Heart Rate Training why no Zone 3

Zone 3 is tempo. More experienced athletes can handle more work at that intensity. I think too many newer athletes tend to go too hard, so maybe people are just telling them to use caution so they don't run themselves into injury. If you just started running, you should keep most of your runs on the easier side. Newbies really shouldn't spend much/any time at zone 4 or 5...especially for running.

But, I don't really know what I'm talking about, so take it with a grain of salt .

Same as above. 

Zone 1 and 2 for base work.  Zone 3 for tempo, and 4/5 for speed work.

I barely do speed work sessions.  Maybe one tempo run/bike per week, and 90% in Z1/Z2.  But that just me.  Some workout say it's ok to just get into the low end of Z3 during run/bikes on some climbs, but mostly try to stay below that.

I think the key word you're missing is MAJORITY.  In Z3, you're working both systems but neither one exclusively.  So if you're a newbie and need to work on buiding an Aerobic base, Z3 will not help you.  If you are working on getting your VO2 up, Z3 will not help you. 

Personally, I do my Tempo and race pace work (depending on distance) in Z3.  The problem comes in when all of your work is done in Z3.  You're neither buidling base nor increasing your V02.  That's what it meant by that.

The "rule" is due mostly to the too hard on easy days, too easy on hard days that you bring up.  Z3 (or that middle zone or gray zone) is good work, but may leave many people unable to recover well enough for their real "hard" days and they don't get the full benefits from them. 

You don't need to do a lot of "hard" work, but if you want to get full value from doing it then it needs to be "hard".  You get more benefit by going easier and harder versus one steady rate.  But if you can do that while recovering from any other workout, then it really doesn't matter if you are in that gray zone (so experience and ability to recover come into plahy for any individual).  For longer distance events, it is quite valuable to spend a good amount of time there as it approximates race effort (e.g., marathons, HIMs).

Edit:  Though I agree in 'spirit' with what Dan says above, you certainly do build your aerobic 'base' in z3.  If you spend equal time there, you will develop it MORE than at a lower effort.  Again, the issue comes back to recovery and being able to do 'equal time' over time.  Consistency always wins in the end.

Great info from previous posters.  I do beleive there are situtions that Z3 is beneficial.

I use a lot of Z1/Z2 for endurance/base training and tend toward Z4 for tempo training either as sustained efforts of 20-50 minutes or as cruise-intervals (Z4 for 6-10 minutes with 1-2 minutes of Z1 recovery between intervals).  I will get some Z3 minutes when going up hills, beating a traffic light or other Fartlek type stuff...

For HIM and marathon training I like to work in "race pace" miles into my longer bikes and runs during the last 3-7 weeks before the event.  For HIMs and marathons my race pace is Z3.  For example, in training for my 11/1 marathon, my long run this past Saturday was 6mi Z2, 7mi Z3, 3mi Z2, 1mi Z1.  Those 7 miles in Z3 were race pace, holding my effort/HR/pace to where I expect to be during my marathon.  I'm teaching my body to get comfortable sustaining that effort over a longer period.  In 9 days, I'll be doing a 20-miler with the last 10 miles at race pace.  That will be my most important workout three weeks before the marathon.  I tend to forego my tempo run on these weeks, as others have suggested, there is some threshold/tempo benefit to these workouts.  These are HARD workouts that demand 3-4 days of recovery (for me).  So, I don't do many of them.

The majority (80%) of my bike and run training is in Z1 and Z2.

And without a HRM, one can easily substitute "race pace" training

• Z1/Z2 = easy, converastional run
• Z3 = marathon pace
• Z4 = 10k to 1/2-marathon pace
• Z5a = 5k to 10k pace
• Z5b/c = puke fest effort

Happy training!

I'm certainly no expert at this, but what I read (and I'm currently reviewing Pfitzinger-Douglas as I fantasize about a possible spring marathon) seems to indicate marathon pace to be in Zone 4, not 3. Quoting P-D, "Successful marathoners typically race at a speed very close to their lactate threshhold pace," which is the dividing line (under most systems) between  Z4 and Z5a. "Very close" would seem to be in Z4, not Z3.

