd want to do your main session in addition to those beneficial extra recovery runs to and from work.

I think he's right...
17/09/2003 at 13:45
An excellent thread this (will print off and read the entire thing this evening). Although I bash out the miles (and, when on form, can still achieve periods of improvement) I realise how completely unstructured and without any kind of real plan my own training currently is. Have tried following Frank Horwill's 10 day plan (i.e. the 5 pace theory) but don't always manage to fit the more intensive quality sessions in.
17/09/2003 at 13:45

I am waiting to see a specialist but I fear my running days may be over. It kills me looking at this site and not being able to run to be honest but force of habit I suppose. No real idea what I'm going to do with myself now - I'd rather come to see myself as a runner.
17/09/2003 at 13:52
Popsy - a lot of runners have been given a new lease of life by Pose running - the impact is so minimal. Please go look at the trhead in General and the web site There is a message board there where you can post specific questions to be answered by the experts. Hang in there...
17/09/2003 at 14:04
Found all this very good and I am thinking of giving it a go after completing the Abingdon Marathon. I do most of my runs at an easy or steady pace anyway. The problem I have is wearing the HR monitor, I believe you can get belts which are much softer than the older ones, any recomendations? An easy way of working our max. HR please apart from 220 minus age.

17/09/2003 at 14:50
Jane if you read back you'll get a good HR formula from Mark Allen I posted earlier that does not require a Max HR. Better by far...
17/09/2003 at 15:15
Thanks Pantman, worked it out and apparently up to 137 for me, I can do that. I assume its okay to cross-train as long as you keep to the correct range. Some of my training over the winter will be done in the gym, don't like being on treadmill too long. Most of my runs for marathon training have been done below 130 HR, with ocasional races with HR up to 155.
17/09/2003 at 15:18
Sounds about right, Jane. X-training won't help running much, but will burn more cals - if you do it then, yes, do keep to FB HRs.
17/09/2003 at 15:35
Jane - the belt will work through something thin like lycra/coolmax/etc as long as it's moist. Or perhaps try the new Polar "wearlink" belt?
17/09/2003 at 15:36
17/09/2003 at 16:42
Thanks Chaos, have looked at the new "wearlink" belt, looks okay but not sure about the different sizes, I will wait and order one when they have them in stock. My monitor doesn't work over my Enell bra, but works okay if tucked under it, making bra a little tighter, use vaseline but now have a very sore mark where chest strap was.
17/09/2003 at 20:15
Have just read all the Lydiard clinic stuff Michael linked to in the 2nd posting on this thread.

2 questions

1. It talks about runs being done at `best aerobic' capacity. This for me is about 165 bpm. Does this mean I should aim for as many runs as possible at this level?

2. In the conditioning phase it mentions hilly runs. At our club they are done by charging up them as fast as you can then jogging along to the next one. I've found it hard today to rein myself back on hills to stay within HR limits.

How would a Lydardian (new word for the language!) do these hilly runs? If the answer is within the same HR boundaries, what's the advantage of doing them over the regular flat course?
17/09/2003 at 21:45
BR - my understanding of Lydiard's ideas:
1. He talks of doing up to 100 miles per week at 'best aerobic pace' - supplemented with as much easy jogging as you can manage. Like all great coaches, he is fairly dogmatic - 'Nobody can do more than 100 miles a week at this effort, etc...)' Then again, most of us aren't going to try to prove him wrong ;o)

2. Lydiard's runners did a lot of their aerobic work on hilly terrain (roads). Just at their steady state, not surging / jogging. I have not seen Lydiard talk about HRs - more about perceived effort (like comments from Pantman & myself earlier in this thread).

Personally, I will only be using my HRM to control my slower runs. If your HR goes above your ideal training rate from time to time, that is not a problem, so long as over the course of the run you are not building up lactic acid.
18/09/2003 at 11:30
Presumably 'best aerobic pace' (as in Lydiard) is the maximum aerobic pace using the Mark Allen formula mentioned earlier?

Lydiard does tend to focus on perceived effort, but I think for the inexperienced that heart rate is better - most runners aren't very good at judging perceived effort (I know I'm not) and go too fast if left to their own devices.
41 to 60 of 11,533 messages
Previously bookmarked threads are now visible in "Followed Threads". You can also manage notifications on these threads from the "Forum Settings" section of your profile settings page to prevent being sent an email when a reply is made.
Forum Jump  

RW competitions

RW Forums