HADD training plan

2,621 to 2,640 of 3,777 messages
04/02/2013 at 19:51

Roy - I did join in this thread back earlier in 2012. However at that point I was 4 stone heavier and my resting heart rate was probably over 70% of my max heart rate lol I should be in better shape this time round. I guess many people are doing what i plan to do - HADD and then move to P&D 18 weeks before a marathon?

04/02/2013 at 20:16

Khanivore, glad you are back and have shed a few pounds, all 56 of them.

05/02/2013 at 09:10

Khanivore - welcome

Just to give you an idea of how HADD can really help. I started on HADD last September, I'm 53 and had been running for a 12mths before starting HADD. 16 weeks of pure HADDing at 75% and below saw a full minute come off my pace at that level. Now I'll not pretend it was all fun sticking at that pace for that long (and the pace was slower than a sleeping dinosaur) but it meant I was injury free (up until I changed my running shoes!!). I still can't follow a full P&D schedule but I have added some 80% work in to the mix and will at some point follow a tougher schedule. My immediate prority is to get a PB for my next HM and HADDing has given me the confidence to do that. It isn't quick, but it works if you have the patience and if your aiming for 2014 spring marathon you will be amazed at what you can achieve. Stick with us and we'll help you through

05/02/2013 at 09:40

Welcome back Khanivore.

I reckon the reason its so quiet is that everybody basically knows what they are doing and are out putting their acquired knowledge into practice

8.3 miles yesterday with 10x90s (60s jog).

05/02/2013 at 10:08

Thanks guys I'll be lurking until after VLM. Lovely to get such a warm welcome!

05/02/2013 at 21:15

I agree with Brian (yet again!)

12m 75% run this morning, about 20sec/mile faster than same run 8 weeks ago.

06/02/2013 at 10:45

Keir - good stuff - HADD rules OK

A while back we had some discussion on HR drift, I found an interesting section in a book I have and thought I'd share it. For the geeks (like me) who love stats it's worth looking at. As always though, stats are great as long as you can compare like for like, but our bodies generally do something different! For this to work it has to be a steady run rather than varied pace or a portion of a varied pace  run that is steady. Ideal for those long runs when trying to determine how aerobically fit you are. In the HADD doc (if I remember rightly) it's determined by the 10 mile rule keeping at the same pace at the same HR before moving up to the next level. The author talks about AeT (aerobic threshold) which seems to translate to the 75% - 80% in HADD and LT (lactate threshold) which we are all familiar with. The drift can be calculated for both types of run - indeed any run at any tempo as long as there is consistency for some or all of the run.

Here goes - quite long so bear with it - plus I have an example at the end for those that fall asleep reading the steps involved;

It is even possible to precisely measure how much decoupling (HR drift) is taking place in such a workout by comparing pace with heart rate for each half of the segment. Here’s how to calculate the rate of decoupling:

STEP 1. Determine average pace and average heart rate for each half of the AeT (or LT) portion of the workout. (1st half 10.25 at 139HR,  2nd half 10.4 at 141.5HR)

STEP 2. Divide the average pace for each half by the average heart rate for each half. (1st half 10.25/132 = 0.07374, 2nd half 10.4/141.5 = 0.07349)

STEP 3. Subtract the second-half quotient from the first-half quotient. If the remainder is a negative number, which will usually be the case if the steady-state portion is long enough, you know you slowed down in the second half. (0.07374 - 0.07349 = 0.00024

STEP 4. Divide the remainder by the first half quotient. This is a percentage that tells you how much drift (decoupling) was experienced during the workout. (0.00024/0.07374 = 0.00325 * 100 = 0.325%)

When an athlete is in good aerobic condition, decoupling (HR drift) should be less than 5 percent. Athletes who are in excellent physical condition decouple less than 1 percent, even for the longest AeT-portion workouts.

And heres how it looks on spreadsheet for a recent run of mine (8 miles)

http://s3.runnersworld.co.uk/members/images/706882/gallery/picture_5.png?width=350

So to sum up over 8 miles at that pace and HR I am aerobically fit. If I tried the same distance at a higher HR - say 82% or a longer run say 15 miles at 75% - I might find I get more drift and therefore less aerobically fit at that level for a given distance. Not rocket science, but interesting (well I thought it was)

Friel, Joe (2009-06-01). Total Heart Rate Training: Customize and Maximize Your Workout Using a Heart Rate Monitor (Kindle Locations 1162-1169). Perseus Books Group. Kindle Edition.