LT pace is also said to approximate 15K to half marathon pace, which would make Z4 paces a little slow for a 10K, wouldn't it?

This is way to complex for me.

I have three "zones":

Easy
Medium
Hard

That's it.  Makes tracking them much easier.  I ask myself at the end how it felt.

If I feel good, ready to keep going, it was easy.

 If I feel a little winded, I can start to feel it in my legs, it was medium.

If I felt like I just raced, it was hard.

In terms of mix, I do mostly easy, maybe one or two medium a week right now, and maybe one hard (this would be the long run).  When I get more serious, I add another hard workout, and do at least 2 medium runs.

bryancd - 2008-09-26 3:01 PM

Scout7 - 2008-09-26 1:50 PM

This is way to complex for me.

I have three "zones":

Easy
Medium
Hard

That's it. 

....Luddite... It's important to keep in mind that at all these "zones" you are using all your energy systems, it's just a question of proportion. To say at one specific HR your body immediately goes from aerobic an anerobic respiration isn't accurate. Zones need to be fluid and grey in nature. Zones combined with RPE and actual race pace results will guide any athlete to train appropriately depending on the goal.

But I do it all while wearing a Garmin.  Does that help, techno-weenie?

It's the rigidity that I disagree with, like you are saying.  The idea of a specific number or set of numbers being somehow more correct than what my legs, lungs, heart, and ears are saying.

OK, that comment made my giggle.  Well done.

 Doesn't that depend on what you're expected 10k time is?  I expect a 10k time of about 55-60 minutes.  That puts me at high zone 4, low 5a.  I'm sure those people unlucky enough to be behind me in the 10k are below their LT and therefor in zone 4.  All those people ahead of me must be pushing 5a and up.

I'm no expert either...

I've done the BT/D3 protocol LT test, getting a 171.  For my 1/2M PR, I ran a 7:21/mi at 168 bpm (1:36).  When I tried to push to 171, things got dicey and I know I couldn't hold that for 10+ miles, but found it to be the appropriate effort/pace for the final 5k of my 1/2-marathon.

I think Daniel's describes LT pace is what you should be able to hold for 1 hour, that's roughly a 15k for me.  So, yes 10k should be a little faster for me.  However, IMO, for most beginners, I think starting a 10k above LT would be too agressive.  Also, many runners take more than 60 minutes for a 10k, which for them, LT would definitely be too fast.

I expect the sub-2:10-2:50 marathon crowd gets pretty darn close to LTHR for their races...  I'm not quite there...  I wonder how P-D define "very close," and what a "successful marathoner" is?  Again, IMO, going out of the gates in Z4 for a marathon would be risky for most beginner/intermediate runners.  I mean runing near LT for 3.5, 4 or even 5 hours?!

My last marathon (Columbus '07 in 3:47), my HR hung around 160bpm and drifted to 162bpm's in the final miles (Z3 the whole way).   I did not negative split, and certainly there wasn't much in the tank as I finished...  I can't imagine how I'd feel if I ran the first 10-15 miles at 170 bpm effort - I'm guessing I woud have walked/jogged the last 6 miles...  I guess I'm not yet a successful marathoner...    Or maybe, I'm just a running wimp and need to HTFU at my next marathon. 

Cheers!

"Successful marathoners typically race at a speed very close to their lactate threshhold pace,"

This is what makes endurance sports so freakin' cool...  Figuring out how hard and how long you can push yourself.  Every race is an experiment in what your body can take, each time pushing more than the last.  At somepoint you break, meltdown, DNF.  But, a few weeks later, you're out testing yourself at a new venue.

Without quoting all that you said there:

I think the fact that you were with 3 bpm shows that you probably were right around your LT for THAT DAY.  Those numbers are not static; they adjust due to weather, stress, health, etc etc ad nauseum.  I'd say in all honesty that you ran that HM right around where you should have.

I think that if people trained properly for marathons, they'd run them much closer to LT than what most people do.  Of course, that means putting in lots and lots of miles, and specific training for it.

The LT field test is described pretty well here.

http://www.beginnertriathlete.com/discussion/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=25734&posts=1&start=1