If i am reading this correctly. I too would find it hard to run at 60-70% of max. My high rate is 175 so @ 65% I would be running at 114 average heart rate.
Is this really correct? Most of my training should be done at what for me would be not much more than a fast walk!!
The reason I asked that is to see what your conversion rate was like (i.e. - are your times for shorter distances comparatively much better than your Mara time). Yours seem ok actually, but lots of folk have a major discrepency due to a lack of aerobic conditioning.
Just for info really (to help you understand the rationale behind running to low HR) - see the Hadd info below. It's worth reading, even if it's just to enhance your knowledge.
There's then a handful of us having a dabble with it (in my case before a Spring Mara).
I have downloaded the Hadd document and had a quick scan through but want to digest properly as I am very interested in this and think I would like to give it a go.
It is a very interesting theory and I want to read and understand more before I commit but sounds very interesting way to train for next springs Marathon.
I will report back here when have read the document in it's entirety.
Thank you for the advice and link - sounds like the beginning of a plan...
Simon - I think you'll be fine. Max HR is different for different folk and is no indication of fitness. My personal max is about 178bpm (I'm 37), yet I have friends who are 190bpm+ (aged 45+), and others whos max HR is less than mine. It's training in the correct zone based on your max that's key really.
Nick - I'm just starting to dabble in it now really, but I know 2 good friends who pretty much swear by it (and both are sub-3 Marathoners a bit older than me). If you fancy joining in and discussing some of your views/findings then the thread I linked to above is pretty good.
It's an 'interesting' way to train though. For info I ran 2'49 at London this year, yet I've been out and done 6.5 miles at 9'59 pace tonight! I actually really enjoyed it as well - takes you back to why you started running in the first place really. No pressure, just enjoyment. My plan is to use it as base training for 12 weeks or so, and then do a 12 week Mara-specific block.
Once you read the document in full you'll see that after 8 weeks or so you start building in some longer runs at a bit higher HR anyway, and a bit of quicker running (the 200/200 session). But the idea is to lay a base of big mileage - you can run for a long time and run every day because the pace is steady - so there's no need for rest or recovery days really. It does make sense to me in theory, so I'm giving it a whirl.
I felt a little like that too, as if I'm a month behind. But if you read the document (this will make more sense after you've fully read it) - the pace you run the 4th rep of the 2400m test will pretty much equate to your Mara pace I think (if well trained). Joe's aim was a sub-2'25 Marathon, so he had to hit 5'32 pace. He managed to do this after 14 weeks of training, despite not running anywhere near that pace for THE WHOLE time - so in effect a lot of the base was done and 5'32 pace was now 'very comfortable' due to his increased lactate threshold. This is why I'm thinking 12 weeks Hadd (or maybe 16 if it goes really well), followed by either 12 or 8 weeks Mara-specific stuff.
One thing I'd say is (in my opinion) a lot of Mara programmes have you running sessions that don't benefit you massively. I really don't think specific speed work or VO2 Max is needed until quite late on in the programme (6 weeks out). So even with your limited time you could still do 12 weeks of Hadd and then do some sharpening nearer the time. See the Hadd phase as baking a cake - you've got to be patient, not rush it and not keep opening the over door every 5 minutes to check progress. And if you burn it then that's it - you've overcooked it. So be patient and do the base for 12 weeks. Bake the cake and then see the last 6 weeks as putting some icing on it with your speed stuff.
Remember - the Marathon is 99% aerobic. Hadd trains your aerobic system and nothing else, teaching you to be more efficient at fuel burning etc (I only had 1 gel at VLM and only drank water). I therefore see it as ideal early Mara training, and genuinely have no issues if I keep at this until 6-8 weeks pre-race.
I thought Heart Rate Training Zones were worked out using your WORKING heart rate, not your maximum heart rate? According to this article anyway -
Heart Rate Training - The Basics
It doesn't say anything about this in the above article, unless I'm missing something?
Interesting to see this thread mentioning HADD so much as I was the one who started the thread that LS21 has linked to. Today is the end of my first 6 week training period and I have not run below 8'30 pace in that time whereas most of my running would have been 7:30-7:45 pace normally.
I must admit that below 70% must be very hard to maintain as I am sticking to 75% (125bpm for me) and that is quite tough. However the principles are sound and once you have done some foundation work then you can go faster. From tomorrow I will be putting at least two 8-13 mile runs at 135bpm and everything else will be done at 125. That takes me up to Xmas and then I start following a plan to get me ready for a spring marathon (maybe Hull or Manchester, although London is still a possibility)
I always thoought you had to take into consideration your resting heart rate as well when calculateing zones.
ie with resting HR of 60 and Max of 180,
70% would be 60 + (70% of 180-60) = 144
80% would be 60 + (80% of 180-60) = 156
Is this right?
The key point in reading this article is to understand how hard it is get to your max heart rate. I am an experienced runner (sub 2.25 marathon in my youth). Currently 55 years old with a theoretical max heart rate of 220-55=165. In training I sometimes get my heart rate to 165 for brief periods (30-60 secs) BUT in races I can keep it at 165 for 20 mins or so, meaning that 165 is NOT my max heart rate.
So...many of you are probably underestimating your max heart rate and consequently your 70% heartrate.
Philip (and others), the 'most important' takeaway is to find out your, actual, 'max' heartrate.
This is mentioned right at the beginning of the article. You state your 'theoretical' rate, which is exactly that, theoretical, based on a 'guideline' that is well known, but only a guideline.
There may well be scientific research on _actual_ max HR's. I was on a Neilson holiday a few years back, and the gym instructor was doing her science Masters partly on this, and was asking guests to do an exhaustion test on a treadmill, to establish Max HR. (a controlled, and gradual, increase in speed and inclination) I don't have other examples, but mine was 199 for a 39 yr old male.... so a substantial amount higher than 'guide'.
I typically find I run at 175, when doing 8min30 pace.
Once you have this as a starting point, you can use the percentages with confidence, although I suspect that even there, your 'most suitable' percentage may vary.
Visit the official Runner's World page
Follow Runner's World on Twitter
Other Natmag-Rodale Sites
Run For Charity
About Runner's World
Runner's World is a publication of Hearst Magazines UK which is the trading name of The National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.
Website powered by: Immediate Media Company Limited. | © Runner's World 2002-2013 |