Edited: 06/02/2013 at 10:57
07/02/2013 at 06:30

Im relatively new to well  ...what I call heart rate monitor training and not HADD   ...I dont know what HADD is and dont have the time to scroll back through this thread!  Im about a week or so in [John Parker book, read cover to cover some areas twice!] and finding the less than 70% of the difference between my MHR and resting rate tough and frustrating but not completely ridiculous.

Im currently averaging abouit 13min miles which considering I can do under 7.30/mile in a 5k is incredibly slow.  Im following a 10k [sub 55m] training plan and have registered for the RW 10k trail series.

The training plan includes 4 runs a week starting with slow runs with a bit of strides.  Im translating slow into recovery or less than 70%.  As some of the runs get a bit quicker I will apply % as follows;

  • slow less than 70%
  • steady 70% to 80% [146 to 158]
  • fast 80 to 85% [159 to 165]

How does this sound?  My Max HR is 183 and resting pulse is 55.

Views guidance etc very welcome!

Edited: 07/02/2013 at 06:31
07/02/2013 at 09:12

Do 70% of MAX heart rate,  Not your WORKING heart rate.

07/02/2013 at 09:16

Thats 128!!  145 is incredibly difficult as it is Id have to walk slowly to keep below that!

07/02/2013 at 09:24

Leecampbelluk - welcome; my maxHR is the same as yours. I started at 75%of MaxHR = 137. Still use this as all my slow runs. Stay with HADD it works. My pace to start was 11:30 for 75% - now down to 10:15 (started September 2012)

 

07/02/2013 at 09:29

Did anyone boil HADD down in to a simple set of instructions? Personally I have read the PDF but a friend was asking about it and i thought a simple set of instructions would be easier for him to digets.

07/02/2013 at 09:30

Leecampbelluk - this is a link from which the original HADD document was formed by a John Walsh. I will try and find the link for the actual document which will really explain it better and for you.

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=42240

07/02/2013 at 09:39

Leecampbelluk - ORIGINAL HADD DOCUMENT HERE


download as pdf

Edited: 07/02/2013 at 09:39
07/02/2013 at 09:39

Leecampbelluk, welcome! Patience is the key. As Bede has touched on, stick with 75% or less to start with. This is 75% of HRmax, not working HR. The pace will increase over time, depending on the time you can spend on your feet.

Interesting calculations on HR drift BeDe. Not really come across a standard or measurement tool before. Looks like it might be useful to compare fitness indicators.

07/02/2013 at 09:45

Brian -Yep - I'm feeding my runs in to it to across various paces and distances. As with everything time will tell but could be an interesting tool.

07/02/2013 at 10:28

Is the HADD bit more up-to-date as Im following the John L parker jr book which is about working at % of WHR?  Ive started this and Im feeling good so Im loathed to change now, when it seems to be a different cut fo the same cake?  Im still focussed on my base aerobics and still runnning slow and long as I have read in Hadds blog?

Has the approach Parker is prescribing been improved upon?  Or is it just differing opinions on getting to the same place - having a excellent aerobic system as a base for fast running?

We are talking about a 8bpm difference!

07/02/2013 at 10:41

Lee, Dunno. What I do know that is running gets you fitter. Running slowly gets you fitter with less chance of getting injured. I'm not sure that 8 beats is drastic, it amounts to between 24s and 32s per mile. All my experience of heart rate training (8 years and 9 marathons) has been using %age of max, so can't really help on WHR. Soz!

07/02/2013 at 10:48

Lee, I have the same book and the same question as you. I hope you get an answer from someone who has tried both. That would be great!

 

07/02/2013 at 10:58

Lee - one must assume that you have looked at this thread for some enlightenment (like we all did at some point). It's up to us as individuals what training schedule we choose to follow. There are so many out there that suit all sorts of different people depending on their aims. All I can say is I had looked at HADD somewhat earlier than last September but I did not have the patience then to follow it through. I got fed up of injuries so I re-visited HADD and hey presto it worked for me. HADD does require patience and I've no idea if it's 'better or more improved' than John L Parkers system - all I know is that after I started on HADD I became injury free (that's not to say you can't get injured!!).

16 weeks of the base phase (all at less than 75% of MaxHR) for me produced amazing results. I then moved slowly to introduce 80% runs once a week and my 75% pace is still improving. So it's horses for courses - if someone has the patience to follow HADD and is not looking for a 'quick fix' it will work for them

Edited: 07/02/2013 at 10:59
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