I'm really intrigued with HR ever since I got my new garmin hence my reason for starting the thread.
I did a long run on Saturday of 14.5miles, aiming to keep my heart rate in the aerobic zone. My HR never exceeded 160 (max is 194 and RHR is 57) and I averaged 8:08min/m. I hope I'm not asking too much here but would that indicate I have relatively poor aerobic system considering I can run a 39:xx 10k and a sub-19 5k ? I'm quite new to running so trying to absorb all knowledge if possible
I am 27, I'm hoping to see if my times drop along with my RHR and by how much. I agree there wont be a direct link, but a general ballpark could be useful just to see how I compare with other of varying ability. If I know people with a similar RHR are achieving better times than me, I will know its not aerobic strength holding me back - if that makes sense.
I'm trying to reduce it with aerobic pace running 70-80%, 2-3 times a week with a long run (12-15miles) thrown in. RHR is influenced by genetics but can be improved by training but surely that goes for all running, some are born better than others but if they don't train they can still lose to a runner that is genetically inferior.
I took my Resting Heart Rate (RHR) yesterday, I got 57. I think this just about puts me slightly better than average but not by a lot. If I raced tomorrow I would probably achieve around 19:00 for 5k, 39:30 for 10k and 1:30:00 for a half.
I'm just after a sample of other runners data to see how their RHR and race times correlate as I'm starting some specific HR training to improve my RHR.